Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform
February 9May 24, 2024 , 2024
Proposals
Ashley J. Lawson
Permitting reform has been a topic of debate in the 118th Congress. One aspect of this debate Permitting reform has been a topic of debate in the 118th Congress. One aspect of this debate
Specialist in Energy Policy Specialist in Energy Policy
addresses the processes for planning, siting, approving, and paying for electricity transmission addresses the processes for planning, siting, approving, and paying for electricity transmission

lines (broadly referred to as transmission permitting in this report). Proponents of transmission lines (broadly referred to as transmission permitting in this report). Proponents of transmission
permitting reform generally identify two main desired outcomes: (1) increased use of wind and permitting reform generally identify two main desired outcomes: (1) increased use of wind and

solar energy and (2) improved electric reliability and resilience. Debate has focused on perceived solar energy and (2) improved electric reliability and resilience. Debate has focused on perceived
hurdles to the development of large, interstate electricity transmission lines which are broadly viewed as being supportive of hurdles to the development of large, interstate electricity transmission lines which are broadly viewed as being supportive of
these two desired outcomes. these two desired outcomes.
One perceived hurdle is the process for siting electricity transmission lines (i.e., approving their route and authorizing One perceived hurdle is the process for siting electricity transmission lines (i.e., approving their route and authorizing
construction). Currently, most electricity transmission siting authority resides in the states. A transmission line crossing state construction). Currently, most electricity transmission siting authority resides in the states. A transmission line crossing state
lines may require approvals from multiple state lines may require approvals from multiple state and local governments along the line’s path. Critics argue the current governments along the line’s path. Critics argue the current
framework adds time to the transmission development process and can allow a single state framework adds time to the transmission development process and can allow a single state or local government to block a to block a
transmission project that is supported by neighboring jurisdictions. In 2005, Congress gave the Federal Energy Regulatory transmission project that is supported by neighboring jurisdictions. In 2005, Congress gave the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC) in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) limited authority to site some transmission Commission (FERC) in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) limited authority to site some transmission
lines under certain circumstances, but this authority was never used. Congress amended FERC’s siting authority in 2021. lines under certain circumstances, but this authority was never used. Congress amended FERC’s siting authority in 2021.
DOE and FERC are currently DOE and FERC are currently developing regulationstaking steps to implement this revised authority. Some transmission permitting to implement this revised authority. Some transmission permitting
reform legislative proposals would further amend this authority, for example, by granting siting authority for all large reform legislative proposals would further amend this authority, for example, by granting siting authority for all large
interstate transmission lines to FERC. A key point of debate around these proposals is the appropriate role of the federal and interstate transmission lines to FERC. A key point of debate around these proposals is the appropriate role of the federal and
state governments over electricity transmission line siting. Some would have the federal government take a larger role, while state governments over electricity transmission line siting. Some would have the federal government take a larger role, while
others would preserve the status quo whereby states have siting authority in most cases. others would preserve the status quo whereby states have siting authority in most cases.
A second perceived hurdle is the allocation of electricity transmission line costs to customers. A central tenet for electricity A second perceived hurdle is the allocation of electricity transmission line costs to customers. A central tenet for electricity
regulators is that the beneficiary of new electricity infrastructure should pay for that infrastructure (sometimes referred to as regulators is that the beneficiary of new electricity infrastructure should pay for that infrastructure (sometimes referred to as
the the cost causation principle). Under current practice, transmission beneficiaries are typically identified using easily quantified principle). Under current practice, transmission beneficiaries are typically identified using easily quantified
factors such as delivery of lower-cost electricity to a particular utility service territory. Costs for transmission development factors such as delivery of lower-cost electricity to a particular utility service territory. Costs for transmission development
are allocated exclusively to these identified beneficiaries. Some transmission permitting reform proposals would allocate are allocated exclusively to these identified beneficiaries. Some transmission permitting reform proposals would allocate
costs to a broader set of customers (based on a broader view of transmission benefits) and would additionally consider costs to a broader set of customers (based on a broader view of transmission benefits) and would additionally consider
benefits that may be difficult to quantify. A key point of debate around these proposals is the appropriate balance of costs and benefits that may be difficult to quantify. A key point of debate around these proposals is the appropriate balance of costs and
benefits for consumers. Some believe that identifying a broader set of benefits and beneficiaries would encourage benefits for consumers. Some believe that identifying a broader set of benefits and beneficiaries would encourage
development of beneficial transmission lines that may not be identified using current cost allocation practices. Others believe development of beneficial transmission lines that may not be identified using current cost allocation practices. Others believe
that changing cost allocation practices could increase costs for consumers without providing direct benefits. that changing cost allocation practices could increase costs for consumers without providing direct benefits.
A third perceived hurdle is the planning process for multistate electricity transmission lines. A third perceived hurdle is the planning process for multistate electricity transmission lines. Currently, FERC requires some
amount ofSince 2011, FERC has required some planning within planning within defined transmission planning regions. Some stakeholders believe transmission planning regions. Some stakeholders believe current FERC requirements FERC requirements
have been ineffective at encouraging large interstate electricity transmission lines. Some proposals would strengthen have been ineffective at encouraging large interstate electricity transmission lines. Some proposals would strengthen
requirements for regional transmission planning and add requirements for interregional transmission planning. Some requirements for regional transmission planning and add requirements for interregional transmission planning. Some
proposals would additionally require minimum levels of electricity sharing (proposals would additionally require minimum levels of electricity sharing (transfer capacity) between regions. Key points of ) between regions. Key points of
debate around these proposals are costs and benefits for consumers as well as the appropriate role of federal debate around these proposals are costs and benefits for consumers as well as the appropriate role of federal andversus state state
and local governments in determining electricity transmission needs. Some believe a stronger federal policy supporting interregional governments in determining electricity transmission needs. Some believe a stronger federal policy supporting interregional
electricity transmission could potentially lower costs for consumers and improve reliability and resilience. Others believe the electricity transmission could potentially lower costs for consumers and improve reliability and resilience. Others believe the
current process sufficiently identifies benefits for consumers and allows state regulators greater say in transmission current process sufficiently identifies benefits for consumers and allows state regulators greater say in transmission
development. development.
This report compares provisions addressing these and other selected electricity transmission topics in 12 permitting reform This report compares provisions addressing these and other selected electricity transmission topics in 12 permitting reform
proposals in the 118th Congressproposals in the 118th Congress, including and the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5) which requires a study of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5) which requires a study of
interregional transfer capacity. Separate from legislative proposals, FERC interregional transfer capacity. Separate from legislative proposals, FERC has initiated rulemakings that would addressrevised its transmission planning regulations in May 2024, partially addressing some some
of the topics identified in this report. of the topics identified in this report. FERC could change some national transmission policies using its existing authority,
without enactment of new legislation specifically addressing electricity transmission permitting. Some Members of Congress
have publicly encouraged FERC to do so. Other Members of Congress have publicly encouraged FERC to preserve the status
quoCongress could consider conducting oversight of the new FERC regulations, which are expected to take several years to fully implement. Congress also could consider legislation directing FERC to take specific actions regarding transmission permitting. .

