The bill requires a new certificate of crossing for construction, connection, operation, and maintenance of border‑crossing portions of oil pipelines, natural gas pipelines, and electric transmission facilities. It assigns issuance authority to FERC for oil and natural gas pipeline crossings and to the Secretary of Energy for electric transmission crossings, while carving out existing projects and certain pending permits.
By replacing presidential permits and imposing statutory deadlines and agency rulemaking obligations, the bill aims to speed and standardize cross‑border energy approvals. It also amends the Natural Gas Act to impose a 30‑day statutory deadline for Commission action on imports or exports with Canada and Mexico and repeals the Federal Power Act provision that required a Commission order for electricity exports to those neighbors.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates a single federal 'certificate of crossing' required to build or operate the U.S. segment of oil, natural gas, and electric lines at international borders, with FERC handling pipelines and the Secretary of Energy handling transmission, and removes the need for presidential permits.
Who It Affects
Operators and developers of cross‑border pipelines and transmission lines, FERC and the Department of Energy, regional grid operators and reliability organizations, and companies seeking to import or export natural gas with Canada or Mexico.
Why It Matters
It centralizes and accelerates cross‑border approvals, replaces executive‑branch presidential permits with statutory agency review, and imposes tight statutory and regulatory deadlines that change how national security, environmental, and reliability considerations are integrated into approvals.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill creates a new, stand‑alone authorization called a certificate of crossing. That certificate applies specifically to the portion of oil pipelines between the international boundary and the first mainline valve, and to portions of natural gas pipelines and electric transmission facilities located at an international boundary.
Applicants must obtain a certificate before constructing, connecting, or operating those border segments, and the certificate issuance is linked to the conclusion of NEPA review: once a relevant official or agency takes final NEPA action, that official or agency must issue the certificate within 90 days unless it finds the project is not in the public interest. FERC is the deciding agency for oil and natural gas pipeline crossings; the Secretary of Energy decides for electricity crossings.
The bill preserves existing statutory regimes where they already apply. It explicitly leaves intact approval requirements under sections 3 and 7 of the Natural Gas Act for siting or operating import/export facilities, and it preserves FERC authority under Federal law for oil pipelines.
At the same time, it amends section 3(c) of the Natural Gas Act to require the Commission to grant an application to import or export natural gas to or from Canada or Mexico no later than 30 days after receiving a complete application. For electricity, the bill repeals the Federal Power Act provision that previously required a Commission order for exports to Canada and Mexico and instead makes the Secretary of Energy responsible for the findings formerly tied to that process; the Secretary must condition certificates on compliance with Electric Reliability Organization and RTO/ISO policies where applicable.The bill removes any separate presidential‑permit requirement for construction, connection, operation, or maintenance of cross‑border pipelines and transmission facilities.
It also exempts projects that are already operating at enactment, projects with an existing permit described in the bill, and pending permit applications (with a 2‑year backstop) from the new certificate requirement. For changes to existing projects, including reversals of flow, ownership changes, or routine maintenance, no new certificate or presidential permit is required if the project is already operating, previously permitted, or already held a certificate.To make the new process operational the statute requires rulemakings: relevant agencies must publish proposed rules within 180 days of enactment and finalize rules within one year.
Substantive provisions of other statutes—including the scope of NEPA review—remain applicable; the bill does not change NEPA's substance, only the timing interplay with certificate issuance. It creates an expedited judicial review window: parties aggrieved by a final agency action under the new regime have 60 days to seek review in specified U.S. Courts of Appeals.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires agencies to issue a certificate of crossing within 90 days after final NEPA action for a border‑crossing facility unless issuance would be contrary to the U.S. public interest.
FERC is assigned authority over border‑crossing certificates for oil and natural gas pipelines; the Secretary of Energy holds authority for electric transmission crossings and must condition certificates on ERO and RTO/ISO requirements where applicable.
Section 3(c) of the Natural Gas Act is amended to require the Commission to grant complete applications to import or export natural gas to or from Canada or Mexico within 30 days.
The bill repeals the Federal Power Act provision requiring a Commission order for electricity exports to Canada and Mexico and eliminates any presidential‑permit requirement for cross‑border oil, gas, or electric infrastructure.
The statute becomes effective one year after enactment and forces agencies to publish proposed rules within 180 days and final rules within one year; judicial review of final agency action must be filed within 60 days.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions and scope for border‑crossing facilities
This section defines key terms that narrow what needs authorization: the 'border‑crossing facility' is the specific U.S. boundary segment of oil pipelines (to the first mainline valve), natural gas pipelines, and electric transmission facilities. It also lists 'appropriate Federal agencies' that must be consulted and clarifies what counts as a 'modification' (including flow reversals, ownership changes, and changes in pump/compressor counts). These definitions matter because they limit the certificate requirement to discrete boundary segments and enumerate the interagency players whose views can affect the public‑interest determination.
