Engineering and Design Materials for Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities Related to Potential Impacts Caused by Natural Hazards

AGENCY:

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Department of Energy.

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) issues this final rule to revise its regulations governing liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities subject to sections 3 and 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) by removing outdated references for seismic hazard evaluations and seismic design criteria for LNG facilities. In their place, the Commission codifies its existing practice of evaluating seismic and other natural hazards and design criteria for jurisdictional LNG facilities. These revisions are intended to reduce confusion about applicable technical requirements and clarify the information required in applications filed before the Commission to ensure the public is protected from potential catastrophic impacts caused by natural hazards from design through the operation of the LNG facilities.

DATES:

This rule is effective December 29, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Andrew Kohout (Technical Information), Office of Energy Projects, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8053, andrew.kohout@ferc.gov.

Kenneth Yu (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426, (202) 502–8482, kenneth.yu@ferc.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

1. In this final rule, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission or FERC) revises its regulations under 18 CFR parts 153 and 380 governing liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities subject to sections 3 and 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) by removing references to a legacy agency (the National Bureau of Standards) that has been renamed and two technical standards related to seismic hazard evaluation and seismic design criteria for LNG facilities (Uniform Building Code's (UBC) Seismic Risk Map of the United States (Map) and National Bureau of Standards Information Report (NBSIR) 84–2833, Data Requirements for the Seismic Review of LNG Facilities ) that have become outdated. Consistent with the Commission's previous rulemakings to update outdated regulations, the final rule codifies the Commission's current practice for reviewing seismic and other natural hazard evaluation and design materials related to NGA section 3 and 7 applications for LNG facilities, as memorialized in the Commission's Guidance Manual for Environmental Report Preparation for Applications Filed Under the Natural Gas Act, Volume II, Liquefied Natural Gas Project Resource Reports 11 and 13 Supplemental Guidance (2017 Guidance). The Commission uses such engineering and design materials to assist in determining that the construction and operation of a proposed LNG facility will be safe and reliable for its entire life. The purpose of the rulemaking is to reduce confusion about the informational requirements under parts 153 and 380 of the Commission's regulations.

I. Background

A. The Commission's Statutory Authority

2. Under section 3(e) of the NGA, the Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over authorizing the siting, construction, expansion, and operation of LNG terminals onshore and in state waters. Additionally, section 3(a) of the NGA provides that the Commission may condition authorizations for the siting, construction, and operation of facilities used to import or export gas as it may find necessary or appropriate. The Commission also issues certificates of public convenience and necessity for LNG and other facilities used for the transportation of natural gas in interstate commerce under section 7 of the NGA. When acting on applications filed pursuant to these sections of the NGA, the Commission serves as the lead Federal agency for satisfying compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

3. Moreover, section 16 of the NGA authorizes the Commission to prescribe and issue rules and regulations that define technical terms and prescribe the form or forms of all applications and reports to be filed before the Commission, and the information which they must contain.

B. The Commission's LNG and NEPA Regulations

4. The Commission's regulations implementing its statutory authority, codified in 18 CFR parts 153, 157, and 380, direct prospective applicants and applicants to provide information necessary for the Commission to process their applications. Part 153 of the Commission's regulations pertains to applications for authorization to site, construct, or operate facilities used to export or import natural gas under section 3 of the NGA. These applications must include exhibits that are consistent with § 153.8(a). In particular, paragraph (a)(5) requires a report containing detailed engineering and design information be included in an application's Exhibit E and references the Commission's Guidance Manual for Environmental Report Preparation. In addition, paragraph (a)(6) requires a report on earthquake hazards and engineering be included in an application's Exhibit E–1 and paragraph (a)(7) requires that an application include an Exhibit F, an environmental report that complies with §§ 380.3 and 380.12 of the Commission's regulations.

5. Similarly, in part 157 of the Commission's regulations, which pertains to applications for certificates of public convenience and necessity for the construction and operation of facilities to provide interstate natural gas transportation service under section 7 of the NGA, § 157.14(a) sets forth the exhibits that must accompany an NGA section 7 application. Paragraph (a)(7) requires the applicant to file an Exhibit F–1, an environmental report that complies with §§ 380.3 and 380.12 of the Commission's regulations.

