June 30, Ms. Kavita Kale Executive Secretary Michigan Public Service Commission 7109 W. Saginaw Highway Lansing, MI 48917

Transcription

1 Founded in 1852 by Sidney Davy Miller PUL MICHEL COLLINS TEL (517) FX (517) E-MIL Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. One Michigan venue, Suite 900 Lansing, Michigan TEL (517) FX (517) June 30, 2017 MICHIGN: nn rbor Detroit Grand Rapids Kalamazoo Lansing Troy FLORID: Tampa ILLINOIS: Chicago NEW YORK: New York OHIO: Cincinnati CND: Toronto Windsor CHIN: Shanghai MEXICO: Monterrey POLND: Gdynia Warsaw Wrocław Ms. Kavita Kale Executive Secretary Michigan Public Service Commission 7109 W. Saginaw Highway Lansing, MI Re: Michigan Gas Utilities Corporation GCR Reconciliation Case No. U R Dear Ms. Kale: Enclosed for electronic filing are the following: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) Michigan Gas Utilities Corporation's pplication; Direct Testimony and Exhibits of Russell T. Laursen; Direct Testimony and Exhibits of Brian M. Marozas; Direct Testimony and Exhibits of David J. Tyler; Direct Testimony and Exhibit of Gary W. Simons; Direct Testimony and Exhibit of Nicholas J. Krzeminski; and ppearances of Sherri. Wellman and Paul M. Collins. Finally, a draft Notice of Hearing has been electronically sent to ngela McGuire. If you should have any questions, please kindly advise. Very truly yours, Miller, Canfield, Paddock and Stone, P.L.C. Enclosures cc: David J. Tyler Koby Bailey Ted Eidukas Russell Laursen Mary Wolter \ By: Paul M. Collins

2 STTE OF MICHIGN BEFORE THE MICHIGN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION * * * * * In the matter of the application of MICHIGN ) GS UTILITIES CORPORTION for a gas cost ) Case No. U R recovery reconciliation proceeding for the ) 12-month period ended March 31, ) PPLICTION Michigan Gas Utilities Corporation, a Delaware corporation ( MGUC or the Company ) respectfully requests that the Michigan Public Service Commission ( Commission ) conduct a gas cost recovery ( GCR ) reconciliation proceeding and approve MGUC s reconciliation determinations relative to the 12-month period ended March 31, In support of its request, MGUC states as follows: 1. MGUC, with its principal Michigan office located at 899 South Telegraph Road, Monroe, Michigan, is a public utility engaged in purchasing, storing, transporting, distributing and selling natural gas to the public in the southern and western portions of Michigan s Lower Peninsula. s of pril 30, 2017, MGUC served approximately 175,000 customers, including 139,500 residential customers, 10,900 commercial and small industrial customers, 36 large industrial customers, and 24,600 transportation and CHOICE customers. Such customers are located in over 52 cities and villages, and in 99 townships, between Lake Erie on the east and Lake Michigan on the west MGUC s retail natural gas sales and transportation business is subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission. 1 Exhibit -1, page 1 of MGUC s filing in this docket includes a map depicting MGUC s gas service territories in Michigan.

3 3. Pursuant to 1982 P 304 ( ct 304 ), the Commission authorized MGUC to incorporate a GCR clause in its rate schedules. Said clause authorizes MGUC to include in its monthly rates a GCR factor. 4. Pursuant to the Commission s ugust 23, 2016 Order pproving Settlement greement in Gas Cost Recovery Plan Case No. U-17940, MGUC was authorized to charge a base 2016/2017 GCR factor of up to $ per thousand cubic feet ( Mcf ), consisting of a gas commodity charge of $ per Mcf and a Reservation charge of $ per Mcf. Prior to the Order, MGUC self-implemented its initially filed GCR factor as authorized by MCL 460.6h(9). The base GCR factor was subject to adjustment under an approved GCR factor contingency matrix. 5. Pursuant 6h(12) of ct 304, MGUC hereby files for, and requests approval of, a reconciliation of the revenues recorded pursuant to the authorized GCR factors with the cost of gas sold and reservation costs during the 12-month period beginning pril 1, 2016, and ending March 31, MGUC is filing, as part of this pplication, testimony and exhibits sufficient to allow reconciliation in accordance with 6h(12) through 6h(15) of ct Such testimony and exhibits indicate that MGUC has a cumulative underrecovered balance of ($2,294,610) as of March 31, 2017 relative to gas costs. This cumulative under-recovered balance reflects the roll-in of the prior year s GCR underrecovered amount of ($177,369). s further described in the accompanying testimony and exhibits, the cumulative under-recovered gas cost balance when added to the interest expense, as calculated in accordance with ct 304, results in a total cumulative under-recovered gas cost balance of ($2,164,067). 2

