[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 85 (Monday, May 5, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 18949-18953]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-07606]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
49 CFR Part 193
[Docket No. PHMSA-2019-0091]
RIN 2137-AF45
Pipeline Safety: Amendments to Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities
AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA),
Department of Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: PHMSA is publishing this advance notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPRM) to solicit stakeholder feedback on potential amendments to the
pipeline safety regulations governing liquefied natural gas (LNG).
DATES: Comments on this ANPRM must be submitted by July 7, 2025.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by the Docket Number
PHMSA-2019-0091 using any of the following methods:
E-Gov Web: https://www.regulations.gov. This site allows the public
to enter comments on any Federal Register notice issued by any agency.
Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
Mail: Docket Management System: U.S. Department of Transportation,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140,
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery: U.S. DOT Docket Management System: West Building
Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, between 9 a.m.
and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
Instructions: Please include the docket number PHMSA-2019-0091 at
the beginning of your comments. If you submit your comments by mail,
submit two copies. If you wish to receive confirmation that PHMSA
received your comments, include a self-addressed stamped postcard.
Internet users may submit comments at https://www.regulations.gov.
Note: Comments are posted without changes or edits to https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided.
There is a privacy statement published on https://www.regulations.gov.
Privacy Act: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to https://www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
https://www.dot.gov/privacy.
Confidential Business Information: Confidential Business
Information (CBI) is commercial or financial information that is both
customarily and actually treated as private by its owner. Under the
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt from
public disclosure. It is important that you clearly designate the
comments submitted as CBI if: your comments responsive to this document
contain commercial or financial information that is customarily treated
as private; you actually treat such information as private; and your
comment is relevant or responsive to this notice. Pursuant to 49 Code
of Federal Regulations (CFR) 190.343, you may ask PHMSA to provide
confidential treatment to information you give to the agency by taking
the following steps: (1) mark each page of the original document
submission containing CBI as ``Confidential''; (2) send PHMSA, along
with the original document, a second copy of the original document with
the CBI deleted; and (3) explain why the information that you are
submitting is CBI. Submissions containing CBI should be sent to Brianna
Wilson, Office of Pipeline Safety (PHP-30), Pipeline and Hazardous
Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), 2nd Floor, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590-0001, or by email at
[email protected]. Any materials PHMSA receives that is not
[[Page 18950]]
specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public docket.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for accessing the docket. Alternatively, you may review
the documents in person at the street address listed above.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
General: Brianna Wilson, Transportation Specialist, by phone at
(771) 215-0969, or by email at [email protected].
Technical: Thach Nguyen, Supervisory General Engineer, by phone at
(909) 262-4464, or by email at [email protected].
I. Executive Summary
PHMSA is publishing this advance notice of proposed rulemaking
(ANPRM) to solicit stakeholder feedback on potential opportunities for
amendment of its regulations governing the siting, design,
installation, construction, inspection, testing, operation, and
maintenance of LNG facilities at 49 CFR part 193. Those requirements
have not been substantially revised for over two decades. In the years
since, the U.S. LNG industry has become truly global in scale and
geopolitical importance; the sophistication of technology and operating
practices within LNG facilities regulated by PHMSA have similarly
evolved at a breakneck pace. In recognition of these developments,
Congress, the Government Accountability Office (GAO), and industry
stakeholders have repeatedly called on PHMSA to update its part 193
regulations to better align with current technologies, operational best
practices, and lessons learned. In response to these recommendations
and mandates, PHMSA now solicits stakeholder feedback on potential
amendments to its part 193 LNG facility requirements that will inform a
forthcoming notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in this proceeding.
II. Background
PHMSA's last significant amendments to its part 193 regulations
governing LNG facilities date to 2004.\1\ Current regulations rely
heavily on the 2001 edition of a consensus industry standard--National
Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 59A, ``Standard for the Production,
Storage, and Handling of Liquefied Natural Gas'' (NFPA 59A) \2\--that
has since been updated multiple times.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Research and Special Projects Administration, ``Pipeline
Safety: Liquefied Natural Gas Facilities; Clarifying and Updating
Safety Standards,'' 69 FR 11336 (Mar. 10, 2004).