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

---

link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page link to page 4 link to page 4 link to page 56 link to page 6 link to page link to page 6 link to page 67 link to page 7 link to page link to page 7 link to page 78 link to page link to page 1214 link to page link to page 1214 link to page link to page 910 link to page link to page 910 link to page link to page 1315 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

Contents
Current Electricity Transmission Policy Issues ............................................................................... 1
Siting Authority ......................................................................................................................... 1
Cost Allocation .......................................................................................................................... 23
Interregional Transmission Planning ......................................................................................... 3
Other Issues ............................................................................................................................... 34
FERC Activities ............................................................................................................................... 4
Legislative Proposals ............................................and FERC Order No. 1920 ........................................................................... 45
Biden Administration Priorities ....................................................................................................... 9 11
Concluding Observations ................................................................................................................ 9 11

Tables
Table 1. Selected Electricity Transmission Provisions in Selected Legislative Proposals
and , Enacted Legislation in the 118th Congress ...., and FERC Order No. 1920 ......................................................................... 67

Contacts
Author Information ........................................................................................................................ 1012

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

---

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

ultiple proposals for permitting reform have been put forward in the 118th Congress, and ultiple proposals for permitting reform have been put forward in the 118th Congress, and
some were adopted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5).1 In the current some were adopted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5).1 In the current
M policy context, the term M policy context, the term permit is commonly used in a broad sense to refer to a number is commonly used in a broad sense to refer to a number
of federal permits, approvals, authorizations, or other forms of consent around infrastructure of federal permits, approvals, authorizations, or other forms of consent around infrastructure
development. Likewise, this report uses the term permit in a broad sense. Permitting reform development. Likewise, this report uses the term permit in a broad sense. Permitting reform
proposals address electricity transmission in various ways. This report discusses current issues in proposals address electricity transmission in various ways. This report discusses current issues in
the debate around transmission permitting and summarizes the key transmission provisions in the debate around transmission permitting and summarizes the key transmission provisions in
major permitting reform bills introduced to date in the 118th Congress. major permitting reform bills introduced to date in the 118th Congress. Additionally, this report summarizes modifications the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) made to its transmission permitting rules in May 2024. Much congressional Much congressional
interest in electricity transmission lies in issues other than permits. Nonetheless, this report uses interest in electricity transmission lies in issues other than permits. Nonetheless, this report uses
the term the term transmission permitting reform to refer to proposals to change any aspect of transmission to refer to proposals to change any aspect of transmission
planning, siting, approval, cost allocation, and other transmission-related issues and processes. planning, siting, approval, cost allocation, and other transmission-related issues and processes.
This approach is consistent with the common use of terms in the current policy discussion. This This approach is consistent with the common use of terms in the current policy discussion. This
report focuses on topics in report focuses on topics in the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
and FERC’s jurisdiction and does not cover topics related to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other does not cover topics related to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other
environmental protection statutes. environmental protection statutes.
Background information on electricity transmission is available in the following CRS resources: Background information on electricity transmission is available in the following CRS resources:
• CRS In Focus IF12253, • CRS In Focus IF12253, Introduction to Electricity Transmission
• CRS Report R47862, • CRS Report R47862, Electricity Transmission: What Is the Role of the Federal
Government?, by Ashley J. Lawson and Adam Vann , by Ashley J. Lawson and Adam Vann
• CRS Report R47521, • CRS Report R47521, Electricity: Overview and Issues for Congress
• CRS In Focus IF11257, • CRS In Focus IF11257, Variable Renewable Energy: An Introduction
• CRS Report R45764, • CRS Report R45764, Maintaining Electric Reliability with Wind and Solar
Sources: Background and Issues for Congress
Current Electricity Transmission Policy Issues
Proponents of transmission permitting reform generally identify two main desired outcomes: (1) Proponents of transmission permitting reform generally identify two main desired outcomes: (1)
increased use of wind and solar energy and (2) improved electric reliability and resilience. To increased use of wind and solar energy and (2) improved electric reliability and resilience. To
achieve these outcomes, a key goal of transmission permitting reform proponents is to support achieve these outcomes, a key goal of transmission permitting reform proponents is to support
increased development of large transmission lines crossing two or more states. These types of increased development of large transmission lines crossing two or more states. These types of
transmission lines are widely viewed to be more beneficial than smaller, intrastate transmission transmission lines are widely viewed to be more beneficial than smaller, intrastate transmission
lines with respect to the desired outcomes noted above. lines with respect to the desired outcomes noted above.
Some industry participants and observers have identified a number of perceived barriers to the Some industry participants and observers have identified a number of perceived barriers to the
development of large interstate transmission lines, as discussed below. development of large interstate transmission lines, as discussed below.
Siting Authority
Currently, most electricity transmission siting authority Currently, most electricity transmission siting authority (i.e., authority to approve the route and authorize construction) resides in the states. A transmission line resides in the states. A transmission line
crossing state lines may require approvals from multiple state crossing state lines may require approvals from multiple state and local governments along the governments along the
line’s path. Critics argue the current framework adds time to the transmission development
process and can allow a single state or local government to block a transmission project that is
supported by neighboring jurisdictions. Others argue that the current framework protects the
ability of states and local governments to approve (or disapprove) infrastructure that is in the best
interest of their citizens.

1 For an overview of permitting reform provisions adopted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5) see
CRS In Focus IF12417, Environmental Reviews and the 118th Congress, by Kristen Hite.
Congressional Research Service

