This bill creates a single, statutory pathway to authorize international border‑crossing facilities for oil, natural gas, and electricity by requiring a ‘‘certificate of crossing’’ before construction, connection, operation, or maintenance may occur. It also eliminates the need for Presidential permits for those facilities and forbids the President from revoking existing permits except by Act of Congress.
For practitioners and stakeholders, the bill realigns authority for cross‑border projects toward sector regulators and statutory deadlines, narrows executive discretion, and aims to accelerate trade with Canada and Mexico—while leaving other federal and statutory approval requirements intact.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires project proponents to obtain a statutory certificate of crossing for any new border‑crossing portion of oil or natural gas pipelines and electric transmission facilities, subject to NEPA review. It assigns issuance responsibility to FERC for oil and gas pipelines and to the Secretary of Energy for electric transmission, and removes the requirement for Presidential permits for those facilities.
Who It Affects
Cross‑border pipeline and transmission developers, FERC and DOE as issuing agencies, Regional Transmission Organizations/Independent System Operators and reliability organizations for electric projects, and counterparties in Canada and Mexico seeking imports or exports.
Why It Matters
By creating a uniform statutory approval route and numeric deadlines for agency action, the bill shortens timelines and reduces reliance on ad hoc executive permits—shifting legal risk from the Executive Branch to regulatory processes and potentially changing how cross‑border energy commerce is coordinated.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The core change in the bill is a new statutory ‘‘certificate of crossing’’ that project sponsors must secure before they can build, connect, operate, or maintain the part of an oil, natural gas, or electric transmission project that lies within roughly 1,000 feet of a U.S. international boundary. The bill ties certificate issuance to NEPA: once the relevant agency finishes its final NEPA action, it has a limited window to issue the certificate unless it finds the project is not in the public interest.
The bill assigns responsibility for issuing certificates to sector agencies: the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission handles pipelines for oil and natural gas, while the Department of Energy handles electric transmission crossings. For electric projects, DOE must condition certificates on compliance with reliability standards and any applicable RTO/ISO operational requirements.Beyond the certificate mechanism, the bill accelerates cross‑border natural gas and electricity approvals through statute: it mandates short agency deadlines for certain applications for trade with Canada and Mexico, repeals the Federal Power Act provision that previously required a Commission order for electricity exports, and explicitly eliminates the need for Presidential permits for these categories of infrastructure.The measure also protects existing and previously permitted projects from new permitting requirements and from unilateral Executive revocation: modifications to operating cross‑border facilities and projects with existing permits are exempted from the new certificate requirement, and the President cannot revoke qualifying permits issued under several named Executive Orders unless Congress authorizes such a revocation.Finally, the bill builds implementation timelines into law: the certificate regime and related amendments take effect one year after enactment, and the agencies must publish proposed and final rules within statutorily set windows.
The bill defines key terms—most notably ‘‘border‑crossing facility’’ as the component within 1,000 feet of the border—and preserves the applicability of other federal laws such as the Natural Gas Act where they already apply.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires the issuing agency to grant a certificate of crossing not later than 120 days after final NEPA action, unless it finds the crossing is not in the U.S. public interest.
For imports to or exports from Canada and Mexico, the Natural Gas Act is amended so the Commission must grant a complete natural‑gas application within 30 days of receipt.
Section 202(e) of the Federal Power Act—the provision that previously required an order for cross‑border electricity transmission— is repealed, shifting electricity authorizations away from that order regime.
The bill abolishes the need for Presidential permits (or similar permits) for construction, connection, operation, or maintenance of oil, natural gas, or electric transmission border facilities, and bars the President from revoking existing Presidential permits absent an Act of Congress.
Implementation deadlines: the certificate regime takes effect one year after enactment, and agencies must publish a proposed rule within 180 days and a final rule within one year of enactment.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Certificate of crossing requirement and implementation trigger
This subsection creates the substantive gatekeeping device: no person may carry out work on the border‑proximate portion of an oil, natural gas, or electric transmission facility without a certificate of crossing. The certificate is tied directly to NEPA final action—once NEPA review is complete the relevant agency has a statutory deadline (120 days) to issue the certificate unless it finds the project contrary to the public interest. Practically, this converts NEPA finality into a trigger for permitting and places time pressure on agencies to issue a positive authorization or make an explicit denial.
