Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description

Transcription

1 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Magnum Gas Storage Project Juab, Millard, and Utah Counties, Utah FERC Docket No. PF June 2009

2 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage Project Juab, Millard, and Utah Counties, Utah Prepared for: MAGNUM GAS STORAGE LLC 2150 South 1300 East, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, Utah Prepared by: Tetra Tech 136 East South Temple, Suite 910 Salt Lake City, Utah (801) Fax (801) Tetra Tech Project No June 2009

3 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS AMSL Bcf BGS BLM BMP CAT Crew DAQ DNR DOGM DOT DWR DWQ Above Mean Sea Level Billion Cubic Feet Below Ground Surface United States Bureau of Land Management Best Management Practices Caterpillar Model Construction spread Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Air Quality Utah Department of Natural Resources Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining United States Department of Transportation Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Quality E&SCP EPA FERC FERC Plan FERC Procedures FWS Goshen Interconnect GPM HDPE Header IPA KRG kv MGS MGS Affiliates MW Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan United States Environmental Protection Agency United States Federal Energy Regulatory Commission FERC s Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance Plan Wetland and Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife Resources Point of Header Interconnection with existing interstate gas transmission pipeline facilities near Goshen, Utah Gallons per Minute High Density Polyethylene Natural Gas Transmission Pipeline Header Intermountain Power Agency Kern River Gas Transmission Company Kilovolt Magnum Gas Storage LLC Affiliates of MGS Mega-watt Tetra Tech June 3, 2009 i

4 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC NGA NPDES NSA OEP Project Questar Questar LDC ROW SHPO SITLA SPCC Storage Site SWPPP UDOT UIC UPDES U.S. USACE USFS USFWS USGS Natural Gas Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Noise Sensitive Areas FERC Office of Energy Projects Magnum Gas Storage Project Questar Pipeline Company Questar Gas Company Right-of-way State Historical Preservation Office State of Utah, School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan 2,050 acre gas cavern and gas storage facilities site Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan Utah Department of Transportation Underground Injection Control Utah Pollution Discharge Elimination Systems United States United States Army Corps of Engineers United States Forest Service United States Fish and Wildlife Service United State Geological Survey WWEC BLM s proposed West-wide Energy Corridor Tetra Tech June 3, 2009 ii

5 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 RESOURCE REPORT 1 - GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION Proposed Project Facilities Purpose and Need Aboveground Facilities Cavern Locations Cavern Wells Water Supply Wells Pumping Facility Brine Management Compression Facility Meter and Regulator Stations and Interconnect Sites Temporary Fabrication Areas Utility Corridors Power Generation Operations and Control Facilities Pipeline Header Header Access Roads Land Requirements Aboveground Facilities inch Gas Pipeline Header Construction and Restoration Procedures Environmental Compliance, Training, and Inspection Aboveground Facilities Header Surveying Right of Way Clearing and Grading Stringing and Welding Trenching and Installation Backfilling Hydrostatic Testing Restoration and Cleanup Special Construction Procedures Rugged Topography Blasting Active Croplands Road Crossings Waterbody Crossings Wetlands Construction Workforce Construction Schedule Operation and Maintenance Plans Storage Site Header and 4-inch Gas Pipeline Future Plans and Abandonment Potential Future Plans Abandonment Tetra Tech June 3, 2009 iii

6 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC 1.6 Permits and Approvals Affected Landowners Non-jurisdictional Facilities LIST OF TABLES MINIMUM FILING REQUIREMENTS FOR RESOURCE REPORT Table Disturbed Acreage Table Road Crossing Construction Method by Milepost Pipeline Header Table Road Crossing Construction Method by Milepost 4-inch Gas Pipeline Table Waterbody Crossing Construction Method by Milepost Pipeline Header Table Waterbody Crossing Construction Method by Milepost 4-inch Gas Pipeline Table Construction Work Force Projection Table Preliminary Construction Schedule Table Magnum Gas Storage Permits and Approvals Table External Stakeholder Meetings Table Landowners along the Pipeline Header LIST OF FIGURES Figure General Project Location Figure Storage Site - Aerial Figure Storage Site - Topographic Figure Header Route Aerial Figure Header Route Topographic Figure Goshen Interconnection Meter Station Figure Goshen Interconnection Metering Facility Site Plan Figure Typical Pipeline Plan View Figure Typical Pipeline Construction Cross Section Figure Pipeline Construction Schematic Figure Typical Uncased Road Crossing Figure Typical Cased Road Crossing Figure Typical Details for Open Cut of Road and Water Crossing Figure Typical Details for Horizontal Bore of Road Crossing Figure Mainline Block Valve Note to FERC Staff: Some elements of the project are currently being refined. Notes on these items are provided in italics throughout the document. Tetra Tech June 3, 2009 iv

7 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC MINIMUM FILING REQUIREMENTS FOR RESOURCE REPORT 1 Minimum Requirements 1. Provide a detailed description and location map of the project facilities. ( (c)(1)) o All pipeline and aboveground facilities. o Support areas for construction or operation. o Facilities to be abandoned. Section Number 1.1 and Figures 1.1-1, 1.1-2, and Describe any non-jurisdictional facilities that would be built in association with the project. ( (c)(2)) Provide current original U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute-series topographic maps with mileposts showing the project facilities. ( (c)(3)) o All linear project elements, and label them. o All significant aboveground facilities, and label them. Figure and Figure Provide aerial images or photographs or alignment sheets based on these sources with mileposts showing the project facilities. ( (c)(3)) Figure and Figure N/A 5. Provide plot/site plans of compressor stations showing the location of the nearest noise-sensitive areas (NSA) within 1 mile. ( (c)(3, 4)) o No NSAs have been identified within 1 mile of the compressor station. N/A 6. Describe construction and restoration methods. ( (c)(6)) Identify the permits required for construction across surface waters. ( (c)(9)) 1.6 and Table Provide the names and address of all affected landowners and certify that all affected landowners will be notified as required in 157.6(d). ( (c)(10)). Provide an electronic copy directly to the environmental staff. 1.7 and Table Additional Information Often Missing and Resulting in Data Requests Describe all authorizations required to complete the proposed action and the status of applications for such authorizations. Provide plot/site plans of all other aboveground facilities that are not completely within the right-of-way. o All surface facilities are described and plot plans are provided. 1.6 and Table Figures 1.1-2, 1.1-3, and Tetra Tech June 3,

8 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Provide detailed typical construction right-of-way cross-section diagrams showing information such as widths and relative locations of existing rightsof-way, new permanent right-of-way and temporary construction right-ofway. 1.2, Figures 1.1-7, and Summarize the total acreage of land affected by construction and operation of the project. 1.2 and Table N/A If Resource Report 5, Socioeconomics is not provided, provide the start and end dates of construction, the number of pipeline spreads that would be used, and the workforce per spread. o Resource Report 5 will be included. Send two (2) additional copies of topographic maps and aerial images/photographs directly to the environmental staff of the Office of Energy Projects (OEP). N/A Provided with Submission Tetra Tech June 3,

9 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC 1.0 RESOURCE REPORT 1 - GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Magnum Gas Storage Project (Project) proposed by Magnum Gas Storage LLC (MGS) is an interstate natural gas storage facility and associated pipeline header (Header) to be located in central Utah. Figure shows the general location of the proposed Project, Figures and show an overview of the proposed Project facilities (Project Facilities) and Figures and show the proposed Header route. This Resource Report 1 presents an overview of the Project, land requirements, construction and restoration procedures, operation and maintenance plans, future plans and abandonment prospects, permits and approvals, affected landowners, and non-jurisdictional facilities. 1.1 Proposed Project Facilities The Project Facilities would incorporate facilities to be used for the storage of natural gas transported in interstate commerce, as well as facilities to be used to create underground storage caverns and to receive, compress, withdraw, dehydrate, and redeliver natural gas. The Project Facilities would be subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) of 1938, as amended. MGS is seeking a certificate of public convenience and necessity from FERC under Section 7(c) of the NGA authorizing MGS to construct the Project and to use the Project Facilities to offer natural gas storage services in interstate commerce. The Project would provide high-deliverability natural gas storage to markets in the Rocky Mountain area and the Western United States (U.S.). The services MGS plans to offer would support the continued expansion of both natural gas production and pipeline take-away capacity and meet a well-documented need for additional natural gas storage capacity and deliverability in the Western U.S. The central elements of the Project would be located within an approximately 2,050-acre site (Storage Site) comprised of private land owned by affiliates of MGS (MGS Affiliates) and public land owned by the State of Utah and administered through the School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) and leased by MGS Affiliates (Figure 1.1-1). The Storage Site is above a known, but thus far undeveloped, salt structure north of the town of Delta in Millard County, Utah. Other elements of the Project include the Header, which would connect the gas storage caverns with existing interstate gas transmission pipelines, as well as required mainline valves, metering and regulation facilities, cathodic protection facilities and appurtenances (discussed more fully below). Eight salt caverns would be created at the Storage Site and used for the storage of natural gas. The natural gas storage caverns would each have a working gas storage capacity of approximately eight billion cubic feet (5.6 Bcf), supported in each case by approximately 2.4 Bcf of base or pad gas. Natural gas would be routed to and from the central compression facility at the Storage Site by means of the Header to a point of interconnection with existing interstate gas transmission facilities owned by Kern River Gas Transmission Company (KRG), Questar Pipeline Company (Questar near Goshen, Utah (Goshen Interconnect). The 36-inch diameter, approximately 61.5-mile Header would originate at the northwest corner of Section 25, Township (T) 15 South (S) Range (R) 7 West (W) and traverse eastward along a 50-foot wide permanent utility corridor to the Goshen Interconnect. Based on the current operational and tariff constraints on the KRG and Questar interstate pipelines for delivery of firm forward haul capacity from the trading hub at Opal, Wyoming (Opal Hub), to the Header, the Tetra Tech June 3,

10 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Project would initially be capable of accepting natural gas at Opal for injections of up to 0.3 Bcf per day, and of supporting withdrawals of up to 0.5 Bcf per day (designed for roughly 6-9 inventory turns annually). Depending upon shipper interest, the Project has the potential to offer increased incremental injection and withdrawal capabilities to customers able to accept delivery at the Goshen Interconnect. The proposed Header ROW would cross Brush Wellman Road in Section 30, T15S R6W, and head north through SITLA and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands until it reaches the BLM s proposed West-wide Energy Corridor (WWEC) in Section 6, T15S R6W. The Header would then turn eastward following the WWEC and turning northeast in Section 4, T15S R5W. In Section 8, T14S R4W, the Header would leave the WWEC to cross the Union Pacific Railroad track and then US Highway 6. In Section 9, T14S R4W, the Header would continue to parallel the WWEC in a northeasterly direction. In Section 26, T13S R4W, the Header would leave the WWEC and travel eastward on BLM land until it reaches Utah State Highway 132 in Section 21, T13S R2W. The Header would parallel the northern side of Highway 132 to Section 14, T13S R2W, where it would follow the existing KRG pipeline northward from the KRG Dog Valley Tap to the Goshen Interconnect in Section 6, T10S R1W. The Goshen Interconnect is the closest access point for the Project to multiple intrastate and interstate pipelines and regional natural gas markets. Additional facilities that would be required for construction and operation of the Project include: Water supply wells and associated onsite water piping; Well pads and wells that would be used for the creation of natural gas storage caverns and the injection and withdrawal of natural gas; Pumping facilities for injection of fresh water to create caverns; Ponds for management of brines resulting from cavern creation; Surface facilities to support gas storage activities, including central compression and gas handling facilities, valving and dehydration facilities, storage tanks, and operations and control facilities; Gas meters and pressure regulators; Pig launchers and receivers; Natural gas-fired electric generators for onsite power needs; A 4-inch natural gas pipeline extending approximately 9.3 miles from the closest existing Questar LDC distribution main to the Storage Site to temporarily supply natural gas-fired electric generators and other on-site gas uses; and Access roads. These Project components are discussed further in Section Purpose and Need The purpose of the Project is to provide high-deliverability, multi-cycle underground natural gas storage capacity to markets throughout Utah and the Western U.S. that can be accessed through the KRG and Questar systems. The Project would provide greater system reliability, increased operating flexibility, and greater security of uninterrupted gas supply to the growing Tetra Tech June 3,

11 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC and increasingly volatile natural gas market in the Western U.S. The Project would enhance the existing natural gas infrastructure by providing traditional seasonal storage services as well as short-term cycling and balancing services to interstate pipelines, gas-fired electric generators, local distribution companies, and gas marketers. The Project would be centrally located between the Rocky Mountain production fields and the markets of California, Nevada, and Arizona. By accessing the existing and proposed interstate pipeline interconnections near Opal, Wyoming, the Project would also support natural gas markets in the Northwest and Midwest. Demand for natural gas storage services in these regional markets and throughout the U.S. demonstrates the need for the Project. This demand is discussed in greater detail in the accompanying Application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. The services to be provided by the Project would include: Firm storage; Interruptible storage; Parking and loaning of natural gas supplies; and Interruptible wheeling service. The Project would support deliveries of natural gas to meet peak demands and would allow flowing natural gas supply to be matched with varying levels of demand. The Project would enhance the ability of the interstate gas transmission infrastructure to handle fluctuations in hourly demand for natural gas imposed by dispatchable gas-fired electric generating facilities which are increasingly being used to backup and firm up intermittent wind and other renewable generation sources Aboveground Facilities The Storage Site is located in a rural, undeveloped, area adjacent to an existing 1,900 Megawatt (MW) coal-fired generating station owned by the Intermountain Power Agency (IPA). Topography in the region varies from approximately 4,600 feet above mean sea level (amsl) at the Storage Site to 6,290 feet amsl at the East Tintic Mountains. Although the Storage Site has very little topographic relief, the specific lands on which the Project would be located are at the bottom of a shallow basin. Any standing surface waters evaporate quickly in this high desert environment; nevertheless, the thin, largely clay-based soils within the Storage Site have become increasingly alkaline as the result of ongoing surface drainage from the surrounding lands. As a result, vegetation consists primarily of sparse greasewood (Sarcobatus spp.) communities. It is generally accepted that this area is unsuitable for agriculture and only marginally functional for grazing. The Storage Site would contain all Project Facilities related to the injection, storage and withdrawal of natural gas. Storage Site facilities would include: water supply wells, cavern creation wells and pumping facilities; brine management ponds; and gas dehydration, compression, operations and control facilities, and metering facilities (Figures and 1.1-3). These facilities are discussed further in the following sections. Tetra Tech June 3,

12 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Cavern Locations Within the Storage Site, MGS would develop eight caverns, with the casing shoe in each cavern located roughly 3,800 to 4,200 feet below ground surface (bgs). The salt structure in which the caverns would be created is located immediately beneath the Storage Site. The salt structure is overlain by unconsolidated alluvium to a depth of about 3,000 feet bgs. Each cavern would have a working gas storage capacity of 5.6 Bcf supported by approximately 2.4 Bcf of pad gas Cavern Wells Each cavern well would require creation of a graveled well pad approximately 400 feet by 400 feet, with a connecting graveled access road. Cavern wells would be constructed by drilling contractors and service providers licensed in the State of Utah and all work would be conducted in accordance with all applicable bonding and drilling requirements of the Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Water Quality (DWQ). The cavern wells would be permitted by the DWQ as Class III underground injection control (UIC) wells. After each well has been successfully completed and the wellhead assembly and connecting pipelines and controls have been installed and tested, all debris, cuttings and drilling fluids would be disposed of on-site or transported to licensed disposal facilities as required by applicable local, state and federal regulations. A gated perimeter security fence would be constructed around the pads Water Supply Wells Up to six water supply wells would be drilled onsite to provide water for creation of the caverns using solution mining techniques. Five of the wells would be new wells projected to operate at a flow rate of approximately 1,000 gallons per minute (gpm). In addition, the exploratory well drilled under a temporary exemption granted by FERC in Docket No. CP would be converted for water supply with a flow rate of approximately 800 gpm. All water supply wells would be constructed by drilling contractors and service providers licensed in the State of Utah and all work would be conducted in accordance with all applicable bonding and drilling requirements of the Utah Department of Natural Resources, Division of Water Rights (DWR). The Storage Site is located within the Sevier River drainage basin. This is a closed basin with no outlet. Existing water rights would be leased and transferred to the Storage Site through temporary changes in the point of diversion, and the place and nature of use. Ownership of the water rights would not change hands under these leases. Leased water no longer needed by the Project would be released to the owner, who would also retain the right to recall water for personal use. Upon termination of the Water Leases, the temporary change applications would be allowed to lapse. The owner of the water right would then be able resume all originally authorized uses at the original points of diversion and places of use Pumping Facility The Pumping Facility would include electric motor driven booster and high pressure pumps, nitrogen handling equipment, and ancillary equipment such as storage ponds or tanks, filters, piping, and controls. The total capacity of the Pumping Facility would be 5,000 to 6,000 gpm. Each cavern would be created by a process of solution mining, in which fresh water is injected in a controlled manner. The fresh water is used to dissolve a cavity in the salt mass. A nitrogen blanket would be used during the solution mining of the cavern to protect the integrity of the casing shoe and control the development of the cavern. Nitrogen would be provided by a third Tetra Tech June 3,

13 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC party supplier. Natural gas would be utilized as an alternative to nitrogen in cavern expansion operations. MGS is currently engaged in subsurface modeling; more information on the solution mining process will be provided in the next draft of this report and Resource Report 6, Geological Resources Brine Management The brine resulting from the dissolution of salt during creation of the storage caverns would be returned to the surface by the pressure imposed by injection of fresh water or, eventually, by injection of natural gas. Produced brine would be transported to lined surface ponds extending across approximately 640 acres. The brine would be managed into a dry consolidated mass by evaporation. The brine ponds would be monitored for leaking and would be permitted by DWR in accordance with Utah dam safety requirements and other applicable regulations. Construction of the brine ponds would require grading and earth work. This would include clearing and grading of site vegetation and compacting soils to the design specifications. Erosion control devices would be installed around the perimeter of the ponds at locations where run-off may be directed. Piping from the Pumping Facility to the brine ponds would be installed and tested. Other appurtenances necessary for the operation of the brine ponds would be constructed and installed. Electrical cable serving the brine pond pumps and other equipment would be installed through aboveground transmission lines and underground conduits. Instrument panels and control systems would also be installed at the Pumping Facility Compression Facility The central gas compression facility would include eight Caterpillar Model (CAT) G3616 compressors, two dehydration units, separators, and ancillary equipment. The compressors would be enclosed by a rectangular building approximately 275 feet by 75 feet with an eave height of 28 feet. The dehydration facility would be enclosed by a building approximately100 feet by 50 feet with an eave height of 15 feet. Piping between the compression facility and the gas storage caverns would be 24-inches or less in diameter, and piping between the compression facility and the Header would be 36-inches in diameter. The compression facility would include pig launchers and receivers for the 36-inch gas pipelines. Various storage tanks would be located within the compression facility area to contain virgin and spent coolant, virgin and spent lube oil, pipeline liquids, condensate, and other produced liquids. All storage tanks would be located within secondary containment Meter and Regulator Stations and Interconnect Sites The Header would include two metering stations, one located at the Storage Site and the other located at the Goshen Interconnect. The metering station located at the Goshen Interconnect (Figure 1.1-7), would be a permanent facility occupying 0.9-acre with two metering systems to receive/deliver gas from/to both the KRG and Questar pipelines. Each system would have two filters, two 12-inch ultrasonic flow meters, and regulation and control/monitoring equipment, and a pig launcher and receiver. The metering facility located at the Storage Site would be constructed within the compression area pad and would replicate the metering station at the Goshen Interconnect. Tetra Tech June 3,

14 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Temporary Fabrication Areas One 17-acre temporary fabrication area located at the Goshen Interconnect would be used to stage equipment and materials related to construction of the metering station and Header (Figure 1.1-6). Two temporary fabrication areas would be located within the Storage Site. One of the areas would be located within the warehouse maintenance area to support the construction of the gas handling area and the second would be located within the footprint of one of the brine management ponds to support pipeline construction. These areas would also provide centralized locations for field construction offices, material storage, and off-road parking for workers associated with construction of the Project Utility Corridors Utilities for operation of the Pumping Facility and gas handling facilities would be placed within a 300-foot wide utility corridor that would run between the well pads, the Pumping Facility, the compression area and the brine management ponds. Piping for fresh water, brine, nitrogen, and natural gas, as well as conduits for electrical supply and control wiring would be constructed in this corridor. Wherever possible, the corridor would also include an access road. Piping between the water supply wells, Pumping Facility, storage caverns, and brine management ponds would be 12 inches in diameter. These pipelines would be buried and covered with a minimum of 3 feet of surface material to protect against freezing and to minimize permanently disturbed areas Power Generation Eight CAT G3520C 2.0 MW natural gas-fired generators would provide on-site power for Project construction and operation. The power generation equipment would be housed in a 150 feet by 75 feet generator building located within the compression area. Gas supply to the generators would be provided by a new 4-inch high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipeline connection to the closest gas distribution main which is owned and operated by Questar LDC. The proposed point of interconnection is located approximately 9.3 miles east of the Storage Site adjacent to State Highway 6. The pipeline would be placed in the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) ROW on the south side of Brush Wellman Road. The permanent ROW for the 4-inch gas pipeline would be 25 feet wide. Twenty-five feet of temporary work space (12.5 feet on each side of the permanent ROW) would be needed for construction-related activities. Additional temporary work space for special construction activities would also be required adjacent to the road and railroad crossings Operations and Control Facilities Operations and control facilities would be located at the Storage Site. An administrative office would be located near the site entrance at Jones Road. There would be a process control office located within the compression area to control gas flow and processing. A second process control office would be located at the Pumping Facility to control cavern creation processes Pipeline Header The 61.5-mile Header would extend from the Storage Site to the Goshen Interconnect, generally following the existing WWEC, State Highway 132, and the existing KRG pipeline (Figure and Figure 1.1-5). The Header would be 36 inches in diameter and would be constructed of carbon steel. The Header would be capable of bi-directional operation and would have a Tetra Tech June 3,

15 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC maximum operating pressure of 1,480 psi. The Header would have three block valves located at approximately 15 mile intervals. Thirty eight percent (38%) of the temporary construction ROW for the Header would be located on private land, fifty five percent (55%) would cross lands administered by the BLM, and eight percent (8%) would traverse SITLA lands. Thirty four percent (34%) of the permanent ROW would be located on private land, sixty percent (60%) would be on lands administered by the BLM, and six percent (6%) would be on SITLA lands. The permanent ROW for the Header would be 50 feet wide. Fifty feet of temporary work space (twenty-five feet on each side of the permanent ROW) would be needed for construction-related activities. Additional temporary work space for special construction activities would also be required adjacent to the road and railroad crossings. Typical plan view layouts of the pipeline ROW are presented on Figures and Construction alignment sheets for the transmission pipeline will be included once the pipeline alignment is finalized Header Access Roads There are currently roads in place for maintenance of the existing KRG natural gas pipeline. Where possible, other existing service roads and other existing private and county roads would be used to access the Header ROW. Some of the existing narrow dirt roads may need to be modified to allow pipe haul trucks. No existing paved roads would be upgraded. [To be verified during detailed pipeline engineering.] 1.2 Land Requirements The total area that would be permanently disturbed by the proposed Project is 796 acres, as summarized on Table The construction of all aspects of the Project, including the pipeline, would result in additional temporary disturbance of 997 acres Aboveground Facilities All land requirements for the aboveground facilities are included on Table This includes both temporary and permanently disturbed area in acres for the Storage Site, Header and 4- inch gas pipeline inch Gas Pipeline The construction of the 4-inch gas pipeline would result in 50 acres of temporary disturbance and no permanent disturbance. Disturbance during construction would be minimized by placing the pipe from the existing roadways. Following construction, if necessary, the temporarily disturbed area would be restored (graded or ground cover). Therefore all disturbance for the temporary construction ROW and permanent ROW is considered temporary. All land requirements for the 4-inch gas pipeline facilities are included in Table Header The construction of the Header would result in 795 acres of temporary disturbance and 1 acre of permanent disturbance for the meter station (0.9 acre) and the three block valves (0.1 acre, total) (Table 1.2-1). Following construction, if necessary, the temporarily disturbed area would be restored (graded or ground cover). Therefore all disturbance for the temporary construction Tetra Tech June 3,

16 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC ROW and permanent ROW is considered temporary. All land requirements for the Header facilities are included in Table The following figures demonstrate the representative pipeline standards: Figure Pipeline Construction Schematic Figure Typical Uncased Road Crossing Figure Typical Cased Road Crossing Figure Typical Details for Open Cut of Road and Water Crossing Figure Typical Details for Horizontal Bore of Road Crossing Figure Mainline Block Valve 1.3 Construction and Restoration Procedures The Project would be constructed in compliance with applicable federal regulations and guidelines, the conditions of required federal, state and local permits, and MGS s written construction specifications. MGS is committed to, and would effectively communicate to its contractors, the objective of minimizing the potential for erosion and sedimentation throughout all phases of construction and restoring all disturbed areas to the extent commercially reasonable. These objectives would be met by employing erosion and sedimentation control measures in accordance with the FERC s Upland Erosion Control, Revegetation, and Maintenance Plan (FERC Plan) and Wetland and Waterbody Construction and Mitigation Procedures (FERC Procedures). In general, these control measures are designed to minimize erosion and sedimentation by: Minimizing the quantity and duration of soil exposure; Protecting critical areas during construction by redirecting and reducing the velocity of runoff; Installing and maintaining erosion and sedimentation control measures during construction; Establishing ground cover as soon as possible following final grading; and Inspecting the ROW and other disturbed areas and maintaining erosion and sedimentation controls as necessary until final stabilization is achieved. Dust mitigation measures would be implemented as necessary. The primary measure to minimize dust would be soil dampening during dry conditions. Special consideration would be given to roadway entrance areas where clear visibility is essential. MGS does not propose any exceptions to the FERC Plan. The Header would be constructed in accordance with applicable federal and state regulations and the specific requirements of the permits issued for the Project. To ensure that construction would comply with the mitigation measures identified in the Resource Reports, FERC's evaluation of the Project, and the requirements of other federal and state permitting agencies, MGS would include implementation details in its construction Tetra Tech June 3,

17 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC drawings and specifications, and would draft a detailed Implementation Plan to be submitted to the Director of the FERC Office of Energy Projects (OEP) for approval. Contractors selected to perform work on the Project would receive copies of specifications and a Construction Drawing Package containing drawings designated as Approved for Construction. For those mitigation measures that address pre-construction surveys and clearances, MGS would include references to pertinent correspondence and documentation in the Construction Drawing Package. For those mitigation measures that address permit conditions imposed by federal, state, and local agencies, MGS would include copies of permits and related drawings in the Construction Drawing Package. For those mitigation measures that, in part, address postconstruction requirements, MGS would include instructions and documentation (e.g., a Maintenance Plan) to be provided to operating personnel following the completion of construction. The Maintenance Plan would include copies of pertinent permits with particular reference to long-term permit conditions and reporting requirements. To support the application of proper field construction methods, MGS would prepare a projectspecific Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater discharge permitting requirements, implementing Best Management Practices (BMPs) as recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the guidance manual, Stormwater Management for Construction Activities, Developing Pollution Prevention Plans and Best Management Practices (1992). The SWPPP would also satisfy the requirements for erosion and sedimentation control planning, and provide specifications for hazardous materials transportation, handling, storage, spill prevention, and spill response in a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan (SPCC) attachment, which would be prepared prior to construction. The SWPPP would also incorporate state and county requirements and provisions of the FERC Plan, with any FERC-approved exceptions. MGS and the construction contractors would jointly develop the SWPPP to ensure the proposed controls adequately address the materials to be used and the proposed construction methods, and to ensure complete contractor acceptance of the plans Environmental Compliance, Training, and Inspection MGS would provide its environmental inspectors with training in proper field implementation of the FERC Plan and Procedures, FERC Certificate, Implementation Plan, Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (E&SCP), SWPPP, the SPCC Plan, hazardous materials management, and other mitigation measures. Although this training would focus on proper field implementation, it would also include instructions on the implementation of other mitigation measures, as appropriate. In addition, MGS would provide training to construction personnel prior to beginning construction activities to make them aware of environmental requirements. Once construction is underway, MGS s Environmental Inspector (see below) would provide periodic follow-up training as necessary for newly-assigned personnel. MGS would employ a full-time Environmental Inspector who would report directly to MGS management and would have environmentally-related stop-work authority. The Environmental Inspector's duties would be consistent with those contained in Paragraph li.b (Responsibilities of Environmental Inspectors) of the FERC Plan and would include ensuring compliance with environmental conditions attached to the FERC Certificate, project environmental designs and specifications, and environmental conditions attached to other permits or authorizations. The Environmental Inspector would be present throughout construction and restoration of the Tetra Tech June 3,

18 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Header, the 4-inch gas pipeline, and the aboveground facilities at the Storage Site and would have the authority to enforce permit and FERC Certificate conditions. The responsibilities of the Environmental Inspector during construction would include the following: Coordinating and/or performing updated environmental training as new contracted personnel begin working on project construction; Ensuring that construction activities occur within authorized works areas; Documenting activities with daily logs, weekly reports, and other required documentation; Educating other inspectors on task-specific environmental concerns; Providing notification of construction activities to agencies as required in permits; and Ensuring the Contractors conduct training for spill prevention and impact minimization. At least one full-time Environmental Inspector would be on the construction project per construction spread in addition to the Chief Inspector, specific construction discipline inspectors, and safety inspectors. The Environmental Inspector would monitor construction activities to ensure compliance with environmental standards and to resolve construction-related environmental issues. The Environmental Inspector would report directly to MGS management which would be responsible for environmental compliance Aboveground Facilities A description of the aboveground facilities to be constructed is included in Section Construction of the above ground facilities at the Storage Site would involve clearing the active construction area of vegetation, and grading and compacting to the design-required elevations. The Storage Site would be perimeter fenced and gated for security and safety during construction. Electrical power, potable water, sanitation and communication service would be established at the site as soon as possible. Erosion control devices would be installed after clearing is completed, but prior to grading to minimize soil runoff and sedimentation into adjacent roads or other sensitive areas. Foundations would be designed and constructed in accordance with specifications based on detailed geotechnical soils investigations. Large pieces of equipment would be assembled and mounted on their respective foundations. Other buildings and appurtenances necessary for the operation of the Storage Site would be constructed and installed. Electrical cable would be installed through aboveground transmission, underground conduits, and/or cable trays. Instrument panels and control systems would be installed and circuits checked. All piping at the Storage Site would be tested. Following construction, debris would be removed. Each temporary fabrication area would be restored, graded, and/or provided with permanent ground cover. The Storage Site would be graded to final contours and permanent ground covers would be established. The main entrance to the site, access roads, and the parking area in the storage site would be dress- Tetra Tech June 3,

19 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC finished. Permanent ground cover, such as gravel, would be spread around equipment areas, aboveground pipe ways and valve areas, and lightly trafficked areas. Non-traffic areas would be sculpted to a relatively natural contour. Outside lighting would be installed as needed. Drilling procedures prescribed by the DWR, DWQ, and DOGM, would be followed, as applicable. These procedures are designed to limit and mitigate impacts to the environment. During well drilling operations, self- contained mud circulating systems with reserve pits would be installed to capture drilling fluids. Because of the practical difficulty of re-establishing vegetative cover in alkaline soils in a desert environment, temporary disturbance areas would be minimized wherever possible. Disturbed areas would be landscaped, graveled, or otherwise improved to suit the future uses of the Storage Site, but reclamation to the land s original state would not be performed. Temporary fabrication areas are planned within the footprints of the future warehouse and a future brine management pond to mitigate the need for additional restoration Header Construction of the Header would follow industry-accepted practices and procedures, as described below. Standard pipeline construction procedures are presented in chronological order in Sections to followed by a discussion of special construction procedures in Section Figure summarizes the pipeline construction graphically. Tables 1.3-1, 1.3-2, and list the anticipated special construction techniques by milepost Surveying Right of Way The Header alignment would be surveyed and identified prior to beginning construction activity. Alignment identification would include staking the centerline of the pipeline, foreign line crossings, and the limits of construction work areas. Sensitive areas would also be flagged at this time Clearing and Grading Vegetation would be cut and cleared from the construction ROW and additional temporary workspaces. Generally, shrubs would be cut flush with the surface of the ground with the root structure left in place, except where necessary to create a safe and level work surface. After clearing, the sloped portions of the construction ROW would be graded with a bulldozer or similar equipment as necessary to create a safe and level work surface. Sediment-control devices, such as silt fence and straw bales, would be installed as necessary at wetlands, water bodies, roads and other areas during clearing and grading, in accordance with the FERC Plan. Topsoil segregation would also be performed where required under the FERC Plan Stringing and Welding After preparation of the construction ROW, pipe and associated support timbers (skids) would arrive on the job site by highway trucks, along with pipe handling equipment in the form of crawler mounted side-boom tractors and hydraulic cranes. Where possible, the trucks would travel down the ROW, being off-loaded as they travel, placing joints of pipe end-to-end supported by skids with pad material to protect the coating. When emptied of their cargo, trucks would either turn around in areas provided, or would proceed to the next public road crossing for egress. Mud on the vehicle tires, wheels and undercarriage, which could be dropped in transit on public roads, would be removed before the vehicles leave the ROW. Tetra Tech June 3,

20 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Pipe joints would be placed along the ROW parallel to the trench and bent to conform to the trench contour. Pipe ends (bevels) would be cleaned prior to welding by means of filing or wire brushing to remove rust, scale, and dirt. A side-boom crawler tractor or other suitable hoisting machine would lift each joint of pipe to abut and align with the bevel of the previous joint, and a suitable space for welding would be attained. Welders qualified by testing to the appropriate welding code would then apply an initial pass of weld, progressing to the next aligned joint as the first weld pass is applied. Subsequent welding passes would be applied by other welders following the initial pass until satisfactory weld metal has been applied. Each pass, including the final pass, would be mechanically cleaned of slag by wire brush and/or grinding disc, and the welds would be radiographically or ultrasonically inspected for defects. Welds found to be defective beyond code limits would be repaired by grinding out the defect and re-welding the objectionable area, or they would be cut out and re-welded. Welding would be performed in accordance with the American Petroleum Institute Standard Number 1104, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) pipeline safety regulations at 49 C.F.R. Part 192 (2008). Completed welds would be visually and radiographically or ultrasonically inspected in accordance with the same standards to determine the integrity of the welds. After passing quality control checks, the weld areas (field joints) would be coated with either a powdered epoxy applied to the induction heated weld areas, or be coated with a mastic sleeve which, when heated, would shrink to form a snug fit on the pipe, and the mastic would become somewhat liquid to eliminate air pockets and provide adhesion. The pipe would be visually checked for damaged coating (holidays), and damaged areas would be repaired by means of melting a stick form of epoxy onto the damaged area Trenching and Installation Trenching involves excavating a ditch for the pipeline and would be accomplished with backhoes and/or trenching machines. The trench would be excavated to a depth sufficient to provide the appropriate amount of cover, which would generally be a minimum of three feet over all pipelines. Depth of cover would be a minimum of four feet at road crossings and a minimum of three feet at ditches adjacent to roads. Trench spoil would be deposited on the spoil storage portion of the ROW. Trench width would be determined based on the pipeline diameter and the type of soils. The trench may be wider in wet or sandy areas to allow for unstable soils and a sloped trench wall. Based on the conditions observed along the pipeline ROW, it is not anticipated that blasting would be required. Due to the unconsolidated nature of the soil present in the Project area, the ditch would be excavated following pipe stringing, welding, and joint coating to minimize impacts from ditch wall sloughing. Pipe sections that are ready to be installed in the trench would be lowered in by means of nylon straps or wheeled cradles suspended from side-boom tractors or other hoisting equipment. After the last handling, an electrical coating tester attached to a girth spring would be passed along the entire length of pipe, alerting by audible signal the presence of defects (holidays) in the pipe coating. The lowering operation would cease until any defects are repaired. Inspectors would ensure, by measuring pipe depth, that the minimum required cover is attained Backfilling After the pipe is lowered into the trench, the trench would be backfilled with the previously excavated material. Where topsoil is stored separately from subsoil, the subsoil would be backfilled first and then the topsoil would be replaced in accordance with the FERC Plan. Tetra Tech June 3,

21 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Although not anticipated, if rock conditions exist, a layer of rock-free material would be placed under, over and around the pipe to protect the coating, and then the backfill operation would be completed. A soil mound would be left over the trench to allow for soil settlement, unless otherwise required by the landowner Hydrostatic Testing After construction and prior to placing the pipelines in service, the completed pipelines would be hydrostatically tested. Hydrostatic testing would be conducted in accordance with the requirements of DOT pipeline safety regulations in 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 192, MGS testing specifications, and applicable permits. Pipeline segments would be tested as constructed with each pipeline section tested independently and the water cascaded from one pipeline to another to reduce the amount of hydrostatic test water required and discharged. MGS would obtain water for hydrostatic testing from groundwater wells within the Storage Site. Approximately 6,500,000 gallons would be required for pipeline testing. The pipeline would be filled from the west end, pushing pipeline pigs ahead of the water to eliminate air from the line. No additives would be introduced into the hydrostatic test water. Once the line is filled with water, the pressure would be increased in steps to a minimum test pressure in accordance with 49 CFR Part The minimum test pressure would be held for a minimum of 8 hours. The temperature and pressure would be recorded both manually and mechanically using pen chart recorders. The test records would be retained for the life of the pipeline in accordance with 49 CFR Part Once hydrostatic testing is complete, the hydrostatic test water would be returned to the site and used in the cavern creation process or evaporated in the brine management ponds Restoration and Cleanup MGS would develop a project restoration plan that identifies specific procedures for restoration and, where commercially reasonable, revegetation of disturbed areas. This plan would be developed in consultation with the BLM and the affected agencies. Temporary erosion-control measures, such as watering for dust suppression, silt fences, temporary slope breakers, straw bales, and mulch, would be employed as appropriate immediately after ground disturbance. MGS would inspect these measures on a daily basis in active construction areas, on a weekly basis, in areas with no construction, and within 24 hours of each 0.5-inch rainfall event. Restoration and cleanup would begin after the trench is backfilled or as soon as weather and site conditions permit. The disturbed areas would be graded as near as practical to preconstruction contours. During cleanup, trash that remains on the ROW would be removed and disposed of in approved areas in accordance with applicable regulations. Organic refuse unsuitable for spreading over the ROW would be disposed at an authorized facility. Cleared vegetation would be chipped (trees), managed on site (brush), or hauled off site to a commercial disposal facility. Chipping would involve spreading the shredded material across the work area. Disturbed areas, fences, and roads would be restored as nearly as commercially reasonable to their original condition, permanent erosion-control measures would be installed as appropriate, and revegetation measures would be implemented in accordance with the FERC Plan. Pipeline markers and cathodic protection stations would be located along the length of the proposed Tetra Tech June 3,

22 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC pipelines at fences, roadways, pipeline crossings, and any other locations deemed necessary to identify the route and location of the new pipeline, as described on the alignment drawings Special Construction Procedures Once detailed engineering design is complete, MGS will delete any irrelevant sections Rugged Topography Those portions of the pipeline system located in upland terrain would employ conventional overland construction techniques for large-diameter pipelines. In the typical pipeline construction scenario, the construction spread (crew) would proceed along the pipeline ROW in one continuous operation. The entire process would be coordinated in such a manner as to minimize the total time an individual tract of land is disturbed and, therefore, exposed to erosion and temporarily precluded from its normal use. The Header would be designed and constructed in accordance with 49 CFR Part 192, Transportation of Natural Gas and Other Gas by Pipeline: Minimum Federal Safety Standards and all other applicable federal and state regulations Blasting Based on preliminary surface observations of the proposed Header ROW, it is not anticipated that blasting will be necessary. A site visit will be conducted by qualified personnel to determine if blasting is necessary Active Croplands The Header ROW would cross approximately 4 acres of active pasturelands, primarily alfalfa/grass fields. MGS would conserve topsoil in active croplands, in accordance with the FERC Plan. The available topsoil up to a maximum of 12 inches would be segregated in actively cultivated or rotated croplands and pastures, hayfields, and in other areas at the specific request of the landowner or land management agency. The topsoil and subsoil would be temporarily stockpiled in separate windrows on the construction ROW and would not be allowed to mix. Where topsoil is less than 12 inches deep, the actual depth of the topsoil would be removed and segregated. Temporarily disturbed areas would be reseeded in accordance with the FERC Plan or as otherwise specified in the landowner ROW easement agreement after construction. The ROW easement agreements between MGS and the landowner would specify that MGS would take reasonable precautions to avoid damaging existing grass on land used for grazing livestock and/or growing crops. In addition, MGS would restore the original contours, to the extent it is commercially reasonable under the circumstances, and reseed the disturbed areas with a mixture of approved grasses. MGS will work with the land owners to determine if irrigation or drainage tile systems are present in the Project area. If irrigation systems are installed prior to construction, the systems would be avoided during construction or provisions would be made to minimize the construction impacts and quickly restore these features to their original condition. If drain tiles are damaged by the construction, they will be quickly restored to their original condition. Tetra Tech June 3,

23 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Road Crossings The Header would cross 48 roads, which would have minor short-term effects on transportation along these routes (Table 1.3-1). Four roads crossed by the Header would require horizontal boring. Forty-four roads crossed by the Header would require open trenching. The 4-inch gas pipeline would cross five roads, of which one road would require horizontal boring and four roads would require open trenching (Table 1.3-2). The open trenching road crossings would be restored to pre-construction conditions or better. If an open-cut road requires extensive construction time, provisions would be made for temporary detours or other measures to allow safe traffic flow during construction. Little or no disruption of traffic is expected. Typical cased and uncased road crossings are shown on Figures and Waterbody Crossings [This section will be revised based on field surveys of the potential waterbody crossings that are currently underway] The Header would cross 85 gullies, washes, valleys, and other potential waterbodies. Seven of the potential waterbodies are identified perennial streams while all others are identified as intermittent. The 4-inch gas pipeline would have four possible crossings, all of which are identified as intermittent. All potential waterbody crossings would be performed using open cut construction techniques (Figure 1.2-4). Waterbody crossings and construction methods are presented in Tables and Waterbody construction techniques and methods are discussed below. Open cut water crossings are typically done on short, shallow crossings. Other factors could necessitate an open cut crossing such as subsurface soil conditions. There are several basic methods of an open cut crossing. MGS anticipates (weather permitting) completing trenching, installing pipe, and backfilling of minor waterbody crossings (less than 10 feet wide) within 24 continuous hours and intermediate waterbodies (more than 10 feet and less than 100 feet wide) within 48 continuous hours, unless a flume is used to allow uninterrupted flows across the trench line. Water flow would be maintained at all waterbody crossings, and no alteration to the waterbody s capacity is planned as a result of pipeline construction. MGS would ensure that construction across the waterbody is completed in the shortest amount of time commercially reasonable to minimize the duration of potentially adverse impacts. Typically, the pipe would be installed approximately perpendicular to the waterbody crossing configuration. Grading at approaches to the waterbody may be required to create a safe work surface and to allow the necessary area for pipe bending. If grading is required, it would be directed away from the waterbody to reduce the possibility of disturbed soils being transported into the waterbody by erosion or sedimentation. Extra work spaces would be located at least 50 feet beyond the edge of the waterbody. If sitespecific conditions do not permit a 50-foot setback, a variance would be sought to allow a lesser setback. Tetra Tech June 3,

24 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC Spill prevention measures would be developed. Hazardous materials, chemicals, fuels or lubricating oils would not be stored nor would concrete coating activities be performed within 100 feet of a waterbody or wetland. Spoil would be stored at least 10 feet from waterbody crossings, where possible. Spoil placed up-gradient of a waterbody would be contained within sediment control devices to prevent spoil materials from flowing into the waterbody or off the ROW. At a waterbody, equipment crossings would be limited, and mats and/or equipment bridges would be laid adjacent to and across streambeds. Trench plugs would be installed at the edge of each waterbody. All waterbody crossings would be performed in accordance with all applicable permits, the FERC Plan and Procedures, and the E&SCP. If crossing installation design(s) need to be revised due to different conditions in the field prior to the initiation of construction, MGS would notify the appropriate agencies of any modifications to the crossing plans. The applicable U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) permit(s) would be obtained prior to pipeline construction activities and drainage crossings would be restored to pre-construction conditions following pipeline construction Wetlands A site visit is currently being completed to verify any potential wetlands present in the Project area. This section will be revised as necessary based on those findings. If present, wetlands would be crossed in accordance with the E&SCP, FERC Procedures, and conditions imposed by any USACE Section 404 permit. Primary emphases would be on minimizing overall impact by limiting the time and extent of disturbance in wetlands and controlling sedimentation into these resources. Special care would be taken during restoration to ensure that wetlands are stabilized and revegetated and that natural functions and values are retained. In general, the method of pipeline construction in wetlands would depend upon the soil stability and the extent of saturation of the wetlands. The total construction ROW width would be limited to a maximum of 75 feet in wetlands. However, MGS would endeavor to minimize the ROW width to the extent commercially reasonable. Where soils are unstable and saturated, stable temporary work surfaces in the wetlands may be required. Timber mats, travel pads, and/or gravel on geo-textile reinforced membrane are possible methods of stabilization and would aid to reduce the disturbance to wetland soils. Extra work spaces would be located a minimum of 50 feet from the boundary of any designated wetland. The construction procedures used to cross unsaturated wetlands would be similar to those used on dry land areas. Unless wetland soils are saturated, the top 12 inches of wetland soil would be salvaged from over the trench. The salvaged soil would be temporarily stockpiled along the pipeline trench, with gaps left at appropriate intervals to provide for natural circulation or drainage of water. Subsoil would be transported to a nearby extra work space for temporary storage. Erosion and sedimentation control devices would be installed at edges of the construction ROW in wetlands. Trench plugs would be installed at the edges of the wetlands. Topsoil would be replaced and ripped if necessary to relieve compaction. Upon completion of construction, cleanup would include removal of any construction work pads and/or temporary matting. The area would then Tetra Tech June 3,

25 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC be restored to approximate original contours in a manner to re-establish the essential hydrologic functions Construction Workforce Construction of the Project is expected to require an average of 250 to 275 workers over a period of 12 months with the construction completed in eight months. Approximately 20 permanent jobs would be created for the gas storage operations. The temporary construction work force is not expected to adversely affect the local population or employment. A review of the proposed manpower breakdown by trade indicates that the vast majority of the workforce can be secured from the existing population within the surrounding counties. Shortages in workforce levels for specific trades would be filled from within Utah. A few specialists would be called on from time to time from outside the immediate area. Table presents the projected workforce for the Project Construction Schedule It is anticipated that construction of the Project would begin soon after issuance of the FERC Section 7(c) certificate, currently anticipated in January Table presents the preliminary construction schedule. 1.4 Operation and Maintenance Plans Operations for the Project are anticipated to begin in the first quarter of The Project would be operated in compliance with all federal and state requirements. Operations and maintenance procedures for the Storage Site and Header are provided below Storage Site MGS would operate and maintain the Project in compliance with requirements of 49 CFR Part 192 and other applicable federal and state regulations. Prior to construction, MGS would prepare and submit operation and maintenance manuals that address procedures for the safe operation and maintenance of the Project Facilities. Operating procedures would address normal operations, as well as safe startup, shutdown, and emergency conditions. Operations and maintenance personnel would be trained to perform their assignments. The operators would be trained in facility safety and proper operation of equipment and would meet the training requirements of the FERC, DOT, and other regulatory entities. MGS may maintain a full-time staff or may contract with third parties to perform routine maintenance and minor overhauls. Trained and qualified contract maintenance personnel would handle major overhauls and major maintenance activities. Trained and qualified personnel would perform routine checks of the Project Facilities, including calibration of equipment and instrumentation, inspection of critical components, and scheduled and routine maintenance of equipment. Safety equipment, such as pressure-relief devices, and gas detection systems, would be regularly tested for proper operation. Monitoring Program MGS has developed a monitoring program in conjunction with the State UIC permits to be conducted during creation of the gas storage caverns. The monitoring program would consist of two components: 1) monitoring of the procedures for setting and cementing casing through Tetra Tech June 3,

26 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC potential fresh water aquifers above the casing shoe, and 2) mechanical integrity testing of the cavern injection wells Header and 4-inch Gas Pipeline MGS would operate and maintain the Header in compliance with DOT regulations provided in 49 CFR Part 192, FERC s regulations in 18 CFR Section , and maintenance provisions of the FERC Plan. MGS s may utilize either its staff or qualified third party contractors to operate and maintain the Header. Qualified contractors would be used for infrequent tasks such as ROW maintenance and inline inspection. Operational activity would focus on maintenance of the ROW; protecting the Header from third party activity; protecting the Header from unauthorized encroachment on the ROW, such as buildings and other substantial structures; conducting cathodic protection surveys in accordance with 49 CFR Part 192, Section ; identifying, preventing and repairing soil erosion; and, identifying other conditions that could present a safety hazard or require preventive maintenance or repairs. MGS would maintain ground cover on the permanent ROW, as required by the FERC plan. The frequency of maintenance of any required revegetation would depend upon the vegetation growth rate, but would not be more frequent than dictated by the FERC Plan. The Header would be clearly marked at line-of-sight intervals and at crossings of roads, railroads, water bodies, and other key points, in accordance with DOT regulations. The markers would indicate the presence of the Header and provide a telephone number and address where a company representative could be reached in the event of an emergency. MGS would also participate in the Utah One Call system to prevent third-party damage to the Header and the 4- inch pipeline, which would also be marked as required by state and local regulations. 1.5 Future Plans and Abandonment Potential Future Plans In the future, the Project could involve the development of additional facilities to expand natural gas storage capacity, as determined by market demand, such as additional: compression and dehydration facilities at the Goshen Interconnection as well as at the Storage Site, salt caverns for natural gas storage, water supply wells or pipelines from adjacent water sources, and ponds for brine management or raw water storage. These additional facilities are not planned at this time. Conditions in credit markets and natural gas markets would have an important bearing on the need for these additional facilities. All facilities would obtain the required regulatory approvals prior to construction. MGS is also investigating additional options for brine management, including off-site storage and evaporation ponds and on-site underground injection. The off-site ponds would be created by diking a portion of the salt playa located about 9 miles west of the Storage Site on lands managed by SITLA and BLM. The underground injection of brine at the Storage Site is contingent upon demonstration that the deep subsurface structures at the Storage Site (> 3,000 bgs) are capable of accepting and containing the injected brines. MGS may wish to include either or both of these options in the Project if they can be shown to be technically, economically, and environmentally feasible. Tetra Tech June 3,

27 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC The availability of natural gas at the Storage Site may attract third parties interested in constructing gas-fired generation or compressed air energy storage near the Storage Site. Similarly, the facilities for the development of underground storage caverns may attract third parties interested in storage of refined petroleum products or other non-hazardous substances, or in processing, packaging and shipping various salt products derived from the produced brines. MGS has no plans to build these facilities Abandonment The supply of natural gas and market needs will be the major factors in determining the life of the Project. The history of natural gas market development in the U.S. indicates that the need for natural gas storage capacity and deliverability can be expected to remain robust, if not increase, during the useful life of the Project Facilities. Properly maintained, the Header can be expected to operate for 50 years or more. The other gas-related elements of the Project (e.g., the central compression facility, cavern wellheads and dehydration facilities, 4-inch gas pipeline), if properly maintained, can be expected to have a useful service life of 30 years or more. The fresh water supply and brine management facilities required for cavern construction would also be required for cavern maintenance. Accordingly, it is likely these facilities would be maintained for the useful life of the caverns. Therefore, abandonment of the Project Facilities is not anticipated in the reasonably foreseeable future. If future abandonment is required, all abandonment procedures would be in accordance with applicable federal, state and local requirements. Abandonment and site restoration activities would be conducted to minimize associated impacts to the environment. 1.6 Permits and Approvals The construction, operation, and maintenance of the Project would require multiple permits and regulatory approvals from federal, state, and local agencies. Table summarizes the applicable federal, state, and local permits and approvals and responsible agencies. Copies of the required permits would be provided to FERC as they are obtained. On November 6, 2008, the Commission issued an Order Granting Exemption for Temporary Acts and Operations authorizing MGS to drill one or two test wells for purposes of exploring the potential fresh and saline aquifers above the salt structure and of obtaining core samples and geophysical logs to confirm the suitability of the salt structure for cavern development (Docket No. CP ). MGS has drilled one such test well and may request modification of the Exemption to allow separation of the second test well into two wells specifically designed for different purposes. One well would facilitate testing of the productive capacity of the deeper aquifers (> 1,400 feet bgs) encountered in the initial test well and projected by the 3D seismic data. The second well would facilitate testing of the injection capacity and suitability of the deeper anhydrite intervals on the flank of the main salt body (> 3,000 feet bgs) projected by the 3D seismic work and encountered in the initial test well. The potential fluids to be injected into these deeper intervals might include the fluids produced by the gas dehydration equipment and, potentially, brines brought to the surface in connection with the creation of caverns for the storage of natural gas. These wells would be drilled by experienced contractors licensed in the State of Utah, and would be permitted and completed in accordance with the applicable procedures and regulations of the DWR, DWQ and DOGM, as applicable. Tetra Tech June 3,

28 Draft Resource Report 1 General Project Description Magnum Gas Storage LLC 1.7 Affected Landowners In its Certificate Policy Statement, FERC directs all applicants for a NGA certificate of public convenience and necessity to take time before filing, in the planning stage, to minimize adverse effects to the interests of landowners and surrounding communities whenever possible. MGS has undertaken an extensive community relations effort prior to filing its certificate application. MGS representatives have met with public officials and community members on a number of occasions to discuss the Project and answer any questions. The meetings conducted with the public and Project stakeholders are summarized in Table Landowners whose holdings are traversed by or located within any Section crossed by the Header ROW were identified from searches of the public land and property tax assessment records maintained by the Recorder s Offices in Millard, Juab, and Utah Counties. MGS has worked proactively to develop a positive rapport with these potentially affected landowners and with the local community. Table identifies the landowners or tenants within 50 feet of the Storage Site, the proposed Header ROW, and the 4-inch gas pipeline ROW, their location relative to the Project, and the status of archeological and biological surveys on their land. Any landowner or tenant located within 50 feet of the Storage Site, the Header ROW, or the 4- inch gas pipeline ROW has been informed of MGS s intent to develop the Project. MGS will continue to communicate with affected landowners and with towns, communities, and local, state, and federal governments and agencies with a potential stake in the Project. All affected landowners would be notified as required by 18 CFR Part 157.6(d), Part (a) (4) & (c) (10). 1.8 Non-jurisdictional Facilities Non-jurisdictional facilities are those facilities related to the Project that would be constructed, owned, and operated by others and are not subject to FERC jurisdiction. MGS is not proposing any non-jurisdictional facilities in connection with this Project. Tetra Tech June 3,

29 TABLES

30 Table Disturbed Acreage Project Component Dimensions (feet) Permanent Operations Acres Additional Temporary Construction Acres Pipeline Header and Facilities 36-inch Transmission Pipeline Header* Meter Station (Goshen Interconnect) 150 x Block Valves (3 total) 25 x Temporary Pipe Yard/Fabrication Area (Goshen Interconnect) 720 x Storage Site Well Pads 8 pads, 400 x 400, 1 pad 200 x Compression and Gas Processing 1000 x Office 60 x Septic Field 200 x Pumping Facility 500 x Warehouse/Maintenance 700 X Brine Ponds Multiple ponds totaling 2700 x Utility Corridor Access Roads inch Gas Supply Pipeline TOTAL Note: * Includes extra temporary workspace at road and railroad crossings

31 Table Road Crossing Construction Method by Milepost Pipeline Header Name Type Construction Method Crossing Length (feet) Milepost Governing Authority Jones Rd Paved Horizontal Bore State of Utah Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < State of Utah Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < State of Utah Highway 174 Brush Wellman Rd Paved Horizontal Bore State of Utah Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < State of Utah Transmission Line Access Rd Dirt Open Cut < State of Utah Transmission Line Access Rd Dirt Open Cut < State of Utah Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Lynndyl West 3 Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM State Highway 6 Paved Open Cut State of Utah Old State Highway 50 Paved Open Cut State of Utah Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Cardson Gravel Pit Rd 1 Dirt Open Cut < BLM Water Trough Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Cedar Ridge Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Gilson Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Gilson Dirt Open Cut < BLM Gilson Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Old Jericho Rd Paved Horizontal Bore BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private Dog Valley/Furner Pass Dirt Open Cut < Private Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private

32 Name Type Construction Method Crossing Length (feet) Milepost Governing Authority Hancock Ranch Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private Tunnel Rd Dirt Open Cut < BLM Tunnel Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private State Highway 6 Paved Horizontal Bore State of Utah Elberta Slant Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private

33 Table Road Crossing Construction Method by Milepost 4-inch Gas Pipeline Name Type Construction Method Crossing Length (feet) Milepost Governing Authority Jones Rd Paved Horizontal Bore State of Utah Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < State of Utah Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < State of Utah Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < State of Utah Minor Rd Dirt Open Cut < Private

34 Table Waterbody Crossing Construction Method by Milepost Pipeline Header Milepost Waterbody Construction Method Type 1.51 Drainage 1 Open Cut I 1.69 Drainage 2 Open Cut I 1.76 Drainage 3 Open Cut I Connector 1 Open Cut I Connector 2 Open Cut I Connector 3 Open Cut I Connector 4 Open Cut I Drainage 4 Open Cut I Drainage 5 Open Cut I Drainage 6 Open Cut I Drainage 7 Open Cut I Drainage 8 Open Cut I Drainage 9 Open Cut I Drainage 10 Open Cut I Drainage 11 Open Cut I Drainage 12 Open Cut I Drainage 13 Open Cut I Drainage 14 Open Cut I Drainage 15 Open Cut I Drainage 16 Open Cut I Drainage 17 Open Cut I Drainage 18 Open Cut I Drainage 19 Open Cut I Drainage 20 Open Cut I Drainage 21 Open Cut I Drainage 22 Open Cut I Drainage 23 Open Cut I Drainage 24 Open Cut I Drainage 25 Open Cut I Drainage 26 Open Cut I Drainage 27 Open Cut I Drainage 28 Open Cut I Drainage 29 Open Cut I Drainage 30 Open Cut I Drainage 31 Open Cut I Drainage 32 Open Cut I Drainage 33 Open Cut I Drainage 34 Open Cut I Drainage 35 Open Cut I Drainage 36 Open Cut I Drainage 37 Open Cut I Drainage 38 Open Cut I Drainage 39 Open Cut I Drainage 40 Open Cut I Drainage 41 Open Cut I

35 Milepost Waterbody Construction Method Type Drainage 42 Open Cut I Drainage 43 Open Cut I Drainage 44 Open Cut I Drainage 45 Open Cut I Drainage 46 Open Cut I Drainage 47 Open Cut I Connector 5 Open Cut I Furner Creek Open Cut I Drainage 48 Open Cut I Drainage 49 Open Cut I Drainage 50 Open Cut I Connector 6 Open Cut I Connector 7 Open Cut I Drainage 51 Open Cut I Drainage 52 Open Cut I Drainage 53 Open Cut I Drainage 54 Open Cut I Drainage 55 Open Cut P Drainage 56 Open Cut P Drainage 57 Open Cut P Drainage 58 Open Cut P Drainage 59 Open Cut P Kimball Creek Open Cut I Drainage 60 Open Cut P Drainage 61 Open Cut P Drainage 62 Open Cut I Drainage 63 Open Cut I Drainage 64 Open Cut I Drainage 65 Open Cut I Drainage 66 Open Cut I Connector 8 Open Cut I Drainage 67 Open Cut I Drainage 68 Open Cut I Drainage 69 Open Cut I Drainage 70 Open Cut I Drainage 71 Open Cut I Drainage 72 Open Cut I Drainage 73 Open Cut I Drainage 74 Open Cut I Drainage 75 Open Cut I Notes: P Perennial I Intermittent

36 Table Waterbody Crossing Construction Method by Milepost 4-inch Gas Pipeline Milepost Waterbody Construction Method Type 1.60 Drainage 1 Open Cut I 1.78 Drainage 2 Open Cut I 1.88 Drainage 3 Open Cut I 2.86 Drainage 76 Open Cut I Notes: I Intermittent

37 Table Construction Work Force Projection Facilities Construction Pipeline Construction Plant Operations Construction Engineer Construction Manager Chief Inspector Materials Manager Carpenters Crane and Backhoe Operators Welders and Welders Helpers Fitters Millwrights Laborers Environmental and Safety Inspectors Trade Inspectors Construction Engineer Construction Manager Chief Inspector Materials Manager Laborers Backhoe and Dozer Operators Welders and Welders Helpers Fitters Coating Inspectors Welding Inspectors Environmental and Safety Inspectors Plant Manager Plant Administration Mechanics Electrical Technicians Instrument Technicians Plant Operators Table Preliminary Construction Schedule Project Component Start Date End Date Pipeline ROW and Storage Site Survey January 2010 March 2010 Brine Pond Construction (Phase Acre) March 2010 June 2010 Brine Pond Construction (Phase Acre) August 2010 December 2010 Storage Site Construction March 2010 September 2010 Salt Cavern Creation (Phase 1 2 caverns) September 2010 March 2012 Salt Cavern Creation (Phase 2 6 caverns) March 2012 Continuing Brine Pond Construction January 2011 Continuing Pipeline Construction November 2011 March 2012 Pipeline in Service March 2012 Continuing Gas Storage Begins March 2012 Continuing

38 Table Magnum Gas Storage Permits and Approvals Permit Agency Address and Contact Information Proposed Submittal Date Submittal Date Receipt Date Status FEDERAL Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity Section 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, NE Washington, DC /22/09 Crossing Federal Lands by ROW Corridors U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) West Desert District 2370 South 2300 West Salt Lake City, UT Glenn Carpenter, District Manager Phone: (801) Fillmore Field Office 35 East 500 North Fillmore, UT Micki Bailey, Manager (435) March 2009 Presentation to BLM Offices 2/25/09; Cost reimbursement agreement in place; Interagency meeting held 4/8/09 Plan of Development in Revision Salt Lake Field Office 2370 South 2300 West Salt Lake City, UT Mike Nelson, Assistant Project Manager Phone: (801)

39 Permit Agency Address and Contact Information Proposed Submittal Date Submittal Date Receipt Date Status Crossing National Forest by ROW Corridor U.S. Forest Service (USFS), Fishlake National Forest 115 East 900 North Richfield, UT Steve Rodriguez, Acting Forest Supervisor Phone: (435) May 2009 Interagency meeting held 4/8/09 Chris Wehrli Phone: (435) Fillmore Ranger District 390 South Main Street Fillmore, UT Individual Permit or Nationwide Permit United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Bill Wright Phone: (435) West 2600 S. Bountiful, UT Timothy Witman ext. 17 June 2009 Threatened and Endangered Species Consultation and Clearances United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Utah Field Office 2369 West Orton Circle, Suite 50 West Valley City, UT Betsy Herrmann Phone: (801) x 139 June 2009 STATE Lease and Easement Agreements State of Utah School and Institutional Trust Lands Administration (SITLA) 675 East 500 South, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, UT LaVonne Garrison, Assistant Director, Oil & Gas Group Phone: (801) /12/07 1/14/09 Lease executed

40 Permit Agency Address and Contact Information Proposed Submittal Date Submittal Date Receipt Date Status Seismic Exploration (ROE) /13/08 10/13/08 Field Work Completed November 2008 Underground Injection Control (UIC) Permit for Solution Mining for Gas Storage Utah Department of Natural Resources (UDNR), Division of Oil, Gas and Mining (DOGM) 1594 West North Temple, Suite 1210 Salt Lake City, UT Paul Baker, Assistant Director Phone: (801) September 2009 Seismic Exploration 6/23/08 Field Work Completed November 2008 Core Drilling 11/26/08 Drilling on-going Underground Injection Control 422 Class III Division of Water Quality PO Box SLC, UT Candice Cady, Environmental Scientist -Groundwater Protection (801) August 2009 Activity Storm Water Permit and Pollution Prevention Plan March 2010 Small Source Exemption Permit; Utah Approval Order; or Title V Major Source Permit (as required) Division of Air Quality 150 N 1950 W Salt Lake City, UT Paul Harding Business Assistance August 2009

41 Permit Agency Address and Contact Information Proposed Submittal Date Submittal Date Receipt Date Status Non-Production Well Permit UDNR, Division of Water Rights (DWR) 1594 West North Temple, Suite 310 Salt Lake City, UT /15/08 Drilling complete Kent Jones Phone: (801) Temporary Change Applications Dam Impoundment Construction Permit 130 North Main Street Richfield, Utah Kirk Forbush, Regional Engineer Phone: (435) August 2009 August 2009 National Historic Preservation Act Cultural Resource Consultations/ Clearance State Historical Preservation Office (SHPO) 300 S. Rio Grande Street Salt Lake City, UT Lori Hunsaker (801) June 2009 Field work on-going Seismic Clearance 10/13/08 Work Completed Pipeline ROW Clearance April 2009 May 2009 Field Work On-going

42 Permit Agency Address and Contact Information Proposed Submittal Date Submittal Date Receipt Date Status Threatened and Endangered Species Consultation and Clearances UDNR, Division of Wildlife Resources (DWR) 1594 West North Temple Suite 2110 Salt Lake City, UT Mike Canning, Director Phone: (801) June 2009 Field work Ongoing Sarah Lindsey, Utah Natural Heritage Program Information Manage Phone: (801) N. Main St. Springville, UT Chris Crockett, Native Species Project Manager Phone: (801) Ashley Green, Habitat Manager Central Region (801) Douglas Sakaguchi, Habitat Biologist, Central Region Phone: (801) E. Sunland Dr. #8 St. George, UT Melinda Bennion, Aquatic (435)

43 Permit Agency Address and Contact Information Proposed Submittal Date Submittal Date Receipt Date Status 1470 N. Airport Road Cedar City, UT Rhett Boswell (435) LOCAL Special Use Permit Millard, Juab and Utah County Commissions Millard County Commission 71 South 200 West Delta, UT August 2009 Kathy Walker, Commissioner Sheryl Dekker, Planning & Zoning Phone: (435) Utah County Commission 100 E Center St. Provo, UT Larry Ellertson, Commissioner Phone: (801) Juab County Commission 160 North Main St. Nephi, UT Val Jones, Commissionner Phone: (435) Zoning/Siting August 2009

44 Table External Stakeholder Meetings Date Parties Purpose 1/14/09 SITLA ROW Sought input on the natural gas pipeline alignment across SITLA land from the Storage Site to approximately HWY 6. 1/16/09 Millard County Zoning Sought input on natural gas pipeline alignment across Millard County. Coordinated follow-up meeting for February 3, 2009 with Millard County Commission and introduction by Millard County to Juab County Commission. 1/22/09 SITLA Economic Development Coordination of infrastructure/utility interconnections with adjacent SITLA Industrial Park, e.g., fresh water supply, electric site power, rail, telecommunications, LDC gas supply and sewer. 1/23/09 Millard County Commissioners Meet and present the Project to all three commission members. 2/9/09 BLM, FERC Phone call to introduce project and discuss FERC and BLM interaction on the Project. 2/17/09 Utah County Commissioners Meet and present the Project to the commission members. 2/19/09 IPSC Meet and present the Project and discuss the potential concerns of IPSC. 2/25/09 BLM, Millard County, Juab County, Tetra Tech 3/3/09 Community and Agency Stakeholders 3/10/09 DMAD (Presidents of the five member companies) and IPSC, David Hansen, Steve Clyde, Brent Rose 3/11/09 Delta City Chamber of Commerce 4/6/09 Utah DNR, Mike Styler, Robyn Pearson, and Paul Harding (UDEQ) Phone call to introduce project and discuss FERC and BLM interaction on the project. OPEN HOUSE in Delta, Utah. Meet and present the Project and discuss the potential concerns of DMAD etc. and the opportunities for water users to be involved in supplying water to the project. Meet and present the Project to the chamber members. Project introduction and review of jurisdiction of UDOGM and UDEQ. 4/8/09 BLM, FERC FERC meeting to discuss the process of FERC pre-filing. 4/27/09 FERC (Archeologist), SHPO, Define scope of Archeological Survey. SITLA, PLPCO, UDOT, BLM 4/27/09 UDEQ, UDOGM Define responsibility for underground injection control permits. 4/30/09 Delta City Project introduction and discussion of water supply. 5/6/09 DMAD Canal Companies Project introduction and discussion of water supply. 5/13/09 SITLA Alignment of Header Pipeline. 5/21/09 BLM, Millard County, Juab Alignment of Header Pipeline. County 5/22/09 SITLA Alignment of Header Pipeline into WEEC and facility layout at Storage Site. 5/27/09 BLM Alignment of Header Pipeline.

45 Header Table Landowners along the Pipeline Header Parcel Owner Parcel ID Length Starting Milepost Ending Milepost State of Utah NA Bureau of Land Management NA Lowell M Berry Jr. and Caryl J Berry MA 2578-A Bureau of Land Management NA Frank Vincent Family Ranch LC XD3903K Bureau of Land Management NA D A Osguthorp XD3902C L.A. & S.L. Railroad NA D A Osguthorp XD3902C U.S. Highway 6 XD3902B D A Osguthorp XD3902C D A Osguthorp XD D A Osguthorp XD Bureau of Land Management NA Cary G Peterson & Ila Ranee Peterson, Trustee XC3144B Reese Blair Painter, Trustee XC3144A Cary G. & Ila Ranee Peterson, Trustees XC Cary G Peterson & Ila Ranee Peterson Trustees XC Cary G Peterson & Ila Ranee Peterson Trustees XC Juab Stake of the Church of Jesus Christ of L XC Juab Stake of the Church of Jesus Christ of L XC Juab Stake of the Church of Jesus Christ of L XC Juab Stake of the Church of Jesus Christ of L XC Joseph Jackson & Carma F. Jackson Trustees XC Juab Stake of the Church of Jesus Christ of L XC Quality for Animal Life Inc. XC Quality for Animal Life Inc. XC Quality for Animal Life Inc. XC George C & Patricia R Kiser, Beverly R & Stev XC /XC George C & Patricia R Kiser, Beverly R & Stev XC2907A Bureau of Land Management NA PETTIT, TYLER M BEIFUSS, BILL ROBIN & LAYNE BROWN INVESTMENTS INC SADDLE VIEW INC WALTER, CHARLES N & JANET G JT WALTER, CHARLES N & JANET G JT SADDLE VIEW INC BRODERICK & HENDERSON INVESTMENTS LL

46 Parcel Owner Parcel ID Length Starting Ending Milepost Milepost KAY, DAN R & DELL REESE TIC Bureau of Land Management KAY, DAN R & DELL REESE TIC Bureau of Land Management NA Bureau of Land Management NA WINTERS, PATRICIA J ET AL HOLMAN, BETHEL V ET AL KREINER, KATHERIN MERRILL RADMALL, STEPHEN J & EVA N JT BAY STORAGE LLC BEIFUSS, BILL ET AL CARSON, LARRY ET AL CARSON, LARRY ET AL CARSON, LARRY ET AL CARSON, LARRY ET AL WASATCH ROCK & GRAVEL LLP CARSON, LARRY ET AL GORDON, PETER J HELSTEN, PALMER D BEIFUSS, BILL & BILL BUTLER STAKE OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS MCLACHLAN, SCOTT BUTLER STAKE OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS BARBER, GEORGE T & TERESA H TEE BARBER, GEORGE T & TERESA H TEE BARBER, GEORGE T & TERESA H TEE RIGTRUP PROPERTIES INC RIGTRUP PROPERTIES INC MC CLACHLAN, SCOTT COOPER ET AL Vacant "See Bronson Plat" BRENT & KAY SUMSION FAMILY L.C. ET A MC LACHLAN, SCOTT & JULIE A CHIEF CONSOLIDATED MINING CO CORP OF PRES BISHOP CHURCH OF JESUS CORP OF PRES BISHOP CHURCH OF JESUS CORP OF PRES BISHOP CHURCH OF JESUS CORP OF PRES BISHOP CHURCH OF JESUS inch Gas Pipeline State of Utah NA A 7.61A Brush Resources A 9.28A Notes: NA Not Applicable

47 FIGURES

48 Fairfield Eagle Mountain Utah Lake Orem Provo--Orem 189 Provo Springville Legend!( Interconnect 36" Pipeline Header 4" Gas Supply Line TOOELE Vernon UTAH Mapleton Spanish Fork Magnum Gas Storage Site County Boundaries Salem Payson Genola Woodland Hills Elk Ridge Goshen Interconnect!( Santaquin Eureka Goshen Santaquin Rocky Ridge 6 Municipalities Interstate Highway Primary Highway Major Road Local Road Major Railroad Lines Stream Intermittent Stream Lake JUAB Mona " Pipeline Header Nephi KRG Dog Valley Tap I d a h o W y o m i n g Magnum Gas Storage Site Lynndyl Leamington Levan Fountain Green Moroni Fairview Mount Pleasant N e v a d a U t a h A r i z o n a C o l o r a d o 4" Gas Supply Line Wales Spring City I Hinckley Delta MILLARD Oak City 15 SANPETE Ephraim Miles 1 inch = 10 miles Scipio Fayette Manti Sterling Project: County: Millard PRJ: MAGNUM GAS STORAGE, LLC Source: AGRC Image Server image.state.ut.us & ESRI Base Data NAD 83 UTM 12 Meters Utah T. 15 S. R. 7 W. State: Loc atio n: Date: 6/09/2009 Figure General Project Location 50 Gunnison Centerfield Mayfield

49

50

51 ) ) Private T10S R7W T11S R7W T12S R7W Bureau of Land Management (BLM) US Forest Service (USFS) T10S R6W Private T11S R6W T12S R6W T10S R5W T11S R5W Private T12S R5W reek Cherry C T10S R4W Private T11S R4W T12S R4W UV36 Private T10S R3W 6 UV 67 T11S R3W T12S R3W Goshen Interconnect T10S R2W T11S R2W ) ) T12S R2W UV 73 ) ) ) !( UV 68 T9S R1W T10S R1W T11S R1W T12S R1W Legend!( Interconnect 36" Pipeline Header 4" Gas Supply Line (KRG) Kern River Gas Magnum Gas Storage Site Major Railroad Lines Interstate Highway Primary Highway Major Road Local Road Stream Intermittent Stream West Wide Energy Corridor (WWEC) Bureau of Land Management Private State Trust Land US Forest Service National Recreation Area State Trust Land Bureau of Land Management (BLM) T15S R7W 4000 T13S R7W T14S R7W Magnum Gas Storage Site Private 0 ) 5 UV174 T13S R6W T14S R6W State Trust Land ) ) ) T15S R6W 5A 10 Brush Wellman Rd 9A T13S R5W National Recreation Area T14S R5W 15 T15S R5W 20 ) ) ) Private T13S R4W 25 T14S R4W T15S R4W UV125 Private T13S R3W 30 ) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) T14S R3W T15S R3W Leamington Pass US Forest Service (USFS) ) 35 UV 132 Private T14S R2W T13S R2W T15S R2W 40 KRG Dog Valley Tap 15 T13S R1W T14S R1W UV 78 T15S R1W Private I Miles 1 inch = 5 miles Project: MAGNUM GAS STORAGE LLC Source : AGRC Image Server >>> image.state.ut.us Count y: Millard Sta te: Utah Location: T. 15 S. R. 7 W. PRJ: NAD 83 UTM 12 Meters Date: 6/02/2009 Figure Header Route - Aerial

52 ) ) Private T10S R7W US Forest Service (USFS) T10S R6W Private T10S R5W Private T10S R4W UV36 Private T10S R3W UV 67 UV 73 Goshen Interconnect T10S R2W ) ) ) !( UV 68 T9S R1W T10S R1W Legend!( Interconnect 36" Pipeline Header 4" Gas Supply Line (KRG) Kern River Gas Magnum Gas Storage Site Interstate Highway Primary Highway Major Road Local Road T11S R7W T11S R6W T11S R5W T11S R4W T11S R3W T11S R2W T11S R1W Major Railroad Lines Stream Intermittent Stream T12S R7W Bureau of Land Management (BLM) T12S R6W Private T12S R5W reek Cherry C T12S R4W 6 T12S R3W ) ) T12S R2W T12S R1W West Wide Energy Corridor (WWEC) National Recreation Area Bureau of Land Management Private State Trust Land US Forest Service State Trust Land Bureau of Land Management (BLM) T15S R7W 4000 T13S R7W T14S R7W Magnum Gas Storage Site Private 0 ) 5 UV174 T13S R6W T14S R6W State Trust Land ) ) ) T15S R6W 5A 10 Brush Wellman Rd 9A T13S R5W National Recreation Area T14S R5W 15 T15S R5W 20 ) ) ) Private T13S R4W 25 T14S R4W T15S R4W UV125 Private T13S R3W 30 ) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) T14S R3W T15S R3W Leamington Pass US Forest Service (USFS) ) 35 UV 132 Private T14S R2W T13S R2W T15S R2W 40 KRG Dog Valley Tap 15 T13S R1W T14S R1W UV 78 T15S R1W Private I Miles 1 inch = 5 miles Project: MAGNUM GAS STORAGE LLC Source : AGRC Image Server >>> image.state.ut.us Count y: Millard Sta te: Utah Location: T. 15 S. R. 7 W. PRJ: NAD 83 UTM 12 Meters Date: 6/09/2009 Figure Header Route - Topographic

53 Temporary Fabrication Area JUN 08, 2009 N:\arcprj2\ \mxd\FERC_ RR\Elberta Meter Station.mxd BY:megan.wood Legend Equipment Piping Pipeline Header Pipeline Header Right-of-Way Feet Elberta Meter Station JUN 08, 2009 FIGURE GOSHEN INTERCONNECTION METER STATION MAGNUM GAS STORAGE LLC