This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains notices to the public of the proposed

issuance of rules and regulations. The

purpose of these notices is to give interested

persons an opportunity to participate in the

rule making prior to the adoption of the final

rules.

Proposed Rules Federal Register

41570 

Vol. 82, No. 169 

Friday, September 1, 2017 

1This notice of proposed rulemaking does not 

apply to exports to FTA countries under section 

3(c) of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717b(c). 

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

10 CFR Part 590 

[FE Docket No. 17–86–R] 

RIN 1901–AB43 

Small-Scale Natural Gas Exports 

AGENCY: Office of Fossil Energy, 

Department of Energy. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Energy 

(DOE or Department) proposes to revise 

its regulations to provide that DOE will 

issue an export authorization upon 

receipt of any complete application that 

seeks to export natural gas, including 

liquefied natural gas (LNG), to countries 

with which the United States has not 

entered into a free trade agreement 

(FTA) requiring national treatment for 

trade in natural gas and with which 

trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or 

policy (non-FTA countries), provided 

that the application satisfies the 

following two criteria: The application 

proposes to export natural gas in a 

volume up to and including 0.14 billion 

cubic feet (Bcf) per day (Bcf/d), and 

DOE’s approval of the application does 

not require an environmental impact 

statement (EIS) or an environmental 

assessment (EA) under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA). In proposing this revision, DOE 

is interpreting the phrase ‘‘public 

interest’’ set forth in the Natural Gas Act 

(NGA). DOE proposes that applications 

that satisfy these criteria are requesting 

authorization for ‘‘small-scale natural 

gas exports’’ and, as such, the exports 

are deemed to be consistent with the 

public interest under the NGA. DOE’s 

regulations regarding notice of 

applications and procedures conducted 

on applications would no longer apply 

to applications that satisfy these criteria. 

The proposed regulation is intended to 

expedite DOE’s processing of these 

applications, thereby reducing 

administrative burdens for the smallscale natural gas export market. 

DATES: Public comment on this 

proposed rule will be accepted until 

October 16, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by Regulation Identifier 

Number (RIN) 1901–AB43 and FE 

Docket No. 17–86–R. Use any of the 

following methods, although the 

eRulemaking Portal is preferred: 

1. Federal eRulemaking Portal (the 

preferred method): Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

on the Federal eRulemaking Portal at 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

2. Email: Send email to fergas@

hq.doe.gov. Include RIN 1901–AB43 and 

FE Docket No. 17–86–R in the subject 

line of the email. Please include the full 

body of your comments in the text of the 

message or as an attachment. 

3. Regular Mail: U.S. Department of 

Energy (FE–34), Office of Regulation 

and International Engagement, Office of 

Fossil Energy, P.O. Box 44375, 

Washington, DC 20026–4375. 

4. Hand Delivery or Private Delivery 

Services (e.g., FedEx, UPS, etc.): U.S. 

Department of Energy (FE–34), Office of 

Regulation and International 

Engagement, Office of Fossil Energy, 

Forrestal Building, Room 3E–042, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW., 

Washington, DC 20585. Telephone: 

202–586–9478. 

Due to potential delays in the delivery 

of postal mail, we encourage 

respondents to submit comments 

electronically to ensure timely receipt. 

Please Note: If submitting a filing via 

email, please include all related 

documents and attachments (e.g., 

exhibits) in the original email 

correspondence. Please do not include 

any active hyperlinks or password 

protection in any of the documents or 

attachments related to the filing. All 

electronic filings submitted to DOE 

must follow these guidelines to ensure 

that all documents are filed in a timely 

manner. Any hardcopy filing submitted 

greater in length than 50 pages must 

also include, at the time of the filing, a 

digital copy on disk of the entire 

submission. 

Docket: This notice of proposed 

rulemaking and any comments that DOE 

receives will be made available on the 

Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://

www.regulations.gov, and also on DOE’s 

Web site at: https://www.energy.gov/fe/ 

services/natural-gas-regulation. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Amy Sweeney, U.S. Department of 

Energy (FE–34), Office of Regulation 

and International Engagement, Office of 

Fossil Energy Forrestal Building, Room 

3E–042, 1000 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20585; (202) 586– 

2627; or Cassandra Bernstein or Ronald 

(R.J.) Colwell, U.S. Department of 

Energy (GC–76), Office of the Assistant 

General Counsel for Electricity and 

Fossil Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 

6D–033, 1000 Independence Ave. SW., 

Washington, DC 20585; (202) 586–9793 

or (202) 586–8499. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Background 

A. Statutory Background 

B. DOE’s Public Interest Analysis 

C. DOE’s Non-FTA Export Authorization 

Orders Since 2012 

II. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

A. Summary of and Reasons for Proposed 

Rule 

B. Consistency With Section 3 of the 

Natural Gas Act 

C. Consistency With the Public Interest 

D. Consistency With Free Market 

Principles 

III. Regulatory Review 

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

B. National Environmental Policy Act 

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act 

D. Paperwork Reduction Act 

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

F. Treasury and General Government 

Appropriations Act, 1999 

G. Executive Order 13132 

H. Executive Order 12988 

I. Treasury and General Government 

Appropriations Act, 2001 

J. Executive Order 13211 

IV. Approval of the Office of the Secretary 

I. Background 

A. Statutory Background 

The Department of Energy is 

responsible for authorizing exports of 

natural gas to foreign nations pursuant 

to section 3 of the NGA, 15 U.S.C. 717b. 

For applications to export natural gas to 

non-FTA countries under NGA section 

3(a), 15 U.S.C. 717b(a),1 DOE has 

consistently interpreted section 3 of the 

NGA as creating a rebuttable 

presumption that a proposed export of 

natural gas is in the public interest. 

Accordingly, DOE conducts an informal 

adjudication and grants the application 

unless DOE finds that the proposed 

exportation will not be consistent with 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules 41571 

2 15 U.S.C. 717b(a); see, e.g., Golden Pass 

Products LLC, DOE/FE Order No. 3978, FE Docket 

No. 12–156–LNG, Opinion and Order Granting 

Long-Term, Multi-Contract Authorization to Export 

Liquefied Natural Gas by Vessel from the Golden 

Pass LNG Terminal Located in Jefferson County, 

Texas, to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations, at 18, 

162 (Apr. 25, 2017). 

