PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Neguse, Joe [D-CO-2] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Oct 5, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10584 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10584 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10584 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10584 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-09-24 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Wildfire and Grid Reliability Act would create federal grants for electric utilities to strengthen the power grid. Funded work would have to supplement utilities’ existing plans, be designed to improve public safety, and either reduce the risk of power lines starting wildfires or improve grid reliability. Public, cooperative, investor-owned and federal utilities could participate. The bill would authorize funding, but that authorization would not itself provide the money.
This Act may be cited as the Wildfire and Grid Reliability Act.
The term eligible entity means an electric utility, including— (A) a publicly owned electric utility; (B) a municipal electric utility; (C) a cooperatively owned electric utility; (D) an investor-owned electric utility; and (E) a Federal agency or federally owned corporation that is an electric utility (as defined in section 3 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 796)).
the Secretary shall make grants to eligible entities to carry out activities that— (1) are supplemental to existing power grid-hardening efforts of the eligible entity planned for any given year; (2) are designed to enhance public safety; and (3) (A) reduce the risk of any power lines owned or operated by the eligible entity causing a wildfire; or (B) increase the reliability of the power grid.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out the program $15,000,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2036.
The Energy Secretary would have to establish the grant program within the Office of Electricity no later than 90 days after enactment.
The term Secretary means the Secretary of Energy.
Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish within the Office of Electricity a program
The proposal would cover both transmission and distribution power lines. Grid reliability would include the ability to withstand natural disasters, including earthquakes and several kinds of storms.
The term power line includes a transmission line or a distribution line, as applicable.
The term reliability, with respect to the power grid, includes the ability to withstand natural disasters, such as earthquakes, ice storms, wind storms, snow storms, heat storms, and other natural disasters.
Utilities would apply under requirements set by the Secretary. Wildfire-risk applicants would have to submit a wildfire mitigation plan; grid-reliability applicants would have to report their past, current and future reliability efforts.
An eligible entity desiring a grant under the program shall submit to the Secretary an application at such time, in such manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may require.
As a condition of receiving a grant under the program, an eligible entity shall submit to the Secretary as part of the application of the eligible entity under paragraph (1)— (A) a wildfire mitigation plan, if the eligible entity seeks a grant for purposes of implementing a project or otherwise carrying out activities to reduce wildfire risk, as described in subsection (b)(3)(A); or (B) a report detailing past, current, and future efforts by the eligible entity to improve the reliability of the power grid if the eligible entity seeks a grant for purposes of increasing the reliability of the power grid.
Grants could pay to put new or existing lines underground, strengthen overhead lines with more resilient or fire-resistant equipment, replace obsolete conductors and cables, and relocate power lines to roadways.
An eligible entity may use a grant provided under the program— (1) for the undergrounding of new and existing power lines and circuits; (2) to harden overhead power lines with fire resistant or more resilient equipment, such as steel poles and covered wires; (3) to replace obsolete overhead conductors and underground cables;
(7) for the relocation of power lines to roadways;
Grants could also pay for electrical protection systems, weather stations, equipment to locate or detect electrical faults, real-time monitoring technology and technology to detect fallen power conductors.
(4) to install fast-tripping protection systems; (5) to construct and operate 1 or more weather monitoring stations; (6) to install fault location equipment or early fault detection equipment;
(10) to install cameras, sensors, or other technology that provides real-time information about conditions; (11) to install technology to detect downed conductors;
Utilities could use grants to manage vegetation or other material that can fuel fires, subject to federal, state and local law. Grants could also fund equipment to reduce hazards involving animals and related grid damage.
(8) to carry out vegetation or fuels management activities in accordance with Federal, State, and local laws (including regulations); (9) to install technology or equipment to mitigate hazards from or to animals and related damage to the power grid;
Other allowed uses would include electrical facilities for local power networks called microgrids, including storage to integrate distributed energy resources, to support communities after a main-grid outage. Grants could also strengthen facilities against earthquakes and fund related upgrades to reduce wildfire ignition or natural-disaster damage.
(12) for the installation of electrical facilities necessary to sustain targeted microgrid operations, including storage for the integration of distributed energy resources into power grid operations, for the benefit of community resilience following a main power grid outage; (13) to harden facilities, substations, and other systems for seismic events; and (14) for other, related power grid upgrades to reduce the risk of wildfire ignition or damage from natural disasters.
The Secretary would have to prioritize projects judged to offer the greatest community benefit relative to cost through improved grid reliability or reduced wildfire ignition risk from power lines or equipment. This is a selection standard, not evidence that those benefits would occur.
the Secretary shall give priority to projects that, in the determination of the Secretary, will generate the greatest community benefit in improving power grid reliability or reducing the risk of wildfire ignition from power lines or equipment relative to the cost of the project.
