Ed Miller Business Development Project Manager

1
Ed MillerBusiness Development Project Manager
Wyoming Natural Gas Pipeline Authority

• El Paso Rockies
• Export Project
• August 30, 2005

2
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 companys (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.

3
Rocky Mountain Supply(Volumes are Wellhead
Measured in MMcf/d)
1.5 Bcf/d
Forecast by 2010 High Case 13,000 Mid Case
9,500 Low Case 7,200
1990-2002 Wellhead total data from IHS
database 2003 Estimate 2004-2010 CIG forecast
4
Cheyenne Plains Throughputvs. Midcontinent
MidCon less Cheyenne Hub Differential vs.
Cheyenne Plains Rate
August 1-24, 2005
5
Projected Demand Growth
Bcf/d
WesternCanada
5.3 6.4 7.3
EasternCanada
3.7 4.1 4.7
2.5 2.7 3.1
NW and Alaska
Maritimesand Northeast U.S.
9.0 10.1 11.7
10.5 10.9 11.6
3.8 4.7 5.2
4.0 4.2 4.9
6.3 7.2 7.7
8.7 11.1 14.4
Total 2004 72.8 2009 82.2 2014 93.6
14.1 14.6 16.2
5.0 6.2 7.0
Mexico
Source El Paso/ Energy Information Agency
6
Connectivity / Liquidity
(MMcf/d)
7
Cost of Capacity Shortage Out of
RockiesEstimated Revenue Lost per Bcf/d of
Rockies Production
Net Present Value at 20 Pre-Tax
2/Mcf Basis
1/Mcf Basis
0.25/Mcf Transport
8
Overview

• Two alternatives
• Opal to Campbellsville, Kentucky
• Opal to Perryville, Louisiana

9
Rockies Export Project RouteSchematic
Opal
Cheyenne
Wamsutter
ANR
Tennessee
Campbellsville
Tennessee to Sonat
Greensburg
Tennessee
ANR
Sonat
Perryville

• Propose as seamless
• Downstream transport with rate certainty
  available as part of projects

10
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

11
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

12
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

13
Contacts

• Contact myself or Laine Lobban to schedule
  detailed proposal presentation
• Ed Miller [phone]
• Laine Lobban [phone]