3 meetings related to this legislation
Designates the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as the lead agency to coordinate the environmental review (NEPA) for proposed natural gas pipeline authorizations and certificates. It sets procedures and timelines for inviting other federal agencies to participate, requires agencies to coordinate and generally defer to FERC’s NEPA review, and mandates public tracking of permitting steps. Also requires several procedural and technical safeguards: attention to water-quality requirements, use of remote environmental surveys where appropriate, use of third‑party reviewers in some cases, and consultation with the Transportation Security Administration on pipeline security. Overall the change centralizes review authority with FERC to promote coordination, transparency, and predictable schedules for pipeline permitting.
Defines “Commission” to mean the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Defines “Federal authorization” by reference to section 15(a) of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717n(a)).
Defines “NEPA review” as review under section 102 of the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4332).
Defines “project-related NEPA review” as any NEPA review required for issuance of authorizations under section 3 or certificates under section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
When FERC acts as lead agency under section 15(b)(1) of the Natural Gas Act for a section 3 authorization or section 7 certificate, FERC shall be the only lead agency for the project-related NEPA review.
Updated 1 day ago
Last progress December 10, 2025 (1 month ago)
Who is affected and how:
Pipeline applicants and operators: Likely benefit from clearer leadership, standardized timelines, and centralized coordination that can reduce duplicative federal reviews and speed permitting. They may also face new procedural requirements (e.g., third‑party reviewers, remote surveys, additional water‑quality steps, TSA consultations).
Federal agencies: Agencies with statutory roles in permitting and environmental protection will be asked to participate under FERC’s leadership and to defer to FERC’s NEPA review in many respects. That could reduce parallel analyses but may limit independent agency decision timelines or public-facing roles.
FERC staff and resources: FERC becomes the central coordinator for multi-agency reviews, which may increase workload and demand for staff and technical resources. If no new funding is provided, that could pressure existing staff and schedules.
Communities near proposed pipelines and environmental justice communities: Public tracking increases transparency for local stakeholders and may produce faster final decisions. Some communities and advocacy groups may be concerned that centralizing review at FERC and emphasizing deference could reduce the thoroughness of independent agency scrutiny.
Environmental and public-interest groups: May view the streamlining and deference provisions as potentially reducing independent environmental review or limiting agencies’ abilities to impose additional protections. Conversely, required attention to water quality and public tracking could improve oversight in specific areas.
Security stakeholders (TSA and pipeline security): Formal consultation with TSA integrates security considerations into environmental review, potentially improving coordination between safety/security and environmental review teams.
Overall impact: The bill centralizes and standardizes federal review of gas-pipeline NEPA processes to increase coordination, transparency, and predictability. That can shorten timelines and reduce duplicative federal work, but it may also prompt legal and political debate about agency independence, the adequacy of environmental review, and whether resources will be sufficient to implement the new lead-coordination role effectively.
Last progress December 15, 2025 (1 month ago)
Introduced on June 2, 2025 by Richard Hudson
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.