DOE Proposes New Procedures for LNG Export Authorizations

May 30, 2014

Reading Time : 5 min

The lead agency for NEPA review is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) if the LNG terminal is located onshore or in state waters,4 or the Maritime Administration within the Department of Transportation (MARAD) if the LNG terminal is located offshore beyond state waters.5  Some have argued that, under Section 15 of the Natural Gas Act and FERC’s implementing regulations,6 DOE may be required to issue its determination within 90 days after FERC issues its final environmental document.  FERC’s authority to impose a 90-day deadline on DOE has never been litigated.  Assuming FERC could impose a 90-day deadline on DOE, and DOE missed the deadline, the applicant could ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to set “a reasonable schedule and deadline for the agency to act on remand.”7

DOE explained that issuance of conditional export authorizations pending completion of the NEPA process – in accordance with existing regulations that DOE issued in 1981 – may not be necessary under current market conditions.8  FERC has proceeded with the NEPA review process for many LNG terminals that have yet to receive conditional non-FTA authorizations from DOE. Similarly, many applicants have been willing to devote significant time and resources to the NEPA review process (which is site-specific) without having received conditional authorizations from DOE.     

DOE asserts that the proposed procedure will ensure that applications otherwise ready to proceed will not be held back by their position in the order of precedence:

[I]t is likely that if DOE were to continue on its current course in the published order of precedence, DOE would act on some applications that have yet to initiate NEPA review before acting on others that have already finished NEPA review. By removing the intermediate step of conditional decisions and setting the order of DOE decisionmaking based on readiness for final action, DOE will avoid the possibility of delayed action on applications that are otherwise ready to proceed.9 

By acting only on applications that have completed the NEPA review process, DOE will likely avoid devoting resources to applications that have little prospect of proceeding.

Analysis

As of March 24, 2014, there were twenty-six applications for authorization to export LNG to non-FTA countries pending before DOE, and the order in which DOE acts on those applications is critical to the project developers.  Given the continued development of other large LNG export projects globally, there may be a limited window of opportunity for U.S. companies to capture market share.  Moreover, there is lingering concern that, at some point in the future, DOE may impose cumulative limits on the total volume of LNG that can be exported from the U.S. to non-FTA destinations.  This concern is reinforced by DOE’s announcement, also made yesterday, that it intends to commission two new economic studies “to gain a better understanding of how potential U.S. LNG exports between 12 and 20 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) could affect the public interest.”  DOE stated that the cumulative impacts of U.S. LNG exports “will remain a key criterion” in future public interest determinations.  If DOE were to impose administrative limits on total U.S. exports, it is not clear whether or how the limits might apply to existing projects.  Under this scenario, new projects probably would face the highest risk. 

The practical effect of DOE’s proposed new procedures would be to force project developers to commit millions of dollars and significant management resources to complete the NEPA process without any assurance that they will be able to secure the essential DOE export authorization.  The increased risk and uncertainty may benefit projects that require only an environmental assessment rather than a full EIS, because they will be able to complete the NEPA process, and get their DOE permits, sooner, although only a few projects eligible for use of an environmental assessment remain.  Greenfield projects may now face even higher risks, because they typically would require full EIS processes. 

DOE states that its proposal, if adopted, would not affect the continued validity of conditional orders it already has issued.  “Further, the Department will continue to act on requests for conditional authorizations during the period when the procedures proposed in this notice are under consideration.”  It is not clear whether DOE will act on any request for a conditional authorization that is filed before a new rule becomes effective, but for some developers, there may be a perceived incentive to file soon. 

Finally, it is not clear whether or how this new proposal and the new economic studies will affect the Congressional debate on legislation to expedite the U.S. LNG export project approval process.  The Energy and Commerce Committee in the U.S. House of Representatives has passed legislation that would require DOE to approve or deny a permit application within 90 days after the close of public comment on the application.  Similar legislation is pending in the U.S. Senate, although it remains unclear when or if that chamber will take it up.  Initial reaction to the DOE announcement by House Republican leaders on the Energy and Commerce Committee has been negative, suggesting that these changes could slow down the approval process and discourage investment in potential projects.  In contrast, some key Democratic energy policy leaders in the Senate have indicated initial support for the proposal. 


1 On December 5, 2012, DOE published the order in which it intended to take up applications to export LNG to non-FTA countries.  The group of applications placed first included those for which the applicant had received approval from FERC to use the FERC pre-filing process on or before December 5, 2012. The group of applications placed second included those that had not yet initiated NEPA review but had already applied to DOE. The group placed third included all applicants that had yet to apply to DOE as of December 5, 2012, regardless of their status in the NEPA review process.

2 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.

3 10 C.F.R. § 1021.410, apps. A & B.

4 Section 3(e) of the NGA. 15 U.S.C. § 717b(e).

5 Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2012, Pub. L. No. 112-213, § 312, 126 Stat. 1569.  