\2\ PHMSA elsewhere in this ANPRM refers to specific editions of
NFPA 59A by adding the date of those editions as a suffix; by way of
example, ``NFPA 59A-2023'' refers to the 2023 edition of NFPA 59A.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the interim, the U.S. LNG industry has emerged as a driver of
the U.S. domestic economy, a lynchpin of international commerce, and a
critical instrument for advancing U.S. strategic interests. A recent
study predicts the U.S. LNG industry over the next 16 years will
contribute around $1.3 trillion to U.S. Gross Domestic Product--
including more than $2.5 trillion in total revenues for U.S.
businesses, $165 billion in Federal and State tax revenues, more than
$500 billion in labor income, and support an average of nearly a half-
million U.S. jobs annually.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Yergin et al., Major New U.S. Industry at a Crossroads: a
U.S. LNG Industry Impact Study--Phase 1 (Dec. 2024), available at
https://www.spglobal.com/en/research-insights/special-reports/major-new-us-industry-at-a-crossroads-us-lng-impact-study-phase-1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile, the United States is the largest international exporter
of LNG, is the source of roughly 22% of worldwide LNG supply, and is a
critical supplier to energy markets in Europe and Asia (the top
destinations for U.S. LNG exports). U.S. LNG exports play an outsized
role in advancing U.S. strategic interests, improving the nation's
trade balance, and supporting the energy needs of resource-constrained
strategic allies.
U.S. LNG facility technologies and operations have evolved
alongside the expansion and growing importance of the industry. When
PHMSA issued its last major updates to the part 193 regulations in
2004, most LNG facilities regulated by PHMSA were relatively small
facilities focused on the U.S. domestic market: LNG import facilities
and ``peak-shaving'' facilities supporting local gas distribution
companies. But even as those LNG facilities remain common, there is
increasing interest within the U.S. domestic LNG market for small-scale
or mobile or temporary LNG facilities supporting novel applications,
including (but not limited to): marine bunkering for fueling maritime
vessels; trucking fleet transportation fueling; alternative gas supply
for pipeline testing activity; off-grid electric power and heat
generation; and electric power continuity for data centers. At the same
time, the re-orientation of the U.S. LNG industry toward international
markets has resulted in the construction of a number of massive,
capital-intensive, and increasingly sophisticated LNG export terminals.
The LNG industry has compiled and memorialized the lessons learned and
best practices in designing, constructing, and operating each of these
types of LNG facilities over the last two decades in consensus industry
standards--culminating in the latest edition of NFPA 59A that was
published in 2023.
Recognizing that PHMSA regulations have not kept pace with
technological innovation and best practices in the LNG industry,
policymakers and other stakeholders have repeatedly called on PHMSA to
update its part 193 regulations. GAO in 2020 criticized PHMSA for not
having conducted a standards-specific review of its part 193
regulations for nearly two decades and recommended that PHMSA consider
incorporating by reference more recent editions of consensus industry
standards such as NFPA 59A.\4\ Section 27 of the Protecting our
Infrastructure of Pipelines and Enhancing Safety Act of 2016 (PIPES Act
of 2016, Pub. L. 114-183) directed PHMSA to update its minimum safety
standards for ``permanent, small scale'' LNG facilities.\5\
Subsequently, section 110 of the Protecting our Infrastructure of
Pipelines and Enhancing Safety Act of 2020 (PIPES Act of 2020, Pub. L.
116-2600) directed PHMSA to update the minimum safety standards by
December 27, 2023, to impose a risk-based regulatory approach for
large-scale LNG facilities, other than peak-shaving facilities.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ GAO, GAO-20-619, ``Natural Gas Exports: Updated Guidance and
Regulations Could Improve Facility Permitting Processes'' (Aug.
2020), available at https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-20-619.
\5\ 49 U.S.C. 60103 note.
\6\ 49 U.S.C. 60103 note.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Meanwhile, President Trump in his first term issued Executive Order
(E.O.) 13868 ``Promoting Energy Infrastructure and Economic Growth,''
directing PHMSA to issue a final rule updating its part 193 regulations
no later than May 2020.\7\ President Trump has in the current term
issued E.O. 14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,''
requiring agencies to identify opportunities to alleviate unnecessary
regulatory compliance burdens imposed on industry and the general
public, E.O. 14154, ``Unleashing American Energy,'' requiring agencies
to reduce undue burdens on the identification, development, or use of
domestic energy resources; and E.O. 14156, ``Declaring a National
Energy Emergency,'' to ensure the integrity and
[[Page 18951]]
expansion of U.S. energy infrastructure.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ E.O. 13868, ``Promoting Energy Infrastructure and Economic
Growth,'' 84 FR 15495 (Apr. 19, 2019).
\8\ E.O. 14192, ``Unleashing Prosperity Through Deregulation,''
90 FR 9065 (Feb. 6, 2025); E.O. 14152, ``Unleashing American
Energy,'' 90 FR 8353 (Jan. 29, 2025); E.O. 14156, ``Declaring a
National Energy Emergency,'' 90 FR 8433 (Jan. 29, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
PHMSA has also received petitions for rulemaking and other requests
from industry trade groups calling on PHMSA to update its part 193
regulations to address various alleged shortcomings, including
incorporating by reference more recent editions of NFPA 59A.
To develop an NPRM responding to the above recommendations and
mandates, PHMSA is soliciting stakeholder feedback on, among other
things: (1) the topics listed in section III below; (2) potential
amendments to its part 193 LNG facility requirements, including any
amendments identified by stakeholders; (3) the appropriateness of those
amendments for different types of LNG facilities (including export
terminals and peak-shaving facilities); (4) the incremental compliance
costs and benefits (including benefits pertaining to avoided compliance
costs, safety harms, and environmental harms) anticipated from those
amendments; and (5) the technical feasibility, reasonableness, cost-
effectiveness, and practicability of those potential amendments. PHMSA
plans to hold a public meeting in the near future to supplement or to
clarify the materials received in response to this ANPRM.
With respect to incremental cost and benefit information, PHMSA is
seeking per-unit, aggregate, and programmatic (both one-time
implementing and recurring) data. Explanation of the bases or
methodologies employed in generating cost and benefit data, including
data sources, assumptions (e.g., calculations), is valuable so that
PHMSA can explain the support for any estimates it is able to provide
that accompany a proposed rule, and other commenters may weigh in on
the validity and accuracy of the data. Please also identify the
baseline (e.g., a particular edition of a consensus industry standard
such as NFPA 59A; widespread voluntary operator practice; or
documentation of sample surveys and other operator level data or
information) from which those incremental costs and benefits arise.
When estimates are approximate or uncertain, consider using a range or
specifying the distribution in other ways.
When responding to a specific question below please note the topic
letter and question number in your comment. PHMSA will review and
evaluate all comments received, as well as late-filed comments to the
extent practicable.
III. Topics Under Consideration
A. PHMSA's enabling statute at 49 U.S.C. 60101(a)(14) defines an
LNG facility subject to PHMSA's authority as ``a gas pipeline facility
used for transporting or storing liquefied natural gas, or for
liquefied natural gas conversion, in interstate or foreign commerce.''
Excluded from this definition is ``any part of a structure or equipment
located in navigable waters.''
1. What regulatory amendments could improve or clarify the
applicability of PHMSA's part 193 regulations to LNG facilities under
its statutory authority? Should PHMSA's regulations be amended to
clarify the boundaries of its regulatory authority with respect to some
or all categories of LNG facilities? Which provisions (including
regulatory definitions) merit revision and how should they be modified?
2. For LNG facilities over which PHMSA shares regulatory authority
with another Federal agency, should PHMSA consider an LNG facility's
compliance with analogous regulatory requirements or guidance issued by
those other agencies in evaluating compliance with existing part 193
requirements or (should they be incorporated by reference into part 193
regulations) NFPA 59A-2023? Please identify those analogous
requirements of PHMSA and other Federal agencies.