6. Section 380.3 establishes the information that an applicant must file, including information identified in § 380.12 and appendix A to part 380. Section 380.12 identifies the content requirements for each of the environmental reports outlined in the 13 individual resource reports. Specifically, § 380.12(h)(5) requires a report, in Resource Report 6 (Geological Resources), on earthquake hazards and engineering that conforms to NBSIR 84–2833 if the applicant proposes to construct and operate LNG facilities located in zones 2, 3, or 4 of the UBC map, or where there is potential for surface faulting or liquefaction.

7. Further, pursuant to § 380.12(o), applicants must also prepare a report, Resource Report 13, that contains engineering and design material for the proposed LNG facility. The information provided in Resource Report 13 is used to evaluate the information provided in Resource Report 11, which addresses the potential hazard to the public from failure of LNG facility components resulting from accidents and natural catastrophes, including seismic events, the effects of these events on reliability, and the procedures and design features that have been used to reduce potential failures. Section 380.12(o)(14) requires an applicant to identify how it will comply with the applicable U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations, including its siting requirements, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 59A LNG Standards and, if applicable, U.S. Coast Guard's regulations pertaining to vapor dispersion calculations from LNG spills over water. As with Resource Report 6, applicants must provide seismic information specified in NBSIR 84–2833 for LNG facilities that would be located in zone 2, 3, or 4 of the UBC map when preparing Resource Report 13.

8. Appendix A to part 380 summarizes the minimum filing requirements for these resource reports. Failure to comply with these minimum filing requirements can result in rejection of the application.

C. Outdated Technical Standards and Legacy Reference in Regulations

9. As described above, both Resource Reports 6 and 13 require information based on the UBC map and NBSIR 84–2833. The UBC map groups the country into seismic risk classifications and formalizes construction standards based on those classifications. The last version of the UBC was published in 1997 and was subsequently replaced by the International Code Council's (ICC) International Building Code (IBC), first published in 2000. The IBC incorporates the U.S. Geological Survey's Seismic Risk Map of Ground Motions for the United States, seismic design categories in the Structural Engineering Institute (SEI) of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures (ASCE 7), and NEHRP's Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other Structures.

10. Published in 1984, NBSIR 84–2833 was intended to provide guidance for applicants requesting Commission authorization to construct LNG facilities on how to investigate a site to obtain geologic and seismic data for the Commission's seismic review of proposed LNG facilities. It also standardized the format for reporting this data to the Commission. In light of multiple revisions to DOT's minimum safety standards and NFPA 59A since 1984, NBSIR 84–2833 no longer serves as the most appropriate guidance to help applicants prepare resource reports for the Commission's review.

11. On January 23, 2007, the Commission issued a draft document, Seismic Design Guidelines and Data Submittal Requirements for LNG Facilities, to address the confusion caused by these two outdated standards by updating and replacing the information in NBSIR 84–2833. The Commission, however, never finalized those guidelines.

12. On February 22, 2017, as part of a larger effort to update its environmental reporting guidance, the Commission issued the 2017 Guidance, recommending specific engineering-design information, the level of detail, and formatting that should be included in applications to help Commission staff evaluate and address a proposed project's potential safety and reliability impacts. The 2017 Guidance updated and clarified the level of detail and format of the information needed for the Commission's evaluation of hazards associated with proposed LNG facilities, including information regarding how accidents or natural catastrophes, including seismic events, would affect a proposed project's safety and reliability and whether the project's engineering design ensures adequate reliability and safety. For example, the guidance identified the types of natural hazards that should be analyzed, the natural hazard design investigations and design forces that should be referenced, the types of structures, systems, and components that should be described, and the types of diagrams and maps that should be included. The 2017 Guidance also recommended that applicants design certain LNG structures, systems, and components to be consistent with the seismic requirements of the 2005 version of ASCE 7 to demonstrate that their proposed projects would not have a significant impact on public safety. The 2017 Guidance recommended other evaluation and design measures for other natural hazards based on the regulatory requirements in § 380.12, DOT's regulations in 49 CFR part 193, and other best practices.

D. Governmental Accountability Office's Report

13. On August 6, 2020, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report recommending that the Commission update part 153 of its regulations because they incorporate the outdated technical standard NBSIR 84–2833 and UBC. The GAO noted that the Commission issued the 2017 Guidance and the draft 2007 Guidelines to address applicants' confusion, but, because guidance documents are not binding, it recommended that the Commission review its regulations for outdated technical standards and update them accordingly so as to avoid confusing the public about current regulatory requirements.

E. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

14. On November 17, 2022, the Commission issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to revise the Commission's regulations as described in this final rule. The Center for LNG (CLNG) and American Petroleum Institute (API) (together, commenters) filed a timely joint comment. As discussed below, the Commission considered the comment in preparing the final rule.

II. Discussion

15. The current rulemaking clarifies and updates the informational requirements in the Commission's regulations by codifying the current practice for processing NGA section 3 and 7 applications. As a brief overview of the Commission's practice, once an applicant files an application, Commission staff reviews it to ensure that it contains all the information required by the regulations. If the application is deficient, Commission staff issues requests for information to supplement the application. Once the application is complete, Commission staff then discloses to the public and the Commissioners in the NEPA document staff's analysis of the proposal's environmental, engineering, and safety effects. The environmental document includes Commission staff's recommendations related to the construction and operation of the project, including measures to mitigate adverse effects. If the Commission approves the application, the Commission's oversight of the project continues through final design, construction, commissioning, and operation of the project to ensure that the project has complied with the terms and conditions of the Commission's authorization order.

16. As the Commission has previously explained, applications that follow the same format result in a more expeditious Commission review and processing of applications. When an application lacks the information necessary for the Commission to review a proposal's potential impacts on the environment, public safety, or reliability, the Commission's review is delayed until the Commission obtains the missing information. The Commission has previously taken steps to clarify its regulations to reduce applicants' uncertainty when outdated Commission regulations were contributing to applicants' confusion about the Commission's practice or informational requirements. The purpose of codifying an existing practice is “to provide better guidance to the regulated industry on what the Commission needs for its environmental analysis” and “when the information should be provided.” As a result of this rulemaking, the Commission will be able to more “quickly process applications in a way that protects the environment and ensures the procedural requirements of NEPA are met,” as well as ensure the proposed LNG facilities will be constructed and operated in a safe and reliable manner.

A. This Rulemaking Complies With the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995

17. The commenters recommend that the Commission identify and use appropriate voluntary consensus standards in lieu of codifying the practices outlined in the Commission's 2017 Guidance but do not identify or recommend any specific standard that would be appropriate.

18. Section 12(d) of the NTTAA requires all Federal agencies and departments to use technical standards that are developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standard bodies to carry out policy objectives or activities determined by the agencies and departments unless using such a standard is inconsistent with applicable law or otherwise impractical. The use of a voluntary consensus standard would be impractical, for example, if it would not be effective at meeting an agency's regulatory or program needs. Moreover, there may be instances where a suitable voluntary consensus standard does not exist. In either instance, an agency is permitted to use another standard other than a voluntary consensus standard.

19. The final rule does not adopt voluntary consensus standards related to natural hazard evaluation and design criteria for LNG structures, systems, and components because adopting such standards would be impractical. The Commission's evaluation and analysis of LNG applications, which propose technically diverse types of facilities, must consider the unique locations that the LNG facilities will be sited, constructed, and operated. Over 2,500 standards exist that could be applicable to an LNG structure, system, or component. No one standard would apply to every application that the Commission reviews. Likewise, no individual application would be subject to every standard. To ensure that all types of proposals are covered by a standard would require that the Commission codify every potential consensus standard that could apply in its various LNG proceedings. Such an effort would be infeasible and would confuse applicants about which standards the Commission expects them to apply to their proposal.

20. Moreover, although some standards set criteria for the siting, design, construction, operation, and maintenance of LNG facilities, they often do not sufficiently detail the engineering information needed in an application to allow the Commission to fully assess the reliability and safety of the LNG facilities. As a result, the lack of detail has led to applicants applying these standards inconsistently.

21. The Commission's practice, informed by the 2017 Guidance, has been to clarify that, when applicants prepare Resource Report 13, they should provide certain specific information regarding the engineering of the proposed LNG facilities. This information includes identifying applicable Federal regulations, proposed codes and standards, as well as additional information on the proposed siting, design, construction, and operation. By having the applicants identify all Federal regulations, codes, and standards that apply to their project-specific and site-specific proposal, the Commission is then able to evaluate applications for LNG facilities on a case-by-case basis, determine and evaluate the Federal regulations, codes, and standards that apply (including any voluntary consensus standards that are adopted into those regulations). Based on the information, the Commission could more effectively coordinate with other Federal agencies with jurisdiction over the proposal, evaluate whether the identified regulations, codes, and standards contain informational gaps, and recommend modifications or conditions that should be included in the Commission's authorization based on the proposed LNG facilities and layers of protection that would reduce the risk of adverse effects to the public and the environment and reliability.