3See, e.g., Golden Pass Products, DOE/FE Order 

No. 3978, at 135–66. 

4New Policy Guidelines and Delegations Order 

Relating to Regulation of Imported Natural Gas, 49 

FR 6684 (Feb. 22, 1984) [hereinafter 1984 Policy 

Guidelines]. 

5 Id. at 6685. 

6Phillips Alaska Natural Gas, DOE/FE Order No. 

1473, at 14 (citing Yukon Pacific Corp., DOE/FE 

Order No. 350, Order Granting Authorization to 

Export Liquefied Natural Gas from Alaska, 1 FE ¶ 

70,259, at 71,128 (1989)). 

7 DOE Delegation Order No. 0204–111, at 1; see 

also 1984 Policy Guidelines, 49 FR at 6690. 

8See Applications for Authorization to Construct, 

Operate, or Modify Facilities Used for the Export or 

Import of Natural Gas, 62 FR 30,435, 30,437 n.15 

(June 4, 1997) (citing DOE Delegation Order No. 

0204–127, 54 FR 11,436 (Mar. 20, 1989)). 

9 ‘‘EIA’’ refers to the U.S. Energy Information 

Administration. 

10See 2012 LNG Export Study, 77 FR 73,627 (Dec. 

11, 2012), available at: http://energy.gov/sites/prod/ 

files/2013/04/f0/fr_notice_two_part_study.pdf. 

11U.S. Energy Info. Admin., Effect of Increased 

Levels of Liquefied Natural Gas Exports on U.S. 

Energy Markets (Oct. 2014), available at: https://

www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/fe/pdf/lng.pdf. 

12Center for Energy Studies at Rice University 

Baker Institute and Oxford Economics, The 

Macroeconomic Impact of Increasing U.S. LNG 

Exports (Oct. 29, 2015), available at: http://

energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/12/f27/20151113_

macro_impact_of_lng_exports_0.pdf. 

13 Dep’t of Energy, Addendum to Environmental 

Review Documents Concerning Exports of Natural 

Gas From the United States, 79 FR 48,132 (Aug. 15, 

2014), available at: http://energy.gov/fe/addendumenvironmental-review-documents-concerningexports-natural-gas-united-states. 

14 Dep’t of Energy, Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas 

Perspective on Exporting Liquefied Natural Gas 

From the United States, 79 FR 32,260 (June 4, 

2014). DOE/FE announced the availability of the 

LCA GHG Report on its Web site on May 29, 2014. 

15See, e.g. Cheniere Marketing, LLC and Corpus 

Christi Liquefaction, LLC, DOE/FE Order No. 3638, 

FE Docket No. 12–97–LNG, Final Order and 

Opinion Granting Long-Term, Multi-Contract 

Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural Gas by 

Vessel from the Proposed Corpus Christi 

Liquefaction Project to Be Located in Corpus 

Christi, Texas, to Non-Free Trade Agreement 

Nations, at 94–148, 167–83 (May 12, 2015); Golden 

Pass Products, DOE/FE Order No. 3978, at 71–92. 

the public interest.2 Before reaching a 

final decision on any non-FTA 

application, DOE must also comply with 

NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq. 

Typically, the federal agency 

responsible for permitting the export 

facility serves as the lead agency in the 

NEPA review process, and DOE serves 

as a cooperating agency within the 

meaning of the Council on 

Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) 

regulations, 40 CFR 1501.4, 1501.5. For 

LNG terminals located onshore or in 

state waters, the agency responsible for 

permitting the export facilities is the 

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

(FERC) pursuant to authority delegated 

by DOE under section 3(e) of the Natural 

Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. 717b(e). For LNG 

terminals located offshore beyond state 

waters, the responsible agency is the 

Maritime Administration (MARAD) 

within the Department of 

Transportation pursuant to section 3(9) 

of the Deepwater Ports Act, as amended 

by section 312 of the Coast Guard and 

Maritime Transportation Act of 2012 

(Pub. L. 112–213). 

DOE’s environmental review process 

under NEPA usually results in the 

preparation or adoption of an EIS or EA 

describing the potential environmental 

impacts associated with the application. 

In some cases, DOE may determine that 

an application is eligible for a 

categorical exclusion from the 

preparation or adoption of an EIS or EA 

pursuant to DOE’s regulations 

implementing NEPA, 10 CFR 1021.410, 

appendices A & B. For example, 

categorical exclusion B5.7 of DOE’s 

regulations (10 CFR part 1021, subpart 

D, appendix B5.7) applies to natural gas 

import or export activities requiring 

minor operational changes to existing 

projects, but no new construction. 

B. DOE’s Public Interest Analysis Under 

Section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act 

Although NGA section 3(a) 

establishes a broad public interest 

standard and a presumption favoring 

export authorizations, the statute does 

not define ‘‘public interest’’ or identify 

criteria that must be considered in 

evaluating the public interest. In prior 

decisions, DOE has identified a range of 

factors that it evaluates when reviewing 

an application for export authorization. 

These factors include economic 

impacts, international impacts, security 

of natural gas supply, and 

environmental impacts, among others. 

To conduct this review, DOE looks to 

record evidence developed in the 

application proceeding.3

DOE’s prior decisions have also 

looked to certain principles established 

in its 1984 Policy Guidelines.4 The goals 

of the Policy Guidelines are to minimize 

federal control and involvement in 

energy markets and to promote a 

balanced and mixed energy resource 

system. The Guidelines provide that: 

The market, not government, should 

determine the price and other contract terms 

of imported [or exported] natural gas. . . . 