B. The term ``LNG facility'' is defined in PHMSA's enabling statute
at 49 U.S.C. 60101(a)(14) and PHMSA implementing regulations at 49 CFR
193.2007. LNG facilities subject to part 193 requirements include
``baseload'' facilities, ``peak-shaver'' facilities, ``temporary'' or
``mobile'' LNG facilities, and ``satellite'' LNG facilities.
1. How many of each of these categories of LNG facilities are
projected to come into existence over the next two decades? What
function(s) do they each currently serve in the interstate natural gas
transportation system, and are there any emerging applications for
those facilities?
2. Are there material differences in the characteristics (e.g.,
capacity or size; physical processes) of and among those categories of
LNG facilities that merit distinguishable treatment under part 193?
What proportion of each category of LNG facilities are operated by
``small entities'' (small businesses, small organizations, or small
government jurisdictions) \9\ as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 6010 et seq.) and its implementing regulations?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ For example, ``small businesses'' include those operators
that employ fewer than 1500 employees or which have annual revenue
less than $40 million; ``small government jurisdictions'' are those
with a population of less than 50,000 persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. LNG facility reporting requirements are set forth at 49 CFR
193.2011.
1. Is there information required in the annual, incident, and
safety related condition reports required by PHMSA regulations with
limited or no safety value any of the categories of part 193-regulated
LNG facilities?
2. Is there information required in the reports that is duplicative
with the information required to be submitted to other State or Federal
regulatory authorities?
3. What incremental, per-unit costs and benefits may arise from
amending Sec. 193.2011 to clarify that safety-related condition
reporting would be required not only for ``in-service'' LNG facilities,
but also safety-related conditions that occur during commissioning and
initial start-up?
D. Current part 193 regulations incorporate much of NFPA 59A-2001's
provisions pertinent to LNG facility siting (Sec. 193.2051), design
(Sec. 193.2101(a)), construction (Sec. 193.2301), equipment (Sec.
193.2401), and fire protection (Sec. 193.2801).
1. Stakeholders have asserted that compliance with provisions of
NFPA 59A-2001 has become increasingly impracticable as vendors and the
industry itself employ more recent consensus industry standards in
their activities. Please describe noteworthy examples of tension
between NFPA 59A-2001 provisions referenced in current PHMSA
regulations and more recent consensus industry standards. What
incremental, per-unit costs (including, but not limited to, those
arising from personnel having to compare operator practices with
provisions of NFPA 59A-2001 referenced in current PHMSA regulations)
arise from operators having to navigate those tensions?
2. Should PHMSA consider a narrow rulemaking to update only the
NFPA 59A standard to the 2023 edition and pursuing a broader part 193
update afterward? What would the incremental costs and benefits be of
an update of the NFPA 59A standard to 2023?
3. To what extent do different categories of LNG facility operators
generally comply with other NFPA 59A-2001 provisions (e.g., those
governing operating and maintenance) not explicitly incorporated by
reference in part 193? With which of those NFPA 59A-2001 provisions do
different categories of LNG facility operators
[[Page 18952]]
generally comply? With which do they generally not comply?
4. To what extent do different categories of LNG facility operators
generally comply with provisions in more recent editions of NFPA 59A?
If so, which edition (e.g., NFPA 59A-2019 or NFPA 59A-2023) do
operators generally follow? Do operators generally conform their
activities to the entirety of those more recent editions, or do they
follow specific chapters or paragraphs of those more recent editions,
but not others? Do operators conform to more recent editions of NFPA
59A voluntarily or due to regulatory requirements imposed by another
State or Federal regulatory authority?
5. Part 193 regulations in several places broadly incorporate
pertinent NFPA 59A-2001 requirements provided they do not conflict with
specific part 193 provisions; such language appears in Subparts B
(``Siting''), C (``Design''), D (``Construction''), E (``Equipment''),
and I (``Fire Protection). What incremental, per-unit costs and
benefits would arise from substituting NFPA 59A-2023 provisions for the
current reference to NFPA 59A-2001 provisions (or superseding part 193
provisions) in each of those subparts of part 193? Should PHMSA exclude
some NFPA 59A-2023 provisions from incorporation by reference in those
subparts? To which categories of LNG facilities should any NFPA 59A-
2023 provisions pertinent to those subparts apply?