1

---

link to page 7 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals
line’s path. Transmission line developers may need additional approvals from local or tribal governments, depending on the path of the 1 For an overview of permitting reform provisions adopted in the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5) see CRS In Focus IF12417, Environmental Reviews and the 118th Congress, by Kristen Hite. Congressional Research Service 1 link to page 7 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals line.2 Critics argue the current framework adds time to the transmission development process and can allow a single state or other government to block a transmission project that is supported by neighboring jurisdictions. Others argue that the current framework protects the ability of states and other governments to approve (or disapprove) infrastructure that is in the best interest of their citizens.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 added Section 216 of the Federal Power Act (FPA, 16 U.S.C. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 added Section 216 of the Federal Power Act (FPA, 16 U.S.C.
§824p), which carves out a limited role for FERC and other federal agencies in siting interstate §824p), which carves out a limited role for FERC and other federal agencies in siting interstate
electric transmission facilities. This section authorizes the Secretary of Energy, in consultation electric transmission facilities. This section authorizes the Secretary of Energy, in consultation
with the affected states, to designate areas experiencing electricity transmission constraints or with the affected states, to designate areas experiencing electricity transmission constraints or
congestion as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETCs). The section grants congestion as National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors (NIETCs). The section grants
FERC authority to issue permits for constructing interstate electricity transmission facilities in FERC authority to issue permits for constructing interstate electricity transmission facilities in
designated NIETCs (commonly referred to as FERC’s designated NIETCs (commonly referred to as FERC’s backstop siting authority). As originally ). As originally
enacted, this authority could be exercised only if the state that has authority to approve the enacted, this authority could be exercised only if the state that has authority to approve the
facilities had “withheld approval for more than one year.” facilities had “withheld approval for more than one year.”
Two judicial decisions hamstrung the exercise of the Section 216 authority granted in 2005 to the Two judicial decisions hamstrung the exercise of the Section 216 authority granted in 2005 to the
agencies. In agencies. In Piedmont Environmental Council v. FERC (558 F.3d 304 (4th Cir. 2009)), the U.S. (558 F.3d 304 (4th Cir. 2009)), the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that FERC may not permit transmission facilities if a Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that FERC may not permit transmission facilities if a
state has denied the applicant’s request to site transmission facilities; FERC may permit the state has denied the applicant’s request to site transmission facilities; FERC may permit the
transmission facilities only in the event the state has not acted on the applicant’s request. And in transmission facilities only in the event the state has not acted on the applicant’s request. And in
California Wilderness Coalition v. U.S. Dep’t of Energy (631 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2011)), the U.S. (631 F.3d 1072 (9th Cir. 2011)), the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated the Department of Energy’s first two NIETC Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated the Department of Energy’s first two NIETC
designations, finding that the agency had failed to consult adequately with the states as required designations, finding that the agency had failed to consult adequately with the states as required
by the FPA. Since the Ninth Circuit’s 2011 decision, the Secretary of Energy has made no further by the FPA. Since the Ninth Circuit’s 2011 decision, the Secretary of Energy has made no further
NIETC designations. NIETC designations.
In 2021, Congress amended FERC’s backstop siting authority in the Infrastructure Investment In 2021, Congress amended FERC’s backstop siting authority in the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58) to address, among other things, the issues identified by the and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58) to address, among other things, the issues identified by the
lawsuits.lawsuits.2 DOE is revising its determination of NIETCs and released guidance3 Under its amended authority, DOE released a guidance document for applicants in for applicants in
December 2023December 2023.3 DOE anticipates releasing and a preliminary list of a preliminary list of potential NIETCs in NIETCs in SpringMay 2024.4 DOE expects to make final designations of NIETCs 2024. Final
designation of NIETCs would occur after additional public engagement and completion of any after additional public engagement and completion of any
necessary environmental reviews.necessary environmental reviews.4 FERC is likewise revising5 Similarly, FERC revised its regulations related to the its regulations related to the
backstop siting authority, as discussed in the sectibackstop siting authority, as discussed in the section “FERC Activities.”
Some transmission reform proposals would give FERC siting authority for large interstate Some transmission reform proposals would give FERC siting authority for large interstate
transmission lines (in contrast to the status quo whereby states generally site such lines), while transmission lines (in contrast to the status quo whereby states generally site such lines), while
preserving state siting authority for small transmission lines and lines that do not cross state preserving state siting authority for small transmission lines and lines that do not cross state
borders. Proponents of this approach say that having a single federal approval process would borders. Proponents of this approach say that having a single federal approval process would
speed the development of large interstate transmission lines compared to the status quo. speed the development of large interstate transmission lines compared to the status quo.
Opponents say that states are better positioned to identify the best path for all transmission line
development. Another proposal would remove DOE’s role in determining NIETCs and leave
FERC as the sole federal agency involved in federal backstop siting authority.
Cost Allocation
A central tenet for electricity regulators is that the beneficiary of new electricity infrastructure
should pay for that infrastructure (sometimes referred to as the cost causation principle). FERC
enforces this principle in its transmission cost allocation policies laid out in its 2011 Order No.

2 2 Siting approval is one of multiple permits that a transmission line may require. Some federal agencies may have authority to issue some of these permits, depending on the path of the line. Additional information about the role of federal agencies is in CRS Report R47862, Electricity Transmission: What Is the Role of the Federal Government?, by Ashley J. Lawson and Adam Vann. 3 For a summary of changes made to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC’s) backstop siting authority, For a summary of changes made to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC’s) backstop siting authority,
see CRS Report R47034, see CRS Report R47034, Energy and Minerals Provisions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58), ,
coordinated by Brent D. Yacobucci. coordinated by Brent D. Yacobucci.
34 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), “National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor Designation Process,” U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), “National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor Designation Process,”
https://www.energy.gov/gdo/national-interest-electric-transmission-corridor-designation-process. https://www.energy.gov/gdo/national-interest-electric-transmission-corridor-designation-process.
45 DOE Guidance on Implementing Section 216(a) of the Federal Power Act to Designate National Interest Electric DOE Guidance on Implementing Section 216(a) of the Federal Power Act to Designate National Interest Electric
Transmission Corridors, December 19, 2023, pp. 35-43, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/2023-12-Transmission Corridors, December 19, 2023, pp. 35-43, https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2023-12/2023-12-
15%20GDO%20NIETC%20Final%20Guidance%20Document.pdf. 15%20GDO%20NIETC%20Final%20Guidance%20Document.pdf.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

2 2

---

link to page 7 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals Opponents say that states are better positioned to identify the best path for all transmission line development. Another proposal would remove DOE’s role in determining NIETCs and leave FERC as the sole federal agency involved in federal backstop siting authority. Cost Allocation A central tenet for electricity regulators is that the beneficiary of new electricity infrastructure should pay for that infrastructure (sometimes referred to as the cost causation principle). FERC enforces this principle in its transmission cost allocation policies laid out in its 2011 Order No. Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

