1. Wyoming Pipeline Authority January 15, 2008
Ruby Pipeline
Ed Miller
EPWP
Dan Fitzgerald
PG&E
Wyoming Pipeline Authority
January 15, 2008

2. El Paso Corporation Overview
El Paso Corporation provides natural gas and related energy products in a safe, efficient, dependable manner. We own North America’s largest natural gas pipeline system and are one of North America’s largest independent natural gas producers. We are organized around regulated and non-regulated businesses.

3. El Paso Pipeline System
Tennessee Gas Pipeline
Wyoming Interstate
Colorado Interstate Gas
Cheyenne Plains Pipeline
Mojave Pipeline
Southern Natural Gas
Elba Island LNG
El Paso Natural Gas
Mexico Ventures
Florida Gas Transmission (50%)
19% of total U.S. interstate pipeline mileage
23 Bcf/d capacity (16% of total U.S.)
16 Bcf/d throughput (28% of gas delivered to U.S. consumers)
Best market connection
Best supply access
Leading pipeline integrity program

4. Ruby Pipeline Map Ruby Pipeline Malin Opal to Malin Opal Hub GTN PG&E
O R E G O N
GTN
I D A H O
Malin
Ruby Pipeline
Opal to Malin
W Y O M I N G
PG&E
Opal Hub
CIG
Tuscarora
WIC
C A L I F .
Paiute
Cheyenne
Cheyenne
Plains
U T A H
Uinta
Basin
N E V A D A
Piceance
Basin
Kern River
C O L O R A D O

5. Ruby Capacity and Facilities
Design and rates are based upon 1.2 Bcf/d of capacity
680 miles from Opal to Malin
42”, 1,440 psig pipe design
Most cost effective design taking fuel and expansion opportunities into consideration
Compressor stations
Opal ~45,400 HP (site rating)
Midpoint ~18,200 HP (site rating)
Fuel from Opal ~0.9%
Four delivery point interconnects and five receipt point interconnects
Expandable to 2 Bcf/d with compression

6. Ruby Highlights to Date
1.2 Bcf/d pipeline from Opal to Malin
Ownership structure
El Paso Western Pipelines
PG&E Corporation
Bear Energy
During past 5 months, Ruby Project has been presented to most Rockies producers and some western markets under Confidentiality Agreements
Ruby filed an application with the BLM in November to construct a pipeline between Opal and Malin
Negotiations with pipe mills and contractors have been ongoing for over 6 months
Estimate has been finalized during this process
Approximately 50% of firm capacity has been committed
Ruby requires firm capacity commitments of 1.2 Bcf/d to be constructed

7. Rockies versus Western Canada Long-Term Production Trends
Canadian Peak
2001 Peak
- 17 Bcfd
El Paso High Case
Best fit of Current Trend:
Peak
- 14 Bcfd Production
El Paso Base Case
El Paso Base case suggest 9,650 Bcfd of export capacity needed (currently 6,200 in 2007) to meet 85% LF requirement
El Paso High case suggest 12,000 Bcfd of export capacity needed (currently 6,200 in 2007) to meet 85% LF requirement
Best Fit Curves Assumes:
- Gaussian Curve
- 320 EUR
- Few environmental constraints
El Paso Base case suggest 9,650 Bcfd of export capacity needed (currently 6,200 in 2007) to meet 85% LF requirement
El Paso High case suggest 12,000 Bcfd of export capacity needed (currently 6,200 in 2007) to meet 85% LF requirement

8. Rocky Mountain Production by Basin
(Volumes are Wellhead – Measured in MMcfd)
: Wellhead total data from IHS database
2006: Estimate
: El Paso forecast

9. Projected Gas Flows with Ruby
Western Canada
Production
Local
Consumption
Exportable
2008
15.69
5.01
10.0
2012
14.32
5.83
8.49
Bcf/d
5.75% fuel
AECO
Total Westbound pipeline capacity
2.6 Bcf/d
Total Eastbound pipeline capacity
12 Bcf/d
3.28% fuel
4.8% to 5.3% fuel NE
NWP
Chicago
Malin (GTN)
1.68%
fuel
1.82% fuel
1.3%
fuel
Ruby
ROX
ROX Basis
Improvement w/Ruby
2012: $0.50-$0.60
2015: $ $1.75
0.9% fuel
NORTHERN
CALIFORNIA
2.98% fuel
Kern
1.3%
fuel TC
1% fuel
San Juan
2.87% fuel
2012 Northern CA Economic Dispatch
2.87% fuel
Projected
2012 Price
w/Ruby
Pipeline
Fuel Only
Dispatch
Malin Price
AECO
7.39
0.251
7.641
ROX
7.52
0.0683
7.588
Ruby gas will be
first through the
meter at Malin

10. Ruby Proposed Next Steps
February-March
Binding
Open Season
October 2008
State Regulatory
Approvals
Jan. 2008
Feb./Mar. 2008
April-Oct. 2008
May 2008
Transporter
Board Approval
January
Ruby Packages
Customer Follow-Up
February
El Paso Upstream
Capacity Open Season
April 2008
Shipper
Board
Approvals