The federal government’s primary 

responsibility in authorizing imports [or 

exports] will be to evaluate the need for the 

gas and whether the import [or export] 

arrangement will provide the gas on a 

competitively priced basis for the duration of 

the contract while minimizing regulatory 

impediments to a freely operating market.5

While the Policy Guidelines are 

nominally applicable to natural gas 

import cases, DOE subsequently held in 

Order No. 1473 that the same Policy 

Guidelines should be applied to natural 

gas export applications.6

In Order No. 1473, DOE stated that it 

was further guided by DOE Delegation 

Order No. 0204–111. That delegation 

order, which authorized the 

Administrator of the Economic 

Regulatory Administration to exercise 

the agency’s review authority under 

NGA section 3, directed the 

Administrator to regulate exports 

‘‘based on a consideration of the 

domestic need for the gas to be exported 

and such other matters as the 

Administrator finds in the 

circumstances of a particular case to be 

appropriate.’’ 7 (In February 1989, the 

Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy 

assumed the delegated responsibilities 

of the Administrator of ERA.8) 

Although DOE Delegation Order No. 

0204–111 is no longer in effect, DOE’s 

review of export applications has 

continued to focus on: (i) The domestic 

need for the natural gas proposed to be 

exported, (ii) whether the proposed 

exports pose a threat to the security of 

domestic natural gas supplies, (iii) 

whether the arrangement is consistent 

with DOE’s policy of promoting market 

competition, and (iv) any other factors 

bearing on the public interest, as 

determined by DOE. 

Additionally, since 2011, DOE has 

commissioned several studies to 

evaluate the reasonably foreseeable 

economic and environmental impacts of 

natural gas exports, and to respond to 

concerns about exports submitted to 

DOE in various proceedings. These 

studies include: Effect of Increased 

Natural Gas Exports on Domestic 

Energy Markets (2012 EIA 9 Study) and 

Macroeconomic Impacts of LNG Exports 

from the United States (NERA Study) 

(collectively, 2012 LNG Export 

Study); 10 Effect of Increased Levels of 

Liquefied Natural Gas Exports on U.S. 

Energy Markets (2014 EIA LNG Export 

Study); 11 The Macroeconomic Impact of 

Increasing U.S. LNG Exports (2015 LNG 

Export Study); 12 the Addendum to 

Environmental Review Documents 

Concerning Exports of Natural Gas from 

the United States (Addendum); 13 and 

the Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas 

Perspective on Exporting Liquefied 

Natural Gas from the United States 

(LCA GHG Report).14 DOE published 

these studies in the Federal Register 

and has responded to the public 

comments received on each study.15


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
41572 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

16 DOE considers the LCA GHG Report in nonFTA export proceedings whenever an application 

seeks to transport LNG by LNG tanker from largescale liquefaction facilities to non-FTA countries. 

By contrast, small-scale exports of natural gas 

(including LNG) typically are transported shorter 

distances using other transportation methods, such 

as ISO containers loaded onto container ships. DOE 

therefore does not consider the LCA GHG Report as 

part of the record in those proceedings. See infra 

(identifying seven non-FTA export authorizations 

for which the LCA GHG Report was not considered 

in the application proceeding, and discussing 

transportation of small-scale exports). 

17See Lake Charles LNG Export Co., LLC, DOE/ 

FE Order No. 4010, FE Docket No. 16–109–LNG, 

Opinion and Order Granting Long-Term, MultiContract Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural 

Gas by Vessel from the Lake Charles Terminal in 

Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana, to Non-Free Trade 

Agreement Nations, at 43–46 (June 29, 2017). 

18 Dep’t of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, 

Electronic Docket Room (E-Docket Room), https:// 

www.energy.gov/fe/downloads/electronic-docketroom-e-docket-room. 

19See Lake Charles LNG Export Co., DOE/FE 

Order No. 4010, at 43–46 (citing these 

authorizations). 

20See, e.g., Golden Pass Products, DOE/FE Order 

No. 3978, at Section XII and 161. 

The 2012 EIA Study generally found 

that natural gas exports will lead to 

higher domestic natural gas prices, 

increased domestic natural gas 

production, reduced domestic natural 

gas consumption, and increased natural 

gas imports from Canada via pipeline. 

Among the key findings of the NERA 

Study (the second part of the 2012 LNG 

Export Study), NERA projected that the 

United States would gain net economic 

benefits from allowing LNG exports. For 

every market scenario examined, the 

NERA Study determined that economic 

benefits increased as the level of natural 

gas exports increased. 

The 2014 EIA LNG Export Study 

found that natural gas exports will 

generally lead to relatively modest 

domestic natural gas price increases, 

increased domestic natural gas 

production, reduced domestic natural 

gas consumption, and higher levels of 

economic output (as measured by real 

gross domestic product). 

The 2015 LNG Export Study 

considered export volumes ranging from 

12 to 20 Bcf/d of natural gas, as well as 

a high resource recovery case examining 

export volumes up to 28 Bcf/d of natural 

gas. The analysis covered the 2015 to 

2040 time period. The 2015 Study made 

the following key findings: 

• Rising natural gas exports are 

associated with a net increase in 

domestic natural gas production; 

• As exports increase, the spread 

between U.S. domestic prices and 

international benchmarks narrows; 

• The overall macroeconomic impacts 

of higher natural gas exports are 

marginally positive—a result that is 

robust to alternative assumptions for the 

U.S. natural gas market; 

• An increase in U.S. natural gas 

exports will generate small declines in 

output at the margin for some energyintensive, trade-exposed industries; and 

• Negative impacts in energyintensive sectors are offset by positive 

impacts elsewhere. 

The Addendum evaluated 

environmental impacts including water 

resources, air quality, greenhouse gas 

emissions, induced seismicity, and land 

use impacts. The DOE Addendum 

concluded that DOE cannot 

meaningfully estimate where, when, or 

by what particular method additional 

natural gas would be produced in 

response to non-FTA export demand. 

Finally, although not directly relevant 

to this proposed rule,16 the LCA GHG 

Report reached conclusions regarding 

the use of U.S. natural gas exports to 

produce electricity in European and 

Asian markets, as well as the life cycle 

greenhouse gas emissions of exported 

U.S. natural gas as compared to other 

sources of natural gas in those markets. 

