draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-1 1.0 Introduction

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) prepared this 

draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to assess the environmental impacts associated with 

the construction and operation of facilities proposed by Freeport LNG3 in accordance with the 

requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The proposed liquefied natural 

gas (LNG) facilities would be located in Brazoria County, Texas. 

Freeport LNG submitted two applications to the Commission for authorization to (1) modify 

previously authorized facilities on Quintana Island known as the Phase II Modification Project in 

Docket No. CP12-29-000, and (2) develop new liquefaction and LNG export facilities known as 

the Liquefaction Project in Docket No. CP12-509-000 (collectively called Projects). This draft 

EIS analyzes the effects of these two interconnected projects. A final EIS will be prepared to 

respond to comments received on this draft EIS. The Commission will use the final EIS in its 

decision-making process to determine whether to authorize Projects. 

The FERC is the federal agency responsible for evaluating applications to construct and operate 

interstate natural gas facilities. We4 prepared this draft EIS in compliance with the requirements 

of NEPA and the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations for implementing NEPA 

(Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Parts 1500-1508), and the Commission’s 

regulations for implementing the NEPA (Title 18 CFR Part 380). 

The U.S. Department of Energy (USDOE), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and 

the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) - Office of Protected Resources 

are cooperating agencies for the development of the draft EIS. A cooperating agency has 

jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to environmental impacts involved with the 

proposal, and is involved in the NEPA analysis. 

1.1 REGULATORY BACKGROUND

The proposal involves the construction of facilities necessary to export LNG to foreign countries, 

and amending the operation of the previously authorized facilities, which requires Commission 

approval under Natural Gas Act (NGA) Section 3.5 While Section 3(a) provides that an 

application shall be approved if the proposal “will not be inconsistent with the public interest,” 

Section 3 also provides that an application may be approved “in whole or in part, with such 

modification and upon such terms and conditions as the Commission may find necessary or 

appropriate.” Section 3(a) also provides that for good cause shown, the Commission may make 

supplemental orders as it may find “necessary or appropriate.”

 3 Refers to the collective applicants: Freeport LNG Development L.P., FLNG Liquefaction, LLC, FLNG 

Liquefaction 2, LLC, and FLNG Liquefaction 3, LLC

4 “We,” “us,” and “our” refer to the environmental staff of the Office of Energy Projects.

5 The regulatory functions of section 3 of the Natural Gas Act were transferred to the Secretary of Energy in 1977 

pursuant to section 301(b) of the Department of Energy Organization Act. 42 U.S.C. § 7151(b) (2006).
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-2 1.0 Introduction

The USDOE has exclusive jurisdiction over the export of natural gas as a commodity. USDOE 

delegated to the Commission authority to approve or disapprove the construction and operation 

of particular facilities, the site at which such facilities would be located, and the place of entry 

for imports or exit for exports. However, the USDOE Secretary has not delegated to the 

Commission any authority to approve or disapprove the import or export of the commodity itself 

as part of the Commission’s public interest determination. 

Freeport LNG filed an application for the Phase II Modification Project on December 9, 2011 in 

Docket No. CP12-29-000 proposing to modify the following previously approved facilities: 

• the LNG vessel berthing dock; 

• the LNG transfer pipelines; 

• the LNG unloading arms; and 

• the access road system. 

The Phase II Modification Project would enable Freeport LNG to import and export LNG at the 

Quintana Island terminal. Freeport LNG also proposes to eliminate the vaporization equipment 

that was proposed to increase the sendout capacity of its existing Quintana Island terminal. This 

action would eliminate the need for some of the associated support equipment, interdependent 

infrastructure, and appurtenant facilities that were previously authorized. 

On January 5, 2011, the Commission staff granted Freeport LNG’s request to use the FERC’s 

pre-filing environmental review process and assigned the Liquefaction Project pre-filing Docket 

No. PF11-2-000. Subsequently, staff determined that the Phase II Modification Project was an 

interconnected action and would be analyzed in a single EIS with the Liquefaction Project.

On August 31, 2012, Freeport LNG filed an application under Section 3 of the NGA for the 

Liquefaction Project in Docket No. CP12-509-000, which would consist of multiple components, 

including facilities at and adjacent to the existing LNG terminal and facilities located beyond 

Quintana Island. The main liquefaction components, located at and adjacent to the existing LNG 

terminal, would consist of three propane pre-cooled mixed refrigerant liquefaction trains, each 

capable of producing a nominal 4.4 million metric tons per annum (mtpa) of LNG (13.2 mtpa in 

aggregate) for export, which equates to a total liquefaction capacity of approximately 1.8 billion 

cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) of natural gas.6

 6 Each train is capable of producing 4.48 mtpa of LNG; beyond the 4.4 mtpa that would be available for export, the 

remaining 0.08 mtpa would become BOG to be used as fuel gas for the Pretreatment Plant or would constitute 

“unaccounted-for” gas in the liquefaction process.

These trains and their support facilities are 

collectively referred to as the Liquefaction Plant. In addition to the Liquefaction Plant, Freeport 

LNG proposes to construct various facilities, both at and adjacent to the terminal and beyond 

Quintana Island, to support the liquefaction and export operation. These facilities include a 

proposed natural gas pretreatment plant (Pretreatment Plant) located about 2.5 miles north of the 

existing Quintana Island terminal, several interconnecting pipelines and utility lines including a 

5-mile long, 12-inch-diameter boil-off-gas (BOG) feed gas line from the terminal to the 

Pretreatment Plant (Referred together as the Pipeline/Utility Line System), and appurtenant 

structures. The Liquefaction Plant, the Pretreatment Plant, and the Pipeline/Utility Line System, 
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-3 1.0 Introduction

together with the associated appurtenant structures, are collectively referred to as the 

Liquefaction Project. Figure 1-1 shows the location of the existing and proposed Freeport LNG 

Liquefaction Project facilities and regional setting. Figures 1-2 and 1-3 show the Liquefaction 

Project proposed facility layout at the Quintana Island terminal and at the Pretreatment Plant, 

respectively. The layout for the Phase II Modification Project is shown in figure 1-4.

