vs' aix wic ii · 2020-03-11 · auto. m1, 413, z j umml"ily 9 r sos ' 0n 3130 01...

11,,ro .114

%La> 1.111.

flc,

; • II

ritt +v.'s C

VS' ,

"CU. A

IX WIC

210 cw

..1C•Xdr Aidecam

Ilcr t.c.rta, =ch

ill= N

ib. Lwebu ...SI b

t .1.,f..

. 6 Pts Shad a

uto

.

M1,413,

Z Jumml"Ily

9r SOS '0N 0 313001 Dad

Custom

Soil Resourre R

eport M

ap—H

ydrologi,. SC

.i Group IA

EP

Te...as Rio G

rande LNG

lnterr.onneLtion Proiecti

Map sheet 2 ot 2

IA.

PO ,1

1

41..t

oNot fated or not available

1:1 C

The soil surveys that comprise your A

Ol w

ere mapped at

1:20.000 CI

co a

D

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for m

ap m

easurements

ArD •

0

130

CIO a

0

Custom Soil Resource Report

17

9I-505 '09N 1a)POU Dila z juaunpupy ££C.10 19Z atm

MA

P LE

GE

ND

M

AP

INFO

RM

ATIO

N

Area of Interest 4A01) Area of Interest !h

al

Soils Soil R

ating Polygons

Ar0

8 f3,0

C:D

o

Li

Not rated or nut available

Soil Rating Lines

, 0 A

000

.

•.

Not rated or not available

Soil Rating Points

a

A

1:3 ArO

•13

•BiD

Source of Map

Natural R

esources Conservation S

ervice W

eb Soil Survey U

RL

Coordinate System

W

eb Meicator (E

PS

G 3857)

Maps from

the Web Soil S

urvey are based on the Web M

ercatar pro ection, w

hich preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conro projection should be used if m

ore accurate calculations of distance or area are required

This product is generated Von-) the U

SD

A-N

RC

S certified data as

116 Aerial Plotography

of the version date(s) listed below

Sol S

urvey Area C

ameron C

ounty, fexas Survey Area D

ata Version 15, Sep 14, 2018

Sol rnap rinds are labeled (as space allow

s) for map scales

1 50,000 or large'

Datels) aerial im

ages were photographed

Dec 31 2009—

Dec

11, 2017

The orthophoto or other base map on w

hich the scil lines were

compiled and dig tized probably differs from

the background im

agery displayed on these maps As a result som

e minor

shifting of map unit boundaries m

ay be evident.

Water Features

Streams and Canals

Transportation Rails

Interstate Hghw

ays

US Rokses

Major Fbads

Background

PUC Docket No. 50546 Attachment 2

Page 262 of 333


Table—Hydrologic Soil Group (AEP Texas Rio Grande LNG interconnection Project)

Map unit syrnbol Map unit narne Rating Acres in A01 Percent of A01

BA Banada clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes very frequently flooded, nceasinnally pnnded

0 335 8 4 2%

LM Lomalta clay, 0 to 1 oercent slopes, occasionally ponded

310 7 3 9%

LO LomaIto occasionally ponded-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes

D 79 7 1 0%

PO Point Isabel clay loam. 1 to 5 percent slopes, rarely flooded

C 936 3 11 6%

PU Point Isabel-Urban land complex

C 15 3 0 2%

SE Septa silty clay loam, 0 to Ci'D 2 210 6 27.4%

1 percent slopes. occasionally ponded

su Sejita-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes, occasionally ponded

452 1 5 6%

USX Twinpalms occasionally flooded-Yarborough frequently flooded complex. 0 to 3 percent slopes

C 1 717 3 21.3%

Water D 2,009 2 24 9%

Totals for Area of Interest

8,067.1 100.0%

Rating Options—Hydrologic Soil Group (AEP Texas Rio Grande LNG interconnection Project)

Aggregation Method. Dominant Condition

Component Percent Cutoff None Specified

Tie-break Rule: Higher

Water Features

Water Features include ponding frequency, flooding frequency, and depth to water table.

18

302


Page 263 of 333


Depth to Water Table (AEP Texas Rio Grande LNG interconnection Project)

"Water table" refers to a saturated zone in the soil. It occurs during specified months. Estimates of the upper limit are based mainly on observations of the water table at selected sites and on evidence of a saturated zone, namely grayish colors (redoximorphic features) in the soil. A saturated zone that lasts for less than a month is not considered a water table.

This attnbute is actually recorded as three separate values in the database. A low value and a high value indicate the range of this attribute for the soil component. A "representative" value indicates the expected value of this attribute for the component. For this soil property, only the representative value is used.

19

303

Custom

So l Resource R

eport M

ap—D

epth b, Water Table .A

EP

Texas Rio G

raiide LNG

Intel conneamn Pro,ectr

I Wet, SPeet

J..

A. A

I,P11P

SNIA

. V

at. SC,J4

444, O

VA

1

3

2

4120 M

OM

11 101111,J1J1 J• e

t). /0. • • I. 1 V

t.<

.11f4A. d

rir

elox Im

re 8.141.

ROW

1..1

1

.1111AC

91-SOS '0N1 3al3OCI arm

, 'koo-•

c ...t.

XM

em

, CO) .../

. 501

—MO ,A1

AM

44,tirallat Ctr, r .,..dria. .6134 1-20. h

i _..1.111, 1.0•40111

2(1

z juaunpupy

7449 z

tun 'F

M

—UV

Custom

Sod Resource R

eport M

ay--DsLai to W

Eter Tab'e 1AEP Texas Rio G

raude LNG

interccrineLlitvi Proert)

Map sheet 1 of 2

UmlIt.a.107

4allz oeft

it •

Z WaunPUI/V

91-SOS '0N 0 313011 Di1c1

1

C 132

alb 31.a

••• 'V

I. A

I, W

I •11.1

' rw5ow

.k."......b4enally ......raccelriar. 41.5114 ligcba _

MO

, ON dr,ns. 21

•4

Z I llauillaulIV 9t iOS '0N1 l alacm Dim

Map A

I= ...r.r2cr

Custom

(311 R

esource Report

Map—

Depth to W

ater Tab.e i AEP Texas Rio G

rande LNG

I nterconneam.i P

ro,ecti Atap sheet 2 of 2

MA

P LE

GE

ND

M

AP

INFO

RM

ATIO

N

Area of Interest (A

O!)

Feed of Inteiest i01

1

Water Features

Soils Stream

s and Carals

Soil Rating Polygons

Transportation E

l 0 - 25

Rails 25 - 50

interstate Highways 50

1U0 US Retries

100 - 150 M

a,or Rime s

L.J

15U - 200

Background

200 es

ti Aehal Priotography

CD

Not rated or nul available

Soil Rating Lines

roe

0 - 25

Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for m

ap m

easurements

Source of Map

Natural R

esources Conservation S

ervice W

eb Soil S

urvey UR

L C

oordinate System

W

eb Mercator rE

PS

G 3857)

Maps from

the Web S

oil Survey are based on the W

eb Mercator

preection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts

distance and area A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if m

ore accurate calculattons of distance or area aie required

This product is generated from the U

SD

A-N

RC

S certified data as

of the version date(s) listed below

0 Not rated or not avaoable

1 he soil surveys that comprise your AO

I were m

apped at 1 20 000

0 0 •

0

25 50

50 - 100

100 - 150

150 - 200

Sol S

urvey Area C

ameron C

ounty, Texas Survey A

rea Data

Version 15, Sep 14, 2018

Sol rnap units are labeled (as space allow

s) for map scales

1,50,000 or large' 200

0 •

Not rated or nal ayaiiable D

atersy aerial images w

ere photographed D

ec 31, 2009 - Dec

11, 2017 Soil R

ating Points

•- 25

0 25 - 50

0 50 - 100

o 100 - 150

D

150 - 200

•••• 200

The orthophoto or other base map on w

hich the scil lines were

compiled and dig hzed probably differs from

the background im

agery displayed on these maps As a result sorne m

inor shrtling of m

ap unit boundaries may be evident,

Z i naull-PnOV Cf£30 L9Z and

91-SOS *otsl I a313943 Dild


23


Page 268 of 333


Table—Depth to Water Table (AEP Texas Rio Grande LNG Interconnection Project)

Map unit symbol Map unit name Rating (centimeters) Acres in A01 Percent of A01

BA Barrada clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes very frequently flooded occasionally poncied

0 335 8 4 2%

LIV1 Lomalta clay, 0 to 1 percent slopes, occasionally ponded

310.7 3 9%

LO Lomalta occasionally ponded-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes

0 79 7 1 0%

PO Point Isabel clay loam 1 to 5 percent slopes, rarely flooded

>200 936 3 11 6%

PU Point Isabel-Urban land complex

>200 15 3 0 2%

SE Septa silty clay loam, 0 to 0 2 210 6 27 4%

1 percent slopes. occasionally poncied

SU Septa-Urban land complex, 0 to 1 percent slopes, occasionally ponded

0 452 1 5 6%

USX Twinpalms occasionally flooded-Yarborough frequently flooded complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes

115 1.717 3 21 3"o

Water >200 2,009 2 24 9%

Totals for Area of interest

8,067.1 100.0%

24

308


Page 269 of 333


Rating Options—Depth to water Table (AEP Texas Rio Grande LNG Interconnection Project)

Units of Measure: centimeters

Aggregation Method: Dominant Component

Component Percent Cutoff: None Specified

Tie-break Rule: Lower

interpret Nulls as Zero- No

Beginning Month: January

Ending Month• December

25

309


Page 270 of 333

Front: Meaux. Lisa To: Aqiiian5, Dent5e Subject: FW Transiussan Line Date: Fhday, June 07, 2019 5 41 34 PM

L.SA BARK() MEAJX 1 , R(;JLc_. I MANACLR !,.ViltiOr4r.1EN' AL DEPAR "MEAT :11ANAC ER

Norchae Drive Su te OO r.susfon 1%.?Yas 77060

.?ri1 )!-.0/ direct 713;_iti2 Pot /6 cell

11%;i llarknouliamoe,t,nni

POWER Engineers, Inc. ,,,uuv.v(m eieng. 02111

From: MONTEMAYOR, JASON [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, June 06, 2019 4:40 PM To: Meaux, Lisa Cc: RGV WALL TEAM; GONZALEZ, NORBERTO J Subject: Transmission Line

Hello Mrs. Barko,

l have looked at the rnaps you provided to Chief Padilta and have determined that none our infrastructure projects will intersect nor interfere with each other. However, I did notice that we do have a technology project proposed for an area called Gallinas Road. The GPS coordinates are 2S*59'49.77"N, 97"15'40.00 and may be close to your proposed project area. Please de-conflict the coordinates with your project and let 116 know at your earliest convenience We would be available to schedule a meeting as early as next week it needed. Feel tree to cortact me directly or via email it you wish to discuss further Thank you and have a great evening!

Jason Montemayor Supemsory I3order Patrol Atient RGV Wall Protect Delivery Team Office 4 956-2894980 Go\ Cell # 956-250-95 l3 Personal # 956-793-0023

"v nic ( (1-r4ir rnAterjAi - hat s 'if.'"a , w. arc1:cr t qP rrr). 1 .( r rte -rded ia,e.tst ,a•-y r.se. <FEU oi.t oi J:sc.os...:e y, otreis 74: c.tec

a-e 7 - e 7 teraed PiEase cootaLti—e -ce- cte .41 c -3pier

310


Page 271 of 333

TEXAS GENERAL LAN D OFFICE GEORGE P. BUSH, COMMISSIONER

May 2, 2019

I,isa Barko Meaux Power Engineers, Inc. 16825 Northchase Drive. Suite 1200 lIouston, TX 77060-6012

Re: Proposed Rio Grande LNG Interconnection Project Cameron County, Texas POWER Engineers, Inc. Project No. 141358

Dear Ms. Meaux:

On behalf of Commissioner Bush, I would like to thank you for your letter concerning the above-referenced project.

Using your map depicting the project's study area; it does not appear that the General Land Office will have any environmental issues or land use constraints at this time.

When a final route for this proposed project has been determined. please contact me and we can assess the route to determine if the project will cross any streambeds or Permanent School Fund (PSE) land that would require an easement from our agency.

In the interim, if you would like to speak to me further on this project, 1 can be reached by email at [email protected] or by phone at (512) 463-8180.

Again, thank you for your inquiry,

Sincerely,

Glenn Rosenbaum Manager, Right-of-Way Department Leasing Operations

1730 North 011.grr., s Avenue. Auqi-i Tevti "87111-14(f5 P.O. I lox 12873. 787 1-2/C73

5 12-i63-q)01 ,e.o.-exas.gov

311


Page 272 of 333

TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION real places telling real stories

May 23, 2019

Lisa Barko Meaux POWER Engineers, Inc. 16825 Northchase Drive, Ste. 1200 Houston, Tx 7'7060

Re: Project review under the National Historic Preservation Act: Proposed Rio Grande LNG Interconnection Proled, Cameron County. (TFIC 4 20108012; POWER i 141358)

Dear Ms. Barko:

Thank you for your correspondence describing the above referenced project. This letter serves as comment on the proposed undertaking from the State Historic Preservation Officer, the Executive Director of the Texas Historical Comrnission.

The review staff, led by Arlo McKee, has examined our records. The majority of the preliminary study area has never been surveyed by a professional archeologist and there arc many known archeological sites on similar landforms in the nearby area. We consider the preliminary study area area to have a high potential for undocumented cultural deposits.

Once the transmission line routes have been selected. the project area will need to be surveyed by a professional archeologist prior to initiating any ground disturbance to demonstrate a good faith effort to identify historic properties that may be adversely affected by these activities, as defined in 36 CFR 800. We recommend consulting with a professional archeologist early in the project process to perform a records search and to identify high probability areas for archeological survey. By consulting with a professional archeologist, previously recorded archeological resources may be avoided, Please submit these results, recotnrnended survey areas. and a scope of work for our concurrence.

If the survey is being perforrned on public land or within a public easement, your contract archeologist must obtain an Antiquities Permit from our office before any investigations are undertaken. An Antiquities Permit can be issued as soon as we have a completed permit application. A report of the investigations should be produced in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior's Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation and submitted to this office for review.

Thank you for your cooperation in this federal review process, and for your efforts to preserve the irreplaceable heritage of Texas. If you have any questions concerning our review or if we can be of further assistance, please contact Arlo McKee at 512/463-5711 or

Sincerely,

for Mark Wolfe, State Historic Preservation Officer

MW/am

GREG ABBOTT, GOVERNOR * JOHN L. NAU, III, CHAIR * MARK WOLFE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR P O. BOX 12276 *AUSTIN, TEXAS • 75711-2276*P 52 463 6100 *F 512 475 4872 *thc texas goy

312


Page 273 of 333 Docusign Envelope ID FOE1E953-8394-4D4A-9967-809ACSAS40A0 *

Air Texas Department of Transportation 6U0 W InteiVate 2 . Pharr, '.-2.as ,'S,37, .1231 '..Y36) (02 62.;0 Io.ww hdot kzov

March 24, 2019

Ms. Lisa Berko Meaux Project Manager Power Engineers 1.6825 Northchase Drive Suite 1.200 Houston, Tx 77060

Re: Proposed Rio Grande LNG Interconnection Project Cameron County, Texas Power Engineers, Inc. Project Number 141358

Dear Ms. Barko Meaux:

In response to your April 26. 201.9 letter to Mr. Peter Smith, P.E„ in which you requested that our agency provide the most current information concerning environmental, land use constraints and other issues of interest to our agency within the LNG Interconnection Project study area, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) offers the following: • Currently, TxDOT has a project along SH 48 to replace the northern concrete barrier from San

Martin to the eastern boundaty of the of the Bahia Grande • The General Land Office (GLO) also has a project that will widen the Bahia Grande Channel from

the Brownsville Ship Channel to the Bahia Grande • Power Engineers will need to request and secure an access permit from TxD0T to cross or place

any utility within the TxDOT Right of Way • There are numerous state and federal listed endangered and threatened species and species of

concern in the area; we recommend you contact TPWD and USFWS for any information on these biological resources.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your proposed project and if you need any additional information. please contact Juan Sustaita, Jr., P.E., our Director of Maintenance, who handles access issues and right of way permits, at 956-702-6338.

Sincerely;

2ClocuSiockl by

rõ g. awry, r.ty R:+•Alvarez, P.E.

Pharr District Engineer - TxDOT

cc: Rex Costley, P.E., Deputy District Engineer Juan Sustaita, Jr., P.E., Director of Maintenance Juan Bosquez, P.E., San Benito Area Engineer

313


Page 274 of 333

From: Teta. Sa rah To: Texas Natura Giversitv Catabas1 Cc: Deetse, meaux. tsa Subject: TXNDD Data Regtiest - Rio Grande Date: Friday, April 26, 2019 9 55.14 AM

ciopd Morning Bob,

POWER Engineers Inc is requesting a TXNDD review for a transmission line project on behalf of American Electric. Power Texas. The proposed project is within Cameron County, Texas. The USGS 7 5 minute quadrangles listed below ..ire located within the study area boundaries

East Brownsville Palmito Hill Laguna Vista Port Isabel

I he I XINDD data review information will assist us curing the routing process and draiting the environmental assessrnents for the project lhe review deliverable should include an ArcGIS file ot element occurrences, Element Occurrence Record List and EOR Report.

Thank you!

t. ,ir '1:;rt =::

- '

POWER Engineers. Inc ti.v.00/wcnci cora

314


Page 275 of 333

"A Team Workm To Serve Yoe Department of ransportation

4 rr, ./t ,/,/;c1 P....en:re • F.):7 Pre-na • , ; ,,S • :(•:' • 'ray .`.tr,J,It..171(.1ni • loitc Ae•-•rks. • -ill W3V 1,1 ‘..!e • :4.

David Garcia Yavier Vilkirreal Director Assistant Di,.ector

May 9, 2019

Lisa Barko Meaux 16825 North Chase Dr. Suite 1200 Flouston, TX 77060

RE: Proposed Rio Grande LNG interconnection Project Environmental Assessment

Ms. Barko:

We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed "Rio Grande LNG Interconnection Project" Environmental Assessment (EA). We offer the following review comments in regards to the "Rio Grande LNG Interconnection Project" EA:

Access and Right of Way

According to the map submitted, the proposed project area does not contain roads that are under the jurisdiction of Cameron County.

Floodplain Management

Cameron County adopted the Floodplain Management Regulations designed to comply with the requirements and criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program. A permit is required before any construction or other development begins within the unincorporated areas of the county including: initial disturbance of soils associated with clearing, grading, drilling, excavation activities, demolition, subdivision of land, and installation of utilities. A copy of the regulations is available through our website at http:i.L. o. l , trAf1C130'1:111 .' jiiie ptip.

Storm Water Quality

During the construction process, soil is highly vulnerable to erosion by wind and water. Clearing and grading during construction cause the loss of native vegetation necessary for terrestrial and aquatic habitat. The Cameron County Stormwater Management Plan promotes the public welfare by regulating the design, construction, use, and maintenance of any development or other activity that disturbs or breaks the topsoil or results in the movement of earth on land in Cameron County. Any activity that would require the uncovering of a minimum of one (1) acre will require a site development permit. A copy of the permit is available through our website at httly/11.vw,A, co.ciyperprItx.lisiP(r1Qo!.si_SCR2016 pdf.

315


Page 276 of 333

Ms. Lisa Barko Meaux Power Engineers, Inc. May 9, 2019 Page 2 of 2

We have no further comments to make at this time but reserve the right to comment at a later date, if warranted.

If you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me by phone at 956-247-3533 or via email at ridolma caireron tx us .

Thank you,

Paolina Vega, P.E., County Engineer

316


Page 277 of 333

ATTACHMENT A PAGE 1 OF 22

BROWNSVILLE NAVIGATION DISTRICT LEASE CONTRACT NO. 31/ 3 / 114

BETWEEN

THE BROWNSVILLE NAVIGATION DISTRICT

AND

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

L+1% 1. THIS LEASE, made and entered into this t -r day of A"{ , in the year two thousand seven, (2007) by and between the BROWNSVILLE NAVIGATION DISTRICT, a body organized pursuant to section 59 of Article 16 of the Texas constitution and the provisions of chapter 5 of the general laws of the 39'h Legislature, established under chapter 192 of the general laws of the 41st Legislature (1929), whose address is 1000 Foust Road, Brownsville, Texas 78521, acting under the authority of Subchapter F of Chapter 60 of the Texas Water Code, hereinafter referred to as the "Lessor", and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, through the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, hereinafter called the "Service", under the authority of the Migratory Bird Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 715-715r), as amended; Migratory Bird Hunting Stamp Act (48 Stat. 451), as amended (16 U.S.C. 718 et seq.); Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (70 Stat. 1119), as amended (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j); and Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667c); which by this reference are made a part hereof,

WITNESSETH: The parties hereto for the considerations hereinafter rnentioned convenant and agree as follows:

2. The Lessor hereby leases to the Service those several tracts or parcels of land lying and being situated in the County of Cameron, State of Texas, rnore particularly described in Exhibit "A", which is attached here to and incorporated herein for any and all purposes.

3. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises with their appurtenances for a period as shown below:

a. Parcel 3E, Exhibit "A", a period not to exceed the length of the lease agreernent between the Brovinsville Navigation District and the United States of America as executed on August 3, 1983 (expiration date of September 1, 2023); however, this parcel will be leased and managed by the Service only until it is needed for development by the Lessor.

b. Parcel 4E, Exhibit "A", a period not to exceed the length of the lease agreement between the Brownsville Navigation District and the United States of America as executed on August 3, 1983, (expiration date of September 1, 2023).

c. Parcel 5E, Exhibit "A", a period not to exceed the length of the lease agreement between the Brownsville Navigation District and the United Stated of America as executed on August 3, 1983, (expiration date of September 1, 2023); however, this parcel of land will be leased and

Laguna Atascnsa NWR (21OLS)

317


Page 278 of 333


managed by the Service only until it is needed for development by the Lessor.

4. The Service shall not assign this tease in any event, and shall not sublet the demised premises except to a desirable tenant and for a similar purpose, and will not permit the use of the said premises by anyone other that the Service, such sublessee, and the agents and servants of the Service, or of such sublease.

5. The consideration for leasing these three (3) parcels of land to the Service consists of mitigation measures associated with the improvements to State Highway 48 by the Texas Department of Transportation. The Board of Commissioners of the Brownsville Navigation District find that the benefit to the District of those improvements constitutes adequate consideration for this lease.

6. It is mutually understood and agreed that if the Service fails to receive the necessary funds from Congress for managing said lands herein set forth for any fiscal year, then and in that event, the Lessor shall be so advised in writing, and this tease shall terminate on a date as determined by the Service and provided in such written notice.

7. UNLAWFUL CONDUCT. -- The Service agrees that it will not use or cause or allow to be used any part of said premises for any unlawful conduct or purpose.

8. DELIVERY OF PREMISES. -- It is understood and agreed that at the termination of this lease, by normal expiration as described in Item 3. above or otherwise, the Service shall peaceably and without legal process deliver up the possession of the premises herein described, inclusive of the improvements which are to remain the properly of the Lessor, in good condition, usual wear and acts of God expected.

9. INTEREST OF MEMBER OF CONGRESS. -- No member of, or delegate to Congress, or resident commissioner shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or any benefit that may arise herefrom, but this provision shall not be construed to extend to this contract if made with a corporation or company for its general benefit.

10. This lease is subject to the following provisions:

a. The Service covenants and agrees that the lands and rights described in this agreement shall not at any time be used in any manner or for any purpose which rnay cause or tend to impair the operations of the Brownsville Navigation District or the usefulness of the Brownsville Navigation District facilities, including the Brownsville Ship Channel and adjacent lands belonging to Lessor.

b. The Service will not issue any easements, permits, licenses, or rights-of-way to any parties for any purpose, or allow other uses not associated with administration of said lands as a wildlife conservation corridor without prior written concurrence of the Lessor.

c. The Lessor, its successors, assigns, and agents shall have an unrestricted right to enter upon, over, or across lands described in this lease at any time for the purpose of performing or causing the performance of operations which the Brownsville Navigation District

318


Page 279 of 333


may consider necessary in the operation and maintenance of its facilities. Except in the emergency conditions, the Lessor will confine its operations to roads in existence on the date of this agreement or as may be agreed upon in writing at any time and will make all reasonable efforts to minimize any adverse effects upon Service use, operation, protection, and development of said lands for wildlife conservation and related purposes.

d. Subject to valid existing rghts, oil, gas, and other authorized mineral exploration and development will be permitted on the lands described in this agreement under applicable Federal and State laws, rules, and regulations necessary to assure protection of national wildlife refuges and other natural resources. The State of Texas General Land Office environmental codes and provisions in 50 CFR 29.32 covering mineral rights reserved and excepted on national wildlife refuges shall be used as guidelines in issuing any permit for mineral development on this property. In this regard, the parties agree that this is a lease of the surface only, and not of any mineral rights, all of which are retained by Lessor.

11. ASSENT NOT WAIVER OF FUTURE BREACH OF COVENANTS. -- No assent, expressed or implied, to any breach of any of the Service's covenants, shall be deemed to be a waiver of any succeeding breach of any covenants.

12. UPON WHOM BINDING. -- It is understood and agreed that the covenants and agreements hereinbefore mentioned shall extend to and be binding upon the heirs, assigns, successors, executors, and administrators of the parties of this lease.

13. APPROVAL. -- It is further understood and agreed between the parties hereto that this lease shall be valid and binding only after approval by the Secretary of the Interior or his authorized representative.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands.

WITNESSES:

BROWNSVILLE NAVIGATION DISTRICT

By: LOgA4,„ iL Title: Date: 71/€4.48

The lease of the land herein described at the consideration and under the conditions herein stated, the Secretary of the Interior, acting by and through his authorized representative, has executed this lease on behalf of the United States of America on this

day of , 2007.

319


Page 280 of 333


THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,

C By:

Region Director U.S. Fi h and Wildlife Service Albuquerque, New Mexico

320


Page 281 of 333

ATTACHMENT A PAGE 5 Ot 22

November. 2004 Parcel 3E

Page 1 of 2 Pages

Exhibit "A"

County: C ammo Project SH 48 RCS': 022407-053 CCM 0220-07-051

Parcel 38 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

Being 203.666 square feet or 4.676 acres of land out of a 55148 sae tract described in &deed dated July 31, 1999 from F. C. Weems Trust, et al to, DatteMtville Navigation District as recanted in Volume 5839, Page 83 of the Official Recasts of Cialleten County, Ten" said 4.676 acres being out of Share 3 of the San MArtitt Grant, Abstract 6, said 4.676 acres of land being more particularly deecribed by metes and bounds as Mows

Commencing it a Srit inch iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked RODS SURVEYING set at the intersection of the not* fine of said 555.48 acre tract and the existing test right-of-way easement (200 FOOT ROW at this point) of StatelEghway No 48 and from which $ inch kon rod found bears SOUTH 86°47'47* WEST a distance of 1.66 feet and as aluminum cap set on an iron rod tbund bents SOUTH 8647'47" WEST a thalami of617.12 feet, said existing mat right. of-way easement being deacribed in a deed dated October 22, 1952 from W.F. Garcia, et al to the County of Canaan said recorded in Volume 547, Page 23$ of the Deed Records (Atomism Cousty, said commencing point also being in the soinhaly line of a 3260.060 acre tract described in a deed dated October 17. 2000 front May Dougherty King, et al to Brownsville Nrvigation District of Cameron County. Texas records, in Whew 6627, Page 193 of the atheist Records of Cameron County, theme as follows

NORTH 5798'49Y' EAST along tbe common line between said 555.48 and 3260.060 acre tracts a distance of 205.30 feet to the misting east right-of-way (400 FOOT ROW at this point) easement of State Highway No. 48, said existing east right-of-way ems/tent being described in a deed dated October 22, 1952 from Paul Goodrich, et al. to Cameron County a political mbdivision of the State of Texas and recorded in Volume 522, Page 413 of the Deed Records of Canaan County,

SOUTH 57'38'49 WLST along said existing east right-of-way comers a distance of 5082.77 fon to a Ste inch iron rod with a yellow plastic cap narked RODS SURVEYING set for the POINT of BEGINNING of the herein described parcel, said POINT of BEGINNING having surfs% co-ordinitcs of X=1,383,53110 =I Y=16,530,249.06. All bearings and coordinates are based on die State Plane Coordinate System of Texas, South Zone. North American Datum 1983 (1993 adjustment). All distance* and cti-ordinates arc surface and may be converted to grid by dividing by a combined scale factor of 0.99996

321


Page 282 of 333


November, 2004 Pucci 3E

Pap of 2 Pages

1. Thence SOUTH 54•21110* EAST a distance of 1079.51 feet to a VS inch iron rod with a yellow plastic cap merited RODS SURVEYING set for the northeasterly comer of the herein described tact;

2. Thane SOUTH 57°3849 WEST a distance of 203.67 feet to a 3/1 inch iron rod with a yellow plastic maked RADS SURVEYING set for the southeasterly comer of the herein described tam;

3. Thence NORTH 54-21•50" WEST e distance of 1079.51 feet to a Sit inch iren rod with a yellow plastic cep marked RODS SURVEYING set for the southwesterly corner of the herein described panel, said point luring in lurid existing eastaly right.of•way easement ofState histrarayNa. 41t;

4. Theme NORTH 57'311'49" EAST along said misting east right-of.way el:anent a distance of 203.67 feat to the POINT of BEODINDIG of the berein described parcel and containing 203,666 square Asa or 4.676 arts of laid.

A parcel plat accompanies this metes and bounds description.

I do hereby certify dud this metes and bounds ductiption and accompanying parcel plat conform to the current Graters! Rules of Procedures and Practices as promulgated by ths Tame Emit Of Professional Land Surveyors.

WILLIAM L MCCOWN, R.P.LS. N1719 RODS SURVEYING, INC.

ir—

DATE -/ 17.17;114-.431;''

322


Page 283 of 333


November, 2004 Parcel 4E

Page 1 of 2 Pages

Exhibit "A"

County: Cameros Project SH 48 RCSJ: 022047-053 CCS3: 0220-07-0S1

Parcel 4E PROPERTY DESCRIP'floil

Reing 1.123.500 square feet or 25.792 acres of laud eat of a 5.55.48 and s 632.12 acre tract, said tracts being deieribed in a deed dated July 31. 1999 flom F. C. Weems Trust, et al to Brownsville Navigation District as recorded in Volume 5839. Page 83 of the Official Records of Carneroo Covey, Texas, mid 25.792 acres being out of Share 3 of the Sea Martin Giant, Abstract 6, said 25.792 acres of land being more paniculady described by metes and bounds as follows:

Commack* at a 5/8 inch hint rod with a yellow plastic cep merked RODS SURVEYING set at the intersection of the north line of said 555A8 acre tract and the existhig (tut right-o(-way easement (200 FOOT ROW at this point) of State Highway No. 4 sad from which a tÇ inch iron rod fowid bears SOUTH 864747" WEST a distance of 1.66 fan and an aluminum cap an on an iton rod found bean SOUTH 86"47'47" WEST a distance of 617.12 teat, said raining east right-of-way easement being described in a deed dated October 22, 1952 foam WY. Gamut, et al to this Comity of Cameton and recorded in Volume 547, Page 235 of the Deed Records of Canteton County, said commend:4point also being in the southerly line of a 3260.060 acre tract described in a deed dated October 17, 2000 from May Dougherty King, et al to Beownsvi11. Navigation District of Canteron County, Texas recorded in Volum-66627, Page 193 of the Official Reoordsof Camenon County, thence as follows;

NORTH srstro" EAST along the MAWR hoe between said 555.48 and 3260.060 acre tracts a distance of 205.30 feet re the existing east right-of-way (400 FOOT ROW at Mapping uremia of State Highway No et said misfits oast risht-of-way casement being described in a deed dated October 22, 1952 from Paul Goodrich, et 41, to Cameron CoontY a political subdivision of the State of Texas and recorded in Whose 522 Page 413 of the Deed Records of Cameron Como,

SOUTH 57°3SW WEST along said existing an rightotway easement a distance of4812.90 feet to a SA inch iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked RODS SURVEYING sat for the POINT of BEGZINING of the herein dcsaibed parcel. laid POINT of BEGINNING having surface co-ordinates of X••1.3113,759.78. Y..16.530,393.48. All bearings and coordinates are based on the State Plane Cootdimate System of Texas, South Zone, North American Datum 1983 (1993 adiustmeot). Alt distances and co-ordinates are surface and may be converted to grid by dividing by a combined scale factor of 0.99996

323


Page 284 of 333



Page 2 of 2 Pages

1. Thence scum 54.28'5O EAST a distance of 107 5 I feet to a SI inch iron rod with e, yellow plastic cap marked RODS SURVEYING sm fix an inside corner of the herein described tract

2. Thence NORTH 57°38'49" EAST *distance of 605.97 feet to a 518 inch iron rod with yellow plastic csp matted RODS SURVEYING set for the most northerly northwesterly comer of the herein described tact;

3. Theme SOUTH 3028'50" EAST at a distance of 345.44 fact passing the common line between said 555.48 and 63212 sae bads, in all a distance of 825.44 feet to a VS inch iron rod with a yellow plastic cap nisiked RODS SURVEYTNO set for the nonheasterly corner of the herein described tract;

4. Thence SOUTH $04920" WEST a distance of 1059.56 feM to a 5/8 inch iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked RODS SURVEYING set fbr the southeasterly COM( cif** herein described tract

S. Thence NORTH 3028'50" WEST at a distance of 536,37 feet passing the common line hetwaten said 555.48 and 632.12 sae nuts, in all a distance of 8111.111 feet to a 51 inch iron rod with yellow plutie cap marked RODS SURVEYING set for die most easterly southwesterly corner of the herein described pareet

6. Thence NORM 57°3849" EAST a distance of 203.67 feet te a 5/8 inch iron rod with a yellow plastic cep marked RODS SL'RVEYING set fbr an inside corner of the hernia described tract;

7. Thence NORTH 5028'50" WEST a Some of t 07931 feet to a NI inch iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked RODS SURVEYNG set Ihr the most westerly southwesterly comer of the herein deeenled tract, said point being in said existing easteliy right-of-way easement of State hienvay No. 411;

B. Thence NORTH 57•38'450' EAST aloes said existing east right-of-way easement a distance of269.88 feet to the POINT of BEGINNING of the Main described parcel end container's 1,123,500 square fbet or 23.792 saes of hind.

A parcel piss accompenies this metes and bounds description.

!do hereby certify that this tows and bounds description and accompanying parcel plat conform to the current General Rules ofPrecedures and Practices as promulgated by the Texas Board Of Professionai Laid Styveyots.

-1,07 • Y.11 71P-

ei WILLIAM L MCCOWN, RP.L.S. 41719 '51bit, ..4.,..4 RODS SURVEY1NCI, INC. lie eon iri Jz-if -•y DATE

x

324


Page 285 of 333



Page 1 of Pages

Exhibit "A"

County. Csmeron Project: SH 411 RCS!: 022047-053 CCSJ: 0220-07-031

Patel 5E PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

Being 605,966 square feet or 13.911 acme of laid out of a 555.48 acre tract described in deed deted July 31, 1999 from F. C. Weems Trust, et al to Brownsville Navigation District as recorded in Volume 5839, Page 83 of ths 001cial Records of Camera County, Texas, said 13.911 acres belog out of Sham 3 of tbe San Martin Great, Abstract 6„ asid 13.911 saes of land being more patients:* described by metes and botmds as follow=

Conunseuring at a 5/8 inch iron rod with a yettene plastic cap marked RODS SURVEYING set at the intersection of the north line of said 33548 acse traot and the existing east right-of-way easement (200 FOOT ROW at this point) of State Highway No. 4.1 and from which a '4 inch iron rod !band beers SOUTH 86'4747" WEST a distance of 1.66 feet sad an aluminum cap set on an iron rod found bears SOUTH 86'47'47" WEST a distance of 617.12 feet, said misting east right-of-way mamma being described in a deed dated October 2Z 1952 from W. Garcia, a al to the County of Catoctin and recorded in Volume 547, Pege 235 of tbe Deed Records of Cameron County, said commencing point also being in the southerly line of a 3260.060 acre tract described in a deed dated October 17, 2000 ?tom May Dougherty King, et al to Brownrville Navigation District of Canaan County, Texas recorded in Volum" 6627. rase 193 of the Official Remade of Cameo Ce.fenty„ thence u follows;

NOR'TH 57°38'49" EAST atoms the common line between said 555.48 and 3260.040 acne tracts a distance of 205.30 feet to the existing east right-of-way (400 FOOT ROW at t)zis point) easemad of State Hiebwey No. 44„ said misting east night-of-way easement being described in a deed dated October 22. 1952 from rata Goodrich, a al, to Cantestm County a political subdivision of tire state of Texas and recorded in Volume 522, Page 413 of the Deed Records of Cameron County,

SOUTH 57'38'49" WEST along said misting east right-of-way easement a distance 04206.93 feet to a 5/11 inch iren rod with a yellow plastic cep mated RODS SURVEYING set for the POINT of BEGINNING of the herein dumbed parcel, uid POINT of BEGINNING having surface oci-ordinatoe of X-1,384.271/4, P0,530,71731 Alt bearings and coordinates are bated on the State rims Coordinate System of Tecas. South Zone. North American Datum l 9S3 (1993 adjustment). All distances and co-onfinates are aurfate and may be converted to grid by dividing by a combined wale factor of 0.99996

325


Page 286 of 333


November. 2004 Percel SE

Page 2 of 2 Pagel

1. Thence SOUTH son'w EAST a distance of 1079.51 feet to & 5/8 inch iron rod with a yellow plastic cap marked RODS SURVEYING set for the northeasterly comer dew herein described tract;

Z. next SOUTH 57*3819" WEST a dichnce of 605.97 feet to a 5/11 inch iron rod with a yellow plastics cap marked RODS SURVEYING set for the southeasterly coma of the herein described tract

3. Thence NORTH 541211'50" WEST s distance of 1079.51 feet to a inch iron rod with s yellow plastic eap marked RODS SURVEYING set for the southwesterly corner of the hesein described paitel, said point being in said existing euterty right-of-way easement of State highway No. 4/1;

4. Thence NORTH 57°313'49" EAST alengsaid existing east right-of-way easement a distance of 605.97 fest So the POINT of BEGINNING of the herein described parcel and containing 605,966 square feet or 13.911 acresof land.

A parcel plat accompanies this metes and bounds description.

1 do hereby cat* that this metes and besmds description and ucompanying parcel plat confban to the comet General Rubs of Procedures and ?TIMM as promulgated by the Texas Road Of Professional Land Sorveyom,

74-7 L MCCOWN, trI719

RODS SURVEYING, INC.

/ 2- I *# DATE

326


On

am

T

sam

-----

- • • • • •

SANTA

DC

A31tR

AN

T

SEE DETAIL

"A"

PAREN

T TR

ACT

INSET

N.T.S

. PAR

CEL

5E

PA

RC

EL

4E

PARC

EL 3E

3260.0

60

ACRES V

OL,

66

27

. P

G.

193 O

.R.C

.C.

•

Not es,

All beorings ond coordinates ore hosed on the

Texos Sta

te P

ione Coordinate S

ystem. S

outh Zone. N

orth Am

erican Ooturn

of 1983, 1993

Adjustm

ent. All distances and coordinotes shown

ore surface ond m

oy oe converted

to grid by

dividing by o com

bined odjustment foctor o

f 0 99996

2 S

et Indicates o 5

/8

inch iron rod set w

ith o yeliow

piost.c cop m

arked "RO

DS

S

urveying, Inc "

NO

EXISTINC

AC

(SO

FT 1 TAKIN

G

ACR

ES R

EMAIN

DER

AC

RES

3E

4 676

4E 25.792

5E 13 911

I

TOTAL

1,187.600 4

4,3

79

1,14.3 221

P 0.C

.. Set

Porcels 3E

. 4E. &

5E

20

6.5

2'n

bi7.12" F

nd Fr.d.

1/2

" f,R

5/8

" I,R

w/A

um

Cop

8

20:3

0:

47' 4

7'

DE

TA1 "A

,/

"

EASEMEN

T S

KE

TCH

SH

OW

ING

P

RO

PE

RTY

O

F

BRO

WN

SVILLE N

AVIGATIO

N D

ISTRIC

T O

F C

AMER

ON

C

OU

NTY

(4- P

orcel 3E

Sheet 1 o

f 3

Sri

48

CAM

ERO

N

CO

UN

TY R

OD

S SU

RVEYIN

G IN

C.

NO

VE),IBER, 2

00

4

PC

S.;:0220-07-053

CC

S.P

0220-07-051

SEE D

ET

AIL

"A".

S7)EET 1

P.O

.C..

SET PA

RC

ELS 4206,93.

3E.4E.A 5E

355-88.40

Eri9"

203 32' RIG. 4

1

*444.

4 149

EX'STIqC P.C.w.

S.H. 48 (400 P.O.W. vOL. 522. PG. 413 O.R.C.C.)

0 200

4C 0 600

!ilFT

!17

SC

ALE

1"-2

00'

o P4frl 4

d, 1,..

1.. PARCEL

c-) 3E

co -

4&U

'1(: A

,

PARCEL

4E

25.792

ACRES

PARCEL

SE 13.911 ACRES

o

134.94'

134.94'

PARCEL 4E

DETA

IL "A

" N

T S

MA

TCH

LINE

SH

EET TH

REE

Pa

rcel 3E

S

heet 2 o

f 3

N)5" .3

, ."= PRORCED T OOT BASELINE

SEE DETAIL "A

"

s:S7•1

8

S T 203.67.'1

4812.90' N 5

738'49" E

i p.o.s„ sET

605-97'

P.0.6.. SET

t PA

RC

EL AE

PAR

CEL

5E

X=

1.3

83

.75

9.7

8

X=

1.3

84.2

71.6

8

Y=16.530.393.48

'1=16,530.717.75

--345*C8.90

203.46.%

P:OnT

4 ...-^1—•-•,

,ENTERL.NE OP

ExISTING-

.... ,

400 ;COT R.0 W.

,

.

/

I- .

e l''

N:,•dt-j 44"w

/ -

-1 703.4—

.7

1 i-

SETi 5082.77'

269.88'

P.O.B.. SET

PARCEL 3E

x=1,383.531.80

y=16.530.249.06

rile I _PIr.t.11.1II.'

Attachment 2 Page 288 of 333


e-3

cs•

SE

0 200

400 600

.

,,r 2

‘,

..,* 0

P• ''''?.,

PA

RC

EL': 0

0 •

"a '

.... •

a ,)

PARCEL SE

x. >

........P e.' •

, 3E

C,

4.6

76

cs'•=2.•

..,-

..013.911 ACRES

c>,- AC

RES

.`",Ic; .si?>_

_ .

4-

r^ SET

203 67' '

c S 5738'49" W

605.37'

557'38'49"W SET

SET

N 5738'49" E

PARCEL 4E

25.792 ACRES


SCALE r=

200'

MATC

HLIN

E SH

EET TW

O

SE

T

BR

OW

NS

VILLE

N

AV

IGA

TIO

N D

IST

RIC

T

555.48 ACRES

VOL. 5839. PG. 83

O.R.C.C.

632.12

ACR

ES VOL. 5839. PC, 83

O.R.C.C.

BR

OW

NS

VIL

LE

N

AV

IGA

TIO

N D

IST

RIC

T

S54•49'20w

1059.56

SE

T

NAVIGAT:ON

LIOHT TO,iER

Alt bearings and coordinotes ore based on the T

exos Sto

te N

one Coord;note S

ystem. S

outh Z

one. North A

merican D

otum

of 1983,1993

Adjustm

ent, Ail distances ond coordinates show

n ore

surfoce ond rnoy be conve

rted to

grid by cj,,,,;d;"g

by o com

bined scoie fa

ctor o

f 0,99998,

2. Set

Indicates o 5/8

" Iron

Rod se

t with o

yellow

plostic cop morked "R

OO

S

Surveying, Inc,

Parcel 3E

Sheet 3

of 3

ro: 4 N

I ,OOT 0,vr r 13,,,a3SCrCi. 2.E -1

,21

die

Notes,

z l uatutPuov 9t-SOS '0NI 0130C1 Y ld

I

SANTA

tiSA

BE

LOR

AN

T A

-1 3260.060 ACRES

VOL. 6621. G. A93 O.R.C.C.

SEE D

ETAIL "A

" PAR

ENT

TRAC

T IN

SET N

,T S PAR

CEL

5E PAR

CEL

4E PAR

CEL

3E

--7;A

at W

ARTEN1 GRANT

$4.-3

1 ------

S. •

• •

P.O

.C., S

et P

arcets 3E. 4E

, & SE

\

tt%'

\'\* 44. •

1

206 52'

N 8

6'4

7'4

7"

E

Notes:

1 205.3

0'

beor ;rig

s ond coordinates ore bosed on the Texos

Stote P

rone Coordinote S

ystem, S

outh Zone, N

orth Am

erican Dotum

of 1983, 1993

Adjustm

ent. AJ1 dis torices ond coordinates shown

surfoce ond rnoy be converted

to grid by

dividing by o

combined oojustm

ent focto

r of

0.99996.

617.12' F

nd. F

nd. 1/2

" I R.

5/8

" 1.R. w

/A1orn. C

op V

2 S

et r indicates 0 5/8

inch iro

n rod set w

ith a yellow

plastic

cap morked "R

OD

S

Surveying, Inc."

• •

DETAIL "A"

i N3NHOtIL LV

! ' EXISTIN

G

AC '

NO

, I

(50 F

T.)

TAKING

ACR

ES R

EMAIN

DER

AC

RES

r 3E

4 676

4 r

25

.79

2

5E

13 911

TOTAL

1,187 600 4

4.3

79

1,143.221

EASEMEN

T SKETC

H

'g* SH

OW

ING

P

RO

PE

RTY

O

F

BR

OW

NS

VILLE

N

AV

IGA

TIO

N

DIS

TR

IG1

OF CAMERON COUNTY

SH

48 C

AMER

ON

CO

UN

TY R

OO

S SU

RVEYIN

G

INC

. N

OVEM

BER, 2004

RCSJ.0220-07-053 CCSJ:0220-07-051

• • •

.0+ P

arcel 4E

Sheet 1 o

f 3

S.:N

G

R.0

.w.

1355+88.40

Ex 2

03

.32

' R

IGH

r

134.9

4'

13

4.9

4'

1;

•

N57'39"16"E

N57'3

8'4

9"E

C

ENTER

LINE

OF E

x:ST:N

G

400 FOOT

R.O

.w•

\ •

20 .67 ',

-1345+C.90

203.46"\ RtGHT

,

ZZ .A0 S L 39Vd V 1NEWH3VI1V

Ex‘ST

,L.G

PARCEL

5E 13

.91

1

ACRES

MATCHLINE SHEET THREE

e4

'1?c ,„ N

40.

SHEET

11 44

) 4g?

SEE D

ETAIL

"A"./

,

PA31

,ARC2ETS

ce, *

,2

4206.9

3'

3E.4E

.S. 5E

44,

44,c67 •

tft

o

PARCEL

4E

, D

ETAIL

"A"

N

T S

Porcel 4E

Sheet 2 of 3

N 5738'4

9"

E 4812

90'

0 200

400 600

SCALE 1" I

-200'

S.H. 48

t4CO

R

.O.w

. vO

L.

522.

PG.

413 D

.R.C

.C.)

SET 6

05

.97

' P

.0.8

.. S

ET

-I PA

RCEL 4E

PARCE_

5E X

=1

.38

3.7

59

.78

X

=1

.38

4.2

71

.68

Y

=1

6.5

30

.39

3.4

9

Y=

16

.53

0.7

17

.75

S

P. N c9

PARCEL

(7-3 r'<;pb PA

RCEL s

3E 4E

o 4A

alt

'.1<; °

W.!

4.. .

.

.0

' ''' «o

.(7 ..-1 -4 ,p

477 A

t 44

0000

4114Z6r,PO4/...

o j.„ 5ET

SET 5082

77'

269 8

8'

\-R.O

.8..

5ET PA

RCEL 3E

/ x

=1

.38

3.5

31

.80

Y

=1

6.5

30

.24

9.0

6

SEE C

EJA

IL

"A-

N 32

1120' 4 4

' 203

V, ' '

Pp0POSE

0 -

COT 24SEL1N

E

Z PlatutlaeliV 91-COS *coN pl acqj pa d

00 Doim

ettettia 4.

400 600

SCALE

1"-200' M

ATCH

LINE

SHEET

TWO

s

s s

~PARCEI:JA

.S

r

1*.

'0, 4.676

•

s

3E

1-.) s

0

.. ACRES

.-'

_ ..,„

i

,;7k 203.67"

SETO 557.38'49,,w

SET

SET

PARCEL SE

13.911 ACRES

S 57'3849" W

505.97'

SET

N 57'3849

E

PARCEL 4E

25.792 ACRES

2 s.


555.48 ACRES

VOL. 5839. PG. 83

632.12 ACRES

VOL. 5839. PC. 83


O.R.C.C.

1059 56

ZZ 9 1. 3Db'd Yi NBIAJ HDVLIV

554 49 20W

NA

vICA

TIO

N

Notes: SET

oLIGHT TOWER

t. Aìt beor.ngs and

coordinates ore bosed

on the Texos

Sto

le Pk:m

e C

oordiriote System

. South

Zone. North A

merican D

oturn o

f 1983, 1993 A

djustment

All distonces and coardinotes shown

ore surfoce ond rnoy be conve-ted to

grid by dividog by

o combtned scale

facto

r of 0.99996

2 S

et :nd.cates c 5

/8'' irort R

od set with o yetow

plostic

cop marked -R

OD

S S

urveying, Inc.

SET

Porcei 4E

S

heet 3 of 3

L.i

FRC

-.NT4C<II so

t./ '40,295400211‘CAG

‘Sow, Pot 4.F

.ro.",

0.R.C.c.

• • • • •

N

86.4

7'4

7" E

I 1

205.3

0'

2. Set t ird

icctes c

5/8

inch iron ,od set w

ith o yellow

ptost c cop m

orked "RO

DS

Surveyrng, In

c."

NO

EXISTING

AC

(SO

. FT

.) TAK'N

G

ACR

ES R

EMAIN

DER

AC

RES

,3E

4.676

4E

25.792

5E 13 91(

rTO

TAL 1,187.600

44 379 1,143,221

r‘) O

F CAM

ERON CO

UNTY

•

rn

EASEMENT

SKETCH

SH

OW

ING

PR

OP

ER

TY

OF

BRO

WN

SVILLE NAVIGATIO

N DiSTRI T

SH

48 C

AMER

ON

CO

UN

TY ROOS SURVEYING INC.

NOVEM

KR, 2004 R

CS

J:022C-07 -0

53

CC

SJr0220-07 -051

DR

-TAO "A

" TLf

-

• • • •

Porcel 5E

Sheet 1 of 3

SANTA M

AN

EL

AM

MO

3260.0

60 ACRES

VO

L. 6627. P

G.

193 O

.R.G

.c. SEE

DETAil.

"A",

PAREN

T TR

ACT

INSET

N.T.S

. Rit 8

4F

3 L:

PA

RC

EL

SE PAR

CEL

4E

PARC

EL 3E

P 0.C

., Set

Parcels 3E

, 4E. &

SE

206.52'

,

'

01)

1, • col)

617.12' F

nd. E

nd. 1

/2" I.R

. 5

/8'

LR.

w/A

lurn. Cop

Notes

I. Al! aeorings chid coordinotes O

re bosect

on the Texos S

tote Plane C

oordinote System

. South

Zone, North A

rnericon Doturn

of 1983, 1993

Aojustm

ent. AII distances ond coordinates shown

ore surface ond rnoy be converted to

grid by dividing by

c com

bined odiustrnent facto

r of

0 99996. • •

PARCEL

3E 4.676

ACRES

4, _

414ppi 4 .119

e44, 49?,

SET 134.94'

134.94'

1

PARCEL 4E

DETAIL "A"

N.T.S.

r J O

2

3D Vd V i NaW ROV.1 1 V

000

400 600

SC

AE

1"-200'

47, 4a •A/ '04,

4: •4/4/1 Q0

At* 0,4 ,,vo '4

pAic,

N57'39'I6"E

PPOPOSED T CG7 BASEL.:NE

N57°38'49"E

CENTERLINE OF

EXISTING

400 FOOT R.C.w.

/-

\

7

N 32"in 44"w SETI 5082.77

4812.90'

N 57' 8'49" E

o 203.67'

k \

269.88

-..-.1 "-P.0.8.. SET

605 .97'

P.P 0A 1C .E .L SE5E T-/

PARCEL 4E

—'.2 :A

5;2 89°

\--P.0.8.. sET

PARCEL 3E

X=1.383.759.78

X=1.384.271.68

RIC-T

N,, X=1.383.531.801

Y=16.530.393.48

Y=16

.530.

717.75

Y=16.530.249.06

N,

,

SEE DETAIL

"A"

PARCEL SE

13.911 ACRES

MATC

HL1N

E SF1EET

THR

EE

Parce

l 5E

Sheet 2

of 3

p

4

Ex ST!N0 R.O.w.

S.H. 48 (400' R.O.w. vOL. 522. PG. 413 D.R.C.C.)

SET

/ 2

C3

.4I'

PARCEL

4E

25.792

ACRES

_. - , —

: ,,,, 0 4,

-- 40,... 7..?

4:-.4,1,,_ _4

\ 9,4

SEE DETAIL "A". r

\ SHEET 1 1

) 4- ' 4°4

P.13.P,ACKI

1 /

itiW4*?

4206 93

3E.4E.S. SE

‘

C14' -__-

.. ,.

, 30.

\,

EXISTING R.O.w.

,355~86.40

203.32' RIGHT

VA

, v

,1'v

rvn

•

SET N 5738'49'.

E

a JO 6 1. 391k1 'V 1.N3lAIHDYL LV

SET

u20

13 4

00

600

SC

ALE

1"-2

00

*

MATCHLINE SHEET

TWO

P. -,:? PARCELP,-0i;%

0, ',),,- ..0 3E

•

0 0

0 CP

4.676

-. .

- A:REs

2O3. 67' ' -

.i. ..:-.

SET

, 57'38'49"

SET

SET

PARCEL 5E

13.911 ACRES

S 5738'49" W

605.97'


0

555.48 ACRES

VOL. 5839. PC. 83

O.R

.C.C

.

632.12 ACRES

VOL. 5839. PG. 83

BROWNSVILLE NAV:CATION DISTRICT

CP

O.R

.C.C

.

Notes'

1A

lt Deorgngs

arid coordgnotes

ar e D

osed on the

Texas State P

iOne C

oordinote System

. South

Zone. Nortn A

rnergoon Doturn

of 1963,1993 Adjustm

ent Alldtstonces and coordinotes shown

ore surface ond may be converted to 9rsd by

div ,tw,g by

o cornbgned scole factor of 0.99996.

2 Set Ind,cotes o

5/8

- ron R

od set wan a yellow

p:ostgc cop m

arked "RODS Sw- verng. Inc.

564'49'20w

1 k.A

vICA

TION

I

-_jc.1-17 TZAER

i a

: 't...., ,0

19 0

1059.5

SOC,E 1%;"ER

PARCEL 4E

25.792 ACRES

rrs

SET

Porcel 5E

Sheet 3 of 3


Page 296 of 333


Pile: N:\TXDOTNPharr 139\20360020\PARCEL-3E.SQF 12/15/2004, 2:03:36PM _ -------


JOB NUMBER: 20360003

SH 48 PORT ISABEL TO THE SHRIMP BASIN ROW MAPPINa

11- 18-2004 13:19:31

SPN.ID. PARCEL lE

FROM BEARING DISTANCE TO NORTHING EASTING

1509 16530249.06 1383531.80 -

1509 S 54 28 50 E 1079.51 1511 16529621.89 1384410.43

1511 S 57 38 49 W 203.67 1512 16529512.90 1384238.38

1512 N 54 28 50 W 1079.51 1503 16530140.07 1383359.75 ....

1503 N 57 38 49 E 203.67 1509 16530249.06 1383'331.80

AREA OF TRAVERSE 203666 SQ.FT. 4.676 ACRES --

FROM TO BEARING DISTANCE

237 POC 1509 POB S 57 38 49 W 5082.77

Pdge •

336


Page 297 of 333


File: N:\TXDOT\Pharr 139\20360020\PARCEL-4E.SQF 12/15/2004, 2.04:37PM


JOB NUMBER: 20360003 11- 18-2004 11:32:23

SR 48 PORT ISABEL TO THE SHRIMP BASIN ROW MAPPING

SPN.ID: PARCEL-4E

FROM BEARING DISTANCE TO NORTHING RASTING

1508 16510193.48 1183759.78

1508 S 54 28 50 E 1079.51 1510 16529766.31 1384638,41

1510 N 57 38 49 E 605.97 1507 16530090.58 1385150.31

1507 S 54 28 50 E 825.44 1502 16529611.02 1385822.15 ^

1502 S 54 49 20 W 1059.56 1504 1G529000.59 1364956.10

1504 N 54 28 50 W 881.81 1512 16529512.90 1384238.38

1512 N 57 38 49 E 203.67 1511 16529621.89 1384410.43

1511 N 54 28 50 W 1079.51 1509 16530249.06 1383531.80 •

1509 N 57 38 49 E 269.88 1508 16530393.48 1383759.78 ^ -----

AREA OF TRAVERSE 1123500 SQ,FT.


237 POC 1508 POB S 57 38 49 W 4812.90

25.792 ACRES

Page: 1

337


Page 298 of 333


File: N:\TXDOT\Pharr 119\20360020\PARCEL-5E.SOF 12/15/2004, 2:05:31PM


JOH NUMBER: 20360003

SH 48 PORT ISABEL TO THE SHRIMP BASIN ROW MAPPING

11- 18- 2004 13:37 21

SPN.ID: PARCEL-5E

FROM BEARING DISTANCE TO NORTHING EASTING

1501 16530717.75 1384271,68

1501 S 54 28 50 E 1079.51 1507 16530090.58 1385150,31

1507 S 57 38 49 W 604.97 1510 16529766.31 1384638.41

1510 N 54 28 50 W 1079.51 1508 16530393.48 1383759.78 ----

1508 N 57 38 49 E 605.97 1501 16530717.75 1384271.68

AREA OF TRAVERSE

605966 SO.FT. 13.911 ACRES


237 POC 1501 POB S 57 38 49 W 4206.93

FagO:

338


Page 299 of 333

DESIGNATION OF UTILITY CORRIDOR (Cameron County, Texas)

S 1T. 01' TEXAS KNOW ALI. MEN BY 'II ILSE PRESEN TS:

COUNTY OF CAMERON

This Destimation is made by the BROWNSVILLE NAVIGATION DISTRICT OF

CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS. a navigation district organized. created and existing under the

laws of the State of Texas. Yy ith its domicile in Brownsville. Cameron County, Texas (the

"District ) beim: the owner of the lands on which the utilit> corridor hereinafter designated is

located. 'The District hereby establishes a corridor, yar>ing in NA idth from one hundred and filly

feet (15(') to two hundred feet (200') (the -Corridor- ) for overhead electric transmission and

distribution lines. underground sewer. 4% ater and telecommunication lines, and underground gas

pipelines. and any other utilities as may he deemed appropriate (coliceti% ely. the - Utility

Infrastructure- ) at the locations. and on the terms and conditions herein set forth. Such I :tility

Infrastructure is planned to he constructed within the Corridor hy the entities identified herein

below. or their permitted successors and assigns (colleetiv ely, the "I ltilitv ners- ).

Subject to the proy isions of this Designation. the District hereby agrees to exam to the

Owners, b> separate agreernent. a non-exclusive easement to construct, install, maintain.

locate. move. occup. operate. place. protect, reconstruct, reinstall, relocate. remoye. and replace

Utility Infrastructure within the Corridor on the terms and t'or the purposes indicated below. Any

yyork performed b> the Ettlity Owner shall he conditioned upon the Utility Owner ohtaininc all

other permits and approvals that ma> he required by the District, in its sole discretion. or anv

agency. including. without limitation. appRnal of the impact that the Utility Infrastructure may

339


Page 300 of 333

have upon the environment. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to imply that the District or any

agenc, will issue such permits or approN als.

l The Corridor hereb established is depicted on the attached Exhibit A-I through A-13,

inclusive. The Corridor extends along and adjacent to the southern right-of-way line of State

lighway 48, in Cameron Count:. Fexas. north 31 the Brownsville Ship Channel.

2. The portion of the Corridor described in Exhibits A-I, A-2. and A-6 through A-10 is two

hundred feet (200') in w idth: the balance of the Corridor is one hundred and fifty feet (150' ) in

width.

3. District may supplement this Desianation with a metes and bounds description of the

Corridor.

4. Nothing in this Designation should be interpreted as implied or expressed approN al of any

encroachment onto Texas Department of Transportation Right-of-Way of State Highway No. 48

5. The Corridor is established for the purpose of locatimf the follow ing Utility Infrastructure

(starting with the portion of the Corridor closest to State lfiifhway 48. and ino‘ ing south):

a. one double circuit 138 kV electric transmission line, with electric distribution

underhuild, by AEP Texas Central Cornpany ithin the sixt.v -five foot (65') w ide

portion olthe Corridor described and depicted in the attached Exhibits:

b. one sewer line, one potable water line, and one telecommunications line by AT&T

ithin the thirty-live foot (35') vide portion of the Corridor described and depicted

in the attached Exhibits:

c. four gas pipelines of up to fort,v-two inches, each within a twenty-live foot (25')

wide portion of the Corridor described and depicted in the attached Exhibits.

including:

_

340


Page 301 of 333

i. one gas pipeline by Valley Crossing Pipeline, 1 I.C. and

i. two gas pipelines by Rio Bravo Pipeline Company. I IC and

in. one gas pipeline by Texas I.NO. 1.1.C.

Ile pipeline companies owning the above-described pipelines are hereinafter collectiv ely referred

to as the "Pipeline Owners- .

Each component of the abov e-described 'tility Infrastructure shall he installed within that portion

of the Corridor identified in the attached Exhibits. Each component of the above-described Utility

Infrastructure shall have a designated center line at the approximate location shown in the attached

Exhibits.

6. The easements granted for each component of the Utility Infrastructure within the Corridor

shall be non-exclusive. and the District reserves the right to arant easements for other Utility

Infrastructure vv ithin the Corridor. and for other facilities that cross the Corridor to the extent that

such Utility infrastructure or other facilities N% i l not interfere w ith the intended use of the Corridor

for the construction. operation and maintenance of the Utility Infrastructure by the I :tility Owners.

In no event. however. w ill District place. install or construct. or permit to be placed. installed or

constructed, any above-ground buildings, structures or obstructions w ithin the Corridor 1% ithout

the written consent of the Utility Ow nerts) whose Utility Infrastructure 4kould be affected thereby.

7. Prior to commencing any work in the Con idor, each Utility Owner w ill be required to

apply for and obtain work permits and all other required regulatory permits and approvals in

accordance vs ith the laws then in effect, for each construction project or other activity to he

performed within the Corridor, unless such project or activ ity is necessary on an etnereency basis

Further, prior to commencine any invasive work in the Corridor. any Utility Owner shall prov ide

copies ()I. all required insurance certificates and policies to District for its review and approval in

34 1

PUC Docket No. 505-16 Attachment 2

Page 302 of 333

District's sole discretion. If an emergency occurs and the usual means of access for set.% ice

operations as herein provided will not permit the immediate action required by Ihe Utility Owner

in making emergency repairs as required for the safety and 1‘ el fare of the public. the I 'tility Owner

shall have temporary right of access as necessary to accomplish the required emergency repairs.

()them ise. the Utility (hvner shall provide the District w ith at least ten (10) days• notice prior to

performing any maintenance and'or new installations in the Corridor. Die Utility Owner shall

provide the District w ith accurate and complete plans reflecting any installation of new facilities

or removal of old facilities NA, ithin thirty (30) days of the completion of the work.

8. The Ctility Owner shall maintain current, accurate, and complete plans and record

drawings showing, in detail. the exact locaticn, depth. and size of any Utility Infrastructure

constructed or installed within the Corridor in relation to other facilities in the Corridor. Upon

demand, such plans and record drawings shall be delivered to the District in a form to be

determined by District's Director of Engineering Services.

9. Each t 'tility Owner shall, at its sole expense. install, operate and maintain its Utility

Infrastructure in accordance with this Designation. any other easements, licenses. permits or

approvals issued pursuant hereto. all applicable laws. rules and regulations. and shall conduct all

operations within the Corridor in a careful and prudent manner and in accordance \ ith prudent

industry standards and practices. The t •fility 01Nner shall, at its sole expense. procure and maintain

in force alwas during its use of the Corridor all business and other licenses or Approvals necessary

to conduct the activities allowed hereunder

10.Any easement granted to a Pipeline 0\kner shall contain language similar to the following:

'Grantee has been notified that AEI' Texas Central Company plans la construct

electric tramnasston dismbution lines adjacent to the Easement. Grantee has

- 4 -

342


Page 303 of 333

(*entwined to the &tins! rlICI fon and Operation f t Ch electric

tramintsston distribution hnev hy Terus Central Compinv at that location,

and shall Implement any change's. mitigation etforis or improvements to Grantee 's

own planned pipeline h. rotates that may he required by opplicabte regui„twn, „nil

industn- standards' due to the construction anti operation of such electric

transinissiwrihstrihmion lines hv .IEP Texas Central t'ompany at that location

4111 at Grantee's sole eyense."

I 1. l'his Designation does not in and of itself dedicate the Corridor as a utility casement, or

create in any person or entity the right to use the Corridor. All such rights shall be established

pursuant to a separate easement agreement between a Utility Owner and District, which shall he

granted only within the sole discretion of District's Board of Commissioners.

12. rhis Designation shall commence upon the date of execution and shall continue until for a

period of fifty years, and thereafter until cancelled by District by a written instrument recorded on

the Official Records of Cameron County, Texas, with written notice of cancellation to the Utility

Owners. not less than six months prior to the desired termination of this Designation at which time

this Designation shall terminate and on the day so named in such notice this Designation and all

rights and privileges thereunder shall come to an end. Provided, howeY er. that the expiration or

termination of this Designation shall not serse to either terminate or modify the rights anti

obligations arising under any then-existing easement in the Corridor. Thc site and dimensions of

the Corridor may be reNised and changed from tirne to time by the District, subject to rights under

any then-ex Mine eawment.

13. District will require complete liability, ndemnitication. and insurance pro% isions by the

'tilitvOwner for all work performed and laeilities placed within the rtility Corridor. Fite details

- 5 -

3 4 3

By; Joh

Attes d to:

By:

ood, Chairman

7


Page 304 of 333

of the insurance will he attached to each Utility Owner's easement agreement. District reserves

the right to increase said limits from time to time as District deems appropriate. in District's sole

discretion, to maintain insurance requirements commensurate with best industry practice. District

must be named as an additional insured on all insurance policies as required herein and must be

notified of any cancellation or expiration of the required insurance on or before 30 days prior to

cancellation or expiration.

Executed to be effective the I7th day of May, 2017.

DISTRICT:

BROWNSVILLE NAVIGATION DISTRICT OF CAMERON COUNTY, TEXAS

ecretary

344

- 6 -


Page 305 of 333

STATE OF TEXAS

COUNTY OF CAMERON

This instrurnent was acknowledged before me on the 26 day of May, 2017, by John

Wood, in his capacity as Chairman of the Board of Navigation and Canal

Commissioners of the Brownsville Navigation District of Cameron County, Texas.

\-

Notary Publi nd for the State of Texas

345

- 7 -

16" 1-resh Water M

ain

£f£ JO 90£ aud z j uatuipunv 9t51:15 '0NI 0130U 311c1

12" Sew

age Return

4" Telecomm

unication

Exhibit "A

-1" (} •

I. f• ot

e.P

001.8wow. ,...C.poenr NW

0 te JCO

400 0.00

200 0.00

2 0.3a

- 4 0.00

; 5 0.00 12 6.00

12 6.00

121 0.00 25 0 00

25 0.00 25 0.00

1 80 0.00

4 0 00 Minim

um

Depth of

j Cover

6/ 6"/

67/ &

' A. Future H

PNG

Pipeline

Rio B

ravo Pipeline

Rio B

ravo Pipeline

Valley C

rossing Pipeline

200 0.00

100 0.00 35 0.00

(ExDOT A

llowable

Overlap of 1.1igh Tension

Lines) 15 0.00

50 0.00

400 0.00

200 0.00

80 0.00 -02a10001MOki

z watutpunv CfC.J0 LOC aucl

600 0.00

35 0.00 (TeDO

T Allow

able O

verlap of High

Tenston t Ines} ' ,

15 0.00

50 0.00

200 0.00

2 0.38

4 0.00

5 0.00 12 6.00 25 0.00 12 6.00 .21 0 001

. 25 0 00 25 0.00 ,

MInirn urn

Depth of C

over 4 0.00

••••• !

11.

///-

7,7-

7/7—

/77-

7//

//>: /7,

'X/

/1/—

777-

// ///

1

I 12" Sew

age Return '

16" Fresh Water M

ain!

4" Telecornrnuntcation

Exhibit "A-2"

Future HPNG Pipeline

Rio Bravo Pipeline Rio Bravo Pipeline

Valley Crossing Pipeline

r0.4

.1a

v C

.4,0

MP I 01 to

Wow

+ res

0•44114,

ift0 taa...00l VW

• N

YS

24

intim V

.•

350 0.00

200 0.00 -

100 0.00 35 0.00

(TxDOT Allowable

Overlap of High Tension

Lines)

0.4

150 0.00 ,

15 0.00

2 0.38 - -- 4 0.00

5 0.00 12 6.00 12 6.00,

21 1 00

I 25 0.00

I

SU CLUO

'

6 0.0011inirnym D

epth of Cover

4 0.00 I

I \\_

f I

7

/1L 4 :4

1

///, ?//

/// ///

, "///

//.7 ///

777 7

/7— 777 7/7 7/ •

Exhibit "A-3"

12" Sewage Return


16" Fresh Water M

ain ; Valley Crossing Pipehne

4" Telecomm

unication

co

oc

z watutpunv 9f51:15 .°N 0 113°U 311c1

; 40 0.00--

1

100 0.00 155 0.00 35 0 00

(TADOT A

llowable

Overlap of Heigh Tens,on

'ones)

91-SOS '01%1 313013 a fld

4" Telecomm

unication

Z ItlaultPRIV f 1 f Jo 60£ atucl

12" Sewage Return

16" Fresh Water M

ain E

xhibit "A-4"

Future t-IPNG Pipeline

Valley Crossing Pipeline

405 0.00

150 0.00

15 0 00

2 0.38 so o.00

4 0.00 5 0.00 12 6.00

12 6 00 21 1.00

25 0.00

17417. t

6 0.00 Mi lrom

um D

epth

of Cover

4 0.00 N

em

fre-P

---7//

///

57 0.00 •-•

47 0.00 -

at M

ahan

255 0.00 - -

8 '2

7/T 777 =

/// /17

/ oo [...

42 0.00 -,, 49 0.00 o

7.3

UM

Wally

1,1a, 56. Sec. en V

e.

350 0.00

200 0.00 100 0.00

150 0.00 35 0.00

(TxDO

T Allow

able O

verlap of High Tension

tines)

L. 2 0.38 4 0.00 5 0.00 12 6.00

12 6.00 21 1.00

25 0.00 I

t . -

94 0.00 42 6.00

o

_ 1//

/// //

//7

/77- /7T

/7/

///

6 0.00 Minim

um Depth of Cover

Exhibit "A-5" Future HPNG PipelM

e

Valley Crossing Pipeline 12" Sewage Return

16" Fresh Water M

ain it ft

5,•1

4" Telecomm

unication

SeCIVO, V•tw

rot.

z watutpenv £££ JO OTC aua

%SOS '0NI P313011 Dad


Page 311 of 333

351

•1.• O

v1,17.1

z luatutpunv 9t-COS '0N la313043 Dild

ff£30 Zif and

Exhibit "A

-7"


Page 313 of 333

Exhi

b it "

A-8 "

353


Page 314 of 333

354

9tRIS "oN 1130C1 3ild Z 11131.Uq3C3jV

0 , 1.3a 11 _ .330 tt

E

xhibit "A-10"

- .....

IA.. 3.333tor 133, 3 3

4. 4 fill

1130.3,3.3


Page 316 of 333

356

Z PlatUIpenv

Exhibit "A.12"

9t-505 "oN l aVoU Dfld

t t....noto

S41 t SS

t —

„


Page 318 of 333

358

BROWNSVII F NAVIGATION DISTRICT PROPERTY BOUNDARY LINES

• 1.1 0 1,1 106b....S11, • 6 , )(4,

• IWO 631 -111W 14...7 ,71.

£££ JO 6IC agd Z luatutpcov 9tiOS 'oN apou 3f1d

6C

4 RG

LNG

Proposed Fence- B

lue

ALN

EXT •

RG 1.N

li vs TX

Dal fh‘y 48 R

OW

Lines

Hw

v 48 - Red oliset from

cent erline

•,

4

't •

,

reposed Fence Lyle •

JITA

M E

NG

INE

ER

ING

z luatuipunv Eff Jo OZ£ aNed

9rSOS '0N 313043 and

NE

XT

ltG

LNG

vs 1 XI)'.)1 IW

Y .18 R

OW

9tSOS "oN laVoll Dfld

J T

AM

EN

GIN

EE

RIN

G

3 of 3 T

XD

OT

I WY

-18- Red

MY

offset from centeriine

R(.3 I.NG

- Blue

Proposed fence line

z luatugaully

- Red

100' offset from

centerline of Hw

y

o a7u, 1

iTAIT-1‘011 -01

2 of 3 JIT

AM

EN

GIN

EE

RIN

G

RC; LNG

- Blue

Proposed Fenceline

NE

XTi

RG 1.N

G vs TX

DO

T IIWY

48 RO

W LIN

ES


Page 323 of 333

363


Valley Crossing Pipehne

4" Telecomm

unication END iltli4y C.,rlder IA, 4 5 to 5 24

Sr.txm

91-SOS "oN1 3a113043 311.1 z i vatutogov

350 0.00

200 0.00

100 0.00 35 0.00

axDOT Allowable Overlap of High Tension

tines)

150 0.00

—1.5 0.00

50 0.00 —

40 0.0

0--•'N

yz

2 0.38 4 0.00 5 0.00 12 6.00

12 6.00 21 1.00

25 0.00 98 0.00

8

/// ///

/// ///

/r// //

/// ///

///

3 0.00 Minim

um D

epth of Cover Security

ence C

orridor.

eior- Fence

/7/

CV

/ t

t ///

// -37 6 00

iTYPICAL \WIDTH)

4 0.00

/s//

/7/ —7

f11/

" t

12" Sewage Return

16" Fresh Water M

ain

350 0.00

200 0.00

35 0.00 (TxD

OT A

llowable

Overlap of H

igh Tension Ltnes)

—15 0.00

100 0.00 150 0.00 2 0.38

4 0.00

5 0.00 12 6.00 12 6.00

21 1.00 2.5 0.00

/// ///

///

O

;1 94 0.00

0 8 T

//7

r// /7

7 -7

//

50 0.00

—42 6

.00

—*N

y

/// /1/

///

Corridor F

ence jr

C t

37 60

0

(TYPICAL WID

TH)

3 0.00 Minim

um D

epth

of C

over S

ecu

rity F

ence

4" Telecomm

unication Future HPNG Pipeline Valley Crossing Pipeline

9rSOS '0N la130(1 3na

4 0.00

/v./ //

44%r

12" Sewage R

eturn 16" Fresh W

ater Main

z waunpenv

400.1 1

000t.• 1

000011 1

a

33.333.• 3

Cud, 1

g

nef. . 1 f

i

i

a


Page 326 of 333

366


Page 327 of 333 ;

i 't

I. 1 • ?r,• I j•

j 1 k . t;

? ..1 i

4 .'. lio

or,

.6 •••• .4 4

a

34i

;Itt!

. • - , . • . e"

367


Page 328 of 333

Figure 3-2

Primary Alternative Links (Topographic Base with Constraints)

368


Page 329 of 333

(This page left blank intentionally.)

369


Page 330 of 333

THIS PAGE IS OVERSIZED AND CAN BE VIEWED IN CENTRAL

RECORDS OR THE PUC INTERCHANGE BY

DOWNLOADING THE NATIVE FILE (ZIP) FOR THIS ITEM

NUMBER IN DOCKET NO. 50546


Page 331 of 333

Figure 5-1

Habitable Structures and Other Land Use Features in the Vicinity of the Primary Alternative Routes

(Aerial Photograph Base with CCN Inventory items)

3 7 1


Page 332 of 333

(This page left blank intentionally.)

372


Page 333 of 333

THIS PAGE IS OVERSIZED AND CAN BE VIEWED IN CENTRAL

RECORDS OR THE PUC INTERCHANGE BY

DOWNLOADING THE NATIVE FILE (ZIP) FOR THIS ITEM

NUMBER IN DOCKET NO. 50546

Application of AEP Texas Inc. to Amend its Certificate of Convenience and PUC Docket No. 50546 Necessity for the Proposed Union Carbide to Loma Alta Cut-1n to Pompano Attachment 3 138-kV Double-Circuit Transmission Line in Cameron County Page 1 of 5

Estimated Costs of Alternative Routes and Lengths

ROUTE LENGTH (miles) ESTIMATED COST ANNUAL BND

EASEMENT COST* 1 9.74 $ 38,307,044 $ 52,740 2 9.54 $ 37,781,666 $ 48,065 3 10.05 $ 38,476,199 $ 44,610 4 10.23 $ 38,239,233 $ 45,290 5 10.1 $ 39,644,671 $ 40,665 6 10.28 $ 39,378,991 $ 42,000 7 9.89 $ 38,747,156 $ 42,471 8 10.07 $ 39,558,563 _ $ 42,065

*Annual Brownsville Navigation District Easement Cost is based on 2020 easement amount that can increase each year. Easement is based on amount of linear foot of easement width (65 to 100 ft) where BND property is crossed by the route.

374

Application of AEP Texas Inc. to Amend its Certificate of Convenience and PUC Docket No. 50546 Necessity for the Proposed Union Carbide to Loma Alta Cut-1n to Pompano Attachment 3 138-kV Double-Circuit Transmission Line in Cameron County Page 2 of 5

Route 1 Transmission Facilities TOTAL

Right-of-way and Land Acquisition $ 208,460*

Engineering and Design (Utility) $ 405,918

Engineering and Design (Contract) $ 1,086,986

Procurement of Material and Equipment $ 14,173,810

Construction of Facilities (Utility) $ 10,000

Construction of Facilities (Contract) $ 22,421,859

Other $ -

Estimated Total Cost $ 38,307,044








Other $ -









Other $ -


375

Application of AEP Texas Inc. to Amend its Certificate of Convenience and PUC Docket No. 50546 Necessity for the Proposed Union Carbide to Loma Alta Cut-In to Pompano Attachment 3 138-kV Double-Circuit Transmission Line in Cameron County Page 3 of 5




Engineering and Design (Contract) $ 1,312.867



Construction of Facilities (Contract) $ 13,12/.884

Other $ -









Other $ -









Other $ -


376

Application of AEP Texas Inc. to Amend its Certificate of Convenience and Necessity for the Proposed Union Carbide to Loma Alta Cut-In to Pompano 138-kV Double-Circuit Transmission Line in Cameron County


Page 4 of 5








Other $ -









Other $ -


*ROW and Land Acquisition do not include annual easement cost for crossing BND controlled property. The 2020 estimated amounts are included in the summary table at the beginning of this attachment.

377

Application of AEP Texas Inc. to Amend its Certificate of Convenience and PUC Docket No. 50546 Necessity for the Proposed Union Carbide to Loma Alta Cut-In to Pompano Attachment 3 138-kV Double-Circuit Transmission Line in Cameron County Page 5 of 5

Estimated Costs of Substation Terminations

Pompano Substation TOTAL

Right-of-way and Land Acquisition $ **






Other $


** - The Pompano Substation is a GIS substation that will be located within the Rio Grande LNG facility, but still on property owned by BND. AEP Texas will have an annual lease with BND for the substation property, which is planned to be 3.92 acres in size. The current estimated annual lease amount is $15,484.

378

PUC Docket No. 50546 Attachment 4 Page 1 of 102

169 FERC 1161,131 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION

Before Commissioners: Neil Chatterjee, Chairman; Richard Glick and Bernard L. McNamee.

Rio Grande LNG, LLC Docket Nos. CP16-454-000 Rio Bravo Pipeline Company, LLC CP16-455-000

ORDER GRANTING AUTHORIZATIONS UNDER SECTIONS 3 AND 7 OF THE NATURAL GAS ACT

(Issued November 22, 2019)

1. On May 5, 2016, Rio Grande LNG, LLC (Rio Grande) filed an application, in Docket No. CP16-454-000, for authorization under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA)' and Part 153 of the Commission's regulations2 to site, construct, and operate facilities for the liquefaction and export of domestically-produced natural gas at a proposed liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal located on the north embankment of the Brownsville Ship Channel in Cameron County, Texas (Rio Grande LNG Terminal).

2. At the same time, Rio Bravo Pipeline Company, LLC (Rio Bravo) filed a request, under NGA section 7(c)3 and Parts 157 and 284 of the Commission's regulations,' in Docket No. CP16-455-000, for a certificate of public convenience and necessity to construct and operate a new interstate natural gas pipeline system (Rio Bravo Pipeline Project). The proposed project comprises two parallel 42-inch-diameter natural gas pipelines approximately 135.5 miles long, three 180,000 horsepower (hp) compressor stations, an approximately 2.4-mile-long pipeline header system, various valves, metering and pig launcher/receivers, and related facilities located in Jim Wells, Kleberg, Kenedy, Willacy, and Cameron Counties, Texas, to transport natural gas in interstate commerce to

1 15 U.S.C. § 717b (2018).

2 18 C.F.R. pt. 153 (2019).

3 15 U.S.C. § 717f.

4 18 C.F.R. pt. 157 (2019).

379


the Rio Grande LNG Terminal for processing, liquefaction, and export. Rio Bravo also requests blanket certificates under Part 284, Subpart G of the Commission's regulations to provide open-access transportation services,' and under Part 157, Subpart F of the Commission's regulations to perform certain routine construction activities and operations.6

3. For the reasons discussed in this order, we will authorize Rio Grande's proposal under NGA section 3 to construct and operate the Rio Grande LNG Terminal. We will also authorize Rio Bravo's proposal under NGA section 7(c) to construct and operate the Rio Bravo Pipeline Project, and grant the requested blanket certificate authorizations. These authorizations are subject to the conditions discussed herein.

I. Background

4. Rio Grande and Rio Bravo are Texas limited liability companies with their principle place of business in Houston, Texas. Both companies are wholly-owned subsidiaries of NextDecade LNG, LLC (NextDecade),7 a U.S. energy project development and management company.8 Upon receipt of its requested certificate authorizations and commencement of pipeline operations, Rio Bravo will become a natural gas company within the meaning of section 2(6) of the NGA9 and will be subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. As its operations will not be in interstate commerce, Rio Grande will not be a "natural gas company" as defined in the NGA, although it will be subject to the Commission's jurisdiction under NGA section 3.

5 18 C.F.R. pt. 284 (2019).

6 18 C.F.R. pt. 157 (2019).

7 Formerly NextDecade, LLC, the company was renamed NextDecade LNG, LLC on August 11, 2017. Rio Grande and Rio Bravo's August 23, 2017 Informational Filing at 2.

8 NextDecade LNG, LLC is wholly-owned by NextDecade Corporation, a publicly traded company.

9 15 U.S.C. § 717a(6).

380


H. Proposals

A. Rio Grande LNG Terminal (Docket No. CP16-454-000)

5. Rio Grande seeks authorization to site, construct, and operate the Rio Grande LNG Terminal on an approximately 1,000-acre site located on the northern embankment of the Brownsville Ship Channel in Cameron County, Texas. Construction of the terminal would take place in six sequential stages associated with each proposed liquefaction train. The project would produce a nominal capacity of up to 27 million metric tonnes per annum (MTPA) of LNG for export.

6. The Rio Grande LNG Terminal would include the following major facilities: six natural gas liquefaction trains, each with a nominal capacity of 4.5 MTPA, for a total nominal capacity of 27 MTPA; " four full-containment LNG storage tanks, each with a net capacity of approximately 180,000 cubic meters (m3); two LNG carrier loading berths; one 1,500-foot-diameter turning basin; LNG truck loading and unloading facilities with four loading bays;" two Natural Gas Liquids (NGL) truck loading bays; and other facilities such as administrative buildings, a central control building, a workshop, a warehouse, electrical equipment enclosures, a communication system, and other support structures.

7. The Rio Grande LNG Terminal would be located on approximately 750.4 acres of a 984.2-acre parcel of land owned by the Brownsville Navigational District, a political subdivision of Texas that operates the Port of Brownsville. Rio Grande would lease the

'° Rio Grande states that each liquefaction train will contain the following equipment: (i) facilities to remove from the feed gas carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, and other sulfur compounds; water and mercury; and heavy hydrocarbons; (ii) refrigerant compressors driven by two natural gas-fired combustion turbines to cool and liquefy gas; (iii) associated fire and gas safety systems; (iv) associated control systems and electrical infrastructure; (v) and utility connections, telecommunications, and other support systems.

" Rio Grande states that LNG loaded onto trucks at the terminal will be used for vehicular natural gas purposes at truck fueling facilities in South Texas and will not be reintroduced into the U.S. natural gas pipeline system.

381


site from the Brownsville Navigational District for a term of up to 50 years.12 Rio Grande anticipates that the construction process will take place in six stages, with the start of construction for each of the six liquefaction trains occurring between six and nine months after the prior train's commencement of construction date.

8. Rio Grande received authorization from the Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy (DOE/FE) in August 2016 to export annually up to 1,318 billion cubic feet (Bcf) (approximately 3.6 Bcf per day (Bcf/d)) equivalent of natural gas in the form of LNG to countries with which the United States has a Free Trade Agreement.'3 In addition, Rio Grande currently has pending before the DOE/FE an application to export annually up to 1,318 Bcf equivalent of LNG to other nations with which the U.S. permits such trade, but has not entered into a Free Trade Agreement.'4

B. Rio Bravo Pipeline Project (Docket No. CP16-455-000)

1. Facilities and Service

9. In conjunction with the Rio Grande LNG Terminal, Rio Bravo seeks authorization under NGA section 7(c) to construct and operate a new 137.9-mile-long interstate natural gas transmission system designed to provide up to 4.5 Bcf per day (i.e., 4,500,000 dekatherms per day (Dth/d)) of firm natural gas transportation service. Natural gas transported on the Rio Bravo Pipeline will be delivered from interconnects with the existing natural gas pipeline grid located in the Agua Dulce Market Area' in Nueces

12 NextDecade, Rio Grande's parent company, executed an Option to Lease the acreage from the Brownsville Navigation District on November 6, 2013. The final acreage will be determined before the lease is executed, which would coincide with the timing of a final investment decision (i.e., after project approval but before the commencement of construction).

13 Rio Grande LNG, LLC, DOE/FE Docket No. 15-190-LNG, Order No. 3869 (2016).

14 The application, filed on December 23, 2015, is pending before DOE/FE in Docket No. 15-190-LNG.

Is The Agua Dulce Market Area refers, collectively, to the proposed interconnects located in the vicinity of the Agua Dulce Hub in Nueces County, Texas, which includes connections to the following pipelines: Houston Pipe Line Company Pipeline, Gulf South Pipeline, Kinder Morgan Texas Pipelines, Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America, Transcontinental Gas Pipeline, Tennessee Gas Pipeline, TransTexas Gas, and EPGT Texas Pipeline.

382


County, Texas, to the Rio Grande LNG Terminal for liquefaction and export. The proposed Rio Bravo Pipeline Project would consist of the following facilities:

• 2.4 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline. including 0.8 mile of parallel pipeline, at the upstream end of the pipeline system that would receive gas from multiple interconnects with the existing natural gas pipeline grid in Kleberg and Jim Wells Counties. Texas (Header System);

• 135.5 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline traversing Kleberg, Kenedy, Willacy, and Cameron Counties, Texas (Pipeline 1);

• 135.5 miles of 42-inch-diameter pipeline that would parallel Pipeline 1 with a 25-foot offset (Pipeline 2);

• an 180,000-hp compressor station in Kleberg County that would include six 30,000-hp natural gas turbine compressor units, two pig launchers (one for each pipeline), and a metering site (Compressor Station 1);

• an 180,000-hp compressor station in Kleberg County that would include six 30,000-hp natural gas turbine compressor units and two pig launchers/receivers (Compressor Station 2);

• an 180,000-hp compressor station in Cameron County, within the Rio Grande LNG Terminal boundary, that would include six 30,000-hp electric-driven turbine compressor units, a gas custody transfer meter, and pig receivers (Compressor Station 3); 16

16 Each of the three mainline compressor stations would be constructed in six stages, similar to and in parallel with construction of the terminal stages. Each compressor station stage would include installation of one 30,000-hp natural gas or electric turbine unit and associated auxiliary equipment.

383


• two 30,000-hp interconnect booster compressor stations in Kenedy County, each containing one 30,000-hp natural gas turbine compressor unit and a metering site; ' 7

• four metering sites along the 2.4-mile-long Header System; and

• six mainline valve sites.

Rio Bravo states that the proposed pipeline system will be designed, constructed, and operated to transport up to 2.25 Bcf/d (2,250,000 Dth/d) per pipeline, for a total of up to 4.5 Bcf/d (4,500,000 Dth/d). Construction of the Rio Bravo Pipeline would occur in two phases. Phase one (Pipeline 1, the header system, the compressor stations, and the aboveground facilities) would be constructed to coincide with the completion of the first liquefaction train of the LNG Terminal facilities. Construction of Pipeline 2 (i.e., phase two) would commence about 18 months after Pipeline 1 is placed in service. Rio Bravo estimates that the total cost of the Rio Bravo Pipeline Project is approximately $2,173,362,909.

10. Rio Bravo states that it conducted a binding open season from May 24 to June 23, 2016, for the proposed firm transportation service to be offered by the project. '8 As a result of the open season, Rio Bravo states that it received one bid, from its affiliate RioGas Marketing, LLC (RioGas), for the full capacity of the pipeline." Rio Bravo executed a precedent agreement with RioGas for the total capacity of the Rio Bravo Pipeline system for a 20-year term at a negotiated rate.'"

11. Rio Bravo requests approval of its pro forma tariff. Rio Bravo proposes to offer firm transportation service under Rate Schedules FTS, interruptible transportation service under Rate Schedule ITS, and parking and loan service under Rate Schedule PALS.

17 Rio Bravo states that each booster station will be comprised of a single natural gas turbine compressor unit, located at milepost (MP) 19.7 (proposed interconnect with the Texas Eastern Pipeline) and MP 25.7 (proposed interconnect with the Williams Transco North Padre Island Lateral). Both booster stations would be constructed contemporaneously with the construction of Pipeline 1.

18 Rio Bravo's June 28, 2016 Filing at 1.

19 Id. at 2.

20 Id.

384


2. Blanket Certificates

12. Rio Bravo requests a blanket certificate of public convenience and necessity pursuant to Part 284, Subpart G of the Commission's regulations, authorizing Rio Bravo to provide transportation service to customers requesting and qualifying for transportation service under its proposed FERC Gas Tariff, with pre-granted abandonment authorization.2'

13. Rio Bravo also requests a blanket certificate of public convenience and necessity pursuant to Part 157, Subpart F of the Commission's regulations, authorizing certain future facility construction, operation. and abandonment.22

III. Procedural Matters

A. Notice, Intervention, Comments, and Protests

14. Notice of Rio Grande and Rio Bravo's joint application was issued on May 19, 2016, and published in the Federal Register on May 26, 2016,23 with interventions, comments, and protests due by June 9. 2016. Timely, unopposed motions to intervene are granted by operation of Rule 214(c) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure.24 Notwithstanding Rio Grande's and Rio Bravo's opposition to several timely-filed motions to intervene,' the Commission granted all timely, opposed motions to intervene.26 Several individuals and organizations filed late motions to intervene, which the Commission also granted.'

21 18 C.F.R. § 284.221.

22 18 C.F.R. § 157.204.

23 81 Fed. Reg. 33,519.

24 18 C.F.R. § 385.214(c) (2019). Timely motions to intervene include those filed during the comment period for the draft environmental impact statement. See id. § 380.10(a)(1)(i).

25 See Rio Grande's and Rio Bravo's June 22, 2016 Answer in Opposition in Docket Nos. CP16-454-000 and CP16-455-000, and Rio Grande's July 7, 2016 Answer in Opposition in Docket No. CP16-454-000.

26 Secretary's May 17, 2017 Notice Granting Interventions.

27 Id.

385


15. Intervenors filed three protests. Defenders of Wildlife and Sierra Club filed a joint protest, requesting that the Commission deny the applications based on the projects' alleged significant adverse environmental and economic impacts. Defenders of Wildlife and Sierra Club urge the Commission to consider: (i) the LNG Terminal's proposed output and the possibility that Rio Grande will seek a future authorization to increase output; (ii) proposed design alternatives to power the liquefaction trains; (iii) the possibility that exporting LNG will increase domestic natural gas production and domestic gas prices; and (iv) the projects' effect on global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Nearby residents Roberto de los Santos, Beatriz Zurita. and Raul Zurita (collectively, Santos/Zurita)28 and Vecinos Para el Bienestar de la Comunidad Costera (Vecinos)29 also filed protests. In their protests. Santos/Zurita and Vecinos urge the Commission to deny the applications as contrary to the public interest because of alleged significant impacts the project will have on the health, safety, and quality of life of nearby communities. Rio Grande and Rio Bravo filed a joint answer to the protests.'"

28 The intervenors state that they are residents of an unincorporated residential development known as a colonia, which are recognized by the Texas Attorney General's Office as "substandard housing developments prevalent along the Texas-Mexico border where residents lack basic services such as drinking water, sewage treatment, and paved roads."

29 Vecinos is "an unincorporated association of residents of Laguna Heights, Texas and nearby areas that seeks to protect and improve the health, standard of living, and economic development of the coastal community in the Rio Grande Valley of South Texas." Vecinos' June 9. 2016 Motion to Intervene and Protest.

" Rio Grande and Rio Bravo's June 22, 2016 Consolidated Answer. Although the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure generally do not permit answers to protests, 18 C.F.R. § 385.213(a)(2), we will accept Rio Grande and Rio Bravo's response because it clarifies the concerns raised and provides information that has assisted in our decision making.

386


16. In addition. numerous entities and individuals filed comments raising various economic, environmental, and safety concerns about the proposed projects, including, among other things, concerns about the visual impacts of the LNG Terminal, socioeconomic impacts, air emissions, LNG safety and security, proximity of the proposed terminal site to SpaceX's South Texas Launch Site, threatened and endangered species, and wetlands impacts. These concerns are addressed in the final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and, as appropriate, in the environmental analysis below.

B. Request for Hearing

17. Defenders of Wildlife requested a formal hearing.31 The Commission has broad discretion to structure its proceedings so as to resolve a controversy in the best way it sees fit.' An evidentiary, trial-type hearing is necessary only where there are material issues of fact in dispute that cannot be resolved on the basis of the written record.33 Defenders of Wildlife raises no material issue of fact that the Commission cannot resolve on the basis of the written record. Accordingly, the Commission denies the request for a formal hearing.

IV. Discussion

A. Rio Grande LNG Terminal (Docket No. CP16-454-000)

18. The construction and operation of the proposed LNG Terminal facilities and site of their location require approval by the Commission under section 3 of the NGA.34

31 Defenders of Wildlife's June 9, 2016 Motion to Intervene at 2.

32 See Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC, 161 FERC ¶ 61,200, at P 15 (2017) (Columbia) (citing Stowers Oil and Gas Co., 27 FERC ¶ 61,001 (1984) (Commission has discretion to manage its own procedures); PJM Transmission Owners, 120 FERC ¶ 61,013 (2007)).

33 See, e.g., Columbia, 161 FERC ¶ 61,200 at P 15 (citing Dominion Transmission, Inc., 141 FERC ¶ 61,183, at P 15 (2012); Southern Union Gas Co. v. FERC, 840 F.2d 964, 970 (D.C. Cir. 1988)).

34 The regulatory functions of NGA section 3 were transferred to the Secretary of Energy in 1977 pursuant to Section 301(b) of the Department of Energy Organization Act, Pub. L. No. 95-91, 42 U.S.C. § 7101 et seq (2012). In reference to regulating the imports or exports of natural gas, the Secretary of Energy subsequently delegated to the Commission the authority to approve or disapprove the construction and operation of natural gas import and export facilities and the site at which such facilities shall be located. The most recent delegation is in DOE Delegation Order No. 00-004.00A,

387


Page 10 of 102

Although section 3 provides that an application for the exportation or importation of natural gas shall be approved unless the proposal "will not be inconsistent with the public interest,- section 3 also provides that an application may be approved "in whole or in part, with such modification and upon such terms and conditions as the Commission may find necessary or appropriate."' NGA section 3(a) also provides that for good cause shown, the Commission may make supplemental orders as it may find "necessary or appropriate." 36

19. Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife assert that Rio Grande's proposal will raise domestic natural gas prices and increase domestic gas production. Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife state that the Commission must (i) consider the possibility that Rio Grande will seek to increase exports in the future, and (ii) analyze the increased environmental impacts that would result from increasing the project output. With respect to environmental harm, Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife contend that the project will result in indirect environmental impacts from induced natural gas production and consumption activities, and is thus contrary to the public interest.

20. We decline to address these claims as they concern impacts associated with the exportation of the commodity natural gas, rather than the proposal before the Commission. Section 3(a) of the NGA provides, in part, that "no person shall export any natural gas from the United States to a foreign country or import any natural gas from a foreign country without first having secured an order of the Commission authorizing it to do so."37 As noted above, in 1977, the Department of Energy Organization Act transferred the regulatory functions of section 3 of the NGA to the Secretary of Energy.'

effective May 16, 2006. Applications for authorization to import or export natural gas must be submitted to the Department of Energy (DOE). The Commission does not authorize importation or exportation of the commodity itself. See EarthReports, Inc. v. FERC. 828 F.3d 949, 952-53 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (EarthReports) (detailing how regulatory oversight for the export of LNG and supporting facilities is divided between the Commission and DOE).

35 For a discussion of the Commission's authority to condition its approvals of LNG facilities under section 3 of the NGA, see, e.g., Distrigas Corporation v. FPC, 495 F.2d 1057, 1063-64 (D.C. Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 419 U.S. 834 (1974), and Dynegy LNG Production Terminal, L.P., 97 FERC ¶ 61,231 (2001).

36 15 U.S.C. § 717b(a).

37 Id.

38 Department of Energy Organization Act, Pub. L. No. 95-91, 42 U.S.C. § 7101 et seq. Section 301(b) of the DOE Act transferred regulatory functions under section 3 of

388


Page 11 of 102

Subsequently, the Secretary of Energy delegated to the Commission authority to "[a]pprove or disapprove the construction and operation of particular facilities, the site at which such facilities shall be located, and with respect to natural gas that involves the construction of new domestic facilities, the place of entry for imports or exit for exports....-39 The Secretary, however. has not delegated to the Commission any authority to approve or disapprove the import or export of the commodity itself, or to consider the types of issues raised by Sierra Club and Defenders of Wildlife as part of the Commission's public interest determination under NGA section 3(a).4"

21. DOE/FE, pursuant to its authority under NGA section 3, has authorized Rio Grande to export up to 1,318 Bcf per year of domestically-produced natural gas (equal to approximately 26.1 MTPA of LNG)41 to free trade nations from the proposed Rio Grande

the NGA from the Commission's predecessor, the Federal Power Commission (FPC), to the Secretary of Energy. Section 402 of the DOE Act transferred regulatory functions under other sections of the NGA. including sections 1, 4, 5, and 7, from the FPC to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Section 402(f) states:

(f) Limitation No function described in this section which regulates the exports or imports of natural gas ... shall be within the jurisdiction of the Commission unless the Secretary assigns such a function to the Commission.

39 DOE Delegation Order No. 00-004.00A (effective May 16, 2006).

4° See Freeport LNG Development, L.P., 148 FERC If 61,076, reh'g denied, 149 FERC ¶ 61,119 (2014). aff'd sub nom. Sierra Club v. FERC, 827 F.3d 36 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (Freeport) (finding that because the Department of Energy, not the Commission, has sole authority to license the export of any natural gas through LNG facilities, the Commission is not required to address the indirect effects of the anticipated export of natural gas in its NEPA analysis). See also Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC, 146 FERC ¶ 61.117, reh'g denied, 148 FERC ¶ 61,200 (2014), aff'd sub nom. Sierra Club v. FERC, 827 F.3d 59 (D.C. Cir. 2016) (Sabine Pass) and EarthReports, 828 F.3d 949.

41 This conversion assumes a gas density of 0.7 kilograms per cubic meter of gas.


Page 12 of 102

LNG Terminal:42 DOE/FE's order approving Rio Grande's export volumes to Free Trade Agreement nations states that "[i]ri light of DOE's statutory obligation to grant this Application without modification or delay, there is no need for DOE/FE to review other arguments asserted by Rio Grande in support of the Application.'43

22. As the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has explained, an LNG proposal shall be authorized unless the proposal "will not be consistent with the public interest.' We have reviewed Rio Grande's application to determine if the siting, construction, and operation of its LNG Terminal as proposed would not be consistent with the public interest.' Rio Grande's proposed LNG Terminal will be located on 984.2 acres of land, which are owned by a commercial port (Brownsville Navigational District) and intended for industrial development. The northern boundary of the terminal site is a four-lane highway, while the Brownsville Ship Channel serves as the southern boundary. The proposed site for the LNG Terminal is currently undeveloped, zoned for commercial and industrial use, and contains areas of dredge spoils from the original dredging of the existing, man-made ship channel. Further, as discussed below, the EIS prepared for the proposed project finds that most of the direct environmental impacts from construction of the proposed Rio Grande LNG Terminal are expected to be temporary or short term during construction and operation, while some long-term and permanent environmental

42 See Rio Grande LNG, LLC, DOE/FE Docket No. 15-190-LNG, Order No. 3869 (2016). As noted earlier, the application to export LNG to non-Free Trade Agreement nations, submitted on December 23, 2015, is currently under DOE review in DOE/FE Docket No. 15-190-LNG.

43 Id. at 6. Section 3(c) provides that the exportation and importation of natural gas to and from countries with which there is in effect a Free Trade Agreement "shall be deemed to be consistent with the public interest and applications for such importation and exportation shall be granted without modification or delay."

44 15 U.S.C. § 717b(a). EarthReports, 828 F.3d at 953 (citing W. Va. Pub. Servs. Comm'n v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, 681 F.2d 847, 856 (D.C. Cir. 1982)) ("sets out a general presumption favoring such authorization"): see also Sierra Club v. U.S. Dep't of Energy, 867 F.3d 189, 203 (D.C. Cir. 2017).

See Nat'l Steel Corp., 45 FERC ¶ 61,100, at 61,332-33 (1988) (observing that DOE, "pursuant to its exclusive jurisdiction, has approved the importation with respect to every aspect of it except the point of importation" and that the "Commission's authority in this matter is limited to consideration of the place of importation, which necessarily includes the technical and environmental aspects of any related facilities.").

390


Page 13 of 102

impacts would also occur." With the exception of certain cumulative impacts contributed by the Rio Grande LNG Terminal (e.g., on surface water quality in the Brownsville Ship Channel during operational vessel transits; on the federally-listed ocelot and jaguarundi from habitat loss and increased potential for vehicular strikes during construction; on the federally listed northern aplomado falcon from habitat loss, on visual resources due to the presence of new facilities, and on nearby noise-sensitive areas (NSA) during nighttime construction), implementation of Rio Grande's proposed mitigation measures and additional measures recommended by staff in the EIS and adopted in this order would ensure that impacts in the project area would be avoided or minimized, and reduced to less-than-significant levels.'

23. In accordance with the Memorandum of Understanding signed on August 31, 2018, by the Commission and the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) within the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)," PHMSA undertook a review of the proposed facility's ability to comply with the federal safety standards contained in Part 193, Subpart B, of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations.' On March 26, 2019, PHMSA issued a Letter of Determination indicating Rio Grande has demonstrated that the siting of its proposed LNG facilities complies with those federal safety standards.' If the proposed project is subsequently modified so that it differs from the details provided in the documentation submitted to PHMSA, further review would be conducted by PHMSA.

24. Rio Grande is proposing to operate its LNG Terminal under the terms and conditions mutually agreed to by its customers and will solely bear the responsibility for the recovery of any costs associated with construction and operation of the terminal. Accordingly, Rio Grande's proposal does not trigger NGA section 3(e)(4)."

46 Final EIS at 5-1.

47 Id.

48 Memorandum of Understanding Between the Department of Transportation and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Regarding Liquefied Natural Gas Transportation Facilities (Aug. 31, 2018), https://www.ferc.gov/legal/mou/2018/FERC-PHMSA-MOU.pdf.

49 C.F.R. pt. 193, Subpart B (2019).

See Commission staff's March 27, 2019 Memo tiled in Docket No. CP16-454-000 (containing PHMSA's Letter of Determination).

" 15 U.S.C. § 717b(e)(4) (governing orders for LNG terminal offering open

391


Page 14 of 102

25. Accordingly, we find that, subject to the conditions imposed in this order, Rio Grande's proposal is not inconsistent with the public interest. Therefore, we will grant Rio Grande's application for authorization under section 3 of the NGA to site, construct, and operate its proposed LNG Terminal facilities.

B. Rio Bravo Pipeline Project (Docket No. CP16-455-000)

26. Because Rio Bravo's proposed pipeline facilities will be used to transport natural gas in interstate commerce subject to the Commission's jurisdiction, the construction and operation of the facilities are subject to the requirements of subsections (c) and (e) of section 7 of the NGA.'

1. Certificate Policy Statement

27. The Certificate Policy Statement provides guidance for evaluating proposals to certificate new pipeline construction.' The Certificate Policy Statement establishes criteria for determining whether there is a need for a proposed project and whether the proposed project will serve the public interest. The Certificate Policy Statement explains that in deciding whether to authorize the construction of major new pipeline facilities, the Commission balances the public benefits against the potential adverse consequences. The Commission's goal is to give appropriate consideration to the enhancement of competitive transportation alternatives, the possibility of overbuilding, subsidization by existing customers, the applicant's responsibility for unsubscribed capacity, the avoidance of unnecessary disruptions of the environment, and the unneeded exercise of eminent domain in evaluating new pipeline construction.

28. Under this policy, the threshold requirement for applicants proposing new projects is that the applicant must be prepared to financially support the project without relying on subsidization from its existing customers. The next step is to determine whether the applicant has made efforts to eliminate or minimize any adverse effects the project might have on the applicant's existing customers, identify any adverse impacts the applicant's proposal might have on other existing pipelines in the market and their captive customers, and consider whether the applicant's proposal would result in the unnecessary exercise of eminent domain or have other adverse economic impacts on landowners and communities affected by the route of the new facilities. If residual adverse effects on

access service).

52 15 U.S.C. § 717f.

