PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jan 21, 2004
Electric Reliability Act of 2004 - Amends the Federal Power Act to extend Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) jurisdiction over each electric reliability organization (ERO), regional entity, and user, owner, and operator of a bulk-power system for purposes of approving reliability standards and enforcing compliance with this Act.
Prescribes procedural guidelines for: (1) certification as an ERO; (2) filing of reliability standards; and (3) imposition of penalties by either an ERO or FERC for noncompliance with this Act
Requires an ERO to: (1) file with FERC for approval any proposed rule or rule change; and (2) take all appropriate steps to gain recognition in Canada and Mexico.
Requires an ERO to assess periodically the reliability and adequacy of the interconnected bulk-power system in North America.
Directs FERC to establish a regional advisory body on the petition of at least two-thirds of the States within a region that have more than half of their electric loads served within the region
Declares this Act inapplicable to Alaska or Hawaii.
People & committees
Sen. Cantwell, Maria [D-WA] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S118-120)
Introduced in Senate
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: Sep 8, 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 S.2014 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 S.2014 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 S.2014 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 S.2014 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.