A bipartisan group of U.S. lawmakers shared a rare moment this week at a Senate committee hearing—they all agreed that the government’s handling of the federal permitting process is in need of serious reform.

“For too long, critical projects such as energy and infrastructure projects, along with industrial projects as well, have been trapped in a cycle of redundant reviews, shifting goalposts and regulatory uncertainty,” Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chair Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va) said in opening remarks at the Feb. 19 hearing. This includes projects needed to redeploy renewable energy and to restore the environment, she added.

The hearing came a day after the EPA granted Capito’s home state of West Virginia the right to approve the Class VI well program for carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) projects.

The committee’s ranking member, Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), said the panel is working with Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee members as well as the House on permitting reform legislation. But he warned that Democrats will not agree to any permitting package—including any bill that excludes offshore wind energy provisions—unless the Trump administration “ends its lawless disregard for congressional authority and judicial orders.”

Another senator raised the issue that the administration’s continued staff cuts at federal agencies exacerbates their ability to function. 

Several speakers characterized National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews as a major culprit in project delays. Leah Pilconis, general counsel of the Associated General Contractors of America, said the reviews, along with permitting and litigation issues, increase costs and cause workforce disruptions. She said that NEPA is the most litigated environmental statute and that the number of lawsuits being filed is increasing.

“Congress has taken meaningful steps to streamline environmental reviews and improve permitting efficiency,” she said, noting bipartisan reforms such as the Fiscal Responsibility Act that caps discretionary spending for fiscal 2024 and 2025. “However, federal agencies continue to introduce regulatory obstacles that conflict with congressional intent and delay critical infrastructure projects.”

AGC is calling on Congress, she said, to ensure that NEPA implementation aligns with spending reforms to standardize the 150-day judicial review period for all critical infrastructure projects and to expand the scope of permitting efficiencies.

Unpredictability is a big problem when it comes to infrastructure, especially energy projects, for the Laborers’ International Union of North America said General President Brent Booker. Approval for projects of any size takes far too long, he said, with permitting approval and judicial litigation particularly significant issues.

“A project could be permitted, fully funded and ready to go one day, then … out of nowhere, it gets hit with a lawsuit,” Booker said. Litigation guidelines and limited judicial review timelines should be part of all permit reform packages, including approvals under NEPA, he said.

Booker also called out the Trump administration’s halt on offshore wind energy site lease sales for causing major market disruptions, with projects especially off the east coast being withdrawn at a cost to union jobs. He cited several examples, including Europe-based cable manufacturer Prysmian Group’s recent decision to abandon plans to build a factory in Somerset, Mass., which would have supplied undersea cables to multiple offshore wind farms. 

Injection Well Accelerated Development

Meanwhile, West Virginia became only the fourth state so far since 2018 to have its request granted for state oversight of Class VI wells, which are used to inject carbon dioxide into deep geologic formations for long-term storage. The others are Louisiana, North Dakota and Wyoming.

Lee Zeldin, newly installed U.S.. Environmental Protection Agency head, touts the program “to power the great American comeback” to produce more energy, but groups including the independent research nonprofit Ohio River Valley Institute opposed the West Virginia approval. In a statement, it cited the state’s poor environmental compliance history, lack of attention to environmental justice concerns and “its demonstrated challenge in managing its existing injection well program.”