4 7. In accordance with its standard refund procedures, MGUC requests authorization to roll-in the total cumulative under-recovered gas cost balance amount of ($2,164,067) into its current 2017/2018 GCR plan period. 8. In accordance with the Commission s January 26, 2012 order in Case Nos. U & U-16513, et al, MGUC committed to file a separate reconciliation of its Reservation Charge costs and revenues. Such testimony and exhibits indicate that MGUC has a cumulative over-recovered balance, applicable to its Reservation Charge costs, of $1,332,209 as of March 31, This cumulative over-recovered balance reflects the roll-in of the prior year s under-recovered amount of ($399,716). s further described in the accompanying testimony and exhibits, the cumulative over-recovered balance added to the interest expense, as calculated in accordance with ct 304, results in a total cumulative over-recovered balance of $1,268,490 relative to Reservation Charge costs. 9. In accordance with its standard refund procedures, MGUC requests authorization to roll-in the cumulative over-recovered Reservation Charge cost balance amount of $1,268,490 into its current 2017/2018 GCR plan period. 10. MGUC represents that the proposals contained in this pplication are just, reasonable and in the public interest. WHEREFORE, MGUC requests that the Commission:. Establish an early time and place for hearing and give notice thereof; B. pprove the reconciliation of the 12-month gas costs & revenues, as well as the reservation costs and revenues, for the period pril 1, 2016 through March 31, 2017, as presented by MGUC; 3

5 C. Find and determine that MGUC s gas costs and reservation costs incurred during the period pril 1, 2016 through March 31, 2017, were reasonably and prudently incurred; D. uthorize MGUC to roll-in the cumulative under-recovered balance of ($2,164,067) into its 2017/2018 GCR plan period gas costs for GCR customers, roll-in the cumulative over-recovered balance of $1,268,490 into its 2017/2018 GCR plan period reservation costs; and E. Grant MGUC such other and further authority as may be lawful and proper. Respectfully submitted, Dated: June 30, 2017 By: One of its ttorneys Sherri. Wellman (P38989) Paul M. Collins (P69719) MILLER, CNFIELD, PDDOCK ND STONE, P.L.C. One Michigan venue, Suite 900 Lansing, Michigan (517)

6 TWELVE-MONTHS ENDED MRCH 31, 2017 GS COST RECOVERY RECONCILITION CSE CSE U R INDEX OF EXHIBITS Exhibit No. Page No.(s) Description Witness -1 1 Map of MGUC s Service reas and Pipeline ccessibility R. T. Laursen -2 1 & /2017 Index and Daily Priced Purchase Listing R. T. Laursen /2017 Peak Day nalysis R. T. Laursen /2017 Storage Utilization R. T. Laursen -5 1 Capacity Utilization R. T. Laursen -6 1 Market Prices R. T. Laursen -7 1 to 5 Winter Firm Supply Bid nalysis R. T. Laursen -8 1 to 10 Volatility Calculation B. M. Marozas -9 1 to 27 Status Update on Hedging B. M. Marozas Legal and Regulatory ctions taken by MGUC at the Federal Level to Minimize the Cost of Purchased Gas to 13 Monthly Summary of Differences between Plan and ctual Supply GCR Reconciliation Report Monthly Over/(Under) Recovery 2 GCR Reconciliation Report Sources of Gas Supply psia Dry) D. J. Tyler D. J. Tyler D. J. Tyler D. J. Tyler 3 GCR Reconciliation Report - Cost of Purchased Gas D. J. Tyler 4 GCR Reconciliation Report - Monthly Sales and Number of Customers by Revenue Class 5 GCR Reconciliation Report Dekatherms / Volumes Reported By the Pipeline D. J. Tyler D. J. Tyler

