Greensboro, Georgia October 3rd...Investors are urged to closely consider the disclosures and risk...

© 2013 The Williams Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.

Transco Customer Meeting Greensboro, Georgia

October 3rd , 2013

© 2013 The Williams Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. 2 Customer Meeting | October 3, 2013 |

Forward-looking statements

The reports, filings, and other public announcements of The Williams Companies, Inc. (Williams) and Williams Partners L.P. (WPZ) may contain or incorporate by

reference statements that do not directly or exclusively relate to historical facts. Such statements are "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A

of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We make these forward looking statements in

reliance on the safe harbor protections provided under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. You typically can identify forward-looking statements by

various forms of words such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “seeks,” “could,” “may,” “should,” “continues,” “estimates,” “expects,” “assumes,” “forecasts,” “intends,”

“might,” “goals,” “objectives,” “targets,” “planned,” “potential,” “projects,” “scheduled,” “will,” “guidance,” “outlook,” “in service date” or other similar expressions. These

forward-looking statements are based on management's beliefs and assumptions and on information currently available to management and include, among others,

statements regarding:

> Amounts and nature of future capital expenditures;

> Expansion and growth of our business and operations;

> Financial condition and liquidity;

> Business strategy;

> Cash flow from operations or results of operations;

> The levels of dividends to Williams stockholders and of cash distributions to WPZ unitholders;

> Seasonality of certain business components;

> Natural gas, natural gas liquids, and olefins prices, supply, and demand; and

> Demand for our services

Forward-looking statements are based on numerous assumptions, uncertainties and risks that could cause future events or results to be materially different from

those stated or implied in this presentation. Many of the factors that will determine these results are beyond our ability to control or predict. Specific factors that could

cause actual results to differ from results contemplated by the forward-looking statements include, among others, the following:

> Whether Williams has sufficient cash to enable it to pay current and expected levels of dividends;

> Whether WPZ has sufficient cash from operations to enable it to pay current and expected levels of cash distributions, if any, following establishment of cash

reserves and payment of fees and expenses, including payments to WPZ’s general partner;

> Availability of supplies, market demand, and volatility of prices;

> Inflation, interest rates, and, in the case of Williams, fluctuation in foreign exchange and general economic conditions (including future disruptions and volatility in

the global credit markets and the impact of these events on our customers and suppliers);

> The strength and financial resources of our competitors and the effects of competition;


Forward-looking statements continued

> Ability to acquire new businesses and assets and integrate those operations and assets into our existing businesses, as well as successfully expand

our facilities;

> Development of alternative energy sources;

> The impact of operational and development hazards and unforeseen interruptions;

> Costs of, changes in, or the results of laws, government regulations (including safety and environmental regulations), environmental liabilities, litigation,

and rate proceedings;

> Williams’ costs and funding obligations for defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans sponsored by its affiliates;

> WPZ’s allocated costs for defined benefit pension plans and other post retirement benefit plans sponsored by its affiliates;

> Changes in maintenance and construction costs;

> Changes in the current geopolitical situation;

> Our exposure to the credit risk of our customers and counterparties;

> Risks related to strategy and financing, including restrictions stemming from our debt agreements, future changes in our credit ratings and the availability and

cost of capital;

> The amount of cash distributions from and capital requirements of our investments and joint ventures in which we participate.

> Risks associated with weather and natural phenomena, including climate conditions;

> Acts of terrorism, including cybersecurity threats and related disruptions; and

> Additional risks described in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Given the uncertainties and risk factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement, we caution

investors not to unduly rely on our forward-looking statements. We disclaim any obligations to and do not intend to update the above list or to announce publicly the

result of any revisions to any of the forward-looking statements to reflect future events or developments.

In addition to causing our actual results to differ, the factors listed above may cause our intentions to change from those statements of intention set forth in this

announcement. Such changes in our intentions may also cause our results to differ. We may change our intentions, at any time and without notice, based upon

changes in such factors, our assumptions, or otherwise.

With respect to WPZ, limited partner interests are inherently different from the capital stock of a corporation, although many of the business risks to which we are

subject are similar to those that would be faced by a corporation engaged in a similar business.