1000. The order specifies that costs must be allocated “in a manner that is at least roughly 1000. The order specifies that costs must be allocated “in a manner that is at least roughly
commensurate with estimated benefits.”commensurate with estimated benefits.”56 A related principle (stated explicitly in Order No. 1000) A related principle (stated explicitly in Order No. 1000)
is that customers that do not benefit from transmission investments should not be required to is that customers that do not benefit from transmission investments should not be required to
cover those costs. Under current practice, transmission beneficiaries are typically identified using cover those costs. Under current practice, transmission beneficiaries are typically identified using
easily quantified factors such as delivery of lower-cost electricity to a particular utility service easily quantified factors such as delivery of lower-cost electricity to a particular utility service
territory. Costs for transmission development are allocated exclusively to these identified territory. Costs for transmission development are allocated exclusively to these identified
beneficiaries. beneficiaries.
Some transmission reform proposals would shift some transmission cost allocation to less direct Some transmission reform proposals would shift some transmission cost allocation to less direct
beneficiaries, either by considering a broader geographic spread of benefits or including benefits beneficiaries, either by considering a broader geographic spread of benefits or including benefits
that are more difficult to quantify (e.g., resilience). Proponents of this approach say it would that are more difficult to quantify (e.g., resilience). Proponents of this approach say it would
incentivize transmission projects with multiple values that might be overlooked in the current incentivize transmission projects with multiple values that might be overlooked in the current
framework. Opponents say this could increase costs for some consumers without providing direct framework. Opponents say this could increase costs for some consumers without providing direct
benefits. benefits.
Interregional Transmission Planning
Transmission planning—identifying needed upgrades or expansions to the transmission system—Transmission planning—identifying needed upgrades or expansions to the transmission system—
happens at the state level (for happens at the state level (for local projects) and at a multistate level (for ) and at a multistate level (for regional projects). ).
Transmission planning affects the kinds of transmission projects that are built in the future. Order Transmission planning affects the kinds of transmission projects that are built in the future. Order
No.1000 also addresses transmission planning, and aims in part to encourage increased No.1000 also addresses transmission planning, and aims in part to encourage increased
development of regional projects. In Order No. 1000, FERC required utilities to participate in development of regional projects. In Order No. 1000, FERC required utilities to participate in
regional transmission planning in multistate regions.regional transmission planning in multistate regions.67 Order No. 1000 also addresses interregional Order No. 1000 also addresses interregional
transmission by requiring transmission providers in neighboring regions to coordinate their transmission by requiring transmission providers in neighboring regions to coordinate their
planning processes. Some stakeholders argue Order No. 1000 has been ineffective at encouraging planning processes. Some stakeholders argue Order No. 1000 has been ineffective at encouraging
a large build-out of regional and interregional transmission. a large build-out of regional and interregional transmission.
Transmission permitting reform proposals reviewed by CRS do not address regional transmission
planning, but some do address interregional transmission planning. Some transmission permitting
reform proposals would direct FERC to establish new interregional transmission planning
requirements. Some would require FERC to enforce minimum levels of interregional transfer
capacity. Proponents of these approaches say this would encourage more long-distance
transmission development that could potentially lower costs for consumers and improve
reliability and resilience. Opponents say the current process is sufficient and allows state
regulators greater say in transmission development.
Other Issues
Various other topics have been included in someIn May 2024, FERC issued Order No. 1920 which adds to the Order No. 1000 requirements for regional planning, as discussed in the section “FERC Activities.” Transmission permitting reform proposals reviewed by CRS do not address regional transmission planning, but some do address interregional transmission planning. Some transmission permitting transmission permitting reform proposals would direct FERC to establish new interregional transmission planning 6reform proposals. These
include
• FERC’s organizational structure for regulating transmission;

5 FERC, FERC, Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation by Transmission Owning and Operating Public Utilities, ,
https://www.ferc.gov/electric-transmission/order-no-1000-transmission-planning-and-cost-allocation. FERC issued https://www.ferc.gov/electric-transmission/order-no-1000-transmission-planning-and-cost-allocation. FERC issued
Order No. 1000 in 2011 to revise its policies for transmission planning and cost allocation. Order No. 1000, and two Order No. 1000 in 2011 to revise its policies for transmission planning and cost allocation. Order No. 1000, and two
related clarifying orders, are currently in force. related clarifying orders, are currently in force.
67 Not all entities that own transmission lines are covered by Order No. 1000. For example, federal power marketing Not all entities that own transmission lines are covered by Order No. 1000. For example, federal power marketing
administrations (e.g., the Bonneville Power Administration) are outside of FERC’s jurisdiction for transmission administrations (e.g., the Bonneville Power Administration) are outside of FERC’s jurisdiction for transmission
planning. Such entities are not required by FERC to participate in regional transmission planning, though they may planning. Such entities are not required by FERC to participate in regional transmission planning, though they may
choose to do so in a manner consistent with their statutory obligations. For a discussion of federal power marketing choose to do so in a manner consistent with their statutory obligations. For a discussion of federal power marketing
administrations, see CRS Report R45548, administrations, see CRS Report R45548, The Power Marketing Administrations: Background and Current Issues, by , by
Richard J. Campbell. For additional information, congressional offices may contact Ashley J. Lawson. Richard J. Campbell. For additional information, congressional offices may contact Ashley J. Lawson.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

3 3

---

link to page link to page 410 link to page link to page 94 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals requirements. Some would require FERC to enforce minimum levels of interregional transfer capacity. Proponents of these approaches say this would encourage more long-distance transmission development that could potentially lower costs for consumers and improve reliability and resilience. Opponents say the current process is sufficient and allows state regulators greater say in transmission development. Other Issues Various other topics have been included in some transmission permitting reform proposals. These include • FERC’s organizational structure for regulating transmission; Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

