Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 179 / Tuesday, September 16, 2014 / Notices 55443 

1Cameron LNG, LLC, 134 FERC ¶ 61,049 (2011). 

2Cameron previously sought authorization to 

export the same quantity of LNG to any country 

with which the United States has, or in the future 

may enter into, a FTA requiring national treatment 

for trade in natural gas (FTA countries). DOE/FE 

granted that FTA authorization by order dated 

January 17, 2012. 

Department published in the Federal 

Register, in text or Adobe Portable 

Document Format (PDF). To use PDF 

you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, 

which is available free at the site. 

You may also access documents of the 

Department published in the Federal 

Register by using the article search 

feature at: www.federalregister.gov. 

Specifically, through the advanced 

search feature at this site, you can limit 

your search to documents published by 

the Department. 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552a. 

Dated: September 5, 2014. 

Matthew D. Sessa, 

Deputy Chief Operating Officer Federal 

Student Aid. 

[FR Doc. 2014–22073 Filed 9–15–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Record of Decision and Floodplain 

Statement of Findings for the Cameron 

LNG, LLC Export Application 

AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, 

Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Record of decision. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) announces its decision in 

Cameron LNG, LLC, DOE/FE Docket No. 

11–162–LNG, to issue DOE/FE Order 

No. 3391–A, its Final Opinion and 

Order Granting Long-Term MultiContract Authorization to Export 

Liquefied Natural Gas by Vessel From 

the Cameron LNG Terminal in Cameron 

Parish, Louisiana to Non-Free Trade 

Agreement Countries (Order No. 3391– 

A). Order No. 3391–A is issued under 

section 3 of the Natural Gas Act. DOE 

participated as a cooperating agency 

with the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission (FERC) in preparing an 

environmental impact statement (EIS) 

analyzing the potential environmental 

impacts of a proposed liquefaction 

project (Liquefaction Project) and a 

proposed pipeline project (Pipeline 

Project) and alternatives that, if 

constructed, will be used to support the 

export authorization sought from DOE’s 

Office of Fossil Energy (FE). 

ADDRESSES: The EIS and this Record of 

Decision (ROD) are available on DOE’s 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) Web site at http://energy.gov/

nepa/nepa-documents. Order No. 3391– 

A is available on DOE/FE’s Web site at 

http://energy.gov/fe/downloads/listingdoefe-authorizations-issued-2014. 

Copies of these documents may be 

requested by writing John Anderson, 

U.S. Department of Energy (FE–34), 

Office of Natural Gas Regulatory 

Activities, Office of Fossil Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To 

obtain additional information about the 

project, the EIS, or the ROD, contact Mr. 

John Anderson as indicated above under 

ADDRESSES or Mr. Edward LeDuc, U.S. 

Department of Energy (GC–51), Office of 

the Assistant General Counsel for 

Environment, 1000 Independence 

Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20585. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE 

prepared this ROD and Floodplain 

Statement of Findings pursuant to the 

National Environmental Policy Act of 

1969 (42 United States Code [U.S.C.] 

4321, et seq.), and in compliance with 

the Council on Environmental Quality 

(CEQ) implementing regulations for 

NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations 

[CFR] parts 1500 through 1508), DOE’s 

implementing procedures for NEPA (10 

CFR part 1021), and DOE’s ‘‘Compliance 

with Floodplain and Wetland 

Environmental Review Requirements’’ 

(10 CFR part 1022). 

Background 

Cameron is a limited liability 

company organized under the laws of 

Delaware, with its executive offices 

located in San Diego, California. 

Cameron owns the existing Cameron 

LNG Terminal and has an existing 

interconnection with Cameron Interstate 

Pipeline, LCC (Cameron Interstate). 