11. Ruby Schedule Highlights
Preliminary route work completed
January
FERC Prefiling
July-November
Route Surveys
and Mapping
March 2011
In-Service
October
Pipe Commitment
July
Commence
Construction
Filed route
with BLM
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
April
Receive Certificate
May
Formal Customer
Discussions
Commence
January
File FERC
Certificate
Application
March
Pipe Option

12. Market Overview

13. U.S. West Coast Distinct Gas Markets
Supplied primarily from two regions:
1. Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin
2. Western Domestic Basins
(Rockies, San Juan and Permian)
Pacific Northwest 600 Bcf/yr
Northern California 835 Bcf/yr
Northern Nevada 65 Bcf/yr
Southern California 965 Bcf/yr

14. Malin Takeaway
Sumas
BRITISH COLUMBIA
2.2 Bcf/d firm takeaway capacity plus displacement on GTN at Malin
Access to west coast market:
Northern/Central California via Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Northern Nevada via Tuscarora Gas Transmission
Pacific Northwest via GTN and indirectly to Williams’ Northwest Pipeline and Avista Utilities
Southern California via deliveries off PG&E system
Access to 82 Bcf of underground storage
PG&E (CA): 42 Bcf
Wild Goose (CA): 24 Bcf *
Lodi (CA): 16 Bcf *
WASHINGTON
Northwest Pipeline
Seattle
Jackson Prairie
Mist
Portland
GTN
IDAHO
OREGON
Malin
Ruby
Tuscarora Gas Transmission
CALIFORNIA
NEVADA
PG&E Area of Detail
PG&E
Line 400
Wild Goose
Line 401
Pleasant Creek
Lodi
San Francisco
Los Medanos
McDonald
Island
Line 401
Line 300
* Currently being expanded
Natural Gas Storage
Line 2

15. Northern/Central California Market 2006 Demand
2006 annual gas demand of 835 Bcf
Annual growth forecasted at 1.3% through 2025
Results in incremental requirement of 67 Bcf of annual gas demand by 2012
2006 peak day demand was 3.5 Bcf (2007 peak day of 3.9 Bcf)
PG&E, Wild Goose and Lodi storage fields serve peak day demands
Two strong gas demand periods
Winter: Large residential demand
Summer: Large gas-fired generation load and storage injections
4.0
3.5
3.0
Bcf/day
2.5
2.0
1.5
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Sources: 2006 California Gas Report and PG&E CGT Pipe Ranger

16. Northern Nevada Market 2006 Demand
Annual gas demand of 64 Bcf
Annual growth forecasted at 4.0% through 2016
Results in incremental requirement of 17 Bcf of annual gas demand by 2012
Seasonal demand
2006 Peak day demand was 0.32 Bcf
Lovelock LNG storage (1.0 Bcf) located near Reno, NV serve peak day demands
Ruby interconnects with both Paiute (near Lovelock) and Tuscarora (at Malin)
0.35
Seasonal Market with a Winter Peak
0.30
0.25
0.20
Bcf/day
0.15
0.10
0.05
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec

17. Pipelines in Northern Nevada
Northern Nevada is served via two pipelines (Tuscarora and Paiute)
Paiute Pipeline
Largest customers: SWG, Sierra Pacific
96% of transport contracts
155 MDth/d receipt capacity from NWPL
~75 MMcf/d sources from Canadian supply
NWPL contracts expire by 2009
System operates at an average load factor of 71%
Tuscarora Gas Transmission
Largest customers: Sierra Pacific, SWG, Barrick Gold
Represent 96% of transport
Certificate issued 7/24/07 for an expansion of 40 MDth/d that will serve the Tracy Power Plant (514 MW)
22.5-year contract with Sierra Pacific Power (40 MDth) upstream of Malin
SWG and Barrick do not hold capacity on upstream pipe
Northwest Pipeline
GTN
IDAHO
OREGON
Malin
RUBY
PG&E
Tuscarora
0.17 Bcf/d
UTAH
0.2 Bcf/d
Paiute
CALIFORNIA
Reno
NEVADA

18. Pacific Northwest (PNW) Market 2006 Demand
Sumas
BRITISH COLUMBIA
Kingsgate
WASHINGTON
Northwest Pipeline
Seattle
3.5
3.0 s
Jackson Prairie
MIST
2.5 s
Portland
IDAHO
NWN
GTN
Bcf/day
2.0
OREGON
1.5
1.0
Malin
0.5
NEVADA
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual gas demand of 600 Bcf
Annual growth forecasted at 2.1% through 2012
Results in incremental requirement of 80 Bcf of annual gas demand by 2012
2006 peak day demand was 2.9 Bcf
Jackson Prairie, MIST and Clay Basin storage fields serve peak day demands
Gas-fired power generation load varies depending on hydro power availability
Demand is more seasonal
Sources: Northwest Gas Association 2006 Outlook and Northwest Pipeline and GTN Scheduled Volumes

19. Contacts El Paso Western Pipelines PG&E Bear Energy Ed Miller
Business Development
Roland Harris
Russ Council
Engineering
Jennifer Webster
Government Affairs
Dan Fitzgerald
Jeff Rawls
Bear Energy

20. Wyoming Pipeline Authority January 15, 2008
Ruby Pipeline
Ed Miller
EPWP
Dan Fitzgerald
PG&E
Wyoming Pipeline Authority
January 15, 2008