1.2 PROJECT PURPOSE

Freeport LNG indicates in its application that the proposed Liquefaction Project would allow for 

exportation of domestic natural gas to the global market and meet its contractual obligations. 

The existing Freeport LNG facility was approved by the Commission for the sole purpose of 

importing foreign-sourced LNG, storing and re-vaporizing that LNG, and delivering natural gas 

to United States markets. The Phase II Modification Project would modify the existing terminal 

to meet Freeport LNG’s plans for exportation of LNG under the Liquefaction Project. 

1.2.1 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

The Projects have a water-dependency purpose as it relates to the liquefaction and subsequent 

exportation of domestic natural gas. LNG vessels would be utilized to transport LNG to 

worldwide markets. The Projects requires marine berths for loading and unloading of LNG 

vessels for waterborne transport of LNG. A portion of the marine facilities required for the 

export of LNG are already operational and additional facilities would be constructed to support 

import or export of LNG. 

1.2.2 U.S. Department of Energy

The USDOE’s Office of Fossil Energy must meet its obligation under Section 3 of the NGA to 

authorize the import and export of natural gas, including LNG, unless it finds that the import or 

export is not consistent with the public interest. The purpose and need for USDOE action is to 

respond to the Freeport LNG’s application for authority to export LNG from the Quintana Island 

terminal under Dockets FE10-160-LNG, FE10-161-LNG, FE12-06-LNG, and FE11-161-LNG. 

The USDOE is conducting its review under Section 3 of the NGA to evaluate the application for 

long-term, multi-contract authorization to export up to 2.8 Bcf/d of domestic natural gas as LNG 

for a 20-year period, commencing the earlier of the date of first export or five years from the date 

of issuance of the requested authorization. Freeport LNG seeks to export the LNG to any 

country: (1) with which the United States does not have a free trade agreement requiring the 

national treatment for trade in natural gas and LNG; (2) that has, or in the future develops, the 

capacity to import LNG; and (3) with which trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or policy.
8-inch NGL Pipeline (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

42-inch Gas Pipeline (Existing)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

24-inch Gas Pipeline (Existing Spur)

8-inch Nitrogen Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Water Line (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

Stratton Ridge Meter Station (Existing)

42-inch Gas Pipeline (Existing)

8-inch NGL Pipeline (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

42-inch Gas Pipeline (Existing)

8-inch NGL Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Nitrogen Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Water Line (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

Stratton Ridge Underground Storage Site -

Compressor Station (Existing)

42-inch Gas Pipeline (Existing)

12-inch BOG Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Nitrogen Pipeline (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

Quintana Island Terminal (Existing)

INEOS Plant

Stratton Ridge Underground

Storage Site - Cavern Well

Pad (Existing)

DMPA Property Boundary

Liquefaction Plant Main Operational Footprint (Proposed)

42-inch Gas Inflow Pipeline (Proposed)

42-inch Gas Outflow Pipeline (Proposed)

12-inch BOG Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch NGL Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Nitrogen Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Water Line (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

Pretreatment Plant Main Operational Footprint (Proposed)

Pretreatment Plant Site (Proposed)

Electric Line (Proposed)

Exxon Mobil Property Boundary

8-inch Nitrogen Pipeline (Proposed)

Electric Line (Proposed) p 012

Miles

FILE: M:\Clients\D-F\FRE\Liquefaction\_ArcGIS\2013\03\RR_Revisions\_FRE_RR_1_1_2_LiqProj_Facilities_All_Topo_Letter.mxd | REVISED: 04/17/2013 | SCALE: 1:80,000DRAWN BY: JEBAKKEN

Texas

Figure 1.1-2

Freeport LNG - Liquefaction Project

Proposed Project Facilities -

Regional Setting

Brazoria County, Texas

Figure 1-1

Freeport LNG - Liquefaction Project

Project Facilities - Regional Setting

Brazoria County, Texas

draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-4 1.0 Introduction
A

B

C

D

C

E

G

H

Train 3

Train 2

Train 1

F I

J

C

K

M:\Clients\D-F\FRE\Liquefaction\_ArcGIS\2013\03\RR_Revisions\_FRE_RR_1_4_1_Liquefaction_Existing_Proposed_Facilities_wTWS.mxd REVISED: 03/21/2013

This information is for environmental review purposes only.

0 1,400 2,800

Feet

1:16,800

Figure 1.4-1

Freeport LNG - Liquefaction Project

Proposed Liquefaction Facilities and Workspace Layout

at and Adjacent to Quintana Island Terminal

Brazoria County, Texas

DRAWN BY: JEBAKKEN

Terminal Land Property Boundary

DMPA Property Boundary

Exxon Mobil Property

Proposed Liquefaction Facilities

Operational Footprint

Liquefaction Train

Construction Dock

Firewater Intake Structure

Liquefaction Plant Ancillary Facilities

Aggregate Dock

Stormwater Collection Basin

Operational Plant Road

BOG Compressors

Proposed Pipeline/Utility Line System

42-inch Gas Pipeline (Existing)

12-inch BOG Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Nitrogen Pipeline (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

