The American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653) is a 417-page Senate permitting bill, introduced September 30, 2026, that would speed federal environmental reviews, expand transmission, and make new data centers pay their grid costs. Resources for the Future projects it would cut the cost of providing electricity by 3.5% to 7.0% and save more than $350 billion through 2050.
What is The American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653) – Introduction
The American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653) is the formal Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026, known as BAAJA. Senators Shelley Moore Capito, Mike Lee, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Martin Heinrich introduced it on September 30, 2026. It amends four major environmental laws and rewrites federal rules for transmission lines, geothermal leasing, hydropower, and offshore energy. The Senate scheduled a cloture vote for 5:30 p.m. on November 9.
This report explains what the bill does, using the Congressional Research Service summary, Resources for the Future modeling, and news coverage through November 9, 2026. The sponsors released a substitute amendment on November 7. The vote result was not known when this report was written. Cost figures are only model projections, not retail electricity rates.
Interesting Facts: American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653) 2026
Projected Changes Versus Baseline, RFF Central Case (each █ = 1)
System cost, low estimate ███▌ 3.5%
System cost, high estimate ███████ 7.0%
Emissions, 2041 ██████ 6%
Emissions, near term ███████████████ 15%
Transmission capacity, 2041 ██████████████████████████████ 30%
| Interesting Fact | 2026 Data |
|---|---|
| Introduced | September 30, 2026 |
| Length | 417 pages, 7 titles, 2 divisions |
| Sections (this report’s count) | 71 |
| Sponsors | 4 senators (2 Republicans, 2 Democrats) |
| System cost of electricity | Down 3.5% to 7.0% |
| Net present value savings through 2050 | More than $350 billion |
| Transmission capacity by 2041 | Up 30% |
| Cloture vote needed | 60 votes, November 9 |
Source: Congressional Research Service, Report R49506 (November 5, 2026); Resources for the Future (October 29, 2026); Congress.gov.
The bill moves on two tracks. Division A, from the Environment and Public Works Committee, changes review laws. Division B, from the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, changes transmission, leasing, and historic preservation rules.
Resources for the Future modeled the power-sector effects. It projects lower costs, 30% more transmission capacity by 2041, and a cumulative 1.83 gigatonne cut in power-sector carbon dioxide through 2041.
American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653) 2026 Bill Structure: Titles and Sections
Sections per Title (each █ = 1)
NEPA (Division A, Title I) ██████████████ 14
Clean Water Act (Title II) █████ 5
Endangered Species Act (Title III) ████████ 8
Project Certainty (Title IV) ███ 3
Electric Transmission (Division B, Title I) ███████████████ 15
Energy Permitting (Title II) ████████████████████████ 24
Historic Preservation (Title III) ██ 2
| Division and Title | Committee | Sections |
|---|---|---|
| A-I: National Environmental Policy Act | Environment and Public Works | 14 |
| A-II: Clean Water Act | Environment and Public Works | 5 |
| A-III: Endangered Species Act | Environment and Public Works | 8 |
| A-IV: Project Certainty | Environment and Public Works | 3 |
| B-I: Electric Transmission | Energy and Natural Resources | 15 |
| B-II: Energy Permitting | Energy and Natural Resources | 24 |
| B-III: Historic Preservation | Energy and Natural Resources | 2 |
Source: Congressional Research Service, Report R49506, Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026: Summary of All Sections (November 5, 2026); section counts by this report.
Division A has 30 sections across four titles, and Division B has 41 across three. Energy Permitting is the largest title at 24 sections, covering leasing, geothermal, hydropower, staffing, and offshore energy. Electric Transmission follows at 15.
Capito chairs Environment and Public Works, and Whitehouse is its ranking member. Lee chairs Energy and Natural Resources, and Heinrich is its ranking member. Coverage describes the bill as largely technology neutral, so it covers fossil fuel and renewable projects.
NEPA and Federal Environmental Review Changes 2026: Deadlines, Lawsuits and Programmatic Reviews
Programmatic Environmental Document Reliance, Years (each █ = 1)
Current law █████ 5
Under S. 5653 ██████████ 10
| Provision | Change Under S. 5653 |
|---|---|
| Agency NEPA rules | Revised within 180 days of enactment |
| Programmatic environmental documents | Reliance extended from 5 to 10 years |
| Lawsuit deadline | 150 days after an impact statement is published or an authorization is made public |
| Court remedies | No vacatur or injunction without extra criteria |
| Permitting Improvement Fund | $20 million per year, FY2027 to FY2033 |
| NEPA appropriations authorization | Raised from $1 million to $5 million per year |
Source: Congressional Research Service, Report R49506 (November 5, 2026), Sections 1103, 1107, 1110, 1121, and 1133.
The NEPA title would make the review an information document and say it does not require a particular decision. Agencies would rewrite their NEPA procedures within 180 days. Programmatic reviews would last 10 years instead of 5. A 150-day limit would apply to lawsuits, and courts could not vacate a decision or issue an injunction on a NEPA violation alone.
The Council on Environmental Quality would build electronic permitting tools and a public tracker of delayed projects. Congress would authorize a $20 million annual Permitting Improvement Fund from FY2027 through FY2033. That is $140 million over seven years, by this report’s calculation.
Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act Changes 2026: Permit Terms and Consultation Deadlines
Endangered Species Act Section 7 Deadlines, Days (each █ = 5)
Formal consultation, current ██████████████████ 90
Formal consultation, S. 5653 ████████████ 60
Extension without consent, current ██████████████████████████████ 150
Extension without consent, S. 5653 ████████████████████ 100
| Provision | Current Law | Under S. 5653 |
|---|---|---|
| NPDES permit term | 5 years | 10 years |
| Section 404 general permit term | 5 years | 10 years |
| Fill impacts treated as minimal | Not specified | Under 2 acres |
| ESA formal consultation | 90 days | 60 days |
| ESA consultation extension | 150 days | 100 days |
| Biological opinion lawsuits | Not specified | D.C. Circuit, 150 days |
Source: Congressional Research Service, Report R49506 (November 5, 2026), Sections 1203, 1204, 1302, and 1305.
The Clean Water Act title would double pollution-discharge permit terms to 10 years and double general fill-permit terms to 10 years. It would narrow what states can consider when they certify projects under Section 401, and it would limit the Environmental Protection Agency’s veto of fill permits. Adverse effects from fill in less than two acres would count as minimal.
The Endangered Species Act title would cut formal consultation from 90 to 60 days and extensions from 150 to 100 days. States could assume consultation duties from the Fish and Wildlife Service, backed by $150 million a year from FY2027 through FY2031. A coastal fund would receive $50 million a year from FY2028 through FY2032.
Project Certainty 2026: Permit Protections, Deadlines and the Manager’s Amendment
Project Certainty Time Limits, Days (each █ = 10)
Agency decision, covered projects ████████████████████████████████████▌ 365
Lawsuit window, NEPA claims ███████████████ 150
Court-ordered agency action ██████ 60
| Provision | Detail |
|---|---|
| Protected permits | Those in effect on or after September 16, 2026 |
| Agency decision deadline | One year for covered projects without an EA or EIS |
| Court-ordered action | Within 60 days if a deadline is missed |
| Remedies | Injunctions and costs paid from the Judgment Fund |
| Manager’s amendment | Adds a sixth exception for actions under applicable law |
| Manager’s amendment | Deadline runs from the last complete application |
Source: Congressional Research Service, Report R49506; Bipartisan Policy Center explainer (updated November 8, 2026).
Project Certainty bars agencies from revoking or altering permits that hold all federal approvals, with exceptions for court orders, legal violations, fraud, and safety. It protects permits in effect on or after September 16, 2026. It also gives developers a cause of action for a pattern of disparate treatment. Remedies could include costs paid from the Treasury’s Judgment Fund.
This title drew the most scrutiny. Supporters say it protects renewable projects from stalls like those under the current administration. Critics say it locks in existing permits and exposes taxpayers to payouts. The manager’s amendment added a sixth exception and moved the one-year deadline to Section 1403. RFF says its modeling reflects only the stated intent.
Electric Transmission and Data Center Costs 2026: FERC Siting, Planning and Ratepayer Protection
Required Review Cycles, Years (each █ = 1)
Department of Energy congestion report ███ 3
Interconnection rule reopened ████ 4
FERC fee review █████ 5
Geothermal Gold Book update █████ 5
| Provision | Detail |
|---|---|
| FERC backstop siting | Expanded, including some offshore and international lines |
| Federal right of first refusal | Prohibited in transmission planning rules |
| Data centers of 20 MW or more | Pay full cost of service; costs not passed to others |
| Behind-the-meter resources | 5 kW or more, online within 15 minutes, may join wholesale markets |
| Reconductoring | Categorical exclusion in existing rights-of-way |
| Data center demand data | Energy Information Administration collects electricity use |
Source: Congressional Research Service, Report R49506 (Sections 2101-2114); MLQ.ai summary of the Senate’s final text (November 7, 2026); Resources for the Future.
The transmission title expands the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s backstop siting power for interstate lines. It bans a federal right of first refusal and requires regional and interregional planning. The manager’s amendment makes transmission developers wait about a year for states to act first. It also gives courts more room to unwind permits.
The ratepayer rule is the bill’s main affordability measure. New data centers of 20 megawatts or more would pay the full cost of the grid service they need, and the cost could not be shifted to other customers. A 5-kilowatt threshold lets small batteries and generators join wholesale markets. Heinrich said the data center provisions protect household bills.
Electricity Cost Projections 2026: What RFF Modeling Shows for Power Prices and Emissions
RFF Central Case Effects Versus Baseline (each █ = 1)
System cost, low ███▌ 3.5%
System cost, high ███████ 7.0%
Near-term emissions ███████████████ 15%
Emissions in 2041 ██████ 6%
Transmission in 2041 ██████████████████████████████ 30%
| Metric | RFF Central Case |
|---|---|
| System cost of electricity | Down 3.5% to 7.0% per year through 2041 |
| Net present value savings | More than $350 billion, 2025 to 2050 |
| Transmission capacity, 2041 | Up about 30% |
| Interregional transmission | Roughly doubles; adds 10 to 15 GW per year, 2032 to 2041 |
| Extra clean capacity, 2028 | About 60 gigawatts |
| Near-term emissions | Down about 210 million tonnes (15%) |
| Emissions in 2041 | Down 107 million tonnes (6%) |
| Cumulative emissions, 2041 | Down 1.83 gigatonnes |
Source: Resources for the Future, Projected Effects of the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act on the Power Sector (October 29, 2026).
RFF’s model finds lower costs and lower emissions in every scenario it tested, though the size varies. Cost savings come from lower fuel and generation spending, partly offset by higher transmission costs. The model assumes electricity demand grows 2.7% a year because of data centers. Baseline power emissions rise from about 1,400 million tonnes in 2025 to nearly 1,800 in 2041.
The system cost is not the retail rate customers pay. RFF says it is a reasonable proxy only in regulated regions and excludes distribution costs. The study also leaves out permitting review changes, judicial review changes, and any side effects of Project Certainty. Separate modeling cited by MIT Technology Review found emissions would have been higher than the baseline had the bill applied in 2025.
Energy Permitting Provisions 2026: Geothermal, Hydropower, Offshore and Mining Changes
Geothermal Lease Sale Interval, Years (each █ = 1)
Current law ██ 2
Under S. 5653 █ 1
| Technology | Provision |
|---|---|
| Geothermal leasing | Annual lease sales instead of every two years |
| Geothermal permits | Federal decision within 60 days after review is complete |
| Geothermal on nonfederal land | No federal permit if government owns under 50% of subsurface |
| Micro hydrokinetic | Licenses for projects up to 5 MW; 10 to 20 year terms |
| Hardrock mining mill sites | $400 per site annual maintenance fee |
| Offshore energy | Preferred transmission routes; rights-of-way in marine sanctuaries |
Source: Congressional Research Service, Report R49506 (November 5, 2026), Sections 2215, 2223, 2225, 2226, 2234, 2251, and 2252.
Geothermal gets the most detailed treatment. The Bureau of Land Management would hold lease sales every year when parcels are nominated. It would create an ombudsman and a task force.
Other provisions cover hydropower licensing, offshore routes, and mining. Hydropower licenses for projects of 5 megawatts or less would last 10 to 20 years. Mill-site claims would cost $400 a year, with fees and lease receipts going to an abandoned hardrock mine fund.
Funding Authorized by S. 5653 2026: Historic Preservation, Endangered Species and Permitting
Annual Authorizations, Millions of Dollars (each █ = 10)
Historic Preservation Fund ████████████████████ $200M
Endangered Species Act Section 7 ███████████████ $150M
Coastal State Fund █████ $50M
Permitting Improvement Fund ██ $20M
Tribal preservation grants ██ $20M
Distributed energy permitting ██ $20M
| Program | Annual Amount | Years | Total (Calculated) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Historic Preservation Fund | $200 million | FY2027-FY2036 | $2.0 billion |
| ESA Section 7 and state program | $150 million | FY2027-FY2031 | $750 million |
| Coastal State Fund | $50 million | FY2028-FY2032 | $250 million |
| Permitting Improvement Fund | $20 million | FY2027-FY2033 | $140 million |
| Distributed energy permitting | $20 million | FY2026-FY2031 | $120 million |
| Tribal preservation officer grants | $20 million | FY2027-FY2030 | $80 million |
Source: Congressional Research Service, Report R49506 (November 5, 2026); totals calculated by this report. All amounts are authorizations, not appropriations.
These six programs authorize about $3.34 billion over their stated years, by this report’s calculation. The Historic Preservation Fund is the largest at $200 million a year for ten years. The bill would make deposits available without further appropriation. The fund previously received $150 million a year in mandatory deposits that Congress had to appropriate before spending.
An authorization is not an appropriation, so Congress must fund each program. The bill also raises the NEPA appropriations authorization from $1 million to $5 million annually.
Senate Vote and Political Outlook for S. 5653 2026: Support, Opposition and Next Steps
Sponsors Versus Votes Needed for Cloture (each █ = 2)
Sponsors ██ 4
Votes needed ██████████████████████████████ 60
| Item | Status |
|---|---|
| Cloture vote | 5:30 p.m., November 9, 2026 |
| Threshold | 60 votes |
| Manager’s amendment | Released November 7 |
| Jeffries | Announced opposition on November 5 |
| Tribal leaders | National Congress of American Indians opposes |
| Supporters | Public transit group APTA and a Chamber of Commerce coalition |
Source: Congressional Record via MLQ.ai; Inside Climate News (November 6, 2026); Native News Online; APTA; Western Environmental Law Center.
Majority Leader John Thune filed cloture on the motion to proceed before the recess. The vote needs 60 senators, so Democrats must supply votes. Supporters may want well over 61, since the House could demand wide bipartisan backing. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries said he would not rubber-stamp the bill after Democrats won majorities for 2027.
The National Congress of American Indians said the amended text still weakens tribal sovereignty. Supporters include the American Public Transportation Association and business groups. Check Congress.gov for the vote result and later House action.
American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653) 2026 – FAQs
What Is the American Affordability and Jobs Act (S. 5653) in 2026?
It is the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026, a 417-page Senate bill that reforms federal permitting for energy and infrastructure projects. Senators Capito, Lee, Whitehouse, and Heinrich introduced it on September 30, 2026.
What Does S. 5653 Change About Environmental Reviews?
It narrows and speeds NEPA reviews, sets a 150-day limit on lawsuits, extends programmatic reviews from 5 to 10 years, and requires agencies to rewrite NEPA rules within 180 days.
How Would S. 5653 Affect Electricity Costs?
Resources for the Future projects system costs falling 3.5% to 7.0% and more than $350 billion in savings through 2050. That is not the same as retail rates.
Does S. 5653 Make Data Centers Pay for Grid Costs?
Yes. New data centers of 20 megawatts or more would pay the full cost of the grid service they need, and those costs could not be passed to other customers.
What Is Project Certainty in S. 5653?
Title IV bars agencies from revoking or altering permits held by projects with all federal approvals, with exceptions. It protects permits in effect on or after September 16, 2026.
When Is the Senate Vote on S. 5653?
The cloture vote on the motion to proceed was set for 5:30 p.m. on November 9, 2026, and needs 60 votes.
What Changed in the Manager’s Amendment?
Sponsors released it on November 7. It adds a sixth Project Certainty exception, adds nuclear, wildfire, and brownfields provisions, and clarifies tribal rights-of-way language.
Who Opposes S. 5653?
Tribal leaders, many environmental groups, and House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries have raised objections. Supporters include APTA and business coalitions.
How Much Money Does S. 5653 Authorize?
Six programs total about $3.34 billion over their stated years, by this report’s calculation, led by $200 million a year for historic preservation.
Disclaimer: This research report is compiled from publicly available sources. While reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, no representation or warranty, express or implied, is given as to the completeness or reliability of the information. We accept no liability for any errors, omissions, losses, or damages of any kind arising from the use of this report.