7 TWELVE-MONTHS ENDED MRCH 31, 2017 GS COST RECOVERY RECONCILITION CSE CSE U R INDEX OF EXHIBITS Exhibit No. Page No.(s) Description Witness GCR Reconciliation Report Computation of Lost and Unaccounted for Volumes 7 GCR Reconciliation Report - Monthly Reservation Charge Over/(Under) Recovery Reconciliation of Exhibit -11, Page 1 to Exhibit -12 Pages 2 and 6 D. J. Tyler D. J. Tyler D. J. Tyler Computation of Interest on Over/(Under)-Recoveries llocation of Reservation Charges and Revenues Between Choice & GCR Customers D. J. Tyler D.J. Tyler Detail of Cashouts D. J. Tyler 2 Detail of Overrun Charges D. J. Tyler 3 Detail of Scheduling Fees D. J. Tyler 4 Detail of Capacity Release Credits D. J. Tyler Impact of Unbilled Sales djustment G. W. Simons to 4 Performance of the PEGsys system N. J. Krzeminski

8 STTE OF MICHIGN BEFORE THE MICHIGN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION * * * * * In the matter of the application of MICHIGN ) GS UTILITIES CORPORTION for a gas cost ) Case No. U R recovery reconciliation proceeding for the ) 12-month period ended March 31, ) DIRECT TESTIMONY ND EXHIBITS OF RUSSELL T. LURSEN ON BEHLF OF Date: June 30, 2017

9 1 Q PLESE STTE YOUR NME, POSITION ND BUSINESS DDRESS. My name is Russell T. Laursen. My business address is WEC 2Energy Group, Inc., 700 North dams Street, P.O. Box 19001, Green Bay, Wisconsin My position at Michigan Gas Utilities Corporation ( MGUC 4or the Company ), a subsidiary of WEC Energy Group, Inc. ( WEC ), is Manager 5 Gas Supply Q WHT RE YOUR PRIMRY DUTIES ND RESPONSIBILITIES S MNGER GS SUPPLY FOR MGUC? s Manager-Gas Supply, I am responsible for the daily operational 9 oversight and balancing of MGUC s distribution system. I am also 10 responsible for the following: (i) developing gas supply and storage capacity 11 strategies to provide reliable and cost-effective natural gas service; (ii) developing 12and implementing short- and long-term gas supply and capacity release strategies 13 including gas purchase and hedging strategies; (iii) administering gas supply, 14 transportation and storage contracts in accordance with prescribed legal policies, 15 procedures, and approved plans; and (iv) acquiring daily, monthly, and annual 16 supplies to meet system requirements. dditionally, I review and approve 17 invoices for supply, storage, and transportation costs Q PLESE SUMMRIZE YOUR EDUCTION, EMPLOYMENT ND PROFESSIONL EXPERIENCE. I received a Bachelor of Science degree in Mechanical Engineering 22 from the Milwaukee School of Engineering in 2004, and a Master 23 of Business dministration degree from the University of Wisconsin La 24 Crosse in I have been employed by WEC or its predecessors since In addition to my 1

10 current role, I have held positions as a Gas Trader ( ), 1 Manager of Upper Peninsula Power Company ( UPPCO ) Power Supply 2 ( ), Manager of Retail Electric Rates ( ), and Manager of3 Resource Planning and Policy ( ). In my role from , and 4beginning again in September 2015, I worked as a Gas Trader for WEC subsidiaries 5 (including MGUC). In this position, I planned and executed monthly 6purchases, released capacity, planned and executed storage activity, and generally 7 had a significant role in ensuring the daily operations of MGUC fit within the structure 8 of the GCR plan. In ugust 2016, I assumed my current role as Gas Supply9 Manager Q HVE YOU PREVIOUSLY TESTIFIED IN NY REGULTORY PROCEEDINGS? Yes. I have testified before the Michigan Public Service Commission 13 ( MPSC or Commission ) and the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin 14 ( PSCW ) in various Gas Cost Recovery ( GCR ), Power Supply Cost 15 Recovery ( PSCR ), and rate case dockets on behalf of MGU, UPPCO and Wisconsin 16 Public Service Corporation ( WPS Corp ), including: MPSC Case No. U-18154: MGU s GCR Plan; MPSC Case No. U-18224: Upper Michigan Energy Resources 19 Corp s filing for a Certificate of Need to build generation; MPSC Case No. U-17091: UPPCO s 2013 PSCR Plan; MPSC Case No. U R: UPPCO s 2012 PSCR Plan Reconciliation; MPSC Case No. U-16881: UPPCO s 2012 PSCR Plan; MPSC Case No. U R: UPPCO s 2011 PSCR Plan Reconciliation; 24 PSCW Docket No UR-123: WPS Corp s 2015 test year 25 rate case; and 2

