So that’s really a focus. As far as additional opportunities, I think the Blue Racer example is another great one. We’ve been focused on cleaning up inefficiencies within our business. The team has been very successful, both within our commercial core dev and operating teams in finding opportunities to further take efficiency out of the business. And that’s actually the last of the non-operated joint ventures that we participate in. So we’ve made great progress and again, taking that kind of inefficient structure out of the business. And we’ll continue to look for opportunities to do that. And with the scale and geographic footprint like ours, these low-risk, high-value bolt-ons, I think, will continue to be opportunities.
Theresa Chen: Got it. And thus far into fourth quarter, can you provide some color on the progress made to date on the marketing efforts, just given the seasonal tailwinds this winter?
Chad Zamarin: Yes. I’d say it’s too early to really speculate the winner is just getting started. We’ve got – I mean, the great thing about the Sequent platform is it’s set up to be a very low risk platform, and we can sit and be opportunistic as weather events materialize. But at this point, we’re going to continue to remain cautious on kind of over-interpreting or trying to over predict the weather itself. And so we’re well set up well positioned for the winter, if we see dislocations. But remember that as that asset, that footprint is primarily structured for basis differentials and differentials in time and so we’ll continue to watch the weather play out. But right now, we feel pretty good how we’re set up.
Theresa Chen: Thank you.
Operator: We’ll go next now to Jean Ann Saulsbury at Bernstein.
Jean Ann Saulsbury: Hi good morning. Congrats on the Southeast Supply Enhancement precedent agreements. I just had a couple of questions on that. Does the spin start when MVP goes in service, and therefore, kind of the clock. So the 4Q 2027, if basically MVP starts a lot later than expected, that would also push back?
Alan Armstrong: No. Well, just to be clear, the agreements go – the clock starts on those agreements for 20 years when we place the expansion in service. And so that was the reference to 2047. I would say it’s pretty optimistic to think we would have that in service in 2027, certainly would be probably the latter part of that just timing standpoint. But that’s – obviously, we’ve set it up for permitting success, so we may be able to do that, but that was a reference to that. So it doesn’t – the timing doesn’t have any of those terms don’t have anything to do with Mountain Valley Pipeline. They are, many of those agreements are dependent on Mountain Valley Pipeline coming into service. But not under that timeline.
Jean Ann Saulsbury: Got it. Yes, I think I meant more for you to have the project online. If Mountain Valley gets pushed, would your start date also kind of get pushed because you would wait to start working on it.
Alan Armstrong: Yes. Sorry, Jean. I’m sorry, I didn’t understand your question. Yes. I would just say if that didn’t get done, I think it’s very low probability that over between now and 2027 that it wouldn’t be placed in service, but that’s what you’re suggesting, then we would probably have – those markets are going to have to have supplies from somewhere. And so we would have to come up with another way of getting those supplies to them, which would be a bigger project.
Jean Ann Saulsbury: Got it. That makes sense. And is it all going to be kind of the 1.4 Bcfd, and kind of all one day kind of shows up – not one day, but at one time? Or could it be sort of phased in gradually leading up to the final.
Alan Armstrong: Right now, our plans would be for it to all come on at once.
Jean Ann Saulsbury: Got it. And then another follow-up. I think most people believe that we’re entering a period of significantly more volatility in gas price both in regional spreads and in time spreads. Can you kind of just walk us through the specific part of Williams portfolio that would benefit from this over time versus this year, which wasn’t particularly volatile? I know that there’s sequence, obviously, in but also sort of market rate storage, the gas-linked gathering contracts that you referred to, et cetera?
Alan Armstrong: Yes. Sure. Chad, do you want to take that?
Chad Zamarin: Yes. I think you mentioned several of them. I think the fundamental base business benefits, I mean, at the end of the day, pipeline infrastructure is built to mitigate basis. I mean, so we like the setup certainly near term from a marketing, from a storage and optimization perspective. It’s obviously drives the need for our producers and our supply areas to be better connected to different markets. But ultimately, volatility and basis differentials are what drive value across our core infrastructure. And that’s why we think we’re set up so well to continue to grow our base business and layer in is kind of the cherry on top, layer in these other assets and capabilities that capture that volatility. But at the end of the day, our business is converting volatility in infrastructure, and that’s really what we’re focused on.
And we think we’re really well set up to follow basis differentials and volatility and bring infrastructure solutions to help mitigate that long term.
Jean Ann Saulsbury: Makes a lot of sense. Thank you.
Chad Zamarin: Thanks.
Operator: Thank you. We’ll go next now to Brian Reynolds at UBS.
Brian Reynolds: Hi good morning everyone. Maybe to peak ahead to 2024, excluding today’s acquisitions. We have some tailwinds around full year Mountain West and some small expansions also by some hedging headwinds, it seems like, but kind of just curious if you can maybe just talk about the existing base business and whether there are any rising ties as it relates to volumes or kind of what Jean Ann alluded to some nat gas storage opportunities or margin uplift that could move the needle one way or the other next year as we think about just the 2024 versus 2023? Thanks.
