Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
The bill amends the Geothermal Steam Act to require the Secretary to approve or deny geothermal-related applications within 60 days after completing required federal reviews. It bars pending civil actions from preventing processing unless a federal court vacates or issues injunctive relief, and clarifies that courts retain their existing authority.
Trust in agencies' ability to complete thorough NEPA/ESA reviews within 60 days
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive amendment that establishes a statutory deadline for agency action on geothermal authorizations and attempts to insulate processing from pending civil actions except where a court vacates or enjoins.
The bill amends the Geothermal Steam Act to require the Secretary to approve or deny geothermal-related applications within 60 days after completing required federal reviews.
It bars pending civil actions from preventing processing unless a federal court vacates or issues injunctive relief, and clarifies that courts retain their existing authority.
The subsection defines "authorization" broadly for permits, approvals, and interagency consultations needed for geothermal projects.
Technically narrow and low-cost but touches litigation/permit reform; easier as part of a larger energy package than alone.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive amendment that establishes a statutory deadline for agency action on geothermal authorizations and attempts to insulate processing from pending civil actions except where a court vacates or enjoins. The primary operational mechanism (60-day deadline after completion of required federal processes) and the responsible actor (the Secretary) are specified, but the bill omits several implementation details that would typically accompany a statutory processing deadline.
Trust in agencies' ability to complete thorough NEPA/ESA reviews within 60 days
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Trust in agencies' ability to complete thorough NEPA/ESA reviews within 60 days
Supports accelerating clean energy but worries the deadline could pressure agencies and weaken review in practice.
Notes the bill preserves court injunctive authority but limits litigation's ability to delay administrative processing.
Views the bill as a pragmatic streamlining measure with merits if agencies have resources.
Approves of retained judicial authority, but worries 60 days may be unrealistic for complex reviews.
Favors the bill as a pro-development reform that curbs litigation-driven delays and increases regulatory predictability for geothermal projects.
Sees retained court powers as adequate protection.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technically narrow and low-cost but touches litigation/permit reform; easier as part of a larger energy package than alone.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Trust in agencies' ability to complete thorough NEPA/ESA reviews within 60 days
Technically narrow and low-cost but touches litigation/permit reform; easier as part of a larger energy package than alone.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused substantive amendment that establishes a statutory deadline for agency action on geothermal authorizations and attempts to insulate processing f…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.