C. DOE’s Non-FTA Export 

Authorizations Since 2012 

To date, DOE has issued 28 final 

export authorizations to non-FTA 

countries, bringing the cumulative total 

of approved non-FTA exports of LNG 

and compressed natural gas (CNG) to 

21.33 Bcf/d of natural gas, or 7.79 

trillion cubic feet per year.17 These nonFTA authorizations are available online 

at the DOE/FE E-Docket Room.18

Of these 28 non-FTA authorizations, 

seven authorize exports in volumes 

below 0.14 Bcf/d of natural gas—the 

volume limitation set forth in the 

criteria for this proposed rulemaking. 

These seven authorizations include: 

Carib Energy (USA) LLC (0.04 Bcf/d), 

American Marketing LLC (0.008 Bcf/d), 

Emera CNG, LLC (0.008 Bcf/d), 

Floridian Natural Gas Storage Company, 

LLC (0.04 Bcf/d), Air Flow North 

American Corp. (0.002 Bcf/d), Flint 

Hills Resources, LP (0.01 Bcf/d), and 

Carib Energy (USA), LLC (0.004).19

Together, these authorizations approve 

exports of LNG and CNG in a combined 

volume of 0.112 Bcf/d—less than 0.6% 

of the cumulative volume of non-FTA 

exports approved by DOE to date. 

In each of the 28 non-FTA export 

authorizations issued to date, and on the 

basis of the record evidence presented 

in those proceedings, DOE has reached 

the following conclusions as part of its 

public interest determination for each 

application: 

• Substantial domestic natural gas 

supplies exist to meet domestic natural 

gas demand and increased natural gas 

exports; 

• While increased natural gas exports 

will result in higher U.S. natural gas 

prices, these price changes remain in a 

relatively narrow range across the 

scenarios studied and the domestic 

natural gas market is capable of 

accommodating increased natural gas 

exports without significant negative 

price or other economic impacts; 

• Even with these estimated price 

increases, increased natural gas exports 

are likely to generate net economic 

benefits for the United States; 

• Increased natural gas exports 

stimulate local, regional, and national 

economies through direct and indirect 

job creation, increased economic 

activity, and tax revenues; and 

• Increased natural gas exports 

increase diversity of supply in the 

global natural gas market, in turn 

benefiting international trade and 

relations as well as global energy 

security. 

DOE also has observed that it is far from 

certain that all or even most of the 

proposed natural gas export projects 

will be realized because of the time, 

difficulty, and expense of 

commercializing, financing, and 

constructing such projects, as well as 

the uncertainties inherent in the global 

market demand for natural gas.20

II. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

A. Summary of and Reasons for 

Proposed Rule 

The emerging small-scale export 

market involves exports of small 

volumes of natural gas from the United 

States to countries primarily in, but not 

limited to, the Caribbean, Central 

America, and South America. Many of 

these countries do not generate enough 

natural gas demand to support the 

economies of scale required to justify 

large volumes of LNG imports from 

large-scale LNG terminals via 

conventional LNG tankers. The smallscale natural gas export market has 

developed as a solution to the practical 

and economic constraints limiting 

natural gas exports to these countries. 

DOE is proposing to revise its 

regulations to expedite the application 

and approval process for small-scale 

exports of natural gas. Specifically, the 

proposed rule provides that DOE, upon 

receipt of any complete application to 

export natural gas (including LNG) to 

non-FTA countries, will grant the 

application provided that it satisfies the 

following two criteria: (1) The 

application proposes to export natural 

gas in a volume up to and including 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules 41573 

21See, e.g., Int’l Gas Union, IGU World Gas LNG 

Report 59 (2016 ed.), available at: www.igu.org/ 

download/file/fid/2123 (‘‘IGU defines the largescale LNG industry as every LNG business above 1 

million MTPA of LNG production and/or 

consumption. Conversely, small-scale LNG is any 

business under 1 million MTPA.’’); Int’l Gas Union, 

Small Scale LNG 11 (June 2015), available at: 

http://www.igu.org/sites/default/files/node-pagefield_file/SmallScaleLNG.pdf (‘‘For the purpose of 

this report, the [small-scale LNG] production 

installed capacity has been defined as below 1 

million metric tons per annum (mtpa).’’); Ce ́dric 

Andrieu, Gas Tech. Inst., Et Al., Small Scale LNG 

Import Terminal: Not As Simple As A Reduced One 

2, 4 (Conference Paper, LNG 17 International 

Conference & Exhibition on Liquefied Natural Gas, 

2013), available at: http://www.gastechnology.org/ 

Training/Documents/LNG17-proceedings/Storage-6- 

Cedric_Andrieu.pdf (‘‘Typically, the send-out rate 

of . . . small LNG terminals is ranging from 0.2 to 

1 mtpa.’’). 

22See, e.g., Southern LNG Company, L.L.C., DOE/ 

FE Order No. 3956, FE Docket No. 12–100–LNG, 

Opinion and Order Granting Long-Term, MultiContract Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural 

Gas by Vessel from the Elba Island Terminal in 

Chatham County, Georgia, to Non-Free Trade 

Agreement Nations (Dec. 16, 2016), at Ordering 

Para. H. 

23 15 U.S.C. 717b(a). 24See id.; see, e.g., Golden Pass Products, DOE/ 

FE Order No. 3978, at 18, 162. 25U.S. Energy Information Administration, 

Annual Energy Outlook 2017 (Jan. 2017), available 

at: http://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo. 

0.14 Bcf/d; and (2) DOE’s approval of 

the application does not require an EIS 

or EA under NEPA—that is, the 

application is eligible for a categorical 

exclusion under DOE’s NEPA 

regulations. 