Electric Line

Existing Phase I Facilities

Admin Building/Parking

Phase I Process Area

Detention Pond

Construction Dock

Phase I LNG Berthing Dock

Plant Entrance Road

Temporary Workspace and Construction Facilities

Temporary Workspace

Temporary Workspace - Defined Laydown Area

Temporary Construction Facilities

Batch Plant/Material Storage

A: Flare

B: Refrigerant Storage Area

C: Electric Substation

D: Utility Area

E: Control Room

F: Office/Warehouse Building

G: Maintenance Building

H: LNG Containment Sump

 I: Security Building

J: Fire Suppression Foam System

K: Radio Tower

20130401-5330 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 4/1/2013 4:53:18 PM

Figure 1-2

 A: Flare 

 B: Refrigerant Storage Area 

 C: Electric Substation 

 D: Utility Area 

 E: Control Room 

 F: Office/Warehouse Building 

 G: Maintenance Building 

 H: LNG Containment Sump 

 I: Security Building 

 J: Fire Suppression Foam System 

 K: Radio Tower

draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-5 1.0 Introduction
Unit 3

42-inch Gas Pipeline (Existing)

12-inch BOG Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Nitrogen Pipeline (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

42-inch Gas Pipeline (Existing)

8-inch NGL Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Nitrogen Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Water Line (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

Electric Line (Proposed)

West Access

Road (Proposed)

West Access Road 

(Existing/Modified)

North Access Road (Proposed)

South Access Road (Proposed)

42-inch Gas Inflow Pipeline (Proposed)

42-inch Gas Outflow Pipeline (Proposed)

12-inch BOG Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch NGL Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Nitrogen Pipeline (Proposed)

8-inch Water Line (Proposed)

Fiber Optic Line (Proposed)

B

G

C

C

D

D

D

D

E

F

A

H

Unit 2 Unit 1

I

D

D

D

M:\Clients\D-F\FRE\Liquefaction\_ArcGIS\2013\03\RR_Revisions\_FRE_RR_1_4_2_LiqProj_ExistProp_Facilities_wTWS.mxd REVISED: 03/21/2013

This information is for environmental review purposes only.

0 500 1,000

Feet

1:12,000

Figure 1.4-2

Freeport LNG - Liquefaction Project

Proposed Facilities and Workspace Layout

at the Pretreatment Plant Site

Brazoria County, Texas

DRAWN BY: JEBAKKEN

A: Administration/Maintenance/

 Warehouse Building

B: Control Building

C: Electrical Substation

D: Equipment Area

E: Firewater Area

F: Ground Flare

G: Security Building

H: Detention Pond

I: Radio Tower

Site Boundary

Proposed Pipeline/Utility Line System

Temporary Workspace and Construction Facilities

Temporary Workspace

Fill Source Area

Proposed Pretreatment Facilities

Main Operational Footprint

Flare Operational Footprint

Pretreatment Unit

Pretreatment Plant Ancillary Facilities

Access Road

20130401-5330 FERC PDF (Unofficial) 4/1/2013 4:53:18 PM

Figure 1-3

draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-6 1.0 Introduction
M:\Clients\D-F\FRE\Liquefaction\_ArcGIS\2011\10\Liquefaction_PhaseII\_FRE_PhaseII_Facilities_Aerial.mxd REVISED: 12/02/2011

This information is for environmental review purposes only.

0 250 500

Feet

1:9,000

Figure 1.-4

Freeport LNG - Phase II Modification Project

Proposed Facilities and Components at 

the Quintana Island Terminal

Brazoria County, Texas

DRAWN BY: JPBOENTJE

Bulkhead

Elevated Sump Trough

Permanent Plant Road

Temporary Plant Road

Existing Sump

Phase II Berthing Area

LNG Ship Dock

LNG Transfer Pipelines

Rock Breakwater

Authorized LNG Storage Tank

Figure 1-4

draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-7 1.0 Introduction
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-8 1.0 Introduction

The USDOE has approved Freeport LNG’s application under Docket Nos. FE10-160-LNG, and 

FE12-06-LNG to allow up to 2.8 Bcf/d of natural gas to U.S. free-trade countries. In Order 3282 

on May 17, 2013, contingent on FERC siting approval, the USDOE approved export of up to 1.4 

Bcf/d of natural gas to non free-trade countries. Application FE11-161-LNG, for the export of 

an additional 1.4 Bcf/d of natural gas to non free-trade countries received conditional approval 

by USDOE on November 15, 2013 for 0.4 Bcf/d, which in total would allow Freeport LNG to 

export 1.8 Bcf/d to non free-trade countries (and 2.8 Bcf/d to free-trade countries). Freeport 

LNG’s FERC application is for 1.8 Bcf/d, and if Freeport LNG proposed to export more than this 

amount, it would be required to submit an additional application to the FERC. 

1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THE EIS

Under Section 3 of the NGA, the FERC considers as part of its decision to authorize natural gas 

facilities, all factors bearing on the public interest. Specifically, regarding whether to authorize 

natural gas facilities used for importation or exportation, the FERC shall authorize the proposal 

unless it finds that the proposed facilities would not be consistent with the public interest.

This draft EIS is prepared for public review and comment, after which a final EIS would be 

prepared to respond to comments received on this draft EIS. The distribution list for this draft 

EIS is provided in appendix A.

Our principal objectives in preparing this draft EIS are to:

• identify and assess potential impacts on the natural and human environment that would 

result from the implementation of the proposed actions;

• describe and evaluate reasonable alternatives to the proposed actions that would avoid or 

minimize adverse effects on the environment;

• identify and recommend specific mitigation measures, as necessary, to minimize the 

environmental impacts; and

• facilitate public involvement in identifying the significant environmental impacts.

The Commission will consider the findings of the draft EIS as well as non-environmental issues 

in its review of these proposals to determine whether to authorize the Liquefaction Project and 

the Phase II Modification Project. Environmental impact assessment and mitigation 

development are important factors in the overall public interest determination. 

Under Section 3 of the NGA, the FERC considers as part of its decision to authorize natural gas 

facilities, all factors bearing on the public interest. Specifically, regarding whether to authorize 

natural gas facilities used for importation or exportation, the FERC shall authorize the 

proposal unless it finds that the proposed facilities would not be consistent with the public 

interest. 
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-9 1.0 Introduction

1.3.1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Role

The USEPA is tasked with implementation of the Clean Air Act (CAA). USEPA’s greenhouse 

gas (GHG) Tailoring Rule, issued in May 2010, established thresholds for permitting GHG 

emissions under the CAA. Additional detail can be found in section 4.11 of this EIS. Freeport 

LNG, on December 21, 2011, filed an application with the USEPA Region VI office for a GHG 

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit and USEPA issued the draft Permit on 

December 2, 2013. The USEPA is required to ensure that its GHG Permit (appendix B) would 

not violate the Endangered Species Act (ESA), Clean Water Act (CWA), and the National 

Historic Protection Act (NHPA). To ensure this, the USEPA has agreed to be a cooperating 

agency and will use this draft EIS to document its compliance with the aforementioned laws.

1.3.2 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Role

The Projects would impact areas within the Galveston District of the USACE. Wetlands in the 

area of the Projects are regulated at the federal and state levels. The USACE elected to cooperate 

in preparing this draft EIS because it has jurisdictional authority pursuant to Section 404 of the 

CWA (33 United States Code [USC] 1344), which governs the discharge of dredged or fill 

material into water of the United States, and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 

(RHA) (33 USC 403), which regulates any work or structures that potentially affect the 

navigable capacity of a waterbody. 

The USACE must comply with the requirements of the NEPA before issuing permits under these 

statutes. In addition, when a Section 404 discharge is proposed and a standard permit is 

required, the USACE must consider whether the proposed Section 404 discharge represents the 

least environmentally damaging, practicable alternative pursuant to the CWA Section 404(b)(1) 

guidelines. The USACE must also carry out its public interest review process before a standard 

permit can be issued. Although this draft EIS addresses environmental impacts associated with 

the Projects as they relate the USACE’s jurisdictional permitting authority, it does not serve as a 

public notice for any USACE permits or take the place of the USACE’s permit review process.

1.3.3 U.S. Department of Transportation Role

Under 49 USC 60101, the USDOT has prescribed the minimum federal safety standards for 

LNG facilities. Those standards are codified in 49 CFR Part 193 and apply to the siting, design, 

construction, operation, maintenance, and security of LNG facilities. A portion of the National 

Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 59A, “Standard for the Production, Storage, and 

Handling of Liquefied Natural Gas,” is incorporated into these requirements by reference, with 

regulatory preemption in the event of conflict. In accordance with the 1985 Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) on LNG facilities and the 2004 Interagency Agreement on the safety and 

security review of waterfront import/export LNG facilities, the USDOT participates as a 

cooperating agency and assists in assessing any mitigation measures that may become conditions 

of approval for any project. USDOT staff has reviewed FERC staff’s analysis and provided 

comments on our conclusions regarding compliance with the Part 193 regulations.
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-10 1.0 Introduction

1.3.4 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Role

The NOAA Office of Protected Resources (OPR) is a headquarters program office of NOAA's 

National Marine Fisheries Service (NOAA Fisheries), under the U.S. Department of Commerce, 

with responsibility for protecting marine mammals and threatened/endangered marine life. 

NOAA's OPR works to conserve, protect, and recover species under the ESA and the Marine 

Mammal Protection Act (MMPA).

To ensure that impacts on threatened/endangered species are minimized, the NOAA's OPR has 

agreed to be a cooperating agency and assist the FERC in ensuring that this draft EIS documents 

compliance with the aforementioned laws.

1.4 PUBLIC REVIEW AND COMMENT

1.4.1 Liquefaction Project

As previous stated, on January 5, 2011, the FERC's Director of the Office of Energy Projects 

(OEP) granted Freeport LNG’s request to utilize our Pre-Filing Process. This review process 

was established to facilitate and encourage early involvement by citizens, governmental entities, 

non-governmental organizations, and other interested parties. As part of this process, the FERC 

assigned the Liquefaction Project an individual Pre-Filing Docket No. PF11-2-000. During the 

Pre-Filing Process, we worked with Freeport LNG and interested stakeholders to identify and 

resolve issues, where possible, prior to Freeport LNG’s filing of a formal application with the 

FERC. 

As part of the Pre-Filing Process, Freeport LNG sent notification letters to landowners, 

government officials and the general public informing them about the Liquefaction Project and 

inviting them to attend Freeport LNG-sponsored open houses to acquire information, ask 

questions, and to express their comments and concerns. Notifications of the open houses were 

also published in local newspapers. Table 1.4.1-1 provides a list of public open houses held for 

the Liquefaction Project. 

Table 1.4.1-1

List of Public Open Houses Held for the Freeport LNG Liquefaction Project

Date of Meeting Meeting Location

February 23, 2011 Quintana Island terminal

February 24, 2011 Clute, TX

July 28, 2011 Quintana Island terminal

February 2, 2012 Lake Jackson, TX
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-11 1.0 Introduction

1.4.2 Phase II Modification Project

Prior to filing its application for the Phase II Modification Project, Freeport LNG submitted to 

the Commission, on November 18, 2011, a request for a determination by the Director of the 

OEP that the Phase II Modification Project would not be subject to the Commission’s otherwise 

mandatory Pre-Filing Process. On December 6, 2011, the Director of OEP issued a Letter Order 

finding that the proposal to modify the authorization granted by the September 26, 2006 Order 

would be exempt from the Commission’s Pre-Filing Process because the number of LNG vessels 

ship-calls would not change and it would remain within the existing Quintana Island terminal.

