Project Execution Client Due Diligence

December 4, 2014

Carlos Macias/V.P. Project Management

Forward Looking Statements

This presentation contains certain statements that are, or may be deemed to be, “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included herein are “forward-looking statements.” Included among “forward-looking statements” are, among other things:

statements regarding the ability of Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. to pay distributions to its unitholders;

statements regarding our expected receipt of cash distributions from Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P., Sabine Pass LNG, L.P., Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC or Cheniere Creole Trail Pipeline, L.P.;

statements that we expect to commence or complete construction of our proposed liquefied natural gas (“LNG”) terminal or our proposed pipelines, liquefaction facilities or other projects, or any expansions thereof, by certain dates or at all;

statements regarding future levels of domestic and international natural gas production, supply or consumption or future levels of LNG imports into or exports from North America and other countries worldwide, regardless of the source of such information, or the transportation or demand for and prices related to natural gas, LNG or other hydrocarbon products;

statements regarding any financing transactions or arrangements, or ability to enter into such transactions;

statements relating to the construction of our natural gas liquefaction trains (“Trains”), or modifications to the Creole Trail Pipeline, including statements concerning the engagement of any engineering, procurement and construction ("EPC") contractor or other contractor and the anticipated terms and provisions of any agreement with any EPC or other contractor, and anticipated costs related thereto;

statements regarding any agreement to be entered into or performed substantially in the future, including any revenues anticipated to be received and the anticipated timing thereof, and statements regarding the amounts of total LNG regasification, liquefaction or storage capacities that are, or may become, subject to contracts;

statements regarding counterparties to our commercial contracts, construction contracts and other contracts;

statements regarding our planned construction of additional Trains, including the financing of such Trains;

statements that our Trains, when completed, will have certain characteristics, including amounts of liquefaction capacities;

statements regarding any business strategy, our strengths, our business and operation plans or any other plans, forecasts, projections or objectives, including anticipated revenues and capital expenditures and EBITDA, any or all of which are subject to change;

statements regarding projections of revenues, expenses, earnings or losses, working capital or other financial items;

statements regarding legislative, governmental, regulatory, administrative or other public body actions, requirements, permits, investigations, proceedings or decisions;

statements regarding our anticipated LNG and natural gas marketing activities; and

any other statements that relate to non-historical or future information.

These forward-looking statements are often identified by the use of terms and phrases such as “achieve,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “develop,” “estimate,” “example,” “expect,” “forecast,” “opportunities,” “plan,” “potential,” “project,” “propose,” “subject to,” “strategy,” and similar terms and phrases, or by use of future tense. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, they do involve assumptions, risks and uncertainties, and these expectations may prove to be incorrect. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this presentation. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of a variety of factors, including those discussed in “Risk Factors” in the Cheniere Energy, Inc. and Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. Annual Reports on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on February 22, 2013, each as amended by Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A filed with the SEC on March 1, 2013, and the Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 29, 2013, which are incorporated by reference into this presentation. All forward-looking statements attributable to us or persons acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by these ”Risk Factors”. These forward-looking statements are made as of the date of this presentation, and other than as required under the securities laws, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements.

2

3

Agenda

1. HSE Moment

2. Company Introduction

3. Projects Due Diligence Importance

4. Cheniere’s Approach to Project Risks Assessment

5. Risk Considerations & Management

6. Incurred Events

7. Closing

4

1.a - Cheniere’s HSE Standard Practices for Project Execution

Health, Safety & Environment – is the top priority

in ALL Cheniere projects

Ultimate Goal and Sincere Commitment to

Maintain all Employees’ Safety & Health and to

Comply with all Environmental Agency permits

and Government Regulations

Safety First ------ ALWAYS

Wellness and First Aid Station Facilities

Stewards of the Environment

5

1.b - Coexistence of Flora & Fauna During Project Construction

6

1.c - Beneficial Use of Dredged Material

Beach Nourishment

From Dredge

Spoils

7

2.0 - Company Introduction

1. Company Structure

2. LNG Plant Development & Progression

3. Current Major Projects

2.1.a - Company Summary Organizational Structure

8

Cheniere Energy,

Inc. (NYSE MKT: LNG)

Sabine Pass LNG, L.P.

(“SPLNG”)

Sabine Pass Liquefaction, LLC

(“SPL”)

Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P.

(NYSE MKT: CQP)

Cheniere Creole Trail Pipeline, L.P.

(“CTPL”)

Corpus Christi Liquefaction, LLC

(“CCL”)

Cheniere Marketing, LLC

(“CMI”)

Cheniere Energy Partners GP,

LLC

100% Interest

100% Interest 100% Interest 100% Interest

(1) Current ownership interest. As Class B units accrete Blackstone will increase its ownership percentage, and the public and CQH will have reduced ownership

percentages.

Liquefaction

facilities

13.5 mtpa under

development

Regasification

facilities

4.0 Bcf/d of capacity

17.0 Bcf of storage

2 berths

Liquefaction facilities

18 mtpa under

construction

9 mtpa under development

Cheniere Energy Partners LP Holdings, LLC (NYSE MKT: CQH)

1.5 Bcf/d capacity for

SPL

Provides gas supply

for SPL

84.5% Interest

55.9% Interest (1)

2.0% Interest & Incentive Dist. Rights

Int’l LNG marketing

SPAs with SPL and

CCL

Three 5-year LNG

vessel charters Blackstone (BX) 29.0% (1)

Public 13.1% (1)

Public 15.5%

2.1.b - Cheniere Investments Investing $30B+ for 9 LNG trains, ~40.5 MTPA, ~5.5Bcf/d LNG exports

9

Sabine Pass Liquefaction

Gulf of Mexico

TX LA Creole Trail PL

Sabine Pass Liquefaction

• 6 Train Development – 27 MTPA

~3.8 Bcf/d in export capacity

• Trains 1-4 are under

construction;

First LNG in late 2015

• Trains 5-6 under development;

FID expected 2015

Corpus Christi Liquefaction

• 3 Train Development – 13.5 MTPA

~1.7 Bcf/d in export capacity

• FID expected early 2015

• First LNG expected 2018

Corpus Christi Liquefaction

10

• LNG Plant Development & Projects Progression

2.2 - Company Development

2.2.a – LNG Import Terminal Project

11

Aug. 18, 2009

AAV Test

Sep. 3, 2009

Project Complete

Aug. 15, 2003

SPLNG Greenfield Site

Mar. 12, 2008

1st LNG Ship

Artist Rendition

SPLNG Phase 1 & 2

Sabine Pass LNG Terminal SPLNG Phase 2 SPLNG Phase 1

2.2.b - Existing Facilities & Liquefaction Projects Site (Nov. 2011)

12

STAGE 1 STAGE 2

Future STAGE 3

Sabine Pass Liquefaction Plant Stage 1 Stage 2

Brownfield

Brownfield

2.2.c – LNG Export Terminal Project

2.3.a - Sabine Pass Liquefaction - Brownfield LNG Export Project Utilizes Existing Assets, Trains 1-4 Fully Contracted, Under Construction

14

Significant infrastructure in place including storage, marine and pipeline interconnection

facilities; pipeline quality natural gas to be sourced from U.S. pipeline network

Design production capacity is expected to be ~4.5 mtpa per train, using

ConocoPhillips’ Optimized Cascade® Process

Current Facility

~1,000 acres in Cameron Parish, LA

40 ft. ship channel 3.7 miles from coast

2 berths; 4 dedicated tugs

5 LNG storage tanks (~17 Bcfe of storage)

5.3 Bcf/d of pipeline interconnection

Liquefaction Trains 1 – 4: Fully Contracted

Lump Sum Turnkey EPC contracts w/ Bechtel

T1 & T2 EPC contract price ~$4.0B

• ~76% complete (as of 9/30/2014)

• Operations estimated late 2015/2016

T3 & T4 EPC contract price ~$3.8B

• ~43% complete (as of 9/30/2014)

• Operations estimated 2016/2017

Liquefaction Trains 5&6: T5 Fully Contracted

EPC contract under negotiation with Bechtel

Permits expected 2014/2015

Artist’s

rendition

2.3.b - SPL, STAGE 1 PROJECT TIMELINE

SEQUENCE OF EVENTS

June 2010

FEL K.O.