6 Section 15 of the Natural Gas Act is implemented in 18 C.F.R. 157.22, which states:  “For an application under section 3 or 7 of the Natural Gas Act that requires a Federal authorization—i.e., a permit, special use authorization, certification, opinion, or other approval—from a Federal agency or officer, or State agency or officer acting pursuant to delegated Federal authority, a final decision on a request for a Federal authorization is due no later than 90 days after the Commission issues its final environmental document, unless a schedule is otherwise established by Federal law.”   

7 Section 19(d) of the NGA.  15 U.S.C. § 717r(d)(3).

8 DOE is not proposing to amend 10 C.F.R. § 590.402 and proposes to retain its discretion to issue conditional decisions in the future should conditions warrant.

9 DOE, Proposed Procedures for Liquefied Natural Gas Export Decisions 9 (May 29, 2014), available at http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/05/f16/FR%20Notice%20Proposed
%20Procedure%20Change.pdf

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

June 25, 2025

On June 4–5, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) hosted a commissioner-led technical conference to discuss resource adequacy challenges facing regional transmission organizations and independent system operators (RTO). The conference is a response to the growing concern that multiple RTO regions across the country may not have sufficient supply available in the coming years to meet demand due to resource retirements, the pace of new generation entry and higher load growth arising from the construction of data centers and reindustrialization.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

June 12, 2025

We are pleased to share the presentation slide deck and a recording of Akin’s recently presented webinar, “Navigating U.S. Policy Shifts in the Critical Minerals Sector.”

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

June 10, 2025

On June 4, 2025, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) announced revisions to its procedures for pipeline safety enforcement actions. The changes, outlined in two new policy memoranda from PHMSA’s Office of the Chief Counsel (PHC), aim to enhance due process protections for pipeline operators by clarifying how civil penalties are calculated and expanding the disclosure of agency records in enforcement proceedings.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

May 22, 2025

On May 19, 2025, the Department of Energy (DOE) finalized its 2024 LNG Export Study: Energy, Economic and Environmental Assessment of U.S. LNG Exports (the 2024 Study) through the release of a Response to Comments on the 2024 Study. The Response to Comments concludes that the 2024 Study, as augmented through public comments submitted on or before March 20, 2025, supporting a finding that liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports serve the public interest. With the comment process complete, DOE will move forward with final orders on pending applications to export LNG to non-free trade agreement (non-FTA) countries.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

May 20, 2025

On Thursday, May 15, the Senate Commerce, Science & Transportation Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Freight, Pipelines and Safety held a hearing titled, “Pipeline Safety Reauthorization: Ensuring the Safe and Efficient Movement of American Energy.” The hearing examined legislative priorities for reauthorizing the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

April 15, 2025

On April 9, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order (EO)1 directing several federal agencies and subagencies that regulate energy, environmental, and conservation matters,2 including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Department of Energy (DOE), to establish conditional sunset dates for “regulations governing energy production.” The stated objective of the EO is to require agencies to periodically reexamine their regulations to ensure that they continue to serve the public good. For FERC, the order covers regulations promulgated under the Federal Power Act (FPA), the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act (FUA)3, as amended, while DOE must consider regulations promulgated under the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct 1992), the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), as amended (collectively the Covered Regulations).4 To the extent the DOE has been directed to promulgate regulations under various sections of the NGA, FPA and FUA, and FERC has been directed to promulgate regulations specific to the statutes attributed to the DOE in the EO, the EO is silent. The EO expressly does not apply to those “regulatory permitting regimes authorized by statute.”5

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

April 10, 2025

On April 8, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order (EO) directing the Department of Energy (DOE) to take steps to expand the use of its emergency authority under Federal Power Act (FPA) Section 202(c) to require the retention of generation resources deemed necessary to maintain resource adequacy within at risk-regions of the bulk power system regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).1 The EO appears to envision a more active role for DOE in overseeing and supporting the resource adequacy of the grid that deviates from the historic use of Section 202(c) and touches on issues at the intersection of state and federal authority over resource planning.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

March 10, 2025

On March 5, 2025, the United States Department of Energy (DOE) approved Golden Pass LNG Terminal LLC’s (GPLNG) request to extend a deadline to begin exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) from its terminal facility currently under construction in Sabine Pass, Texas for 18 months, from September 30, 2025, to March 31, 2027 (the Order). The Order amends GPLNG’s two existing long-term orders authorizing the export of domestically produced LNG to countries with which the United States does and does not have free trade agreements (FTA).1  The Order does not amend the authorizations’ end date, which remains December 31, 2050. Under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), the DOE may authorize exports to non-FTA countries following completion of a “public interest” review, whereas exports to FTA countries are deemed to be in the public interest and the DOE is directed to issue authorizations without modification or delay.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.