Good Energy Jobs Act of 2026
- Sponsor
- Sen. Heinrich, Martin [D-NM]
- Committees
- Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 15, 2026
Bottom line
The bill leverages Department of Energy financial assistance to enforce high labor standards, promote domestic manufacturing, and ensure equitable community benefits in energy projects.
What it actually does
This bill amends the Department of Energy Organization Act to establish new requirements for recipients of DOE financial assistance. It mandates prevailing wages and apprenticeship utilization for covered projects, requires labor neutrality certifications, and makes project labor agreements mandatory for certain DOE facility projects. The bill also introduces a comprehensive framework for community benefits plans and associated agreements, promotes domestic manufacturing with strong labor standards, and sets a goal to direct 40% of financial assistance to small or disadvantaged communities.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue this bill will ensure that federal investments in energy projects create high-quality, good-paying jobs, strengthen American manufacturing, and deliver tangible benefits to local communities, especially those that are small or disadvantaged. They contend it will foster a skilled workforce, protect workers' rights to organize, and promote equitable economic development while advancing the clean energy transition.
Opponents contend
Opponents might argue that the extensive mandates on labor, domestic manufacturing, and community benefits will significantly increase project costs, add substantial administrative burdens, and potentially slow down the development and deployment of critical energy infrastructure. They may also contend that it limits competition, infringes on employer rights, and could lead to less efficient allocation of federal funds.
The bill is moderately complex but its structure allows for a clear understanding of its main provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2, adding new Sec. 601 to Title VI, Part A of the Department of Energy Organization Act
Definitions for Energy Jobs, Community Benefits, and Financial Assistance
This section establishes the meaning of key terms used throughout the new part of the Department of Energy Organization Act. It defines what constitutes 'financial assistance' from DOE, what a 'covered project' entails, and sets criteria for identifying a 'small or disadvantaged community,' which is central to several of the bill's mandates.
Supporters argue
Proponents argue that clear and comprehensive definitions are essential for the consistent and effective application of the bill's requirements, ensuring all stakeholders understand their obligations and potential benefits.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against definitional sections, though the specific criteria for 'small or disadvantaged community' could be a point of debate regarding its scope and flexibility.
Tradeoffs
The definitions aim to balance broad applicability with specific targeting, ensuring the bill's intent is clearly understood without creating unintended loopholes or overly narrow interpretations.
Section 2, adding new Sec. 602
Prevailing Wage and Apprenticeship Requirements
This provision mandates that all laborers and mechanics employed on covered projects receiving DOE financial assistance must be paid wages at rates not less than those prevailing in the locality, as determined by the Secretary of Labor. Additionally, it requires that at least 15% of the total labor hours on such projects be performed by individuals participating in registered apprenticeship programs, adhering to specified apprentice-to-journey worker ratios. Non-compliance can result in withholding or termination of financial assistance.
Section 2, adding new Sec. 603
Labor Neutrality Certification
This section requires any entity receiving financial assistance from the Department of Energy, including its contractors and subcontractors, to certify that it will remain neutral regarding its employees' exercise of their right to organize and bargain collectively under the National Labor Relations Act. This neutrality must be maintained for the entire term of the financial assistance, covering all construction, operations, or maintenance activities.
Section 2, adding new Sec. 604
Mandatory Project Labor Agreements for DOE Facilities
This section mandates that all contractors and subcontractors undertaking construction, alteration, maintenance, or repair projects at Department of Energy facilities with a total cost exceeding $1,000,000 must negotiate or become a party to a project labor agreement (PLA). The Secretary is also directed to ensure these PLAs include goals for local hiring and the participation of women, people of color, veterans, justice-involved individuals, and other underrepresented workers, as well as apprenticeship utilization.
Section 2, adding new Sec. 605
Community Benefits Plans and Enforceable Agreements
This section requires entities applying for DOE financial assistance for covered projects to submit a Community Benefits Plan (CBP). This plan must be informed by a community needs assessment, demonstrate meaningful engagement with local stakeholders, and detail how the project will address community concerns and provide measurable benefits to small or disadvantaged communities. Crucially, the CBP must be designed to result in one or more legally enforceable workforce or community agreements, such as a community benefits agreement or collective bargaining agreement.
