[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 208 (Monday, October 30, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 74033-74045]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23791]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Parts 153 and 380

[Docket No. RM22-8-000; Order No. 900]

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(NGA) by removing outdated references for seismic hazard evaluations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,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].
    Kenneth Yu (Legal Information), Office of the General Counsel,
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>, [email protected].

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 \1\ 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,\2\ 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).\3\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995
(NTTAA) defines ``technical standards'' as ``performance-based or
design-specific technical specifications and related management
systems practices.'' 15 U.S.C. 272 note. The Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) clarifies that the definition of technical standard
includes, among other things, the definition of terms;
classification of components; delineation of procedures;
specification of dimensions, materials, performance, designs, or
operations; measurement of quality and quantity in describing
materials, processes, products, systems, services, or practices;
test methods and sampling procedures; formats for information and
communication exchange; or descriptions of fit and measurements of
size or strength. Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the
President, Revised OMB Circular A-119, Federal Participation in the
Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in
Conformity Assessment Activities 2(a) (Jan. 27, 2016).
    \2\ See, e.g., Revisions to Reguls. Governing Authorization for
Constr. of Nat. Gas Pipeline Facilities, Order No. 555, FERC Stats.
& Regs. ] 30,928 (1991) (cross-referenced at 56 FERC ] 61,414),
withdrawn, FERC Stats & Regs. ] 30,965 (cross-referenced at 62 FERC
] 61,249) (before withdrawing the final rule, the Commission
attempted to update and codify the Commission's practice of
processing environmental data in part 380 by formalizing the use of
resource reports); Applications for Authorization to Construct,
Operate, or Modify Facilities Used for the Exp. or Imp. of Nat. Gas,
Order No. 595, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,054 (1997) (cross-referenced
at 79 FERC ] 61,245) (codifying the Commission's practice of
requiring engineering-related information and seismic information in
NBSIR 84-2833); Revision of Existing Reguls. Governing the Filing of
Applications for the Constr. & Operation of Facilities to Provide
Serv. or to Abandon or Serv. Under Section 7 of the Nat. Gas Act,
Order No. 603, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 31,073 (1999) (cross-referenced
at 87 FERC ] 61,125) (codifying the Commission's practice of
allowing applicants to prepare environmental reports in the form of
resource reports).
    \3\ Notice of Availability of the Final Guidance Manual for
Env'l Preparation, 82 FR 12088 (Feb. 28, 2017). The 2017 Guidance is
available at https://cms.ferc.gov/media/guidance-manual-volume-2pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.\4\
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.\5\ 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.\6\ 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).\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 717b(e)(1).
    \5\ Id. 717b(a). The 1977 Department of Energy (DOE)
Organization Act (42 U.S.C. 7151(b)) placed all section 3
jurisdiction under DOE. The Secretary of Energy subsequently
delegated authority to the Commission to ``[a]pprove or disapprove
the construction and operation of particular facilities, the site at
which such facilities shall be located, and with respect to natural
gas that involves the construction of new domestic facilities, the
place of entry for imports or exit for exports.'' DOE Delegation
Order No. S1-DEL-FERC-2006, section 1.21A (May 16, 2006).
    \6\ 15 U.S.C. 717f(c).
    \7\ 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq; 15 U.S.C. 717n(b)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 717o.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 \9\ and applicants to provide information
necessary for the Commission to process their applications.\10\ 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 Sec.  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.\11\ In addition, paragraph (a)(6)
requires a report on earthquake hazards and engineering be included in
an application's Exhibit E-1 \12\ and paragraph (a)(7) requires that an
application include an Exhibit F, an environmental report that complies
with Sec. Sec.  380.3 and 380.12 of the Commission's regulations.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ Applicants seeking authorization to construct LNG terminals
are required to comply with the Commission's pre-filing process
prior to filing an application with the Commission. Id. 717b-1(a);
18 CFR 157.21.
    \10\ See 18 CFR 153.8(a)(5) and (6) and (a)(7)(i), 157.14(a)(7),
157.21, 380.3, 380.12.
    \11\ Id. Sec.  153.8(a)(5).
    \12\ Id. Sec.  153.8(a)(6).
    \13\ Id. Sec.  153.8(a)(7)(i). See also id. Sec.  157.21
(requiring prospective applicants of LNG import or export facilities
to prepare an application that contains the environmental
information prescribed in part 380).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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, Sec.  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 Sec. Sec.
380.3 and 380.12 of the Commission's regulations.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \14\ Id. Sec.  157.14(a)(7).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. Section 380.3 establishes the information that an applicant must
file, including information identified in Sec.  380.12 and appendix A
to part 380.\15\ Section 380.12 identifies the content requirements for
each of the environmental reports outlined in the 13 individual
resource reports.\16\ Specifically, Sec.  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.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\ Id. Sec.  380.3(c)(2). Section 380.3(b) also requires
applicants to provide all necessary or relevant information to the
Commission and conduct studies that the Commission staff has
considered necessary or relevant to determine the impact of the
proposal on the environment. Id. Sec.  380.3(b)(1) and (2).
    \16\ Id. Sec.  380.12.
    \17\ Id. Sec.  380.12(h)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. Further, pursuant to Sec.  380.12(o), applicants must also
prepare a report, Resource Report 13, that contains engineering and
design material for the proposed LNG facility.\18\ 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,\19\
including its siting requirements, the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) 59A LNG Standards and, if applicable, U.S. Coast
Guard's regulations \20\ pertaining to vapor dispersion calculations
from LNG spills over water.\21\ 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.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\ Id. Sec.  380.12(o).
    \19\ 49 CFR part 193.
    \20\ 33 CFR part 127.
    \21\ 18 CFR 380.12(o)(14).
    \22\ Id. Sec.  380.12(o)(15).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Appendix A to part 380 summarizes the minimum filing
requirements for these resource reports.\23\ Failure to comply with
these minimum filing requirements can result in rejection of the
application.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ Id. part 380, appendix A.
    \24\ Id. Sec. Sec.  153.21, 157.8. Commission practice is to
issue data requests seeking to obtain missing information before an
application is rejected.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 \25\ and was subsequently replaced by
the International Code Council's (ICC) International Building Code
(IBC), first published in 2000.\26\ 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),\27\ and NEHRP's Recommended Seismic Provisions for
New Buildings and Other Structures.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ International Conference of Building Officials, Dwelling
Construction Under the Uniform Building Code (1997 ed.).
    \26\ The IBC was most recently revised in 2021 and various
editions are in use or have been adopted by states, territories, and
municipalities. See International Code Council, International Codes,
https://codes.iccsafe.org/codes/i-codes; International Code Council,
International Building Code Adoption Map, https://www.iccsafe.org/wp-content/uploads/Code_Adoption_Maps.pdf (published Oct. 19, 2000);
see also Rossberg, J., Leon, R.T., Evolution of Codes in the USA,
https://www.nehrp.gov/pdf/UJNR_2013_Rossberg_Manuscript.pdf
(detailing the historical changes to structural design codes in the
United States).
    \27\ American Society of Civil Engineers, Release of ASCE/SEI 7-
22 Brings Important Changes to Structural Loading Standard, Building
Safety Journal, International Code Council (Dec. 9, 2021), https://www.iccsafe.org/building-safety-journal/bsj-technical/release-of-asce-sei-7-22-brings-important-changes-to-structural-loading-standard.
    Additionally, we note that the National Earthquake Hazards
Reduction Program (NEHRP), a Congressionally mandated, multi-agency
partnership, is actively engaged in revisions to ASCE 7 and the IBC.
NEHRP's Recommended Seismic Provisions for New Buildings and Other
Structures often serves as the basis for changes to ASCE 7 and the
IBC.
    \28\ The Commission has previously noted the importance of
referencing the IBC and ASCE 7 because engineers must be
knowledgeable of both the IBC and ASCE 7 to qualify as an engineer
of record under state professional engineering requirements. See
Background Section of the 2017 Guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\29\ It also standardized the format for
reporting this data to the Commission.\30\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ National Bureau of Standards, NBSIR 84-2833: Data
Requirements for the Seismic Review of LNG Facilities 1 (June 1984),
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/Legacy/IR/nbsir84-2833.pdf.
    \30\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\31\ The Commission, however, never finalized those guidelines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \31\ Seismic Design Guidelines & Data Submittal Requirements for
LNG Facilities at ii (Jan. 23, 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\32\ 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.\33\ 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.\34\ The 2017 Guidance recommended
other evaluation and design measures for other natural hazards based on
the regulatory requirements in Sec.  380.12, DOT's regulations in 49
CFR part 193, and other best practices.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \32\ See 2017 Guidance at 1-1--1-2.
    \33\ See Background Section of the 2017 Guidance.
    \34\ Id.
    \35\ Id. and 13-94 (listing certain good engineering 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.\36\ 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.\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \36\ See U.S. Gov't Accountability Office, Natural Gas Exports:
Updated Guidance and Regulations Could Improve Facility Permitting
Processes 28 and Appendix II (Aug. 2020) (GAO Report), https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-619.
    \37\ Id. at 28-29, n.47.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.\38\ The Center for LNG
(CLNG) and American Petroleum Institute (API) (together, commenters)
filed a timely joint comment.\39\ As discussed below, the Commission
considered the comment in preparing the final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \38\ Updating Reguls. for Engineering and Design Materials for
Liquefied Nat. Gas Facilities Related to Potential Impacts Caused by
Nat. Hazards, 87 FR 72906 (Nov. 28, 2022), 181 FERC ] 61,142 (2022).
    \39\ CLNG and API Jan. 27, 2023 Comment.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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,\40\ including
measures to mitigate adverse effects.\41\ 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 \42\ of the Commission's authorization order.\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \40\ Commission staff relies on performance and risk-based
principles as part of its review to craft conditions related to the
construction and operation of the proposed LNG facility.
    \41\ See, e.g., Final EIS for Texas LNG Project (CP16-116)
(issued Mar. 15, 2019); Final EIS for Rio Grande LNG Project (CP16-
455) (issued Apr. 26, 2019).
    \42\ See 15 U.S.C. 717b(a), 717b(e)(3)(A), 717f(e) (authorizing
the Commission to include terms and conditions to our authorization
orders).
    \43\ See 15 U.S.C. 717b(a) (authorizing the Commission to issue
supplemental orders as the Commission may find necessary or
appropriate).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    16. As the Commission has previously explained, applications that
follow the same format result in a more expeditious Commission review
and processing of applications.\44\ 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.\45\ 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.\46\ 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.'' \47\ 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,''
\48\ as well as ensure the proposed LNG facilities will be constructed
and operated in a safe and reliable manner.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \44\ See Revision of the Commission's Reguls. Under the Nat. Gas
Act, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,535, at 33,524 (1998) (cross-
referenced at 84 FERC ] 61,345) (Order No. 603 NOPR). Although Order
No. 603 focused on NGA section 7 applications, the order changed the
informational requirements for environmental reports in part 153 so
that they comport with the requirements in part 157. Id. at 33,527-
28.
    \45\ See id. at 33,525 (stating ``[a]n incomplete filing
necessitates time consuming staff data requests. However, the more
complete the environmental information is at the time of filing, the
more expeditiously the Commission can process the application.'').
See also 18 CFR 153.21(b) (rejection of applications filed under
part 153); 18 CFR 157.8 (rejection of applications filed under part
157).
    \46\ See Order No. 603 NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,535 at
33,525 (explaining that ``conducting the environmental review is the
most time consuming part of the certificate process. The Commission
believes this is the result of several factors. First, too often
pipelines are filing minimal information with the intention of
filing the missing information at some later date . . . Further,
applicants may be unsure of what is needed because many of the
Commission's environmental regulations dealing with pipeline
projects are either outdated, found in several parts of the CFR, or,
in the case of the environmental report, as stated, replaced in
current practice by a preferred format that does not appear anywhere
in the regulations.'').
    \47\ Id.
    \48\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.\49\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \49\ See CLNG and API Jan. 27, 2023 Comment at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    18. Section 12(d) of the NTTAA \50\ requires all Federal agencies
and departments to use technical standards that are developed or
adopted by voluntary consensus standard bodies \51\ 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.\52\ 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.\53\ Moreover, there
may be instances where a suitable voluntary consensus standard does not
exist.\54\ In either instance, an agency is permitted to use another
standard other than a voluntary consensus standard.\55\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \50\ Public Law 104-113, 12(d), 110 Stat. 775 (1996).
    \51\ A voluntary consensus standard body is a type of
association, organization, or technical society that plans,
develops, establishes, or coordinates voluntary consensus standards
using a voluntary consensus standards development process that
includes following attributes or elements: openness, balance, due
process, appeals process, and consensus. Revised OMB Circular A-119,
2(e).
    \52\ 15 U.S.C. 272 note. OMB further establishes factors for
agencies to consider when deciding to use a standard, including the
nature of the agency's statutory mandate and the consistency of the
standard with that mandate; the level of protection the standard
provides or is expected to provide for public health, welfare,
safety, and the environment; and the clarity and detail of the
standard's language. Revised OMB Circular A-119 at 17-18.
    \53\ Revised OMB Circular A-119 at 4, 19-20. OMB further
includes in the definition of impractical circumstances in which the
use of a voluntary consensus standard would be infeasible,
inadequate, ineffectual, or inefficient, or less useful than the use
of another standard. Id. at 20.
    \54\ Id. at 20.
    \55\ See 15 U.S.C. 272 note; Revised OMB Circular A-119 at 20.
When an agency uses a government-unique standard in lieu of a
voluntary consensus standard, it must submit a report explaining its
reason to OMB through NIST. We intend to submit the report for this
rulemaking to NIST before December 31, as directed by OMB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\56\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \56\ For example, approximately 50 recent LNG applications filed
with the Commission reference approximately 2,500 individual
applicable codes and standards. On average, an application
references nearly 400 codes and standards. On the margins,
applications have ranged from less than 10 to more than 1,000
proposed codes and standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\57\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \57\ NFPA 59A (2001 edition), for example, requires geotechnical
investigations and testing to address subsurface behavior caused by
loads induced by LNG structures, systems, and components. The
standard, however, does not detail the parameters of the
geotechnical investigations and testing. Specifically, it does not
identify the locations and types of subsurface investigations that
should be performed, including the number, location, spacing, cross-
sections, and depths of in-situ tests or the number and types of
laboratory tests performed. Investigations, in-situ tests, and
laboratory tests are dictated by site of the LNG facility and are
necessary to describe the subsurface conditions used to determine
the design of the foundations.
    ASCE 7-22 (2022 edition) is another example. ASCE 7-22 provides
general requirements for buildings, other structures, and their
nonstructural components that are subject to building code
requirements, but how the ASCE 7-22 requirements apply to industrial
facilities, such as LNG facilities, are less clear. For example, it
does not define or consider the loads of equipment used during
construction and operation and their effect on structures, systems,
and components at industrial facilities (such as the dynamic loading
from movement of construction equipment over below ground
structures, systems, and components (e.g., buried pipelines or
piping)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 \58\ that
would reduce the risk of adverse effects to the public and the
environment and reliability.\59\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \58\ Layers of protection is a method to analyze the
effectiveness of independent parts of a system's design to protect
or mitigate the harms caused by an event. Layers of protection
typically include a facility design that prevents hazardous events,
control systems, safety instrumented prevention systems, physical
protection systems, site security measures for controlling access to
the plant, and onsite and offsite emergency response.
    \59\ See section 11.4 of 2017 Guidance.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.'' \60\ 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.\61\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \60\ CLNG and API Jan 27, 2023 Comment at 2.
    \61\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\62\ ``Structures, systems, and
components'' is a common engineering term used in connection with
engineering design of complex systems, including LNG facilities.\63\ 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.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \62\ See, e.g., 18 CFR 12.5 (the Commission expects a hydropower
licensee or applicant to ``use sound and prudent engineering
practices in any action relating to the design, construction,
operation, maintenance, use, repair, or modification of a water
power project or project works''). The Commission's expectations are
consistent with the expectations of other Federal agencies. See,
e.g., 49 CFR 193.2605 (DOT requires ``[e]ach operator [. . .]
determine and perform, consistent with generally accepted
engineering practice''); 29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(ii) (the Occupational
Safety and Health Administration requires ``inspection and testing
procedures [. . .] follow recognized and generally accepted good
engineering practices''); 40 CFR 68.48(b) (the Environmental
Protection Agency requires owners or operators of certain facilities
that use and distribute hazardous chemicals ``to ensure that the
process is designed in compliance with recognized and generally
accepted good engineering practices'').
    \63\ We recognize that Federal agencies that share the
responsibility of regulating LNG facilities may have different
codified definitions for structures, systems, or components,
determined by their own regulatory needs and statutory authorities.
See, e.g., 49 CFR 193.2007 (DOT defines ``component'' as ``any part,
or system of parts functioning as a unit, including, but not limited
to, piping, processing equipment, containers, control devices,
impounding systems, lighting, security devices, fire control
equipment, and communication equipment, whose integrity or
reliability is necessary to maintain safety in controlling,
processing, or containing a hazardous fluid''). Once the final rule
becomes effective, new Sec.  380.12(o)(14) will require prospective
applicants and applicants to identify the regulations applicable to
their proposal and explain how their proposal complies with them.
    \64\ See, e.g., section 13.3.1 of the 2017 Guidance (Earthquake
design conditions) and Att. 4 of the 2017 Guidance (Sample
Categorization of LNG structures, Components, and Systems).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\65\ As noted

earlier, when interpreting terms, applicants should exercise the
professional standard of care that is expected of engineers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \65\ The list of examples here is not intended to be exhaustive
or capture the full scope of structures, systems, or components
associated with safety. There may also be less critical systems that
are associated with safety, such as instrument air systems that are
used to control pneumatic (air) operated valves that can fail even
when they are set in a safe position because of loss of instrument
air, and valves and associated electrical cabling that are fire-
rated to prevent spurious maloperation. The 2017 Guidance provides
more examples. See 2017 Guidance, Attachment 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 Sec.  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.\66\ 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.\67\ 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.\68\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \66\ CLNG and API Jan 27, 2023 Comment at 3.
    \67\ Id.
    \68\ Id. at 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    29. We decline to adopt commenters' recommendation because Sec.
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.'' \69\ Therefore, the
requirements in new Sec.  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.\70\ Adding a
new applicability section would be redundant and unnecessary.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \69\ 18 CFR 380.12(o) (emphasis added).
    \70\ With respect to applications that are still pending
Commission approval when the final rule becomes effective, to the
extent that these applications are not already consistent with the
final rule, the Commission will not require these applicants to
amend their applications to comport with the new requirements in
this final rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Sec.  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,\71\ 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.\72\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \71\ The code provides minimum design and construction
requirements for reinforced concrete and prestressed structures for
the storage and containment of refrigerated liquefied gases.
    \72\ Id. at 3-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    31. We do not anticipate that compliance with this rule will alter
current practice. With respect to new Sec.  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 Sec.
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.\73\ 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.'' \74\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \73\ CLNG and API Jan. 27, 2023 Comment at 4.
    \74\ Id. at 4 (quoting NBSIR 84-2833 at 1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\75\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \75\ See, e.g., 18 CFR 380.12(o)(14) (to be codified). The
identify-and-explain approach is commonplace in the Commission's
existing LNG regulations, such as 18 CFR 380.12(o)(13) (``Provide a
list of all permits or approvals from local, state, Federal, or
Native American groups or Indian agencies required prior to and
during construction of the plant, and the status of each, including
the date filed, the date issued, and any known obstacles to
approval. Include a description of data records required for
submission to such agencies and transcripts of any public hearings
by such agencies. Also provide copies of any correspondence relating
to the actions by all, or any, of these agencies regarding all
required approvals.''); Id. Sec.  50.5(e)(6) (requiring a similar
list with regard to applicants seeking to initiate a pre-filing
proceeding site new transmission facilities); Id. Sec.  5.6(a)
(mandating a similar requirement with regard to pre-application
documents for certain hydropower projects).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 Sec.  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 Sec.
380.12(o)(15).\76\ 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 Sec.  153.8(a)(6), the final rule also
removes this paragraph.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \76\ Id. Sec.  153.8(a)(7) contains an errant ``(i)''
designation, which this final rule removes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    36. Part 380 of the Commission's regulations implement NEPA. For
the same reason as deleting existing Sec.  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 Sec.
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 Sec.  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 Sec.  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 Sec.  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 Sec.  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 Sec.  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.\77\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \77\ This revision to Sec.  380.12(o)(12) is consistent with the
stated purpose of the NOPR, which is to update the information
requirements related to filing an application to site, construct,
expand, or operate an LNG terminal under section 3 of the NGA or
construct or operate an LNG facility under section 7 of the NGA. See
NOPR, 181 FERC ] 61,142 at P 1 & Summary. The NOPR discussed the
need to clarify the use of standards related to our oversight of
jurisdictional activities beyond the design of LNG facilities. See,
e.g., id. PP 1, 2-6, 12, 19. It reasonably follows that applicants
should identify all standards and codes that apply to the LNG
components, not only those that relate to design, in order for the
Commission to ensure that the LNG facilities, once approved, are
constructed and operated in accordance with the Commission-approved
designs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    40. With respect to Sec.  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 Sec.
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.\78\ OMB's regulations require approval of certain information
collection requirements imposed by agency rules.\79\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \78\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
    \79\ 5 CFR 1320.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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).\80\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \80\ In the proposed rule, the Commission used FERC-539A & FERC-
577A as temporary placeholder designations for the purposes of this
rulemaking. The permanent designations (i.e., FERC-539 and FERC-577)
were pending renewal at OMB, and no more than one information
collection may be pending at OMB at one time. At present, FERC-539
and FERC-577 are available so the final rule references these OMB
control numbers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 ([email protected]) 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.\81\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \81\ See Order No. 603 NOPR, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 32,535 at
33,526 (in a similar rulemaking in which the Commission codified
existing practice for reviewing environmental reports, the
Commission noted ``that the proposed changes to the environmental
regulations discussed above do not change the filing requirements
burden on the pipeline. They simply codify existing standard
practice to help expedite the environmental review process.'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \82\ The Commission staff estimates that industry is similarly
situated in terms of hourly cost (for wages plus benefits). Based on
the Commission's FY (Fiscal Year) 2021 average cost (for wages plus
benefits), $87.00/hour is used.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Number of
       Number of respondents          responses per   Total number of   Average burden hours & average   Total annual burden hours &        Cost per
                                       respondent        responses        cost \82\ per response ($)        total annual cost ($)        respondent ($)
(1)                                             (2)    (1) * (2) = (3)  (4)...........................  (3) * (4) = (5)..............    (5) / (1) = (6)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6..................................               2                 12  15 hours; $1,305..............  180 hours; $15,660...........             $2,610
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  Number of                                                                                Cost per
    Number of respondents       responses per   Total number of     Average burden hours & average      Total annual burden hours &      respondent ($)
                                 respondent        responses       cost per response ($) (rounded)    total annual cost ($) (rounded)      (rounded)
(1)                                       (2)    (1) * (2) = (3)  (4)..............................  (3) * (4) = (5).................    (5) / (1) = (6)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6............................              16                 96  193.52 hours; $17,610.32.........  18,578 hours; $1,690,591........           $281,765
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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.\83\ 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.\84\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \83\ Reguls. Implementing the Nat'l Env'l Policy Act of 1969,
Order No. 486, FERC Stats. & Regs. ] 30,783 (1987) (cross-referenced
at 41 FERC ] 61,284).
    \84\ 18 CFR 380.4(a)(2)(ii).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification

    50. The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (RFA) \85\ 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.\86\ 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.\87\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \85\ 5 U.S.C. 601-612.
    \86\ Id. 603(c).
    \87\ Id. 605(b).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    51. The Small Business Administration's (SBA) Office of Size
Standards develops the numerical definition of a small business.\88\
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.\89\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \88\ 13 CFR 121.101.
    \89\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free at 1-866-208-3676) or email at
[email protected], or the Public Reference Room at (202) 502-
8371, TTY<PHONE_NUMBER>. Email the Public Reference Room at
[email protected].

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.

    Issued: October 23, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.

    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

0
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).

Sec.  153.2  [Amended]

0
2. Amend Sec.  153.2 by:
0
a. Removing paragraph (b); and

0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (c) through (f) as paragraphs (b) through
(e), respectively.

Sec.  153.8  [Amended]

0
3. Amend Sec.  153.8 by:
0
a. Removing paragraph (a)(6);
0
b. Redesignating paragraphs (a)(7) through (9) as paragraphs (a)(6)
through (8), respectively; and
0
c. In newly redesignated paragraph (a)(6):
0
i. Removing the designation ``(i)''; and
0
ii. Removing ``Sec.  380.3 and Sec.  380.12'' and adding ``Sec. Sec.
380.3 and 380.12'' in its place.

PART 380--REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL
POLICY ACT

0
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.

0
5. Amend Sec.  380.12 by:
0
a. Removing paragraph (h)(5);
0
b. Redesignating paragraph (h)(6) as paragraph (h)(5); and
0
c. Revising paragraphs (o)(12), (14), (15).
    The revisions read as follows:

Sec.  380.12  Environmental reports for Natural Gas Act applications.

* * * * *
    (o) * * *
    (12) Identify all codes and standards under which the plant (and
marine terminal, if applicable) will be sited, designed, constructed,
tested, monitored, operated, and maintained, and any special
considerations or safety provisions that were applied to the design of
plant components.
* * * * *
    (14) Identify all Federal, state, and local regulations and
requirements that apply to the siting, design, construction, testing,
monitoring, operation, and maintenance of the proposed project and
explain how the proposed project will comply with the applicable
Federal regulations, including codes and standards incorporated by
reference into Federal regulations.
    (15) Provide information to demonstrate that the proposed
facilities will be sited, designed, constructed, and operated to
maintain reliability and will not significantly impact public safety
given geotechnical conditions and the occurrence of a natural hazard
identified in paragraphs (o)(15)(i) through (iii) of this section. Site
information must provide geotechnical studies and natural hazard
studies based on the site location, which must provide impacts and
magnitude of historical events and projected impacts and magnitude of
events based on projected prescriptive/deterministic events and
projected probabilistic events corresponding to mean recurrence
intervals. Design information must provide the basis of design
supported by site information, including design parameters and criteria
and preliminary resultant design loads used in the geotechnical and
structural design of LNG facilities. Construction and operation
information must also include discussion of quality assurance and
quality control plans, monitoring programs, and action programs
developed in preparation of and response to geotechnical and natural
hazards. All information provided must, at a minimum, demonstrate
compliance with all applicable Federal requirements and applicable
codes and standards, and identify any applicable state and local
requirements for the siting, design, construction, testing, monitoring,
operation, and maintenance used to safeguard against significant
impacts caused by geotechnical conditions and natural hazards.
    (i) General information. Provide site information that includes:
    (A) A description of all structures, systems, and components,
including, at a minimum, the layout of all proposed above ground and
below ground structures, systems, and components including temporary
access roads used during construction and permanent roads used during
operation.
    (B) The design classification for each structure, system, and
component in accordance with, at a minimum, all applicable Federal
requirements and applicable codes and standards.
    (C) The derivation and values for risk category and mean recurrence
intervals that are, at a minimum, in accordance with all applicable
Federal requirements and applicable codes and standards.
    (D) A description of all load combinations for each design
classification for all structures, systems, and components that are, at
a minimum, in accordance with design methods and all applicable Federal
requirements and applicable codes and standards.
    (E) A description of all preliminary dead loads that are, at a
minimum, in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements and
applicable codes and standards, and include, at a minimum, weight of
materials of construction of structures, systems, and components;
weight of any hydrostatic test fluid service within structures,
systems, and components during commissioning; weight of fluid services
within structures, systems, and components during startup, normal
operation, abnormal operation, and shutdown; and soil and hydrostatic
pressure loads and potential uplift of below ground structures,
systems, and components.
    (F) A description of all preliminary live loads that are, at a
minimum, in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements and
applicable codes and standards, and include, at a minimum, dynamic
loads from movement during transportation of structures, systems, and
components; induced loads from construction equipment atop of below
ground structures, systems, and components; uniform and concentrated
loads from construction and operation personnel and equipment on
structures, systems, and components; and crane loads for structures,
systems, and components.
    (G) A description of all preliminary loads induced from natural
hazards for all structures, systems, and components that are, at a
minimum, in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements and
applicable codes and standards as described in paragraph (o)(15)(iii)
of this section.
    (H) A description of all mitigation measures to protect against
natural hazards (like earthquakes) including, at a minimum, a
discussion of the proposed site elevation and design of any storm walls
or barriers relative to information described in paragraphs (o)(15)(ii)
and (iii) of this section.
    (I) A description of a natural hazard preparedness and action
program, which includes facilitating timely decisions concerning the
present or future state of the LNG facility that address, at a minimum,
the natural hazards described in paragraph (o)(15)(iii) of this
section.
    (ii) Geotechnical information. Provide a geotechnical investigation
that includes:
    (A) A summary of the site investigation that lists the applicant's
exploratory program for the site and the types of subsurface
investigations performed and planned to be performed for the site.
    (B) A list and description of all in situ tests performed,
standards used for tests, and their results including all standard
penetration tests, cone penetration tests (static and dynamic), test
pits, trenches, borings, rock coring, soil sampling, plate load tests,
and in situ shear strength tests.
    (C) A plot plan that identifies the number, location, spacing,
cross-sections, and depths of each in situ test.
    (D) A description of completed surveys, standards used for surveys,
and the results of surveys that were conducted to obtain continuous
lateral and depth information for the

evaluation of subsurface conditions including all seismic refraction
and reflection surveys.
    (E) A description of the applicant's laboratory testing program
that includes the treatment of samples, the preparation of the soil
specimen for testing, the techniques to detect sample disturbance, and
the laboratory testing specifications.
    (F) A list and description of all laboratory tests performed,
standards used for tests, and their results, including results from all
soil classification tests, index tests, strength and compressibility
tests, permeability tests, and soil corrosivity tests.
    (G) A description of proposed mitigation measures for soil
improvement or other mitigation that would remediate low bearing
strength, poor consolidation, poor permeability, high corrosivity, or
other geotechnical issues discovered during in situ or laboratory
tests.
    (H) A discussion of subsurface conditions and profiles based on the
results of the subsurface exploration and field test conducted at the
site. Subsurface profiles must identify groundwater conditions and the
physicochemical properties of the groundwater, soil/rock layers and
parameters, and various soil strata in various cross-section drawings
spanning across the site including the LNG storage tank areas.
    (I) A description of soil conditions that indicate compressible or
expansive soils, corrosive soils, collapsible soils, erodible soils,
liquefaction-susceptible soils, frost-heave susceptible soils, frozen
soils, sanitary landfill, or contaminated soils.
    (J) An analysis of actual or potential hazards (e.g., landslides,
subsidence, uplift, capable faults, or collapse resulting from natural
features such as tectonic depressions and cavernous or karst terrains)
to the site.
    (K) A discussion of the relationship between the regional and local
geology and the site location.
    (L) An evaluation and discussion of surface displacement caused by
faulting or seismically induced lateral spreading or lateral flow,
regional subsidence, local subsidence, and heave.
    (M) Drawings of existing and proposed site elevation contours.
    (N) A slope-stability analysis, including slope stabilization
methods, sloping topography for the site, recommendations for slope
stability, static and seismic stability, and factor of safety.
    (O) Recommendations for site improvement to increase bearing
capacity, reduce the potential of liquefaction and lateral spreading,
and mitigate poor or unusual soil conditions.
    (P) Recommendations for site improvement to mitigate soil
contaminants and shoreline erosion control.
    (Q) An evaluation and discussion of the expected total settlement
over the design life of the facilities that considers soil conditions,
regional subsidence, and local subsidence.
    (R) Recommendations for shallow foundations, including, at a
minimum, ultimate bearing capacity, factor of safety, allowable bearing
capacity, total and differential settlement criteria, liquefaction
settlements, settlement monitoring, and lateral resistance.
    (S) Recommendations for deep foundations, including, at a minimum,
acceptable foundation type, bearing capacity, total pile capacities,
axial capacity, lateral capacity, group effects, down-drag, factor of
safety, settlement of single pile and pile groups, lateral movement of
pile groups, pile installation, pile cap, indicator piles and pile load
test programs, static axial pile load test, lateral load test, and
dynamic pile load test.
    (T) A summary of information needed to establish broad design
parameters and conclusions used to determine the proposed layout and
design of buildings, structures, and support facilities.
    (U) A description of the implementation of the geotechnical
monitoring system for the site and structures, including inclinometer,
extensometers, piezometer, tiltmeter, settlement monuments or cells,
pressure and load cells, and crack monitoring devices.
    (iii) Natural hazard information. Provide studies, basis of design,
and plans for all natural hazards, including, at a minimum, each
natural hazard in paragraphs (o)(15)(iii)(A) through (G) of this
section:
    (A) Seismic information. Provide a discussion of seismic design and
hazards analysis that includes:
    (1) The seismic design basis and criteria that are, at a minimum,
in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements, and applicable
codes, standards, and specifications used as basis of design.
    (2) A description of seismic setting and seismic hazard
investigation.
    (3) A description of seismological characteristics of the
geographical region within 100 miles of the site.
    (4) A description of capable faults, including any part of a fault
within five miles of the site, the fault characteristics in the site
vicinity, the methods and techniques used for fault analysis and
investigations, and the potential effect of fault displacement on
structures, systems, and components.
    (5) Derivation of the site class describing the soil conditions and
supportive geotechnical studies that are, at a minimum, in accordance
with all applicable Federal requirements and applicable codes and
standards.
    (6) Criteria used to determine potential soil liquefaction,
subsidence, fault rupture, seismic slope stability, and lateral
spreading.
    (7) A historical ground motion analysis, including a description of
past seismic events of Modified Mercalli Intensity greater than IV or
magnitude greater than 3.0 within 100 miles of the site, including date
of seismic events, magnitude of seismic events, distance from site to
epicenter of seismic events, depth of seismic events, and resultant
ground motions recorded or estimated at site location.
    (8) A site-specific ground motion analysis based on ground motions
projected from the U.S. Geological Survey national seismic maps and any
deterministic seismic hazard analyses (DSHA) and probabilistic seismic
hazard analyses (PSHA).
    (9) Derivation of all ground motions used for the Operating Basis
Earthquake (OBE), Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE), site-specific design
earthquake (DE), site-specific peak ground motion (PGA), and aftershock
level earthquake (ALE) that are, at a minimum, in accordance with all
applicable Federal requirements and applicable codes and standards.
    (10) A list of OBE, SSE, and ALE site-specific ground motion
spectral values for 0.5%, 1%, 2%, 5%, 7%, 10%, 15%, and 20% damping
during all periods range.
    (11) The DE seismic coefficients and seismic design parameters,
including the spectral response acceleration and five percent damped
design spectral response acceleration parameters at a short-period, at
a period of one second, and at other periods; short-period site
coefficient and long-period site coefficient; importance factor;
component importance factor; fundamental period of the structure; long-
period transition period; and response modification coefficient that
are, at a minimum, in accordance with all applicable Federal
requirements and applicable codes and standards.
    (12) A description of site-specific response spectrum analysis
method, time history analysis method, or equivalent static load
analysis.
    (13) A seismic analysis for soil-structure interaction that is, at
a

minimum, in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements and
applicable codes and standards, and includes, at a minimum, a
discussion of the modeling methods and the factors considered in the
modeling methods, including the extent of embedment, the layering of
the soil/rock strata, and the boundary of soil-structure model.
    (14) A comparison of seismic responses used for each design
classification for all structures, systems, and components.
    (15) A list of seismic hazard curves of spectral accelerations for
all periods for the site.
    (16) Vertical response spectra for seismic design and ratio to
horizontal response spectra.
    (17) Natural frequencies and responses for each LNG tank system and
associated safety systems and associated structures, systems, and
components.
    (18) A description of procedures used for structural analyses,
including consideration of incorporating the stiffness, mass, and
damping characteristics of the structural systems into the analytical
models.
    (19) A description of determination of seismic overturning moments
and sliding forces for each LNG tank system and associated safety
related structures, systems, and components, including consideration of
the three components of input motion and the simultaneous action of
vertical and horizontal seismic forces.
    (20) A description of design procedure for seismically isolated
structures, systems, and components.
    (21) A description of seismic design basis and criteria for the LNG
storage tank(s) and foundation(s). The seismic design basis and
criteria must include the flexibility of the tank shell(s) and its
influence on the natural frequencies of the tank(s), liquid level,
effects of liquid motion or pressure changes; minimum design freeboard;
sloshing and impulsive loads; seismic coefficients; importance
factor(s); reduction factor(s); slosh height(s); sloshing periods of
LNG storage tank(s); global stability of the tank(s) in terms of the
potential for overturning and sliding; differential displacement
between the tank(s) and the first support; and a total settlement
monitoring program for the tank foundation(s).
    (22) A description of seismic monitoring system in accordance with,
at a minimum, all applicable Federal requirements and applicable codes
and standards, including any 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. The
proposed seismic monitoring must include the installation locations on
a plot plan; description of the triaxial strong motion recorders or
other seismic instrumentation; the proposed alarm set points, and
operating procedures (including emergency operating procedures) for
control room operators in response to such alarms/data obtained from
seismic instrumentation; and maintenance procedures.
    (23) A cross reference to potential for earthquake generated
tsunamis and seiches provided in paragraph (o)(15)(iii)(B) of this
section, earthquake generated floods in paragraph (o)(15)(iii)(C) of
this section, earthquake generated landslides in paragraph
(o)(15)(iii)(G) of this section, and earthquake generated releases and
fires in paragraph (m) of this section.
    (B) Tsunami and seiche information. Provide a discussion of tsunami
and seiche design and hazards that includes:
    (1) The tsunami and seismic design basis and criteria with a
description of the applicable requirements and guidelines, and
generally accepted codes, standards, and specifications used as basis
of design.
    (2) The seiche design inundation and run-up elevations and
corresponding return periods for all structures, systems, and
components.
    (3) The maximum considered tsunami (MCT) inundation and run-up
elevation for the site, including the maximum considered earthquake
(MCE) level ground motions at the site if the MCE is the triggering
source of the MCT.
    (4) A comparison of design loads of seiche water inundation
elevations with inundation elevation corresponding to return periods of
MCE and MCT for all structures, systems, and components.
    (5) The Tsunami Risk Category for the site and a description of
potential tsunami generation by seismic sources, and the prevention and
mitigation plan for potential tsunami and seiche hazards.
    (6) A cross reference to potential tsunami and seiche generated
floods in paragraph (o)(15)(iii)(C) of this section, tsunami and seiche
generated landslides in paragraph (o)(15)(iii)(G) of this section, and
tsunami and seiche generated releases and fires in paragraph (m) of
this section.
    (C) Flood information. Provide a discussion of flood design
criteria and hazards that includes:
    (1) The floods design basis and criteria with references to
applicable requirements and guidelines, and generally accepted codes,
standards, and specifications used as basis of design.
    (2) A description of flooding potential in the region surrounding
the site due to one or more natural causes such as storm surge, tides,
wind generated waves, meteorological tsunamis or seiches, extreme
precipitation, or other natural hazard events that have a common cause.
    (3) A comparison of flood design loads corresponding to return
periods of 10,000-year, 5,000-year, 1,000-year, 500-year, and 100-year
for all structures, systems, and components.
    (4) A discussion of final designed site elevations and storm surge
walls or floodwalls for the site that includes tsunami considerations,
flood design considerations, site total settlements, sea level rise,
subsidence.
    (D) Hurricane information. Provide a discussion of hurricanes and
other meteorological events design criteria and hazards that includes:
    (1) The wind and storm surge design basis and criteria that are, at
a minimum, in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements, and
applicable codes, standards, and specifications used as basis of
design.
    (2) A comparison of design wind loads for both sustained and three-
second gusts and storm surge elevations, including consideration for
still water, wind/wave run-up effects, and crest elevations, with
hurricanes and other meteorological events at the site location
corresponding to return periods of 10,000-year, 5,000-year, 1,000-year,
500-year, and 100-year for all structures, systems, and components.
    (3) A discussion of historic hurricane frequencies and hurricane
categories equivalent on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale at the
site and associated wind speeds and storm surge.
    (4) The design regional subsidence that includes a discussion of
the elevation change used to account for regional subsidence for the
design life of the facilities at the site.
    (E) Tornado information. Provide a discussion of tornado design
criteria and hazards that includes:
    (1) The tornadoes design basis and criteria that are, at a minimum,
in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements, and applicable
codes, standards, and specifications used as basis of design.
    (2) A comparison of tornado design loads corresponding to return
periods of 10,000-year, 5,000-year, 1,000-year, 500-year, and 100-year
for all structures, systems, and components.
    (3) A discussion of historic tornado frequencies and tornado
categories as classified on the Enhanced Fujita (EF)