For each small-scale application 

submitted to DOE, DOE will first 

determine if the application is complete 

under DOE’s regulations. If the 

application is complete, DOE will post 

the application on DOE’s Web site, 

consistent with DOE practice. Next, 

DOE will determine if the application 

meets the criteria for a small-scale 

natural gas export. If the application 

meets the criteria, DOE will issue a nonFTA authorization granting the 

application on an expedited basis, 

without providing notice of application 

and other procedures typically required 

for non-FTA export applications under 

DOE’s regulations, 10 CFR 590.205 and 

10 CFR part 590, subpart C (10 CFR 

590.303–10 CFR 590.317). All smallscale natural gas export authorizations 

issued pursuant to these regulations will 

be posted on DOE’s Web site, and will 

contain appropriate terms and 

conditions consistent with DOE’s 

regulations and practice. 

DOE notes that entities involved in 

this emerging market typically define 

‘‘small-scale’’ natural gas exports as 

exports of 1.0 million metric tons per 

annum (mtpa) or lower.21 When 

converting from million metric tons to 

billion cubic feet, DOE uses a 

conversion factor of 51.75 Bcf per 

million metric tons of dry natural gas.22

Based on this conversion factor, 1 

million metric tons per annum equates 

to approximately 0.14 Bcf/d of natural 

gas. Consequently, as the first criterion 

for the proposed rule, DOE proposes to 

define small-scale natural gas exports as 

any export of natural gas up to and 

including a volume of 0.14 Bcf/d. DOE 

believes this volume limitation is 

consistent with industry practice, but 

invites comment on any other 

appropriate small-scale volume 

limitation. 

As the second criterion for this 

proposed rule, DOE must determine that 

its approval of the application does not 

require an EIS or an EA under NEPA, 

because it qualifies for a categorical 

exclusion. For example, pursuant to 

DOE’s categorical exclusion B5.7, a 

small-scale natural gas export that 

involves only existing facilities and/or 

minor operational changes is an action 

that does not involve new construction. 

Any application that satisfies these 

two criteria would qualify as a ‘‘smallscale natural gas export’’ as that term is 

defined under this proposed rule, and 

would be deemed to be consistent with 

the public interest under NGA section 

3(a). As noted above, DOE’s regulations 

regarding notice of applications, 10 CFR 

590.205, and procedures applicable to 

application proceedings, 10 CFR 590 

subpart C (10 CFR 590.301 to 10 CFR 

590.317), would not apply to 

applications that satisfy these criteria. 

Rather, this proposed rule, and the 45- 

day comment period for this proposed 

rule, would constitute the notice and 

opportunity for hearing on all 

prospective small-scale natural gas 

export applications. 

This proposed rule is limited to 

qualifying small-scale exports of natural 

gas. If adopted, this proposed rule 

would not affect either existing DOE 

authorizations or DOE’s evaluation of 

any non-FTA application that does not 

meet the criteria for small-scale natural 

gas exports. In expediting the 

application and approval process for 

these exports, DOE recognizes the 

unique characteristics and minimal 

adverse impacts of the small-scale 

natural gas market emerging primarily 

in the United States, the Caribbean, 

Central America, and South America. 

As discussed below, the proposed rule 

is in accordance with section 3 of the 

NGA, DOE’s interpretation of the public 

interest standard set forth in NGA 

section 3(a), and DOE’s long-standing 

policy of minimizing federal control and 

involvement in energy markets and 

promoting a balanced and mixed energy 

resource system. 

B. Consistency With Section 3(a) of the 

Natural Gas Act 

Under section 3(a) of the NGA, the 

Secretary of Energy is required to issue 

an order upon application unless, after 

opportunity for hearing, DOE finds that 

the proposed export ‘‘will not be 

consistent with the public interest.’’ 23

DOE has long interpreted section 3(a) as 

creating a rebuttable presumption that a 

proposed export of natural gas is in the 

public interest, such that DOE must 

grant an application under section 3(a) 

unless opponents of the application 

overcome that presumption by making 

an affirmative showing of inconsistency 

with the public interest.24 The statute, 

however, does not define ‘‘public 

interest’’ or identify criteria that DOE 

must consider when determining 

whether a proposed export of natural 

gas is consistent with the public interest 

under section 3(a). The statute affords 

DOE broad discretion in determining 

whether proposed exports to non-FTA 

countries are ‘‘consistent with the 

public interest’’ (15 U.S.C. 717b(a)). In 

this proposed rule, DOE is interpreting 

NGA section 3(a) to determine that 

small-scale natural gas exports are 

consistent with the public interest after 

considering all relevant factors, 

including the domestic need for the 

small volumes of natural gas to be 

exported and the security of domestic 

natural gas supplies. 

C. Consistency With the Public Interest 

In determining that small-scale 

natural gas exports are consistent with 

the public interest, DOE has considered 

the economic studies and the 

Addendum discussed in Section I.B, as 

well as the public comments received 

on these studies. DOE has also 

considered the 28 final non-FTA export 

authorizations issued to date, including 

the seven non-FTA authorizations 

approving exports at volumes below 

0.14 Bcf/d of natural gas (identified in 

section I.C), as well as the most recent 

authoritative projections for natural gas 

supply, demand, and prices set forth in 

the Annual Energy Outlook 2017 (AEO 

2017).25 Based on this evidence, and for 

the reasons described in Section II.A, 

DOE has determined that small-scale 

natural gas exports are consistent with 

the public interest under NGA section 

3(a). 

In reaching this conclusion, DOE has 

considered the economic impacts of 

higher natural gas prices and potential 

increases in natural gas price volatility 

and, as noted earlier, has reviewed the 

economic impacts of natural gas 

exports. Recent advancements in natural 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
41574 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

26See, e.g., Delfin LNG LLC, DOE/FE Order No. 

4028, FE Docket No. 13–147–LNG, Opinion and 

Order Granting Long-Term, Multi-Contract 

Authorization to Export Liquefied Natural Gas by 

Vessel from a Proposed Floating Liquefaction 

Project and Deepwater Port 30 Miles Offshore of 

Louisiana to Non-Free Trade Agreement Nations, at 

62–63 (June 1, 2017). 

gas exploration and production 

technology have changed the outlook for 

the U.S. natural gas market, such that 

the increase in domestic supplies of 

natural gas will outpace increases in 

domestic demand. 

