New Bill Gives FERC Total Control Over LNG Export Terminals, Fast-Tracking Fossil Fuel Infrastructure

The “Unlocking our Domestic LNG Potential Act of 2025” is a short, sharp piece of legislation that completely changes who gets to greenlight the construction and operation of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) import and export facilities. Essentially, this bill moves the final decision-making power exclusively to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), requiring FERC to consider the export or import of natural gas as "consistent with the public interest" when making its call (SEC. 2).

The Regulatory Power Shift: One Agency to Rule Them All

Right now, approving major energy infrastructure like LNG terminals involves several different agencies, including environmental reviews. This bill cuts through that multi-agency process by handing FERC the exclusive authority to approve or deny these applications. Think of it like this: If you're building a house, you usually need sign-offs from zoning, plumbing, and electrical inspectors. This bill says, "Nope, just the electrical inspector gets the final say on everything."

For the energy industry, this is a massive streamlining effort. It means less time waiting for different agencies to weigh in, potentially speeding up construction schedules and getting U.S. natural gas into global markets faster. If you work in construction, logistics, or the energy sector, this could mean more jobs and increased investment in your area.

The 'Public Interest' Loophole

Here’s where things get interesting, and potentially vague. The bill mandates that FERC must view LNG export/import as being "consistent with the public interest." That sounds nice, but the term “public interest” is incredibly broad and lacks clear metrics. FERC could interpret this narrowly, focusing primarily on economic benefits and energy security—which the industry certainly wants. But what about the other side of the public interest: environmental impact, local community safety, and climate goals? The bill doesn't define how FERC must weigh these competing interests.

For people living near proposed terminal sites—say, a coastal community dealing with increased shipping traffic or potential safety risks—concentrating this power in one agency that is mandated to view the action favorably could mean their concerns get less consideration than they would under a broader, multi-agency review process. It centralizes a lot of power in a single, non-elected body, which can be concerning when dealing with multi-billion-dollar infrastructure projects.

Sanctions Still Stand

One provision that remains intact is the President's authority to impose sanctions. The bill explicitly states that it doesn't limit the President's existing power to prohibit imports or exports to certain foreign governments or persons, especially those designated as state sponsors of terrorism. This means that while the regulatory path for building the infrastructure is being cleared, the White House still keeps the foreign policy levers needed to restrict trade with bad actors if necessary.