• Consumer protection, for example, an Independent Transmission Monitor to • Consumer protection, for example, an Independent Transmission Monitor to
ensure transmission development is efficient and cost-effective; ensure transmission development is efficient and cost-effective;
• Presidential authority for approving international transmission lines (i.e., those • Presidential authority for approving international transmission lines (i.e., those
connecting the United States with Canada or Mexico); connecting the United States with Canada or Mexico);78
• Reliability and resilience; and • Reliability and resilience; and
• Incentives for new technology deployment, such as Grid Enhancing Technologies • Incentives for new technology deployment, such as Grid Enhancing Technologies
(GETs) and Non-Transmission Alternatives. (GETs) and Non-Transmission Alternatives.
FERC Activities
In In the last several years, FERC has initiated (but not finalized) rulemakings addressing many of
the issues discussed above. In many cases, FERC has proposed reforms that generally align with
the goals of legislative proposals. For example, FERC has proposed reforms to take a broader
view for determining transmission cost allocation.8 FERC has existing authority to finalize these
rulemakings and implement some degree of transmission reform without additional congressional
directives. Alternatively, Congress could provide statutory guidance for FERC’s transmission
policies, as some transmission reform proposals would do.
FERC is also revisingMay 2024, FERC issued Order No. 1920, the first major revision to FERC’s transmission policies since Order No. 1000.9 The new order adds to the requirements of Order No. 1000, primarily by requiring regional planning processes to consider transmission needs at least 20 years in the future. The order requires transmission planners to consider specific factors driving long-term transmission needs, including policies that affect the generation resource mix, decarbonization and electrification policies, trends in fuel and technology costs, plans for generator retirements and new construction, and corporate commitments (e.g., renewable energy procurement goals). The order further requires the use of scenarios for long-term transmission needs and the estimation of specific benefits of transmission over a 20-year horizon. Order No. 1920 focuses on certain aspects of regional transmission planning and does not address the topics covered in Table 1 in a general manner, in contrast to many of the legislative proposals summarized in the table. For example, the order specifies some cost allocation requirements, but only those pertaining to transmission needs identified through the long-term planning process required by Order No. 1920. Cost allocation for transmission projects selected under different planning processes remain unchanged. Additionally, Order No. 1920 provides some support for GETs by requiring transmission planners to consider opportunities to deploy certain kinds of GETs (e.g., conduct a cost-benefit analysis of including GETs as part of regular regional transmission planning). Order No. 1920 does not, however, require the adoption of GETs. Also in May 2024, FERC revised its regulations implementing its backstop siting authority in response to its regulations implementing its backstop siting authority in response to
IIJA (backstop siting authority is discussed in the IIJA (backstop siting authority is discussed in the section section “Siting Authority”).).10 The 8 Currently, international transmission lines require a presidential permit for construction. 9 FERC, Building for the Future Through Electric Regional Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation, https://ferc.gov/media/e1-rm21-17-000. 10 FERC, Applications for Permits to Site Interstate Electric Transmission Facilities, https://ferc.gov/media/e-2-rm22-7-000. Congressional Research Service 4 link to page 10 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals The extent to which extent to which
FERC’s revised backstop siting authority could affect transmission development remains unclear. FERC’s revised backstop siting authority could affect transmission development remains unclear.
IIJA does not IIJA does not requirerequire FERC to approve projects that states have denied. Instead, the backstop FERC to approve projects that states have denied. Instead, the backstop
siting authority provides a “second chance” for projects that meet specified criteria if the projects siting authority provides a “second chance” for projects that meet specified criteria if the projects
do not receive approval from the do not receive approval from the statesapplicable state governments. Potentially, transmission project developers and states . Potentially, transmission project developers and states
will be encouraged to come to agreements about siting, in order to avoid the federal process. will be encouraged to come to agreements about siting, in order to avoid the federal process.
Alternatively, transmission project developers may focus on project design that is likely to be Alternatively, transmission project developers may focus on project design that is likely to be
approved by FERC, regardless of state regulators’ preferences. approved by FERC, regardless of state regulators’ preferences.
Legislative Proposals and FERC Order No. 1920
CRS analyzed the transmission permitting reform provisions in selected bills introduced in the CRS analyzed the transmission permitting reform provisions in selected bills introduced in the
118th Congress118th Congress, and draft legislative proposals, and draft legislative proposals, and in legislation enacted in the 118th Congress.legislation enacted in the 118th Congress.
CRS also analyzed FERC Order No. 1920. Table 1 provides a summary of the provisions in each bill addressing the issues identified above. provides a summary of the provisions in each bill addressing the issues identified above.
The table is not a full analysis of each bill, and does not necessarily identify all transmission-The table is not a full analysis of each bill, and does not necessarily identify all transmission-
related provisions in each bill. For example, H.R. 1 addresses NEPA review for vegetation related provisions in each bill. For example, H.R. 1 addresses NEPA review for vegetation
management (a maintenance procedure for transmission lines) on public lands, but this provision management (a maintenance procedure for transmission lines) on public lands, but this provision
is not included in the table because NEPA is not a topic discussed in this report. The table also is not included in the table because NEPA is not a topic discussed in this report. The table also
does not identify all electricity-related provisions. For example, the does not identify all electricity-related provisions. For example, the discussion draft of Promoting Efficient and Promoting Efficient and
Engaged Reviews Act of 2023 addresses the process for interconnecting new power plants with Engaged Reviews Act of 2023 addresses the process for interconnecting new power plants with
the transmission system, but this provision is not included in the table. the transmission system, but this provision is not included in the table.
The bills The bills and, legislative proposals, FERC regulation, and enacted legislation included in this analysis are legislative proposals included in this analysis are

7 Currently, international transmission lines require a presidential permit for construction.
8 See FERC, Building for the Future Through Electric Regional Transmission Planning and Cost Allocation and
Generator Interconnection, https://www.ferc.gov/media/rm21-17-000. In July 2023, FERC issued Order No. 2023
modifying its regulations for interconnecting new power plants to the transmission system. These modifications could
potentially support some goals of transmission permitting reform proposals, namely increased use of wind and solar
energy and improved reliability.
Congressional Research Service

4

---

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

• The Streamlining Interstate Transmission of Electricity Act (SITE Act; S. 946), • The Streamlining Interstate Transmission of Electricity Act (SITE Act; S. 946),
introduced by Senator Whitehouse on March 22, 2023. introduced by Senator Whitehouse on March 22, 2023.
• The Lower Energy Costs Act (H.R. 1), as passed by the House on March 30, • The Lower Energy Costs Act (H.R. 1), as passed by the House on March 30,
2023. 2023.
• •
• The Building American Energy Security Act of 2023 (S. 1399), introduced by The Building American Energy Security Act of 2023 (S. 1399), introduced by
Senator Manchin on May 2, 2023. Senator Manchin on May 2, 2023.
• The Spur Permitting of Underdeveloped Resources Act (SPUR Act; S. 1456), • The Spur Permitting of Underdeveloped Resources Act (SPUR Act; S. 1456),
introduced by Senator Barrasso on May 4, 2023. introduced by Senator Barrasso on May 4, 2023.
• The Revitalizing the Economy by Simplifying Timelines and Assuring • The Revitalizing the Economy by Simplifying Timelines and Assuring
Regulatory Transparency Act (RESTART; S. 1449) Act, introduced by Senator Regulatory Transparency Act (RESTART; S. 1449) Act, introduced by Senator
Capito on May 4, 2023. Capito on May 4, 2023.
• The Promoting Efficient and Engaged Reviews Act of 2023 (PEER Act) • The Promoting Efficient and Engaged Reviews Act of 2023 (PEER Act)
discussion draft, released by Senators Carper and Schatz on May 18, 2023. discussion draft, released by Senators Carper and Schatz on May 18, 2023.911
• The Interregional Transmission Planning Improvement Act of 2023 (S. 1748), • The Interregional Transmission Planning Improvement Act of 2023 (S. 1748),
introduced by Senator Heinrich on May 18, 2023. introduced by Senator Heinrich on May 18, 2023.
• The Facilitating America’s Siting of Transmission and Electric Reliability Act of • The Facilitating America’s Siting of Transmission and Electric Reliability Act of
2023 (FASTER Act of 2023; S. 1804), introduced by Senator Heinrich on June 1, 2023 (FASTER Act of 2023; S. 1804), introduced by Senator Heinrich on June 1,
2023. Companion legislation (H.R. 4689) was introduced by Representative 2023. Companion legislation (H.R. 4689) was introduced by Representative
Peters on July 17, 2023. Peters on July 17, 2023.
11 The Promoting Efficient and Engaged Reviews Act (PEER Act) discussion draft is available at https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/5/carper-schatz-unveil-environmental-review-and-permitting-reform-proposal. Congressional Research Service 5 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals • The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5), enacted on June 3, 2023. • The Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (P.L. 118-5), enacted on June 3, 2023.
• The Connecting Hard-to-reach Areas with Renewably Generated Energy Act of • The Connecting Hard-to-reach Areas with Renewably Generated Energy Act of
2023 (CHARGE Act of 2023; S. 2480), introduced by Senator Markey on July 2023 (CHARGE Act of 2023; S. 2480), introduced by Senator Markey on July
25, 2023. Companion legislation (H.R. 5154) was introduced by Representative 25, 2023. Companion legislation (H.R. 5154) was introduced by Representative
Ocasio-Cortez on August 4, 2023. Ocasio-Cortez on August 4, 2023.
• The Building Integrated Grids With Inter-Regional Energy Supply Act (BIG • The Building Integrated Grids With Inter-Regional Energy Supply Act (BIG
WIRES Act; S. 2827/H.R. 5551), introduced by Senator Hickenlooper and WIRES Act; S. 2827/H.R. 5551), introduced by Senator Hickenlooper and
Representative Peters on September 18, 2023. Representative Peters on September 18, 2023.
• The Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act (CETA Act; H.R. 6747), • The Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act (CETA Act; H.R. 6747),
introduced by Representative Casten on December 13, 2023. introduced by Representative Casten on December 13, 2023.10

