PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 5, 2007
National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor Clarification Act - Amends the Federal Power Act to revise the factors the Secretary of Energy may consider in determining whether to designate a national interest electric transmission corridor.
Authorizes the Secretary to consider whether the designation would have potential impacts on natural values and special places considered to be in the national interest. Repeals authority to consider whether designation would serve U.S. energy independence.
Directs the Secretary, before a corridor designation, to analyze all alternatives measures that could address energy transmission constraints or congestion.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Prohibits a corridor designation from encompassing, within one mile of their respective boundaries, lands on which development is prohibited or limited to protect scenic, natural, cultural, or historic resources.
Revises conditions for issuance of permits by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for construction or modification of electric transmission facilities in such a corridor. Requires that a state commission or other state entity with authority to approve facility siting has: (1) disapproved the siting in a decision that FERC considers an abuse of discretion; or (2) unreasonably withheld or delayed making a decision for at least a year.
Requires each permit application to include an engineering study of the feasibility of placing the line underground.
Requires treatment as a taking for which just compensation is due of a diminution of 10% or more in any property value resulting from acquisition of a right-of-way and the construction of a facility on it.
Requires each agency to issue its own record of decision in order to ensure that its environmental review complies with statutory mandates and regulatory requirements.
Repeals any right to appeal to the President an agency denial or failure to act regarding federal authorization for a transmission facility.
People & committees
Rep. Wolf, Frank R. [R-VA-10] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E256-257)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. 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.829 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.829 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.829 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.829 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.