Terminals

John Schlosser

President Terminals Group

Terminal Network Largest Independent Terminal Operator in North America

2

Bulk 82 Terminals Liquids 40 Terminals Transload 10 Transload Operations

KM Terminals Segment Facilities

Historical Growth (a)

3

($ in thousands)

__________________________ (a) Before Certain Items (b) Without corporate overhead (c) 2014 Budget excludes acquisition capital of $100 MM (d) 2002-2014 CAGR Note: Does not include impact of APT / SCT acquisition

2011Actual

2012Actual

2013Actual

2014Budget

Earnings before DD&A (excluding APT) 701,042 752,303 797,875 969,095

Revenue (net) $1,298,507 $1,343,294 $1,388,319 $1,626,278 Opex $598,212 $587,713 $576,822 $624,298 EBITDA $700,295 $755,580 $811,497 $1,001,980 Book Income Tax ($747) $3,277 $13,621 $32,885 Earnings Before DD&A $701,042 $752,303 $797,875 $969,095 Sustaining Capital (b) $83,187 101,420 104,654 $136,747 DCF $617,855 $650,883 $693,221 $832,348

Expansion Capital (b,c) $223,173 $579,994 $817,137 $517,694

Operating Margin 53.93% 56.25% 58.45% 61.61%

Growth from prior year (earnings before DD&A) 8.42% 7.31% 6.06% 21.46% Internal 6.05% 5.83% 5.52% 20.30% Acquisition 2.36% 1.49% 0.53% 1.16%

EBDA CAGR (d)

12.53%

Contract Diversification

Top-10 Customers $497MM

Total Revenue (c) $1,626MM

4

Liquids Revenue Breakout (a) Bulk Revenue Breakout (a)

4.1-yr Avg. Contract Life (b) Top-10 Customers (a)

__________________________ (a) 2014 budget (b) 2014 budget weighted average, as of 12/31/2013 (c) No customer greater than 6% of revenue (d) Gasoline & Distillate

Liquids 4.2 Years

Bulk 4.1 Years

(d)

Bulk Tonnage

5

Key Take-aways Export coal volume expected to increase by 22.7%, or 6.24MM tons, due to new expansion projects coming on-line Petcoke volume expected to increase due to a full year of BP Whiting expansion project and increased petcoke handling

at IMT Expected decline in Fertilizer volume due to the divestiture of the Tampaplex ammonia business in December 2013 Expected decline in Other Bulk related to the KMMS CSX lost contract in Q1 2013

Variance ('14 vs '13)

KMBT Tonnage (tons)

Actual 2013

Budget 2014 Amt %

Coal 33,489,763 42,653,512 9,163,748 27.4% Ores/Metals (Bulk & Break-Bulk) 24,611,841 25,957,581 1,345,739 5.5% Petcoke 10,808,429 14,377,923 3,569,494 33.0% Soda Ash 4,585,962 4,678,141 92,180 2.0% Fertilizers 4,507,304 3,564,717 (942,587) -20.9% Salt 3,106,715 3,189,662 82,947 2.7% Aggregate 3,119,228 3,034,400 (84,828) -2.7% Cement (Including Clinker) 592,346 703,044 110,698 18.7% Other Bulk 5,123,472 4,559,055 (564,417) -11.0%

Totals 89,945,060 102,718,034 12,772,975 14.2%

Key Take-aways Increase in expected Petroleum Feedstock volume due to BOSTCO, Edmonton and crude by rail expansions Increase in expected Gasoline volume due to higher margin blending and export opportunities for our customers,

partially offset by a decrease in distillate blending Expected Chemical volume increase due to Galena Park, Harvey expansions, plus a full-year impact of acquisitions

Liquids Throughput

6 __________________________ (a) Crude, black oil and other feedstocks

Variance to Budget

Actual 2013

Budget 2014 Amt %

KMLT Throughput (Bbl)

Gasoline 334,811,713 400,448,520 65,636,807 19.6% Petroleum Feedstocks (a) 46,429,464 219,053,233 172,623,769 371.8% Distillate 134,720,953 117,123,544 (17,597,409) -13.1% Fuel Grade Ethanol / Bio-diesel 64,956,249 65,927,648 971,399 1.5% Chemical 26,051,704 28,654,624 2,602,920 10.0% Vegetable Oils 7,413,838 8,468,052 1,054,214 14.2% Animal Fats 202,764 202,608 (156) -0.1% Other 4,270,602 5,997,677 1,727,075 40.4%

Totals 618,857,287 845,875,904 227,018,617 36.7%

KMLT Utilization Capacity Utilization Rate 94.5% 97.5% Capacity (MMBbl) 68.1 72.4

Major Projects – Backlog

7

* Model assumption may differ from total facility capacity ** Initial Term (years); Combined Total figure is weighted average based on Capital *** C$ / USD exchange rate 1:1 (A) Reflected at KM Ownership Level – 55% (B) Reflected at KM Ownership Level – 50% (C) Reflected at KM Ownership Level – 51% (D) Capital figure reflects remaining capital calls on vessel builds; EBITDA is not pro-rated for capital

Project Name ProductModeled Capacity

(MMBbl) *Capital(MM)

First Full Year EBITDA

ExpectedIn Service

Avg. ContractLength **

Edmonton Tank Expansion Phase I *** Crude 3.4 $308.7 $34.9 Q4/13 - Q1/14 12

Edmonton Tank Expansion Phase II *** Crude 1.2 $111.9 $16.8 Q3/14 - Q4/14 12

North 40 Connection (Edmonton, AB) *** Crude n/a $6.9 $1.8 Q2/14 10

BOSTCO Phase 1 (La Porte, TX) (A) Resid/VGO/Distillates 6.2 $253.1 $20.0 Q4/13 - Q2/14 6

BOSTCO Phase 2 (A) ULSD 0.9 $29.8 $3.9 Q3/14 5

Galena Park Central Plant Rail Additive n/a $10.4 $1.7 Q1/14 5

Greens Port Crude by Rail (KWX JV; Houston, TX) (B) Crude 0.2 $33.5 $6.6 Q3/13 - Q1/14 5

Splitter Project Support Infrastructure Refined Petroluem 0.8 $77.5 $9.3 Q4/13 - Q1/14 12

Houston Export Terminal Blendstock 1.5 $172.0 $22.2 Q1/16 11

Pony Express (Deeprock JV; Cushing, OK) (C) Crude 1.5 $26.3 $3.8 Q3/14 5

Alberta Crude Terminal (Keyera JV; Edmonton, AB) (B) *** Crude 0.1 $32.9 $13.1 Q3/14 5

Geismar (Methanex Project) and Harvey, LA Chemical Tankage Chemical 0.8 $60.9 $9.6 Q4/14 9

Edmonton Rail Terminal (Imperial JV) (B) *** Crude 0.5 $184.0 $50.6 Q4/14 5

State Class Tankers (D) Crude/Products 1.3 $213.5 $66.0 Q4/15 - Q4/16 5

Galena Park Tank Project Refined Products 1.2 $106.2 $13.0 Q3/14 - Q4/15 10Greensport Dock Conversion Refined Products n/a $31.2 $4.4 Q1/16 8

TOTAL 19.6 $1,658.9 $277.9 8

Project Name ProductModeled Capacity

(MM Tons) *Capital(MM)

First Full Year EBITDA

ExpectedIn Service

Avg. ContractLength **

Deepwater Coal Handling (Deer Park, TX) Coal 7.0 $174.0 $24.2 Q3/14 10

IMT Phase 3 (Myrtle Grove, LA) Coal 3.3 $64.7 $9.8 Q2/14 10

Pier IX Yard Expansion (Newport News, VA) Coal 1.0 $29.3 $5.3 Q2/14 10

Sulfur System Upgrades (Vancouver, BC) *** Sulfur 1.3 $6.5 $1.6 Q4/14 5

Grain System Upgrades (Vancouver, BC) *** Grain 0.5 $6.1 $2.2 Q1/14 3Mt. Milligan (Thompson Creek) Copper Gold Mine (Vancouver, BC) *** Copper Ore 0.2 $13.5 $3.4 Q2/14 6

TOTAL 13.2 $294.1 $46.5 10

ONGOING EARLY-STAGE PROJECTS $347.4 $60.5

TOTAL PROJECT BACKLOG $2,300.4 $384.9

Future Identified Projects $250MM - $600MMCrude/NGL's

Refined ProductsMinerals

BU

LK

LIQ

UID

S

Major Projects – Placed In-Service in 2013

8 * Model assumption may differ from total facility capacity ** Initial Term (years); Combined Total figure is weighted average based on Capital (A) Reflected at KM Ownership Level – 67%