At least 40 percent of program amounts made available to utilities would have to go to utilities seeking grants for wildfire-risk reduction. A separate minimum of 20 percent would be reserved for utilities that sell no more than 4 million megawatt-hours of electricity annually, a measure of annual electricity sales.
not less than 40 percent of the total amounts made available to eligible entities under the program are made available to eligible entities that seek a grant for purposes of implementing a project or otherwise carrying out activities to reduce wildfire risk, as described in subsection (b)(3)(A).
not less than 20 percent of the amounts made available to eligible entities under the program are made available to eligible entities that sell not more than 4,000,000 megawatt-hours of electricity per year.
Most grant recipients would have to contribute cash or noncash contributions worth at least the grant amount. Utilities selling no more than 4 million megawatt-hours annually would instead have to contribute at least one-third of the grant amount.
Except as provided in paragraph (2), as a condition of receiving a grant under the program, an eligible entity shall provide matching funds in the form of cash or an in-kind contribution in an amount equal to not less than 100 percent of the amounts made available under the grant.
With respect to an eligible entity that sells not more than 4,000,000 megawatt-hours of electricity per year, as a condition of receiving a grant under the program, the eligible entity shall provide matching funds in the form of cash or an in-kind contribution in an amount equal to not less than 1/3 of the amounts made available under the grant.
With the Secretary’s approval, a utility’s spending on grid reliability or wildfire-risk mitigation during the year before receiving a grant would count toward its required contribution.
On approval by the Secretary, amounts expended by an eligible entity on power grid reliability or wildfire risk mitigation efforts during the 1-year period ending on the date on which a grant is received under the program shall count toward the matching requirement described in paragraph (1) or (2), as applicable.
Grant amounts provided to federal power marketing administrations would be nonreimbursable, meaning those amounts would not have to be repaid.
Any amounts made available to a Federal power marketing administration pursuant to a grant under the program shall be nonreimbursable.
The Secretary could use program funds to provide technical help to applicants and recipients, and grants to hire or retain professionals supporting project planning, financing and implementation. Those staffing grants would not count toward either funding reservation and would not require matching contributions.
Using amounts made available to the Secretary to carry out the program, the Secretary may— (A) provide technical assistance to— (i) eligible entities seeking to prepare an application under subsection (c); and (ii) eligible entities to which the Secretary has provided a grant under the program; and (B) provide grants to eligible entities for the hiring or retention of individuals to provide and support, on a professional basis, assistance (including technical assistance) and informed decisionmaking in the planning, financing, and implementation of 1 or more activities described in subsection (d).
Grants under paragraph (1)(B)— (A) shall not be counted toward a set-aside described in subsection (f); and (B) shall not be subject to subsection (g).
Within two years after enactment, and every two years afterward, the Secretary would have to report to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and House Energy and Commerce Committee on how and to what extent the program improved reliability and reduced power-line-caused wildfire risk.
Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, and every 2 years thereafter, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and the Committee on Energy and Commerce of the House of Representatives a report describing the manner in which, and the extent to which— (1) the reliability of the power grid has increased under the program during the period covered by the report; and (2) the risk of wildfires caused by power lines has been reduced under the program during the period covered by the report.
The bill would authorize Congress to provide $15 billion for each fiscal year from 2027 through 2036. This is permission for future appropriations, not an appropriation of those funds.
There is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry out the program $15,000,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2036.
The supplied October 5, 2026 source snapshot records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on September 24, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-05T12:36:09Z. 2026-09-24: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 2026-09-24: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-09-24. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. Program authorizations and category-wide funding reservations are not automatically earmarks. This conclusion is limited to this version; formal disclosures and accompanying materials are absent.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied introduced text contains preferential funding terms for defined subsets of eligible utilities. These provisions relate to the main grant program; identifying them is not a judgment about their merits.
Utilities selling no more than 4 million megawatt-hours annually would receive two preferences within the main program: a reservation of at least 20 percent of available utility funding and a minimum matching contribution of one-third of the grant, compared with the ordinary 100 percent requirement.
not less than 20 percent of the amounts made available to eligible entities under the program are made available to eligible entities that sell not more than 4,000,000 megawatt-hours of electricity per year.
Except as provided in paragraph (2), as a condition of receiving a grant under the program, an eligible entity shall provide matching funds in the form of cash or an in-kind contribution in an amount equal to not less than 100 percent of the amounts made available under the grant.
With respect to an eligible entity that sells not more than 4,000,000 megawatt-hours of electricity per year, as a condition of receiving a grant under the program, the eligible entity shall provide matching funds in the form of cash or an in-kind contribution in an amount equal to not less than 1/3 of the amounts made available under the grant.
Federal power marketing administrations would receive an express special funding term: grants under this program would be nonreimbursable. The bundle does not explain how this provision would interact with repayment obligations outside the bill.
Any amounts made available to a Federal power marketing administration pursuant to a grant under the program shall be nonreimbursable.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 5, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI