National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures, 25340-25344 [2020-08511]
Download as PDF
25340
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 85 / Friday, May 1, 2020 / Proposed Rules
names, correspondence containing
comments, and any documents
submitted with the comments.
Do not submit to https://
www.regulations.gov information for
which disclosure is restricted by statute,
such as trade secrets and commercial or
financial information (hereinafter
referred to as Confidential Business
Information (‘‘CBI’’)). Comments
submitted through https://
www.regulations.gov cannot be claimed
as CBI. Comments received through the
website will waive any CBI claims for
the information submitted. For
information on submitting CBI, see the
Confidential Business Information
section.
DOE processes submissions made
through https://www.regulations.gov
before posting. Normally, comments
will be posted within a few days of
being submitted. However, if large
volumes of comments are being
processed simultaneously, your
comment may not be viewable for up to
several weeks. Please keep the comment
tracking number that
www.regulations.gov provides after you
have successfully uploaded your
comment.
Submitting comments via email, hand
delivery/courier, or postal mail.
Comments and documents submitted
via email, hand delivery/courier, or
postal mail also will be posted to https://
www.regulations.gov. If you do not want
your personal contact information to be
publicly viewable, do not include it in
your comment or any accompanying
documents. Instead, provide your
contact information on a cover letter.
Include your first and last names, email
address, telephone number, and
optional mailing address. The cover
letter will not be publicly viewable as
long as it does not include any
comments.
Include contact information each time
you submit comments, data, documents,
and other information to DOE. If you
submit via postal mail or hand delivery/
courier, please provide all items on a
CD, if feasible. It is not necessary to
submit printed copies. No telefacsimiles
(faxes) will be accepted.
Comments, data, and other
information submitted to DOE
electronically should be provided in
PDF (preferred), Microsoft Word or
Excel, WordPerfect, or text (ASCII) file
format. Provide documents that are not
secured, written in English, and free of
any defects or viruses. Documents
should not contain special characters or
any form of encryption and, if possible,
they should carry the electronic
signature of the author.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
08:06 May 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
Campaign form letters. Please submit
campaign form letters by the originating
organization in batches of between 50 to
500 form letters per PDF or as one form
letter with a list of supporters’ names
compiled into one or more PDFs. This
reduces comment processing and
posting time.
Confidential Business Information.
According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any
person submitting information that he
or she believes to be confidential and
exempt by law from public disclosure
should submit via email, postal mail, or
hand delivery/courier two well-marked
copies: One copy of the document
marked confidential including all the
information believed to be confidential,
and one copy of the document marked
‘‘non-confidential’’ with the information
believed to be confidential deleted.
Submit these documents via email or on
a CD, if feasible. DOE will make its own
determination about the confidential
status of the information and treat it
according to its determination.
It is DOE’s policy that all comments
may be included in the public docket,
without change and as received,
including any personal information
provided in the comments (except
information deemed to be exempt from
public disclosure).
DOE considers public participation to
be a very important part of the process
for developing energy conservation
standards. DOE actively encourages the
participation and interaction of the
public during the comment period in
each stage of the rulemaking process.
Interactions with and between members
of the public provide a balanced
discussion of the issues and assist DOE
in the rulemaking process. Anyone who
wishes to be added to the DOE mailing
list to receive future notices and
information about this process or would
like to request a public meeting should
contact Appliance and Equipment
Standards Program staff at (202) 287–
1445 or via email at
ApplianceStandardsQuestions@
ee.doe.gov.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on February 25,
2020, by Alexander N. Fitzsimmons,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Energy
Efficiency, Energy Efficiency and
Renewable Energy, pursuant to
delegated authority from the Secretary
of Energy. That document with the
original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal
Register, the undersigned DOE Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of
the Department of Energy. This
administrative process in no way alters
the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on April 22,
2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
[FR Doc. 2020–08851 Filed 4–30–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 1021
[DOE–HQ–2020–0017]
RIN 1990–AA49
National Environmental Policy Act
Implementing Procedures
Office of the General Counsel,
Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
and request for comment.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE or the Department)
proposes to update its National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
implementing procedures regarding
authorizations issued under section 3 of
the Natural Gas Act. These changes will
improve the efficiency of the DOE
decision-making process by saving time
and money in the NEPA review process
and eliminating unnecessary
environmental documentation. DOE
invites public comments on the
proposed changes.
DATES: Comments must be received by
(or, if mailed, postmarked by) June 1,
2020 to ensure consideration.
ADDRESSES: Documents relevant to this
rulemaking are posted on the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov (Docket: DOE–HQ–
2020–0017). Documents posted to this
docket include: This notice of proposed
rulemaking; DOE’s ‘‘Technical Support
Document’’ which provides additional
information; and a ‘‘redline/strikeout’’
(markup) file of affected sections of the
DOE NEPA regulations indicating the
changes proposed in this proposed rule.
Submit comments, labeled ‘‘DOE
NEPA/NG Procedures, RIN 1990–
AA49,’’ by one of the following
methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting
comments electronically. This
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM
01MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 85 / Friday, May 1, 2020 / Proposed Rules
rulemaking is assigned Docket: DOE–
HQ–2020–0017.
2. Postal Mail: Mail comments to
Office of NEPA Policy and Compliance
(GC–54), ATTN: NEPA/NG Procedures
(RIN 1990–AA49), U.S. Department of
Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC 20585. Because
security screening may delay mail sent
through the U.S. Postal Service, DOE
encourages electronic submittal of
comments through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
questions concerning how to comment
on this proposed rule, contact Yardena
Mansoor, Office of NEPA Policy and
Compliance, at DOE-NEPARulemaking@hq.doe.gov or 800–472–
2756. For detailed information on
submitting comments, see ‘‘How may
the public comment on DOE’s proposed
changes?’’.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE is
responsible for authorizing exports of
domestically produced natural gas to
foreign countries under section 3 of the
Natural Gas Act (NGA).1 Section 3(a) of
the NGA requires DOE to issue an order
authorizing natural gas exports unless it
finds that such an order ‘‘will not be
consistent with the public interest.’’
DOE complies with NEPA 2 before
reaching a final decision on applications
to export natural gas to countries with
which the United States does not have
a free trade agreement requiring national
treatment for trade in natural gas (nonFTA countries).
DOE authorization also is required for
imports of natural gas under section 3(a)
of the NGA. However, section 3(c) of the
NGA was amended by section 201 of the
Energy Policy Act of 1992 3 to require
that applications to authorize the import
of natural gas (as well as the export of
natural gas to FTA countries) be
‘‘deemed consistent with the public
interest, and . . . granted without
modification or delay.’’ This
requirement leaves DOE with no
discretion in its approvals of natural gas
imports, as they are deemed to be in the
public interest. Accordingly, DOE
proposes to remove the reference to
authorizations to import natural gas
from its NEPA regulations consistent
with the legal principle that an agency
is not required to prepare a NEPA
analysis when it has no discretion in its
action.
In addition, with regard to
authorizations for export to non-FTA
countries, DOE proposes to revise its
regulations consistent with the legal
1 15
U.S.C. 717b.
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
3 EPACT 1992, Public Law 102–486.
2 42
VerDate Sep<11>2014
08:06 May 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
principle that potential environmental
effects considered under NEPA do not
include effects that the agency has no
authority to prevent, because they
would not have a sufficiently close
causal connection to the proposed
action.4 Here, DOE’s proposed action is
authorization of natural gas exports.
The statutory term ‘‘export’’ is not
defined in the NGA. In adjudications
under NGA section 3(a), however, DOE
has construed an ‘‘export’’ of LNG from
the United States as occurring ‘‘when
the LNG is delivered to the flange of the
LNG export vessel.’’ 5 To ensure that
DOE’s NEPA regulations are consistent
with this longstanding practice, DOE
will focus exclusively on NEPA review
of potential environmental impacts
resulting from actions occurring at or
after the point of export.6
Additionally, this proposed
rulemaking is consistent with two life
cycle analyses (LCAs) that DOE
commissioned to calculate the life cycle
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for
LNG exported from the United States.
DOE commissioned both the original
LCA GHG Report, published in 2014,7
and an updated LCA GHG Report,
published in 2019,8 to evaluate
4 See Dep’t of Transp. v. Pub. Citizen, 541 U.S.
752 (2004); Sierra Club v. Fed. Energy Regulatory
Comm’n, 827 F.3d 36 (D.C. Cir. 2016).
5 See, e.g., Freeport LNG Expansion L.P., et al.,
DOE/FE Order No. 3282–C, FE Docket No. 10–161–
LNG, Final Opinion and Order Granting Long-Term,
Multi-Contract Authorization to Export Liquefied
Natural Gas by Vessel from the Freeport LNG
Terminal on Quintana Island, Texas, to Non-Free
Trade Agreement Nations, at 23 (Nov. 14, 2014)
(‘‘Export occurs when the LNG is delivered to the
flange of the LNG export vessel.’’) (citing Dow
Chem. Co., DOE/FE Order No. 2859, FE Docket No.
10–57–LNG, Order Granting Blanket Authorization
to Export Liquefied Natural Gas, at 1 (Oct. 5, 2010)).
6 This scope of analysis is also consistent with
decisions in recent years of the U.S. Court of
Appeal for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C.
Circuit), which recognized that DOE ‘‘maintains
exclusive jurisdiction over the export of natural gas
as a commodity.’’ Sierra Club v. Fed. Energy
Regulatory Comm’n, 827 F.3d 36, 40 (2016).
Specifically, the D.C. Circuit observed that the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has
an obligation to comply with the NGA and NEPA
with respect to its decisions to authorize the
construction of LNG terminals, whereas DOE has an
independent obligation ‘‘to consider the
environmental impacts of its export authorization
decision under NEPA and determine whether it
satisfied the Natural Gas Act’s ‘public interest’
test.’’ Sierra Club v. U.S. Dep’t of Energy, 867 F.3d
189, 192 (D.C. Cir. 2017).
7 See U.S. Dep’t of Energy, Life Cycle Greenhouse
Gas Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas
From the United States, 79 FR 32260 (June 4, 2014)
(LCA GHG Report).
8 See U.S. Dep’t of Energy, Life Cycle Greenhouse
Gas Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas
From the United States; Notice of Availability of
Report Entitled Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas
Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas
From the United States: 2019 Update and Request
for Comments, 84 FR 49278 (Sept. 19, 2019) (LCA
GHG Update).
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25341
environmental aspects of the LNG
export chain under NGA section 3(a).
Both Reports concluded that the use of
U.S. LNG exports for power production
in European and Asian markets will not
increase global GHG emissions from a
life cycle perspective, when compared
to regional coal extraction and
consumption for power production.9
DOE has used these Reports to support
its public interest determination
regarding a proposed export. These
Reports are not, however, part of DOE’s
NEPA reviews because the regasification
and ultimate burning of LNG in foreign
countries are beyond the scope of DOE’s
NEPA review.
What parts of DOE’s current NEPA
regulations does DOE propose to
amend?
DOE’s current NEPA regulations list
classes of actions for each level of NEPA
review.10 Five of these classes regard
applications to import or export natural
gas to a non-FTA country. There are two
categorical exclusions: B5.7 (Import or
export of natural gas, with operational
changes) and B5.8 (Import or export of
natural gas, with new cogeneration
powerplant); one class of actions
normally requiring an EA: C13 (Import
or export natural gas involving minor
new construction); and two classes of
action normally requiring an EIS: D8
(Import or export of natural gas
involving major new facilities) and D9
(Import or export of natural gas
involving major operational change).11
What changes does DOE propose?
DOE proposes to revise the classes of
action in its NEPA regulations regarding
authorizations under section 3 of the
NGA consistent with the legal principle
enunciated in Public Citizen and Sierra
Club 12 that potential environmental
effects considered under NEPA do not
include effects that the agency has no
authority to prevent. DOE’s authority
under Section 3 of the NGA is limited
to authorization of exports of natural
gas. Therefore, DOE need not review
potential environmental impacts
associated with the construction or
9 See, e.g., U.S. Dep’t of Energy, Life Cycle
Greenhouse Gas Perspective on Exporting Liquefied
Natural Gas From the United States: 2019 Update—
Response to Comments, 85 FR 72, 78, 85 (Jan. 2,
2020).
10 There are three levels of NEPA review
established in the Council on Environmental
Quality’s (CEQ’s) NEPA implementing regulations
(40 CFR parts 1500–1508)—categorical exclusion,
environmental assessment (EA), and environmental
impact statement (EIS)—each involving different
levels of information and analysis.
11 See 10 CFR 1021.410 and subpart D.
12 See Dep’t of Transp. v. Pub. Citizen, 541 U.S.
752 (2004); Sierra Club v. Fed. Energy Regulatory
Comm’n, 827 F.3d 36 (D.C. Cir. 2016).
E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM
01MYP1
25342
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 85 / Friday, May 1, 2020 / Proposed Rules
operation of natural gas export facilities
because DOE lacks authority to approve
the construction or operation of those
facilities. DOE’s review is properly
focused on potential environmental
impacts resulting from the exercise of its
NGA section 3 authority. These impacts
occur at or after the point of export.
Accordingly, DOE proposes to revise
the scope of categorical exclusion B5.7
by deleting the reference to operation of
natural gas facilities. The revised B5.7
would include a new statement that the
scope includes any ‘‘associated
transportation of natural gas by marine
vessel,’’ which is the only source of
potential environmental impacts
associated with DOE’s decision
regarding authorizations under section 3
of the NGA. Based on prior NEPA
reviews and technical reports, DOE has
determined that transport of natural gas
by marine vessel normally does not pose
the potential for significant
environmental impacts. (See Technical
Support Document.)
DOE also proposes to remove the
reference to import authorizations from
B5.7 because section 3(c) of the Natural
Gas Act directs that authorization
requests to import natural gas ‘‘shall be
granted without modification or delay.’’
DOE is not required to prepare NEPA
analysis when it has no discretion in its
action.13
Finally, DOE proposes to remove and
reserve categorical exclusion B5.8 and
classes of action C13, D8, and D9. These
would no longer be needed with the
proposed changes to categorical
exclusion B5.7.
How does DOE make a categorical
exclusion determination?
The proposed revision to B5.7 would
be subject to the same conditions as
other categorical exclusions listed in
appendix B to subpart D of DOE’s NEPA
regulations. Before a proposed action
such as an export authorization may be
categorically excluded, DOE must
determine in accordance with 10 CFR
1021.410(b) that: (1) The proposed
action fits within a categorical exclusion
listed in appendix A or B to subpart D;
(2) there are no extraordinary
circumstances related to the proposal
that may affect the significance of the
environmental impacts of the proposed
action; and (3) the proposal has not been
segmented to meet the definition of a
categorical exclusion, there are no
connected or related actions with
cumulatively significant impacts and
the proposed action is not precluded as
an impermissible interim action.14
13 15
14 40
U.S.C. 717b(c).
CFR 1506.1 and 10 CFR 1021.211.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
08:06 May 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
In addition, to fit within a class of
actions in appendix B (including B5.7),
a proposed action must satisfy certain
conditions known as ‘‘integral
elements’’ (appendix B, paragraphs (1)
through (5)). These conditions ensure
that a proposed action would not have
the potential to cause significant
environmental impacts—for example,
due to a threatened violation of
applicable environmental, safety, and
health requirements, or by disturbing
hazardous substances such that there
would be uncontrolled or unpermitted
releases.
How may the public comment on DOE’s
proposed changes?
DOE invites interested persons to
participate in this proposed rulemaking
by submitting comments on the
proposed rule and on the supporting
information for proposed changes set
forth in the preamble and the Technical
Support Document, including on
industry experience with marine
transport of natural gas. As appropriate,
comments should refer to the specific
section of the proposed rule to which
the comment applies, identify a
comment as a general comment, or
identify a comment as a new proposal.
DOE will consider all timely
comments received in response to this
notice of proposed rulemaking.
Comments may be submitted by one
of the methods in the ADDRESSES section
of this proposed rule. Comments
received will be included in the
administrative record and will be made
available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
specifically identified as Confidential
Business Information (CBI) or other
information whose disclosure is
restricted by statute. Information that
you consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected should be submitted by mail,
not through https://
www.regulations.gov. If you submit
information that you believe to be
exempt by law from public disclosure,
you should mail one complete copy, as
well as one copy from which the
information claimed to be exempt by
law from public disclosure has been
redacted. Please include written
justification as to why the redacted
information is exempt from disclosure.
DOE is responsible for the final
determination with regard to disclosure
or nondisclosure of the information and
for treating it accordingly under the
DOE Freedom of Information Act
regulations (10 CFR 1004.11).
The Federal eRulemaking Portal is an
‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
means DOE will not know your contact
information unless you provide it. If you
choose not to provide contact
information and DOE cannot read your
comment due to technical difficulties,
DOE may not be able to consider your
comment. Electronic files should avoid
the use of special characters and any
form of encryption, and be free of any
defects or viruses.
Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule has been
determined not to be a significant
regulatory action under E.O. 12866,
‘‘Regulatory Planning and Review,’’ 58
FR 51735 (October 4, 1993).
Accordingly, this action was not subject
to review under that Executive Order by
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).
B. Review Under National
Environmental Policy Act
The requirements for Federal agencies
to establish NEPA implementing
procedures are set forth in the CEQ
regulations at 40 CFR 1505.1 and 40
CFR 1507.3. DOE NEPA procedures
assist the Department in the fulfillment
of its responsibilities under NEPA but
are not final determinations of the level
of NEPA analysis required for particular
actions. The CEQ regulations do not
require agencies to prepare a NEPA
analysis before establishing or updating
agency procedures for implementing
NEPA. DOE has determined that the
proposed revision would not have a
significant effect on the environment
because it would not authorize any
activity or commit resources to a project
that may affect the environment.
Therefore, DOE does not intend to
conduct a NEPA analysis of these
proposed regulations.
C. Review Under Regulatory Flexibility
Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires preparation
of an initial regulatory flexibility
analysis for any rule that by law must
be proposed for public comment, unless
the agency certifies that the rule, if
promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. As required by
E.O. 13272, ‘‘Proper Consideration of
Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking,’’
67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE
published procedures and policies on
February 19, 2003, to ensure that the
potential impacts of its rules on small
entities are properly considered during
the rulemaking process (68 FR 7990).
E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM
01MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 85 / Friday, May 1, 2020 / Proposed Rules
DOE has made its procedures and
policies available on the Office of the
General Counsel’s website: https://
energy.gov/gc.
DOE has reviewed this proposed rule
under the provisions of the Regulatory
Flexibility Act and the procedures and
policies published on February 19,
2003. The proposed rule would not
directly regulate small entities. The
proposed revisions to 10 CFR part 1021
would revise the scope of categorical
exclusion B5.7 by removing reference to
operation of natural gas facilities and
adding ‘‘transportation of natural gas by
marine vessel.’’ The proposed revisions
would also focus on the export of
natural gas because imports are deemed
by law to be in the public interest. The
proposal is intended to appropriately
focus DOE’s NEPA analysis for natural
gas export applications, and does not
impose any new requirements on small
entities. DOE anticipates that the rule
could reduce the burden on applicants
for conducting environmental reviews.
On the basis of the foregoing, DOE
certifies that this proposed rule, if
adopted, would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Accordingly,
DOE has not prepared a regulatory
flexibility analysis for this proposed
rulemaking. DOE’s certification and
supporting statement of factual basis
will be provided to the Chief Counsel
for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
605(b).
D. Review Under Paperwork Reduction
Act
This proposed rulemaking will
impose no new information or recordkeeping requirements. Accordingly,
OMB clearance is not required under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.
3501 et seq.).
E. Review Under Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4) generally
requires Federal agencies to examine
closely the impacts of regulatory actions
on state, local, and tribal governments.
Subsection 101(5) of title I of that law
defines a Federal intergovernmental
mandate to include any regulation that
would impose upon state, local, or tribal
governments an enforceable duty,
except a condition of Federal assistance
or a duty arising from participating in a
voluntary Federal program. Title II of
that law requires each Federal agency to
assess the effects of Federal regulatory
actions on state, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the
private sector, other than to the extent
VerDate Sep<11>2014
08:06 May 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
such actions merely incorporate
requirements specifically set forth in a
statute. Section 202 of that title requires
a Federal agency to perform a detailed
assessment of the anticipated costs and
benefits of any rule that includes a
Federal mandate which may result in
costs to state, local, or tribal
governments, or to the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any one year
(adjusted annually for inflation) (2
U.S.C. 1532(a) and (b)). Section 204 of
that title requires each agency that
proposes a rule containing a significant
Federal intergovernmental mandate to
develop an effective process for
obtaining meaningful and timely input
from elected officers of state, local, and
tribal governments (2 U.S.C. 1534).
The proposed rule would amend
DOE’s existing regulations governing
compliance with NEPA to update DOE’s
regulations consistent with controlling
legal principle. The proposed rule
would not result in the expenditure by
state, local, and tribal governments in
the aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more in any one year.
Accordingly, no assessment or analysis
is required under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
F. Review Under Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105–277) requires
Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any
proposed rule that may affect family
well-being. The proposed rule would
not have any impact on the autonomy
or integrity of the family as an
institution. Accordingly, DOE has
concluded that it is not necessary to
prepare a Family Policymaking
Assessment.
G. Review Under Executive Order 13132
E.O. 13132, ‘‘Federalism,’’ 64 FR
43255 (August 4, 1999), imposes certain
requirements on agencies formulating
and implementing policies or
regulations that preempt state law or
that have federalism implications.
Agencies are required to examine the
constitutional and statutory authority
supporting any action that would limit
the policymaking discretion of the states
and carefully assess the necessity for
such actions. DOE has examined this
proposed rule and has determined that
it would not preempt state law and
would not have a substantial direct
effect on the states, on the relationship
between the national government and
the states, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
25343
various levels of government. No further
action is required by E.O. 13132.
H. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing
regulations and the promulgation of
new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O.
12988, ‘‘Civil Justice Reform,’’ 61 FR
4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on
Executive agencies the general duty to
adhere to the following requirements:
(1) Eliminate drafting errors and
ambiguity; (2) write regulations to
minimize litigation; and (3) provide a
clear legal standard for affected conduct
rather than a general standard and
promote simplification and burden
reduction. With regard to the review
required by section 3(a), section 3(b) of
E.O. 12988 specifically requires that
Executive agencies make every
reasonable effort to ensure that the
regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the
regulation’s preemptive effect, if any; (2)
clearly specifies any effect on existing
Federal law or regulation; (3) provides
a clear legal standard for affected
conduct while promoting simplification
and burden reduction; (4) specifies the
retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately
defines key terms; and (6) addresses
other important issues affecting clarity
and general draftsmanship under any
guidelines issued by the Attorney
General. Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988
requires Executive agencies to review
regulations in light of applicable
standards in section 3(a) and section
3(b) to determine whether they are met
or it is unreasonable to meet one or
more of them. DOE has completed the
required review and determined that, to
the extent permitted by law, the
proposed rule meets the relevant
standards of E.O. 12988.
I. Review Under Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
The Treasury and General
Government Appropriations Act, 2001
(44 U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for
agencies to review most disseminations
of information to the public under
guidelines established by each agency
pursuant to general guidelines issued by
OMB.
OMB’s guidelines were published at
67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002), and
DOE’s guidelines were published at 67
FR 62446 (October 7, 2002). DOE has
reviewed this proposed rule under the
OMB and DOE guidelines and has
concluded that it is consistent with
applicable policies in those guidelines.
J. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM
01MYP1
25344
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 85 / Friday, May 1, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May
22, 2001), requires Federal agencies to
prepare and submit to OMB a Statement
of Energy Effects for any proposed
significant energy action. A ‘‘significant
energy action’’ is defined as any action
by an agency that promulgated or is
expected to lead to promulgation of a
final rule, and that: (1)(i) Is a significant
regulatory action under E.O. 12866, or
any successor order, and (ii) is likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy; or
(2) is designated by the Administrator of
OIRA as a significant energy action. For
any proposed significant energy action,
the agency must give a detailed
statement of any adverse effects on
energy supply, distribution, or use
should the proposal be implemented,
and of reasonable alternatives to the
action and their expected benefits on
energy supply, distribution, and use.
This regulatory action would not have a
significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy, and is
therefore not a significant energy action.
Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
K. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined pursuant to E.O.
12630, ‘‘Governmental Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Property Rights,’’ 53 FR 8859
(March 18, 1988), that this proposed
rule would not result in any takings that
might require compensation under the
Fifth Amendment to the United States
Constitution.
L. Review Under Executive Orders
13771 and 13777
On January 30, 2017, the President
issued E.O. 13771, ‘‘Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory
Costs.’’ E.O. 13771 states that the policy
of the executive branch is to be prudent
and financially responsible in the
expenditure of funds, from both public
and private sources. E.O. 13771 states
that it is essential to manage the costs
associated with the governmental
imposition of private expenditures
required to comply with Federal
regulations.
Additionally, on February 24, 2017,
the President issued E.O. 13777,
‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory Reform
Agenda.’’ E.O. 13777 requires the head
of each agency to designate an agency
official as its Regulatory Reform Officer
(RRO). Each RRO oversees the
implementation of regulatory reform
initiatives and policies to ensure that
agencies effectively carry out regulatory
reforms, consistent with applicable law.
Further, E.O. 13777 requires the
establishment of a regulatory task force
VerDate Sep<11>2014
08:06 May 01, 2020
Jkt 250001
at each agency. The regulatory task force
is required to make recommendations to
the agency head regarding the repeal,
replacement, or modification of existing
regulations, consistent with applicable
law. At a minimum, each regulatory
reform task force must attempt to
identify regulations that:
(i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job
creation;
(ii) Are outdated, unnecessary, or
ineffective;
(iii) Impose costs that exceed benefits;
(iv) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with regulatory
reform initiatives and policies;
(v) Are inconsistent with the
requirements of Information Quality
Act, or the guidance issued pursuant to
that Act, in particular those regulations
that rely in whole or in part on data,
information, or methods that are not
publicly available or that are
insufficiently transparent to meet the
standard for reproducibility; or
(vi) Derive from or implement
Executive Orders or other Presidential
directives that have been subsequently
rescinded or substantially modified.
DOE initially concludes that this
rulemaking is consistent with the
directives set forth in these Executive
Orders. This proposed rule would
update and improve efficiency in DOE’s
implementation of NEPA by
appropriately focusing DOE’s NEPA
analysis for natural gas export
applications and eliminating certain
requirements of its existing regulations
that are unnecessary.
Signed in Washington, DC, on April 17,
2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S.
Department of Energy.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, DOE is proposing to amend
part 1021 of Chapter X of Title 10 of the
Code of Federal Regulations as set forth
below:
PART 1021—NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT
IMPLEMENTING PROCEDURES
1. The authority citation for part 1021
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.; 42 U.S.C.
4321 et seq.; 50 U.S.C. 2401 et seq.
2. Appendix B to subpart D of part
1021 is amended by:
■ a. Revising section B5.7; and
■ b. Removing and reserving section
B5.8.
The revision reads as follows:
■
APPENDIX B TO SUBPART D OF
PART 1021—CATEGORICAL
EXCLUSIONS APPLICABLE TO
SPECIFIC AGENCY ACTIONS
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
B5. * * *
*
*
The Secretary of Energy has approved
publication of this notice of proposed
rulemaking.
B5.7 Export of natural gas and associated
transportation by marine vessel
Approvals or disapprovals of new
authorizations or amendments of existing
authorizations to export natural gas under
section 3 of the Natural Gas Act and any
associated transportation of natural gas by
marine vessel.
B5.8 [Removed and Reserved].
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 1021
*
Approval of the Office of the Secretary
Environmental impact statements.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of
Energy was signed on April 16, 2020, by
William S. Cooper III, General Counsel,
pursuant to delegated authority from the
Secretary of Energy. That document
with the original signature and date is
maintained by DOE. For administrative
purposes only, and in compliance with
requirements of the Office of the Federal
Register, the undersigned DOE Federal
Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the
document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of
the Department of Energy. This
administrative process in no way alters
the legal effect of this document upon
publication in the Federal Register.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
*
*
*
*
APPENDIX C TO SUBPART D OF
PART 1021—CLASSES OF ACTIONS
THAT NORMALLY REQUIRE EAs BUT
NOT NECESSARILY EISs
C13 [Removed and Reserved]
■
3. Remove and reserve section C13.
APPENDIX D TO SUBPART D OF
PART 1021—CLASSES OF ACTIONS
THAT NORMALLY REQUIRE EISs
D8 and D9 [Removed and Reserved]
4. Remove and reserve sections D8
and D9.
■
[FR Doc. 2020–08511 Filed 4–30–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450–01–P
E:\FR\FM\01MYP1.SGM
01MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 85 (Friday, May 1, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 25340-25344]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-08511]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
10 CFR Part 1021
[DOE-HQ-2020-0017]
RIN 1990-AA49
National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures
AGENCY: Office of the General Counsel, Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking and request for comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE or the Department) proposes
to update its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) implementing
procedures regarding authorizations issued under section 3 of the
Natural Gas Act. These changes will improve the efficiency of the DOE
decision-making process by saving time and money in the NEPA review
process and eliminating unnecessary environmental documentation. DOE
invites public comments on the proposed changes.
DATES: Comments must be received by (or, if mailed, postmarked by) June
1, 2020 to ensure consideration.
ADDRESSES: Documents relevant to this rulemaking are posted on the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov (Docket: DOE-
HQ-2020-0017). Documents posted to this docket include: This notice of
proposed rulemaking; DOE's ``Technical Support Document'' which
provides additional information; and a ``redline/strikeout'' (markup)
file of affected sections of the DOE NEPA regulations indicating the
changes proposed in this proposed rule.
Submit comments, labeled ``DOE NEPA/NG Procedures, RIN 1990-AA49,''
by one of the following methods:
1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the online instructions for submitting comments electronically. This
[[Page 25341]]
rulemaking is assigned Docket: DOE-HQ-2020-0017.
2. Postal Mail: Mail comments to Office of NEPA Policy and
Compliance (GC-54), ATTN: NEPA/NG Procedures (RIN 1990-AA49), U.S.
Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC
20585. Because security screening may delay mail sent through the U.S.
Postal Service, DOE encourages electronic submittal of comments through
the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions concerning how to
comment on this proposed rule, contact Yardena Mansoor, Office of NEPA
Policy and Compliance, at [email protected] or 800-472-
2756. For detailed information on submitting comments, see ``How may
the public comment on DOE's proposed changes?''.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE is responsible for authorizing exports
of domestically produced natural gas to foreign countries under section
3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA).\1\ Section 3(a) of the NGA requires DOE
to issue an order authorizing natural gas exports unless it finds that
such an order ``will not be consistent with the public interest.'' DOE
complies with NEPA \2\ before reaching a final decision on applications
to export natural gas to countries with which the United States does
not have a free trade agreement requiring national treatment for trade
in natural gas (non-FTA countries).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 717b.
\2\ 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DOE authorization also is required for imports of natural gas under
section 3(a) of the NGA. However, section 3(c) of the NGA was amended
by section 201 of the Energy Policy Act of 1992 \3\ to require that
applications to authorize the import of natural gas (as well as the
export of natural gas to FTA countries) be ``deemed consistent with the
public interest, and . . . granted without modification or delay.''
This requirement leaves DOE with no discretion in its approvals of
natural gas imports, as they are deemed to be in the public interest.
Accordingly, DOE proposes to remove the reference to authorizations to
import natural gas from its NEPA regulations consistent with the legal
principle that an agency is not required to prepare a NEPA analysis
when it has no discretion in its action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ EPACT 1992, Public Law 102-486.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, with regard to authorizations for export to non-FTA
countries, DOE proposes to revise its regulations consistent with the
legal principle that potential environmental effects considered under
NEPA do not include effects that the agency has no authority to
prevent, because they would not have a sufficiently close causal
connection to the proposed action.\4\ Here, DOE's proposed action is
authorization of natural gas exports.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Dep't of Transp. v. Pub. Citizen, 541 U.S. 752 (2004);
Sierra Club v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 827 F.3d 36 (D.C. Cir.
2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The statutory term ``export'' is not defined in the NGA. In
adjudications under NGA section 3(a), however, DOE has construed an
``export'' of LNG from the United States as occurring ``when the LNG is
delivered to the flange of the LNG export vessel.'' \5\ To ensure that
DOE's NEPA regulations are consistent with this longstanding practice,
DOE will focus exclusively on NEPA review of potential environmental
impacts resulting from actions occurring at or after the point of
export.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ See, e.g., Freeport LNG Expansion L.P., et al., DOE/FE Order
No. 3282-C, FE Docket No. 10-161-LNG, Final Opinion and Order
Granting Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization to Export Liquefied
Natural Gas by Vessel from the Freeport LNG Terminal on Quintana
Island, Texas, to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations, at 23 (Nov. 14,
2014) (``Export occurs when the LNG is delivered to the flange of
the LNG export vessel.'') (citing Dow Chem. Co., DOE/FE Order No.