Freeport LNG filed its application for the Phase II Modification Project on December 9, 2011, in 

Docket No. CP12-29-000. We issued a Notice of Application on December 21, 2011 indicating 

that the public comment period would close on January 11, 2012. We continued to receive and 

accept comments after the close of the comment period. After Freeport LNG filed the 

application, it was determined that the Phase II Modification Project may be used for both import 

and export activities and would be constructed concurrently with the Liquefaction Project. Thus, 

we are analyzing the Projects in this draft EIS.

1.4.3 Public Scoping Period for Liquefaction Project and Phase II Modification Project

On August 11, 2011, we issued a Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Assessment for 

the Planned Liquefaction Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues and 

Notice of Public Scoping Meeting (NOI). The NOI was mailed to interested parties, including 

federal, state, and local officials; agency representatives; conservation organizations; Native 

American tribes; local libraries and newspapers; and property owners in the area. On September 

8, 2011, we conducted a scoping meeting in Lake Jackson, Texas to provide the public an 

opportunity for the public to learn about the Liquefaction Project, FERC’s process, and provide 

comments on the record. Four members of the public provided comments at the scoping 

meeting. 

Since the issuance of the August 11, 2011 NOI, Freeport LNG proposed changes to the facilities 

and the scope of our review has changed such that the staff determined that review of the 

Liquefaction Project would require an EIS. On July 19, 2012, we issued a Supplemental Notice 

of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for the Planned Liquefaction Project, 

Request for Comments on Environmental Issues, and Notice of Public Scoping Meeting 

(Supplemental NOI). This Supplemental NOI included both the Liquefaction Project and the 

Phase II Modification Project and was mailed to interested parties, including federal, state, and 

local officials; agency representatives; conservation organizations; Native American tribes; local 

libraries and newspapers; and property owners in the area. 

On August 9, 2012, we conducted a second public scoping meeting in Lake Jackson, Texas to 

provide an opportunity for the public to learn more about the newly proposed modifications to 

the proposed export terminal and Pretreatment Plant and to provide comments on environmental 

issues to be addressed in the EIS. Twenty four people commented at the meeting.
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-12 1.0 Introduction

Issuance of the Supplemental NOI also opened the time period for receiving written comments 

and established a scoping closing date of August 20, 2012. The FERC continued to receive and 

accept comments after the close of the comment period. As of February 28, 2014, we have 

received a total of 186 comment letters and two petitions (a petition in opposition signed by 323 

people associated with the Liquefaction Project, and a second letter disavowing the petition 

signed by 57 landowners from Quintana Island). 

Issues identified during the public comment process and public meetings included: alternatives to 

the various project locations; concerns about safety such as the potential for fires, explosions, 

and spills, concerns about emergency response capability; the ability of the facility to withstand 

hurricanes and their associated storm surges; climate change; traffic impacts during construction, 

visual impacts, lighting impacts, noise and vibration during construction and operation, air 

emissions and concerns about air quality impacts to residents and wildlife. 

Issues identified during the public comment process that are within the scope of the 

environmental analysis are summarized in table 1.4.3-1 and addressed in the applicable sections 

of this draft EIS.

Table 1.4.3-1

Issues Identified During the Public Comment Period

Issue Specific Comments

draft EIS Section 

Where 

Comments are 

Addressed

Alternatives Consideration of alternatives that reduce impacts on fish and wildlife 

resources, relocate facilities to Freeport-owned industrial parcels 

(including Site A) and away from residential areas, consideration for 

alternative location adjacent to salt dome storage facility on Farm-toMarket (FM) Route 523.

3.0

Water Use and Quality Impacts of increased vessel traffic on water quality; impacts on water 

quality as a result of air pollution; placement of proposed pipelines in 

proximity to one of Quintana's public water systems. 

4.3

Surface Waters Surface and groundwater contamination; effects of hurricane/storm 

surge and the washing of wastes/contaminated materials into 

surrounding community.

4.3.2

Wetlands Wetland mitigation plan (i.e., mitigation should benefit as many species 

as possible); loss of wetlands, contamination of wetlands as a result of 

hurricane/storm surge.

4.3.5

Vegetation Impacts on native coastal prairie vegetation and submerged aquatic 

vegetation (SAV), invasive species control measures/plan.

4.4

Fish and Wildlife Loss of important habitat; effects of habitat loss on survival of migratory 

birds; effects of habitat loss on productivity and diversity of bird species; 

effects to avian resources as a result of bird strikes on LNG storage 

tanks and other tall structures; impacts on aquatic resources (including 

discharge of ballast water); impacts on Brazoria County National Wildlife 

Refuge (NWR); consideration of construction windows to reduce impacts 

on migratory birds; donation of land to the City of Quintana in the amount 

Freeport LNG would be using to mitigate wildlife impacts.

4.5

Threatened, Endangered, 

and Special-Status 

Species

State threatened/endangered bird species use of Quintana Island 

habitats; impacts on federally and state-listed rare, threatened, and 

endangered species and their habitats within five miles of the Projects.

4.6
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-13 1.0 Introduction

Table 1.4.3-1

Issues Identified During the Public Comment Period

Issue Specific Comments

draft EIS Section 

Where 

Comments are 

Addressed

Land Use, Recreation, and 

Visual Resources

Loss of eco-tourism attractions (hot spot for neotropical migratory birds); 

interaction of recreational boat traffic and LNG vessels; relocation of boat 

ramp; loss of important farmland (soils); visual impacts on nearby 

residents (including light pollution); impacts on estuarine recreation 

(including businesses: Kirby Marina and Tempest Marine).

4.7

Socioeconomics Effects of construction truck traffic on traffic levels, and on Quintana 

Island bridge traffic; loss of property values; lower quality of life for 

nearby residents/environmental justice issues, increased gas 

production/climate change issues; tax abatements would not benefit 

Freeport residents; few permanent jobs in facilities for local citizens; 

effects of increased shipping and marine traffic; economic effect of 

exporting resources that could be used domestically

4.8

Cultural Resources Effects of the Projects on historic cemetery maintenance, and restoration 

efforts; availability and access to an existing cemetery given Freeport 

LNG’s security concerns. 

4.9

Reliability and Safety Proximity of homes to proposed terminal site location; potential terrorism 

issues, public safety concerns (island does not have adequate 

evacuation route for residents, limited access for first responders, air 

pollution; fail safe valves on pipeline); increased demands on the United 

States Coast Guard for protection of shoreline security; hurricane/storm 

surge poses threat to facility.

4.10

Air Quality and Noise Noise and air pollution from influx of construction workers; impacts on air 

quality both locally and cumulatively from Project facilities, air impacts 

from shipping and construction traffic; air and noise pollution effects on 

wildlife (especially birds); and construction and operational noise, 

vibration, and air pollution impacts on nearby residents.

4.11

1.5 NONJURISDICTIONAL FACILITIES

The facilities for the Liquefaction Project and the Phase II Modification Project that are under 

the FERC's jurisdiction are described in detail in section 2.0 of this draft EIS. Occasionally, 

proposed projects have associated facilities not under the jurisdiction of the FERC. 

Nonjurisdictional facilities may be integral to the need for a proposed project or they may merely 

be associated as a minor, non-integral component of the jurisdictional facilities.

Our review of associated facilities for the Liquefaction Project identified the following 

nonjurisdictional components: a Natural Gas Liquid (NGL) pipeline, nitrogen pipeline, utility 

lines (electric, water, and fiber optic), and associated appurtenant facilities. The electric lines, 

including a 2.93-mile-long 138 kilovolt (kV) line that would serve the new Liquefaction Plant, 

would be installed on the same poles as the Quintana Island terminal’s existing 69 kV electric 

transmission line. 

The new 138 kV line supplying the Liquefaction Plant would connect with the Cortez substation 

on the south side of the Liquefaction Plant and would provide approximately 600 to 700 

megawatts of power. Beyond this line installation, no substantial system upgrades would be 

required to supply the anticipated electric load. A proposed 2-mile-long, 138 kV electric line 

would connect the Pretreatment Plant with the existing electric transmission corridor and would 
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-14 1.0 Introduction

be located about 1.6 miles west of the plant’s operational footprint. The design, construction, 

and operation of the electric lines would be done by CenterPoint Energy.

The nonjurisdictional facilities may be authorized and regulated by federal, state, and local 

agencies other than the FERC. For example, the electric transmission lines at the terminal and 

the Pretreatment Plant would require approval from various authorities, including the Town of 

Quintana, the City of Oyster Creek, the Texas Public Utility Commission (PUC), and, if waters 

of the U.S. are affected, the USACE. However, to facilitate a complete and thorough 

environmental review, we have identified the environmental impacts for the associated 

nonjurisdictional facilities, and these are discussed throughout section 4.0.

1.6 PERMITS, APPROVALS, AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS

As the lead federal agency for the Projects, the FERC is required to comply with Section 7 of the 

ESA, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA), Section 106 of 

the NHPA, General Conformity under the CAA, and the Coastal Zone Management Act 

(CZMA). Each of these statutes has been taken into account in the preparation of this document.

Section 7 of the ESA, as amended, states that any project authorized, funded, or conducted by 

any federal agency (e.g., FERC) should not pose “... adverse modification of habitat of an 

endangered or threatened species that is determined to be critical habitat.” (16 USC Section 

1536(a)(2)(1988)). The FERC, or Freeport LNG as a non-federal party, is required to consult 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and NOAA Fisheries to determine whether any 

federally-listed or proposed threatened/endangered species or their designated critical habitat 

occur in the vicinity of the proposed Project. Formal consultation is required if an action is 

likely to “adversely affect” listed species and designated critical habitat. The FERC is then 

required to prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) to identify the nature and extent of adverse 

impact, and to recommend measures that would avoid the habitat and/or species, or would reduce 

potential impacts to acceptable levels. If, however, the FERC determines that no federally-listed 

or proposed threatened/endangered species, or their designated critical habitat, would be affected 

by the proposed Project, no further action is necessary under the ESA. We request that the FWS 

and NOAA accept the information provided in this EIS as the BA for the Projects. See section 

4.6 of this draft EIS for the status of this review.

The MSA, as amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-267), 

established procedures designed to identify, conserve, and enhance Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) 

for those species regulated under federal Fishery Management Plans (FMPs). The MSA requires 

federal agencies to consult with NOAA Fisheries on all actions or proposed actions authorized, 

funded, or undertaken by the agency that may adversely affect EFH (MSA Section 305(b)(2)). 

Although absolute criteria have not been established for conducting EFH consultations, NOAA 

Fisheries recommends consolidating EFH consultations with interagency coordination 

procedures required by other statutes, such as the NEPA, or the ESA (50 CFR 600.920(e)) in 

order to reduce duplication and improve efficiency. As part of the consultation process, we 

prepared an EFH Assessment included in section 4.5.5 of this draft EIS.
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-15 1.0 Introduction

Section 106 of the NHPA requires the FERC to take into account the effects of its undertakings 

on properties listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) 

and to afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) an opportunity to comment 

on the undertaking. The FERC has requested that Freeport LNG, as a non-federal party, assist in 

meeting the FERC’s obligation under Section 106 by preparing the necessary information and

analyses as required by the ACHP regulations at 36 CFR 800. See section 4.9.4 of this draft EIS 

for the status of this review.

