Keith Stanley: Hi. Good morning and congrats as well. Randy, you’ve definitely been one of the most helpful and friendly IR people that I’ve gotten a chance to work with. So thank you. Wanted to start just on the outlook, like the outlook for the year. So understanding, you’re not giving the employee goal for EBITDA for 2024. At a high level, though, you had a lot of momentum exiting 2023 in your results. You have a fair amount of capital and during service with PDH-2 and a couple of plants. You’re still constructive on volumes. Is it fair to say 2024 should be a relatively stronger growth year? Or are there any headwinds or things you would point to versus 2023 that could be an offset?
Jim Teague: This is Jim. I think 2024 is shaping up to be a better year than 2023. It’s not just the assets we’ve brought on. We’re seeing, for example, and Brent’s got some information, our processing margins on what is not fee-based is looking better. You might want to address that.
Brent Secrest: Yes, if we just look at the fourth quarter on what — we have floors in our processing contracts, especially around the Midland Basin. So in the fourth quarter, I think those floors were at around, they were all hit at about 97% of those contracts hit the floor. In fact, December was 100%. So as things get more constructive on gas, we’ll see if that happens. Certainly, there were some benefits in January. We’re seeing some benefits in the current month on NGLs. But that number is probably around 62% in January that hit the floor. So I think from a processing standpoint, there’s definitely benefits across the portfolio that we’ll see.
Keith Stanley: Okay, thank you.
Brent Secrest: It seems like each quarter, we transport more and more hydrocarbons.
Keith Stanley: Right, yes, Q4 volumes are definitely strong.
Randy Fowler: And Keith, this is Randy. I think the other thing is, just as you, I think we’ve, again, we’ve got a pretty good track record that if you look out over time, our average return on capital has been, I mean, it’s when you look at the total company has ranged from 10% to 13%. And then when you come in and you look at the CapEx, specifically the projects that we’re putting into service and the level of capital expenditures that we have, I think what that translates to over a three, four year period is probably mid-single digit EBITDA growth. Now, you’re not going to be able to use a ruler on that number, but that’s about what it works out to be. And then, then you may have some variability in and around that kind of number. But I think if you come back in and just look at what we’ve been able to do in the past and look at the amount of capital investment that we’re making, I think that’s where it would take you.
Jim Teague: The other thing is look at our, our people are relentless in visiting customers and getting new deals. I’ve been shocked at the appetite, for example, for our ethane export doc. And so we’re probably going to build new processing plants in the Permian, and I would expect that we’re going to fill up our ethane export docs and our LPG docs. The other thing we’re seeing is more crude flows to Houston. So we’re seeing more crude across our docs.
Keith Stanley: That’s all very helpful. And Jim, if I can kind of follow up on that last point, the NGL export volumes were very strong in Q4, and you noted the removal of the daylight restrictions helping you. Can you give a sense of how close the company is to its capacity based on that Q4 export number? Are you able to keep increasing exports this year before some of the expansions start up in 2025?
Jim Teague: I think if you look at NGLs as a whole and maybe crude oil, yes. If you look at LPG, I think things are going to be tight in terms of doc space on LPG. That gets resolved probably mid next year, but for 2024 and maybe part of 2025, LPG’s going to be pretty tight. You have something?
Keith Stanley: Thank you.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for questions. Our next question comes from Jean Ann Salisbury with Bernstein. You may proceed.
Jean Ann Salisbury: Hi, good morning. Do you forecast Permian processing utilization staying as tight as it is now over the next couple of years? Said another way, is it a stretch to say that the timing of processing coming on will dictate the pace of Permian growth in your view?
Brent Secrest: I think, Jean Ann, and this is Brent, I expect it to stay tight. When we look at our build out and the contracts that come on, there may be a short little window that there’s excess capacity, but it fills up very quickly. We’ll lean on Tony for his forecast, but what Tony has told us in years past has certainly come true. If not, it’s been even more prolific. And then when you look at capacity right now, I think there is gas that’s being held back in the basin. It’s waiting on compression and it’s waiting on processing capacity.
Brent Secrest: That’s exactly what I was going to say. It’s not just processing. Some of it’s gathering compression in the field that’s behind. Once we see that bottleneck kind of get fixed, we’ll see processing get full very quickly.
Jean Ann Salisbury: That’s very helpful. Thank you. And then one more. There’s some discussion of upcoming Haynesville gas pipelines possibly being delayed due to legal issues. Is there any further expansion potential on Acadian or is that maxed out here?
Brent Secrest: We’re maxed out after our last expansion. I’d say we may be a benefactor if that project is late. However, Haynesville is flat to staying flat. Would you say that, Tony?
Tony Chovanec: Yes. Jean Ann, there’s so much discussion about the Haynesville and what’s going to happen. And honestly, I’m somewhat befuddled by it. And I think that’s the right term. We’ve got LNG coming on in the Louisiana area. The call it is 4.5 to 5 Bcf over the next two years. And that’s a big number. And it has — there’s nothing that the whole permitting thing that has recently happened that Jim addressed so well this morning, it impacts that. So we think that — or we talk like Louisiana and the Haynesville has a chance to go to hell in a hand basket. And I’m sorry. I just don’t see it. Unless I’m missing something. The Haynesville, last but not least, is one of the primary basins for a massive amount of long-term storage of gas reserves. No question about it. So we still see it as an ideal and kind of a cornerstone basin for us relative to natural gas.
Jean Ann Salisbury: Great. Thanks for that, Tony. And thank you, Randy, for all of your help over the years. You’ll be missed. That’s all for me.
Operator: Thank you. One moment for questions. Our next question comes from Spiro Dounis with Citi. You may proceed.
Spiro Dounis: Thanks, operator. Good morning, team. Two very quick follow-ups from me. One, Randy, just want to go back to the distribution growth and follow up on Tristan’s question. The cadence the last two years or so has been an increase about every two quarters, tracking around that 5% annual growth. I know you like to keep us guessing. So as we think going forward, how opportunistic is the distribution growth from here? Or is that something we should really kind of expect going forward?
Randy Fowler: Yes. Spiro, again, I just go back to our track record. We don’t like to get out in front and run our board. But again, I think with the CapEx we’re deploying and the return on capital that we’re expecting to get, I think coming in, and we’ve been increasing distribution 25 years in a row. And I feel pretty good about 2026. And we’ve been doing it around mid-single digits.
Spiro Dounis: All right. Fair enough. Second one, just around M&A, you all purchased some natural gas storage assets around the quarter. Pretty small for you, so I don’t want to read into it too much. But just curious, is this sort of the beginning of a bigger push into natural gas storage? Or is it more opportunistic? As you look at the rest of your asset base, are there more opportunities like this to vote on?
