Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 213 / Monday, November 8, 2021 / Proposed Rules
lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS1

indirect GHG emissions associated with authorizing LNG by rail tank car, and the adequacy of emergency planning and response resources.27 PHMSA
sought to mitigate potential risks that were affected by those uncertainties by adopting certain requirements in the LNG by Rail final rule suggested by comments in the rulemaking docket.28
PHMSA also stated that it may adjust the HMRs regulatory framework governing rail tank car transportation of LNG as more information became available from its oversight activities.29
In fact, PHMSA had already begun work within the LNG Task Force on a comprehensive set of tasks directed toward refining PHMSAs knowledge of the risks of rail tank car transportation of LNG when it issued the LNG by Rail final rule. PHMSA also expected that it would have the benefit of the TRB
committees study on LNG by rail that Congress had directed for the express purpose of informing pertinent PHMSA
rulemakings. Lastly, PHMSA
understood it would have time to amend the HMR to integrate insights from those research activities, as it could take time to build a fleet of dedicated DOT113C120W9 tank cars, as stated in the RIA.30
Uncertainty regarding the potential benefits and safety and environmental risks of rail transportation of LNG under the HMR has persisted longer than PHMSA anticipated when it issued the LNG by Rail final rule, and has in fact increased as a result of the release of the TRB Phase I Report on June 15, 2021.
Uncertainty has persisted longer than expected because the COVID19 public health emergency has delayed the completion of research efforts to confirm and enhance PHMSA and FRAs knowledge of public safety and environmental risks attendant in rail tank car transportation of LNG. As explained in the TRB Phase I Report, several of the tasks that had been scheduled for completion by early 2021
will not be completed before late 2021
or 2022. Delivery of the TRB Phase I
Report was expected March 31, 2021, but the report was issued June 15, 2021.
Uncertainty also has increased because, while the TRB committee generally commended PHMSA and FRAs efforts under the LNG Task Force, 27 85 FR 45016 describing market demand uncertainties and 4501921 describing ongoing efforts to improve emergency planning and emergency response training and resources; Docket No. PHMSA201800250478 at 35 discussing uncertainties regarding GHG emissions impacts of that rulemaking.
28 85 FR 44996.
29 85 FR 44995.
30 Docket No. PHMSA20180025-0479 at 19.

VerDate Sep<11>2014

17:34 Nov 05, 2021

Jkt 256001

the TRB committee identified a number of information gaps in its and the LNG
Task Forces work that PHMSA was not aware of when it issued the LNG by Rail final rule. The gaps concern testing and the evaluation of public safety and environmental risks e.g., relating to full-scale impact testing, pool fire testing, worst-case analysis, and quantitative risk assessmentincluding testing on which PHMSA had relied in the LNG by Rail final rule.31 The data gaps identified by the TRB committee might have been resolved by this point in time, but they currently remain unresolved because of the disruptions caused by the COVID19 public health emergency. Further, the committee identified opportunities to improve the work of the LNG Task Force in understanding the risks to the public, workers, and the environment from rail tank car transportation of LNG, which potentially could further reduce uncertainties in the future and put PHMSA in a better position to evaluate risks as it moves forward with its companion rulemaking. The TRB
committee also emphasized the need for a robust understanding of the potential risks to public and worker safety arising from releases during loading, unloading, and transloading of LNG tank cars, and improved emergency planning and response training and resources, further underscoring the importance of PHMSA
taking additional time to ensure it fully understands and considers uncertainties.
The COVID19 public health emergency and other developments have also exacerbated uncertainties in nearand long-term market demand for rail transportation of LNG bounding the potential benefits and risks to public safety and the environment from the LNG by Rail final rule. The FEA
supporting the LNG by Rail final rule acknowledged the complexity of the economics driving whether demand for natural gas transport outside the pipeline network as LNG would be met through the transportation in tank cars under the LNG by Rail final rule or by alternatives one or more of highway transportation of LNG via MC338
insulated cargo tanks, rail transportation of LNG pursuant to SP, or rail transportation of LNG via portable tank pursuant to FRA approval.32 The COVID19 public health emergency has complicated that calculus further by causing economic disruption 31 See 85 FR 45006 full-scale impact testing, 45012 pool fire testing, and 45013 quantitative risk assessment.
32 Docket No. PHMSA201800250478 at 11, 2629.

PO 00000

Frm 00018

Fmt 4702

Sfmt 4702

61735

throughout the natural gas industry, impacting LNG infrastructure investment directly.33 Additionally, since the LNG by Rail final rule became effective, LNG markets have seen a number of announcements portending potentially fundamental supply and demand changes in international LNG
markets.34 Consequently, PHMSA
believes there is more uncertainty now than when the LNG by Rail final rule was issued regarding whether, when, and where rail tank car transport of LNGand by extension, any potential benefits and public safety/
environmental riskswill materialize.
PHMSA believes the increased uncertainty regarding the potential benefits and safety and environmental consequences of rail transportation of LNG pursuant to the LNG by Rail final rule warrants temporary suspension while PHMSA evaluates under RIN
2137AF54 whether and under what circumstances the HMR should allow rail transportation of LNG. As explained above, research activity that PHMSA
had expected would corroborate its understanding of the safety and environmental risks attendant in rail transportation of LNG has been delayed, while TRBs peer review of testing cited in the LNG by Rail final rule has raised additional questions.35 Uncertainties in 33 See, e.g., Kravtosova & DiSavinio, Reuters, LNG Investments Vanish in 2020 as Coronavirus Slashes Oil and Gas Prices, Sep. 9, 2020, https
www.reuters.com/article/us-lng-exports-investmentanalysis/lng-investments-vanish-in-2020-ascoronavirus-slashes-oil-and-gas-pricesidUSKBN2602PY.
34 See, e.g., DiSavinio, Reuters, For LNG
Developers, Another Year of Cancelled Projects May 18, 2021, https www.reuters.com/business/
energy/lng-developers-another-year-canceledprojects-2021-05-18/; Shiryaevskaya, Stapczynski &
Ratcliffe, Bloomberg, King of LNG Undercuts Rivals to Keep Dominating World Market May 19, 2021, https www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/
2021-05-19/king-of-lng-undercuts-rivals-in-bid-todominate-global-market; Stapczynski. Bloomberg, Global LNG Market Faces Shakeup from Japans Green Shift Jul. 26, 2021, https
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-26/
japan-s-green-ambitions-threaten-the-lng-market-ithelped-create.
35 PHMSA also notes that, even as there is less certainty regarding the potential benefits associated with the LNG by Rail final rule, there is greater scientific certainty that one of those potential benefits would entail significant environmental consequences. Specifically, the LNG by Rail final rule touted the potential for increased natural gas methane production as a potential benefit of that rulemaking. See, e.g., 85 FR 44995. However, more recent science has underscored the urgency of limiting such additional production for avoiding the worst consequences from anthropogenic climate change from indirect emissions associated with production and transportation activity. See, e.g., Sixth Assessment ReportWorking Group I:
Physical Science Basis at TS68, 611, 673 Aug.
2021, https www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/
FullReport last visited Aug. 19, 2021 explaining the urgency of reducing GHG emissionsin
E:FRFM08NOP1.SGM

Continued
08NOP1