2859, FE Docket No. 10-57-LNG, Order Granting Blanket Authorization
to Export Liquefied Natural Gas, at 1 (Oct. 5, 2010)).
\6\ This scope of analysis is also consistent with decisions in
recent years of the U.S. Court of Appeal for the District of
Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit), which recognized that DOE
``maintains exclusive jurisdiction over the export of natural gas as
a commodity.'' Sierra Club v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 827
F.3d 36, 40 (2016). Specifically, the D.C. Circuit observed that the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has an obligation to
comply with the NGA and NEPA with respect to its decisions to
authorize the construction of LNG terminals, whereas DOE has an
independent obligation ``to consider the environmental impacts of
its export authorization decision under NEPA and determine whether
it satisfied the Natural Gas Act's `public interest' test.'' Sierra
Club v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, 867 F.3d 189, 192 (D.C. Cir. 2017).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, this proposed rulemaking is consistent with two life
cycle analyses (LCAs) that DOE commissioned to calculate the life cycle
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for LNG exported from the United States.
DOE commissioned both the original LCA GHG Report, published in
2014,\7\ and an updated LCA GHG Report, published in 2019,\8\ to
evaluate environmental aspects of the LNG export chain under NGA
section 3(a). Both Reports concluded that the use of U.S. LNG exports
for power production in European and Asian markets will not increase
global GHG emissions from a life cycle perspective, when compared to
regional coal extraction and consumption for power production.\9\ DOE
has used these Reports to support its public interest determination
regarding a proposed export. These Reports are not, however, part of
DOE's NEPA reviews because the regasification and ultimate burning of
LNG in foreign countries are beyond the scope of DOE's NEPA review.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See U.S. Dep't of Energy, Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas
Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas From the United
States, 79 FR 32260 (June 4, 2014) (LCA GHG Report).
\8\ See U.S. Dep't of Energy, Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas
Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas From the United
States; Notice of Availability of Report Entitled Life Cycle
Greenhouse Gas Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas From
the United States: 2019 Update and Request for Comments, 84 FR 49278
(Sept. 19, 2019) (LCA GHG Update).
\9\ See, e.g., U.S. Dep't of Energy, Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas
Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas From the United
States: 2019 Update--Response to Comments, 85 FR 72, 78, 85 (Jan. 2,
2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
What parts of DOE's current NEPA regulations does DOE propose to amend?
DOE's current NEPA regulations list classes of actions for each
level of NEPA review.\10\ Five of these classes regard applications to
import or export natural gas to a non-FTA country. There are two
categorical exclusions: B5.7 (Import or export of natural gas, with
operational changes) and B5.8 (Import or export of natural gas, with
new cogeneration powerplant); one class of actions normally requiring
an EA: C13 (Import or export natural gas involving minor new
construction); and two classes of action normally requiring an EIS: D8
(Import or export of natural gas involving major new facilities) and D9
(Import or export of natural gas involving major operational
change).\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ There are three levels of NEPA review established in the
Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ's) NEPA implementing
regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508)--categorical exclusion,
environmental assessment (EA), and environmental impact statement
(EIS)--each involving different levels of information and analysis.
\11\ See 10 CFR 1021.410 and subpart D.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
What changes does DOE propose?
DOE proposes to revise the classes of action in its NEPA
regulations regarding authorizations under section 3 of the NGA
consistent with the legal principle enunciated in Public Citizen and
Sierra Club \12\ that potential environmental effects considered under
NEPA do not include effects that the agency has no authority to
prevent. DOE's authority under Section 3 of the NGA is limited to
authorization of exports of natural gas. Therefore, DOE need not review
potential environmental impacts associated with the construction or
[[Page 25342]]
operation of natural gas export facilities because DOE lacks authority
to approve the construction or operation of those facilities. DOE's
review is properly focused on potential environmental impacts resulting
from the exercise of its NGA section 3 authority. These impacts occur
at or after the point of export.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Dep't of Transp. v. Pub. Citizen, 541 U.S. 752 (2004);
Sierra Club v. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm'n, 827 F.3d 36 (D.C. Cir.
2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, DOE proposes to revise the scope of categorical
exclusion B5.7 by deleting the reference to operation of natural gas
facilities. The revised B5.7 would include a new statement that the
scope includes any ``associated transportation of natural gas by marine
vessel,'' which is the only source of potential environmental impacts
associated with DOE's decision regarding authorizations under section 3
of the NGA. Based on prior NEPA reviews and technical reports, DOE has
determined that transport of natural gas by marine vessel normally does
not pose the potential for significant environmental impacts. (See
Technical Support Document.)
DOE also proposes to remove the reference to import authorizations
from B5.7 because section 3(c) of the Natural Gas Act directs that
authorization requests to import natural gas ``shall be granted without
modification or delay.'' DOE is not required to prepare NEPA analysis
when it has no discretion in its action.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 15 U.S.C. 717b(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, DOE proposes to remove and reserve categorical exclusion
B5.8 and classes of action C13, D8, and D9. These would no longer be
needed with the proposed changes to categorical exclusion B5.7.
How does DOE make a categorical exclusion determination?
The proposed revision to B5.7 would be subject to the same
conditions as other categorical exclusions listed in appendix B to
subpart D of DOE's NEPA regulations. Before a proposed action such as
an export authorization may be categorically excluded, DOE must
determine in accordance with 10 CFR 1021.410(b) that: (1) The proposed
action fits within a categorical exclusion listed in appendix A or B to
subpart D; (2) there are no extraordinary circumstances related to the
proposal that may affect the significance of the environmental impacts
of the proposed action; and (3) the proposal has not been segmented to
meet the definition of a categorical exclusion, there are no connected
or related actions with cumulatively significant impacts and the
proposed action is not precluded as an impermissible interim
action.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 40 CFR 1506.1 and 10 CFR 1021.211.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, to fit within a class of actions in appendix B
(including B5.7), a proposed action must satisfy certain conditions
known as ``integral elements'' (appendix B, paragraphs (1) through
(5)). These conditions ensure that a proposed action would not have the
potential to cause significant environmental impacts--for example, due
to a threatened violation of applicable environmental, safety, and
health requirements, or by disturbing hazardous substances such that
there would be uncontrolled or unpermitted releases.
How may the public comment on DOE's proposed changes?
