February 2026 Vol. 81 No. 2
Features
Washington Watch: Will Senate remove infrastructure roadblocks?
STEPHEN BARLAS, Washington Editor
Legislation to remove regulatory barriers to infrastructure construction is up for grabs in the Senate in 2026 as Democrats are under pressure to find a way to approve two permitting bills House Republicans passed in December with minimal Democratic support.
One of those bills is called the Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development Act (SPEED Act/H.R. 4776). It makes changes to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), which determines the scope of environmental review by federal agencies for many different kinds of construction projects, including highways, wastewater, electric and pipelines. The National Utility Contractors Association (NUCA) is a supporter of the bill, arguing it “delivers the required clarifications and reforms the utility construction industry has sought for years.”
The National Gas Council also supports the bill, saying it simply incorporates into federal regulation the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Seven County Infrastructure Coalition vs. Eagle County. It said NEPA reviews could not consider the environmental effects of upstream and downstream projects that are separate in time or place from an infrastructure project. That case involved an 88-mile railroad line connecting Utah’s oil-rich Uinta Basin to the national freight rail network, facilitating the transportation of crude oil to refineries along the Gulf Coast. Eleven Democrats supported the SPEED Act in the House, which passed the bill on Dec. 18, 2025, by a vote of 221 to 196.
Senate passage is up for grabs considering seven Democrats will have to vote for the bill to reach a 60-vote majority needed for passage. In a blog post, the law firm Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP wrote: “Democrats are advocating for a broader package that includes support for clean energy and transmission infrastructure.”
The SPEED Act is sitting in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee chaired by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV). A committee staff member told Underground Infrastructure that “the Chairman remains committed to working with her Democrat colleagues to reach a bipartisan solution that will streamline our permitting processes and benefit projects across all sectors of the economy.”
Restrict CWA pipeline stoppages
The other bill passed by the House is called the Improving Interagency Coordination for Pipeline Reviews Act (H.R. 3668). It has been referred to the Senate Commerce Committee. It focuses specifically on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and would eliminate a state’s current authority under the Clean Water Act to stop a pipeline project already approved by FERC. States have used their authority under section 401 of the Clean Water Act to block infrastructure projects.
Under the bill, FERC would incorporate a state’s water quality review into its existing NEPA review of a pipeline construction permit, including any terms or conditions proposed by states that are required for compliance with the underlying statute. Three Democrats voted for H.R. 3668 on Dec. 12, 2025, when it passed with a vote of 213-184.
The explicitly pipeline construction focus of this bill stems from the current concern about whether there is adequate electric power for the data centers being built around the U.S. to accommodate artificial intelligence. On the House floor during debate on the bill, Rep. Bob Latta (R-OH) noted that after years of modest growth in electricity consumption, the next five years could see upwards of 128 gigawatts of new demand.
“The vast majority of this demand growth will require new, baseload, dispatchable power and natural gas will fill that gap,” he said. He argued that pipeline construction delays because of Clean Water Act section 401 approval delays by states “have resulted in energy shortages in certain areas of the country, exposing consumers to high prices and our grid to increased vulnerability.”
But when the bill came up on the House floor, Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) called the bill “an outright assault on our nation's environment.” He argued FERC “has no idea” how to judge whether a pipeline is in compliance with the Clean Water Act. He added, “At an Energy and Commerce Committee hearing in April, we heard from FERC that they do not currently have the staff expertise or resources.”
There may be some indication that Democrats in the Senate might be willing to vote for both bills with some changes. Democratic-run governments in New York and New Jersey have recently reversed their rejection on Clean Water grounds of pipeline projects. Last November, they reversed their previous denials of section 401 approval for Williams’s Northeast Supply Enhancement Project (NESE), which FERC approved in 2019. That project involves approximately 24 miles of new underwater pipeline designed to add capacity to the New York City area, with a targeted 2027 in-service date.
Turning the tide?
An even bigger indication of Democratic rethinking on Clean Water restrictions is Williams’s redoing of its CWA section 401 application for the 124-mile Constitution pipeline that FERC approved in 2014 and New York state blocked leading to Williams canceling Constitution in 2020. New York Governor Kathy Hochul has been repeating her “all of the above” energy development mantra, which will get a broader test of Democratic acceptability when the liberal Democratic-majority state legislature votes on specific Hochul pro-energy proposals this year.
It also remains to be seen whether Hochul’s willingness to temper blockage of infrastructure projects spreads to Senate Democrats such as New York’s Chuck Schumer, the minority leader, and Kirsten Gillibrand, just to pick two examples. If the Senate is poised to make a serious attempt to pass either of these two bills, that will become clear in the first quarter of 2026. There will be Democratic efforts to change both bills, and no one would be surprised if the FERC bill was dropped into the SPEED Act.
The Senate Commerce Committee, chaired by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), has jurisdiction over the FERC bill. Cruz’s office did not reply to a query about his plans for the FERC bill.
Capito will have a heavy legislative lift in her committee. On Dec. 22, the committee’s top Democrat, Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), issued a statement threatening to end permitting talks altogether following the Trump administration’s decision to halt the construction of five major offshore wind projects. “The illegal attacks on fully permitted renewable energy projects must be reversed if there is to be any chance that permitting talks resume,” he said. “There is no path to permitting reform if this administration refuses to follow the law.”
However, the first part of his statement thanked Capito and Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), chairman of the Senate Energy Committee, for their “good-faith efforts to negotiate a permitting reform bill that would have lowered electricity prices for all Americans. There was a deal to be had that would have taken politics out of permitting, made the process faster and more efficient, and streamlined grid infrastructure improvements nationwide.”
Electric utilities share that goal. In a column in the Washington Examiner on Nov. 19, 2025, Drew Maloney, president and CEO of the Edison Electric Institute, provided his industry’s support for permitting reform. As an example of why it is needed, he referred to the Cardinal-Hickory Creek transmission line (through northeast Iowa and western Wisconsin).
“It was approved in 2011 but took 13 years to complete due to permitting delays and lawsuits. This is not an isolated example,” he wrote. “Rather, it’s a nationwide pattern that adds billions of dollars in unnecessary costs annually and cannot be allowed to continue.”
Comments