11 PSCW Docket No UR-122: WPS Corp s 2014 test year 1 rate case Q WHT IS THE PURPOSE OF YOUR TESTIMONY IN THIS PROCEEDING? The purpose of my testimony is to demonstrate that MGUC s GCR Q expenditures were incurred in a reasonable and prudent manner. 6 My testimony will discuss the consistency of MGUC s actual results in as compared to the GCR Plan. I will focus on significant events and purchasing 8 activity for the period pril 1, 2016, through March 31, I will also testify 9 in support of the reasonableness and prudence of MGUC s actual gas supply costs. 10 PLESE IDENTIFY ND BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE EXHIBITS THT YOU RE SPONSORING. Exhibit -1(RTL-1) is a map of MGUC s service territory. The map shows the general location of MGUC s three service areas and of the15company s twelve groups within those service areas. Exhibit -2 (RTL-2) is a summary of index and daily-priced purchases for the GCR period. Exhibit -3 (RTL-3) displays the five peak-days for total sendout and the corresponding sales volume. Exhibit -4 (RTL-4) is a table reflecting the actual monthly storage balances compared to the GCR Plan. Exhibit -5 (RTL-5) displays the Company s utilization of long haul interstate transportation capacity on a monthly basis, as well as capacity24release volumes. 3

12 1 Exhibit -6 (RTL-6) compares the price forecast in the GCR Plan utilizing the December 2015 NYMEX with actual index prices for the Plan2year Exhibit -7 (RTL-7) is a summary of the bids received during the Request for Proposal ( RFP ) for the firm winter supply. Q PLESE DEFINE SOME OF THE UNIQUE TERMS IN THE TESTIMONY OR EXHIBITS YOU RE SPONSORING. Some key terms commonly used in my testimony and exhibits 8 include the 9 following: sset Management greement (M) n agreement between 10 the utility and a counterparty where the counterparty provides reliable gas 11 supply and manages the transportation assets. The utility agrees to receive and 12 pay for the gas delivered and release all applicable transportation assets to the 13sset Manager for some level of compensation. Baseload Supply that is the same volume every day for a given 16 period. lso known as a 10-day or 20-day call, where 18supply is available to be called upon during a certain period for the number of days 19 in the option and not to exceed the daily volume multiplied by the number of 20 days. For example: a 10-day call of 2,000 Dth can be called upon for a total of2120,000 Dth for the winter period, but cannot exceed 2,000 Dth per day. Forward Start lso known as a swing deal, where 24supply is available to be called upon during a certain period, typically for one or 25more months up to 26 the volume agreed upon. 4

13 Gas Customer Choice ( GCC or Choice ) Service 1Under this service, customers separately contract with an lternative Gas Supplier 2 ( GS also called a Choice Marketer ) to obtain gas supply, and MGUC3 distributes the gas received from the Choice Marketer. MGUC also acts as the 4 Supplier of Last Resort, so that service to GCC customers will not be interrupted 5 in the event that the Choice customers consume more gas than was delivered by6 Choice Marketers Gas Cost Recovery ( GCR ) Service Under this service MGUC 8 procures and distributes gas on behalf of the customer. Peaking Services contracted service which gives MGUC 11 the right to call upon gas supply for a certain number of days for a predetermined 12 period at a certain location. lso known as calls, swings, and forward start 13 options Request for Proposal (RFP) formal process for inviting 15 counterparties to provide offers for a product or services. Total Sendout - The total amount of gas that flowed through18the pipeline meters into MGUC s distribution system, including all supplies 19 purchased for GCR customers and delivered by Transportation customers and Choice 20 Marketers. 21 Transportation Service Under this service, a customer procures 22 its own gas supply and delivers it to MGUC s distribution system. MGUC 23 does not serve as the Supplier of Last Resort for Transportation customers, 24 so Transportation 25 customers may use only as much gas as they have delivered to MGUC s system. 5