The 2015 Study considered export 

volumes ranging from 12 to 20 Bcf/d of 

natural gas, as well as a high resource 

recovery case examining export volumes 

up to 28 Bcf/d of natural gas. By 

comparison, to date DOE has issued 

final non-FTA authorizations in a 

cumulative volume of exports totaling 

21.33 Bcf/d of natural gas—well below 

the 28 Bcf/d case considered in the 2015 

Study. As DOE has explained in recent 

orders,26 the authors of the 2015 Study 

had to include several unlikely 

assumptions about the global natural gas 

market for U.S. LNG exports to exceed 

12 Bcf/d, much less to reach the high 

resource recovery case of 28 Bcf/d of 

exports. Based on this evidence and the 

small volumes at issue in this proposed 

rule, DOE believes that domestic 

supplies will be adequate both to meet 

domestic needs and to supply smallscale exports of natural gas. 

DOE finds that small-scale natural gas 

exports meeting the criteria set forth in 

this proposed rulemaking will not 

interfere with the domestic need for 

natural gas. Likewise, small-scale 

exports will not have a detectable 

impact on domestic natural gas prices, 

and will not pose a risk to the security 

of domestic natural gas supplies. While 

small-scale natural gas exports are 

unlikely to generate negative economic 

or supply impacts in the United States, 

these exports are expected to have 

positive impacts. Specifically, smallscale natural gas exports are expected to 

generate positive economic benefits in 

the United States through direct and 

indirect job creation, increased 

economic activity, tax revenues, and 

improved U.S. balance of trade. 

To countries that do not otherwise 

have access to natural gas, small-scale 

natural gas exports represent an 

important change in their ability to 

generate electricity. Small-scale exports 

also will enable electric generation 

facilities in the importing countries to 

switch from heavy fuel oil and diesel to 

natural gas, providing positive 

environmental benefits through the 

reduction of emissions at fuel oil and 

diesel burning electric generators. The 

availability of a reliable supply of 

natural gas to customers outside of the 

United States who are currently burning 

diesel or fuel oil for power generation 

may encourage conversion to natural 

gas-based power generation equipment. 

Companies in the United States would 

be well positioned to provide and 

support this type of power generation 

equipment, thus providing secondary 

economic benefits from the small-scale 

exports. 

Additionally, small-scale natural gas 

exports will enable importing countries 

to diversify their fuel supplies, while 

contributing to greater overall 

transparency, efficiency, and liquidity 

of natural gas markets outside the 

United States. To the extent small-scale 

natural gas exports will diversify global 

natural gas supplies, and increase the 

volumes of natural gas available 

globally, small-scale natural exports will 

improve energy security for many U.S. 

allies and trading partners. As such, the 

proposed rule will advance the public 

interest by fostering international 

relations, trade, and security. 

D. Consistency With Free Market 

Principles 

DOE has consistently subscribed to 

the principles set forth in the 1984 

Policy Guidelines that the market, not 

the government, is the most efficient 

means of allocating natural gas supplies. 

The United States has an abundant 

supply of affordable natural gas that 

studies have shown will significantly 

exceed domestic demand. Meanwhile, 

foreign demand for natural gas imports 

from the United States has increased as 

many countries, such as those in the 

Caribbean, Central America, and South 

America, seek to import cleaner sources 

of energy. 

The conventional, large-scale natural 

gas import/export market is extremely 

capital-intensive. Companies must 

achieve sufficient economies of scale to 

justify their multi-billion dollar 

investments in large-scale LNG 

terminals and in large-volume LNG 

tanker fleets. However, many of the 

countries in the Caribbean, Central 

America, and South America simply do 

not generate enough demand to import 

the large volumes of natural gas 

supplied by the large-scale natural gas 

import/export market. Given these 

diseconomies of scale, a gap has 

emerged in the regional natural gas 

import/export market. Small-scale 

natural gas exports represent a marketdriven response to fill this gap. In 

contrast to large-scale natural gas 

exports, small-scale natural gas exports 

typically originate from existing 

facilities in the United States, are 

transported shorter distances, and rely 

on a variety of transportation modes 

(such as ISO containers loaded onto 

container ships and barges). DOE 

believes that facilitating small-scale 

natural gas exports will allow for greater 

diversity and competition in the natural 

gas market. 

III. Regulatory Review 

A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

This regulatory action has been 

determined to not be a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ under Executive 

Order 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 of the Office of Management and 

Budget. 

DOE has also reviewed this regulation 

pursuant to Executive Order 13563, 

issued on January 18, 2011. (76 FR 3281, 

Jan. 21, 2011.) EO 13563 is 

supplemental to and explicitly reaffirms 

the principles, structures, and 

definitions governing regulatory review 

established in Executive Order 12866. 

To the extent permitted by law, agencies 

are required by Executive Order 13563 

to: (1) Propose or adopt a regulation 

only upon a reasoned determination 

that its benefits justify its costs 

(recognizing that some benefits and 

costs are difficult to quantify); (2) tailor 

regulations to impose the least burden 

on society, consistent with obtaining 

regulatory objectives, taking into 

account, among other things, and to the 

extent practicable, the costs of 

cumulative regulations; (3) select, in 

choosing among alternative regulatory 

approaches, those approaches that 

maximize net benefits (including 

potential economic, environmental, 

public health and safety, and other 

advantages; distributive impacts; and 

equity); (4) to the extent feasible, specify 

performance objectives, rather than 

specifying the behavior or manner of 

compliance that regulated entities must 

adopt; and (5) identify and assess 

available alternatives to direct 

regulation, including providing 

economic incentives to encourage the 

desired behavior, such as user fees or 

marketable permits, or providing 

information upon which choices can be 

made by the public. 

DOE concludes that this proposed 

rule is consistent with these principles. 

Specifically, this proposed rule provides 

that DOE will issue an export 

authorization upon receipt of any 

complete application that seeks to 

export natural gas, including LNG, to 

non-FTA countries, provided that the 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules 41575 

application satisfies the following two 

criteria: (1) The application proposes to 

export natural gas in a volume up to and 

including 0.14 Bcf/d, and (2) DOE’s 

approval of the application does not 

require an EIS or EA under NEPA. 