DOE invites interested persons to participate in this proposed
rulemaking by submitting comments on the proposed rule and on the
supporting information for proposed changes set forth in the preamble
and the Technical Support Document, including on industry experience
with marine transport of natural gas. As appropriate, comments should
refer to the specific section of the proposed rule to which the comment
applies, identify a comment as a general comment, or identify a comment
as a new proposal.
DOE will consider all timely comments received in response to this
notice of proposed rulemaking.
Comments may be submitted by one of the methods in the ADDRESSES
section of this proposed rule. Comments received will be included in
the administrative record and will be made available online at https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided,
unless the comment includes information specifically identified as
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider to
be CBI or otherwise protected should be submitted by mail, not through
https://www.regulations.gov. If you submit information that you believe
to be exempt by law from public disclosure, you should mail one
complete copy, as well as one copy from which the information claimed
to be exempt by law from public disclosure has been redacted. Please
include written justification as to why the redacted information is
exempt from disclosure. DOE is responsible for the final determination
with regard to disclosure or nondisclosure of the information and for
treating it accordingly under the DOE Freedom of Information Act
regulations (10 CFR 1004.11).
The Federal eRulemaking Portal is an ``anonymous access'' system,
which means DOE will not know your contact information unless you
provide it. If you choose not to provide contact information and DOE
cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties, DOE may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters and any form of encryption, and be free of any
defects or viruses.
Procedural Requirements
A. Review Under Executive Order 12866
This proposed rule has been determined not to be a significant
regulatory action under E.O. 12866, ``Regulatory Planning and Review,''
58 FR 51735 (October 4, 1993). Accordingly, this action was not subject
to review under that Executive Order by the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
B. Review Under National Environmental Policy Act
The requirements for Federal agencies to establish NEPA
implementing procedures are set forth in the CEQ regulations at 40 CFR
1505.1 and 40 CFR 1507.3. DOE NEPA procedures assist the Department in
the fulfillment of its responsibilities under NEPA but are not final
determinations of the level of NEPA analysis required for particular
actions. The CEQ regulations do not require agencies to prepare a NEPA
analysis before establishing or updating agency procedures for
implementing NEPA. DOE has determined that the proposed revision would
not have a significant effect on the environment because it would not
authorize any activity or commit resources to a project that may affect
the environment. Therefore, DOE does not intend to conduct a NEPA
analysis of these proposed regulations.
C. Review Under Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) requires
preparation of an initial regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule
that by law must be proposed for public comment, unless the agency
certifies that the rule, if promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. As required
by E.O. 13272, ``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency
Rulemaking,'' 67 FR 53461 (August 16, 2002), DOE published procedures
and policies on February 19, 2003, to ensure that the potential impacts
of its rules on small entities are properly considered during the
rulemaking process (68 FR 7990).
[[Page 25343]]
DOE has made its procedures and policies available on the Office of the
General Counsel's website: https://energy.gov/gc.
DOE has reviewed this proposed rule under the provisions of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act and the procedures and policies published on
February 19, 2003. The proposed rule would not directly regulate small
entities. The proposed revisions to 10 CFR part 1021 would revise the
scope of categorical exclusion B5.7 by removing reference to operation
of natural gas facilities and adding ``transportation of natural gas by
marine vessel.'' The proposed revisions would also focus on the export
of natural gas because imports are deemed by law to be in the public
interest. The proposal is intended to appropriately focus DOE's NEPA
analysis for natural gas export applications, and does not impose any
new requirements on small entities. DOE anticipates that the rule could
reduce the burden on applicants for conducting environmental reviews.
On the basis of the foregoing, DOE certifies that this proposed
rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared
a regulatory flexibility analysis for this proposed rulemaking. DOE's
certification and supporting statement of factual basis will be
provided to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
D. Review Under Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rulemaking will impose no new information or record-
keeping requirements. Accordingly, OMB clearance is not required under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
E. Review Under Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4) generally
requires Federal agencies to examine closely the impacts of regulatory
actions on state, local, and tribal governments. Subsection 101(5) of
title I of that law defines a Federal intergovernmental mandate to
include any regulation that would impose upon state, local, or tribal
governments an enforceable duty, except a condition of Federal
assistance or a duty arising from participating in a voluntary Federal
program. Title II of that law requires each Federal agency to assess
the effects of Federal regulatory actions on state, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or to the private sector, other than to
the extent such actions merely incorporate requirements specifically
set forth in a statute. Section 202 of that title requires a Federal
agency to perform a detailed assessment of the anticipated costs and
benefits of any rule that includes a Federal mandate which may result
in costs to state, local, or tribal governments, or to the private
sector, of $100 million or more in any one year (adjusted annually for
inflation) (2 U.S.C. 1532(a) and (b)). Section 204 of that title
requires each agency that proposes a rule containing a significant
Federal intergovernmental mandate to develop an effective process for
obtaining meaningful and timely input from elected officers of state,
local, and tribal governments (2 U.S.C. 1534).
The proposed rule would amend DOE's existing regulations governing
compliance with NEPA to update DOE's regulations consistent with
controlling legal principle. The proposed rule would not result in the
expenditure by state, local, and tribal governments in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any one year.
Accordingly, no assessment or analysis is required under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
F. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
1999
Section 654 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations
Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277) requires Federal agencies to issue a Family
Policymaking Assessment for any proposed rule that may affect family
well-being. The proposed rule would not have any impact on the autonomy
or integrity of the family as an institution. Accordingly, DOE has
concluded that it is not necessary to prepare a Family Policymaking
Assessment.
G. Review Under Executive Order 13132
E.O. 13132, ``Federalism,'' 64 FR 43255 (August 4, 1999), imposes
certain requirements on agencies formulating and implementing policies
or regulations that preempt state law or that have federalism
implications. Agencies are required to examine the constitutional and
statutory authority supporting any action that would limit the
policymaking discretion of the states and carefully assess the
necessity for such actions. DOE has examined this proposed rule and has
determined that it would not preempt state law and would not have a
substantial direct effect on the states, on the relationship between
the national government and the states, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities among the various levels of government. No further
action is required by E.O. 13132.
H. Review Under Executive Order 12988
With respect to the review of existing regulations and the
promulgation of new regulations, section 3(a) of E.O. 12988, ``Civil
Justice Reform,'' 61 FR 4729 (February 7, 1996), imposes on Executive
agencies the general duty to adhere to the following requirements: (1)
Eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity; (2) write regulations to
minimize litigation; and (3) provide a clear legal standard for
affected conduct rather than a general standard and promote
simplification and burden reduction. With regard to the review required
by section 3(a), section 3(b) of E.O. 12988 specifically requires that
Executive agencies make every reasonable effort to ensure that the
regulation: (1) Clearly specifies the regulation's preemptive effect,
if any; (2) clearly specifies any effect on existing Federal law or
regulation; (3) provides a clear legal standard for affected conduct
while promoting simplification and burden reduction; (4) specifies the
retroactive effect, if any; (5) adequately defines key terms; and (6)
addresses other important issues affecting clarity and general
draftsmanship under any guidelines issued by the Attorney General.