14 Q Q SUMMRY OF SUPPLY PORTFOLIO ND PURCHSES PLESE SUMMRIZE THE COMPNY S GS SUPPLY PORTFOLIO ND PURCHSING METHODOLOGY DURING THE GCR PERIOD. The purpose of the MGUC portfolio is to provide reliable and 5 reasonably priced natural gas for its GCR customers. Reliability is accomplished 6 through utilizing diverse purchase locations and counterparties. HOW DID PRICES FORECSTED IN THE GCR PLN COMPRE TO THE CTUL PRICES SEEN IN THE MRKET PLCE? ctual gas prices were 8.4% higher than the forecast in the Plan. The average of the various pricing points in the Plan was $ and actual index pricing at these points was $2.70 over the GCR period. Exhibit 13-6 (RTL-6) provides monthly prices at each location Q PLESE DESCRIBE THE COMPNY S METHODOLOGY FOR SECURING THE INDEX PRICE SUPPLY. The majority of the Company s index price purchases are made 18 on a monthly basis through the request for proposal ( RFP ) process. Winter 19 (November through March) supplies are purchased on a term basis as well. 20 The results of the winter RFP are available in Exhibit -7 (RTL-7). Purchase 21 volumes are determined by the GCR Plan and adjusted for the current 22 storage positions relative to Plan storage levels. The Company may make a multi-month 23 index- priced purchase if a base level requirement for a period can 24be determined. Multi-month index-priced purchases provide security in ensuring 25 that supply is contracted for and will be available, especially during the 26 winter period. 6

15 Exhibit -2 (RTL-2) provides specific information as to the1term, volumes, Q prices and supply location of gas purchased. DID THE COMPNY ENGGE IN NY NON-CORE SLES DURING THE PLN YER? Yes. Please see the following table for a description of the non-core 6 sales and the financial impact to GCR costs. Sale Date(s) Pipeline Volume (dth/day) Recovery (Loss) Reason 5/18-5/19/16 PEPL 4,500 $ Maintenance work at 5/18-5/19/16 PEPL 4,000 $ Division Drive/PEPL station 5/20-5/23/16 PEPL 8,500 $ (4,122.50) coupled with warm weather 9/6/16 PEPL 3,000 $ (112.50) 9/7-9/9/16 PEPL 3,000 $ MGU Storage filled, coupled 9/10-9/12/16 PEPL 1,500 $ with warm weather 2/22/17 PEPL 4,000 $ (3,844.00) 32.6 o warmer than normal Total 71,500 $ (6,930.25) Recovery (credit to GCR costs) or loss (increase in GCR costs) 8 is the difference between the purchase price and sale price of the gas Q DID THE COMPNY CONTRCT FOR PEKING SERVICES FOR THE PLN YER? Yes. The Company contracted for peaking services during13 the Plan year through the winter RFP process. The results of the winter 14 RFP are available in Exhibit -7 (RTL-7). These peaking services give MGUC15 the right to call upon gas supply for a certain number of days for a predetermined 16period at a certain location. Multiple bids were received from multiple parties. 17 The bids were assessed for reliability, flexibility and price. The packages that 18 were selected are highlighted in Exhibit -7 (RTL-7). s shown in Exhibit -2 19(RTL-2) Page 2 of 7

