Transcript Name of Speaker Title of Speaker

Wyoming Natural Gas
Pipeline Authority
Ed Miller
Business Development Project Manager
El Paso Rockies
Export Project
August 30, 2005
Cautionary Statement Regarding
Forward-looking Statements
This presentation includes forward-looking statements and projections, made in reliance on
the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The
company has made every reasonable effort to ensure that the information and assumptions on
which these statements and projections are based are current, reasonable, and complete.
However, a variety of factors could cause actual results to differ materially from the
projections, anticipated results or other expectations expressed in this presentation, including,
without limitation, the ability to implement and achieve our objectives in the long-range plan;
changes in commodity prices for oil, natural gas, and power; inability to realize anticipated
synergies and cost savings associated with restructurings and divestitures on a timely basis;
our ability to obtain necessary governmental approvals for proposed pipeline projects and our
ability to successfully construct and operate such projects; the risks associated with
recontracting of transportation commitments by our pipelines; regulatory uncertainties
associated with pipeline rate cases; general economic and weather conditions in geographic
regions or markets served by El Paso Corporation and its affiliates, or where operations of the
company and its affiliates are located; the uncertainties associated with governmental
regulation; difficulty in integration of the operations of previously acquired companies,
competition, and other factors described in the company’s (and its affiliates’) Securities and
Exchange Commission filings. While the company makes these statements and projections in
good faith, neither the company nor its management can guarantee that anticipated future
results will be achieved. Reference must be made to those filings for additional important
factors that may affect actual results. The company assumes no obligation to publicly update
or revise any forward-looking statements made herein or any other forward-looking statements
made by the company, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.
2
Rocky Mountain Supply
(Volumes are Wellhead – Measured in MMcf/d)
10,000
9,000
8,000
Big Horn
Wind River
Green River
Overthrust
Powder River
Uinta
Piceance
Denver
1.5 Bcf/d
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
Forecast by 2010:
High Case 13,000
Mid Case 9,500
Low Case 7,200
3,000
2,000
1,000
1990-2002: Wellhead total data from IHS database
2003: Estimate
2004-2010: CIG forecast
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
1990
0
3
Cheyenne Plains Throughput
vs. Midcontinent
$0.8000
600
$0.7000
580
$0.6000
560
$0.5000
540
$0.4000
520
$0.3000
Cheyenne Plains Rate = $0.34
NGPL less Cheyenne Hub
8/24/2005
8/23/2005
8/22/2005
8/21/2005
8/20/2005
8/19/2005
8/18/2005
8/17/2005
8/16/2005
8/15/2005
8/14/2005
8/13/2005
8/12/2005
8/11/2005
8/10/2005
8/9/2005
8/8/2005
8/7/2005
$0.0000
8/6/2005
460
8/5/2005
$0.1000
8/4/2005
480
8/3/2005
$0.2000
8/2/2005
500
Cheyenne Plains Throughput
$MMBtu
August 1-24, 2005
620
8/1/2005
MDth/d
MidCon less Cheyenne Hub Differential vs. Cheyenne Plains Rate
Cheyenne Plains Rate
4
Projected Demand Growth
NW and
Alaska
Western 5.3
Canada 6.4
2.5
2.7
3.1
Eastern
Canada
7.3
3.8
4.7
5.2
6.3
7.2
7.7
4.0
4.2
4.9
3.7
4.1
4.7
Bcf/d
Maritimes
and
Northeast U.S.
9.0
10.1
11.7
10.5
10.9
11.6
8.7
11.1
14.4
Total
2004 72.8
2009 82.2
2014 93.6
14.1
14.6
16.2
Mexico
5.0
6.2
7.0
Source: El Paso/ Energy Information Agency
5
Connectivity / Liquidity
Perryville
Pipeline
ANR
Gas Daily Point
(MMcf/d)
Campbellsville
Takeaway
Gas Daily
Point
Takeaway
LA
1,400
LA
1,400
NGPL
TexOk
1,800
TexOK
1,600
PEPL
–
1,500
–
1,600
TGC
–
1,600
–
1,600
–
650
MGT
TGP
Zone 3, 500 Leg, 800 Leg
4,150
–
2,400
TGT
Zone 1
2,000
–
1,700
Tetco
M-1 (Kosi)
2,500
–
2,500
MRT
–
730
–
730
CGT
–
2,400
–
2,200
SNG
LA
3,000
TGPL
Zone 4
4,000
FGT
Zone 3
1,900
Total
26,980
16,380
6
Cost of Capacity Shortage Out of Rockies
Estimated Revenue Lost per Bcf/d of Rockies Production
Net Present Value at 20% Pre-Tax
$1,400
$1,200
$2/Mcf Basis
$800
$600
$1/Mcf Basis
$400
$200
$0.25/Mcf Transport
23
21
19
17
15
13
11
9
7
5
3
$0
1
($Millions)
$1,000
Months of Delay
7
Overview
►
Two alternatives
– Opal to Campbellsville, Kentucky
– Opal to Perryville, Louisiana
8
Rockies Export Project Route
Schematic
Opal
Wamsutter
Cheyenne
ANR
Tennessee
Campbellsville
Tennessee
to Sonat
Greensburg
Tennessee
ANR
Perryville
►
►
Sonat
Propose as seamless
Downstream transport with rate certainty available as part of projects
9
Perryville
►
►
Can be constructed economically for smaller volumes; minimal risk of
delay; shortest and cheapest route
–
Range of rates from $1.10 to $1.40/Dth from Opal to Perryville
depending upon commitments (includes $7 fuel)
–
Range of Rockies commitments required from 600 MDth/d up
–
Additional seamless rates to Pugh (SNG Zone 1; TGP 500 Leg / 800
Leg; Transco Z3, Z4; PGT Z2, Z3; Tetco M-1); Lebanon, Cornell (DTI),
Joliet Hub, and others
–
Rates become more attractive as commitments increase
Accesses highest demand growth area in the U.S. in southeast
–
Recent Florida basis is $1.00 to Henry
►
Late 2008 in-service
►
Also directly accesses east coast pipelines and existing shippers
►
Interim capacity available to Greensburg by March 2007 as part of project
10
Campbellsville
►
Balances gaining close proximity to Northeast markets while
minimizing risk of delays
– Avoids construction through Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio
– Based upon previous proposed projects, building through
those states will cause 2-year delay or more to in-service
►
Range of rates from $1.30 to $1.45/Dth from Opal (includes $7 fuel)
►
Range of Rockies commitments required from 1.5 to 2 Bcf/d
►
500 MDth/d of downstream capacity available to Ellsworth (near
Leidy area) on Tennessee
►
More expensive than Perryville
►
Late 2008 in-service
►
Interim capacity available to Greensburg by March 2007 as part of
project
11
Development Schedule
►
One-on-one meetings with potential shippers
through September to present detailed rates, route
info, etc.
►
Precedent Agreements – September and October
2005
►
Begin NEPA work November 2005
►
Anticipated in-service late 2008 on either project
12
Contacts
►
Contact myself or Laine Lobban to schedule
detailed proposal presentation
– Ed Miller
(719) 520-4305
– Laine Lobban
(719) 520-4344
13