DOE’s regulations regarding notice of 

applications, 10 CFR 590.205, and 

procedures applicable to application 

proceedings, 10 CFR part 590, subpart C 

(10 CFR 590.303 to 10 CFR 590.317), 

would not apply to small-scale natural 

gas exports. The proposed regulation is 

intended to expedite DOE’s processing 

of these applications, thereby reducing 

administrative burdens for the smallscale natural gas export market. 

B. Executive Orders 13771, 13777, and 

13783 

On January 30, 2017, the President 

issued Executive Order 13771, 

‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling 

Regulatory Costs.’’ That Order stated the 

policy of the executive branch is to be 

prudent and financially responsible in 

the expenditure of funds, from both 

public and private sources. The Order 

stated it is essential to manage the costs 

associated with the governmental 

imposition of private expenditures 

required to comply with Federal 

regulations. This proposed rule is 

expected to be an EO 13771 

deregulatory action. 

Additionally, on February 24, 2017, 

the President issued Executive Order 

13777, ‘‘Enforcing the Regulatory 

Reform Agenda.’’ The Order required 

the head of each agency 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, EO 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. 

Finally, on March 28, 2017, the 

President signed Executive Order 13783, 

entitled ‘‘Promoting Energy 

Independence and Economic Growth.’’ 

Among other things, EO 13783 requires 

the heads of agencies to review all 

existing regulations, orders, guidance 

documents, policies, and any other 

similar agency actions (collectively, 

agency actions) that potentially burden 

the development or use of domestically 

produced energy resources, with 

particular attention to oil, natural gas, 

coal, and nuclear energy resources. 

Such review does not include agency 

actions that are mandated by law, 

necessary for the public interest, and 

consistent with the policy set forth 

elsewhere in that order. 

Executive Order 13783 defined 

burden for purposes of the review of 

existing regulations to mean to 

unnecessarily obstruct, delay, curtail, or 

otherwise impose significant costs on 

the siting, permitting, production, 

utilization, transmission, or delivery of 

energy resources. 

DOE concludes that this proposed 

rule is consistent with the directives set 

forth in these executive orders. 

Specifically, this proposed rule would 

require DOE to issue an export 

authorization upon receipt of any 

complete application that seeks to 

export natural gas, including LNG, to 

non-FTA countries, provided that the 

application satisfies the following two 

criteria: (1) The application proposes to 

export natural gas in a volume up to and 

including 0.14 Bcf/d, and (2) DOE’s 

approval of the application does not 

require an EIS or an EA under NEPA. 

DOE proposes that applications that 

satisfy these criteria are requesting 

authorization for ‘‘small-scale natural 

gas exports’’ and, as such, the exports 

are deemed to be consistent with the 

public interest under NGA section 3(a). 

DOE’s regulations regarding notice of 

applications and procedures conducted 

on applications would no longer apply 

to applications that satisfy these criteria. 

The proposed regulation would 

expedite DOE’s processing of these 

applications, thereby reducing 

administrative burdens for the smallscale natural gas export market. 

C. National Environmental Policy Act 

DOE has determined that 

promulgation of these regulations fall 

into a class of actions that does not 

individually or cumulatively have a 

significant impact on the human 

environment as set forth under DOE’s 

regulations implementing the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321 et seq). Specifically, this 

rulemaking is covered under the 

Categorical Exclusion found in the 

DOE’s National Environmental Policy 

Act regulations at paragraph A6 of 

appendix A to subpart D, 10 CFR part 

1021, which applies to rulemakings that 

are strictly procedural. Accordingly, 

neither an EIS nor an EA is required. 

D. 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 

Executive Order 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). DOE 

has made its procedures and policies 

available on the Office of General 

Counsel’s Web site: http://

www.gc.doe.gov. 

DOE has reviewed this proposed rule 

under the provisions of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act and the procedures and 

policies published on February 19, 

2003. As discussed in the preamble, this 

proposed rule would require DOE to 

issue an export authorization upon 

receipt of any complete application that 

seeks to export natural gas, including 

LNG, to non-FTA countries, provided 

that the application satisfies the 

following two criteria: (1) The 

application proposes to export natural 

gas in a volume up to and including 

0.14 Bcf/d, and (2) DOE’s approval of 

the application does not require an EIS 

or an EA under NEPA. DOE’s 

regulations regarding notice of 

applications and procedures conducted 

on applications would no longer apply 

to applications that satisfy these criteria. 

To date, DOE has received—and 

granted—seven applications to export 

LNG in volumes below 0.14 Bcf/d of 

natural gas to non-FTA countries 

(identified in section I.C). Of these 

seven applicants, two qualify as small 

businesses under the Small Business 

Administration’s size standards under 

NAICS 221210, Natural Gas 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
41576 Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules 

Distribution, of 1,000 employees or less. 

Because it would streamline the 

application and approval process for 

small-scale natural gas exports, the 

proposed rule would not result in a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The proposed rule would, however, 

provide greater regulatory certainty for 

applicants by eliminating the individual 

application proceeding and public 

interest evaluation for qualifying 

applications. This, in turn, will both 

reduce the administrative burden 

associated with the application process 

and expedite authorization of qualifying 

applications, removing (at a minimum) 

the opportunity cost of receiving an 

application delayed by the current 

procedures. 

Therefore, DOE certifies that this 

rulemaking will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Accordingly, 

DOE did not prepare an IRFA for this 

rulemaking. DOE’s certification and 

supporting statement of factual basis 

will be provided to the Chief Counsel 

for Advocacy of the Small Business 

Administration for review under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b). 

E. Paperwork Reduction Act 

The proposed rule does not change 

any requirements subject to review and 

approval by OMB pursuant to the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) and the procedures 

implementing that Act, 5 CFR 1320.1 et 

seq. Current natural gas import and 

export authorization holders, including 

any approved under this proposed rule, 

would be subject to the information 

collection requirements approved by the 

Office of Management and Budget under 

OMB Control No. 1901–0294. Public 

reporting burden for the certification is 

estimated to average 3 hours per 

response, including the time for 

reviewing instructions, searching 

existing data sources, gathering and 

maintaining the data needed, and 

completing and reviewing the collection 

of information. 