Agency allocation and electric reliability conditions
The bill assigns FERC jurisdiction over pipeline border crossings and DOE responsibility for electrical crossings. For electricity, DOE must condition certificates on compliance with mandatory reliability standards and any RTO/ISO operational controls that govern the facility. That ties cross‑border siting approvals to ongoing system operations and third‑party reliability oversight rather than leaving authorization solely to interagency or executive discretion.
Exclusions and treatment of existing projects
Projects already operating at the date of enactment, projects with existing Presidential permits, and pending permit applications are carved out. Modifications to operating or previously permitted facilities—defined broadly to include flow reversals, ownership changes, flow volumes, interconnections, and pump/compressor adjustments—do not require a certificate. That reduces retroactivity concerns and preserves operational flexibility for existing infrastructure.
Accelerated approvals for Canada/Mexico and repeal of electricity order requirement
The Natural Gas Act is amended so that complete applications for imports/exports with Canada or Mexico receive final action from the Commission within 30 days. The bill also repeals FPA section 202(e), removing the separate Commission order requirement for cross‑border electric transactions and making conforming changes to related statutes. Together these alterations shorten statutory approval timelines for North American trade.
Elimination and protection regarding Presidential permits
The bill states that no Presidential permit or similar permit will be required for the covered categories of pipelines and transmission facilities, and it prevents the President from revoking existing permits issued under specified Executive Orders unless Congress authorizes revocation. This replaces an executive‑branch licensing convention with statutory authorization and shields incumbents from unilateral executive action.
Effective dates, agency rulemaking, and definitions
The new regime becomes operative one year after enactment; agencies must publish proposed rules within 180 days and final rules within one year of enactment. The bill also supplies operational definitions—most consequentially defining a border‑crossing facility as the portion within 1,000 feet of the international boundary and listing what counts as a ‘‘modification’’—which will affect project scoping and whether a given activity triggers the certificate requirement.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Energy across all five countries.
Explore Energy in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Cross‑border project developers and energy exporters/importers — they gain shorter, predictable statutory deadlines and a single, sectoral permit pathway that reduces reliance on Presidential discretion and can accelerate project timelines.
- Canadian and Mexican counterparties and energy traders — faster, statutory timelines for approvals (including a 30‑day clock for certain gas transactions) lower regulatory uncertainty around cross‑border transactions.
- RTOs/ISOs and reliability entities — by requiring DOE certificates to be conditioned on compliance with reliability standards and RTO/ISO controls, the bill gives these entities clearer operational authority to ensure grid security at international interconnections.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal agencies (FERC and DOE) — they face new statutorily imposed deadlines, rulemaking obligations, and potential staffing and resource needs to meet 120‑, 30‑, 180‑, and 365‑day timeframes.
- Environmental, tribal, and local governments — the bill narrows executive administrative leverage (like Presidential permits) and imposes faster decision windows that may reduce opportunities for longer engagement or incremental mitigation negotiations.
- The Executive Branch — the President loses discretion to require or revoke permits for the covered facilities, constraining foreign policy and national‑security levers traditionally exercised through Presidential permits.
- Opponents and litigants — compressed administrative timelines may shift disputes into court, increasing litigation costs for opposing stakeholders and requiring agencies to defend expedited decisions.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill pushes decisional power into statute and sectoral regulators to speed cross‑border projects and provide certainty for commerce, but doing so constrains the Executive and compresses environmental and stakeholder review—creating a trade‑off between predictability for developers and flexibility for policymakers and community interests.
The bill attempts to thread a difficult needle—speed and predictability versus deliberative review. It ties certificate issuance to NEPA completion and gives narrow deadlines for agency action, but it does not suspend NEPA or eliminate statutory environmental obligations.
That creates implementation pressure: agencies must complete legally defensible NEPA analyses within existing timelines or face compressed decision windows that may invite litigation alleging inadequate review.
The law reallocates authority from executive permitting to sector regulators and statutory rules, which reduces the Executive’s flexibility to respond to changing foreign policy or national‑security circumstances. The prohibition on revocation absent Congressional action is a particularly bold constraint; it protects investors but removes a tool the President can use in emergencies.
Practical questions remain about coordination with Canadian and Mexican regulators, how ‘‘public interest’’ will be defined by FERC and DOE in contested cases, and how overlapping statutes (for example, the Natural Gas Act’s section 3 approvals and FERC’s oil pipeline authority) will be synchronized with the certificate process.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.