9 The Promoting Efficient and Engaged Reviews Act (PEER Act) discussion draft is available at
https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/5/carper-schatz-unveil-environmental-review-and-permitting-
reform-proposal.
1012 • FERC Order No. 1920, issued on May 13, 2024. 12 Earlier versions of this report included a discussion draft of the Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act, Earlier versions of this report included a discussion draft of the Clean Electricity and Transmission Acceleration Act,
which is available at https://seec.house.gov/sites/sustainableenergyandenvironmentcoalitioncaucus.house.gov/files/which is available at https://seec.house.gov/sites/sustainableenergyandenvironmentcoalitioncaucus.house.gov/files/
CETA%20Act%20Discussion%20Draft%2023.04.26.pdf. CETA%20Act%20Discussion%20Draft%2023.04.26.pdf.
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

56

---

Table 1. Selected Electricity Transmission Provisions in Selected Legislative Proposals and
, Enacted Legislation in the 118th Congress, and FERC Order No. 1920
Interregional Transmission

Federal Siting Authority
Cost Allocation
Planning
Other Topics
SITE Act (S. 946) SITE Act (S. 946)
Would give FERC authority to issue Would give FERC authority to issue
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
certificate of public convenience and certificate of public convenience and
necessity for certain large, interstate necessity for certain large, interstate
transmission lines. transmission lines.
Would provide right of eminent Would provide right of eminent
domain for holders of such a domain for holders of such a
certificate. certificate.
Lower Energy Costs Lower Energy Costs
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Would modify approval Would modify approval
Act (H.R. 1) Act (H.R. 1)
process for international process for international
transmission facilities. transmission facilities.
Building American Building American
Would amend backstop siting authority Would establish cost allocation Would amend backstop siting authority Would establish cost allocation
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Energy Security Act of Energy Security Act of
to allow FERC to determine to allow FERC to determine
principles based on broader set principles based on broader set
2023 2023
transmission facilities in the national transmission facilities in the national
of benefits than status quo, for of benefits than status quo, for
(S. 1399) (S. 1399)
interest (i.e., removes DOE NIETC interest (i.e., removes DOE NIETC
transmission determined by transmission determined by
designations for purposes of backstop designations for purposes of backstop
FERC to be in the national FERC to be in the national
siting authority). Facilities must be siting authority). Facilities must be
interest. interest.
interstate (including offshore) or interstate (including offshore) or
international and meet other criteria. international and meet other criteria.
SPUR Act SPUR Act
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Would modify approval Would modify approval
(S. 1456) (S. 1456)
process for international process for international
transmission facilities. transmission facilities.
RESTART Act RESTART Act
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
(S. 1449) (S. 1449)
CRS- CRS-67

---

Interregional Transmission

Federal Siting Authority
Cost Allocation
Planning
Other Topics
PEER Act discussion PEER Act discussion
Would give FERC authority to issue Would give FERC authority to issue
Would establish cost allocation Would establish cost allocation
Would direct FERC to Would direct FERC to
Would establish an Office of Would establish an Office of
draft draft
certificate of public convenience and certificate of public convenience and
principles based on broader set promulgate a rule requiring principles based on broader set promulgate a rule requiring
Transmission at FERC. Transmission at FERC.
necessity for certain large, interstate necessity for certain large, interstate
of benefits than status quo. of benefits than status quo.
transmission providers to transmission providers to
Would require independent Would require independent
transmission lines. transmission lines.
Would require other changes Would require other changes
engage in interregional and engage in interregional and
transmission monitors for each transmission monitors for each
Would provide right of eminent Would provide right of eminent
to cost allocation methodol- to cost allocation methodol-
interconnection-wide planning interconnection-wide planning
transmission planning region. transmission planning region.
domain for holders of such a domain for holders of such a
ogies, including preventing ones processes. ogies, including preventing ones processes.
Would promote adoption of Would promote adoption of
certificate. certificate.
that discourage distributed that discourage distributed
Would direct FERC to Would direct FERC to
GETs and NTAs. GETs and NTAs.
generation, energy efficiency, generation, energy efficiency,
establish minimum transfer establish minimum transfer
demand response, or energy demand response, or energy
capability between regions. capability between regions.
storage. storage.
Interregional Interregional
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Would establish cost allocation Would establish cost allocation
Would direct FERC to Would direct FERC to
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Transmission Planning Transmission Planning
principles for interregional principles for interregional
promulgate a rule addressing promulgate a rule addressing
Improvement Act of Improvement Act of
transmission projects based on transmission projects based on
interregional transmission interregional transmission
2023 (S. 1748) 2023 (S. 1748)
broader set of benefits than broader set of benefits than
planning. planning.
status quo. status quo.
FASTER Act (S. 1804 / FASTER Act (S. 1804 /
Would amend backstop siting authority Not addressed. Would amend backstop siting authority Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
H.R. 4689) H.R. 4689)
to allow transmission developers to to allow transmission developers to
request certain proposed routes to be request certain proposed routes to be
designated as a NIETC. designated as a NIETC.
Would encourage transmission Would encourage transmission
developers to enter into community developers to enter into community
benefit agreements with affected benefit agreements with affected
parties. parties.
Fiscal Responsibility Act Not addressed. Fiscal Responsibility Act Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Directs NERC and FERC to Directs NERC and FERC to
Not addressed. Not addressed.
of 2023 (P.L. 118-5) of 2023 (P.L. 118-5)
study existing interregional study existing interregional
transfer capability and transfer capability and
recommend levels that would recommend levels that would
demonstrably strengthen demonstrably strengthen
reliability. reliability.
CRS- CRS-78