Cameron Interstate, an affiliate of 

Cameron, is an interstate pipeline 

regulated by FERC. Cameron Interstate’s 

facilities consist primarily of a 36.2 mile 

pipeline connecting the Cameron 

Terminal with five other interstate 

pipelines. The Terminal initially was 

used for the sole purpose of receiving 

and storing foreign-sourced LNG, regasifying such LNG, and sending it out 

for delivery to domestic markets. In 

January 2011, FERC authorized 

Cameron to operate the Cameron 

Terminal for the additional purpose of 

exporting previously imported (i.e., 

foreign sourced) LNG on behalf of its 

customers.1

Project Description 

Cameron proposes to site, construct, 

and operate the Liquefaction Project, 

including liquefaction and export 

facilities, on a 502 acre site that is 

partially within the existing Terminal 

fence line in Cameron Parish, Louisiana. 

The Liquefaction Project includes three 

liquefaction systems and a 160,000 

cubic meter LNG storage tank, and 

would allow Cameron to liquefy 

domestic natural gas supplies for the 

export of approximately 12 million 

metric tons per year (mtpy) of LNG. 

Cameron Interstate proposes to site, 

construct, operate, and maintain the 

Pipeline Project, consisting of a new 

natural gas pipeline in Cameron, 

Calcasieu and Beauregard Parishes, 

Louisiana. The Pipeline Project includes 

the construction of 21 miles of 42-inch 

diameter pipeline and a compressor 

station, and would add bi-directional 

flow capability to Cameron Interstate’s 

existing pipeline to enable the transport 

of natural gas to the Cameron Terminal 

for export. The pipeline right-of-way 

would be within or abutting existing 

rights-of-way, and about 15.5 miles of 

the pipeline would be collocated with 

Cameron Interstate’s existing pipeline 

right-of-way. 

Cameron’s Application 

Cameron filed its application with 

DOE in Docket No. 11–162–LNG on 

December 21, 2011, seeking 

authorization to export up to 12 mtpy of 

domestically produced LNG (the 

equivalent of 620 billion cubic feet (bcf) 

per year of natural gas) for a 20-year 

period to nations with which the United 

States has not entered into a free trade 

agreement providing for national 

treatment for trade in natural gas (nonFTA nations).2 On February 11, 2014, 

DOE/FE issued Order No. 3391 to 

Cameron, conditionally granting 

Cameron’s application for long-term, 

multi-contract authorization to export 

domestically produced LNG by vessel to 

non-FTA nations. DOE/FE conditionally 

authorized Cameron to export LNG in a 

volume equivalent to 620 bcf per year of 

natural gas, or approximately 12 mtpy of 

LNG, for a term of 20 years. The 

Conditional Order addressed the record 

evidence and DOE/FE’s findings on all 

non-environmental issues considered 

under NGA section 3(a), including 

economic impacts, international 

impacts, and security of gas supply. 

Because DOE/FE must also consider 

environmental issues, DOE/FE 

conditioned the authorization on 

satisfactory completion of the 

environmental review process under 

NEPA and DOE/FE’s issuance of a 

finding of no significant impact or a 

record of decision. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
55444 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 179 / Tuesday, September 16, 2014 / Notices 

3Cameron LNG, LLC, 147 FERC ¶ 61,230 (2014). 

EIS Process 

FERC was the lead federal agency and 

initiated the NEPA process by 

publishing a notice of intent (NOI) to 

prepare an EIS in the Federal Register 

(FR) on August 6, 2012 (77 FR 48145); 

DOE was a cooperating agency. FERC 

issued the draft EIS for the Liquefaction 

Project and Pipeline Project on January 

10, 2014 (79 FR 3197), and the final EIS 

on April 30, 2014 (79 FR 26244). The 

final EIS recommended that FERC 

approve Cameron’s proposed projects 

subject to 76 environmental conditions. 

Accordingly, on June 19, 2014, FERC 

issued an ‘‘Order Granting 

Authorization Under Section 3 of the 

Natural Gas Act and Issuing 

Certificates’’ (FERC Order), which 

authorized Cameron to site, construct, 

and operate the Liquefaction Project, 

and for Cameron Interstate to construct 

the associated Pipeline Project, subject 

to the 76 environmental conditions 

contained in Appendix A of that order.3

In accordance with 40 CFR 1506.3, after 

an independent review of FERC’s final 

EIS, DOE adopted the EIS on August 7, 

2014 (DOE/EIS–0488), and the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency 

published a notice of that adoption in 

the Federal Register on August 15, 

2014. (79 FR 48140) 

Addendum to Environmental Review 

Documents Concerning Exports of 

Natural Gas From the United States 

(Addendum) 

On June 4, 2014, DOE/FE published 

the Draft Addendum for public 

comment (79 FR 32258). Although not 

required by NEPA, DOE/FE prepared 

the Addendum in an effort to be 

responsive to the public and to provide 

the best information available on a 

subject that had been raised by 

commenters. The Addendum is a review 

of existing literature and was intended 

to provide information only on the 

resource areas potentially impacted by 

unconventional gas production. 

The 45-day comment period on the 

Draft Addendum closed on July 21, 

2014. DOE/FE received 40,745 

comments in 18 separate submissions, 

and considered those comments in 

issuing the Addendum on August 15, 

2014. DOE provided a summary of the 

comments received and responses to 

substantive comments in Appendix B of 

the Addendum. DOE/FE has 

incorporated the Draft Addendum, 

comments, and final Addendum into 

the record in its Cameron proceeding. 

Alternatives 

The EIS assessed alternatives that 

could achieve the project objectives. 

The range of alternatives analyzed 

included the No-Action Alternative, 

alternative energy sources, system 

alternatives, alternative Terminal 

Expansion sites, alternative Terminal 

Expansion configurations and designs, 

alternative Pipeline Expansion above 

ground facility sites, and alternative 

compressor station designs. Alternatives 

were evaluated and compared to the 

proposed project to determine if the 

alternatives were environmentally 

preferable. 

The EIS evaluated system alternatives 

for the Terminal Expansion, including 

five operating LNG import terminals in 

the Gulf of Mexico area, and seven 

proposed or planned liquefaction and 

export projects along the Gulf Coast. All 

of the system alternatives were 

eliminated from further consideration 

for reasons that include comparatively 

greater construction, production volume 

limitations, in-service dates scheduled 

significantly beyond Cameron’s 

commitments to its customers, and 

environmental impacts that were 

considered comparable to or greater 

than those of the proposed project. 

The EIS evaluated two alternative 

sites for the Terminal Expansion. 

Construction of the Terminal Expansion 

at each of the alternative sites would 

have comparatively greater impacts on 

open water, marshes, aquatic resources, 

wetlands and wildlife. 

For the Terminal Expansion, the EIS 

considered the use of on-site power 

generation as a design alternative to the 

proposed use of purchased power. 

During operation, emissions and noise 

levels of the turbine generators under 

this alternative would be greater than 

those of purchased power in the vicinity 

of the Terminal Expansion site. 

However, based on the available data, it 

was not possible to determine the 

overall difference in the levels of the 

key air emissions of the two design 

options. 

For the Pipeline Expansion, the EIS 

evaluated three existing pipeline 

systems as system alternatives. None of 

the systems were determined to be 

environmentally preferable, as each 

would require significant expansion of 

the existing facilities and would likely 

result in environmental impacts similar 

to or greater than those of the Pipeline 

Expansion. The EIS did not identify any 

site-specific environmental concerns 

that would necessitate consideration of 

alternative pipeline routes, because the 

proposed route largely overlaps or is 

parallel to existing rights-of-way. 

