1 / 43

The FERC Review Process and The Importance of Safe Pipeline and LNG Terminal Operation

Learn about the role of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in regulating the safe operation of pipelines and LNG terminals. Discover the importance of safety measures, compliance, and design standards in the energy industry.

starnesl
Télécharger la présentation

The FERC Review Process and The Importance of Safe Pipeline and LNG Terminal Operation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The FERC Review Process and The Importance of Safe Pipeline and LNG Terminal Operation NASFM Annual Meeting- July 8, 2005 Office of Energy Projects Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

  2. Who is FERC? • Independent Regulatory Commission • Five members • Appointed by the President • Confirmed by the Senate

  3. Natural gas – a critical source of energy and raw material • Vital to the US Economy • ¼ of U.S. energy requirements • environmental fuel of Choice and regulation • provides about 19% of electric generation • residential customers --60 million in 2001 • U.S. industries- over 40% of all primary energy • Industrial consumption, up by almost 48% from 1986 to 2001. Increase continues….. • Production U.S. lower-48 and non-Arctic Canada flat to declining, • LNG and Arctic gas will become the major supply source, providing 20-25% of U.S. demand by 2025. • And lastly……..

  4. Over 90 percent of the 185 GW of new electric generation since June 2001 is natural gas Source: Derived from Platts POWERmap

  5. Safety?– How Important? • Essential • Prevention is Possible • Compliance • Design Standards & Review • No Dig Rules • Testing and Repair Rules • Inspection

  6. FERC Existing and Proposed North American LNG Terminals CONSTRUCTED A. Everett, MA : 1.035 Bcfd (Tractebel - DOMAC) B. Cove Point, MD : 1.0 Bcfd (Dominion - Cove Point LNG) C. Elba Island, GA : 0.68 Bcfd (El Paso - Southern LNG) D. Lake Charles, LA : 1.0 Bcfd (Southern Union - Trunkline LNG) E. Gulf of Mexico: 0.5 Bcfd, (Gulf Gateway Energy Bridge - Excelerate Energy) APPROVED BY FERC 1. Lake Charles, LA: 1.1 Bcfd (Southern Union - Trunkline LNG) 2. Hackberry, LA : 1.5 Bcfd, (Sempra Energy) 3. Bahamas : 0.84 Bcfd, (AES Ocean Express)* 4. Bahamas : 0.83 Bcfd, (Calypso Tractebel)* 5. Freeport, TX : 1.5 Bcfd, (Cheniere/Freeport LNG Dev.) 6. Sabine, LA : 2.6 Bcfd (Cheniere LNG) 7. Elba Island, GA: 0.54 Bcfd (El Paso - Southern LNG) 8. Corpus Christi, TX: 2.6 Bcfd, (Cheniere LNG) 9. Corpus Christi, TX : 1.0 Bcfd (Vista Del Sol - ExxonMobil) 10. Fall River, MA : 0.8 Bcfd, (Weaver's Cove Energy/Hess LNG) 11. Sabine, TX : 1.0 Bcfd (Golden Pass - ExxonMobil) APPROVED BY MARAD/COAST GUARD 12. Port Pelican: 1.6 Bcfd, (Chevron Texaco) 13. Louisiana Offshore : 1.0 Bcfd (Gulf Landing - Shell) CANADIAN APPROVED TERMINALS 14. St. John, NB : 1.0 Bcfd, (Canaport - Irving Oil) 15. Point Tupper, NS 1.0 Bcf/d (Bear Head LNG - Anadarko) MEXICAN APPROVED TERMINALS 16. Altamira, Tamulipas : 0.7 Bcfd, (Shell/Total/Mitsui) 17. Baja California, MX : 1.0 Bcfd, (Sempra & Shell) 18. Baja California - Offshore : 1.4 Bcfd, (Chevron Texaco) PROPOSED TO FERC 19. Long Beach, CA : 0.7 Bcfd, (Mitsubishi/ConocoPhillips - Sound Energy Solutions) 20. Logan Township, NJ : 1.2 Bcfd (Crown Landing LNG - BP) 21. Bahamas : 0.5 Bcfd, (Seafarer - El Paso/FPL ) 22. Corpus Christi, TX: 1.0 Bcfd (Ingleside Energy - Occidental Energy Ventures) 23. Port Arthur, TX: 1.5 Bcfd (Sempra) 24. Cove Point, MD : 0.8 Bcfd (Dominion) 25. LI Sound, NY: 1.0 Bcfd (Broadwater Energy - TransCanada/Shell) 26.Pascagoula, MS: 1.0 Bcfd (Gulf LNG Energy LLC) 27. Bradwood, OR: 1.0 Bcfd (Northern Star LNG - Northern Star Natural Gas LLC) 28.Pascagoula, MS: 1.3 Bcfd (Casotte Landing - ChevronTexaco) 29. Cameron, LA: 3.3 Bcfd (Creole Trail LNG - Cheniere LNG) 30. Port Lavaca, TX: 1.0 Bcfd (Calhoun LNG - Gulf Coast LNG Partners) 31. Freeport, TX: 2.5 Bcfd, (Cheniere/Freeport LNG Dev. - Expansion) PROPOSED TO MARAD/COAST GUARD 33. California Offshore: 1.5 Bcfd (Cabrillo Port - BHP Billiton) 33. So. California Offshore : 0.5 Bcfd, (Crystal Energy) 34. Louisiana Offshore : 1.0 Bcfd (Main Pass McMoRan Exp.) 35. Gulf of Mexico: 1.0 Bcfd (Compass Port - ConocoPhillips) 36. Gulf of Mexico: 2.8 Bcfd (Pearl Crossing - ExxonMobil) 37. Gulf of Mexico: 1.5 Bcfd (Beacon Port Clean Energy Terminal - ConocoPhillips) 38. Offshore Boston, MA: 0.4 Bcfd (Neptune LNG - Tractebel) 39. Offshore Boston, MA: 0.8 Bcfd (Northeast Gateway - Excelerate Energy) 15 14 38 27 A 23 39 10 25 20 B 24 32 19 33 C 7 18 17 21 26 2 29 D 5,31 6 28 3 4 23 1 11 8 36 35 22 34 9 E 37 30 13 12 US Jurisdiction FERC US Coast Guard 16 As of June 30, 2005 * US pipeline approved; LNG terminal pending in Bahamas Office of Energy Projects

  7. FERC Potential North American LNG Terminals 51 50 POTENTIAL U.S. SITES IDENTIFIED BY PROJECT SPONSORS 40. Coos Bay, OR: 0.13 Bcfd, (Energy Projects Development) 41. Somerset, MA: 0.65 Bcfd (Somerset LNG) 42. California - Offshore: 0.75 Bcfd, (Chevron Texaco) 43. Pleasant Point, ME : 0.5 Bcf/d (Quoddy Bay, LLC) 44. St. Helens, OR: 0.7 Bcfd (Port Westward LNG LLC) 45. Galveston, TX: 1.2 Bcfd (Pelican Island - BP) 46. Philadelphia, PA: 0.6 Bcfd (Freedom Energy Center - PGW) 47. Astoria, OR: 1.0 Bcfd (Skipanon LNG - Calpine) POTENTIAL CANADIAN SITES IDENTIFIED BY PROJECT SPONSORS 48. Quebec City, QC : 0.5 Bcfd (Project Rabaska - Enbridge/Gaz Met/Gaz de France) 49. Rivière-du- Loup, QC: 0.5 Bcfd (Cacouna Energy - TransCanada/PetroCanada) 50. Kitimat, BC: 0.61 Bcfd (Galveston LNG) 51. Prince Rupert, BC: 0.30 Bcfd (WestPac Terminals) 52. Goldboro, NS 1.0 Bcfd (Keltic Petrochemicals) POTENTIAL MEXICAN SITES IDENTIFIED BY PROJECT SPONSORS 53. Lázaro Cárdenas, MX : 0.5 Bcfd(Tractebel/Repsol) 54. Puerto Libertad, MX: 1.3 Bcfd(Sonora Pacific LNG) 55. Offshore Gulf, MX: 1.0 Bcfd(Dorado - Tidelands) 56. Manzanillo, MX: 0.5 Bcfd 57. Topolobampo, MX: 0.5 Bcfd 49 48 52 43 47 44 41 40 46 42 54 45 57 55 US Jurisdiction FERC US Coast Guard 56 53 As of June 30, 2005 Office of Energy Projects

  8. LNG Review Process Notice of Application Safety & Engineering Interventions/ Protests Cryogenic Design & Safety Review Notice of Intent Technical Conference Scoping Meeting / Site Visit Waterway Suitability Assessment Data Requests, Analysis & Agency Coordination Issue DEIS Waterway Suitability Report Public Meeting / Comments USCG Letter of Recommendation (issued independently) Issue FEIS Authorization / Denial

  9. Pre-Filing Process –Increased Public Involvement • More interactive NEPA/permitting process, no shortcuts • Earlier, more direct interaction between FERC, other agencies, landowners • Time savings realized only if we are working together with stakeholders • FERC/Agency staff are advocates of the Process, not the Project! • Goal of “no surprises”

  10. Timelines: Traditional vs. Pre-Filing Process Develop Study Corridor File At FERC Announce Open Season Prepare Resource Reports Traditional - Applicant Conduct Scoping Issue Draft EIS Issue Final EIS Issue Order Traditional - FERC Announce Open Season Develop Study Corridor File At FERC Prepare Resource Reports NEPA Pre-Filing - Applicant Application Complete Approve PF Request, Conduct Scoping Review Draft Resource Reports & Prepare DEIS Issue Draft EIS Issue Final EIS Issue Order NEPA Pre-Filing - FERC 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (months)

  11. Opportunities for Public Involvement The FERC Process: • Issue Notice of the Application • Project Sponsor Sends Landowner Notification Package • Issue Notice of Intent to Prepare the NEPA Document (i.e., scoping) • Hold Scoping Meetings Public Input: • File an Intervention; register for e-subscription • Contact the project sponsor w/questions, concerns; contact FERC • Send letters expressing concerns about environmental impact • Attend scoping meetings

  12. Opportunities for Public Involvement The FERC Process: • Issue Notice of Availability of the DEIS • Hold Public Meetings on DEIS • Issue a Commission Order Public Input: • File comments on the adequacy of DEIS • Attend public meetings to give comments on DEIS • Interveners can file a request for Rehearing of a Commission Order

  13. Interagency Agreements Agreement for Environmental Review of Natural Gas Facilities • Signed May 2002 • Signed by 10 Federal agencies with jurisdiction or expertise • Establishes FERC as lead agency for environmental review • Ensures early participation and cooperation • Work with schedule set by FERC

  14. Interagency Agreements Agreement for LNG Safety and Security • Signed January 2004 by FERC, USCG, DOT • Defines roles and responsibilities • Establishes FERC as lead for environmental review • Stresses coordination, seamless review • Coordination continues from initial review through construction and operation • Includes terminal facilities and ships

  15. FERC Onshore Facility Safety • Compliance with 49 CFR Part 193 and NFPA 59A • Cryogenic Design and Technical Review – Report 13 • Exclusion Zones – Thermal Radiation and Flammable Vapor • Seismic design review Office of Energy Projects

  16. FERC Thermal Exclusion Zones Office of Energy Projects

  17. FERC Flammable Vapor Exclusion Zone Office of Energy Projects

  18. FERC Cryogenic Design Review • Process Flow and Material Balance • Piping and Instrumentation Diagrams • LNG Storage Tank Design • Hazard Detection and Emergency Shutdown Systems • Hazard Control – Fire Water, Dry Chemical, • High Expansion Foam • Technical Conference Office of Energy Projects

  19. FERC Marine Traffic and Vessel Safety • Compliance with 33 CFR Part 127 • Letter of Intent to initiate U.S. Coast Guard Letter of Recommendation • June 2005 NVIC • Marine Safety Analysis – Thermal Radiation and Flammable Vapor Hazards • Vessel Traffic Congestion Office of Energy Projects

  20. FERC ABSG Report – Models for CalculatingSite-Specific Hazards • Spill rates from cargo tank holes • Spread of unconfined pool on water • Vapor generation from spills on water • Thermal radiation from fires • Flammable vapor dispersion Office of Energy Projects

  21. FERC Sandia Report –Cargo Tank Breach Analysis Accidental breach scenario conclusions: • Groundings and low speed collisions - no cargo spill • High speed collisions - 0.5 to 1.5 m2 cargo tank hole Intentional breach scenario conclusions: • Cargo tanks holes range from 2 to 12 m2 • Nominal tank hole size of 5 – 7 m2 Office of Energy Projects

  22. FERC Sandia Report –General Hazard Analysis Zone 1 - significant impacts to public safety / property within 500 meters (1,640 feet) due to thermal hazards from a fire. Zone 2 – transition to less severe thermal hazard levels to public safety / property - 500 to 1,600 meters. Zone 3 - lower public health and safety impacts beyond 1,600 meters (5,250 feet). Large, unignited LNG vapor cloud unlikely, but could extend to 2,500 meters (8,200 feet). Office of Energy Projects

  23. FERC Application of ABSG and Sandia Reports to LNG Project Review • Cargo hole sizes/scenarios - Sandia Report • Site-specific hazard calculations - ABSG Report • Risk-based management options - Sandia Report Office of Energy Projects

  24. FERC Site-Specific HazardCalculations Office of Energy Projects

  25. FERC NVIC (June 14, 2005) • Waterway Suitability Assessment (WSA) • Validation of WSA through Port Committees (i.e. – Area Maritime Security Committee) • Waterway Suitability Report for DEIS • Security Resource Requirements for DEIS • Letter of Recommendation follows FEIS Office of Energy Projects

  26. Oversight of Construction • Company files monthly progress reports during construction. • Review of final design and changes by FERC. • Clearances for design/construction changes by Director of OEP. • Site inspections by FERC during major construction activity. • Authorization to commence service from Director of OEP.

  27. Monitoring Operations Reporting Requirements: • Semi-annual reports of plant activities, maintenance, and problems • Immediate notification of serious accidents Operating Inspections: • Inspect condition of all major plant equipment • Review plant operations; maintenance • Review changes in design; operations; safety systems • Inspect security measures • Update Cryogenic Design and Inspection Manual

  28. Opportunities For Fire Officials • Public Notices/Meetings • Cryogenic Design Reviews • NVIC • Emergency Response Plans • LNG Pilot Program • Pre-Filing Consultations • _______________________

  29. FERC Existing and Proposed North American LNG Terminals CONSTRUCTED A. Everett, MA : 1.035 Bcfd (Tractebel - DOMAC) B. Cove Point, MD : 1.0 Bcfd (Dominion - Cove Point LNG) C. Elba Island, GA : 0.68 Bcfd (El Paso - Southern LNG) D. Lake Charles, LA : 1.0 Bcfd (Southern Union - Trunkline LNG) E. Gulf of Mexico: 0.5 Bcfd, (Gulf Gateway Energy Bridge - Excelerate Energy) APPROVED BY FERC 1. Lake Charles, LA: 1.1 Bcfd (Southern Union - Trunkline LNG) 2. Hackberry, LA : 1.5 Bcfd, (Sempra Energy) 3. Bahamas : 0.84 Bcfd, (AES Ocean Express)* 4. Bahamas : 0.83 Bcfd, (Calypso Tractebel)* 5. Freeport, TX : 1.5 Bcfd, (Cheniere/Freeport LNG Dev.) 6. Sabine, LA : 2.6 Bcfd (Cheniere LNG) 7. Elba Island, GA: 0.54 Bcfd (El Paso - Southern LNG) 8. Corpus Christi, TX: 2.6 Bcfd, (Cheniere LNG) 9. Corpus Christi, TX : 1.0 Bcfd (Vista Del Sol - ExxonMobil) 10. Fall River, MA : 0.8 Bcfd, (Weaver's Cove Energy/Hess LNG) 11. Sabine, TX : 1.0 Bcfd (Golden Pass - ExxonMobil) APPROVED BY MARAD/COAST GUARD 12. Port Pelican: 1.6 Bcfd, (Chevron Texaco) 13. Louisiana Offshore : 1.0 Bcfd (Gulf Landing - Shell) CANADIAN APPROVED TERMINALS 14. St. John, NB : 1.0 Bcfd, (Canaport - Irving Oil) 15. Point Tupper, NS 1.0 Bcf/d (Bear Head LNG - Anadarko) MEXICAN APPROVED TERMINALS 16. Altamira, Tamulipas : 0.7 Bcfd, (Shell/Total/Mitsui) 17. Baja California, MX : 1.0 Bcfd, (Sempra & Shell) 18. Baja California - Offshore : 1.4 Bcfd, (Chevron Texaco) PROPOSED TO FERC 19. Long Beach, CA : 0.7 Bcfd, (Mitsubishi/ConocoPhillips - Sound Energy Solutions) 20. Logan Township, NJ : 1.2 Bcfd (Crown Landing LNG - BP) 21. Bahamas : 0.5 Bcfd, (Seafarer - El Paso/FPL ) 22. Corpus Christi, TX: 1.0 Bcfd (Ingleside Energy - Occidental Energy Ventures) 23. Port Arthur, TX: 1.5 Bcfd (Sempra) 24. Cove Point, MD : 0.8 Bcfd (Dominion) 25. LI Sound, NY: 1.0 Bcfd (Broadwater Energy - TransCanada/Shell) 26.Pascagoula, MS: 1.0 Bcfd (Gulf LNG Energy LLC) 27. Bradwood, OR: 1.0 Bcfd (Northern Star LNG - Northern Star Natural Gas LLC) 28.Pascagoula, MS: 1.3 Bcfd (Casotte Landing - ChevronTexaco) 29. Cameron, LA: 3.3 Bcfd (Creole Trail LNG - Cheniere LNG) 30. Port Lavaca, TX: 1.0 Bcfd (Calhoun LNG - Gulf Coast LNG Partners) 31. Freeport, TX: 2.5 Bcfd, (Cheniere/Freeport LNG Dev. - Expansion) PROPOSED TO MARAD/COAST GUARD 32. California Offshore: 1.5 Bcfd (Cabrillo Port - BHP Billiton) 33. So. California Offshore : 0.5 Bcfd, (Crystal Energy) 34. Louisiana Offshore : 1.0 Bcfd (Main Pass McMoRan Exp.) 35. Gulf of Mexico: 1.0 Bcfd (Compass Port - ConocoPhillips) 36. Gulf of Mexico: 2.8 Bcfd (Pearl Crossing - ExxonMobil) 37. Gulf of Mexico: 1.5 Bcfd (Beacon Port Clean Energy Terminal - ConocoPhillips) 38. Offshore Boston, MA: 0.4 Bcfd (Neptune LNG - Tractebel) 39. Offshore Boston, MA: 0.8 Bcfd (Northeast Gateway - Excelerate Energy) 15 14 38 27 A 23 39 10 25 20 B 24 32 19 33 C 7 18 17 21 26 2 29 D 5,31 6 28 3 4 23 1 11 8 36 35 34 9 22 E 37 30 13 12 US Jurisdiction FERC US Coast Guard 16 As of July 1, 2005 * US pipeline approved; LNG terminal pending in Bahamas Office of Energy Projects

  30. FERC Potential North American LNG Terminals 51 50 POTENTIAL U.S. SITES IDENTIFIED BY PROJECT SPONSORS 40. Coos Bay, OR: 0.13 Bcfd, (Energy Projects Development) 41. Somerset, MA: 0.65 Bcfd (Somerset LNG) 42. California - Offshore: 0.75 Bcfd, (Chevron Texaco) 43. Pleasant Point, ME : 0.5 Bcf/d (Quoddy Bay, LLC) 44. St. Helens, OR: 0.7 Bcfd (Port Westward LNG LLC) 45. Galveston, TX: 1.2 Bcfd (Pelican Island - BP) 46. Philadelphia, PA: 0.6 Bcfd (Freedom Energy Center - PGW) 47. Astoria, OR: 1.0 Bcfd (Skipanon LNG - Calpine) POTENTIAL CANADIAN SITES IDENTIFIED BY PROJECT SPONSORS 48. Quebec City, QC : 0.5 Bcfd (Project Rabaska - Enbridge/Gaz Met/Gaz de France) 49. Rivière-du- Loup, QC: 0.5 Bcfd (Cacouna Energy - TransCanada/PetroCanada) 50. Kitimat, BC: 0.61 Bcfd (Galveston LNG) 51. Prince Rupert, BC: 0.30 Bcfd (WestPac Terminals) 52. Goldboro, NS 1.0 Bcfd (Keltic Petrochemicals) POTENTIAL MEXICAN SITES IDENTIFIED BY PROJECT SPONSORS 53. Lázaro Cárdenas, MX : 0.5 Bcfd(Tractebel/Repsol) 54. Puerto Libertad, MX: 1.3 Bcfd(Sonora Pacific LNG) 55. Offshore Gulf, MX: 1.0 Bcfd(Dorado - Tidelands) 56. Manzanillo, MX: 0.5 Bcfd 57. Topolobampo, MX: 0.5 Bcfd 49 48 52 43 47 44 41 40 46 42 54 45 57 55 US Jurisdiction FERC US Coast Guard 56 53 As of July 1, 2005 Office of Energy Projects

  31. FERC LNG Onshore Project Status -Approved Projects* Applications Approved: Status of Construction • Trunkline, Lake Charles Expansion (CP02-60) #1 Underway, Service 4th Q ’05 • Sempra, Cameron LNG (CP02-374) #2 Underway, Amendment Authorized • AES, Ocean Express Pipeline (CP02-90) #3 Amendment Authorized • Tractebel, Calypso Pipeline (CP01-409) #4 Pending • Freeport LNG (CP03-75) #5 Construction Clearance Authorized * Status as of July 1, 2005 Office of Energy Projects

  32. FERC LNG Onshore Project Status -Approved Projects* Applications Approved: Status of Construction • Cheniere LNG - Sabine, LA (CP04-47) #6 Authorized • Southern LNG – Elba Island (CP02-380) #7 Underway • Cheniere, Corpus Christi (CP04-37) #8 Pending • Vista Del Sol, Corpus Christi (CP04-395) #9 Pending • Weaver’s Cove Energy, Fall River (CP04-36) #10 Pending • Exxon Mobil, Golden Pass (CP04-386) #11 Pending * Status as of July 1, 2005 Office of Energy Projects

  33. FERC Rejected LNG Onshore Projects Applications Rejected: • Keyspan, Providence (CP04-223) As of July 1, 2005 Office of Energy Projects

  34. FERC Onshore LNG Project Status* • Pre-Filing: • Broadwater, LI Sound (PF05-04) #25 • Gulf Energy, Pascagoula (PF05-05) #26 • Casotte Landing, Pascagoula (PF05-09) #28 • Creole Trail, Cameron (PF05-08) #29 • Northern Star, Bradwood (PF05-10) #27 * Status as of July 1, 2005 Office of Energy Projects

  35. FERC Onshore LNG Project Status* Applications Filed: • Working on DEIS • Sound Energy Solutions, Long Beach (PF03-6, CP04-58) #19 • Sempra, Port Arthur (PF04-11, CP05-83) #23 • Calhoun LNG, Port Lavaca (CP05-91) #30 • Dominion, Cove Point (PF04-15, CP05-130) #24 • Freeport Expansion (CP05-361) #31 * Status as of July 1, 2005 Office of Energy Projects

  36. FERC Onshore LNG Project Status* Applications Filed: • Working on FEIS • BP, Crown Landing (PF04-2, CP04-411) #20 • Ingleside/Occidental, Corpus Christi (CP05-11) #22 * Status as of July 1, 2005 Office of Energy Projects

  37. FERC LNG Project Status -Associated Pipelines* Filed at FERC : • El Paso, Seafarer (PF04-08, CP05-25) #21 • Excelerate Energy, Northeast Gateway (CP05-383) #39 Applications Filed: • Working on DEIS with USCG • Freeport-McMoran, Main Pass (CP04-68) #34 Working ON FEIS with USCG • Conoco Phillips, Compass Port (CP04-114) #35 • Exxon Mobil, Pearl Crossing (CP04-374) #36 * Status as of July 1, 2005 Office of Energy Projects

  38. North East LNG Terminals Legend: Existing Terminal Approved Terminal Proposed Terminal: Pre-Filing Proposed Terminal: Filed Working on DEIS Working on FEIS Potential Terminal Pleasant Point, ME (43) Everett, MA (A) Offshore Boston - Excelerate (39) Offshore Boston - Neptune (38) Providence, RI Rejected Fall River, MA (10) Somerset, MA (41) July 1, 2005

  39. Mid-Atlantic LNG Terminals Long Island Sound, NY (25) Philadelphia, PA (46) Logan Township, NJ (20) Legend: Existing Terminal Approved Terminal Proposed Terminal: Pre-Filing Proposed Terminal: Filed Working on DEIS Working on FEIS Potential Terminal Cove Point, MD (B/24) July 1, 2005

  40. South East LNG Terminals Legend: Existing Terminal Approved Terminal Proposed Terminal: Pre-Filing Proposed Terminal: Filed Working on DEIS Working on FEIS Potential Terminal Elba Island, GA (C/7) Bahamas (3/4/21) (Pipelines only) July 1, 2005

  41. Gulf Coast LNG Terminals Legend: Existing Terminal Approved Terminal Proposed Terminal: Pre-Filing Proposed Terminal: Filed Working on DEIS Working on FEIS Potential Terminal Pascagoula, MS (26/28) Lake Charles, LA (D/1) Port Arthur (23) Sabine Pass, LA (6) Cameron (29) Golden Pass (11) Hackberry (2) Galveston, TX (45) Freeport McMoran (34) Freeport, TX (5/31) Compass Port(35) Port Lavaca, TX (30) Gulf Landing (13) Corpus Christi, TX (8) Beacon Port (37) Pearl Crossing (36) Vista Del Sol (9) Gulf Gateway (E) Ingleside LNG (22) Port Pelican (12) July 1, 2005

  42. Southwest LNG Terminals Legend: Existing Terminal Approved Terminal Proposed Terminal: Pre-Filing Proposed Terminal: Filed Working on DEIS Working on FEIS Potential Terminal Long Beach, CA (19) California Offshore (32/33/42) BHP Billiton (32) Crystal Energy (33) July 1, 2005 Chevron Texaco (42)

  43. North West LNG Terminals Astoria, OR (47) Legend: Existing Terminal Approved Terminal Proposed Terminal: Pre-Filing Proposed Terminal: Filed Working on DEIS Working on FEIS Potential Terminal Bradwood, OR (27) St. Helens, OR (44) Coos Bay, OR (40) July 1, 2005 Office of Energy Projects 43

More Related