Investors are urged to closely consider the disclosures and risk factors in Williams’ and WPZ’s annual reports on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on Feb. 27, 2013,

and each of our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q available from our offices or from our websites at www.williams.com and www.williamslp.com.


Williams Update

Rory Miller

Sr. Vice President

Atlantic Gulf Operating Area


The Williams Companies > One of the leading energy

infrastructure companies in North

America

> 15,000 miles of interstate gas

pipelines

> 1,000 miles of NGL transportation

pipelines

> 10,000 miles of oil and gas

gathering pipelines

> Daily gas processing capacity of

6.6 billion cubic feet of natural gas

> Natural gas liquids production of

more than 200,000 barrels per day

> 4,100 employees

> NYSE: WMB

> Headquarters in Tulsa, Okla.

> Learn more at williams.com

http://www.williams.com/


Senior management team

Alan Armstrong

John Dearborn

Frank Billings

Allison Bridges

Rory Miller

Don Chappel

President and CEO

NGL & Petchem Services

NE Gathering & Processing

West Operating Area

Atlantic - Gulf Operating Area

Chief Financial Officer

Fred Pace Brian

Perilloux Jim Scheel

Robyn Ewing

Craig Rainey

Engineering & Construction

Operational Excellence

Corporate Strategic

Development

Strategic Services &

Administration

General Counsel


Rory Miller

Senior Vice President Atlantic & Gulf

Frank Ferazzi

Vice President

& General Manager

Transco

David Williams

Director Operations

Hector Alatorre

JV Specialist

Jim Moore

Vice President Transco

Commercial

Jim Shannon

Director Operations

Mario DiCocco

Director Operations

Paul Egner

Director Operations

Scott Turkington

Director

Rates & Regulatory

Transco Organization


Scale positions, competitive advantages

drive growth and value creation

Strategy-

aligned capital

investment

Northeast

Transco

Canada

Gulf of Mexico

NGL-Petchem


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Natural Gas – U.S. Supply Growth

Northeast

Rockies

San Juan

Gulf of Mexico

Fort Worth

Mid-Continent

Gulf Coast

Permian

West Coast

Alaska

Well-positioned in key areas of supply growth

Source: Wood Mackenzie North America Gas Service

Bcf/d Direct

Ownership Investment


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Natural Gas - U.S. Demand Growth

Residential Commercial Industrial Power LNG Exports Transport Other


Bcf/d

Gas demand grows in response to supply, price

47% growth

2012 - 2031

2009-2012

+10%


0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2008 2013 2018 2023 2028

NGLs – U.S. Supply Growth

Natural Gasoline

Isobutane

Butane

Propane

Ethane

Big infrastructure critical for growing NGL

supplies

Source: Williams proprietary research; assumes total production with no infrastructure constraints

MBbls/day

New market outlets needed

quickly to sustain development


0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Bcf/d

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Source: Jeffries, Williams research; assumes total

production with no infrastructure constraints

Marcellus/Utica is the place to be for growth

Gas Production Marcellus/Utica

NGL Production Marcellus/Utica


+510% 2012-2017

MBbls/d

Significant growth in

price-pressured market

2012-2017

+109% opportunities

Liquids surge creates big


Growing supply quickly overwhelming local markets;

challenging producer economics

Source: Williams proprietary research. Operators include: Chesapeake, Range, Chevron, Seneca, Antero, EOG, EQT, CONSOL, XOM,

Stone, Other. Local Propane Demand represents average year round demand in PADD 1-A and 1-B

By 2020, 1MM bbls per day of NGLs in search of an outlet

Local Propane Demand

Local C4+ frac capacity

Mariner West - Ethane

ATEX - Ethane

Mariner East - Ethane & Propane

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

MBbl/d

Marcellus + Utica Liquids

Bluegrass Pipeline has

200-400 Mbl/d capacity


Project Description and Capex in Millions*

(Excludes ACMP projects)

Expected Remaining Time to In-Service Date

Other Petchem Svs. Projects – $240 Canadian Ethane Recovery – $450-500

Pipeline Acq. & Related Petchem Svs. Proj. – $403 CNRL Upgrader – $500-600

Canadian PDH - not disclosed Bluegrass Pipeline 50% Ownership - not disclosed

Parachute Plant Expansion - $200

Geismar Expansion – $450-500

Rockaway Lateral – $180 Mid-South Expansion – $200

Virginia South Side – $300 Constitution Pipeline 41% Ownership – $280

NE Supply Link – $390 Keathley Canyon Connector 60% Ownership – $430

Gulfstar 51% Ownership – $500 Leidy SE – $600

Laurel Mountain Midstream 51% Ownership - $110 Three Rivers Midstream - $150

Utica JV – (Blue Racer Midstream) - $354 Susquehanna Supply Hub - $1,125

Ohio Valley Midstream - $1,584

WPZ

Atlantic/Gulf

WPZ NGL/Petchem

WMB

NGL/Petchem

2013

•The amounts listed for the Northeast represent the midpoint of capex and

investment guidance for 2013-2015. Amounts for other projects represent total

expected capital expenditures, including amounts invested prior to 2013.

•Note: ACMP projects are self-funded so they are not reflected here.

Strategic, large-scale, primarily fee-based

cash flows driving growth

WPZ

Northeast

WPZ West

Totals made up of many projects with various in-service dates

Guidance from 7/31/13 Historical reference only

1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q

2014 2015 2016 2017

125 Mdth/d of 250Mdth/d now in service


Creating large-scale position in Marcellus + Utica

Laurel Mtn Midstream 500,000

ACMP – Marcellus 1,700,000

Ohio Valley Midstream 236,000

Susquehanna 150,000

Three Rivers JV 275,000

Total Marcellus 2,861,000

ACMP – Utica 1,846,000

Blue Racer JV - Utica Under negotiation

Total Utica 1,846,000

Total Marcellus +

Utica

4,707,000

Gross Dedicated Acres

Partners and Investments

Assets at 6/30/13

WPZ Northeast G&P $5.4 billion

Proposed NGL pipeline

Note: map does not depict ACMP or Blue Racer positions.

Capitol

Energy

Ventures


Atlantic-Gulf gas pipeline assets expected to

provide predictable growth with fully contracted

projects

7.7 8.1

9.0 9.0 9.2

9.8 9.9 10.2

10.8 10.9 11.4 11.5

13.4

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

$0

$200

$400

$600

$800

$1,000

$1,200

$1,400

$1,600

$1,800

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Cap

ac

ity –

MM

dt/d

ay

Cap

ital In

ve

stm

en

t p

lac

ed

in

to s

erv

ice

$

mil

lio

ns

Transco Gulfstream* Constitution* Capacity

* Represents 100% ownership.


Atlantic – Gulf Expansion Projects

Constitution

Mar ’15

NE Supply Link

Nov ’13

Virginia Southside

Sept ’15

Mid Atlantic Connector

Jan ‘13

Mid South Expansion

Sept ’12 / Jun ’13

NE Connector/ Rockaway Lateral

2nd half of 2014

Leidy Southeast

Dec ‘15

Mobile Bay South III

Apr ’15

Gulfstar I

mid ‘14

Keathley Canyon

3Q ‘14

CPV Woodbridge

Apr ’15

Dalton Lateral

TBD

Hillabee Lease

May ‘17

Green – Projects in development phase

Rock Springs

Aug ‘16

Atlantic Sunrise

July ‘17


System Flow Update

Camilo Amezquita

Director - Customer Service


Key Takeaways

> Supply

– Game changing shale developments offers supply diversity and flow reliability

to customers

• Access to Midcontinent shale at Station 85

• Access to Marcellus shale on Leidy

> Demand

– Power generation demand outlook remains strong

– Industrial sector experiencing a “renaissance”

– LNG Exports

> Operational Challenges

– There are 2 obstacles preventing the mainline from flowing south.

• Hydraulic capability

• Mainline odorization

> Opportunities

– Expansion projects provide access to Marcellus

– System becomes bi-directional


Transco System Overview

Zone 4

Zone 5

Zone 6

Zone 1

Zone 2

Zone 3

System Facts

> Peak design capacity 9.9 MMDth/d.

> ~ 10,200 miles of pipe – 2,000 mainline miles

> 40 Mainline Compressor Stations – 369 compressor units

– 1.5 MM HP

> Extensive Offshore Gathering System

> ~ 900 Active Metering Points.

> 197 MMDth Storage Capacity.

WASHINGTON

78 MMDth

W/D 817 MDth/d

Inj. 431 MDth/d

EMINENCE

10 MMDth

W/D 1,240 MDth/d

Inj. 150 MDth/d

PINE NEEDLE LNG

4 MMDth

W/D 414 MDth/d

Inj. 21 MDth/d

LEIDY

91 MMDth

W/D 1,328 MDth/d

Inj. 519 MDth/d

S-2

12 MMDth

W/D 137 MDth/d

Inj. 104 MDth/d

STA. 240 LNG

2 MMDth

W/D 399 MDth/d

Inj. 10 MDth/d


7.5

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

10.5

Qu

an

tity

(M

Md

t/d

)

Peak Day

3 Day Peak 9.96

8.99

Transco Peak Day Deliveries*

8.64

8.24

10 - 11 09 - 10 07- 08

9.00

9.25

08 - 09

12/14/10 1/3/10 1/2/08 2/5/09 12/13-15/10 1/2-4/10 2/3-5/09 1/2-4/08

9.52

9.25

8. 91

8.23

*Market area deliveries, which includes Zones 4 through 6.

1/3/12

11 - 12

1/3-5/12 1/22/13 1/22-24/13

12 – 13

10.44

9.90


Game-Changing Shale Supplies

195210

85

Source: Wood Mackenzie H1 2013 Base Case

Zone 5

Zone 4

Zone 6

Zone 2

Zone 1

Zone 3

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Year MMDth/d

2012 14.3

2022 10.2

Change -4.1

Production

Gulf Coast & Gulf of Mexico

Gulf Coast

Gulf of Mexico

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Year MMDth/d

2012 2.0

2022 5.7

Change 3.7

Production

Eagle Ford Shale0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

Woodford

Fayetteville

Barnett

Haynesville

Midcontinent Shale

Year MMDth/d

2012 15.7

2022 20.7

Change 5.0

Production

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Marcellus Shale

Year MMDth/d

2012 6.7

2022 15.0

Change 8.3

Production


Transco System Flows Rivervale

'08-'09 71 MDthd

’12-’13 213 MDthd

Pleasant Valley

'08-'09 30 MDthd

’12-’13 47 MDthd Cascade Creek

'08-'09 235 MDthd

’12-’13 207 MDthd

Leidy

'08-'09 1,171 MDthd

’12-’13 1,893 MDthd

CTGS

‘08-’09 223 MDthd

’12-’13 203 MDthd

SWLA

‘08-’09 390 MDthd

’12-’13 81 MDthd

CENLA

‘08-’09 102 MDthd

’12-’13 107 MDthd

Katy

‘08-’09 209 MDthd

’12-’13 62 MDthd

Holmesville/Walthall

'08-'09 438 MDthd

’12-’13 418 MDthd

Lower Chanceford

'08-'09 0 MDthd

’12-’13 207 MDthd Boswell’s Tavern

'08-'09 118 MDthd

’12-’13 148 MDthd

Destin

'08-'09 63 MDthd

’12-’13 15 MDthd

Scott Mtn./Pineview

'08-'09 499 MDthd

’12-’13 2,056 MDthd

Note: ‘12-’13 volumes through 7/31/13

*Indicates southward flow

Marcellus supplies on the Leidy Line continue to increase TETCO’s TEMAX expansion delivers Rockies/Marcellus supplies

to Lower Chanceford Mobile Bay volumes flow southward on a regular basis Steady volumes from Mid-Continent shales provide supply

reliability at Station 85 Supply from Production Area laterals decline

210

Zone 5

SELA

'08-'09 610 MDthd

’12-’13 337 MDthd

Mobile Bay

'08-'09 122 MDthd

’12-’13 (569) MDthd*

Trunkline Ragley

'08-'09 176 MDthd

’12-’13 130 MDthd

Zone 6

Zone 4

Zone 3

Zone 2

Zone 1

195

85

65 45

30


Active and Proposed Leidy Line Interconnects

In Service

IC Meter

Design

(dt/d)

ISD In Service (cont.) IC Meter

Design (dt/d) ISD

NCL – Penn State 10,661 existing Anadarko – Miller Hill 637,560 10/25/2012

XTO – Cabot Clinton 10,350 existing CNYOG – Marc I (Pipeline Interconnect) 571,320 11/29/2012

PVR NEPA Gas Gathering – Canoe Run 155,250 11/25/2008 Mountain Gathering (XTO) - Dry Run 124,200 12/6/2012

PVR NEPA Gas Gathering – Barto 155,250 3/15/2009

PVR Marcellus Gas Gathering – Quaker

State 38,709 1/3/2013

Anadarko – Grugan 119,025 10/28/2010 Anadarko – Bull Run Vista 2 119,025 1/30/2013

PVR Marcellus Gas Gathering – Tombs

Run 258,750 2/15/2011 PVR NEPA Gas Gathering – Barto II 258,750 05/16/13

Pennsylvania General – Breon 238,050 7/5/2011 5,445,550

Anadarko – Bull Run Vista 72,450 7/6/2011

Anadarko – Grugan 2 243,225 10/13/2011 In Progress

IC Meter

Design (dt/d) Proposed ISD

Williams Field Services – Puddlefield 724,500 1/9/2012 UGI Penn Natural Gas - Carverton 310,500 10/2013

Great Plains Operating – Rattlesnake 12,420 4/17/2012 310,500

Anadarko – Guinter 637,560 4/26/2012

NFG Midstream Trout Run – Liberty Drive 282,245 5/30/2012

PVR NEPA Gas Gathering – Chapin 776,250 9/28/2012 Total Interconnect Meter Design 5,756,050

Marcellus Interconnects

Existing Meter Stations

In Service

I/C Agmt. In Place

In Negotiations

Preliminary

535

515

517520

Wharton Storage

Leidy StorageAnadarko-Grugan

XTO-Cabot Clinton

NCL-Penn State

PVR-Tombs Run

PVR-Canoe Run

PVR-BartoAnadarko-

Bull Run VistaPennsylvaniaGeneral-Breon

Anadarko-Guinter

Anadarko-Grugan 2

NFG Midstream-Liberty Drive

Anadarko-Miller Hill

Williams Field Services-Puddlefield

Anadarko-Bull Run Vista 2

Great Plains-Rattlesnake

CNYOG-Marc I

PVR-Chapin

PVR-Barto II

PVR-Quaker State

Mountain Gathering(XTO) – Dry Run

UGI Penn Natural Gas - Carverton


Leidy Line Volumes Ramping Up

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

MD

th/d

Marcellus Flow Volumes (MDth/d)

Marcellus Interconnect Capacity:

In Service: 5,446 MDth/d

In Progress: 311 MDth/d


Future Projected Supply Usage To Meet Market Demands

85

Florida markets

Mid-Atlantic markets

Southeast markets

Northeast markets

Barnett

Haynesville

Fayetteville

Woodford

Marcellus

Interconnect capacity totals

over 3 Bcf/d at Station 85

Current flow approx. 2 Bcf/d

65

Eagle Ford

Shale Gas also to supply

Proposed LNG exports in

Texas and Louisiana

• Future Expansion Projects will provide shippers

with contractual capacity as far south as Station 85

from Marcellus production receipts

• Mainline becomes bi-directional

• Mainline will consist of a null point

• System demands and operations will determine how

far south Marcellus Production will flow and how far

north Mid Continent Production will flow

Marcellus Interconnect capacity

totals over 5 Bcf/d on Leidy Line.

Current flow approx. 2.5 Bcf/d

New York City


Operational Challenges


Northern Market Area Demand Rolling 30-Day Average

0

500,000

1,000,000

1,500,000

2,000,000

2,500,000

3,000,000

3,500,000

4,000,000

4,500,000

5,000,000

VO

LU

ME

S, M

SC

F

Market Loads


System Throughputs Rolling 30-Day Average

(1,000,000)

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

2/1

/10

3/1

/10

4/1

/10

5/1

/10

6/1

/10

7/1

/10

8/1

/10

9/1

/10

10/1

/10

11/1

/10

12/1

/10

1/1

/11

2/1

/11

3/1

/11

4/1

/11

5/1

/11

6/1

/11

7/1

/11

8/1

/11

9/1

/11

10/1

/11

11/1

/11

12/1

/11

1/1

/12

2/1

/12

3/1

/12

4/1

/12

5/1

/12

6/1

/12

7/1

/12

8/1

/12

9/1

/12

10/1

/12

11/1

/12

12/1

/12

1/1

/13

2/1

/13

3/1

/13

4/1

/13

5/1

/13

6/1

/13

7/1

/13

TH

RO

UG

HP

UT

, M

SC

F

STA 90, STA 200 AND CENTERVILLE THROUGHPUT

30 per. Mov. Avg. (Centerville)

30 per. Mov. Avg. (STA 200)

30 per. Mov. Avg. (STA 90)


Zone 6 Constrained Areas


BREAK


Expansion Projects

Gary Duvall

Project Director

Business Development


Over $2 Billion In Transco Expansions (2001-2013)

> Strong track record of successfully building system expansions to meet the

customers’ needs…when they need it.

# Project In-Service MDth/d Capex ($MM)

1 MarketLink Phase 1 2001 166 $123

2 MarketLink Phase 2 2002 130 $120

3 Leidy East 2002 130 $98

4 Trenton Woodbury 2003 51 $20

5 Central New Jersey 2005 105 $16

6 Leidy to Long Island 2007 100 $172

7 Sentinel Phase 1 2008 40 $42

8 Sentinel Phase 2 2009 102 $187

21 Northeast Supply Link 2013 250 $385

Total Northern Market 1,074 $1,163

9 Sundance 2002 236 $135

10 Momentum Phase 1 2003 269 $164

11 Momentum Phase 2 2004 54 $25

12 Potomac 2007 165 $76

13 Eminence Enhancement 2009 46 $13

14 Mobile Bay South 2010 253 $37

15 Mobile Bay South 2 2011 380 $33

16 85 North 2010/2011 309 $222

17 Pascagoula 2011 467 $30

18 Mid-South Phase 1 2012 95 $138

19 Mid-Atlantic Connector 2013 142 $60

20 Mid-South Phase 2 2013 130 $64

Total Southern Market 2,546 $997

Total Transco 3,620 $2,160

20

19

18

17

16

15

1413

12

11

109

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

121


Sample Of Project Timelines (Avg 2.7 Years)

0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42

Northeast Supply Link

NJ-NY

Tenn. NE Upgrade

Tetco Team 2012

Tenn. NE Supply Div.

Mid South Ph. 1

DTI App. Gateway

Equitrans Sunrise

Tenn 300 Exp.

Tetco Temax/Time III

El Paso Ruby

FGT Phase VIII

Sonat So. Sys. III (Ph. 1)

85 North Ph. 1

Kinder REX East

Kinder MidCon Exp.

GS ETEX to MS

Kinder REX West

Months

Prefile to 7(c) File

7(c) File to 7(c) Cert.

7(c) Cert. to ISD

Avg. Construction = 14.5 mos. Avg. Filing = 10.7 mos. Avg. PreFiling = 7.7 mos.

Source: FERC


Capital Costs Of Sample Projects (Filed vs. Actual)

Source: FERC

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

1/1/2008 1/1/2009 1/1/2010 1/1/2011 1/1/2012 1/1/2013 1/1/2014

Filed Capex: $18.6 B

Over/(Under): $1.5 B; 8%

Over Capex: $1.9 B

Under Capex: ($0.4) B


Typical FERC Timeline (3 – 4 years)

0 10 20 30 40 50

Complete Construction

Receive and Accept FERC Certificate

Submit 7C Application

Initiated Pre-filing Process

PA - Board Approval - Project Design

Open Season

Months

1.5 mos.

7.0 mos.

7.7 mos.

10.7 mos.

1.5 mos.

14.5 mos.

Note: Durations will vary depending on scope and sensitivity of the project.


Project Life Cycle

• Update project

parameters to

System Planning.

• PD&E conducts

site visits,

evaluates

equipment,

receives input from

operations and

checks for

technical feasibility

of the project.

• Execution of

Precedent

Agreements.

• BD seeks Board

approval.

• Construct project. • Place project into

service.

• A project team is

assembled.

• Begin consulting

with Natural

Resources and

Public Outreach to

assess risks.

• Initial shipper

discussions.

Identify/

Prioritize

Opportunity

Discover Select Define Deliver Integrate G2 G3 G4 G5 G1 G0

Decide to

Initiate

Decide to

Proceed

Decide to

Continue

Decide to

Sanction

Decide to

Handover

Decide to

Closeout

Decide to

Pursue

Commercial

Development Operations

Execution

FERC Process


Northeast Supply Link

Nat’l Fuel

Texas Eastern

“Leidy” “Sta 520” “Sta 517”

Leidy Hub

Station 520 Station 517

15 M

Dth

/d

Receipt Quantities

Manhattan

Central Manhattan

Dom

inio

n

Narrows Deliv

ery

Qu

an

tities

Station 210

Clinton

Lycoming

Sullivan

Bradford

Potter

Tioga

Wyoming

Susquehanna

135 M

Dth

/d

Luzerne

Lackawanna

Centre

Clearfield

Cameron

Union

NJ

PA

NY

20%

20%

60%

50 MDth/d

50 MDth/d

150 MDth/d

100 M

Dth

/d

> Expansion of Transco's existing system from

Marcellus production in northeastern PA to the

zone 6 Market Pool (Sta 210) and existing

New York City delivery points.

> Capacity: 250 MDth/d

– Half of volumes placed into service to Station 210 in August 2013

> In-service date: November 2013


134th Street Manhattan Meter Station


Northeast Connector (FT); Rockaway Lateral

(FDLS)

Rockaway

Philadelphia

PA

NY

NJ

205

207

200

Rockaway

Rockaway Lateral

3.3 miles

26” Lateral

• Measurement

• Regulators

• Heaters

Compression

Compression

195

Compression

DE

Zone 6

> Two related projects that would expand Transco’s

system and add a new lateral into the NYC area.

> Northeast Connector – 100 MDth/d expansion from

Station 195 to the Rockaway Delivery Lateral.

> Rockaway Delivery Lateral – 3 mile, 647 MDth/d

lateral from the Lower NY Bay Extension to National

Grid on the Rockaway Peninsula.

> In-service date: 2nd half of 2014


Rockaway Delivery Lateral: This takes an Act of

Congress!


Mobile Bay South III

85

> Provides additional firm southbound capacity on Mobile Bay line

– Begins at Station 85

– Extends as far south as the interconnection with FGT at Citronelle

> Shippers are Southern Company for 200 MDth/d and PowerSouth for 25 MDth/d


– Three MB expansions total 858 MDth/d of southward flow

> Target in-service date: 2nd Qtr 2015

84

83

Citronelle M&R

S

S

Bay Gas Storage Southern Pines

Storage

Compression & modifications

Compression

Expand meter station

Compression


Virginia Southside Expansion

Zone 5

Zone 6

Washington, D.C.

Richmond

165 167

175

185

195

160

200 210 Philadelphia

New York

Brunswick

Cascade Creek

> Expansion from Transco’s Zone 6 Station 210 Pooling

Point to Transco’s Cascade Creek, Pleasant Hill and

proposed Brunswick delivery meters on the South Virginia

Lateral.

> Shippers are Dominion Virginia Power for 250 MDth/d and

Piedmont Natural Gas Company for 20 MDth/d.

> Capacity: 270 MDth/d.

> Target in-service date: September 1, 2015.

Pleasant Hill


Leidy Southeast

> Expansion of Transco’s system from various receipt points

along the Leidy Line to east coast markets as far south on

the mainline as Station 85 in Choctaw County, AL.