Project Name Product

Modeled Capacity(MMBbl) *

Capital(MM)

First Full Year EBITDA In Service

Avg. ContractLength **

Ethanol tank and truck bay (Pasadena, TX) Ethanol 0.1 $7.9 1 4/7 Q1/13 N/A

UAN Handling (Fairless Hills, PA) UAN 0.1 $6.3 3/4 Q3/13 5

TOTAL 0.2 $14.2

Project Name Product

Modeled Capacity

(MM Tons) *Capital(MM)

First Full Year EBITDA In Service

Avg. ContractLength **

Petcoke Handling (Whiting, IN) Petcoke 2.2 $62.8 11 4/9 Q3/13 10

Port of Houston Export Coal (Deer Park, TX) Coal 1.2 $51.5 6 4/9 Q4/13 10

IMT Phase 1 (Myrtle Grove, LA) (A) Coal 4.0 $56.2 8 3/4 Q3/13 15

IMT Phase 2 (A) Coal 3.0 $31.9 4 3/5 Q1/13 10

Fertilizer Domes (Fairless Hills, PA) Fertilizer 0.1 $13.6 1 4/9 Q3/13 4

Shiploader Expansion (Portland, OR) Soda Ash 1.9 $9.5 1 3/7 Q2/13 10

TOTAL 12.4 $225.4

COMBINED TOTAL $239.7 $36.5 10

LIQ

UID

S B

ULK

Crude

Canadian Crude Oil

10

= Increased North American demand for petroleum storage and transport

__________________________ Source: CAPP Crude Oil Forecast, Markets & Transportation, June 2013 Morgan Stanley Crude Oil: Long Term Outlook and Supply Deep Dive November 26, 2013

Western Canadian conventional and oil sands supply is increasing, beyond earlier forecasts Outbound pipeline takeaway capability isn’t keeping pace Regulatory issues playing a major role Canadian crude pricing reflects the logistical disconnect Traditional markets are evolving due to flood of lighter crudes in the U.S. Gulf

Canadian Oil Production Forecast Uncertainty Around Pipeline Development Driving Rail Investment

KM Terminal Response Expansion of Rail Take-away Capacity and Merchant Tankage

11

Future Capacity Increases Edmonton Rail Terminal Expansion Incremental capacity as much as 150 MBbl/d

Alberta Rail Terminal Phase 2 Incremental capacity as much as 110 MBbl/d Possibility of adding a diluent recovery unit

Edmonton Terminal Future Phases on Edmonton tank development

Rail Terminals Edmonton Rail Terminal 50-50 joint venture with Imperial Oil Base scope accommodates 1-3 unit trains per day, or approximately 100

MBbl/d Connected via pipe to KM’s Edmonton South terminal Served by both CN and CP mainlines

KM Capital $184 Million

Alberta Rail Terminal 50-50 joint venture with Keyera Initial phase includes 20 rail car loading spots accommodating approximately

40 MBbl/d Pipeline connectivity to KM’s Edmonton terminal Served by both CN and CP

KM Capital $33 million

Tankage Kinder Morgan’s Edmonton Terminal: Trans Mountain Operational 2.6 MMBbl North 40 Merchant 2.1 MMBbl Edmonton Merchant Phase 1 3.4 MMBbl Under construction – completion Q1-2014

KM Capital= $308.7 MM Edmonton Merchant Phase 2 1.2 MMBbl Under construction – completion Q3-2014

KM Capital = $111.9 MM 9.5 MMBbl (a)

Edmonton Rail Terminal (ERT) __________________________ (a) Total Edmonton Terminal tankage includes a 220K barrel regulated tank built during Phase I Expansion.

U.S. Crude Oil

12

US crude oil production is projected to hit 9.5 MMBbl/d by 2016 according to the EIA, approaching the historical record volume of 9.6 MMBbl/d

Increases (a) driven by: — Permian (projected to hit 2 MMBbl/d in 2020); — Eagle Ford TX, (1.76 MMBbl/d by 2020); — Bakken growth (1.73 MMBbl/d) — And offsetting declining ANS production

__________________________ Source: Turner Mason CCOC Conference Presentation, September 2013 (a) Morgan Stanley Crude Oil: Long Term Outlook and Supply Deep Dive November 26, 2013

U.S. Crude Oil Situation

13

Light crude production will increase out of the Eagle Ford and Permian, and will saturate the Gulf Coast with its predominate medium to heavy refinery base

Heavy Crude volume will find its way to rail and water from Alberta as a bridge to pipeline expansion

Estimated 425K carloads in 2013 The delta between originated and terminated

carloadings will increase as more Canadian crude enters the US market

(a)

__________________________ (a) Turner Mason CCOC Conference Presentation, September 2013

KM Response Expansion of Rail Receipt Capacity and Merchant Tankage

Selected Opportunities KWX - PNW and Northeast Crude Other Ship Channel crude development Northeast Shale gas export facility Acquisition candidates

Tankage and Connectivity Deeprock (Cushing, OK) Tallgrass Energy obtained FERC approval to convert the Pony

Express Pipeline to crude service - Deeprock Development JV is the destination

Project scope increased to nine (six new and three existing) x 250K Bbl tanks and two new pipelines connecting to five Cushing area destinations

Throughput capacity to up to 350 MBbl/d KM JV Terminal – KM Capital $26 million (KM 51%)

Rail Terminals Greens Port (Houston Ship Channel) Crude oil receipt and distribution terminal, Houston Ship Channel

– capable of handling 210 MBbl/d Heavy crude handling capability added in bolt-on project 250 MBbl storage, 105 car handling capability Fully built out by March 2014

Richmond, CA Converted from ethanol to crude oil in September 2013 Currently the only 100-car unit train crude oil facility in California

Pecos, TX Crude and sand facility relocated in 2013 Manifest crude service will grow to unit train scale as Permian rail

demand escalates KWX ND and Canadian JV Terminals Three manifest terminals in Canada; one operating unit train

facility in ND Combination of crude oil and frac sand

KWX JV terminals – KM Capital $35 million (KM 50%)

14

Greens Port Rail Terminal (GPRT)

KM Response APT / SCT Tanker Acquisition

American Petroleum Tankers (“APT”) – 5 existing medium-range Jones Act qualified

product tankers – 49,000 DWT per vessel (approx. 330,000 Bbl) – Average remaining term of approximately 4

years on current/forward charters; approximately 6 years including renewal options

State Class Tankers (“SCT”) – 4 new-build medium-range Jones Act qualified

product tankers (49,430 DWT per vessel) – Delivery between 4Q 2015 and 4Q 2016 – Built at General Dynamics’ NASSCO shipyard

(San Diego, CA) – Upon delivery each vessel will go on time

charter with an initial term of 5 years; 3 x 1-year renewals

Operations Agreement with Crowley Maritime – Maritime transportation company founded in

1892 – Services provided include: technical services,

crewing, security, maintenance & repair, purchasing, insurance, SQE Administration, regulatory reporting, bookkeeping

Alas

kan

Nor

th S

lope

Jones Act Trade Routes

Experienced Leadership Team at KM Rob Kurz – Joined APT in January 2010 (CEO) – Over 30 years of experience in maritime industry Phil Doherty – Joined APT in September 2010 (CFO) – Over 10 years of experience in maritime industry Tim Casey – Joined KM in 2013 – Previously served as President & CEO of K-Sea Transportation – Over 30 years of experience in maritime industry

15

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

(MB

bl/d

)

Crude Gasoline Blendstock Finished Gasoline Jet Distillates

KM Response APT / SCT Tanker Acquisition (Cont’d)

16

A number of favorable supply and demand factors are currently impacting the Jones Act trade: — Significant U.S. shipyard capacity constraints and long-lead delivery schedules — Stringent charterer vetting requirements takes supply out of market via vessel retirements — Dislocations in crude supply as a result of increased shale oil production has generated new, high-value trade

routes along West and Gulf coasts — With advantaged crude supply, PADD 3 refiners should continue to run near (or above) record levels, supporting

increase in PADD 3-to-PADD 1 products trade Result is a tightly supplied Jones Act tanker market and strong daily time charter rates for foreseeable future

__________________________ Source: EIA; Port of Corpus Christi

PADD 3 to PADD1 Transfers by Tanker & Barge

KM Response APT / SCT Tanker Acquisition (Cont’d)

17

Remain. Contract Length (yrs.)

Built/ Current Charterer/ Without WithVessel Delivered Forward Charterer Renewals Renewals 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Golden State Jan-09 Major Integrated 2 5Remaining

Contract TermRenewal Term(s)

Pelican State Jun-09 Major Integrated 2 4Remaining

Contract TermRenewal Term(s)

Sunshine State Dec-09 Major Integrated 3 4Remaining

Contract TermRenewal

Term

Empire State Oct-10U.S. Navy/Major Refiner

7 7Rem. Term

Ren.Term

Forward Charter -- Initial Term

Evergreen State Jan-11U.S. Navy/Major Refiner

6 10Rem. Term

Ren.Term

Forward Charter -- Initial Term Forward Charter -- Renewal Term

4 6

Remain. Contract Length (yrs.)

Built/ Current Charterer/ Without WithVessel Delivered Forward Charterer Renewals Renewals 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

SCT-1 4Q 2015 Major Integrated 5 8 Initial Contract Term Renewal Term(s)

SCT-2 2Q 2016 Major Integrated 5 8 Initial Contract Term Renewal Term(s)

SCT-3 4Q 2016 Major Integrated 5 8 Initial Contract Term Renewal Term(s)

SCT-4 3Q 2016 Major Integrated 5 8 Initial Contract Term Renewal Term(s)

5 8

APT

SCT

__________________________ Note: Remaining Contract Length from 1/1/2014

Petroleum

Gulf Coast Crude Delivery Capacity

19

37%

15%

22%

26%

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

Cushing Patoka Permian Eagle Ford

Thou

sand

bar

rels

per

day

Cushing • Seaway • Keystone Patoka • Trunkline Permian • Longhorn • BridgeTex • Cactus • Permian Express • West Texas Gulf Eagle Ford • KMCC • Double Eagle • Other

__________________________ Source: Company disclosures, EIA

Houston – the bucket at the bottom of the crude cascade — 4.5 MMBbl/d of increased pipeline delivery capacity from 2010 to 2015 — Represents roughly 50% of approximately 9.0 MMBbl/d USGC refining capacity

Gulf Coast Crude Runs

20

6,000

6,500

7,000

7,500

8,000

8,500

9,000

Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Thou

sand

bar

rels

per

day

5-yr Range 5-yr Average 2012 2013

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000 19

86

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

Thou

sand

bbl

per

day

Heavy Imports Medium Imports Light Imports Domestic

__________________________ Source: EIA – (Heavy Crude less than 25 °API; Medium Crude 25-to-35 °API Light Crude greater then 35 °API; 2013 data through September)

2013 runs at historical high — Recent expansions — 7.9 MMBbl/d in 2013

Increasing domestic crude

— 2013 imports have fallen to less than 4 MMBbl/d

— Displaced light imports — Decreasing medium imports — Increasing Jones Act

takeaway

Competitive refining capacity

— Distressed crude — Low natural gas prices — Product export growth

Refined Product Trade Balance

21 __________________________ Source: EIA : (Gasoline includes blendstocks)

(2,500)

(2,000)

(1,500)

(1,000)

(500)

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Thou

sand

bar

rels

per

day

Gasoline Jet Diesel Other

U.S. – Shifted from a net importer to exporter of refined product — Gasoline net imports have fallen nearly 1 MMBbl/d — Distillate net exports have grown to 1 MMBbl/d

Gasoline Exports

22 __________________________ Source: EIA – (2013 data through October, Exports include blending components)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

210

335

526 506 508

(MB

bl/d

)

Padd 1 1%

Padd 2 2%

Padd 3 88%

Padd 5 9%

Mexico 45%

Canada 11%

Other Americas

35%

Africa 4%

Asia 5% Gulf Coast accounts for 88% of gasoline exports

Distillate Exports

23 __________________________ Source: EIA – (2013 data through October)

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

587 654

853

1,007 1,095

(MB

bl/d

)

Padd 1 11%

Padd 3 78%

Padd 5 11%

Mexico 10% Canada

2%

Other Americas

49%

Africa 2%

Europe 35%

Asia 2%

Gulf Coast accounts for 78% of diesel exports

KM Response

Executing BOSTCO

— Phase I – 6.2 MMBbl of black oil storage plus two high-speed deep water ship docks, three barge docks (12 spots) and 24 rail spots - started operations in 4Q13

— Phase II – 900MB of ULSD tankage under construction and will be in service 3Q14

Splitter Tankage & Infrastructure — Expanded to 100 MBbl/d and

beyond Houston Export Facility

— 1.4 MMBbl plus ship and barge docks - will be in service 1Q16.

In the Pipeline Pasadena / Galena Park

Infrastructure — 10 tanks (1.2 MMBbl) plus barge

dock and rail expansion ($116MM).

New Projects — BOSTCO Phase III – expansion

includes 3.5 MMBbl plus two additional ship docks and one barge dock (4 spots)

— BOSTCO Pipeline - ULSD pipeline connection from KM Pasadena Terminal

— KM Watco ship dock ($31M) — Additional KM Pasadena /

Galena Park tank builds

24

KMTT 9640 CLINTON

GALENA PARK NORTH PLANT

GALENA PARK TERMINAL

KMTT FERRO OPERATION

VALERO

KINDER MORGAN CRUDE BY RAIL

PASADENA TERMINAL

KINDER MORGAN EXPORT TERMINAL

HOUSTON REFINING LYONDELL

KINDER MORGAN SHIP DOCK

GREENS PORT TERMINAL

JEFFERSON STREET TRUCK RACK

HOUSTON BULK TERMINAL

DEEPWATER TERMINAL

DEER PARK RAIL TERMINAL

PROPOSED PIPELINE

BOSTCO TERMINAL

Houston Ship Channel

25

Kinder Morgan is actively managing over $1.5B of growth projects along the Houston Ship Channel (Tankage increase ‘13 through ‘16)

KMCC GALENA PARK SPLITTER

2013 2016 (a)

Houston Ship Channel Total Barrels 30.7 38.7

__________________________ (a) Does not include BOSTCO Phase III

RFS Requirement(s)

2013 RFS Standard (MM Gallons)

2014 RFS Revisions (MM Gallons)

Cellulosic BioFuel 14 17

Biomass Diesel 1,280 1,280

Advanced Biofuel 2,750 2,200

Corn Ethanol 13,800 (a) 13,000

Total Renewable Fuels 16,550.0 15,210

Ethanol

26

Kinder Morgan Business Segment

Actual Throughput

(MM Gallons) Market Share

of US Demand

Terminals 2,585.0 19.29%

Products Pipeline 1,623.6 12.12%

Total 4,208.6 31.41%

Kinder Morgan Business Segment

Forecast Throughput

(MM Gallons) Market Share

of US Demand

Terminals 2,560.2 19.69%

Products Pipeline 1,785.0 13.73%

Total 4,345.2 33.42%

2013 Actual Throughput

2014 Forecast Throughput

Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) Revisions (as of November 15 2013)

__________________________ (a) 2013 Corn Ethanol Demand estimated 13,400.0MM Gallons vs. the Mandate Requirement.

Chemical

KM Chemical Network

27 Terminals (a)

10.9MM Bbl Storage Capacity 75+ Products

180+ Customers

28

Liquid Terminal

• Argo, IL • Chicago, IL • Cincinnati, OH (Queen City) • Cincinnati, OH (River T) • Pittsburgh, PA (Dravosburg)

Midwest

Upper River

• Cahokia, IL • Muscatine, IA • St. Louis, MO

Mid River

• Blytheville, AR • Guntersville, AL • Memphis, TN

Lower River • Geismar, LA • Harvey, LA • St. Gabriel, LA • Westwego, LA

Gulf

• Galena Park, TX

• Richmond, CA

Northeast

• Carteret, NJ • Perth Amboy, NJ • Philadelphia, PA

Mid Atlantic • Chesapeake, VA (South Hill) • Norfolk, VA

Southeast • Charleston, SC (Shipyard River) • Chester, SC • N. Charleston, SC • Port Sutton, FL • Wilmington, NC

West

__________________________ (a) Includes 2013 Acquisitions: Chester, Chesapeake, Norfolk

U.S. Chemical Industry Renaissance

29

Global Ethylene Capacity Cost Curve

__________________________ Source: American Chemistry Council; LyondellBasell

Lower natural gas prices have resulted in the increased competiveness of the U.S. chemical industry

— Reversal of industry’s global competitiveness from 2012 — Direct result of higher crude-to-gas ratios

U.S. NGL Prices versus Brent

30

Capital Expenditures Location

__________________________ Source: American Chemistry Council, “Shale Gas, Competitiveness, and New US Chemical Industry Investment: An Analysis Based on Announced Projects”