Notwithstanding any other provision 

of the law, no person is required to 

respond to, nor shall any person be 

subject to a penalty for failure to comply 

with, a collection of information subject 

to the requirements of the PRA, unless 

that collection of information displays a 

currently valid OMB Control Number. 

F. 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 tribal, state, and local governments. 

Subsection 101(5) of title I of that law 

defines a Federal intergovernmental 

mandate to include any regulation that 

would impose upon tribal, state, or local 

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 tribal, state, and local 

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 tribal, state, or local 

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 tribal, state, and 

local governments. 2 U.S.C. 1534. 

This proposed rule would streamline 

procedures for small-scale natural gas 

exports. DOE has determined that the 

proposed rule would not result in the 

expenditure by tribal, state, and local 

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. 

G. 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. 

H. Executive Order 13132 

Executive Order 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 Executive Order 

13132. 

I. Executive Order 12988 

With respect to the review of existing 

regulations and the promulgation of 

new regulations, section 3(a) of 

Executive Order 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 Executive Order 12988 

specifically requires that Executive 

agencies make every reasonable effort to 

ensure that the regulation: (1) Clearly 

specifies the 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 Executive Order 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 

Executive Order 12988. 

J. 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 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 169 / Friday, September 1, 2017 / Proposed Rules 41577 

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. 

K. Executive Order 13211 

Executive Order 13211, ‘‘Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use,’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 

22, 2001) requires Federal agencies to 

prepare and submit to the 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) Is a significant regulatory action 

under Executive Order 12866, or any 

successor order; and (2) is likely to have 

a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy, or 

(3) 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. 

For the reasons discussed in section 

II.C, this regulatory action would not 

have a significant adverse effect on the 

supply, distribution, or use of energy, 

and therefore is not a significant energy 

action. Accordingly, DOE has not 

prepared a Statement of Energy Effects. 

IV. Approval of the Office of the 

Secretary 

The Secretary of Energy has approved 

the publication of this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 590 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Exports, Natural gas, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on August 25, 

2017. 

Robert J. Smith, 

Acting Assistant Secretary, Office of Fossil 

Energy. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, DOE proposes to amend part 

590, chapter II of title 10, subchapter G, 

Code of Federal Regulations as set forth 

below: 

PART 590—ADMINISTRATIVE 

PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO 

THE IMPORT AND EXPORT OF 

NATURAL GAS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 590 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: Secs. 301(b), 402(f), and 644, 

Pub. L. 95–91, 91 Stat. 578, 585, and 599 (42 

U.S.C. 7151(b), 7172(f), and 7254), Sec. 3, Act 

of June 21, 1938, c. 556, 52 Stat. 822 (15 

U.S.C. 717b); E.O. 12009 (42 FR 46267, 

September 15, 1977); DOE Delegation Order 

Nos. 0204–111 and 0204–127 (49 FR 6684, 

February 22, 1984; 54 FR 11437, March 20, 

1989). 

■ 2. Section 590.102 is amended by: 

■ a. Redesignating paragraph (p) as 

paragraph (q), respectively; 

■ b. Adding new paragraph (p). 

The revisions to read as follows: 

§ 590.102 Definitions. 

* * * * * 

(p) Small-scale natural gas export 

means an export of natural gas to 

nations with which there is not in effect 

a free trade agreement with the United 

States requiring national treatment for 

trade in natural gas and with which 

trade is not prohibited by U.S. law or 

policy, provided that the application for 

such export authority satisfies the 

following two criteria: 

(1) The application proposes to export 

natural gas in a volume up to and 

including 0.14 billion cubic feet per 

day, and 

(2) DOE’s approval of the application 

does not require an environmental 

impact statement or an environmental 

assessment under the National 

Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. 

4321 et seq. 

* * * * * 

■ 3. Section 590.208 is revised to read 

as follows: 

§ 590.208 Small volume exports. 

(a) Small-scale natural gas exports. 

Small-scale natural gas exports are 

deemed to be consistent with the public 

interest under section 3(a) of the Natural 

Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. 717b(a). DOE will 

issue an export authorization upon 

receipt of any complete application to 

conduct small-scale natural gas exports. 

DOE’s regulations regarding notice of 

applications, 10 CFR 590.205, and 

procedures applicable to application 

proceedings, 10 CFR part 590, subpart C 

(10 CFR 590.303 to 10 CFR 590.317), are 

not applicable to small-scale natural gas 

exports. 

(b) Scientific, experimental, or other 

non-utility natural gas exports. Any 

person may export up to 100,000 cubic 

feet of natural gas (14.73 pounds per 

square inch at 60 degrees Fahrenheit) or 

the liquefied or compressed equivalent 

thereof, in a single shipment for 

scientific, experimental, or other nonutility gas use without prior 

authorization of the Assistant Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 2017–18580 Filed 8–31–17; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6450–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2017–0660; Product 

Identifier 2017–NE–21–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; General 

Electric Company Turbofan Engines 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

General Electric Company (GE) GEnx– 

1B64/P2, –1B67/P2, –1B70/P2, –1B70/ 

75/P2, –1B70C/P2, and –1B74/75/P2 

turbofan engines. This proposed AD was 

prompted by a report of the failure of 

the high-pressure turbine (HPT) stage 1 

blade retainer and subsequent in-flight 

shutdown of the engine. This proposed 

AD would require inspection of the HPT 

stage 1 blade retainer. We are proposing 

this AD to address the unsafe condition 

on these products. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by October 16, 2017. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this NPRM, contact General Electric 

Company, GE-Aviation, Room 285, 1 

Neumann Way, Cincinnati, OH 45215, 

phone: 513–552–3272; fax: 513–552– 

3329; email: geae.aoc@ge.com. You may 

view this service information at the 

FAA, Engine and Propeller Standards 

Branch, Policy and Innovation Division, 


sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with PROPOSALS