Section 3(c) of E.O. 12988 requires Executive agencies to review
regulations in light of applicable standards in section 3(a) and
section 3(b) to determine whether they are met or it is unreasonable to
meet one or more of them. DOE has completed the required review and
determined that, to the extent permitted by law, the proposed rule
meets the relevant standards of E.O. 12988.
I. Review Under Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act,
2001
The Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2001 (44
U.S.C. 3516 note) provides for agencies to review most disseminations
of information to the public under guidelines established by each
agency pursuant to general guidelines issued by OMB.
OMB's guidelines were published at 67 FR 8452 (February 22, 2002),
and DOE's guidelines were published at 67 FR 62446 (October 7, 2002).
DOE has reviewed this proposed rule under the OMB and DOE guidelines
and has concluded that it is consistent with applicable policies in
those guidelines.
J. Review Under Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
[[Page 25344]]
Distribution, or Use,'' 66 FR 28355 (May 22, 2001), requires Federal
agencies to prepare and submit to OMB a Statement of Energy Effects for
any proposed significant energy action. A ``significant energy action''
is defined as any action by an agency that promulgated or is expected
to lead to promulgation of a final rule, and that: (1)(i) Is a
significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866, or any successor order,
and (ii) is likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy; or (2) is designated by the
Administrator of OIRA as a significant energy action. For any proposed
significant energy action, the agency must give a detailed statement of
any adverse effects on energy supply, distribution, or use should the
proposal be implemented, and of reasonable alternatives to the action
and their expected benefits on energy supply, distribution, and use.
This regulatory action would not have a significant adverse effect on
the supply, distribution, or use of energy, and is therefore not a
significant energy action. Accordingly, DOE has not prepared a
Statement of Energy Effects.
K. Review Under Executive Order 12630
DOE has determined pursuant to E.O. 12630, ``Governmental Actions
and Interference with Constitutionally Protected Property Rights,'' 53
FR 8859 (March 18, 1988), that this proposed rule would not result in
any takings that might require compensation under the Fifth Amendment
to the United States Constitution.
L. Review Under Executive Orders 13771 and 13777
On January 30, 2017, the President issued E.O. 13771, ``Reducing
Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs.'' E.O. 13771 states that
the policy of the executive branch is to be prudent and financially
responsible in the expenditure of funds, from both public and private
sources. E.O. 13771 states that it is essential to manage the costs
associated with the governmental imposition of private expenditures
required to comply with Federal regulations.
Additionally, on February 24, 2017, the President issued E.O.
13777, ``Enforcing the Regulatory Reform Agenda.'' E.O. 13777 requires
the head of each agency to designate an agency official as its
Regulatory Reform Officer (RRO). Each RRO oversees the implementation
of regulatory reform initiatives and policies to ensure that agencies
effectively carry out regulatory reforms, consistent with applicable
law. Further, E.O. 13777 requires the establishment of a regulatory
task force at each agency. The regulatory task force is required to
make recommendations to the agency head regarding the repeal,
replacement, or modification of existing regulations, consistent with
applicable law. At a minimum, each regulatory reform task force must
attempt to identify regulations that:
(i) Eliminate jobs, or inhibit job creation;
(ii) Are outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective;
(iii) Impose costs that exceed benefits;
(iv) Create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with
regulatory reform initiatives and policies;
(v) Are inconsistent with the requirements of Information Quality
Act, or the guidance issued pursuant to that Act, in particular those
regulations that rely in whole or in part on data, information, or
methods that are not publicly available or that are insufficiently
transparent to meet the standard for reproducibility; or
(vi) Derive from or implement Executive Orders or other
Presidential directives that have been subsequently rescinded or
substantially modified.
DOE initially concludes that this rulemaking is consistent with the
directives set forth in these Executive Orders. This proposed rule
would update and improve efficiency in DOE's implementation of NEPA by
appropriately focusing DOE's NEPA analysis for natural gas export
applications and eliminating certain requirements of its existing
regulations that are unnecessary.
Approval of the Office of the Secretary
The Secretary of Energy has approved publication of this notice of
proposed rulemaking.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 1021
Environmental impact statements.
Signing Authority
This document of the Department of Energy was signed on April 16,
2020, by William S. Cooper III, General Counsel, pursuant to delegated
authority from the Secretary of Energy. That document with the original
signature and date is maintained by DOE. For administrative purposes
only, and in compliance with requirements of the Office of the Federal
Register, the undersigned DOE Federal Register Liaison Officer has been
authorized to sign and submit the document in electronic format for
publication, as an official document of the Department of Energy. This
administrative process in no way alters the legal effect of this
document upon publication in the Federal Register.
Signed in Washington, DC, on April 17, 2020.
Treena V. Garrett,
Federal Register Liaison Officer, U.S. Department of Energy.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOE is proposing to amend
part 1021 of Chapter X of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
as set forth below:
PART 1021--NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT IMPLEMENTING
PROCEDURES
0
1. The authority citation for part 1021 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7101 et seq.; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 50
U.S.C. 2401 et seq.
0
2. Appendix B to subpart D of part 1021 is amended by:
0
a. Revising section B5.7; and
0
b. Removing and reserving section B5.8.
The revision reads as follows:
APPENDIX B TO SUBPART D OF PART 1021--CATEGORICAL EXCLUSIONS APPLICABLE
TO SPECIFIC AGENCY ACTIONS
* * * * *
B5. * * *
* * * * *
B5.7 Export of natural gas and associated transportation by
marine vessel
Approvals or disapprovals of new authorizations or amendments of
existing authorizations to export natural gas under section 3 of the
Natural Gas Act and any associated transportation of natural gas by
marine vessel.
B5.8 [Removed and Reserved].
* * * * *
APPENDIX C TO SUBPART D OF PART 1021--CLASSES OF ACTIONS THAT NORMALLY
REQUIRE EAs BUT NOT NECESSARILY EISs
C13 [Removed and Reserved]
0
3. Remove and reserve section C13.
APPENDIX D TO SUBPART D OF PART 1021--CLASSES OF ACTIONS THAT NORMALLY
REQUIRE EISs
D8 and D9 [Removed and Reserved]
0
4. Remove and reserve sections D8 and D9.
[FR Doc. 2020-08511 Filed 4-30-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P