Certificate of crossing: who issues it and when
The bill makes it unlawful to build, connect, or operate a covered border segment without a certificate of crossing. It ties certificate issuance to the final NEPA action: within 90 days after that final action the relevant agency must issue the certificate unless it finds the project contrary to the U.S. public interest. FERC issues certificates for oil and natural gas pipelines; the Secretary of Energy issues them for electric transmission facilities. Practically, applicants must coordinate NEPA completion and agency consultations so the 90‑day window can be met, and agencies must be prepared to make public‑interest findings on compressed timelines.
Exclusions and grandfathering for existing and pending projects
The statute exempts facilities already operating on enactment, those that already hold a permit described in the bill, and pending applications from the new certificate requirement (pending apps are grandfathered up to denial or two years). It also exempts modifications and maintenance of existing or previously certified projects. These clauses minimize disruption to ongoing commerce but create a clear line between legacy projects and new builds — a critical detail for developers and regulators sorting which rules apply.
Amendment to the Natural Gas Act — 30‑day grant deadline
The bill adds a 30‑day statutory deadline to section 3(c) of the Natural Gas Act: for imports from or exports to Canada or Mexico, the Commission must grant a complete application within 30 days. That is a procedural acceleration that constrains the Commission’s timetable for cross‑border gas trade and could shift how environmental, commercial, and interagency technical issues are sequenced.
Electric exports: repeal of FPA section 202(e) and conforming edits
By repealing the Federal Power Act’s requirement to secure an order under section 202(e) for transmitting electricity to Canada or Mexico, the bill transfers the core authorization role to the Secretary of Energy and removes the Commission’s prior order requirement. Conforming edits adjust references elsewhere to reflect the Secretary’s role. The Secretary must condition certificates on compliance with ERO and applicable RTO/ISO standards, preserving technical reliability obligations while changing which federal official delivers the ultimate public‑interest finding.
Elimination of presidential permits
The bill states that no presidential permit or similar executive authorization will be required for the construction, connection, operation, or maintenance of cross‑border oil, natural gas, or electric facilities. This is a structural change: authority shifts from a White House permit process to statutorily assigned federal agencies, altering the locus of discretion for national‑security and foreign‑policy considerations tied to border infrastructure.
Implementation timing, rulemaking, and judicial review
Substantive provisions take effect one year after enactment. Relevant agencies must propose implementing rules within 180 days and finalize them within one year of enactment. The bill also creates a 60‑day statute of limitations for judicial review of final agency actions under the new regime and specifies venue in the courts of appeals where the applicant is located or the D.C. Circuit. The compressed rulemaking and review windows are designed to make the regime operational quickly but will demand immediate agency capacity.
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 developers and energy exporters — gain predictable, agency‑based approval timelines and a single certificate rather than ad hoc presidential permits, reducing procedural uncertainty for new pipeline and transmission projects.
- Utilities and grid operators involved in cross‑border electricity flows — obtain explicit statutory conditioning that ties certificates to ERO and RTO/ISO standards, clarifying reliability requirements for international interconnections.
- North American trading partners and energy traders — benefit from faster, more predictable approvals for natural gas and electricity crossings, especially because the Natural Gas Act amendment imposes a 30‑day decision clock for Canada/Mexico trade.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal agencies (FERC and DOE) — must run accelerated NEPA–to‑certificate workflows, meet short rulemaking deadlines, and absorb administrative burdens of statutory timing and consultations with multiple agencies.
- Environmental and local stakeholders — may face compressed windows to litigate or influence permit outcomes because of the 90‑day certificate deadline post‑NEPA and 60‑day judicial review period.
- The Executive Branch's foreign‑policy apparatus — loses the presidential‑permit lever as a policy tool, shifting attention and potential costs to interagency processes and agency litigation defending public‑interest findings.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between predictable, expedited authorization for critical cross‑border energy infrastructure and the need for deliberate, comprehensive review of environmental, reliability, and national‑security risks: speed reduces uncertainty for projects but can curtail the time and institutional space necessary to identify and resolve legitimate public‑interest concerns.
The bill trades procedural speed and statutory certainty for compressed interagency and public review windows. Tying certificate issuance to a 90‑day deadline after final NEPA action pressures agencies to make public‑interest determinations quickly; that can reduce bottlenecks but also risks superficially resolved interagency disputes or incomplete consideration of evolving national‑security inputs.
The bill states it does not change the substance of NEPA or other statutes, but accelerating downstream decisions will require agencies to parallelize technical, environmental, and security analyses in ways they currently do not.
Removing presidential permits centralizes authority within agencies and reduces executive discretion that historically allowed a single, high‑level national security and foreign‑policy check on cross‑border energy links. That shift could improve predictability for developers but weakens a diplomatic tool and may increase litigation as stakeholders test agency public‑interest determinations.
The 30‑day grant requirement for NGA section 3 applications to Canada/Mexico similarly forces rapid action; without careful rulemaking and information standards it risks administrative errors or delegation of complex issues to post‑grant remedies rather than pre‑grant resolution.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.