Faster tree-cutting near power lines—with public revenue safeguard

What it does

This bill allows the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management to permit electrical utilities to cut and remove trees near power lines on federal lands without conducting a formal timber sale. If utilities sell the removed wood, they must share proceeds with the government (minus transportation costs). The bill aims to reduce wildfire risk by clearing vegetation around electrical infrastructure.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is to expedite vegetation removal around electrical lines on federal lands to reduce wildfire hazard, while maintaining environmental oversight and public revenue-sharing. It is a targeted operational efficiency measure with a clear public-safety rationale.

What the text implies

• Utilities gain discretion over which vegetation to remove within 'vicinity' of lines, potentially allowing removal beyond strict fire-safety necessity if consistent with land management plans.
• Revenue-sharing applies only if utilities choose to sell removed material; utilities may dispose of wood at no cost to themselves, capturing full value of the removal work without public compensation.
• Bill does not define 'vicinity' of distribution or transmission lines, leaving interpretation to agency guidance and potentially creating disputes over removal scope.
• Streamlined permitting may accelerate removal timelines, reducing opportunity for public comment or environmental review beyond baseline compliance with existing land management plans.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Ordinary citizens benefit from reduced wildfire risk near electrical infrastructure, which protects lives, property, and grid reliability. The bill maintains environmental compliance (land management plans, applicable environmental laws) and ensures public revenue from any timber sales, preventing utilities from capturing full value of public resources.

Who stands to gain

• electrical utilities (reduced permitting costs and faster vegetation removal)
• timber/biomass processors (if utilities sell removed material)

Named in the bill

U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of Land Management, Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary of the Interior, electrical utilities, National Forest System lands

Where it stands

3 cosponsors: 2 Republicans, 1 Democrats.

• Mar 31, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Mar 31, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Agriculture and House Committee on Natural Resources · Congress.gov: “Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period…”
• May 13, 2025 — Passed the House · Congress.gov: “Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection”
• May 13, 2025 — Floor vote scheduled · Congress.gov: “Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

6 lobbying clients named this bill on 6 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Mar 2026 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $154,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 10 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 82% of bills with at least one filing.

Salud Carbajal, the sponsor, reported $631,982 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• County of Ventura — $60,000 on 1 filing
• Northwest Public Power Association (nwppa) — $40,000 on 1 filing
• County of Santa Barbara — $24,000 on 1 filing
• Alaska Power Association — $10,000 on 1 filing
• Desimone Consulting Group on Behalf of the Northwest Public Power Association — $10,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.