Over $70 billion in announced U.S. chemical investment as a direct result of lower feedstock prices

— Predominantly in the Gulf Coast petrochemicals — Access to natural gas and NGL feedstock as well as worldwide export markets

U.S. Chemical Industry Investment “Just the 2nd Inning”

KM Response to the Chemical Market

Develop Existing Portfolio Methanex project – leveraging existing Geismar, LA assets to

provide critical marine, rail, and truck access in support of Methanex’s relocated methanol production plant

Harvey Tank Expansion – adding tanks at fully-subscribed Harvey, LA terminal to capitalize on tight lower river chemical storage market

Acquire & Build New Businesses Quality Carriers acquisition – rail and truck chemical terminal in

Chester, SC Allied Terminal acquisition – Chesapeake and Norfolk, VA

terminals Selectively exploring other chemical storage acquisition

opportunities

Growth through Diversification Actively investigating different ways KM can participate in the

chemical – and petrochemical – processes of our customers: in-plant builds, tolling arrangements, etc.

Acquire

Develop

Grow

31

Coal

U.S. remains the second largest seaborne exporter of metallurgical coal behind Australia

Coal overtakes oil as the worlds most consumed fuel in 2019 and is estimated to account for more than 40% of the worlds electric generation by 2035 (a)

China is expected to bring on ~200 GW of power and India is expected to bring on ~70 GW of power by 2017; 1.1 billion metric tons in demand

China’s forecast hot metal production by 2022 is estimated to be 814 Mt, or 23% higher than 2012 production levels

India’s forecast hot metal production by 2022 is estimated to be 76 Mt, or 64% higher than 2012 production levels

Europe’s forecast hot metal production by 2022 is estimated to be 98 Mt, or 18% higher than 2012 production levels

33

International Coal Markets Thermal and Metallurgical Coal Market Conditions & Drivers

Total Seaborne Demand for Met Coal (MMTons) (b)

Global Energy Demand by Fuel (Mtoe) (a)

Projected U.S. Thermal Coal Exports (c)

0

20

40

60

80

100

(MM

sho

rt to

ns)

Europe Asia Other Americas __________________________ (a) Wood Mackenzie Global Horizons Service, Coal to exceed oil by 2020, October 2013 (b) Alpha Natural Resources, European Investor Presentation, December 4, 2013; (c) EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2014 Early Release

34

$417.6MM of Coal Terminal Expansions & Improvements:

Deepwater and Penn City – Houston, Texas New Capacity = 12.7 million net tons Thermal Coal International Marine Terminal (IMT) – Myrtle Grove, LA New Capacity = 11.0 million net tons Thermal Coal Pier IX Terminal – Newport News, VA New Capacity = 1.5 million net tons Metallurgical Coal

Kinder Morgan Coal Export Expansions Export KM Incremental Modeled Export Name Plate Capacity Terminal Investment Capacity Export Volume 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Pier IX $ 29.30 1.5 1.0 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 16.0

IMT - Export Volume (a) $ 162.80 11.0 7.3 5.0 5.0 5.0 11.0 16.0

Houston Bulk Terminal $ 51.50 2.7 1.2 0.0 2.2 2.2 2.7 2.7

Deepwater $ 174.00 10.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0

Total $ 417.6 25.2 16.5 19.5 21.7 21.7 28.2 44.7

2014 Budget assumes 27.5 export tons (b)

2014 Take or Pay equals 24.9 export tons – annualized = 29.1

KM Response: All new export capacity supported by strong, long-term take-or-pay contracts

__________________________ (a) Capital outlay represents KM's net investment in IMT (b) Includes Fairless

Summary Highlights Expected EBDDA growth in 2014 – 21.46% Only true national bulk and liquids terminal network Largest terminal footprint in U.S. and Canada = significant capital investment

opportunities. Significant growth from opportunities currently under development – $2.3 billion

in project backlog – with an additional $250-600 million of identified future projects being investigated

— Export distillate and gasoline — Edmonton tank expansion and take-away capacity development — Crude by rail terminal development — Chemical network development -- inside the fence line expansion and greenfield

projects Continued focus on KMT’s safety performance

— 1.64 TRIR vs. comparable marine cargo handling / other warehouse and storage industry average of 6.45 (a)

35 __________________________ (a) Composite of liquids ILTA, port and harbor operations and marine and cargo handling