Sen. Alan Armstrong, R-Okla., is pushing an overhaul of federal permitting rules that he says would streamline approval for energy infrastructure projects and reduce costs for American consumers. Armstrong, who was appointed to the Senate earlier this year after stepping down as CEO of Williams Companies, a natural gas processor and transporter based in Oklahoma, has made permitting reform his singular priority during his time in office.
The proposed legislation, called the American Energy and Mineral Infrastructure Act of 2026, would make the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) the lead agency for approving interstate pipelines and liquefied natural gas terminals. Under current law, individual states can block federally approved projects, a dynamic Armstrong argues creates unnecessary delays and increases costs.
The package has attracted Republican co-sponsors including Sens. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Rick Scott of Florida, and Katie Britt of Alabama. Nearly two dozen oil and gas companies have also backed the effort.
What the Right Is Saying
Republicans supporting the bill say streamlining permitting is essential for U.S. energy competitiveness against China and other global rivals. They argue that current delays add years to project timelines and billions in costs, which ultimately get passed on to consumers.
"America has got to be able to build again, or else we are leaving our kids a worse country than the one we inherited from previous generations," Armstrong said. "I'm glad that my presence in the Senate these last few months has reinvigorated this conversation, and rest assured, I won't be stepping off the gas."
The bill's supporters contend that reforms to NEPA would merely clarify existing law rather than eliminate environmental review. They argue that procedural delays under the current system benefit neither industry nor communities, and that faster approvals with reasonable conditions serve everyone better than endless litigation.
What the Left Is Saying
Democratic lawmakers and environmental advocates have raised concerns about provisions that would narrow environmental review requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). They argue that weakening NEPA could harm communities near energy projects by reducing opportunities for public input on potential pollution, health risks, and environmental damage.
Environmental groups contend that streamlining permitting could disproportionately affect low-income neighborhoods and communities of color that often bear the burden of industrial development. They point to studies showing disparate health outcomes near fossil fuel infrastructure.
Some Democrats have expressed openness to targeted reforms that address legitimate delays without gutting environmental protections. However, they argue that provisions limiting judicial review of projects could prevent affected residents from seeking legal recourse when federal rules are violated.
What the Numbers Show
According to FERC data, interstate natural gas pipeline projects have taken an average of four to six years to receive final approval after initial applications, compared to roughly two years in Canada. LNG export terminal projects face even longer timelines, with some waiting more than a decade for full federal clearance.
A 2023 Government Accountability Office report found that environmental reviews under NEPA averaged 4.5 years for major infrastructure projects, compared to statutory requirements of one to two years. The same report noted that litigation adds an average of 1.2 years to project timelines.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration estimates that domestic natural gas production reached approximately 40.5 trillion cubic feet in 2025. Industry groups argue that new pipeline infrastructure could reduce regional price disparities that cost consumers an estimated $15 billion annually, though independent analysts have not verified this figure.
The Bottom Line
Armstrong's proposal represents the most comprehensive permitting reform effort since similar bills failed to advance in previous Congresses. The legislation faces an uncertain path forward, as it would need Democratic support to clear the Senate's 60-vote threshold for most major legislation.
Environmental groups are expected to mount significant opposition to NEPA changes, which they view as core protections that cannot be compromised. Industry advocates counter that reasonable reform has bipartisan support and point to polls suggesting voters across party lines favor faster infrastructure development.
What happens next: The bill will need a Senate sponsor with more seniority to advance. Armstrong's term ends in January, giving him limited time to build coalition support before the end of the year.