Kinder Morgan's CEO Discusses Q1 2013 Results - Earnings Call Transcript

| About: Kinder Morgan (KMP)

Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. (NYSE:KMP)

Q1 2013 Results Earnings Call

April 17, 2013 4:30 PM ET


Rich Kinder - Chairman and CEO

Kim Dang - Chief Financial Officer

Steve Kean - President

Jim Wuerth - President Elect, CO2

Tom Martin - President, Natural Gas Pipelines Group

John Schlosser - President Elect, Terminals

Ron McClain - President Elect, Products Pipelines


Darren Horowitz - Raymond James

Ted Durbin - Goldman Sachs

Craig Shere - Tuohy Brothers

Bradley Olsen - Tudor Pickering


Welcome to the Quarterly Earnings Conference Call. At this time all participants are in a listen-only mode until the question-and-answer session. (Operator Instructions)

This call is being recorded. If you have any objections, please disconnect at this time. I would now like to turn today’s call over to your Mr. Rich Kinder, Chairman and CEO of Kinder Morgan. Sir, you may begin.

Rich Kinder

Thank you, Irene. And welcome to the Kinder Morgan analyst call for the first quarter of 2013. As usual, we'll be making statements within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

I'll give an overview of the first quarter. Kim Dang, our Chief Financial Officer will then take you through the detailed financials and then our President, Steve Kean, Kim and I will answer any and all questions that you might have.

As usual, we’ll be talking about Kinder Morgan Inc. the GP of the Kinder Morgan companies, which I'll refer to as KMI and also about Kinder Morgan Energy Partners and El Paso Pipeline Partners, which I'll refer to as KMP and EPB, and those are our affiliated master limited partnerships. Together these companies have an enterprise value of little over $110 billion that makes us the largest midstream and third largest energy company in North America.

Once again, I’m happy to report that all three entities raised their dividends or distributions for the first quarter of 2013. So let me take you through each of the three companies.

Starting with KMI, we raised our dividend to $0.38, which is a $1.52 annualized that’s up 19% from the first quarter of 2012. We had cash available for dividends of $513 million or $0.49 per share, which is an increase of 14% over the $0.43 per share that we had in Q1 of 2012.

We are on target with drop downs of El Paso assets into KMP and EPB, and we completed the drop down to KMP in the first quarter a 50% of El Paso Natural Gas and certain midstream assets, and we expect to sell our 50% interest to the Gulf LNG facilities to EPB later this year.

And we are also on target regarding the expected savings resulting from the El Paso acquisition. We recently projected $350 million in the first full year. We are now in excess of $400 million for that first full year versus that $350 million target.

Strong performance at KMI was driven by good results at both KMP and EPB, and by good results in the pipeline assets we still retain at KMI.

We expect to meet our budget target of $1.57 and declare dividends for 2013, that’s a 12% increase from a 2012 declared dividends of $1.40. And if you look out further into the future we’ve currently identified well over $12 billion of expansion in JV projects across North America.

Now let me turn to Kinder Morgan Energy Partners or KMP. There we increased our distribution to $1.30, which is $5.20 annualized, that’s up 8% from Q1 of ’12. Our segments produced earnings before DD&A of $1.276 billion that’s up 24% from Q1 of ’12. And of course as you know we like to refer to distributable cash flow per unit and there DCF you pre certain items was $1.46 versus $1.37 for Q1 of 2012 and that’s an increase of 7% year-over-year.

If you look at the performance of each segment in KMP starting with Natural Gas and let me just relate to our overall feelings of Natural Gas across all of the Kinder Morgan companies.

We believe Natural Gas is clearly the fossil fuel of the future, it’s domestic, clean, abundant and reasonably priced, and that makes it a clear winner for this country for decades to come.

One of the biggest challenges to this rosy scenario is to overcome the obstacles in midstream infrastructure to ensure that there is adequate capacity to connect the new sources of supply to the markets where the demand is.

Now if you look at Kinder Morgan specifically, we have 62,000 miles of gas pipelines. We’ll have about 70,000 post the Copano merger. So I think our companies are ideally situated to help meet this challenge providing the needed infrastructure in North America.

Within KMP, this segment was up 78% from it’s earnings before DD&A in the first quarter of 2012. Of course this improvement was driven primarily by the drop downs of Tennessee Gas Pipeline and El Paso Natural Gas, both of which occurred subsequent to the first quarter of 2012 and both of which are performing as expected and actually a bit above our plan for Q1 of 2013.

Across the KMP Natural Gas segment, transportation volumes were up about 7% versus a year ago, that as a result of higher Eagle Ford value -- volume, increase deliveries to Mexico on our Texas Intrastate systems and the new supply project in the Northeast on Tennessee.

We expect to close on the Copano acquisition in early May. As we’ve told previously, we expect that to be modestly accretive to KMP in 2013 and that’s not in our present forecast numbers and we expected to be about $0.10 accretive in 2014 and beyond.

We expect that we’ll be adding, as I said, about 7,000 miles of gas pipelines which have 2.7 Bcf a day of natural gas throughput capacity together with nine processing plants which have over Bcf a day of processing capacity and about 315 million a day of treating capacity.

Aside from Copano, we have lots of other projects underway in our Natural Gas segment in KMP. Mostly at TGP in the Northeast where we have $900 million worth of projects there alone, but we are also finding opportunities to do more gas to Mexico to expand our Texas operations and we are now in an open season to determine the industry interest in our proposed Freedom Pipeline, which would connect a portion -- which would convert a portion of El Paso Natural Gas from natural gas to crude oil service and would move crude from the Permian Basin in West Texas to the California refineries.

Now let me emphasis, as we said before, we won’t build this unless we have customer support through binding long-term contracts, our open season began on April 2nd and extends through May 2nd.

Turning to our CO2 segment, the positives there were very good oil production in SACROC, we averaged 30,700 barrels per day in the first quarter that’s up 14% or almost 4,000 barrels from Q1 of 2012.

And we also have record NGL production actually over 20,000 barrels per day gross production at our SACROC processing unit, the Snyder Gas Plant and that was up 15% from the first quarter of 2012. We also substantially approved our -- improved our volumes at the Katz Field as that production continues to ramp up quarter-to-quarter.

The negatives were wide Midland-Cushing spread on oil prices in January and February that’s now corrected and the forward curve indicate it will stay corrected for the rest of the year. But that spread in January and February did negatively impact our average oil price per barrel.

We also faced lower NGL prices for the quarter compared to year ago but pretty much on our plan. Even with those two negatives, we expect CO2 segment to be slightly above plan for the full-year 2013, although I’ll caution that at anytime you talk about projecting what’s going to happen over the next nine months that’s always a little dicey this early in the year. But so far we feel good about our CO2 segment.

The big thing here is that the CO2 demand in the Permian Basin remains very strong. We talk about that almost every quarter. Consequently, we are expanding our source fields in Southwest Colorado by adding significant amount of compression that we believe will boost the total output from Southwest Colorado from about 1.2 Bcf a day that we have today to about 1.4 Bcf a day by 2014. All of that additional CO2 will be sold under long-term contracts, as I said the demand for CO2 in the Permian is very strong.

We are also starting work on a new source field on the Arizona/New Mexico border that will add significant additional supply in future years and we estimate that we will be able to add at least 200 million cubic feet a day as a result of that field. So if you look at it, we are supplying about 1.2 Bcf a day today, with these projects we expect to get up into the 1.6 Bcf a day, maybe a little better than that in the next few years. That’s a significant additional source of service to our customers and additional source of opportunity for our own bottom line. Today, of course we are still curtailing customers including our own oil production activities in the Permian Basin, that’s how strong the demand is for CO2 in the Permian.

Turning to our Products Pipeline segment, they had a very good first quarter led by higher volumes and revenues on our Cochin Pipeline system by increased volumes and margins at our transmix operations and by the contribution from Kinder Morgan Crude & Condensate line, which was completed in the second quarter of 2012.

In this segment, our NGL volumes increased by 32%. Over a year ago, our NGL revenues were up 56%. Looking at refined products volumes, we were up 1.4% for the quarter versus the first quarter of ‘12 and that is contrasted with an EIA national decline of about 1.2%. Our increase was driven largely by volumes on our plantation system, which in turn were helped by a competitor pipelines allocations during the first quarter.

We also had good biodiesel volumes in this segment, which were up by 20% over a year ago. We expect this segment to be slightly above plan for full-year 2013. And also in this area, we have a number of significant projects underway. These include splitter project on the Houston Ship Channel, which will split condensate for us.

We've now expanded that planning to 1,000 barrels per day of processing capacity, and we’ve expanded the storage capacity from 1.2 million barrels to 1.9 million barrels, that’s all pursuant to long-term contracts with BP. The total cost is now projected at about $360 million. The first phase will come online in ’14, the second phase in ’15, and we expect that to be a very good project for us and our customers. And in fact, we think there maybe opportunity to add even additional volumes on a going-forward basis.

In addition, we have significant expansions of our KMCC line, construction of our Parkway Pipeline in Louisiana and Mississippi and the reversal of our Cochin Pipeline to move condensate up to Alberta. These are significant projects and we have a lot more detail on them in our release from this afternoon.

Turning to our Terminals segment, here we benefitted from increased demand for export coal where our volumes were about 12% above last June, but we continued to see lower domestic coal volumes. We also enjoyed increased revenues in our liquids terminals, particularly in the Northeast and Gulf Coast due to new and restructured contracts at higher rates.

On the negative side, we had lower petcoke volumes due largely to refinery shutdowns during the quarter along the Gulf Coast and we had a decline in steel volumes. We think the average utilization of our steel customers went from around 79%, down to about 75% during the quarter. And we also saw decline in this segment in ethanol volumes, primarily due to conversion of certain of our ethanol assets to other uses, primarily crude service and some vegetable oil. And we also experienced the impact of higher ethanol barrels being imported on our coastal terminals, but actually have higher demand in our terminals that are located on the inland waterways at elsewhere, away from the coast.

We are working on a wide range of approved major projects. We detailed this in our release and they include significant new liquids storage facilities at Edmonton, Alberta, our fifth crude by rail project, progress on our $430 million BOSTCO terminal on Houston Ship Channel, which we now expect to expand beyond the original 6.5 million barrels of capacity and together with expansion of our chemicals storage capacities.

Turning to Kinder Morgan Canada, Trans Mountain continues to experience very strong demand to move oilsands production at the lower Mainland of British Columbia and to Washington State, as well as across our dock in Vancouver. Specifically, the movement of volumes to Washington State were up by 7%. Our volumes across the dock in Vancouver for the quarter were up 18% from a year ago.

We also signed a new three-year toll agreement with our current customers, which was recently approved by the National Energy Board in Canada. But during the quarter, we closed on the sale of our one-third interest in Express-Platte pipeline and we received approximately $400 million gross proceeds from that sale. That will mean that the segment, Kinder Morgan Canada will likely be slightly below plan for the year, but overall taking into account the use of that cash we received, the transaction will be modestly accretive to cash flow at KMP as a whole.

Most importantly, we continued to make progress on our proposed expansion of the Trans Mountain system from 300,000 barrels a day to 890,000 a day, that’s a $5.4 billion potential project underpinned by long-term contracts on over 700,000 barrels per day. We expect to file our facilities’ application with the NEB later this year.

So that’s it on the segments in KMP. Let me spend just a couple of minutes on EPB. There, we raised our distribution to $0.62 a quarter, that’s up 22% from the first quarter of ’12. On a DCF per unit basis, we had $0.78 per unit versus $0.69 a year ago, that’s up 13% year-over-year. We had a strong first quarter, resulting from the drop downs which occurred in Q2 of ’12 and by good results on the S&G system where we completed an expansion project.

Our gas-fired power generation on SNG was up 4% versus a very strong Q1 of 2012 and that’s in contrast to the national trend, which was down quarter-over-quarter and frankly in contrast to the results at our other Kinder Morgan pipelines, where we were down in 2000 -- first quarter of 2013 versus first quarter of 2012 in terms of demand for power generation, still a good quarter but not as big as first quarter a year ago. At EPB, we’re particularly encouraged by significant LNG export opportunities that we’re pursuing at our Elba Island facility near Savannah, Georgia.

We entered into a long-term contract with the Shell subsidiary to develop the liquefaction facility that will have capacity of 2.5 million tons per year or 350 million cubic feet a day of throughput, under two phases of development. The first phase is approximately 210 million cubic feet a day and that is not contingent on any non-FTA approval.

And on 8X basis, we will evolve a capital cost of about $1 billion. If we build a second phase, that will be an additional CapEx of about $500 million 8X. We own 51% of the project, Shell owns 49%. And in addition, we’re also doing some expansion on related facilities to get the gas to liquefaction facilities and we also earn a return on those.

At Gulf LNG, that’s a facility along the Mississippi Gulf Coast which EPB expects to purchase from KMI later this year, we’re working on a larger facility. But again, we’re emphasizing customers with demand for export to FTA countries. And we’re coming along pretty well with that. We’ll just have to see whether we can put it all together but we’re hopeful that we can.

EPB is also bidding through SNG on a new pipeline project at Florida to serve the Florida Power & Light under an RFP procedure that’s presently under way in Florida. So in summary, 2013 is off to a very good start at the Kinder Morgan companies. And we continue to see enormous opportunities for expanding our great midstream footprint across North America.

And with that, I’ll turn it over to Kim.

Kim Dang

Okay. Thanks Rich. I’m going to start with KMP. Then I’ll do EPB financials and finally KMI. Looking at the first page of the KMP financials, you will see the GAAP income statement as we say every quarter, we don’t find the GAAP income statement overly meaningful.

And so I move to the second page, which is what we think more accurately portrays the results of the company. And our calculation of distributable cash flow, so the cash flow that we produce or if it’s available for distribution.

At the bottom of that page, you will see DCF per unit as Rich said of $1.46, up 7% versus a year ago, versus our distribution of a $1.30 that translates in the coverage of a little over $60 million. As we said at the time of the budget and it still continues to be true, we will have excess coverage in the first quarter. We will have excess coverage in the fourth quarter and we will have excess coverage for the year but we will have negative coverage in the second and the third quarter.

The DCF in total $550 million in the second quarter, that’s $88 million above this first quarter of 2012, looking at where that growth comes from. The segments in total $1.276 billion of segment earnings before DD&A in certain items, that’s up $247 million or 24%.

Of the $247 million, $218 million of that is coming out in natural gas. And as we discussed that’s largely driven by the drop downs that KMP or the assets at KMP has acquired from KMI both in August of last year and in March of this year. And that somewhat offset by reduced income because of the sales -- the FTC sales that we made in the third quarter of -- the fourth quarter of last year.

Products pipeline is up $24 million and that’s a result of the good performance on Cochin and transmix. Looking at each of the segments versus our budget, natural gas pipelines in the quarter were slightly above it’s budget but that’s largely due to timing on O&M on some of the interstate gas pipelines.

For the year, we expect that natural gas will be on it’s budget. CO2 for the quarter were slightly below its budget. That’s a function of the wide Midland/Cushing differential that impacted the price we get on our oil as Rich discussed that is now corrected primarily as a result of the Longhorn Pipeline coming online.

For the year, we expect CO2 to be slightly above its budget, largely as a function of higher ore prices. Products pipelines for the quarter was slightly above its budget as a result of strong performance on Cochin and transmix versus what we expected. And the same will be true for the full year. We expect them to be slightly above their budget for the same reasons.

Terminals for the quarter was a little bit below its budget, given the lower domestic coal volumes, the lower steel volumes and a terminated contract on our material service handling business. For the year, we also expect them to be slightly below their budget primarily as a result of the terminated contract and also higher book taxes.

Now realize book taxes have an impact on terminals but overall our calculation in DCF, we add back both taxes, subtract cash taxes. So this book tax impact does not have an impact on the overall DCF of KMP.

Kinder Morgan Canada was on budget for the quarter. As Rich mentioned, it will be below planned for the year as a result of the express sale. But overall, that transaction is going to be accretive for KMP as we used the proceeds to reduce the debt we need -- the debt and the equity that we need to issue.

Dropping down to the middle of your page, general and administrative expense, $123 million in the quarter, that’s up about $15 million from last year, largely as a result of acquisitions. For the quarter, we are on our budget for G&A. For the full year, we expect G&A to come in slightly below our budget as a result of higher capitalized overhead that’s resulting from increased expansion CapEx projects.

Interest for the quarter was up $48 million over the first quarter of 2012 as a result of higher balance, given the acquisition and expansion projects. For the quarter, we were slightly favorable to our budget. And for the full year, we expect to be favorable to our budget, given the reduced debt needs, our financing needs as a result of the Express transaction.

The sustaining CapEx for the quarter were up about $4 million over last -- the first quarter of 2012. In the first quarter versus our budget, we have actually spent less than what we budgeted. So there is a favorable variance but for the -- that's just timing for the full year, we expect the sustaining CapEx will be on budget.

The certain items in the quarter totaled $137 million benefit, $141 million of that is the gain on the sale of Express. And so that really takes you through KMP, as Rich said, we expect this point to be on our budget for the year.

Looking at KMPs balance sheet, the only thing I point out to here is that we had to -- under the accounting rules, we have to recast KMP for the drop downs. What that means is we have to go back and re-stake KMPs 12/31 balance sheet to include the assets that were dropped down as of March 1st.

The primary impact that you’re going to see on the balance sheet as a result of that is that you’re going to see a big negative of about $490 million in partner’s capital. And that’s because, we’re separating the transaction. We are separating when you put the assets on your balance sheet from when you pay for the assets.

And so when we put the assets on the balance sheet, now they are on our balance sheet as of 12/31, there is big positive. When you pay for them then you have a negative in Partner’s capital, and so that’s what you’re seeing in the change in Partner’s capital between December 31 and March 31.

Looking at debt to EBITDA, we ended be the quarter at 3.9 times, that’s up. Now, what you see on the face of the balance sheet is four times at the end of -- at the end of December but again that’s a result of the recast. Where we actually ended December of last year, was it 3.7 times, the debt-to-EBITDA is up as a result to the acquisitions. And we only have one month of EPNG and midstream in our EBITDA but we’ve got all of the debt in the total debt outstanding.

So, we still expect KMP to end the year at 3.7 times consistent with its budget. Total debt, we ended at $7.22 billion that’s up from $15.35 billion at the end of last year. Again the $15.35 billion is where we really ended. You can see the recast number is $16.5 billion.

So the increase in debt from where we actually ended $1.87 billion increase in debt in the quarter. And just going through the primary uses of that, the acquisitions were $1.1 billion. That was $1.655 was the acquisition price on the drop down that included $558 million of KMP’s allocable share of the EPNG debt. So that’s your $1.1 billion of acquisition. Then as a result of acquiring the other 50% of EPNG, all of EPNG’s debt came onto KMP’s balance sheet. It was previously in equity investment and that debt was not on KMP’s balance sheet.

So you have $1.115 billion came on as a result of that. We had expansion CapEx of about $480 million. And we had contributions to equity investment of a little under $90 million.

The primary contribution to equity investments was $45 million contribution to midstream to pay off a revolver that was down there. So that’s a $2.78 billion use of cash between those items. We generated about $400 million in proceeds from the sale of Express. And then we raised about $650 million in equity between the units that were issued to KMI, KMP offering and the KMR dividend.

And then we had about $139 million use of cash in the quarter for working capital and other items that’s primarily associated with accrued interest, most of KMPs, interest payments on it’s bonds occur in the first quarter and in the third quarter.

So that’s KMP. I will now turn to EPB. Again, first page in your package is EPB’s GAAP income statement. I will skip over that and focus on the calculation of distributable cash flow. EPB generated DCF per unit in the quarter of $0.78, that’s up $0.09 or 13% over a year ago. Based on the distribution that we declared today of $0.62, that’s coverage in the quarter of about $30 million.

Similar to KMP, EPB generates excess coverage in the first quarter and in the fourth quarter. And we expect, it will have negative coverage in the second quarter and the third quarter but we’ll have coverage consistent with its budget for the full year.

DCF, in total, $169 million, that’s up $26 million from the first quarter a year ago. Looking at the component of that $26 million increase in DCF, the first line on the DCF calculation earnings before DD&A and certain items, $317 million in the quarter. That’s up $34 million versus the first quarter of 2012.

In addition, that doesn't tell the whole story as we’ve talked about in prior quarters. EPB was acquiring partial interest in assets from El Paso. And they -- what happens is from accounting perspective, they record 100% of the income. And then on the piece of that asset they don’t own, they record an expense down below on called non-controlling interest.

As a result of acquiring 100% of certain assets, primarily the remaining 14% interest in CIG, there is lower non-controlling interest in the first quarter of 2013 than there was in 20 -- in the first quarter of 2012. So that’s an additional $8 million that the assets generated. So in total, the $34 million plus the $8 million, $42 million increase in the performance of the assets. About $28 million of that is a result of acquisitions and the balance largely as a result of the performance on SNG due to the expansion project and also to improved or lower O&M.

G&A in the quarter, $20 million expense. That’s down from $30 million a year ago, so $10 million improvement. And that just the cost savings, that Rich mentioned that we are achieving, that’s EPB portion of the $400 million. Interest is $75 million expense in the quarter that’s a $6 million increase from a year ago, largely as a result of higher balance given the expansions and the acquisitions.

Sustaining CapEx is lower by about $3 million and then the GP incentive is higher by about $24 million. That gets you to $25 million of the $26 million. So, there is about $1 million in other items. For the year, EPB overall is on track to meet it’s budget. And there aren’t any significant variances in the major line items that we used to calculate DCF.

On EPB’s balance sheet, EPB ended the quarter at 3.7 times debt-to-EBITDA, that’s down a little bit from the 3.9 times at year end. That’s larger -- that improvement is largely timing. We still expect to end the year at 3.9 times consistent with our budget. EPB’s debt in the quarter, we ended at $4.14 billion of debt. That’s down about $93 million. Just to reconcile that debt for you, we spend a little over $20 million in expansion CapEx.

EPB started an ATM program and issued about $22 million under its ATM program during the quarter. We had about $35 million of coverage. And then working capital was a source of cash of about $58 million, largely as a result to the timing on interest payments.

So with that, I’ll move to KMI and its cash available for -- to pay dividends. The first page of KMI numbers, the cash available per share as Rich mentioned $0.49, that’s up $0.07 or 16%. That compares to our dividend of $0.38. So we have over 100 and we’ve got about over $115 million of coverage in the quarter.

Similar to both KMP and EPB, at KMI, we expect excess coverage in the first quarter and the fourth quarter in excess coverage for the year. Actually, we’re going to be right on top for the year of coverage. In the second and the third quarter, our negative coverage, given the timing of certain cash tax payments and interest payments.

The cash available to pay dividend, $513 million. That’s up $210 million or 69% from the first quarter in 2012. Looking at what drove that growth of $210 million. The cash generated from the two MLPs up a $199 million. The cash generated by from KMP up $94 million of that $81 was associated with the GP interest and the balance $13 million was associated with our interest in the limited partner units.

EPB up $105 million as a result of the acquisition that occurred subsequent to the first quarter of 2012. The expenses at G&A, interest and cash taxes actually a $23 million benefit when you compared the first quarter of 2012 to the first quarter of 2013, and that’s largely a result of some debt that was paid down, some KMI debt that was paid down when it matured with the drop down proceeds last August.

If you look cash G&A expenses up $8 million quarter-to-quarter that’s a function of the acquisition, interest expense, I mentioned is a positive. Cash taxes are also a positive but that’s just timing as we outlined in our budget. We expect cash taxes in 2013 to be higher than they were in 2012.

And then the cash available from other assets, $100 million increase and that’s a result of the acquisition and then you can see that is offset by the debt that we assumed in the El Paso acquisition and the acquisition debt. So that that those assets left the debt that was either assumed or issued was about a $12 million increase in expense between the two quarters, that gets you to $210 million increase for the quarter.

Turning to KMI’s balance sheet, KMI ended the quarter $9.375 billion of debt. KMI’s balance sheet like KMP’s balance sheet has been recast, so you can see the 12/31 debt at $10.23 million, actually where we ended 2012 was at $11.4 billion of debt. We basically we have a little over $2 billion repayment of debt at KMI in the first quarter.

Just the major items that drove that, the proceeds from the drop down were about $988 million, the debt that moves to KMP associated those drop downs as we talked about on KMP $1.15 billion.

We sold the Bolivia to Brazil Pipeline and got a little under $90 million. We made a contribution to our pension which is about a $50 million use of cash. We repurchased about $80 million worth of warrants and then we had contributions to equity investments of about $48 million, the largest piece of that was $45 million contributions to midstream to repay its revolver. Then there was about $24 million in other items to get you to the $2.04 billion reduction in debt.

So that’s all I have.

Rich Kinder

Okay. Irene, if you come back on and we will take questions that you may have.

Question-and-Answer Session


Sir, thank you. (Operator Instructions) Our first question comes from Darren Horowitz from Raymond James. Your line is open.

Darren Horowitz - Raymond James

Good afternoon, Rich. How are you?

Rich Kinder

How are you doing?

Darren Horowitz - Raymond James

Good. Thanks.

Rich Kinder


Darren Horowitz - Raymond James

I’ve got a question, actually two questions about the CO2 business and this goes back to some of the comments that you made with regard to expanding the source field in Southwest Colorado. But, as you are talking with these Permian producers, you guys obviously have a pretty good sense of the timing of CO2 production as that ramps concurrent with the expectation for crude production growth and it seems like that could drive a lot of incremental volume commitments on the Freedom line?

So from the source field perspective is the right way to think about those compression additions that you referenced at Doe Canyon and McElmo Dome still tract at about $500 million in total cost for both and a target in terms of volume ramp maybe around the second and the fourth quarter of 2014, respectively?

Steve Kean

Go ahead Jim Wuerth.

Jim Wuerth

Yeah. The costs are right on budget and I think with both those together it’s about $500 million. We should have expanded Doe we should be getting most of that expansion done in the volume by the end of this year in fact in the fourth quarter and then towards the end of 2014 for the Yellow Jacket Facility.

Darren Horowitz - Raymond James

Okay. And then taking that one step further that new source field on the Arizona New Mexico border, I assume you are talking about expanding St. Johns. So and I recognize you are still in the assessment phase there? But is the right way to continue to think about roughly $2 million project costs that could possibly get to 650 MMcf a day throughput and that would basically feed the Cortez line, am I thinking about that the right way?

Jim Wuerth

We reduced the cost quite a bit and looking at a $200 million case and that will start with that and I think those numbers are around $600 million and we -- yeah, we would hit into the Cortez Pipeline just south of Albuquerque.

Darren Horowitz - Raymond James

Okay. That’s all I had. Thanks.

Rich Kinder



Next we have Ted Durbin with Goldman Sachs. Your line is open.

Rich Kinder

Hi, Ted. How are you doing?

Ted Durbin - Goldman Sachs

I’m doing well. Thanks Rich. Just on the Freedom side here you’ve got this number the 277,000 barrels a day, I guess, I’m wondering it seems like a pre-precise number. How did you get to that number? Is that what you need to get to sort of certain hurdle rate or kind of return that you need and then maybe you can talk about kind of tariff you’d need to get to the economics you want on that pipeline?

Rich Kinder

Well, the 277 just what the engineering study showed would result -- would be the resulting capacity from the way we intend to build, that’s not the number of barrels we would need, we would need two barrels in that, I think we’ve said publicly we need around 200,000 barrels a day to make the thing hunt economically. As far as tariff, Tom Martin is here. Tom?

Tom Martin

Yeah. It’s a in the neighborhood of about $5 kind of what we’ve been thinking to the market.

Rich Kinder

$5 and so, again as I said, we have an open season underway now and if we get the kind of commitments that we hope to get, this will be a go project, if we don’t we’ll obviously reassess, we are not building it for our health, we are building it only if we can make money on it.

So that’s where we stand on it. We are just in the middle of the open season, now I’ve had good conversations but we’ll see how that translate into volumes. As I’ve said before it would seem to be marriage made in heaven, you’ve got certainly trend line toward increasingly access production in Permian and you’ve got West Coast refineries that are spending hilarious amounts of money on crude supply and you would think that they have reasonable amount of money to bridge those two, sourcing the demand would make sense, but again that’s up to our customers.

Ted Durbin - Goldman Sachs

Got it. That’s helpful. Thanks. The next one for me is just on the terminals here, it looks like kind of flat year-over-year results, you are now seeing properly below budget? I guess, I’m trying to understand is that just kind of continuation of the trends we saw in the first quarter with the weak coal volume, petcoke volumes or kind of how do you see that shaping up for the rest of the year?

Rich Kinder

Well, first of all we had a 12% growth in the terminals for the year and we will get very close to that. So when we say slightly below budget we still for the year going to have very nice growth. We have some things coming online later in the year.