16 2 Line 130, the Company purchased 3,000 Dth under the terms 1 of these packages 2 labeled as Peaking Q DID THE COMPNY CONTRCT FOR NY MULTI-MONTH PURCHSES THT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN N SSET MNGEMENT GREEMENT? Yes. Through the winter RFP process, the Company sought and 6 received bids for base load packages of index-priced gas for PEPL (Supplier 7 5) and NR SE Headstation (Supplier 7). Please see Exhibit -2 (RTL-2) where 8 these purchases are labeled as Term in the Type column. The results of the 9 winter RFP are 10 available in Exhibit -7 (RTL-7) Q DID THE COMPNY PURCHSE NY INTR-MONTH SUPPLIES DURING THE PLN YER? Yes, the Company purchased intra-month supplies on PEPL14due to colder than normal weather on pril 9-11, 2016 and for two separate operational 15 issues on the NR pipeline during the month of June The June 16 purchases shown in Exhibit -2 (RTL-2) on lines 19 and 20 were the result of 17NR maintenance work at the Fiske Rd/Coldwater gate station. s a result, MGU 18was unable to take gas at this location and was then forced to purchase additional 19 PEPL supply to meet the operational needs of the Coldwater area. Two additional 20 June intra- month purchases, shown in Exhibit -2 (RTL-2) on lines 21 21and 22, occurred a few days later and were the result of an over-odorization22issue on the MGU transmission line between the NR Morenci station and 23 the Thorn regulator station some 20 miles east. To prevent the over-odorized gas 24 from entering the 8

17 distribution system, PEPL supply had to be back-fed from Thorn 1 and flared near 2 Morenci to flush the transmission line Q DID NY OF THE COMPNY S PURCHSES DEVITE BY MORE THN 20% FROM THE PLN? Yes. The warmer than normal weather during the GCR 6 period resulted in lower consumption and, therefore, lower purchases by MGUC. 7 s shown on Mr. Tyler s Exhibit -11 (DJT-2) line 33, the Degree Day Deficiency 8 for the 12- month GCR period was 11.7% lower than normal. NR purchased 9 volumes were 34% less than Plan as shown in line 10. Michigan Consolidated 10 purchased volumes on line 17 were nearly 100% less than plan due to the 11cost of this supply relative to others and the warmer than normal winter. Local 12Production on line varied from forecast and is not controllable by the Company. 13 Pipeline fuel on line 20 was 34% less due to lower overall volumes transported Q WHT LEVEL OF PEK DY PROTECTION DID MGUC INCLUDE IN ITS GCR PLN? The GCR Plan projected a GCC and GCR combined 18 customer peak load of 227,211 Dth. Exhibit -3 (RTL-3) shows the five top 19 days for send-out for the winter months of November 2016 through March 2017 and the sources of supply for those days. The supply for this load was met through 21 a combination of term, city-gate, peaking, and storage supplies. 9

18 Q Q Q PLESE EXPLIN WHY THERE IS DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE COLUMN LBELED GCR SUPPLY ND THE COLUMN LBELED TOTL MGUC SUPPLY IN EXHIBIT -3 (RTL-3)? The Total Sendout column and the MGU Storage column are 4 only available in Mcf -- all other columns are in Dth; therefore MGUC has to 5convert Mcf to Dth using a monthly pipeline average BTU factor. MGUC does not6 have BTU data for individual days for this conversion and, therefore, utilizes7 monthly data. In addition, MGUC cannot determine if distribution line pack8 was increased or decreased on any given day. (Line pack is the amount of supply 9 that has flowed through the pipeline meters that is in the distribution system10but has not flowed through the customer meters yet.) The variances between the11 columns range from 2,255 to 4,518 or from 1.0% to 2.0% of Total Sendout. DID THE COMPNY INCUR NY OVERRUN CHRGES FROM THE PIPELINES? No, as shown on Exhibit -15 (DJT-6), page 2, MGUC did16 not pay any overrun charges during the 12-month period ended March 31, DID THE COMPNY INCUR NY CSH-OUTS OR NY SCHEDULING FEES FROM THE PIPELINES? s shown on Exhibit -15 (DTJ-6) page 1, MGUC did not21incur any cash-outs during the Plan year. s shown on Exhibit -15 (DJT-6) page 223, MGUC incurred $2, in daily scheduling fees during the 12 month period 23 ended March 31,