6. What incremental, per-unit costs and benefits would arise should
PHMSA propose to incorporate by reference the entirety of NFPA 59A-
2023? Please provide those estimated, incremental costs and benefits on
a per-chapter basis where possible, highlighting provisions in each
NFPA 59A-2023 chapter for which compliance would be particularly
burdensome or costly for particular categories of LNG facility
operators.
7. Which mandatory provisions of NFPA 59A-2023 should be made
permissive if incorporated into the PHMSA's part 193 regulations? Are
there certain mandatory elements of NFPA 59A-2023 that should remain
mandatory for some categories of LNG facilities but not others? Should
any non-mandatory provisions in NFPA 59A-2023 be mandatory, and what
incremental, per-unit costs and benefits would arise?
8. What incremental, per-unit costs and benefits would arise from
PHMSA integrating NFPA 59A-2023's references to ``hazardous fluid''
alongside references to ``LNG'' and ``natural gas'' throughout part
193?
9. What incremental, per-unit costs and benefits would arise in
connection with the incorporation by reference in part 193 of NFPA 59A-
2023 chapter 14 requirements governing ``mobile and temporary LNG
facilities''? Are there particular requirements in NFPA 59A-2023
chapter 14 that would entail noteworthy incremental, per-unit
compliance costs and benefits?
10. Are the criteria for ``stationary, small-scale LNG facilities''
in paragraph 17.1.2 of NFPA 59A-2023 appropriate? What would be the
incremental, per-unit costs and benefits of adopting these provisions
relative to current part 193 requirements (including referenced
provisions in NFPA 59A-2001)? Are there particular requirements in NFPA
59A-2023 pertinent to small-scale LNG facilities that would lead to
incremental, per-unit costs and benefits?
11. What would be the incremental, per-unit costs and benefits to
operators from installing dikes around American Society of Mechanical
Engineers (ASME)-compliant single-walled containers and membrane-
containment tank systems? How many single-walled ASME containers,
single-walled ASME vessels, and membrane-containment tank systems would
different categories of LNG facilities have on average?
12. What are the incremental, per-unit costs and benefits to
operators of different categories of LNG facilities from utilizing the
design spill parameters for pipe-in-pipe systems in Frequently Asked
Question (FAQ) #DS2(C) within PHMSA guidance for LNG facilities? \10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ PHMSA, ``LNG Plant Requirements: Frequently Asked
Questions'' (June 21, 2023), https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/2024-06/PHMSA-LNG-FAQs-2014-2023.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. What would be the initial and annual recurring incremental,
per-unit costs and benefits to operators from generation and
implementation of a robust mechanical and electrical lockout program in
different categories of LNG facilities?
14. Are there any PHMSA interpretations of its part 193 regulations
\11\ whose safety value does not justify any associated compliance
costs for each category of LNG facilities? If so, what are the
associated compliance costs? Are there any interpretations that merit
codification in part 193 regulations?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ PHMSA, ``Letters of Interpretation,'' https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/b/2/1 (last accessed Mar. 11,
2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
E. GAO in its August 2020 report identified consensus industry
standards other than NFPA 59A listed in Sec. 193.2013 and currently
incorporated by reference throughout PHMSA's part 193 regulations
meriting updating to more recent editions.
1. Please describe current operator compliance strategies with
respect to those standards. Do some or all operators generally comply
with the older editions currently referenced in part 193 regulations,
more recent editions, or both? If operators comply with a more recent
edition, which one--the latest edition or some intermediate edition? If
some operators but not others comply with each of those updated
standards, are there certain categories of LNG facilities that
generally comply with more recent standards?
2. To which edition of each standard should PHMSA update its part
193 regulations? Please provide technical, safety, and economic reasons
for updating part 193 regulations to reference a particular edition of
each standard.
3. Please estimate any incremental, per-unit costs and benefits
that would arise from updating each of those standards to a more recent
standard. Are there particular provisions of those standards that
entail noteworthy incremental costs and benefits?