The CZMA calls for the “effective management, beneficial use, protection, and development” of 

the nation’s coastal zone and promotes active state involvement in achieving those goals. As a 

means to reach those goals, the CZMA requires participating states to develop management 

programs that demonstrate how these states would meet their obligations and responsibilities in 

managing their coastal areas. In the state of Texas, the Texas Coastal Zone Management 

Program (CZMP)is responsible for administering the CZMA. The CZMA provides that states 

have the authority to review federal projects to determine whether activities are consistent with 

their coastal management program. If a state finds that the activity is not consistent, the federal 

agency may not authorize the activity. Freeport LNG is responsible for preparing and submitting 

an application that establishes the Liquefaction Project’s consistency with the enforceable 

policies contained in the CZMP. See section 4.7.4 of this draft EIS for additional discussion of 

the Texas CZMP.

At the federal level, required permits and approval authority outside of the FERC’s jurisdiction 

include compliance with the CWA, the RHA, the CAA, and U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) 

regulations relating to LNG waterfront facilities. All major permits, approvals, and consultations 

that may be required for the proposed actions are identified in table 1.6-1. The FERC 

encourages cooperation between applicants and state and local authorities, but this does not mean

that state and local agencies, through application of state and local laws, may prohibit or 

unreasonably delay the construction or operation of facilities approved by the FERC. Any state 

or local permits issued with respect to jurisdictional facilities must be consistent with the 

conditions of any authorization issued by the FERC.

7

 7 See, e.g., Schneidewind v. ANR Pipeline Co., 485 U.S. 293 (1988); National Fuel Gas Supply v. Public Service 

Commission, 894 F.2d 571 (2d Cir. 1990); and Iroquois Gas Transmission System, L.P., et al., 52 FERC 61,091 

(1990) and 59 FERC 61,094 (1992).
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-16 1.0 Introduction

Table 1.6-1

Permits, Approvals, and Clearances for Liquefaction Project and Phase II Modification Project

Agency

Permit/Approval

- Regulatory

Scope

Project / Facility

Applicability

Authorization/

Interaction Required Status

FEDERAL

USDOE, Office

of Fossil Energy

Section 3 – Natural 

Gas Act (NGA) Export 

Authorization

Liquefaction Project Authorization Filing Date: December 17, 2010

Free Trade Agreement (FTA) Countries Export Order 

Issuance Date: February 10. 2011

1st Non-FTA Countries Anticipated Authorization Issuance 

Date: May 17, 2013 

2nd Non-FTA Countries Authorization Issuance Date: 

November 15, 2013

FERC Section 3 - NGA Liquefaction Project Authorization Filing Date: August 31, 2012 

FERC Review in Process

Modification Project Authorization Filing Date: December, 9, 2011

FERC Review in Process

USACE – Galveston 

District Regulatory 

Branch

Section 404 –

Clean Water Act 

Section 10 Rivers and 

Harbors Act

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

New permit for Liquefaction Project; 

amendment to existing permit for 

Phase II Modification Project

Filing Date: June 14, 2013

Anticipated Authorization Date: February 2014

USACE - Galveston 

District Real Estate 

Division and Office 

Counsel

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Approval/ Coordination for Dredge 

Spoil Disposal

(For new LNG berthing dock, new 

construction dock, and new firewater 

intake structure)

Anticipated Filing Date: December 20, 2013

Anticipated Authorization Date: April 2014

NOAA Fisheries –

Habitat 

Conservation 

Division

Section 7 –

Endangered Species 

Act

Magnuson- Stevens 

Fishery 

Conservation and 

Management Act

Marine Mammal 

Protection Act

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Consultation Consultation Process ongoing

NOAA Fisheries -

Protected 

Resources Division

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Consultation Consultation Process ongoing
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-17 1.0 Introduction

Table 1.6-1

Permits, Approvals, and Clearances for Liquefaction Project and Phase II Modification Project

Agency

Permit/Approval

- Regulatory

Scope

Project / Facility

Applicability

Authorization/

Interaction Required Status

FWS Section 7 –

Endangered Species 

Act

Migratory Bird Treaty 

Act

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Consultation Consultation Process ongoing

USEPA - Region VI Section 402 –

Clean Water

Act – National 

Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Industrial Storm Water Permit Coordinating with USEPA on renewal of existing National 

Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits 

and permitting of Liquefaction Plant

Liquefaction Project Process Waste Water Discharge 

Permit

Anticipated Filing Date: May 2014

Anticipated Authorization Date: December 2014

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Storm Water Construction 

Permit

Anticipated Filing Date (Notice of Intent): May 2014

Anticipated Authorization Date: June 2014

(Amended permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention 

Plan (SWPPP) to cover all project facilities)

40 CFR 52 GHG 

Tailoring Rule –

Federal 

Implementation 

Plan

Liquefaction Project Prevention of Significant 

Deterioration (PSD) Permit for GHG 

Emissions

Filing Date (Original Application): December 16, 2011

Draft PSD Permit Issues: December 2013

Anticipated Authorization Date: April 2014

U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security 

– U.S. Coast Guard

33 CFR 127, 

Waterfront Facilities 

Handling Liquefied 

Natural Gas and 

Liquefied 

Hazardous Gas

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Letter of Recommendation Not required - authorization complete

STATE

Railroad 

Commission of 

Texas (RRC) with 

notification to EPA

NPDES Storm Water 

Construction Permit

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Permit Anticipated Filing Date (Notice of Intent): May 2014

Anticipated Authorization Date: June 2014

(Amended permit and SWPPP to cover all project 

facilities)
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-18 1.0 Introduction