So, certainly, it’s not going to be flat to 2012, we are going to have growth, we just not going to have quite chin the bar at that 12% growth that we have in the budget. John Schlosser, do you want to add?

John Schlosser

Then the other thing I’d add is that petcoke volume -- our earnings were off $2.3 million and that was associated with four outages at major refineries here on the Gulf Coast and we don’t expect that to recur in the out quarters.

Ted Durbin - Goldman Sachs

Great. And then this is small one, I think it’s a small one for you, but I want to make sure this, of this RIN noise, the renewable credits, I guess, is that anything that we should think about has been an impact to you, an opportunity or cost? Just how do we think about the RINS for you?

Rich Kinder

Well, it’s a positive for us because we generate excess RINS at our transmix facilities. And then, how much of an upside for us is depends on the price of the RINS. We are pretty definite on how many RINS we are going to -- excess RINS we are going to generate and it’s about 700,000 gallons a month.

Steve Kean

That’s right. It’s 700,000.

Rich Kinder

And so today those prices are running $0.65, $0.70, so you can multiply that out and that’s how much per month we can make from it. But they were always $0.10 a few months ago. They have been as high as, I think a $1.08 or $1.10 at one point. So we are just, we are selling them on a monthly basis to customer who wants to take all that we have and so we will just see, what are the results in. So it will be upside.

The question is how much and that we don’t know. We just play it month-by-month and that’s not in any of the projections that Kim is talking about, which she says products is going to slightly exceed its plan for the year. We haven’t counted anything on additional RIN sales, although we recognized about $1.9 million RIN of sales in the first quarter.

Steve Kean

Yeah, $1.9 million.

Ted Durbin - Goldman Sachs

Okay. Great. That’s it from me. Thanks, guys.


Next, we have Craig Shere with Tuohy Brothers. Your line is open.

Rich Kinder


Craig Shere - Tuohy Brothers

Hi. Thanks for the call. Couple of questions. First on LNG, is the focus on off takers that are really interested more in FTA country exports, just natural conservatism or do you think that decision is just going to be very tough to get incremental DOE non-FTA approvals? And do you see the recent rise in gas prices in the states affecting, both the appetite and potential pricing for those long-term contracts?

Rich Kinder

Well, first of all, I think the answer is to why we are concentrating on FTA is a combination of two things. You mentioned that we are conservative about it and secondly, we are not sure of the non-FTA process is. I mean, just as recently as yesterday at a conference I guess the under secretary who is charge with making those decisions, he didn’t know when they would make decision that they had to consider lot of factors. And they have had a couple of studies already of both, which is that we should export. But we don’t have a decision yet. So, I think in the end and I have said this before. Our view is that there will be substantial amounts of non-FTA approved, particularly for those plans that have good contracts with viable credit worthy companies. But we can’t guarantee that that’s going to happen.

So we’ve concentrated on the FTA. And as I said in my remarks, the beauty of the deal with Shell at Elba Island is that whole first phase is not contingent on getting the non-FTA approval. Now, it’s Gulf, where we have more space, more opportunity there in terms of sizing. We are working with some customers there to do a non-FTA train -- excuse me, an FTA train and they were working with other customers to work on non-FTA volumes too. But again, our first preference is to get FTA signed up because there we have projects we can depend on and know that they are going forward, so that's our feeling.

As far as the gas price increase, I don't know how much weekly or monthly movement really means. I don't believe anybody thought that the Henry Hub price of supply looking out over the life of an LNG contract was going to stay at $2 or $2.50, where it was this time last year. But certainly, if the perception becomes that gas prices are meaningfully high, then that will have some impact I suppose on how willing players are to enter into a contract.

You have remember of course that the disconnect between the land and prices for LNG, particularly in Japan and rest of Asia to a lesser extent versus the price of the Henry Hub even when adding in the liquefaction and transportation expenses is still enormous. There is still a big spread there between the landed cost and the cost of the landed price and the cost of delivering.

So, I think there is still money to be made there, but that order may well change, may well close, and obviously we're not betting on that. We're just looking for customers who want to take a swing at those things and make a lot of money and we're happy to just get a minimal return on our little assets that we're going to build for.

Craig Shere - Tuohy Brothers

Right. And just want to follow up on Darren's question on CO2. Is the CO2 supply more than EOR really driving expectations for outperformance for the year? And on EOR, do you see production continuing to surprise the upside?

Rich Kinder

Well, I think, first of all, starting with the second question on the EOR side, we were off to a very good start, particularly SACROC, which was hugely above this quarter last year and a good bid above our plan for the first quarter. And these NGL volumes also running above our plan and at record levels and we expect those to continue. Now, we're going to have -- we have a train down now on that curtails for couple of weeks some of our NGLs. So you may not have exactly the same numbers we have in the first quarter, but we expect both of those will be very strong for the year.

Katz had a very nice increase quarter-over-quarter and we're continuing to see growth over there. We're now running. In April, for example, we're up to 2,400 barrels, a little over 2,400 barrels a day there. So that's a nice increase even though we are in the first quarter. So, I think all of our EOR activities, our oil production looks good for the year and we expect that to continue. The supply side of it, the CO2, I think is more a long-term driver.

As Jim Wuerth said, we will have some of that, particularly at Doe online. We think in the October/November timeframe which will help us some. We're curtailing now and at Doe alone, we think we can take the production up from about 105 a day to 170 a day. So, to the extent we can sell 65 million cubic feet a day of CO2 for a couple of months that will be a nice little driver in the last couple of months.

But it's not the major driver. The major driver I think in the long run is getting that production from Southwest Colorado up to the full 1.4 Bcf a day and that should happen by next year. And then getting the St. Johns field on, in which case, we'll be at 1.6 Bcf or maybe a little better. And that's where I think the upstream or the supply side becomes a real driver.

Craig Shere - Tuohy Brothers

Great. Thanks a lot.


(Operator Instructions) Our next one comes from Bradley Olsen with Tudor Pickering. Your line is open.

Bradley Olsen - Tudor Pickering

Good afternoon.

Rich Kinder

Brad, how are you doing?

Bradley Olsen - Tudor Pickering

Good. On the Cochin project that you guys have discussed going from Illinois to Alberta. You obviously have an Eastern segment of that pipeline, which there has been no reversal plans announced yet. But given the prospect of a lot of condensate basically without a market in Ohio as the Utica gets ramped up, is that a project that you are continuing to look at and have you discussed that with potential customers?

Rich Kinder

Yeah. We continue to look at that. There are a couple of interesting alternatives for that Eastern segment. Ron McClain, anything you want to add to that?

Ron McClain

We’ve looked at several opportunities and actively pursuing it. We don’t have a project yet but we do think its part of the ultimate solution. Some of those products, it’s going to come out of that area, so we’re looking for several people.

Bradley Olsen - Tudor Pickering

Great. Thanks. On Tennessee Gas asset, the asset runs through a potentially productive area. In Northwest Pennsylvania and Northeast Ohio, one of your competitors recently announced a project to provide gathering and processing services in that area.

Is that an area where especially given your past relationships with PetroHawk, given that how Cohen is talking about that being a big area for them. Is that an area that you expect to potentially use your Tennessee Gas footprint to build down a gathering and processing acid base there?

Rich Kinder

Tom Martin?

Tom Martin

Yeah. Our midstream segment was actively pursuing gathering and processing opportunities in the Utica as well as the Marcellus. We’re really focusing on the Utica right now than pursuing that over the last several months and really starting to feel little traction there at this point. So it will be both dry gas and rich gas gathering as well as processing. And we’re pursuing that -- those opportunities right now.

Bradley Olsen - Tudor Pickering

Great. Thank you. And just one more housekeeping question. Can you provide utilization rates on the oil and condensate line out of the Eagle Ford. And if you have the numbers available, a breakout of oil versus condensate volumes?

Rich Kinder

Well, what we have on the Kinder Morgan increased condensate line, it has a capacity of 300,000 barrels a day. As we probably said, our regional contract with PetroHawk, now BHP, was 25000 barrels a day in the first year. They are wrapping up to 50,000 barrels a day, beginning at the middle of this year 2013.

And that throughput alone was sufficient to make it a very viable project economically. Since then, we’ve added Phillips 66 as a customer. We publicly announced this. They have taken additional capacity of about 20,000 barrels a day.

We’re very closed to adding another customer that our Board approved today the expenditures as far that will add another 25,000 barrels a day. And we have still another customer that we think is probably another 25,000 to 30,000 barrels a day. So that’s kind of gives you an idea of the ramp-up in volume share.

We see that as it is going to be an extraordinarily good investment for us because there is just a lot of people, lot of producers who want to get to the Houston Ship Channel that’s what we provide them. And that, sort of, as it step out from that of course, I think that helped us secure the contracts to build the condensates splitter on our Houston Ship general property, which is the $360 million project that I referred to earlier.

So we’ve got long way to go. A lot of upside on KMCC that we’ll just see how it plays out in the future.

Bradley Olsen - Tudor Pickering

Great. Thanks a lot, everyone.


We have no further questions in queue at this time.

Rich Kinder

Okay. All right. Irene, thank you very much and thanks to all of you. And we are delighted to share good news with you and have a great evening. Good bye.


Thank you for your participation on today’s call. You may disconnect your lines at this time.

Copyright policy: All transcripts on this site are the copyright of Seeking Alpha. However, we view them as an important resource for bloggers and journalists, and are excited to contribute to the democratization of financial information on the Internet. (Until now investors have had to pay thousands of dollars in subscription fees for transcripts.) So our reproduction policy is as follows: You may quote up to 400 words of any transcript on the condition that you attribute the transcript to Seeking Alpha and either link to the original transcript or to All other use is prohibited.


If you have any additional questions about our online transcripts, please contact us at: Thank you!