53 Certification of New Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, 88 FERC 1161,227 (1999), clarified, 90 FERC ¶ 61.128, further clarified, 92 FERC ¶ 61,094 (2000) (Certificate Policy Statement).

392


Page 15 of 102

these interest groups are identified after efforts have been made to minimize them, the Commission will evaluate the project by balancing the evidence of public benefits to be achieved against the residual adverse effects. This is essentially an economic test. Only when the benefits outweigh the adverse effects on economic interests will the Commission proceed to consider the environmental analysis, where other interests are addressed.

29. As discussed above, the threshold requirement for pipelines proposing new projects is that the pipeline must be prepared to financially support the project without relying on subsidization from its existing customers. Rio Bravo is a new company with no existing shippers. Thus, there is no potential for subsidization on Rio Bravo's system or degradation of service to existing customers.

30. In addition, there is no evidence that the Rio Bravo Pipeline Project will adversely impact other pipelines in the region or their customers. The project is not intended to replace service on other pipelines. Moreover, no pipeline company or their captive customers have protested Rio Bravo's application.

31. We are also satisfied that Rio Bravo has taken appropriate steps to minimize adverse impacts on landowners and surrounding communities. The Rio Bravo Pipeline Project would impact approximately 1,997 acres of land during construction, and approximately 1,224 acres of land during operation.54 Approximately 66 percent of the pipeline right-of-way would be collocated with or adjacent or parallel to existing pipeline, roadway, railway, or utility rights-of-way.55 Accordingly, for the purposes of our consideration under the Certificate Policy Statement, we find that Rio Bravo has taken sufficient steps to minimize adverse impacts on landowners and surrounding communities.

32. Rio Bravo's proposed pipeline will enable it to transport natural gas to the Rio Grande LNG Terminal, where the gas will be liquefied for export. Rio Bravo executed a precedent agreement with RioGas Marketing, LLC for the full capacity of the pipeline for a 20-year term. Based on the benefits that the Rio Bravo Pipeline Project will provide by enabling the transport of domestically-sourced gas to Rio Grande's LNG Terminal where the gas will be liquefied for export, and the minimal adverse impacts on existing shippers, other pipelines and their customers, and landowners and surrounding communities, we find that the proposed project is consistent with the Certificate Policy Statement. Based on this finding and the environmental review, as discussed below, we further find that the public convenience and necessity require approval and certification of Rio Bravo's

Final EIS at 2-25.

55 Id.

393

PUC Docket No. 505.46 Attachment 4

Page 16 of 102

proposal under section 7 of the NGA, subject to the environmental and other conditions discussed in this order.

2. Blanket Certificates

33. Rio Bravo requests a Part 284, Subpart G blanket certificate in order to provide open-access transportation services. Under a Part 284 blanket certificate, Rio Bravo would not need individual authorizations to provide transportation services to particular customers. Rio Bravo filed a pro forma Part 284 tariff to provide open-access transportation services. Because a Part 284 blanket certificate is required for Rio Bravo to participate in the Commission's open-access regulatory regime, we will grant Rio Bravo a Part 284 blanket certificate, subject to the conditions imposed herein, authorizing Rio Bravo to provide transportation service to customers requesting and qualifying for transportation service under its proposed FERC Gas Tariff, with pre-granted abandonment authorization

34. Rio Bravo also requests a Part 157, Subpart F blanket certificate. The Part 157 blanket certificate gives an interstate pipeline NGA section 7 authority to automatically, or after prior notice, perform a restricted number of routine activities related to the construction, acquisition, abandonment, replacement, and operation of existing pipeline facilities provided the activities comply with constraints on costs and environmental impacts.' Because the Commission has previously determined through a rulemaking that these blanket-certificate eligible activities are in the public convenience and necessity,' it is the Commission's practice to grant new natural gas companies a Part 157

56 18 C.F.R. § 157.203.

57 Revisions to the Blanket Certificate Regulations and Clarification Regarding Rates, Order No. 686, FERC Stats. & Regs. ¶ 31,231, at P 9 (2006) (cross-referenced at 117 FERC ¶ 61,074), order on reh'g, Order No. 686-A, 119 FERC ¶ 61,303, order on reh'g, Order No. 686-B, 120 FERC IT 61,249 (2007).

394


Page 17 of 102

blanket certificate if requested." Accordingly, we will grant Rio Bravo a Part 157 blanket certificate, subject to the conditions imposed herein.

3. Rates

a. Initial Recourse Rates

35. Rio Bravo proposes initial maximum and minimum recourse reservation charges for firm service under Rate Schedule FTS, interruptible service under Rate Schedule ITS, and park and loan service under Rate Schedule PALS. Rio Bravo proposes a capital structure of 50 percent debt and 50 percent equity, a cost of debt of 6.85 percent, a return on equity of 14.00 percent and a depreciation rate of 2.50 percent." Rio Bravo derived the proposed Rate Schedule FTS recourse rates for the pipeline system using an annual cost of service of $390,835,526 and annual reservation billing determinants of 55,080,000 Dth." Rio Bravo proposes: (1) an initial Rate Schedule FTS monthly reservation charge of $7.0958 per Dth and an initial usage charge of $0.000 per Dth; and (2) an initial Rate Schedule ITS and Rate Schedule PAL usage charge of $0.2333 Dth per day, based on a 100 percent load factor equivalent of the Rate Schedule FTS. Section 4 of the General Terms and Conditions (GT&C) of Rio Bravo's pro forma tariff also provides for the Annual Charge Adjustment (ACA) as permitted by section 154.402 of the Commission's regulations."

36. On March 16, 2017, Commission staff issued a data request asking for a clarification regarding Rio Bravo's treatment of Accumulated Deferred Income Taxes (ADIT). On April 3, 2017, Rio Bravo filed a response stating the ADIT treatment for the pipeline system facilities should have been treated as a liability, not as an asset. Rio Bravo filed a revised Exhibit P to reflect a revised cost of service and rates. Rio Bravo proposes a revised Rate Schedule FTS monthly reservation charge of $6.9945 per Dth and revised Rate Schedule ITS and Rate Schedule PAL usage charge of $0.2300 per Dth.

58 C.f Rover Pipeline LLC, 161 FERC ¶ 61,244, at P 13 (2017) (denying a request for a blanket certificate where the company's actions had eroded the Commission's confidence it would comply with all the requirements of the blanket certificate program, including the environmental requirements).

59 Application, Exhibit P.

60 Application, Exhibit P at 1.

" Section 154.402 of the Commission's regulations, 18 C.F.R. § 154.402 (2019), states that a pipeline may not recover the Commission's annual charge through an ACA charge until it pays the annual charge and records it in Account No. 928.

395


Page 18 of 102

37. On May 31, 2017, Commission staff issued a data request concerning the variable costs and associated accounts in Rio Bravo's proposed Operating and Maintenance (O&M) expenses. On June 13, 2017, Rio Bravo filed a response proposing to revise FERC Account No. 859 (Other expenses) from $2,605.203 to $204,455 for Pipeline System facilities. The difference of $2,400,748 for Pipeline System facilities will be reclassified to FERC Account No. 853 (Compressor station labor and expenses). Rio Bravo also proposes to revise FERC Account No. 867 (Maintenance of other equipment) from $3,214.786 to $255,859 for Pipeline System facilities. The difference of $2.958,927 for Pipeline System facilities will be reclassified to FERC Account No. 864 (Maintenance of compressor station equipment). Rio Bravo states it is not proposing any change to the overall O&M expenses proposed, but is reclassifying expenses by account. In addition, Rio Bravo provided a breakdown of O&M expenses by FERC account number and between labor and non-labor. Rio Bravo identified a total of $2,623,093 in non-labor costs for FERC Account Nos. 853, 857 (Measuring and regulating station expenses), 864 and 865 (Maintenance of measuring and regulating station equipment). Consistent with the Commission's regulation requiring the use of straight fixed-variable rate design (SFV),62 these costs are classified as variable costs and should be recovered through a usage charge, not through the reservation charge.63

38. In its January 26, 2018 response to a staff data request, Rio Bravo provided an adjusted cost of service and recalculated its originally proposed initial incremental recourse rates to reflect changes in the federal tax code, as per the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017," which became effective January 1, 2018.65 Rio Bravo's work papers show that the effect of the tax code change is a reduction in the estimated cost of service to $346,601,154, resulting in a reduction in the initial maximum reservation charge to $6.2927 per Dth under Rate Schedule FTS and a revised usage charge to $0.2069 per Dth under Rate Schedules ITS and PALS. As Rio Bravo's January 26, 2018 revised calculation reflects the federal tax code that will be in effect when the project goes into service, the Commission will use the revised recourse rates for the purpose of

62 18 C.F.R. § 284.7(e).

63 Columbia Gulf Transmission, LLC, 152 FERC ¶ 61,214; Dominion Transmission, Inc., 153 FERC ¶ 61,382 (2015).

64 Pub. L. No. 115-97, 131 Stat. 2054 (Dec. 22, 2017).

65 On August 30. 2018, in response to a staff data request, Rio Bravo states it is not a Master Limited Partnership and it will not incur the proposed federal income tax allowance in its own name. Rio Bravo also states all of its income and losses are consolidated on the federal income tax return of NextDecade Corporation, a C-Corp, which owns 100 percent of Rio Bravo.

396


Page 19 of 102

establishing the initial recourse rates subject to Rio Bravo recalculating its initial recourse rates in its compliance filing consistent with an SFV rate design as discussed above.

39. Rio Bravo also proposes an initial fuel retainage percentage of 3.00 percent. Rio Bravo states the retainage percentage of 3.00 percent is based on the pipeline design, compression equipment design, and a high system flow rate. Furthermore, Rio Bravo states the retainage percentage will be revised annually after the in-service date of the phase one pipeline facilities pursuant to GT&C section 23, which includes a true-up adjustment that would reconcile actual fuel used versus fuel retained." The Commission accepts Rio Bravo's proposed initial fuel retainage percentage of 3.00 percent.

b. Allowance for Funds Used During Construction

40. An allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) is a component part of the cost of constructing Rio Bravo's facilities. Gas Plant Instruction 3(17) prescribes a formula for determining the maximum amount of AFUDC that may be capitalized as a component of construction cost.67 However, that formula is not applicable here, as it uses prior year book balances and cost rates of borrowed and other capital that either do not exist or could produce inappropriate results for initial construction projects of newly created entities such as Rio Bravo. Therefore, to ensure that the amounts of AFUDC are properly capitalized in this project, we will require Rio Bravo to capitalize the actual costs of borrowed and other funds for construction purposes not to exceed the amount of debt and equity AFUDC that would be capitalized based on the overall rate of return approved."

c. Three Year Filing Requirement

41. Consistent with Commission precedent, Rio Bravo is required to file a cost and revenue study no later than three months after its first three years of actual operation to

66 Rio Bravo's April 3, 2017 Response to Data Request at 437.

67 18 C.F.R. pt. 201 (2019).

68 See Mill River Pipeline, L.L.C., 112 FERC 1161,070 (2005).

397


Page 20 of 102

justify its existing cost-based firm and interruptible recourse rates." In this filing, the projected units of service should be no lower than those upon which Rio Bravo's approved initial rates are based. The filing must include a cost and revenue study in the form specified in section 154.313 of the Commission's regulations to update cost of service data:° Rio Bravo's cost and revenue study should be filed through the eTariff portal using a Type of Filing Code 580. In addition, Rio Bravo is advised to include as part of the eFiling description, a reference to Docket No. CP16-455-000 and the cost and revenue study.' After reviewing the data, the Commission will determine whether to exercise its authority under NGA section 5 to investigate whether the rates remain just and reasonable. In the alternative, in lieu of this filing, Rio Bravo may make an NGA general section 4 rate filing to propose alternative rates to be effective no later than three years after the in-service date for its proposed facilities.

d. Negotiated Rates

42. Rio Bravo's pro forma tariff provides for Rio Bravo to charge negotiated rates for its proposed services. If Rio Bravo charges a negotiated rate, it must file either its negotiated rate agreement or tariff record setting forth the essential terms of agreements in accordance with the Commission's Alternative Rate Policy Statement' and negotiated rate policies:3 Rio Bravo must file the negotiated rate agreements or tariff records at least 30 days, but not more than 60 days, before the proposed effective date for such rates.'

69 See Bison Pipeline, LLC, 131 FERC ¶ 61,013, at P 29 (2010); Ruby Pipeline, LLC, 128 FERC ¶ 61,224, at P 57 (2009); MarkWest Pioneer, L.L.C., 125 FERC ¶ 61,165, at P 34 (2008) (MarkWest).

7° 18 C.F.R. § 154.313 (2019).

71 Electronic Tariff Filings, 130 FERC ¶ 61,047, at P 17 (2010).

72 Alternatives to Traditional Cost-of-Service Ratemaking for Natural Gas Pipelines,. Regulation of Negotiated Transportation Services of Natural Gas Pipelines, 74 FERC ¶ 61,076; clarification granted, 74 FERC ¶ 61,194, order on reh'g,75 FERC ¶ 61,024 (1996).

73 Natural Gas Pipelines Negotiated Rate Policies and Practices; Modification of Negotiated Rate Policy, 104 FERC ¶ 61,134 (2003), order on reh'g and clarification, 114 FERC ¶ 61,042, reh'g dismissed and clarification denied, 114 FERC ¶ 61,304 (2006).

74 Pipelines are required to file any service agreement containing non-conforming

398


F'age 21 of 102

4. Tariff

43. As part of its application, Rio Bravo filed a pro forma open-access tariff applicable to services provided on its proposed pipeline. We approve the pro forina tariff as generally consistent with Commission policies, with the following exceptions.

a. Nominations, Confirmations and Scheduling

44. Rio Bravo's proposed GT&C section 6.7.E states - Transporter shall have the right to curtail, interrupt, discontinue, or not schedule service in whole or in part on all or a portion of its system from time to time to perform repair and maintenance on Transporter's system as necessary to maintain the operational capability of Transporter's system or to comply with applicable regulatory requirements.'

45. Rio Bravo proposes that it may curtail scheduled service when - necessary to maintain the operational capability of Transporter's system or to comply with applicable regulatory requirements." The Commission has found that pipelines may only "curtail" service in an emergency situation or when an unexpected capacity loss occurs after the pipeline has scheduled service, and the pipeline is therefore unable to perform the service which it has scheduled.' The term 'to perform repair and maintenance on Transporter's system as necessary to maintain operational capability of Transporter's system or to comply with applicable regulatory requirements" is not limited to an emergency situation or an unexpected loss of capacity, and the pipeline should take outages required for routine repair, maintenance, and operating changes into account when it is scheduling service, rather than curtailing service after it is scheduled. If an interruption of service is required for routine repair, maintenance or improvements, then the pipeline should not confirm shipper nominations to schedule service that it will not be able to provide for the period of the outage. For that reason, the Commission has held that pipelines should plan routine repair, maintenance, and improvements through the scheduling process and should not curtail confirmed scheduling nominations in order to perform routine repair,

provisions and to disclose and identify any transportation term or agreement in a precedent agreement that survives the execution of the service agreement. 18 C.F.R. § 154.112(b) (2019).

75 Emphasis added.

76 CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Co., LLC, 144 FERC 61,195, at P 75 (2013) (CenterPoint); Ryckman Creek Resources, LLC, 136 FERC ¶ 61,061, at P 68 (2011); MarkWest, 125 FERC ¶ 61,165 at P 52; Portland Natural Gas Transmission Sys., 76 FERC ¶ 61.123, at 61,663 (1996).

399

vs' aix wic ii · 2020-03-11 · auto. m1, 413, z j umml"ily 9 r sos ' 0n 3130 01...

Documents