Jan. 31, 2011

FERC Application

Sept. 7, 2010

DOE Authorization

To Export to FTA Countries Sept. 2011

FEED Completion

Oct. 2011

Early EPC Works

Started

Apr. 16, 2012

FERC Order

Authorization to

Site/Constr/Operate

Liquefaction & Export of

Domestic NG @ SPLNG

May 20, 2011

DOE Authorization

To Export to Non-FTA

Countries

EPC

2012 – 2015/2016

16

2.3.c – Sabine Pass Liquefaction Construction Progress

October 2014, Aerial Photo

17

2.3.d – Sabine Pass Liquefaction Construction Progress

October 2014, Aerial Photo

Train 1

Train 2

Train 3

Train 1

2.4 - Corpus Christi Liquefaction Project

18

Proposed 3 Train Facility >1,000 acres owned and/or controlled

2 berths, 3 LNG storage tanks (~10.1 Bcfe of storage)

Key Project Attributes 45 ft. ship channel 13.7 miles from coast

Protected berth

Premier Site Conditions • Established industrial zone

• Elevated site protects from storm surge

• Soils do not require piles

• Local labor, infrastructure & utilities

• 23-mile 48” pipeline will connect to several interstate and intrastate pipelines

Trains 1&2: Fully Contracted SPAs signed covering ~7.7 mtpa at a fixed fee

of $3.50/MMBtu; targeting ~10.5 mtpa in SPAs across all 3 Trains prior to FID

Lump Sum Turnkey contracts signed with Bechtel • Stage 1: ~$7.1B includes 2 Trains, 2 tanks, 1 berth

• Stage 2: ~$2.4B includes 1 Train, 1 tank, 1 berth

Regulatory approvals expected 2014/2015

Anticipate FID in early 2015, First LNG expected 2018

Houston New Orleans

Gulf of

Mexico

Corpus Christi

Design production capacity is expected to be ~4.5 mtpa per train,

using ConocoPhillips’ Optimized Cascade® Process

3.0 - Project Due Diligence Importance

19

Pave Roadway to Successful Project Execution

Safely

On Schedule

Within the Project Budget

To Identify Risk & Perform Assessment to Determine Mitigation

Measures

To Program the Project for Success

20

4.0 - Approach to Risk Assessment

Risk Assessments Are Required for All Jobs – Don’t Start Work w/o One!

STEPS:

Identify Hazard/Risks

Assess the:

Likelihood of Occurrence

Impact of Consequence or Occurrence

Identify Control Measures

Implement Control Measures

Monitor and Review

Update as Required

Conducting Risk Reviews, Systematically relative to each Project Phase

Conceptual, Front End, FEED, EPC, Commissioning & Start-up

21

5.1 - Risk Management Plan

Purpose to Assure Significant Project Risks are Mitigated to the “As low as reasonably Practical”

With Intent to Identify Significant Risks and Assign to an Owner

Discuss & Develop Mitigation Measures w/respective Implementation Action Target Dates

Organize the Appropriate Experienced & Knowledgeable PMT for Lessons Learned, Project Execution Reviews, Approvals, & Oversight

Develop Team Effort & Spirit

Produce Risk Register for a Project “Living” Document for Progression Reviews & Updates as Required

22

5.2.a - Risk Factors

Project Location: Domestic vs Foreign

Availability of Resources

Regulatory Bodies & Regulations

Logistics for Materials, etc

Type of Project, Greenfield vs Brownfield

Maturity of Technology

23

Identify, assess, evaluate, and develop plans to preventing, mitigate,

or transfer significant risks (personnel safety, environmental, and

financial).

Risk control measures are evaluated with an appropriate balance

between risks/impacts, cost, schedule, and operational requirements.

Production of a Risk Management Plan that will be further developed

and followed throughout the Project Life

5.2.b - Risk Considerations

24

5.3.a - Top 10 Project Risks

Description of Risk Mitigant

Project Financing

LNG Purchase and Gas Sales Agreements expected to be in place prior to FID. With these long term

agreements and credit worthy position, the Project becomes readily financeable. Current credit markets are

favorable and alternative financing forms exists.

Natural Disasters

While none are anticipated, these events have the potential for significant damages, resulting in delayed

schedules. The majority of costs for restoring the project to its pre-event state will be covered under Builders

Risk Insurance. Advance preparation will minimize damages and immediate restoration actions in such an

event will minimize schedule delays.

Site Safety Safety Practices to be promoted and instilled in all Project Participants with developed safety guidelines,

procedures, safety environment socialization, Safety recognitions, etc—Zero Tolerance Approach.

Default of EPC Contractor

Screening for EPC contractors will be based on reputable, financially sound, LNG experienced, and industry

acceptable track record criteria. Evaluation and Selection process will determine the highest ranked bidder for

assurance of completion of all contractor’s obligations. Contract will include default clauses with requirements

for “irrevocable letter of credit or equivalent” in a specified percentage of Contract Price and retention of

specified percentage amount from each progress invoice payment as fall back, in the event of a default

Delay to Target Completion

Date(s)

Included in the EPC Execution Plan are Schedule Control processes to maintain the project schedule. This

processes with its associated tools, oversight, look ahead and progress reporting prevent any delays. In cases

where impacts to schedule are encountered, work around plans will be expeditiously activated

25

5.3.b - Top 10 Project Risks (continued)

Description of Risk Mitigant

Change to Design after Contract

Award

Project Management Team oversight on a day to day basis with a Management of Change Procedure will

be in place to control, coordinate and head off scope of work changes and avoid any cost and schedule

impacts

Government-Regulatory

Agencies’ Changes

Final Basis of Design will be in compliance with current regulations. Coordination and interface with the

regulatory bodies will be maintained during the project execution. Good communications as required for

data transfer , understanding and reporting will be part of PMT’s responsibility to mitigate any negative

impacts

Labor Disputes and Strikes

Assessment and study of Labor conditions and situations will be an ongoing activity within EPC contractor

and Project Management teams. Good working Relations will be established with labor groups prior to

project construction and maintained through project completion. As we proposed, Project Labor

Agreements could be negotiated and implemented

Materials and/or Labor Escalation

Reasonably assessed Allowance Factors for potential material and labor increase would be included in

Project Venture budget forecast and EPC contractor normally includes such allowances in their EPC

Lump Sum Contract

Currency Fluctuations Project Contracts would be base Country denominated. The risk for currency within the scope of each

contract will be borne by contractor, who normally factors this risk into their lump sum contract price

26

5.4 - Maintaining Awareness of Murphy’s LAW

Murphy’s Law ADAGE: “Anything That Can Go Wrong…

Will Go Wrong”

27

Y2K BUG Dec. 31, 1999, Past Midnight Forecasted Event

6.1.a - Reminder of Millennium BUG

28

6.1.b - Recollection of Y2K Problem

The “Sky Will Fall” Predictions for end of Year 1999

Due to most Computer Dates had been Programmed w/Automatic with

Assumed Year Date which Began with two digits, that being ”19”

Much of Everyday lives Run by Computer

Effected Banks, Traffic Lights, Power Grid, Airport, Process Plants, etc

Globally, Numerous Risks Identified w/Mitigation Plan Developed by ALL

Much Preparation & Updated Programming Done

In Actuality, Very Little Adverse Effects were Experienced

Relatively Minor Millennium Bug Problems Occurred

29

6.2.a - Event, Construction Initiation

1st of Cranes Mobilization, Crane Rolling off Barge!

30

6.2.b – Hurricane Event, MIC

Event: Hurricane IKE, Sept. 2008

(MIC - Microbiologically Induced Corrosion)

• Effects of Salt Water on S.S. Piping

Action Taken:

• Organized & mobilized Setup for Acid Washing of Materials

• Expedited Replacement Materials Purchase for damaged goods

31

6.2.c – Hurricane Event, Storm Surge

Flooded Laydown Areas,

Construction Materials Damaged

Drew Uninvited Critters

• Expedited Insurance Reps Involvement

• Notified the Emergency Response Team/ERT according to Plan

• Mobilized to Site as Soon as Authorities allowed

32

6.2.d – Plant Start Up

Overseas Plant, 1983

Over-Pressure Results

• Immediately Organized Project Team for:

• Damages Assessment

• Prepared & Executed Fast Track Plant Repairs

• Continued in parallel with Plan for Execution of Subsequent Full

Train Capacity restoration

33

“One Can Mitigate Against Risk, But not Remove it

Entirely from Some Endeavors”

“Plus if You’re Going to Prohibit People from taking Risks,

You’re Going to Prohibit Certain Kinds of Progress”

6.2.e – Closing Thoughts

7.0 – Q & A

34