22. For these reasons, we elect to codify the Commission's practice of obtaining information necessary for it to fulfill its regulatory mission in lieu of using a voluntary consensus standard, as permitted by the NTTAA.

B. Final Rule Further Clarifies Certain Terms

23. The commenters request clarification about the following terms undefined in the NOPR: (i) “structures, systems, and components;” (ii) “associated safety related structures, systems, and components;” (iii) “applicable codes and standards;” and (iv) “generally accepted codes, standards, and specifications.” To prevent confusion, they recommend that the final rule define these terms and identify which codes and standards should be incorporated by reference into the Commission's regulations.

24. We find no need to codify a definition for these terms but provide additional clarification below. When interpreting commonly used terms, such as “structures, systems, and components” and “generally accepted,” applicants should exercise the professional standard of care that is expected of engineers. “Structures, systems, and components” is a common engineering term used in connection with engineering design of complex systems, including LNG facilities. In general, structures provide structural support of loads. Examples include free-standing LNG storage tanks, free-standing equipment, pipe racks, buildings, and dikes, including their foundations. Systems are generally a collection of components that together perform a function. Examples include tank systems, transfer systems, firewater systems, electrical systems, and instrument and control systems. Components are equipment, or parts of equipment, that constitute pieces of larger systems. Examples include pumps, valves, and piping. The Commission's 2017 Guidance also clarifies certain structures, systems, and components.

25. Structures, systems, and components that are “associated” with safety depend on context, such as the structure, system, or component's purpose and the characteristics of the surrounding area. Generally, a structure, system, or component that is “associated” with safety would be one that provides a layer of protection that the LNG operator relies on to prevent or reduce the likelihood of failure of a particular structure, system, or component, or limit, mitigate, or reduce the consequences of a failure. An example of system associated with safety is a firewater system because it is used to prevent failure of structures, systems, or components within the overall LNG plant, when exposed to a potential fire ( e.g., pipe rack failure, pressure vessel burst, boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion). Other examples include security systems, such as emergency lighting, including the emergency backup power generators and fuel supply, that reduce the likelihood of an intentional act that could result in failure of structures, systems, or components; and dikes that are used to contain spills from an LNG storage tank to limit the pool spread and reduce the consequences from subsequent dispersion of flammable vapors and fire impacts. As noted earlier, when interpreting terms, applicants should exercise the professional standard of care that is expected of engineers.

26. With regard to “applicable” codes and standards, the applicability of the code or standard is informed by the context of the sentence and paragraph. For instance, new § 380.12(o)(15)(i)(B) requires Resource Report 13 to include “[t]he design classification for each structure, system, and component in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local requirements and applicable codes and standards.” The “applicable” codes and standards, in this context, refers to codes and standards that have requirements for design classification of structures, systems, and components. The applicable Federal regulations may also inform the applicability of codes and standards.

27. It is worth noting that the final rule does not make the Commission's 2017 Guidance obsolete. Even after the final rule becomes effective, prospective applicants and applicants are still advised to refer to guidance to understand the Commission's expectations for informational and formatting requirements under our regulations. If the Commission finds that certain terms continue to confuse applicants, which in turn may delay the Commission's review of their applications, the Commission will issue guidance to provide further assistance.

C. Final Rule Has No Retroactive Effect

28. The commenters seek clarity that the requirements in the final rule will not be retroactively applied to existing jurisdictional LNG facilities. They are concerned that existing operators who file an application or request Commission approval to modify operations, expand, or add equipment to their LNG facilities would be required to upgrade or retrofit the existing facility to comply with the new requirements. To help avoid confusion, they recommend that we amend parts 153, 157, and 380 by adding a new applicability section that states the new requirements do not apply to existing LNG facilities authorized before the effective date of the final rule.

29. We decline to adopt commenters' recommendation because § 380.12(o) already specifies the applicability of the content and formatting requirements for Resource Report 13. It plainly states that the “report is required for construction of new [LNG] facilities, or the recommissioning of existing LNG facilities.” Therefore, the requirements in new § 380.12(o)(14) would apply only to applicants who file an application to construct new LNG facilities or recommission existing LNG facilities once the final rule is effective. Adding a new applicability section would be redundant and unnecessary.

D. Regulatory Burden Analysis Is Sufficient

30. The commenters recommend that the final rule compare the regulatory burden of final rule with the existing regulatory burden. They identify one new requirement that they assert could introduce a new burden. The NOPR proposes in new § 380.12(o)(15)(iii)(A)( 22) that applicants are required to describe the proposed LNG facility's seismic monitoring system, which includes a minimum of one triaxial ground motion recorder installed to register the free-field ground motion and additional triaxial ground motion recorders on each LNG tank system foundation, LNG tank roof, and associated safety related structures, systems, and components. They argue that the term “associated safety related structure, systems, and components” is vague and that it is unclear how many ground motion recorders would be required. The commenters add that applicable codes and standards, such as American Concrete Institute Code 376–11, Code Requirements for Design and Construction of Concrete Structures for Containment of Refrigerated Liquefied Gases, do not require accelerometers for LNG tanks with Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) peak ground accelerations less than 0.1 gravity. If the final rule requires accelerometers for such LNG tanks and associated systems, structures, and components, it would constitute a new regulatory burden, which the commenters oppose.

31. We do not anticipate that compliance with this rule will alter current practice. With respect to new § 380.12(o)(15)(iii)(A)( 22), contrary to the commenters' argument, the new regulation does not require that LNG facilities have a certain number of seismic monitoring systems or accelerometers. The new requirement, which implements the seismic monitoring system recommendations in the 2017 Guidance, requires only that Resource Report 13 describe how the proposed seismic monitoring system would be designed in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements and applicable codes and standards. Nevertheless, the final rule replaces “a minimum of one” with “any” in new § 380.12(o)(15)(iii)(A)( 22) to avoid unnecessary confusion about whether the final rule establishes a specific number of triaxial ground motion recorders. In terms of where the seismic monitoring equipment are required to be located, the new section does not require anything other than a description of what the applicant proposes, which should follow the requirements under Federal requirements and applicable codes and standards. If the Commission determines that the specifics of the proposal require additional seismic monitors to ensure safety and reliability, the order authorizing the application would include such a condition.

32. The commenters contend that the final rule will eliminate the flexibility that is purportedly in the 2017 Guidance, which allows applicants to exercise alternative approaches to prepare seismic information. They quote NBSIR 84–2833 for support: “However, if an applicant believes that the particular seismology and geology of a site indicate that some of the information identified in this report need not be provided, that information should be identified in the application, and supporting rationale or data to justify clearly such departures should be presented.”

33. The commenters are mistaken. The flexibilities in the 2017 Guidance are preserved by its codification in this rulemaking. The final rule does not enumerate specific Federal regulations or codes or standards that applicants must apply to the safe and reliable design, construction, operation, and maintenance of jurisdictional LNG facilities. Instead, consistent with the 2017 Guidance and the Commission's practice, the final rule instructs applicants to identify all applicable Federal regulations, including codes and standards when preparing their application, and to explain how their proposal would comply with these regulations and requirements. To the extent that applicants currently identify information that is not necessary in a geotechnical report based on the seismology and geology of the proposed site, applicants are free to continue to identify the unnecessary information and provide an explanation or rationale for their decision. The Commission would review the information that is provided in Resource Report 13 and coordinate with other Federal agencies with jurisdiction over the proposed LNG facility to ensure that there is sufficient information to assist in the public safety and reliability review of the proposals. Further, if the Commission finds the application contains insufficient information based on applicable regulations, codes and standards, or is unable to demonstrate that their proposed facilities would be sited, designed, constructed, and operated safely and reliably, the Commission may issue data requests for further information or clarification.

E. Section-by-Section Discussion of Changes to Parts 153 and 380

34. Section 153.2 defines terms used in part 153 and paragraph (b) defines the NBSIR as National Bureau of Standards Information Report. Because NBSIR is outdated and the National Bureau of Standards has been renamed the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the final rule deletes existing § 153.2(b).

35. Section 153.8 identifies the exhibits required to accompany an application filed under section 3 of the NGA. Existing paragraph (a)(6) references outdated NBSIR 84–2833 and the UBC map related to preparing a report on earthquake hazards and engineering materials. The final rule deletes this paragraph and codifies in its place the relevant recommendations from the Commission's 2017 Guidance in new § 380.12(o)(15). Since paragraph 4 of the section entitled “Resource Report 6—Geological Resources in Appendix A to Part 380—Minimum Filing Requirements for Environmental Reports Under the NGA” references the now-removed § 153.8(a)(6), the final rule also removes this paragraph.

36. Part 380 of the Commission's regulations implement NEPA. For the same reason as deleting existing § 153.8(a)(6), the final rule deletes paragraph (h)(5) of 380.12 about preparing Resource Report 6. The final rule also removes paragraph (o)(15) and replaces it with recommendations from the 2017 Guidance. Specifically, new § 380.12(o)(15)(i) requires applicants to provide general site-specific engineering information used in the geotechnical and structural design of all structures, systems, and components. This information would address occupancy and risk categorization, clarify an applicant's interpretation of risk and reliability tolerances, ensure an application discusses how the project design would withstand load combinations, and ensure that an applicant's selection of risk categorizations and associated mean recurrence intervals to withstand natural hazards adequately address public safety impacts.

37. Similarly, new § 380.12(o)(15)(ii) requires applicants to provide geotechnical information needed to address the subsurface behavior from loads induced by structures, systems, and components for LNG projects. This section addresses the scope of investigations needed to identify safety concerns and mitigative measures and replaces the scope of information that was previously required by the outdated standards.

38. Finally, new § 380.12(o)(15)(iii) requires applicants to provide information related to the facility's ability to withstand certain natural hazards, such as seismic events, floods, and hurricanes, and aligns with Commission staff's current guidance to applicants, as well as those adopted in certain Federal regulations (including the Commission's existing § 380.12(m), and applicable codes and standards such as NFPA 59A, ASCE 7, and the IBC).

39. Although not proposed in the NOPR, the final rule also revises existing § 380.12(o)(12), which currently requires only that Resource Report 13 identify codes and standards related to siting of a proposed LNG plant and marine terminal, if applicable. Because the Commission's authority is to ensure public safety and reliability of proposed LNG facilities not only during siting of the facilities but also during construction and operations of those facilities, the final rule revises existing § 380.12(o)(12) so that Resource Report 13 would now include identification of codes and standards for the design, construction, testing, monitoring, operation, and maintenance of the LNG facility in addition to identification of codes and standards for siting.

40. With respect to § 380.12(o)(14), it currently requires applicants to identify how they would comply with an unspecified edition of NFPA 59A, part 193 of the DOT's regulations, and part 127 of the Coast Guard's regulations. Not all LNG facilities under the Commission's jurisdiction, however, are required to meet the design criteria specified in NFPA 59A, DOT's regulations, or Coast Guard regulations. Instead, they may be subject to other Federal regulations, such as the Environmental Protection Agency's regulations pertaining to its chemical accidental prevention program (40 CFR part 68) or the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's regulations regarding the safe management of highly hazardous chemicals (29 CFR 1910.119). To prevent confusion about the informational requirements that the Commission applies to its review of applications for the construction and operation of LNG facilities, the final rule modifies § 380.12(o)(14) by requiring applicants to identify all Federal regulations and requirements that apply to the siting, design, construction, testing, monitoring, operation, and maintenance of the proposed project and demonstrate how the proposed project will, at a minimum, comply with all applicable Federal requirements and applicable codes and standards.

III. Regulatory Requirements

A. Information Collection Statement

41. The information collection requirements contained in this final rule are subject to review by the OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. OMB's regulations require approval of certain information collection requirements imposed by agency rules. Upon approval of a collection of information, OMB will assign an OMB control number and an expiration date. Respondents subject to the filing requirements of a rule will not be penalized for failing to respond to the collection of information unless the collection of information displays a valid OMB control number.

42. This final rule removes references to a legacy agency and two outdated technical standards for seismic hazard evaluations and seismic design criteria for LNG facilities and codifies certain existing practices concerning natural hazard evaluations and design for LNG facilities contained in the Commission's 2017 Guidance. The final rule modifies certain reporting and recordkeeping requirements included in FERC–537 (OMB Control No. 1902–0060), FERC–539 (OMB Control No. 1902–0062), and FERC–577 (OMB Control No. 1902–0128).

43. Interested persons may obtain information on the reporting requirements by contacting Ellen Brown, Office of the Executive Director, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20426 by email ( DataClearance@ferc.gov) or phone (202) 502–8663.

44. Title: FERC–537 (Gas Pipeline Certificates: Construction, Acquisition, and Abandonment).

Action: Revisions of information collection FERC–537.

OMB Control No.: 1902–0060.

Respondents: Natural gas companies.

Frequency of Information Collection: Ongoing.

Abstract: The final rule requires prospective applicants and applicants to provide engineering and design materials related to natural hazards to comport with the Commission's current practice of processing section 7 applications related to LNG facilities.

Necessity of Information: The revisions are intended to update the currency of the Commission's regulations and reduce confusion related the preparation and filing of applications to site, design, construct, operate, or modify LNG facilities used in interstate commerce. The revised regulations affect only entities that file applications with the Commission for jurisdictional LNG facilities and do not increase or decrease the recently approved burden on respondents since the final rule codifies the Commission's existing practices.

45. Title: FERC–539 (Gas Pipeline Certificate: Import/Export of LNG).

Action: Revisions of information collection FERC–539.

OMB Control No.: 1902–0062.

Respondents: Natural gas companies seeking to import and/or export LNG.

Frequency of Information Collection: Ongoing.

Abstract: The final rule requires prospective applicants and applicants to provide engineering and design materials related to natural hazards to comport with the Commission's current practice of processing section 3 applications related to LNG facilities.

Necessity of Information: The revisions are intended to update the currency of the Commission's regulations and reduce confusion related the preparation and filing of applications to site, design, construct, operate, or modify facilities for the import or export of LNG. The revised regulations affect only entities that file applications with the Commission for LNG facilities.

46. The estimated burdens for FERC–539, because of the final rule in RM22–8–000, are as follows:

47. Title: FERC–577 (LNG Facilities: Environmental Review and Compliance).

Action: Revisions of information collection FERC–577.

OMB Control No.: 1902–0128.

Respondents: Natural gas companies seeking authorization to site, design, construct, operate, or modify LNG facilities.

Frequency of Information: Ongoing.

Abstract: The final rule requires prospective applicants and applicants, filing an application pursuant to sections 3 or 7 of the NGA, to provide engineering and design materials related to natural hazards to comport with the Commission's current practice of processing environmental reports filed pursuant to part 380 of the Commission's regulations.

Necessity of Information: The revisions are intended to update the currency of the Commission's regulations and reduce confusion related the preparation and filing of applications to site, design, construct, operate, or modify LNG facilities. To facilitate the Commission's review of these applications, applicants are required to also file resource reports detailing engineering and design materials to assist the Commission's understanding of the LNG facility's impact on the environment, safety, security, and reliability. The revised regulations affect only entities that file applications with the Commission for LNG facilities.

48. The estimated burdens for FERC–577, because of the final rule in RM22–8–000, are as follows:

The Commission has reviewed the proposed revisions and has determined that they are necessary. These requirements conform to the Commission's need to ensure public safety, secure jurisdictional infrastructure, and enhance efficient information collection, communication, and management within the energy industry. The Commission has assured itself, by means of internal review, that there is specific, objective support for the burden estimates associated with the information collection requirements for FERC–537, FERC–539, and FERC–577.

B. Environmental Analysis

49. The Commission is required to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement for any action that may have a significant effect on the human environment. Excluded from this requirement are rules that are clarifying, corrective, or procedural, or that do not substantially change the effect of legislation or the regulations being amended. This final rule revises the filing requirements for new or recommissioned existing LNG facilities by deleting references to a legacy agency and two outdated technical standards. Because this rule is corrective, aligns the Commission's regulations with the Commission's current practice, and does not substantially change the effect of the regulations being amended, preparation of an Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement is not required.

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

50. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) generally requires a description and analysis of rules that will have significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The RFA mandates consideration of regulatory alternatives that accomplish the stated objectives of a rule and minimize any significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. In lieu of preparing a regulatory flexibility analysis, an agency may certify that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

51. The Small Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Size Standards develops the numerical definition of a small business. SBA regulations designate natural gas pipelines ( i.e., NAICS 4865210) as small entities if they do not exceed the size standard of $36.5 million. For the past five years, one company not affiliated with larger companies had annual revenues in combination with its affiliates of $36.5 million or less and therefore could be considered a small entity under the RFA. This represents about five percent of the total potential respondents that may have a significant burden imposed on them.

52. As noted earlier, the final rule will affect only entities filing new applications to site, construct, operate, or expand an LNG facility pursuant to sections 3 or 7 of the NGA once the final rule becomes effective. As a result of removing outdated terms and aligning the Commission's regulatory text with current environmental information practices, the final rule will reduce confusion about the Commission's requirements, which would necessitate the issuance of fewer data requests to obtain a complete application that better reflects safe design, construction, maintenance, and operation of proposed LNG facilities.

53. Accordingly, pursuant to section 605(b) of the RFA, the Commission certifies that this final rule would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.

D. Document Availability

54. In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the Federal Register , the Commission provides all interested persons an opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the internet through the Commission's Home Page ( https://www.ferc.gov ).

55. From the Commission's Home Page on the internet, this information is available on eLibrary. The full text of this document is available on eLibrary in PDF and Microsoft Word format for viewing, printing, and/or downloading. To access this document in eLibrary, type the docket number excluding the last three digits of this document in the docket number field.

56. User assistance is available for eLibrary and the Commission's website during normal business hours from the Commission's Online Support at (202) 502–6652 (toll free at 1–866–208–3676) or email at ferconlinesupport@ferc.gov, or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502–8371, TTY (202) 502–8659. Email the Public Reference Room at public.referenceroom@ferc.gov.

List of Subjects

18 CFR Part 153

• Exports
• Imports
• Natural gas
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

18 CFR Part 380

• Environmental impact statements
• Reporting and recordkeeping requirements

By direction of the Commission. Commissioner Danly is concurring with a separate statement attached.

In consideration of the foregoing, the Commission amends parts 153 and 380, chapter I, title 18, Code of Federal Regulations, as follows.

PART 153—APPLICATIONS FOR AUTHORIZATION TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE, OR MODIFY FACILITIES USED FOR THE EXPORT OR IMPORT OF NATURAL GAS

1. The authority citation for part 153 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 717b, 717o; E.O. 10485, 3 CFR, 1949–1953 Comp., p. 970, as amended by E.O. 12038, 3 CFR, 1978 Comp., p. 136; DOE Delegation Order No. S1–DEL–FERC–2006 (May 16, 2006).

2. Amend § 153.2 by:

a. Removing paragraph (b); and

b. Redesignating paragraphs (c) through (f) as paragraphs (b) through (e), respectively.

3. Amend § 153.8 by:

a. Removing paragraph (a)(6);

b. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(7) through (9) as paragraphs (a)(6) through (8), respectively; and

c. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(6):

i. Removing the designation “(i)”; and

ii. Removing “§ 380.3 and § 380.12” and adding “§§ 380.3 and 380.12” in its place.

PART 380—REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT

4. The authority citation for part 380 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 42 U.S.C. 4321–4370h, 7101–7352; E.O. 12009, 3 CFR 1978 Comp., p. 142.

5. Amend § 380.12 by:

a. Removing paragraph (h)(5);

b. Redesignating paragraph (h)(6) as paragraph (h)(5); and

c. Revising paragraphs (o)(12), (14), (15).

The revisions read as follows:

6. Amend appendix A to part 380 in the section entitled “Resource Report 6—Geological Resources” by:

a. Removing paragraph 4;

b. Redesignating paragraph 5 as paragraph 4; and

c. Revising newly redesignated paragraph 4.

The revision reads as follows:

Appendix A to Part 380—Minimum Filing Requirements for Environmental Reports Under the Natural Gas Act

Resource Report 6—Geological Resources

4. For underground storage facilities, how drilling activity by others within or adjacent to the facilities would be monitored, and how old wells would be located and monitored within the facility boundaries. (§ 380.12(h)(5))

Note:

The following appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Appendix A—Commissioner Danly's Statement

United States of America Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Updating Regulations for Engineering and Design Materials for Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities Related to Potential Impacts Caused by Natural Hazards

Docket No. RM22–8–000

(Issued October 23, 2023)

DANLY, Commissioner, concurring:

1. I agree that several changes to the Commission's regulations will be helpful to ensure that the Commission has adequate information to examine the design, engineering and safety of liquefied natural gas (LNG) facilities when authorizing the siting of such facilities under the Commission's jurisdiction. I write separately to express two misgivings about the final rule.

2. First, in their joint comments on the proposed rule, the Center for LNG and the American Petroleum Institute (API) identified potential sources of confusion throughout the proposed rule regarding the requirements that project sponsors identify and comply with all “applicable codes and standards.” The final rule does not sufficiently address these well-articulated concerns.

3. Second, language in the final rule suggests that the Commission has perpetual jurisdiction over LNG facilities under Natural Gas Act sections 3 and 7. I continue to harbor misgivings that the Commission may not, in fact, have ongoing jurisdiction to oversee the safety of LNG facilities once permitted.

For these reasons, I respectfully concur.

James P. Danly,

Commissioner.