Motion by Sierra Club for Rehearing and For Stay Pendente Lite in CP11-72.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC and ) Docket No. CP11-72-000 Sabine Pass LNG, L.P. ) Motion for Rehearing and For Stay Pendente Lite Pursuant to Section 19(a) of the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S. C. 717r(a), and Rule 713 of the Rules of Practice of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), 18 C.F.R. 385.713, the Sierra Club hereby moves for rehearing of the Commission's Order Granting Section 3 Authorization 139 FERC 61,039, issued April 16, 2012 in the above-captioned matter, (Order) and Sierra Club seeks that the order and environmental assessment be withdrawn. Sierra Club relatedly moves for rehearing of FERCs May 10, 2012 Order in the above-captioned matter. These orders grant Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC and Sabine Pass LNG, L.P. (collectively Sabine Pass) authority to construct and operate a liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility in Sabine Pass, Louisiana. Sierra Club additionally moves for a stay of the April 16, 2012 and May 10, 2012 Orders pursuant to Section 19(c) of the Natural Gas Act, 15 U.S.C. 717r(c), and Rule 713(e) of FERCs Rules of Practice, 18 C.F.R. 385.713(e). All communications regarding this motion should be addressed to and served upon Nathan Matthews, Associate Attorney, and Kathleen Kurst, Paralegal, at Sierra Club, 85 2 nd St., Second Floor, San Francisco, California 94105. I. Statement of the Issues 1. The Order violates the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because FERC failed to analyze the projects indirect effect of inducing additional natural gas production and the environmental harms that will result from such production. FERC wrongly concluded that inducement of further production was not reasonably foreseeable. 40 C.F.R. 1508.8(b), Northern Plains Resource Council v. Surface Transportation Board, 668 F.3d 1067, 1081-82 (9th Cir. 2011), Potomac Alliance v. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comm'n, 682 F.2d 1030, 1035-36 (D.C. Cir. 1982), Scientists' Inst. for Pub. Info., Inc. v. Atomic Energy Comm'n, 481 F.2d 1079, 1096-97 (D.C. Cir. 1973). 2. The Order violates NEPA because FERC was required to prepare a full Environmental Impact Statement, rather than an Environmental Assessment, because the project will have significant impacts. 40 C.F.R. 1508.27, Klamath Siskiyou Wildlands Center v. 1 Boody, 468 F.3d 549, 561-62 (9th Cir. 2006), Blue Mountains Biodiversity Project v. Blackwood, 161 F.3d 1208, 1213-14 (9th Cir. 1998). These impacts include: a. The project will induce additional natural gas production, which will significantly affect the environment. The induced gas productions effects will include air emission of volatile organic compounds and sulfur dioxide, risks to ground ...