Plenary Session #11 at the Energy Imperative Summit 2026, entitled "Build more Pipes and Wires" featuring remarks from Senator Alan Armstrong (R-OK), Congressman Scott Peters (D-CA), moderated by Chris Barnard, President of the American Conservation Coalition.
Learn more:
EnergyImperatives.org
The Energy Imperatives Summit is a two-day forum for the leaders, innovators, and thinkers restoring American energy dominance.
June 9–10, 2026
The Capital Hilton
1001 16th St NW, Washington, DC
The 2026 Summit welcomed more than 450 attendees for two days of policy-dense programming, including work...
What Alan Armstrong said
Written from the verified transcript and checked against it. Every figure links to the moment it was said.
Alan Armstrong, former Executive Chairman of Williams Companies and now a Senator, argued that permitting reform should focus on siting all linear infrastructure, not just pipelines or wires, and should not be framed around greenhouse gas emissions. He criticized the overreliance on shot clocks when agencies delay notices of complete applications, and noted that NEPA is waived in housing bills instead of being fixed. Armstrong highlighted the 401 water quality certificate as a past blue-state weapon against pipelines, now becoming a red-state weapon against transmission, and cited a billion-dollar Williams pipeline from Pennsylvania to New Jersey that was vacated by a court. He stressed the need to triple grid capacity, praised the Manchin-Barrasso EPRA bill, and said reform must happen this year, with Senator Capito hoping for a product before summer break. He also mentioned the Western Gateway pipeline to bring low-cost gasoline to Arizona.
Key takeaways
Permitting reform should prioritize siting all linear infrastructure, not just pipelines or wires, and should not be about greenhouse gas emissions.
The 401 water quality certificate, once a blue-state weapon against pipelines, will become a red-state weapon against transmission if not fixed.
Reform must happen this year; Senator Capito hopes for a product before summer break.
The Manchin-Barrasso EPRA bill did a lot of work on transmission and was supported 15-4 in committee.
The Western Gateway pipeline would bring low-cost gasoline to Arizona and displace California gas.
Numbers and commitments
Figure
What it refers to
Type
At
90%
load factor of the Williams pipeline within nine months
Thank you very much, Congressman Harter and Thomas for that conversation. We're excited for a number of sessions on permitting, including this next one on building pipes and wires. We're joined by Chris Barnard, president of ACC, Senator Alan Armstrong, and Representative Scott Peters. Also later we have Senator Joe Manchin and AI hyperscalers. Please welcome the panelists.
Awesome. Thank you, Isaiah. I'd like to start by acknowledging your staff. You have some of the best staff on the hill. I'm not saying that because they gave me permission to push a little today. We've talked about permit reform for years, going in circles, but it feels like we're entering a moment where we can get something done. So I'm excited to push a little and raise the ambition.
Well, it probably came from you, so I appreciate that. Let's start with a softball. How do you both respectively feel about the state of permit negotiations right now?
Well, I think a lot of great work has been done by the House, and it's starting to pile up. At the Senate level, a lot is piled up that we need to tend to. The House has done a nice job dealing with pertinent issues. In the Senate, there's a strong desire among moderate Democrats to get something done, but it's a question of momentum to bring around leadership that may not be interested. I'm focused on making sure what we get done is meaningful and moves the bar. For instance, overreliance on shot clocks doesn't work when an agency won't give a notice of complete application. We need pragmatic solutions.
I think we're in a really good place. We haven't gone in circles; we've made progress. Among Democrats, third-rail stuff from five years ago is now part of our thinking. Reform comes from two things: money put in the bank with the Biden administration that didn't get into the ground, like 43 billion for telecom with no projects done, and 2,600 gigawatts of energy in the interconnection queue, 95% clean. We are in our own way due to laws from the 1970s. We need to build offshore wind, solar, hydrogen pipelines, and transmission for an energy transition. There's a substantial number of Democrats open to a good bipartisan package. It's great to have Alan Armstrong in the Senate; his expertise is valuable. We have a good product on NEPA from the SPEED Act and work on transmission from Manchin-Barrasso. We're set up for a big win this year.
I love to hear it. We'll talk about certainty and transmission, but you mentioned NEPA. It's a procedural statute, but many Democrats fear gutting a bedrock environmental law. How do you respond to that criticism?
There's a lot of hyperbole. I started on this with the Save Our Sequoias Act, which aimed to restore conditions from natural fire. We lost 20% of sequoias due to unnatural conditions. The response from the DC environmental community was 'you can't change NEPA, it's bedrock.' But it's a procedural statute, not substantive. The real bedrock laws are the Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act. NEPA needs modernization. Many Democrats are coming around to that view.
Right. And most projects delayed are zero-emitting. Senator Armstrong, you've worked in oil and gas. How do you address trade-offs between pipes and wires within your conference?
I think it's overcomplicated. Permitting reform should focus on making it easier to site linear infrastructure, regardless of energy source, while minimizing environmental damage. It shouldn't be about greenhouse gas emissions. If we focus on not standing in our way of building infrastructure in an environmentally friendly way, it wouldn't be that difficult. We're getting closer to that perspective. On NEPA, I find it fascinating that we waive NEPA in the housing bill instead of fixing it. That's no way to run environmental policy.
Just to be clear, I want to win for any and all linear infrastructure. I'm not the only voice. People paying attention realize how critical it is to allow access to our energy, whether due to high utility bills or lack of ability to meet AI and manufacturing demand. I don't think I'm solo on that.
We have to figure out how to make the grid more reliable, secure, and triple its capacity. There's little dispute on that. The Manchin-Barrasso EPRA bill did a lot of that work, supported 15-4 in committee. It's about people sitting around solving the problem. The coming increase in energy demand will push us toward answers. Democrats are open to pipeline reforms too; it doesn't make sense for New England to burn fuel oil or import LNG when there's no pipeline.
This is music to my ears. I love the energy addition concept. How do you think the administration's pulling permits for wind and solar has impacted negotiations? How do we get back to tech neutrality?
15 more exchanges in this transcript
Sign in free to read the rest of this interview. No card required.
Armstrong, A. (2026, July 3). Build more Pipes and Wires (ft. Sen. Alan Armstrong, Rep. Scott Peters, & Chris Barnard) [Interview transcript]. Energy Imperatives. CEOInterviews.AI. https://ceointerviews.ai/interview/1067684/
MLA
Alan Armstrong. "Build more Pipes and Wires (ft. Sen. Alan Armstrong, Rep. Scott Peters, & Chris Barnard)." Energy Imperatives, 3 Jul. 2026. Transcript, CEOInterviews.AI, https://ceointerviews.ai/interview/1067684/.
BibTeX
@misc{armstrong2026_1067684,
author = {Alan Armstrong},
title = {Build more Pipes and Wires (ft. Sen. Alan Armstrong, Rep. Scott Peters, \& Chris Barnard)},
howpublished = {Interview transcript, Energy Imperatives. CEOInterviews.AI},
year = {2026},
month = {jul},
url = {https://ceointerviews.ai/interview/1067684/},
note = {Speaker-attributed transcript with timestamps}
}