> 525 MDth/d of firm transportation on 2 firm paths

> Provides access to markets in Zones 6, 5 and 4

> Target in-service date is December 1, 2015

Station 520 PathStation 517 PathZone 6Zone 5Zone 4

Project Shippers: dt/day

> Capitol Energy Ventures Corp. 20,000

> Anadarko Energy Services Company 50,000

> MMGS Inc. 50,000

> Piedmont Natural Gas Company 100,000

> Public Service Company of North Carolina, Inc. 100,000

> South Carolina Electric & Gas Company 40,000

> Washington Gas Light Company 165,000


CPV Woodbridge (FDLS); Rock Springs (FT)

CPV Woodbridge

> New lateral from Transco to serve Competitive Power Ventures’

proposed 725 MW Woodbridge Energy Center in Woodbridge, NJ.

> Service will be provided under Transco’s FDLS.

> Facilities: 2.3 mi. of 20-inch lateral

> Capacity: 264 MDthd

> ISD: April 1, 2015

Rock Springs

> Expansion of Transco’s Mainline from Station 210 to a new

delivery point at the terminus of a new 10.7-mile lateral to serve

Old Dominion Electric Cooperative’s proposed 1,000 MW power

plant in Cecil County, MD.

> Service will be provided under Transco’s FT Service.

> Facilities: 10.7 mi. of 20-inch; compression

> Capacity: 192 MDthd

> ISD: August 1, 2016 210

195

CPV Woodbridge

Rock Springs


Dalton Expansion

210

165

150

140

125 115

195

Zone 4

Zone 5

Zone 6

NC

NJ

PA

DE

MD

VA

GA

SC

130

160

> Expansion from Transco’s Station 210 to interconnections in northern Georgia.

> Facilities include compression, pipe and new interconnections and mainline modifications.

> Capacity: Up to 500 MDth/d.

> Estimated In-service date: August 2016.


Hillabee Lease

85

Hillabee

AL GA

MS

Mo

bile

Ba

y L

ate

ral

> Point-to-point lease with Spectra’s proposed Sabal Trail from Station 85 to a new interconnect in Hillabee, AL.

> Sabal Trail will use lease capacity plus will build a greenfield pipeline to central Florida to serve Florida markets.

> Facilities: Loop and compression

> Capacity: Phased project of 1.1 MMDthd

> Target in-service date: May 2017 (Phase 1)


Atlantic Sunrise

Zone 5

Zone 4

Zone 6 195

85

> Expansion of Transco’s Leidy Line to Mid-Atlantic

and Southeast Markets.

> 450 – 1,000+ MDth/d of firm transportation

> Provides access to markets in Zones 6, 5 and 4

> Target in-service date is July 1, 2017


Gulf Coast Transport Opportunities

85

65

45

30

Zone 2

Zone 3

Zone 4

Golden Pass LNG

Freeport LNG

Sabine Pass LNG

Cameron LNG

Sasol GTL

Trunkline LNG

Nucor Steel

Shell GTL


Constitution Pipeline

Albany

Williams Transco GPL

NJ

NY

PA

CT

MA

NY

Iroquois Wright

&

TGP Line 200

Williams Springville

Gathering System Williams Midstream

Planned Central

Station

Schoharie

Otsego

Delaware

Chenango

Broome

Susquehanna

Wyoming

Bradford

Lackawanna

Wayne

GreeneConstitution

Pipeline

> A 125-mile, 30-inch pipeline connecting Williams’ Midstream System in Susquehanna County, PA to Iroquois Gas Transmission and Tennessee Gas Pipeline in Schoharie County, NY


> Owned (41%) and operated by WPZ; Cabot Oil and Gas owns 25%, Piedmont Constitution Pipeline Company owns 24% and Capitol Energy Ventures (WGL) owns 10%

> Target in-service date: March 2015


Questions???

Greensboro, Georgia October 3rd...Investors are urged to closely consider the disclosures and risk...

Documents

Transcript of Greensboro, Georgia October 3rd...Investors are urged to closely consider the disclosures and risk...