Scott Peters (D-CA)
Certainty in Litigation for Electric Asset Reliability (CLEAR) Act of 2026
A Democratic bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the ``Certainty in Litigation for Electric Asset Reliability (CLEAR) Act of 2026'', seeks to amend the Federal Power Act. It focuses on the coordination of Federal authorizations for transmission facilities. The bill changes the language regarding the siting and construction of these facilities. It also establishes the Commission as the lead agency for certain permitted facilities. Additionally, it requires agencies to publish final actions in the Federal Register and encourages the creation of a consolidated record for review and permit decisions. Finally, it modifies the process for rehearing and judicial review of Federal authorizations.
Yes· 3 of 5
- Scored +4
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
The requirement to publish final agency actions in the Federal Register increases public transparency regarding federal decisions.
- Scored +3
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill centralizes authority by designating the Commission as the lead agency for certain permitting processes.
- Scored +3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Streamlined permitting processes can reduce regulatory uncertainty and costs for energy infrastructure businesses.
The opposite· 3 of 6
- Scored -4
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
By restricting judicial review and rehearing opportunities, the bill limits the legal due process available to challenge federal authorizations.
- Scored -3
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill restricts judicial review and limits the avenues through which legal challenges to transmission projects can be pursued.
- Scored -2
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The streamlining of federal authorizations may reduce the influence of local and state-level input on transmission siting.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Increased Transparency: The head of each Federal agency with authority to issue a Federal authorization must publish final agency actions in the Federal Register (Section 2, paragraph 10). This ensures that people are informed of final decisions made by these agencies.
-
Streamlined Record Keeping: The Secretary is tasked with consolidating all records relating to review and permit decisions into a single joint record of decision for transmission facilities where practicable (Section 2, paragraph 11). This could make the documentation process more efficient for these projects.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Restricted Legal Challenges: Under the new rules, a person may obtain rehearing and judicial review of a Federal authorization only under section 313 of the Federal Power Act (Section 2, paragraph 12(C)). This limits the ways in which people can challenge an approval of a Federal authorization, regardless of other provisions of law.
-
Changes to Judicial Review Standards: The bill dictates that each approval of a Federal authorization is deemed to be an order issued by the Commission for judicial review purposes (Section 2, paragraph 12(A)). This shifts how these approvals are treated during legal proceedings.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — The requirement to publish final agency actions in the Federal Register increases public transparency regarding federal decisions. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill centralizes authority by designating the Commission as the lead agency for certain permitting processes. Does this make it easier to do business across state lines? — The coordination of federal authorizations for transmission facilities may facilitate smoother interstate energy commerce. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — By restricting judicial review and rehearing opportunities, the bill limits the legal due process available to challenge federal authorizations. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The streamlining of federal authorizations may reduce the influence of local and state-level input on transmission siting.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Streamlined permitting processes can reduce regulatory uncertainty and costs for energy infrastructure businesses. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The restricted legal recourse may negatively impact the ability of indigenous communities to contest infrastructure siting on or near their lands. Would farmers be better off under this? — Streamlined transmission siting may reduce the ability of landowners, including farmers, to contest infrastructure placement. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The bill may diminish the ability of rural residents to challenge large-scale transmission projects passing through their communities.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this put more money into wind, solar and other renewable power? — By streamlining the authorization process, the bill facilitates the construction of electric asset transmission facilities. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill restricts judicial review and limits the avenues through which legal challenges to transmission projects can be pursued.
- 9/4/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in House
Gabe EvansRepublican · Colorado