Good morning. My name is Roy Lamoreaux, Director of Investor Relations. We welcome you to Plains All American Pipeline and PAA Natural Gas Storage's Second Quarter Results Conference Call. The slide presentation for today's call is available under the conference call tab at the Investor Relations section of our website at www.paalp.com and www.pnglp.com. Before we get started with our prepared comments, I would mention that throughout the call, we'll refer to the companies by their respective New York Stock Exchange ticker symbols of PAA and PNG, respectively. As a reminder, Plains All American owns the 2% general partner interest and approximately 62% of the limited partner interest in PNG, which accordingly has been consolidated into PAA's results. In addition to reviewing recent results, we'll provide forward-looking comments on the partnership's outlook for the future. In order to avail ourselves the Safe Harbor precepts that encourage companies to provide this type of information, we direct you to the risks and warnings set forth in our most recent and future filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Today's presentation will also include references to certain non-GAAP financial measures such as EBIT and EBITDA. The non-GAAP Reconciliation section of our website reconciles certain non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures and provides a table of selected items that impact comparability of the partnership's reported financial information. References to adjusted financial metrics exclude the effect of these selected items. Also for PAA, all references to net income are references to net income attributable to Plain's. Today's call will be chaired by Greg L. Armstrong, Chairman and CEO of PAA and PNG. Also participating on the call are Harry Pefanis, President and COO of PAA and Vice Chairman of PNG; Dean Liollio, President of PNG; and Al Swanson, Executive Vice President and CFO of PAA and PNG. In addition to these gentlemen and myself, we'll have several other members of our management team present and available for the question-and-answer session. With that, I'll turn the call over to Greg.

Thanks, Roy. Good morning, and welcome to everyone. During today's call, we will discuss PAA's second quarter operating and financial results, our 2011 capital program, our financial position, our updated guidance for the third quarter and the remainder of 2011 as well as our overall outlook. We would also address similar information for PNG as well as provide an update on the natural gas storage markets. Yesterday after market closed, Plains All American announced second quarter adjusted EBITDA of $366 million exceeding the high end of our guidance by $46 million, which is $61 million above the midpoint of the guidance range. As shown on Slide 3, adjusted EBITDA, adjusted net income and adjusted net income per diluted unit for the second quarter of 2011 increased 48%, 87% and 96%, respectively over last year's second quarter and each were favorable compared to guidance. PAA's results were driven by solid performance in all 3 segments with the Supply and Logistics segment being the largest contributor to overperformance. Notably this overperformance includes the adverse impact of the Rainbow release which Harry and Al will discuss in their part of the call. As shown on Slide 4, our second quarter results mark the 38th consecutive quarter of delivering results in line with or above guidance. Yesterday evening, we furnished financial and operating guidance for the third quarter and the balance of the year, increasing the midpoint of our full year 2011 guidance by $89 million. Additionally, last month, PAA declared a 4.2% year-over-year increase in our run rate distribution to $3.93 per unit on an annualized basis. As for the distribution payable next week, PAA will have increased its distribution in each of the last 8 quarters and 27 out of the last 29 quarters. As highlighted by our strong results, the energy environment continues to be very favorable for PAA's assets and business model. PAA has executed well in this environment and we are on track to meet or exceed our 2011 goals. At the end of the day's call, I will provide some additional comments on our distribution outlook for both PAA and PNG, but for now, let me turn the call over to Harry.

Thanks, Greg. During my portion on the call, I'll review our second quarter operating results compared to the midpoint of our guidance issued on May 4, 2011, discuss the operational assumptions used to generate our guidance for the third quarter and discuss our capital program. Dean will cover the PNG-specific information in a moment. As shown on Slide 5, adjusted segment profit for the Transportation segment was $137 million or $0.49 per barrel which was in line with our midpoint guidance. Volumes in the segment were a little more than 3 million barrels per day and were also in line with our guidance, with stronger volumes on basin, our Line 63/2000 system and at the Permian Basin area systems partially offsetting lower volumes or lower than forecasted volumes of our refined products systems and the Rainbow Pipeline. As noted in our press releases and our website update, we experienced a release on the Rainbow pipeline on April 29. The release site has been repaired, clean up efforts are ongoing and we're currently waiting on regulatory approval to place the line back in service. The aggregate second quarter economic impact totaled approximately $23 million net of expected insurance reimbursements. And Al will provide additional detail on this estimate and the cost during his part of the call. Looking forward, we're cautiously optimistic that we'll receive regulatory approval to place the line back in service in the third quarter. However, for purposes of our guidance, we've modeled the restart in the fourth quarter of this year. Moving on to the Facilities segment, adjusted segment profit for the facilities segment was $91 million or $0.37 per barrel, which totaled about $5 million above the midpoint of our guidance. Primary drivers of the overperformance were higher throughput-related fees in certain of our liquid terminal…

Thanks, Harry. In my part of the call, I will review PNG's second quarter operating and financial results and provide an update on operational activities at each of our facilities. I will also review our updated assessment of the current market conditions with respect to natural gas storage. As shown on Slide 9, PNG announced solid second quarter 2011 results, including adjusted EBITDA of $27.5 million, adjusted net income of $17.1 million and adjusted net income per diluted unit of $0.23, each of which reflects performance above the midpoint of our guidance range. This overperformance relative to midpoint guidance is primarily due to favorable Hub Services performance as well as lower expenses than forecast. A portion of the higher Hub Services revenue is due to the accelerated realization of certain short-term opportunities that were previously forecast to be recognized in the last half of the year. This timing adjustment has been factored into the guidance we issued yesterday evening. Let me give you a quick update on activities in each of our storage facilities. At Pine Prairie, we placed cavern well 4 into storage service during the second quarter with an initial working capacity of over 8 Bcf. Including capacity additions due to fill and dewater activities, Pine Prairie's total working capacity is now over 32 Bcf. Leaching operations on cavern well 5 at Pine Prairie are fully underway and we remain on track to bring that cavern into storage service during the second quarter of 2012. Through cavern well 5 and opportunistic fill/dewater activities over the next 12 months, we anticipate increasing Pine Prairie's working capacity by an additional 9 Bcf to 10 Bcf, which would further increase the total working capacity of Pine Prairie to over 40 Bcf. At Bluewater, we completed drilling 2 additional fluid withdrawal wells.…

Thanks, Dean. During my portion of the call, I will discuss capitalization and liquidity and provide comments on PAA's guidance for the third quarter and full year of 2011, as well as provide a summary of the financial impacts of the Rainbow incident. As summarized on Slide 16, PAA exited the second quarter 2011 with solid capitalization, approximately $2.2 billion of committed liquidity and credit metrics that are favorable to our targets. At June 30, PAA's adjusted long-term debt-to-capitalization ratio was 44% and our total debt-to-capitalization ratio was 49%. Our adjusted long-term debt balance was approximately $4.5 billion, which includes $500 million of notes used to fund hedged inventory. The total debt ratio includes $1 billion of adjusted short-term debt that supports our hedged inventory. This debt is essentially self-liquidating from the cash proceeds when we sell the inventory. For reference, our short-term hedged inventory at June 30, 2011 consisted of approximately 17 million barrels equivalent with an aggregate value of $1.45 billion. Our adjusted long-term debt to adjusted EBITDA ratio was 3.2x, and our adjusted EBITDA to interest coverage ratio was 5.9x. As shown on Slide 17, PAA's consolidated long-term debt primarily consists of senior unsecured notes and including balances outstanding on the revolving credit facilities, has an average tenure of approximately 9 years. We have no maturities until September 2012 and approximately 93% of our long-term debt balance is fixed in an average rate of 5.9%. I'll now move on to our guidance. The high point of our third quarter and annual 2011 guidance are summarized on Slide 18. For a more detailed information, please refer to the 8-K that we furnished last night. We are forecasting adjusted EBITDA for the third quarter of 2011 to range from $310 million to $340 million with an adjusted net income…

Thanks, Al. As highlighted throughout today's call, PAA delivered excellent first half performance, reinforcing our belief that PAA's assets and business model are well positioned for the current environment. On the strength of this performance and our positive outlook in the second half of the year, we have increased the midpoint of our full year guidance for the second time and are currently targeting adjusted EBITDA for 2011 of $1,384,000,000. This represents a 13% increase over the $1,225,000,000 provided in the beginning of 2011. We have also increased our quarterly distribution in each of February, May and August and are on track to meet our distribution goal for 2011, which is to pay a distribution in November of 2011 that is 4% to 5% higher than the distribution paid in November 2010. Looking beyond 2011, we believe PAA is well positioned to deliver 3% to 5% distribution growth for the next few years, primarily through the advancement and execution of our large portfolio of organic projects. Furthermore, we remain very active and disciplined on the acquisition front. Based on our historical experiences, the addition of meaningful acquisitions will further enhance and extend our visibility and capacity for distribution growth over time. I also want to make a few comments regarding PAA Natural Gas Storage or PNG. On a consolidated basis the Natural Gas Storage business is small relative to PAA as PNG comprises less than 8% of PAA's total adjusted EBITDA. Accordingly, at this early stage in PNG's growth cycle, even a material variation performance of PNG has a very minor impact on PAA. Nonetheless, PNG is a separate publicly traded entity under PAA's umbrella and our relationships with all of our stakeholders at PAA are very important to us. As Dean highlighted in his comments, the controllable aspects of…

[Operator Instructions] The first question is from the line of Brian Zarahn.

On PNG, can you discuss a little bit more about your long-term outlook for a distribution growth?

Brian, I can't add much more than what I put in the call. I think as we look out, clearly, as the slide that's still up on the screen, if you're looking at it, it shows we're going to add a lot of low cost storage. I think part of it just depends on what rates we put on that storage and as it affects recontracting rates. We feel good about $1.43 both because of the structural positioning relative to as it affects Series B, and we feel good about our ability to execute on our plan. What we just don't know right now is there's just not a lot of visibility in the future on distribution rates. If we had to model here and you can put your inputs into it, we can spit that answer out. But obviously, we can't control what's going on in the market.

Turning to lease gathering volumes. Can you provide some more detail on the transportation logistic issues you discussed during the call that affected volumes a little bit, but also helped generate high margins?

Some of it was weather related, some of it was just getting the equipment and service that we had some timing delays on delivery of equipment on recent contractors. So a combination of those 3 really drove some of the volume differences. And we also had some lower margin volumes that we ended up not renewing in the quarter so a couple of components of the logistical issues.

The weather, Brian, we're in the Rockies, Upper Midwest area where you had all the rains. And so if [indiscernible].

And how sustainable do you think these high lease capping margins are?

For the foreseeable future, that is to say the next 6 to 18 months, it varies by region. Part of the reason why you have the higher margins, Brian, is just simply there's an excess of production capacity relative to pipeline takeaway capacity. So there's -- people are basically pricing in the margins to bring the assets, the movable assets to trucks and rail to those areas. Ultimately, over the long term, pipelines will get built if the volumes are sustainable, and margins will come down. For companies that have -- that are building the pipelines and also are entering into longer-term contracts for the supply, I think we're going to capture a fair portion of that. And I think that's what Al was referring to when he said we think a lot -- a portion of this is sustainable. But clearly, a portion of it are market aberrations. You've got really wide differentials right now for other reasons, and I think we all agree that in 2 or 3 years, a lot of those issues are going to go away because pipelines are going to it built out of Cushing, et cetera. So it really varies region by region by region, wouldn't you say, Harry?

It does, yes.

The next question is from the line of Stephen Maresca.

One question on oil and one question on gas. Where are you seeing most of the bottlenecks, the biggest bottlenecks right now in the oil side? And as a subset to that, what can you -- what color can you give in terms of Cushing right now in terms of inventory levels or how much has been drawn down or how much of a bottleneck is still there?

It's about 36 million barrels of crude in storage in Cushing. A fair amount of it, some of it's operational. You're always going to have an operational and just a pipeline hub where clients come in and buy time on the pipes and get distributed out to refineries in smaller volumes. So the volumes have come off the peaks. As I said, there's still about 36 million barrels of storage sitting in Cushing. As far as -- I think you asked for what some of the logistical issues were...

Where do you see the biggest couple of logistical issues right now?

The Eagle Ford has to be one of the largest. There's a lot drilling going on in the Eagle Ford, a lot of rigs running and very little pipeline infrastructure. So right now, trucks are moving the vast majority of the excess volumes that came from pipes. There's also some rail facilities that are being placed in service. We have access to rail facilities starting this month in the Eagle Ford so that will help alleviate some of it. Bakken, another area where we've got transportation strengths. You're starting to see even a little bit in some areas of Western Oklahoma and West Texas as well.

Stephen, if you recall a couple conference calls, and I caught grief from a few people because I used an analogy of basically it's like trying to shoot a bird in a crossing pattern and the wind's blowing from different directions. What's happening is each area has, again, its own signature. For example, the Eagle Ford -- as Harry just mentioned -- There's really an absence of a main infrastructure there to move crude oil out, but there's a lot being built. I think there's been 5 projects being announced. There's a lot of rail solutions coming into play there. The Bakken, that's an immature area, but the solutions are on the way. The Bakken is a maturing area, but because production continues to ramp up, a lot of the solutions have been put in place, have not been adequate to solve the problem. So you need incrementally more. So there's still more rail and more pipeline solutions coming up. And so it's -- that's the cross winds I was mentioning earlier. The bird's not staying in one place. It's flying across. And weather delays like we had in the second quarter have affected also some of the logistical projects that are being advanced. So really, I think, Harry hit it. It's the Bakken, the Eagle Ford, West Texas and Oklahoma. But every one of them has a unique set of circumstances that dictate what the bottlenecks are. And then, in the bigger picture at Cushing, as you referenced, you've got probably, and we've said this publicly, we think there's probably 55,000 to 60,000 barrels a day imbalance of crude coming in versus crude going out. But some of these solutions we talked about, for example, Bakken there's new crude being rerouted away from Cushing. It's taken some of that pressure off, but at the same time, there's more crude production coming from West Texas and the logical home for that is in Cushing. So it's probably fair to say that for the next 12 to 18 months in general, there's going to be pockets of these imbalances, and there's going to be shorter-terms solutions, and then inevitably there maybe some overkill that goes on with respect to some of the longer-term solutions so we end up with too much pipe coming out of there. But it's hard to forecast that at this point in time because you don't know which of the many projects that have been announced are actually going to get done.

Let me just add just on the West Texas comment. Really, it's kind of a little different than the other areas because they have an infrastructure in West Texas. It's mainly access to trucks. So we're sort of looking forward trying to get ahead of the curve. That was the reason we expanded Mesa. You're not seeing constraints on those export pipelines today. But the constraint there is really the extensions in some of the areas like the Bone Spring, the Avalon where infrastructure isn't quite out that far, from trucking equipment to bring volumes into the existing infrastructure.

My last question is on the gas side and thanks for all the color on it. Considering PNG is your growth platform, you do have a longer-term view on it. And the stock is relative to the market bumpiness, held relatively well and some of your other peers have not in terms of the gas storage stocks. Is this indicative of what you think is going to happen in terms of the acquisition market? Are there going to be -- are seller prices going to come down? Does it benefit you at PNG to get bigger? Does that help you get into different areas if the opportunity presents itself? Is it something that you're actively looking to do with your currency? In my view, still bringing very good for you.

We form PNG to be able to have a better currency, as you referenced, to actually to build out that platform. I guess the short answer to your question is do we want to get big in that area? Absolutely. And that's really why we created PNG. These market conditions are frustrating with respect to the expectations you have with existing assets. But it actually, I think, could prove favorable for acquisitions and consolidation. As to whether the acquisition multiples come down, time will tell. But I think we're better positioned than most, and we certainly have a favorable view toward trying to build that platform and we're pretty creative, I think, about how we could attack some of those opportunities. So I think it's going to take a little bit of time to set in. You may recall, we first announced that we thought the market was started to soften, I believe, in our July or August call of 2010. And I think we were probably 5 or 6 months ahead of the recognition in the industry in general. Having said that, we still didn't see it coming as severe as it has. So I don't want to take too much credit for that. But I think it's taken a while for the reality to set in that rates have fallen as far and as fast as they really have. And we prepared, and I said, we tried to put the contracts in place and we made sure we have the ability to add capacity at low cost. So we've got everything settled in for PNG's existing assets and we're looking to add more.

The next question is from the line of Darren Horowitz. Darren Horowitz - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: Greg, I just have one quick question, and it goes back to a point that Harry was just talking about with all the recent announcements around crude oil and condensate volumes ramping out of the Eagle Ford and West Texas and a lot of that being pointed to Cushing and possibly even some down to Corpus [Corpus Christi]. So I was curious, with the competitive landscape changing, that's got to mean more opportunity for you guys. And in particular, I'm thinking beyond the capacity additions on basin, beyond what you're doing with that Bone Springs project, which I think is going to get about 65,000 more barrels into Cushing. But as you think about getting a lot of those volumes east, those systems in particular are in a great position to continue to leverage off of. So can you just give us some insight, maybe as it relates to the next 6 to 18 months thought process as you continue to see a lot of those Gulf Coast crude oil logistics change?

I commented on sort of the prepared remarks. I mean, we're seeing an unprecedented number of opportunities in the areas where we have assets; a lot of the build out, a lot of expansions, some new pipeline opportunities. Not all of them we're able to talk about today and, you know, so we couple those with, alright now, how do you get crude to the right location because it can't all go towards Cushing. And that's why we think rail's going to be an important component of it -- with our Wascana reversal takes crude out of the -- crude that would otherwise move into the Cushing quarter and moves it further east. We like our Eagle Ford project because it has the capacity to deliver crude to refiners, but also get on the water and move to multiple locations once it's on the water. So I think we've got a backlog of opportunities that we're pursuing.

I'll have to say Darren, we have really 2 primary types of customers in the oil or liquids business. We have customers on the demand-driven side of our business, which are primarily the refineries. And then we have the customers on the supply-driven side, which are the producers. And our job is to make sure we provide services to both of those. We would love to be able to be the only transporter of crude in any given area, but the reality is we don't own or control. There's a lot of competition out there. So for example, in the Mesa pipeline, we work to try, with some logistics, to try and make sure that as production volumes ramp up in West Texas, we work together to make sure we can get them all out of there because it doesn't do us any good to have crude oil stranded. So with the expansion of Mesa, I think it's about 110,000 barrels of oil a day, the expansion of basin and then Sun is working on their West Texas Gulf to increase its capacity and get different markets. I think it's good for all of us. And it's good for the producers, and we've tried to get ahead of it there. So it and then there's some competitive areas where as much as we work with Sun Logistics in certain areas, we're also trying to compete with them to capture opportunities. So it's a little bit hard for us to give you much more color than we have without showing our playbook. And as you know, these conference calls are available to anybody. So I'd be surprised if some of our competitors aren't listening to our comments and I assure you we're going to listen to theirs. Darren Horowitz - Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: On one point that you made, though, as you're talking to producers, how big of an opportunity do you think it's going to be and not just for the latter Eagle Ford type crude oil, but also the condensates, to leverage that footprint in St. James to get a lot more of their product to the Patoka market, but even beyond Patoka and possibly even get into the Northeast. I mean, it would seem to me on a go-forward basis, especially with a lot of the Cushing to Gulf Coast projects announced whether or not they all get built, you're going to have a significant regional pricing opportunity leveraging St. James. Am I thinking about that the right way?

I think you are, except to realize that as soon as you develop a solution for the pricing differentials then they come in very significantly. You've seen it already happened in the gas business. They used to have big, wide regional differentials for natural gas. Everybody built new pipelines, then it all went away. So I think some of those are temporal. I think what we are focused in on doing because we're an MLP that distributes cash flow, we want to distribute and have a solid distribution base and we want to be able to increase over time. We're going to capture some of those low-hanging fruits but they won't be there for an extended period of time. What we're going to do is try to make sure that we permutize a lot of those margins through having the right infrastructure to connect it all together. And I think you are correct. If your question is the St. James going to be an important part of that solution? Absolutely, as well Patoka. I think something that's starting to be recognized in the industry is when you look at what's coming out of Eagle Ford, what's coming out of Bakken, what's -- what could be coming out of areas such as Utica Shale and things like that, these are very light volumes. And so you're talking about probably an aggregate, no matter whose story you believe, at least over 1 million barrels a day, a very light product. And it's going to change the dynamics in an industry that's been gearing up for heavy or sour product. And I think Patoka, St. James and Corpus Christi are part of those solutions, as well Cushing, continue to be an important player there. And we're represented all those areas so we sort of like where we're at.

And I'll just add on to what Greg said, just we've got a rail offload facility at Patoka. We're doubling that capacity at St. James. We're doubling our capacity. And obviously, as we look at rail infrastructure in some of these basins, we're also looking at alternative markets for the rail as well. Just not far enough along to discuss all the projects we're looking at.

Our next question comes from the line of Michael Blum.

Two quick questions for me. One, really, I guess on the PAA side, given all the recent negative economic data that's been coming out on the U.S. economy and globally, really, I was just sort of wondering what kind of baseline economic environment is baked into your guidance for the rest of the year at PAA?

Well, at the risk of always sounding like we think the sky is falling in certain areas, I think if you recall a little over a year ago, we came out and shared that we thought it was going to be a tough economy and tough sledding in general, and we still think so. I don't think anything has changed our outlook there. So we kind of run our numbers off of the near term of GDP growth of sub-3%, which is certainly not an exciting thought. We think interest rates are going to fluctuate quite a bit because there's a combination of international issues that are going on too, that it's just hard to predict where those are going to go. But we bake in a longer-term cost of debt capital in the 5% to 10%, let's give you 5% to 6% range, versus currently LIBOR's at sub-1%. We just don't view that as permanent capital. As far as if you were to ask us what we're physically setting up for the demand side of our equation, I mentioned earlier we've got a demand-driven side, we got a supply-driven side. On the demand-driven side, I think here we're running probably kind of an outlook for 19.3 million to 19.5 million barrels a day of petroleum demand in the U.S., which is about where it's running. It says it doesn't get much better any time soon. A unique aspect that's happened, I'll say unique, an interesting aspect that's happened over the last 4 or 5 years is the refineries are still running at fairly high run rates even though the demand is down almost 9% from 20.7 million barrels to 19.3, the issue that's offset that is the ability of exports and the reduction of refined products imports. So we've…

The other question I had was on PNG. So you've sort of recalibrated your expectations around distribution increases there. I'm curious what your thought is in terms of reevaluating all of the expansions that you have lined up at those facilities, really. And is there a thought to reevaluate that given how if the market persists at this sort of level for a sustained period?

Depending upon which of the scenarios that you wanted to embrace that we run, I mentioned earlier we run several. Even at -- so our capital program in years 2, 3 and 4 from today look different under each one of those just whether we drill more caverns at either in Pine Prairie or Southern Pines. But what doesn't really vary between any of those scenarios is the ability to capture some incremental volumes at very attractive prices. On, I think, Slide 19, we were showing that we can basically increase our capacity about 50% from where we are right now. And 75% of that increase is in the high performance basalt [ph] cavern is, excuse me, 75% growth of basalt [ph] is basically a combination of fill/dewaters and snubbing [ph] . And that cost per Bcf is in the $3 million to $4 million range. So consequently even at these rates, we're still able to generate 20% and 30% rate of return by adding that space. So we're going to do those because we do think these are market conditions that are self-correcting. You can imagine what the economics look like if we build that out at that cost and then it comes back at a higher level. But we will moderate what I call the significant capital test, drilling a new cavern, putting new pipelines, et cetera because today, even though we think we can do it cheaper than almost anybody else in basalt [ph] , those rate of returns are probably closer to the 11%. And there's still some risk of some downside pressure there so why take that? But when you run your worst case scenario and you still come up with 20% rate of returns, it's not a bad solution.

The next question is from the line of John Edwards. John Edwards - Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc.: I'm just curious, I don't know if you even break it out this way, but in terms of your logistics or I guess what you used to call marketing, I'm just curious in terms of capturing, I guess, the differentials between WTI and LL, Louisiana Light Sweet and Brent, obviously -- I mean, are you getting more of this from truck, rail, barge? I mean, in terms of your assets, you're talking a little bit about trucks. Is that where you're capturing most of it? And is there any sense you can give us about approximately percentages or is that -- I don't know how much detail you can give.

Let me see if I can answer it this way because I can't give you a direct answer. If you said -- we got 6 floors here and 3 out in the center, and if you get on there, no matter hope who steps on the elevator bank lift, if you ask them if they're busy, they all say, "More than I've ever been." So the answer is yes to rail, yes to truck, yes to pipeline, yes to the arbitrage opportunities in the market. It's really across the board. I think what you should take away is we had a stellar second quarter. We guided to a third quarter that's above what we would have given at the beginning of the year, but still below what we've given you for the second quarter. And so we try not to include in our forecast that which may come, but we really can't be certain about. And so for the visible period, I think the guidance we're giving for the second half as indicated what we think is a combination of baseline plus market opportunities that we would have locked in or highly confident we'll lock in and if the market continues to stay in this type of a volatility and kind of favorable conditions for the reasons you described, I think there is an upward bias to the midpoint of our performance. John Edwards - Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc.: And then how much additional capture do you think you can get? I mean, obviously, there's a number of reports out indicating that the spread could widen even further next year on the order of $40 to $50. How would that roughly translate in terms of upside potential capture?

Our crystal ball is just not that good and anybody that thinks they can predict $40 to $50 spreads out there, I think I shouldn't be telling you, but they ought to be beaten. My bad. But at least, they're probably selling reports as opposed to putting your money at risk. But I would tell you this, never underestimate the market's ability to solve problems. And if there's a wide enough differential out there for any extended period of time, somebody's going to build an asset or develop or reversal pipeline to do something to take that away. We just never seen those -- it just doesn't make sense. So I think part of these -- those are the transient type things and we'll certainly try to participate in, but we're not going to expend a tremendous amount of capital betting that those to stay out there and that we can capture them over an extended period of time. John Edwards - Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc.: And then just last question. I mean, with the favorable trade, it looks sustainable at least for the next 6 to 18 months at least, probably on the longer side of that. Does that change your thinking on your distribution growth outlook at all to bump that up at all? Are you still going to stick with the kind of 3% to 5%?

I think we're going to stick over an extended period of time to 3% to 5% because we believe we have that under our control to the extent that there are opportunities or that these things mature into sustainable margins, et cetera, I think we certainly have an upper class to that. This year, we guided to the upper end of that 3% to 5%. We said in the 4% to 5% range, and we're certainly on track to achieve very close to, if not near the very top of that range. And I think what most of our investors, over time, really want is if we could raise it, John, and you tell me if we could raise it 7% this year and I had to drop to 3% next year because of things that I can't control, is that better than having two 4.5% raises year-over-year and being able to extend that out? Our belief is, is that our investors want stability. We think we represent -- we're not government -- we're not excellent on risk. I'm not sure if I want to be a government risk. But we think we're very low risk because of the way we run our business and the fact that we underpin and really worry about the downside and still have an ability to capture the upside. And so I think kind of have what I call jack rabbit races where it goes up one year and then comes down the next year. And I can't give you any visibility to what it will be 2 years out. It's not nearly as valuable as saying buy us, we're going to deliver 3% to 5% growth with an upward bias and that's kind of probably where we'll stay.

[Operator Instructions] Please continue. There are no further questions.

Shannon, thank you. Thanks for everybody for participating in the call. I know it's a very busy day for conference calls. And so for those that are able to participate, thank you very much. For those that are going to listen to the replay, thank you for dialing into that, too. We'll sign off. Thanks.

Ladies and gentlemen, that does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for your participation and for using AT&T Executive Teleconference. You may now disconnect.