Section 2, adding new Sec. 607
Domestic Manufacturing and Anti-Offshoring Requirements
This section requires entities receiving DOE financial assistance for research, development, or demonstration to agree that any resulting product will be manufactured substantially in the United States and to submit a domestic manufacturing plan. It gives preference to plans that commit to manufacturing using workers covered by collective bargaining agreements, registered apprenticeship programs, and other industry-leading labor standards. Furthermore, it prohibits the relocation, transfer, or outsourcing of manufacturing of products developed with this assistance to a foreign country for the term of the assistance plus five years, without prior Secretarial approval.
Section 2, adding new Sec. 608
Small and Disadvantaged Communities Initiative
This section establishes a goal for the Department of Energy to ensure that not less than 40% of financial assistance from a specified list of programs provides specific, measurable, and meaningful benefits to small or disadvantaged communities, as determined by the Secretary. It also requires enhanced consideration for projects located in such communities, ensuring they receive meaningful benefits and do not experience significant or permanent increased negative impacts.
The definition of 'small or disadvantaged community' includes communities with populations less than 10,000 where a 'sufficient number' of individuals bear burdens or are disadvantaged, as determined by the Secretary.
Sec. 601(7)(C)(ii)
Why it matters:It is standard legislative practice to grant agencies discretion in implementing broad policy goals, allowing for flexibility to adapt to diverse local contexts. However, it also means the precise scope of eligible communities could vary significantly based on administrative interpretation.
Case for: Proponents argue that this flexibility is necessary for the Secretary to adapt the definition to diverse local contexts and evolving data on disadvantage, ensuring the initiative can effectively target communities most in need.
Case against: Critics might argue that granting such broad discretion introduces ambiguity and potential for inconsistent application, allowing for political influence in designating communities rather than relying on objective, transparent criteria.
Estimated impact: This discretionary clause could significantly influence which communities ultimately qualify for and receive targeted benefits under the Small and Disadvantaged Communities Initiative (Sec. 608), affecting the distribution of potentially billions in federal financial assistance.
The Secretary of Labor and the Secretary of Energy may modify applicable payroll certification requirements under part 3 of title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, for contractors or subcontractors that are parties to a collective bargaining agreement, to better align reporting with their payroll schedules.
Sec. 602(a)(3)
Why it matters:This is a technical administrative adjustment aimed at reducing bureaucratic friction for unionized contractors, rather than a broad policy change. Such details are commonly placed in sub-clauses.
Case for: Proponents argue that this provision streamlines compliance for unionized contractors, reducing administrative burden and promoting efficiency by aligning federal reporting requirements with existing collective bargaining payroll schedules.
Case against: Critics might argue that creating such a carve-out, even for administrative alignment, could potentially reduce transparency or oversight for some projects, although proponents would counter that it's a practical adjustment without compromising accountability.
Estimated impact: This provision would have a minor administrative impact, primarily easing compliance for unionized contractors and potentially improving the accuracy of payroll reporting by aligning it with actual payment cycles.
The prohibition on relocating, transferring, or outsourcing the manufacture of any product developed or commercialized using DOE financial assistance to a foreign country extends for the term of the applicable financial assistance AND for a subsequent 5-year period beginning on the completion of that term.
Sec. 607(e)(2)
Why it matters:Specifics of duration and applicability are often detailed in sub-clauses within legislative text. While not necessarily evasive, it's a detail that significantly extends the impact of the policy beyond the direct funding period.
Case for: Proponents argue that this extended prohibition ensures a sustained commitment to domestic manufacturing, maximizing the long-term benefits of federal investment and preventing companies from taking federal R&D funds and then immediately moving production overseas once the funding ends.
Case against: Critics might argue that a five-year post-assistance restriction could unduly limit a company's operational flexibility and global competitiveness after the federal support has ended, potentially hindering their ability to scale or adapt to market changes.
Estimated impact: This provision significantly extends the reach of domestic manufacturing requirements, potentially impacting long-term business strategies and supply chain decisions for companies that receive DOE R&D or demonstration financial assistance.