Table 1.6-1

Permits, Approvals, and Clearances for Liquefaction Project and Phase II Modification Project

Agency

Permit/Approval

- Regulatory

Scope

Project / Facility

Applicability

Authorization/

Interaction Required Status

Railroad

Commission of 

Texas

Coastal 

Management 

Plan Consistency 

Determination

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Review Filing Date: June 14, 2013

Anticipated Authorization Date: February 2014

Section 401 Water 

Quality Certification

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Certification (concurrent with Section 

404 Permit)

Filing Date: June 14, 2013

Anticipated Authorization Date: February 2014

Hydrostatic 

Discharge 

Permit

Liquefaction Project Permit Anticipated Filing Date: July 2015

Anticipated Authorization Date: October 2015

Organization 

Report and 

Operator Number 

(P-5)

Liquefaction Project Registration Anticipated Filing Date: July 2015

Anticipated Authorization Date: October 2015

Permit to Operate 

a Pipeline (T-4)

Liquefaction Project Permit Anticipated Filing Date: July 2015

Anticipated Authorization Date: October 2015

New

Construction Report 

(PS-48)

Liquefaction Project Permit Anticipated Filing Date: July 2015

Anticipated Authorization Date: October 2015

Texas Intrastate 

Pipeline 

Questionnaire 

(PS-8000A)

Liquefaction Project Questionnaire Anticipated Filing Date: July 2015

Anticipated Authorization Date: October 2015

Texas Commission 

for Environmental 

Quality (TCEQ) - Air 

Permits Division

30 Texas 

Administrative Code 

(TAC) Chapter 116 -

Permit to Construct

Liquefaction Plant New Source Review (NSR) Preconstruction Air PermitFiling Date: December 20, 2011

Anticipated Authorization Date: April 2014

30TAC Chapter 116 -

Permit to Construct

Pretreatment Plant NSR Pre-construction Air Permit Filing Date (Amended Application): July 18, 2012 

Anticipated Authorization Date: April 2014

30 TAC Chapter 122 

– Operating Permit

Liquefaction Plant Title V Site Operating Permit Filing Date: August 29, 2011

Authorization Date: November 8, 2011 

30 TAC Chapter 122 

– Operating Permit

Pretreatment Plant Title V Site Operating Permit Anticipated Filing Date: November 2015 

Anticipated Authorization Date: September 2016

Texas TCEQ Temporary 

Water Use 

Appropriation 

Permit

Liquefaction Project Permit Anticipated Filing Date: August 2014 

Anticipated Authorization Date: December 2014
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-19 1.0 Introduction

Table 1.6-1

Permits, Approvals, and Clearances for Liquefaction Project and Phase II Modification Project

Agency

Permit/Approval

- Regulatory

Scope

Project / Facility

Applicability

Authorization/

Interaction Required Status

Texas Parks and 

Wildlife

Department (TPWD)

Listed Species 

Clearance

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Clearance Consultation ongoing 

Anticipated authorization date concurrent with draft EIS 

issuance

Texas Historical 

Commission - State 

Historic 

Preservation Office

Section 106 National 

Historic Preservation 

Act Consultation

Phase II Modification 

Project

Consultation Consultation Letter sent: December 9, 2011

Receipt of Comment: December 14, 2011

Liquefaction/ 

Pipelines & Utilities

Consultation Informational Update Letter and Request for Clearance 

sent: April 20, 2012

Receipt of Comment: May 8, 2012

Pretreatment Consultation Request for Clearance sent: June 18, 2012

Receipt of Comment: July 3, 2012

Public Utility 

Commission of 

Texas

Certificate of

Convenience

and Necessity

Liquefaction Project Authorization Filing Date (by CenterPoint): October 2012 

Anticipated Authorization Date: January 2014

LOCAL

Brazoria County Building Permits Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Permit Anticipated Filing Date: January 2014

Anticipated Authorization Date: May 2014

Brazoria County 

Floodplain 

Administrator

Permit for 

Construction in a 

Zone “VE” or 

Variance as: 

functionally 

dependent use”

Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Permit or Variance Anticipated Filing Date: January 2014 

Anticipated Authorization Date: May 2014

Velasco Drainage 

District

Levee/Ditch Crossing 

Permit

Section 408 

Clearance for CR 

690 Levee from 

COE through 

Velasco Drainage 

District as a 

precursor to 

Levee/Ditch 

Crossing Permit

Liquefaction Project Permit Filing Date: August 2013

Anticipated Authorization Date: January 2014
draft Environmental Impact Statement 1-20 1.0 Introduction

Table 1.6-1

Permits, Approvals, and Clearances for Liquefaction Project and Phase II Modification Project

Agency

Permit/Approval

- Regulatory

Scope

Project / Facility

Applicability

Authorization/

Interaction Required Status

NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES

Caddo Indian Nation 

of Oklahoma

Consultation Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Project Notification and Comments Informational Letter sent: December 3, 2010

FERC Request for Comments sent: September 26, 2011 

Informational Update Letter sent: April 20, 2012

AlabamaCoushatta Nation of 

Texas

Consultation Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Project Notification and Comments Informational Letter sent: December 3, 2010

FERC Request for Comments sent: September 26, 2011 

Informational Update Letter sent: April 20, 2012

Tonkawa Tribe of 

Oklahoma

Consultation Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Project Notification and Comments Informational Letter sent: December 3, 2010

FERC Request for Comments sent: September 26, 2011

Informational Update Letter sent: 04-20-12

Wichita and 

Affiliated Tribes of 

Oklahoma

Consultation Liquefaction & Phase II 

Modification Projects

Project Notification and Comments Informational Letter sent: December 3, 2010

FERC Request for Comments sent: September 26, 2011

Informational Update Letter sent: April 20, 2012