---

Interregional Transmission

Federal Siting Authority
Cost Allocation
Planning
Other Topics
CHARGE Act (S. 2480 CHARGE Act (S. 2480
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Would establish cost allocation Would establish cost allocation
Would direct FERC to Would direct FERC to
Would establish an Office of Would establish an Office of
/ H.R. 5154) / H.R. 5154)
principles based on broader set promulgate a rule requiring principles based on broader set promulgate a rule requiring
Transmission at FERC. Transmission at FERC.
of benefits than status quo. of benefits than status quo.
transmission providers to transmission providers to
Would require independent Would require independent
Would require other changes Would require other changes
engage in interregional and engage in interregional and
transmission monitors for each transmission monitors for each
to cost allocation methodol- to cost allocation methodol-
interconnection-wide planning interconnection-wide planning
transmission planning region. transmission planning region.
ogies, including preventing ones processes. ogies, including preventing ones processes.
Would promote adoption of Would promote adoption of
that discourage distributed that discourage distributed
Would direct FERC to Would direct FERC to
GETs and NTAs. GETs and NTAs.
generation, energy efficiency, generation, energy efficiency,
establish minimum transfer establish minimum transfer
demand response, or energy demand response, or energy
capacity between regions. capacity between regions.
storage. storage.
BIG WIRES Act BIG WIRES Act
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Not addressed. Not addressed.
Would direct FERC to Would direct FERC to
Not addressed. Not addressed.
(S. 2827 / H.R. 5551) (S. 2827 / H.R. 5551)
promulgate a rule requiring promulgate a rule requiring
specified levels of interregional specified levels of interregional
transfer capacity between transfer capacity between
regions. regions.
CRS-9 Interregional Transmission Federal Siting Authority Cost Allocation Planning Other Topics CETA Act CETA Act
Would give FERC authority to issue Would give FERC authority to issue
Would clarify that owners of Would clarify that owners of
Would direct FERC to Would direct FERC to
Would establish an Office of Would establish an Office of
certificate of public convenience and certificate of public convenience and
certain interstate or offshore certain interstate or offshore
promulgate a rule requiring promulgate a rule requiring
Transmission at FERC. Transmission at FERC.
(H.R. 6747) (H.R. 6747)
necessity for certain large, interstate necessity for certain large, interstate
transmission facilities can seek transmission facilities can seek
transmission organizations to transmission organizations to
Would require independent Would require independent
transmission lines. transmission lines.
cost allocation through FERC. cost allocation through FERC.
develop plans every three years transmission monitors for each develop plans every three years transmission monitors for each
Would provide right of eminent Would provide right of eminent
Would prohibit costs of certain that identify and facilitate the Would prohibit costs of certain that identify and facilitate the
transmission planning region. transmission planning region.
domain for holders of such a domain for holders of such a
network upgrades from being network upgrades from being
construction of certain construction of certain
Would promote adoption of Would promote adoption of
certificate. certificate.
allocated exclusively to a single allocated exclusively to a single
interregional transmission interregional transmission
projects. projects.
GETs and NTAs. GETs and NTAs.
Would amend backstop siting authority interconnection customer. Would amend backstop siting authority interconnection customer.
to avoid duplicate environmental to avoid duplicate environmental
Would direct FERC to Would direct FERC to
reviews for the designation of NIETCs reviews for the designation of NIETCs
establish minimum transfer establish minimum transfer
and FERC siting decision. and FERC siting decision.
capacity between regions. capacity between regions.
FERC Order No. 1920 Not addressed. For transmission facilities Not addressed. Requires consideration of selected for cost allocation certain GETs as part of near- under a long-term regional term and long-term regional transmission plan, requires cost transmission planning. allocation based on specified Requires long-term regional benefits. transmission planning, over a time horizon of at least 20 years. Long-term plans must incorporate specified factors that influence future electricity needs. Source: CRS analysis of 118th Congress Source: CRS analysis of legislation in Congress.govlegislation in Congress.gov and, PEER Act discussion draft PEER Act discussion draft, (available at https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/5/carper-schatz-unveil-available at https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2023/5/carper-schatz-unveil-
environmental-review-and-permitting-reform-proposalenvironmental-review-and-permitting-reform-proposal), and FERC Order No. 1920. .
Notes: FERC = Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; NERC = North American Electric Reliability Corporations; DOE = U.S. Department of Energy; NIETC = FERC = Federal Energy Regulatory Commission; NERC = North American Electric Reliability Corporations; DOE = U.S. Department of Energy; NIETC =
National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor; GETs = Grid-Enhancing Technologies; NTAs = Non-Transmission Alternatives. This table does not provide a National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor; GETs = Grid-Enhancing Technologies; NTAs = Non-Transmission Alternatives. This table does not provide a
comprehensive analysis of comprehensive analysis of the selected legislative proposalsselected legislative proposals or enacted legislation, enacted legislation, or FERC regulation. .


CRS- CRS-810

---

link to page link to page 910 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

Biden Administration Priorities
On May 10, 2023, the White House released a fact sheet outlining the Biden Administration’s On May 10, 2023, the White House released a fact sheet outlining the Biden Administration’s
priorities for permitting reform.priorities for permitting reform.1113 For transmission, these priorities are For transmission, these priorities are
• providing for electric transmission siting and cost allocation; • providing for electric transmission siting and cost allocation;
• developing minimum interregional transfer requirements; • developing minimum interregional transfer requirements;
• broadening the benefits considered for cost allocation; and • broadening the benefits considered for cost allocation; and
• accelerating the deployment of GETs. • accelerating the deployment of GETs.
The Administration fact sheet does not provide legislative details for these priorities. For The Administration fact sheet does not provide legislative details for these priorities. For
example, the fact sheet does not clarify the meaning of “providing for electric transmission siting example, the fact sheet does not clarify the meaning of “providing for electric transmission siting
and cost allocation.” While announcing the Administration’s priorities for permitting reform, and cost allocation.” While announcing the Administration’s priorities for permitting reform,
White House Senior Advisor John Podesta said “Congress should give FERC clear authority to White House Senior Advisor John Podesta said “Congress should give FERC clear authority to
issue permits for interstate transmission lines.”issue permits for interstate transmission lines.”1214
Concluding Observations
Various proposals in the 118th Congress could potentially affect new transmission development. Various proposals in the 118th Congress could potentially affect new transmission development.
Many of the provisions identified inMany of the provisions identified in Table 1 aim to promote increased development of large, aim to promote increased development of large,
interstate transmission lines. Federal policy is not the only factor affecting development of such interstate transmission lines. Federal policy is not the only factor affecting development of such
infrastructure. Other factors include electricity market conditions and state regulatory decisions. infrastructure. Other factors include electricity market conditions and state regulatory decisions.
Other topics included in some permitting reform debate could also potentially affect new Other topics included in some permitting reform debate could also potentially affect new
transmission development. These include proposals to modify NEPA implementation and transmission development. These include proposals to modify NEPA implementation and
proposals to address energy infrastructure development on public lands. A separate, but related, proposals to address energy infrastructure development on public lands. A separate, but related,
issue is the process for approving offshore transmission lines which is currently overseen by the issue is the process for approving offshore transmission lines which is currently overseen by the
Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.1315
Several of the issues addressed by proposed provisions (e.g., cost allocation) would provide Several of the issues addressed by proposed provisions (e.g., cost allocation) would provide
policy direction to FERC within FERC’s existing authority. FERC policy direction to FERC within FERC’s existing authority. FERC could adopt these policies
absent congressional action. FERC has initiated rulemakings addressing some of the topics
discussed in this report. In other words, some FERC transmission policies could change in the
coming years even without Congress passing legislation specifically addressing these policies.
Some Members of Congress have publicly called on FERC to do so. For example, on July 24,
2023, Majority Leader Schumer sent a letter to FERC commissioners urging them to strengthen
and finalize their transmission rulemakings.14 Regarding transmission planning, Senator Schumer

11modified its requirements for regional transmission planning in Order No. 1920. The new order partially addresses some issues addressed by legislative proposals, although to a different degree than some legislative proposals would do. Congress may consider codifying some of these requirements or giving FERC alternative policy direction through legislation. Congress may also continue to monitor electricity transmission development and conduct oversight on implementation of Order No. 1920 as needed. Typically, FERC rules of this magnitude take several years to fully implement, so it remains unclear to what extent the new policy will affect transmission development. Implementation details will be determined by individual planning regions, with FERC oversight. 13 White House, “Fact Sheet: Biden-Harris Administration Outlines Priorities for Building America’s Energy White House, “Fact Sheet: Biden-Harris Administration Outlines Priorities for Building America’s Energy
Infrastructure Faster, Safer, and Cleaner,” May 10, 2023, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-Infrastructure Faster, Safer, and Cleaner,” May 10, 2023, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-
releases/2023/05/10/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-outlines-priorities-for-building-americas-energy-releases/2023/05/10/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-outlines-priorities-for-building-americas-energy-
infrastructure-faster-safer-and-cleaner/. infrastructure-faster-safer-and-cleaner/.
1214 The White House, “Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Senior Advisor John Podesta on the Biden-Harris The White House, “Remarks as Prepared for Delivery by Senior Advisor John Podesta on the Biden-Harris
Administration’s Priorities for Energy Infrastructure Permitting Reform,” May 10, 2023, https://www.whitehouse.gov/Administration’s Priorities for Energy Infrastructure Permitting Reform,” May 10, 2023, https://www.whitehouse.gov/
briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/05/10/remarks-as-prepared-for-delivery-by-senior-advisor-john-podesta-on-the-briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2023/05/10/remarks-as-prepared-for-delivery-by-senior-advisor-john-podesta-on-the-
biden-harris-administrations-priorities-for-energy-infrastructure-permitting-reform/. biden-harris-administrations-priorities-for-energy-infrastructure-permitting-reform/.
1315 For additional information about offshore electricity infrastructure development, see CRS Report R46970, For additional information about offshore electricity infrastructure development, see CRS Report R46970, U.S.
Offshore Wind Energy Development: Overview and Issues for the 118th Congress, by Laura B. Comay and Corrie E. , by Laura B. Comay and Corrie E.
Clark. Clark.
14 Letter from Senator Charles E. Schumer to Commissioners Willie L. Phillips, James Danly, Allison Clements, Mark
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service

911 Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals In addition—if FERC’s transmission rule follows the same path as previous major FERC orders—future FERC administrative actions (such as rehearings) or litigation and judicial review could influence implementation details. Author Information Ashley J. Lawson Specialist in Energy Policy

---

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals

wrote in support of FERC’s proposal to include long-term scenarios in transmission planning and
encouraged FERC to additionally “require that one of those scenarios includes consideration of a
high penetration of variable energy resources.”15 Senator Schumer also wrote in support of
FERC’s proposal to include two GETs in transmission planning and encouraged FERC to
additionally “include other grid enhancing technologies that serve transmission functions and can
avoid the need for new transmission, such as energy storage” and “require consideration of
reconductoring with advanced conductors.” Regarding cost allocation, Senator Schumer wrote “I
am concerned that the proposal does not require the use of a specific list of benefits” and “any
final rule must include cost allocation provisions, and prescribe a set of benefits of
transmission…. Moreover, transmission planners should specifically assess benefits during
periods of grid stress, when the electric reliability benefits of transmission assets are the greatest.”
Regarding backstop siting authority, Senator Schumer wrote “it is also important that FERC
expeditiously finalize its federal backstop siting authority … and this should include allowing
transmission projects to use the Commission’s long-standing pre-filing process to decrease the
risk of further delays of project approval.”
Other Members have publicly called on FERC to preserve the status quo. For example, Senator
Cramer sent a letter to FERC commissioners on September 12, 2023, providing his views on
FERC’s transmission policies. Regarding transmission planning, Senator Cramer wrote “any
attempt by FERC to undermine this state authority [to shape the electricity generation mix] …
under the guise of transmission planning would be a legal farce, and the intentions behind these
misguided policies would be clear.” Regarding cost allocation, Senator Cramer wrote, “forcing
customers in states who do not want power from intermittent, unreliable generators, or
unnecessary expanded transmission capacity is the antithesis of the just and reasonable standard
demanded of FERC.” Regarding backstop siting authority, Senator Cramer wrote:
I am concerned the process is being subverted to serve transmission developers rather than
the national interest. Although this is outside of FERC’s responsibility, it appears DOE is
skirting its role in this process…. By establishing NIETCs at the request of developers,
rather than through a DOE-led corridor process, there is a clear risk this backstop authority
will be utilized by those able to lobby political leadership in Washington rather than
transmission planners capable of determining actual need.16


Author Information

Ashley J. Lawson

Specialist in Energy Policy


C. Christie, July 20, 2023, https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/230720_-
_letter_to_ferc_on_transmission_reformspdf.pdf.
15 Solar and wind are examples of variable energy resources.
16 Letter from Senator Kevin Cramer to Commissioners Willie L. Phillips, James Danly, Allison Clements, Mark C.
Christie, September 12, 2023, https://senatorkevincramer.box.com/s/pt9lbl6jb23xcfga4nx8kfncnxgkllyj.
Congressional Research Service

10

---

Electricity Transmission Permitting Reform Proposals



Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material. copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service Congressional Research Service
R47627 R47627 · VERSION 1012 · UPDATED
1112

---