The EIS evaluated four alternative 

sites for the Holbrook Compressor 

Station and determined that these 

alternative sites were not 

environmentally preferable to the 

proposed site. The EIS also evaluated 

four design options for the compressor 

station. The use of purchased power 

would result in increased impacts due 

to installation of an additional 3.5-milelong electrical distribution line, would 

not provide the flexibility and quality of 

service Cameron Interstate requires, 

would increase the cost of operation, 

and does not appear to offer an 

emissions advantage over the proposed 

on-site power generation. The use of 

larger turbine engines would decrease 

the flexibility and reliability of service 

because the turbines would not have 

variable speed control, and larger 

turbines would require more than 35 

percent more fuel, resulting in a 

substantial increase in annual fuel 

expense. Best available control 

technology analysis indicated selective 

catalytic reduction and use of an 

oxidation catalyst were not feasible 

pollution control options due to 

economic, environmental, and energy 

impacts. As a result, the EIS determined 

that there was not a significant 

advantage to any of the design 

alternatives considered for the Holbrook 

Compressor Station. 

Environmentally Preferred Alternative 

When compared against the other 

action alternatives assessed in the EIS, 

as discussed above, the Cameron project 

is the environmentally preferred 

alternative. While the No-Action 

Alternative would avoid the 

environmental impacts identified in the 

EIS, adoption of this alternative would 

not meet the project objectives. 

Decision 

DOE has decided to issue Order No. 

3391–A authorizing Cameron to export 

domestically produced LNG by vessel 

from the Cameron LNG Terminal in 

Cameron Parish, Louisiana, up to the 

equivalent of 620 bcf/yr of natural gas 

for a term of 20 years to commence on 

the earlier of the date of first export or 

seven years from the date that the Order 

is issued (September 10, 2014). 

Concurrently with this Record of 

Decision, DOE is issuing Order No. 

3391–A in which it finds that a grant of 

the requested authorization has not been 

shown to be inconsistent with the 

public interest, and that the Application 

should be granted subject to compliance 

with the terms and conditions set forth 

in the Order, including the 76 

environmental conditions 

recommended in the EIS and adopted in 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 179 / Tuesday, September 16, 2014 / Notices 55445 

the FERC Order at Appendix A. 

Additionally, this authorization is 

conditioned on Cameron’s compliance 

with any other preventative and 

mitigative measures imposed by other 

Federal or state agencies. 

Basis of Decision 

DOE’s decision is based upon the 

analysis of potential environmental 

impacts presented in the EIS, and DOE’s 

determination in Order No. 3391–A that 

the opponents of Cameron’s application 

have failed to overcome the statutory 

presumption that the proposed export 

authorization is consistent with the 

public interest. Although not required 

by NEPA, DOE also considered the 

Addendum, which summarizes 

available information on potential 

upstream impacts associated with 

unconventional natural gas activities, 

such as hydraulic fracturing. 

Mitigation 

As a condition of its decision to issue 

Order No. 3391–A authorizing Cameron 

to export LNG, DOE is imposing 

requirements that will avoid or 

minimize the environmental impacts of 

the project. These conditions include 

the 76 environmental conditions 

recommended in the EIS and adopted in 

the FERC Order at Appendix A. 

Mitigation measures beyond those 

included in DOE’s Order that are 

enforceable by other Federal and state 

agencies are additional conditions of 

Order No. 3391–A. With these 

conditions, DOE has determined that all 

practicable means to avoid or minimize 

environmental harm from the Cameron 

project have been adopted. 

Floodplain Statement of Findings 

DOE prepared this Floodplain 

Statement of Findings in accordance 

with DOE’s regulations entitled 

‘‘Compliance with Floodplain and 

Wetland Environmental Review 

Requirements’’ (10 CFR Part 1022). The 

required floodplain and wetland 

assessment was conducted during 

development and preparation of the EIS 

(see Table 3.6.1–1 and Section 4.1.4.1 of 

the EIS). DOE determined that the 

placement of some project components 

within floodplains would be 

unavoidable. However, the current 

design for the project minimizes 

floodplain impacts to the extent 

practicable. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

10, 2014. 

Christopher A. Smith, 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office 

of Fossil Energy. 

[FR Doc. 2014–22056 Filed 9–15–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission 

Combined Notice of Filings #1 

Take notice that the Commission 

received the following electric corporate 

filings: 

Docket Numbers: EC14–133–000. 

Applicants: Avalon Solar Partners, 

LLC. 