Scale at the site and associated wind speeds.
    (4) A discussion of tornado loads determination and design
procedure.
    (5) A comparison of impact between wind loads and tornado loads for
the site.
    (F) Rain, ice, snow, and related precipitation information. Provide
a discussion of rain, ice, snow, and related precipitation design
criteria and hazards that includes:
    (1) The rain, ice, and snow design basis and criteria that are, at
a minimum, in accordance with all applicable Federal requirements, and
applicable codes, standards, and specifications used as basis of
design.
    (2) The identification of stormwater flows, outfalls, and
stormwater management systems for all surfaces, including spill
containment system with sump pumps or other water removal systems.
    (3) The comparison of rain, ice, and snow design loads with
rainfall rates, snow loads, and ice loads corresponding to return
periods of 10,000-year, 5,000-year, 1,000-year, 500-year, and 100-year
for all structures, systems, and components.
    (4) A discussion of historic ice and blizzard events and
frequencies and other ice and snow events at the site and associated
loads.
    (G) Landslides, wildfires, volcanic activity, and geomagnetism
information. Provide a discussion of landslides, wildfires, volcanic
activity, and geomagnetism design criteria and hazards that includes:
    (1) The landslides, wildfires, volcanic activity, and geomagnetism
design basis and criteria that are, at a minimum, in accordance with
all applicable Federal requirements, and applicable codes, standards,
and specifications used as basis of design.
    (2) A discussion of historic landslide, wildfire, volcano activity,
and geomagnetic disturbance risks and intensities at the site.
    (3) A description of capable volcanoes, volcanic characteristics of
the region, and a discussion of potentially hazardous volcanic
phenomena considerations.

0
6. Amend appendix A to part 380 in the section entitled ``Resource
Report 6--Geological Resources'' by:
0
a. Removing paragraph 4;
0
b. Redesignating paragraph 5 as paragraph 4; and
0
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. (Sec.  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.\90\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \90\ See Updating Reguls. for Eng'rg & Design Materials for
Liquefied Nat. Gas Facilities Related to Potential Impacts Caused by
Nat. Hazards, 185 FERC ] 61,050 (2023) (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.'' \91\ The final rule
does not sufficiently address these well-articulated concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \91\ See Center for LNG & API January 27, 2023 Comments at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Second, language in the final rule suggests that the
Commission has perpetual jurisdiction over LNG facilities \92\ under
Natural Gas Act sections 3 and 7.\93\ I continue to harbor
misgivings that the Commission may not, in fact, have ongoing
jurisdiction to oversee the safety of LNG facilities once
permitted.\94\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \92\ See Final Rule, 185 FERC ] 61,050 at P 39 (``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 Sec.  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.'') (footnote omitted); see also id.
P 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
[section] 7 applications. . . . 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.'') (citing 15 U.S.C.
717b(a), 717b(e)(3)(A), 717f(e) (authorizing the Commission to
include terms and conditions to our authorization orders)) (internal
citations omitted) (footnotes omitted).
    \93\ 15 U.S.C. 717b, 717f.
    \94\ See EcoEl[eacute]ctrica, L.P., 184 FERC ] 61,114 (2023)
(Danly, Comm'r, concurring at P 3); EcoEl[eacute]ctrica, L.P., 180
FERC ] 61,054 (2022) (Danly, Comm'r, concurring at P 3);
EcoEl[eacute]ctrica, L.P., 179 FERC ] 61,038 (2022) (Danly, Comm'r,
concurring); EcoEl[eacute]ctrica, L.P., 177 FERC ] 61,164 (2021)
(Danly, Comm'r, concurring); EcoEl[eacute]ctrica, L.P., 176 FERC ]
61,192 (2021) (Danly, Comm'r, concurring).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For these reasons, I respectfully concur.

James P. Danly,

Commissioner.

[FR Doc. 2023-23791 Filed 10-27-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P