4. Are there specific provisions or sections in those updated
editions that PHMSA should exclude when incorporating those standards
by reference with respect to some or all part 193-regulated LNG
facilities? Please provide the technical, safety, and economic reasons
for such an exclusion.
5. Are there any updates in development for consensus industry
standards currently incorporated by reference in part 193 regulations
that could merit inclusion in this rulemaking? Please provide the
technical, safety, and economic reasons for inclusion of those
forthcoming updates.
F. Are there any consensus industry standards pertinent to part
193-regulated LNG facilities that PHMSA should consider incorporating
by reference for the first time?
1. Please identify any such standards, noting the edition to be
incorporated by reference and any portions of those standards that
should be excluded from such incorporation, along with any technical,
safety, and economic justification.
2. Which provisions of part 193 should reference those standards?
3. Please estimate any incremental, per-unit costs and benefits
that would arise from incorporating by reference standard. Are there
particular provisions of those standards that entail noteworthy
incremental costs and benefits?
[[Page 18953]]
G. Section 110 of the PIPES Act of 2020 requires PHMSA to update
part 193 operating and maintenance standards for ``large-scale'' LNG
facilities (other than peak shaving facilities) to provide for a
``risk-based regulatory approach'' that PHMSA ensures will achieve an
equivalent level of safety to current, prescriptive part 193 operating
and maintenance standards.
1. What is the appropriate metric and threshold for determining
whether an LNG facility is a large-scale LNG facility and why is it
appropriate?
2. For which provisions of part 193, subparts F (Operations) and G
(Maintenance) should a risk-based regulatory approach provide an
alternative? What would be the incremental, per-unit cost benefits from
substitution of a risk-based regulatory approach, estimated for each of
those part 193, subparts F and G provisions?
3. Are there particular regulatory or conceptual frameworks or
consensus industry standards or protocols that are appropriate for use
in designing implementation plans for an alternative risk-based
regulatory approach? Are those frameworks or consensus industry
standards or protocols employed by ``large-scale LNG facilities--and if
so, how widely? Are such frameworks or standards employed voluntarily
or pursuant to legal requirements (e.g., the terms and conditions of a
FERC certificate of convenience and necessity)? Please provide
technical and safety reasons (to include pertinent data or studies) for
the appropriateness of those frameworks or industry standards.
4. What should be the relationship between an LNG facility
implementation plan and the Emergency Response Plan required under
section 3(a) of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717b-1)?
5. What should be the required content and information in LNG
facility implementation plans submitted to PHMSA? What would be the
incremental, per-unit unit cost for development of implementation
plans?
6. What would be the annual incremental, per-unit costs for
operators' execution of implementation plans? Please provide such an
estimate for each of the elements (e.g., employee and contractor
training; quality assurance programs) listed in section 110(c).
7. What processes should PHMSA employ in reviewing and evaluating
operator submissions? Are there models for those processes elsewhere in
current PHMSA regulations? If so, how are those models appropriate for
use in connection with LNG facility implementation plans? Are there
elements of those models that would be inappropriate for use in
connection with LNG facility implementation plans?
8. What factors should inform PHMSA's review of LNG facility
implementation plans?
H. Section II of this ANPRM identifies Executive Orders directing
PHMSA and other agencies to reduce regulatory burdens on the U.S.
energy industry.
1. Are there current aspects of PHMSA regulations that are
particularly burdensome on the ability of industry to operate LNG
facilities that PHMSA should consider amending or rescinding?
2. Are there areas that PHMSA could add regulatory text that would
reduce costs on operators without reducing safety outcomes?
3. Which aspects of current PHMSA regulations do operators find
outdated or unnecessary because industry practice or existing industry
guidelines are an equivalent or better standard both for cost savings
and safety outcomes?
4. How can PHMSA best design a rulemaking to update its part 193
regulations for LNG facilities to be deregulatory and lead to cost
savings for the industry?
Issued in Washington, DC, on April 28, 2025, under authority
delegated in 49 CFR 1.97.
Benjamin D. Kochman,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2025-07606 Filed 5-2-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P