Description: Application under 

Section 203 with Confidential Exhibit I 

of Avalon Solar Partners, LLC. 

Filed Date: 9/4/14. 

Accession Number: 20140904–5222. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/25/14. 

Docket Numbers: EC14–135–000. 

Applicants: Calpine Fore River Energy 

Center, LLC, Constellation Mystic 

Power, LLC. 

Description: Joint Application for 

Approval Under Section 203 of the 

Federal Power Act of Calpine Fore River 

Energy Center, LLC, et. al. 

Filed Date: 9/5/14. 

Accession Number: 20140905–5187. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/26/14. 

Take notice that the Commission 

received the following exempt 

wholesale generator filings: 

Docket Numbers: EG14–93–000. 

Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy LLC. 

Description: Notice of SelfCertification of Exempt Wholesale 

Generator Status of Beech Ridge Energy 

LLC. 

Filed Date: 9/8/14. 

Accession Number: 20140908–5054. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/14. 

Docket Numbers: EG14–94–000. 

Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy II 

LLC. 

Description: Notice of SelfCertification of Exempt Wholesale 

Generator Status of Beech Ridge Energy 

II LLC. 

Filed Date: 9/8/14. 

Accession Number: 20140908–5055. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/14. 

Docket Numbers: EG14–95–000. 

Applicants: Beech Ridge Energy 

Storage LLC. 

Description: Notice of SelfCertification of Exempt Wholesale 

Generator Status of Beech Ridge Energy 

Storage LLC. 

Filed Date: 9/8/14. 

Accession Number: 20140908–5056. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/29/14. 

Take notice that the Commission 

received the following electric rate 

filings: 

Docket Numbers: ER10–1325–002; 

ER12–1946–002; ER14–2323–000; ER11– 

2080–002; ER10–1333–002; ER14–2319– 

000; ER12–1958–002; ER14–2321–000; 

ER10–1335–002. 

Applicants: CinCap V, LLC, Duke 

Energy Beckjord, LLC, Duke Energy 

Carolinas, LLC, Duke Energy 

Commercial Asset Management, LLC, 

Duke Energy Commercial Enterprises, 

Inc., Duke Energy Florida, Inc., Duke 

Energy Piketon, LLC, Duke Energy 

Progress, Inc., Duke Energy Retail Sales, 

LLC. 

Description: Supplement to June 30, 

2014 Triennial Market Power Analysis 

Update for the Southeast Region of 

Duke Energy Corporation MBR Sellers. 

Filed Date: 9/5/14. 

Accession Number: 20140905–5176. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/26/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER11–2029–004; 

ER12–1400–003. 

Applicants: Cedar Creek II, LLC, Flat 

Ridge 2 Wind Energy LLC. 

Description: Notification of Change in 

Status of Cedar Creek II, LLC, et. al. 

Filed Date: 9/5/14. 

Accession Number: 20140905–5189. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/26/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER12–2273–000. 

Applicants: Public Service Company 

of Colorado. 

Description: eTariff filing per 

35.19a(b): 2014–9–5 Cadott, Tremplo 

Refund Report Filing to be effective 

N/A. 

Filed Date: 9/5/14. 

Accession Number: 20140905–5145. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/26/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2107–002. 

Applicants: Southwest Power Pool, 

Inc. 

Description: Compliance filing per 35: 

1148 Substitute R18 American Electric 

Power NITSA and NOA (Compliance 

Filing to be effective 5/1/2014. 

Filed Date: 9/5/14. 

Accession Number: 20140905–5161. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/26/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2793–000. 

Applicants: Imperial Valley Solar, 

LLC. 

Description: Tariff Withdrawal per 

35.15: Notice of Cancellation to be 

effective 9/5/2014. 

Filed Date: 9/5/14. 

Accession Number: 20140905–5140. 

Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 9/26/14. 

Docket Numbers: ER14–2794–000. 

Applicants: Green Mountain Power 

Corporation, ISO New England Inc. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES