MarkWest Energy Partners L.P. Q2 2009 Earnings Call Transcript

Aug.11.09 | About: MarkWest Energy (MWE)

MarkWest Energy Partners L.P. (NYSE:MWE)

Q2 2009 Earnings Call

August 11, 2009; 4:00 pm ET

Executives

Frank Semple - Chairman, President & Chief Executive Officer

Nancy Buese - Chief Financial Officer

Randy Nickerson - Chief Commercial Officer

John Mollenkopf - Chief Operations Officer

Andy Schroeder - Vice President of Finance

Dan Campbell - Treasurer of Investor Relations

Analysts

Teresa Fox - Stone Harbor

Michael Blum - Wells Fargo Securities

Adam Leight - RBC

Louis Shammy - Zimmer Lucas Partners

Biron Lim - Seix Investment Advisors

Yves Siegel - Credit Suisse

Operator

Good afternoon. Welcome to the MarkWest Energy Partners second quarter earnings conference call. Your lines have been placed on listen-only, until the question-and-session of today’s conference. This call is being recorded, if you have any objections please disconnect at this time.

I will now turn the call over to Dan Campbell.

Dan Campbell

Thank you, Sarah. Good afternoon everyone and thanks for joining us today. Our comments today will include forward-looking statements, which involve risks and uncertainties and are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results could vary significantly from those expressed or implied in such statements and are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties.

Although we believe that the expectations expressed today are reasonable, we can give no assurance that the expectations will prove to be correct and we caution you that projected performance or distributions may not be achieved.

Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from their expectations are included in the periodic reports we file with the SEC. We encourage you to carefully review and consider the cautionary statements and other disclosures made in those filings, specifically those under the heading “Risk Factors”.

With that, I’ll turn the call over to Frank Semple, our Chairman, President and CEO.

Frank Semple

Good afternoon, and thanks to everyone for joining us on today’s call. Following a brief overview of our financial performance and the continuing progress in our key business objectives, I’ll then open the call up to your questions.

On the call with me today are Nancy Buese, our Chief Financial Officer; Randy Nickerson, our Chief Commercial Officer; John Mollenkopf, our Chief Operations Officer; and Andy Schroeder, our Vice President of Finance.

While it’s been a very challenging and productive quarter, in spite of one of the most difficult economic environments in many years, we’ve been able to achieve the critical balance sheet and distribution objectives that we discussed in our last earnings call, and also maintain a significant inventory of high quality growth projects.

These projects are being developed in some of the most economic resources plays in the U.S. and are being driven by the success of our key producer customers drilling programs. Even in this very depressed natural gas market.

Our existing core asset continue to perform well and our entire team remains very focused on supporting our customers needs and meeting the challenges of today’s environment. Most importantly these new projects, which I’ll discuss a minute put us in a great position to grow our assets and distributable cash flow as the economy recovers.

As indicated in our press release, distributable cash flow for the second quarter was $40 million, adjusted EBITDA was $61 million and segment operating income was $71 million. For the first six months of the year DCF was $89 million, adjusted EBITDA was $142 million and segment operating income was $121 million.

This financial metrics were lower than in the same periods of 2008 and the decrease was driven almost entirely by the significant year-over-year decline in commodity prices. Despite of that we were able to maintain our $0.64 per unit distribution with a covered ratio as 1.4 times for the second, and 1.2 times through the first half of the year.

Our overall system gathering throughput, processing volumes and NGL production increase significantly over last year primarily as a result of new projects coming online in our Oklahoma, East Texas and Pennsylvania operations. Segment operating income in the second quarter decreased by approximately 30% year-over-year, due primarily to NGL price being lower, and they had dropped from the record high levels over the past 12 months.

Its important to point out that segment operating income does not include realize gains or loss on derivative instruments. Realized gains in the second quarter of $4 million compared to a realized loss of $15 million in the second quarter of 2008. So while our segment operating income decreased by $30 million, realized gains on our hedge program increased $19 million, which reflects the benefit of our hedging program.

We remain very committed to our rolling 36 month hedging program to manage the risk associated with our commodity based contracts, and also to achieve our distribution objective. We’re approximately 80% hedged in 2009, 50% hedged in 2010, 40% hedged in 2011, and 20% hedged in 2012. These percentage with include the fact that during the second quarter we took advantage of the Contango in the core market to locking attractive margins for a portion of our volumes over the next several years.

Now, let me shift gears and provide updates in several of our most significant growth projects starting with Marcellus Shale development in Pennsylvania. MarkWest has a significant first mover advantage in this rapidly developing field, and we are the largest gatherer and processor in this strategic play.

In conjunction with NGP, M&R our joint venture partner, we have invested a significant amount of capital to develop a gathering and processing backbone in Southwestern, Pennsylvania for the majority of the activity in the Marcellus that is currently taking place.

This backbone of midstream infrastructure will allow us to very efficiently, and significantly expand to meet the expected production growth that will occur at the Marcellus is fully developed. A critical component of this infrastructure includes NGL fractionation, pipelines, storage and marketing facilities, some of which are already in place and the balance are under development.

We have more than 20 years of experience operating in Appalachia, and our deep understanding of the regional NGL markets has given us an advantage in developing this crucial NGL marketing infrastructure. Because the Northeastern United States does not have extensive NGL infrastructure like other parts of the country such as the Gulf Coast, our facilities will be key to the success of MarkWest Energy and our producer customers in the Hydrocarbon rich areas of the Marcellus.

In fourth quarter of last year, we completed a 30 million cubic feet a day mechanical refrigeration plant at our Huston, Pennsylvania Processing Complex. In May of this year, we added a 30 million cubic feet a day cryogenic plant and have subsequently expanded the mechanical refrigeration plant to its current capacity of 40 million cubic feet a day.

We will further expand the mechanical refrigeration plant in order to achieve combined processing capacity, in the two plants of approximately 90 million cubic feet per day at September 1 of this year. We will also complete the installation of a 120 million cubic feet a day cryogenic plant in late 2009 or early 2010.

As we look ahead, the strong performance by the producers in the Marcellus will result in significant growth in gas volumes over the next several years. To provide the required capacity for the additional gas production, we are currently designing gathering and processing expansions, which will increase our capacity in 2011 to approximately 470 million cubic feet a day. These expansions will be supported by long term agreements with our producer customers.

Clearly, we have established strong relationships with extremely successful producers, such as Range Resources. If you listen to their last several conference calls, they are knocking the cover off the ball in the Marcellus. We intend to continue to expand in the Marcellus, stay ahead of our producer customers and maintain a very competitive position in one of the best shale plays in the U.S.

Most of you saw the press release we issued last night, announcing the amendment to our agreement with M&R. Our partnership with M&R is a key part of our long term strategy for the Marcellus. The amendment will provide additional funding to allow the joint venture to keep pace with the dramatic increase in volumes and also provide MarkWest with additional capital flexibility.

In addition to the Marcellus, there are other resource plays that will be key drivers of our future growth. Many of the large independent producers recently announced their second quarter results, and spent a lot of time discussing the Haynesville Shale, the Woodford Shale and the Granite Wash in the Texas panhandle. I’m going to spend a couple of minutes discussing how well we are positioned in these three exciting areas.

In East Texas, our base production comes from the Cotton Valley, and Travis Peak formation, underlying our Carthage and Appleby systems. However, much of the recent willing activity has been focused on developing the Haynesville Shale formation. The Haynesville is primarily located in Louisiana, but a sizable portion of this play extends into Texas and covers the areas served by our East Texas operations.

Our producer customers have completed a number of horizontal Haynesville wells with very promising results. Today, we are gathering approximately 30 million cubic feet a day of Haynesville gas, and it appears that Haynesville drilling will continue to grow in 2010.

The Haynesville Shale and/or roughly half of our East Texas operations is hydrocarbon rich, and fits extremely well with our existing gathering and processing facilities. The other half does not require processing and provides us with the opportunity to develop an efficient, low pressure, dry gas gathering system.

Our second largest gathering system serves the Woodford Shale in Southeast Oklahoma. Our system is new and highly efficient and we are by a significant margin, the largest gatherer in the Woodford. We work with a number of great producers with Newfield being the largest.

Our system volumes in the Woodford have increased 80% year-over-year, but have flattened out during the first half of ‘09, as a result of recently announced curtailment and a reduction in the pace of well completions. However, the Woodford story continues to be an exciting one.

Producers continue to report increased initial well production and reserves and their well finding and development costs have been dramatically reduced. One important driver in reducing these F&D costs, is the producer’s utilization of pad drilling, which is also really driving reduced costs of our gathering facilities, because we can serve multiple wells with a single well connect.

With respect to gas volumes, there are approximately 25 wells behind our gathering system that have been drilled, but not yet completed. As gas prices improve, we expect producers will complete these wells and volumes on our system should increase significantly.

In July, we also completed the Arkoma Connector Pipeline, which provides long term strategic market access for the Woodford shale producers. We announced in the second quarter that we sold a 50% interstate pipeline to ArcLight Capital Partners. This provided us with additional liquidity and allowed us to develop another strong relationship with a great long term partner.

We also recently received formal notification regarding our option to acquire 10% equity interest in the Midcontinent Express Pipeline. We expect to exercise our right to conduct due diligence and to evaluate the option to purchase an equity interest in the pipeline.

Now, I’d like to discuss our Western Oklahoma gathering and processing system, where we have historically gathered gas from vertical wells drilled in the Anadarko basin. In 2008, we completed a major plant expansion and installed a 50-mile pipeline extension and new gathering system to gather the Granite Wash gas and Newfield, Stiles Ranch field in the Texas panhandle.

I would encourage you to review Newfield’s press releases and earnings call transcript, but I believe it’s fair to say that their Granite Wash drilling success have been very impressive. In fact the volumes in our western Oklahoma system have nearly doubled its results at the Stiles Ranch project.

Newfield’s development in the Stiles Ranch field is still in the early stages and has been tampered by the current price environment, but it’s clear that this could grow to be a very significant field. It’s pretty obvious that we are excited about the opportunities around these growing resource plays, but our other core operations are also performing well. One of these is our Javelina plant and Corpus Christi processes off-gas for the six area refineries.

Javelina is now subject to exploration and development decline risks and although its financial performance has been impacted by lower commodity prices, Javelina has a compiling long term business model that generates strong returns. In addition, earlier this year we significantly expanded our Siloam fractionator near Portsmouth Ohio, which solidifies our position as the largest fractionator in the Northeast and also adds to our fee-based cash flow.

Turning now to our balance sheet, at quarter end we had cash on hand of $56 million and available capacity of $173 million on our revolving credit facility. Our total debt was $1.3 billion, comprised primarily of $1.1 billion of senior notes in three trenches with the earliest trench due in 2014.

For the second quarter our leverage ratio was 4.35 times and our interest coverage ratio was 3.96 times. These two ratios are calculated in reports with our credit agreement and include an adjustment for material projects for which we have incurred indebtedness, but have not yet started to generate cash flow. Our debt to total capital was 55% for the second quarter.

Regarding our liquidity, we have a consistent and measured approach in carefully managing our balance sheet and to pre-fund our growth capital requirements, while maintaining a comfortable cushion around our bank covenants. We executed a number of transactions earlier this year to significantly strength our liquidity position, including an $85 million increase in our revolving credit facility and two strategic joint ventures.

In the second quarter, we accessed the capital markets to complete the public equity offering and a private placement of senior unsecured notes. We used the combined net proceeds of approximately $171 million from the two offerings to repay borrowings under our credit facility and to fund a portion of our capital program. Even with our significant capital spending in the first half of the year, we increased our liquidity by $100 million compare to the first quarter, and ended the second quarter with available liquidity of $230 million.

Let me also mention two other events that occur subsequent to the end of second quarter, that will have additional positive impact on our liquidity. The first is that, in July we received the second and final payment of just over $31 million from ArcLight Capital, related to their acquisition of the 50% equity interest in the Arkoma Connector Pipeline that I mentioned earlier.

In addition we are in the process of divesting the steam methane reformer plant, which is under construction at our Javelina facility. Proceeds from the sale will be approximately $70 million, and we expect the transaction to close in the third quarter. These two events will add an additional $100 million to our available liquidity in the third quarter.

Before turning to your question, I want to briefly discuss our guidance. We narrowed our 2009 Bcf guidance to a range of $160 million to $190 million, to reflect our current volume estimates and to account for the full year forecast for NGL Correlation and commodity prices.

We included it in our earnings release and updated DCF sensitivity analysis, that reflects year-to-date actual results and our revised forecast for the rest of the year. The key takeaway from the analysis, is that even with low commodities prices and weak NGL Correlations for 2009, we can still maintain a coverage ratio of at least one-time our current distribution.

With regard to growth capital, our 2009 forecast is $480 million; approximately $330 million of this amount will be funded through a combination of capital contributions from our joint venture partners and proceeds from the pending sale SMR facility. As a result, our share of low capital expenditures for 2009 will be approximately $150 million, compared to our previous forecast of $225 million. This allowed us to improve liquidity, while still supporting our long term growth opportunities. Maintenance capital for 2009 is still forecasted to be in the range of $5 million to $10 million.

Historically, we’ve not provided formal guidance for the next year’s capital program until November. However, we got a lot of projects going on and we had a lot of questions about these announced expansion projects and its impact on our 2010 capital program. Our preliminary estimate of MarkWest capital in 2010 is approximately $200 million, net of the JV partner contributions.

This number is obviously subject to changes that we refine our estimates, but we’ll provide our formal guidance for 2010, including this updated capital number on our third quarter earnings call in November. It’s also important to note that our future growth capital is being driven by solid rate of return projects that are largely fee-based in the growing areas of our Southwest and Pennsylvania operations.

To summarize our call today, our people and assets continue to perform well, even with the downturn of the economy. Our core operations are located in some of the best resource plays in the U.S., and as the economy starts to recover, we are very well positioned to capture additional market share, volume and incremental cash flow.

Looking forward, we will continue to focus on our key priorities, providing quality midstream services for our customers, strengthen our balance sheet, and achieving our distribution objectives.

So with that Sarah, I’ll open it up to question.

Question-and-Answer Session

Operator

(Operator Instructions) Your first question comes from Teresa Fox - Stone Harbor.

Teresa Fox - Stone Harbor

I think when I was registering for this question, you actually answered it, so let me hit it again. Your 2010 CapEx program you said was $200 million, your expansion, is that correct?

Frank Semple

That’s correct. That’s a part of our guidance for 2009. I just made the point that we had so many questions about the projects that have already been announced primarily in the Marcellus, that we felt it was important to start getting some preliminary indications of what the 2010 capital, net of the JV contributions would look like for 2010.

Teresa Fox - Stone Harbor

So if I’m calculating this right, based on your press release today, your shortfall if you want to maintain your 51% ownership, your potential contributions would be about in the $230 million range.

Frank Semple

I’m not sure Teresa how you’re developing that. Probably the best way to think about it, I think you‘re probably referencing the M&R press release that went out late last night. Essentially, the way to think about that, is that currently it’s a 60-40, with us owning 60%, M&R owning 40% of that Liberty JV in the Marcellus.

If you kind of look at what the current agreement involves from M&R investment is $200 million and the revision to the M&R agreement involves $150 million additional. So if you kind of add those together and kind of estimate what the CapEx would be through 2010, then there is a shortfall if you will between the 60-40 and the ultimate 49%, 51%. The actual investment by MarkWest is to be able to achieve that true-up, depending on what our capital program is in 2010, 2011.

Teresa Fox - Stone Harbor

Also just a quick question, your 10% ownership in the Pioneer, I know you are conducting due diligence now. What would be the estimated cost of that? Is that included in your CapEx program for this year?

Frank Semple

The Arkoma Connector Pipeline? Oh the MEP option?

The MEP option that I mentioned is not in our capital forecast, not in the numbers that we provided. The fact is that we have noticed the intent to conduct due diligence for that option, that will take several weeks, and really until we have the information to the due diligence process and the total cost of the project, it’s hard to estimate what the capital would involve, but it is 10% of the equity event of that project. Once we’re through that process then we will provide information, disclosures about whether or not we’re choosing to move forward with that purchase.

Operator

Your next question comes from Michael Blum - Wells Fargo Securities.

Michael Blum - Wells Fargo Securities

A couple of questions, maybe I’ll just start with the MEP options since you just touched on that. Maybe two things; one, will your option be based on the original cost of the project or the final cost totality, with the cost overrun?

Frank Semple

It will be the final cost Michael. Clearly the decision to move forward with the option to connect due diligence is a pretty big decision, but obviously it’s going to take a lot of analysis to determine really the cost in the economics of the project, but the investment will be based on the final cost of the project and the final cost of service.

Michael Blum - Wells Fargo Securities

Is your criteria and your decision to making process, is it going to be based on the merits of the project, and the accretion of the project, or is that more related to the capital availability from year end of things?

Frank Semple

First of all, just keep in mind to make sure I’m clear to everyone on the call, that this is a 50/50 partnership with ArcLight. So together with ArcLight, we would evaluate the economics, of the quality of the revenue and the cash flow from the project and the ability for us to support MarkWest, our ability to support the 50% component of that option.

Michael Blum - Wells Fargo Securities

The next question was, could you possibly breakout that $200 million preliminary CapEx? Where is that capital going in the project?

Frank Semple

Well, that $200 million again that we are providing is just a preliminary estimate. I think you could sense from the discussions around, the project that we’re currently involved in is primarily driven by the Marcellus investment, but there are a number of other projects that really are components of that 2010 CapEx.

Michael Blum - Wells Fargo Securities

Okay, my last question, can you just provide a little more in terms of what’s your outlook for volumes for the rest of this year and if you will in 2010 by system? Thanks.

Frank Semple

Okay Michael, probably the best way to approach that is first kind of our view of 2009 volumes, to the first part of Michael’s question, and I can think the easiest way to respond to that is that each system is a little bit different.

Marcellus continues to grow, obviously East Texas looks pretty flat, again because we are getting offsets from the Haynesville, what I discussed earlier, and then you move up to Oklahoma with the Woodford system and essentially if you combine those two system together it’ll be fairly flat, again but the Southeast as you heard from us, some of the producers, there will be some curtailments going on in the Southeast, but that will offset by some ramp up in the Granite Wash area.

So with the exception of Marcellus, which again continues to ramp up sort of towards that $100 a day by the end of the year, and the rest of our systems are going to be fairly flat. Probably the most important point Michael is that those volume forecasts, with all the margins associated with those volumes, are really a part of the sensitivity analysis that we provided at the end of the earnings release in the tables.

So, you get the benefit of not only understanding the impact of volume assumption, but also the impact of the commodity pricing correlations and margins. 2010 we’ll provide updates in November, but again 2010 and beyond is very, very dependent on natural gas prices.

Operator

Your next question comes from Adam Leight - RBC.

Adam Leight - RBC

I’d like to say great minds must think alike, because the first two questioners got through a lot of what I wanted; but on the volume side the Oklahoma volumes, on the gathering side have been relatively flat, but the NGL processing volumes have gone up, is that primarily Granite Wash volumes that are going to Arapaho and do you see that increasing at a continued rapid pace?

Frank Semple

You are right Adam. The driver for the increased processing in Oklahoma has come from the Granite Wash development. We do certainly expect the success of Newfield out in the Granite Wash to continue. Again, you can reference their earnings call script and you’ll get a sense of what they’re planning from a rig perspective and the success that they’ve seen out in the Granite Wash. But yes, the big driver Adam for our increased processing in Oklahoma comes from the Granite Wash.

Adam Leight - RBC

Do you have enough capacity to be working with other producers? Are there other opportunities since there’s a lot of activity going on right around your system?

Frank Semple

Let me just turn this over to Randy, and let him respond to that question. Randy.

Randy Nickerson

Yes, thanks Frank. I think we certainly do have capacity in talking to other producers. One of the wildcards though, is if you read Newfield’s press release, the ability of Stiles Ranch to grow is really pretty amazing.

So I think it’s fair to say that while we had capacity we’re working on things. We’re also kind of working very, very closely with Newfield to make sure that when their gas prices improve and they step on the peddle in Stiles Ranch, we’ll have the facilities there waiting for them. So, I guess the answer is, yes and yes.

Adam Leight - RBC

Then just on rest of the year volumes in general, do you see risk on your systems for a systemic backup line pressure stuff like that and if so, where would that be most likely to occur? As storage fills and we get into the end of…?

Frank Semple

We had a lot of flexibility for outlets and I’m just looking around the table we can’t really identify any major problems that we might see.

Randy Nickerson

It’s helpful that we deliver lots of our gas in the kind of key supplier, large pipeline system hubs. Thinking of Carthage Hub, thinking of the Bennington hub in Western Oklahoma, we have interconnects with four pipelines now. So we are fortunate that we have a lot of ability to kind of move that gas around and deliver in the significant market hubs. So that part, I think we’re in a very good position to whether kind of any down-up of stores that you are referring to.

Operator

Your next question comes from Louis Shammy - Zimmer Lucas Partners.

Louis Shammy - Zimmer Lucas Partners

My question is regarding the 2009 CapEx. Outside of the Marcellus, where is most of that being spent?

Frank Semple

The 2009 CapEx really reflects and includes the capital that has been spent to-date on the Arkoma Connector Pipeline and the SMR project, in addition to the ramp up of the Marcellus facilities. So the $480 million, I believe that was in our capital guidance for 2009 reflects the MW capital to support those projects and those are the largest chunks of capital.

Now on a go forward basis through the rest of the year, those projects, in case the Arkoma is completed and the SMR were close to completion, so the forecast through the end of the year is largely driven by the Marcellus capital.

Louis Shammy - Zimmer Lucas Partners

The Marcellus capital for 2010, given that M&R is going to be contributing, I think it was for the $200 million next or $150 million?

Frank Semple

$150 million Louis is model for 2010. At the end the agreement reflects the next trench of capital from investment from M&R will be an additional $150 million. No doubt, a significant portion of that will be in 2010, but it will depend on the amount of capital overall, that we will ultimately be spending in 2010, but go ahead with your question.

Louis Shammy - Zimmer Lucas Partners

I guess, what I was going to ask is above that $150 million, is MarkWest going to be contributing anything to the JV in 2010? It sounds like they are investing.

Frank Semple

Yes, it will be side-by-side investing at a different rate for 2010, a different percentage than M&R.

Operator

Your next question comes from Biron Lim - Seix Investment Advisors.

Biron Lim - Seix Investment Advisors

At the end of your press release, you have that table with the crude oil price, NGL correlations and so forth, that will show the estimates of the distributable cash flow for 2009. It looks like with the changes in crude oil prices, the distributable cash flow doesn’t change very much, is that because of the hedges that you have in place now that helps?

Frank Semple

You’ve got the combination of the fact that we’re six months through the year and the hedges will tend to kind of mute the impact of the crude oil pricing.

Biron Lim - Seix Investment Advisors

The crude oil pricing that you’re showing is for the average for the whole year, correct?

Frank Semple

That’s exactly right.

Biron Lim - Seix Investment Advisors

Is there anyway that you deal with I guess the deviation of the NGL prices from crude oil in anyway? Have you been able to put in more of the direct hedges of the NGL components?

Frank Semple

Well, just back to the base part of that question, the table reflects the hedges and all those hedges for our long liquids positions are crude oil proxy hedges. So with that statement then, we constantly look at the effectiveness of being able to go out and covert those crude oil hedges to NGLs, the value of those, relative to the projected settlements of the crude oil hedges and make a determination of whether or not it makes sense to do that NGL.

Even six to 12 months at it, the NGL market is not real liquid, and we’ve historically been able to do that pretty efficiently. This year we’ve not done any of the conversion. That’s right, we’ve not done any conversions this year, but we constantly look at that, because again, it’s just a risk management tool for us and to the extent that we can make that conversion without a lot of costs, then we’ll do that.

Operator

Your final question comes from Yves Siegel - Credit Suisse.

Yves Siegel - Credit Suisse

Just a couple of follow-ups, one is how much did you invest in SMR? Does $70 million basically cover the cost of your investment?

Frank Semple

That’s very close to the investment that we’ve got in the SMR.

Yves Siegel - Credit Suisse

Second question is, as it’s relates to Midcontinent Express Pipeline, are there any soft reasons or intangibles that you’re looking to perhaps achieve by, if you did decide to excise the options? I’m not sure if I’m asking that properly. Besides just the return on the investment, are there other benefits that you might be able to receive, if you decide to exercise?

Frank Semple

You can expect I think the big driver for that decision is going to be on the economics of the project. With that said, the ability to participate in a interstate pipeline with those two strong partners would have some benefits. I mean obviously we operate some jurisdictional facilities, but the expansion of that experience and capabilities with Energy Transfer and Kinder would be a great experience, but the main drivers and obviously will be economics and our ability to efficiently, effectively finance it.

Yves Siegel - Credit Suisse

Then the last question is really around other potential divestitures going forward. Are you actively looking at anything?

Frank Semple

No.

Operator

I will now turn the call over to Frank Semple for closing remarks. Thank you, sir.

Frank Semple

Sarah, thanks for facilitating the call and thanks to everyone for joining us today. As always, we appreciate your interest and continued support in MarkWest. Please give us a call if you’ve got any additional questions. Thanks a lot and that concludes our call for today.

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 www.SeekingAlpha.com. All other use is prohibited.

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HERE IS A TEXTUAL REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S CONFERENCE CALL, CONFERENCE PRESENTATION OR OTHER AUDIO PRESENTATION, AND WHILE EFFORTS ARE MADE TO PROVIDE AN ACCURATE TRANSCRIPTION, THERE MAY BE MATERIAL ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR INACCURACIES IN THE REPORTING OF THE SUBSTANCE OF THE AUDIO PRESENTATIONS. IN NO WAY DOES SEEKING ALPHA ASSUME ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS MADE BASED UPON THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ON THIS WEB SITE OR IN ANY TRANSCRIPT. USERS ARE ADVISED TO REVIEW THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S AUDIO PRESENTATION ITSELF AND THE APPLICABLE COMPANY'S SEC FILINGS BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENT OR OTHER DECISIONS.

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