19 Scheduling fees were incurred on Panhandle Eastern Pipeline 1( PEPL ). MGUC receives scheduling fees when the actual deliveries exceed2 10% or 100 Dth (whichever is greater) of the scheduled quantity. Scheduling3 fees on PEPL are 4 common, minimal, and expected Q Q STORGE UTILIZTION PLESE DESCRIBE THE STORGE UTILIZTION FOR THE PLN YER. The Company started and ended the Plan year with actual natural 9 gas inventories greater than that set forth in the Plan for both NR storage 10 and the MGUC storage fields. s delineated in the Plan, the Company adjusted 11 monthly index purchases throughout the summer and winter to compensate 12 for initial and subsequent storage inventory levels. Exhibit -4 (RTL-4) compares 13 the planned storage balances to the actual storage balances throughout14 the Plan year. TRNSPORTTION MNGEMENT BRIEFLY EXPLIN MGUC S CPCITY UTILIZTION FOR THE PLN YER. Exhibit -5 (RTL-5) shows the capacity utilization for 20 the Company s transportation contracts. This exhibit shows capacity utilization, 21 capacity release volumes, capacity that was part of the sset Management22 greement (M), capacity needed for Swing//Peaking deals, and the combination 23 of the four elements. Through capacity segmentation and capacity release 24 the Company was 11

20 able to achieve utilization rates in excess of 100% periodically 1 throughout the 2 3 year. The Company is required to meet its Peak Day load obligation, 4 and the contracts for primary in-path firm transportation capacity help satisfy 5 this requirement. Because the Company contracts for pipeline capacity with terms 6 generally longer than one year, contract capacity may not match with the Plan7 period s Peak Day requirement. The Company releases transportation capacity 8 to mitigate reservation costs when circumstances permit. While the Company 9 may not experience a Peak Day during a 12-month GCR period, it is still 10 necessary to plan for a Peak Day. Failing to have adequate supply, capacity, 11 storage, and/or swing/call packages on a Peak Day would place the Company s 12 customers at risk of curtailment and/or financial harm. The Company s current portfolio of transportation capacity is 15contracted through the GCR year with (a majority of) NR and for16 the GCR year with PEPL. The Company continually assesses current17and future capacity needs in the context of safety, reliability, operational 18 requirements, cost, availability, supply basin diversity, and delivery point19requirements. The Company s use of capacity segmentation, coupled with the20releases referred to above, enhanced the Company s capacity utilization rate. Q WHT WS THE COMPNY S EXPERIENCE WITH CPCITY RELESE DURING THE PLN YER? The Company released Bcf of capacity outright 25and Bcf associated with M entered into for the Plan year Bcf of capacity 12

21 was reserved for use with /Swing/Peaking deals for the Plan 1 year. Exhibit -5 (RTL-5) contains the Company s capacity utilization for the Plan 3 year Q Q HOW RE CPCITY RELESE OFFER VOLUMES DETERMINED BY THE COMPNY (SPECIFICLLY NR ML7 STORGE CPCITY)? NR-ML7 capacity is short-haul capacity from NR storage7or Joliet to the MGUC city gates. Its usage mostly depends on the need for 8 storage, Joliet baseload, balancing the system, and intraday nominations. MGUC 9 does not typically release the NR-ML7 storage capacity during the10winter because such release could render the Company unable to fully use11 its NR storage services, including the NR No-Notice service, which is critical 12 for balancing MGUC s system on a daily basis. Storage injections are typically 13 facilitated using long haul or Joliet capacity, but withdrawal capacity14can be used to inject if necessary during warmer than normal winter weather.15 IS THE COMPNY UNDER-UTILIZING ITS NR ML7 STORGE WITHDRWL CPCITY? No. s shown Exhibit -5 (RTL-5), line 7, the Company has 1912,690,235 Dth of ML7 storage withdrawal capacity annually. The Company 20 utilized 4,380,216 Dth of this capacity directly, as shown on line 41, 21 and prudently holds all or most of the capacity for storage withdrawals during 22 the November through March period. This means that only the pril capacity 23 wasn t 100% utilized (line 7 minus line 41, pril) leaving 334,944, or 3%, 24 unutilized. 13

22 1 2 Q DOES THE COMPNY EVER RELESE ML7 STORGE CPCITY DURING THE WINTER? Yes. There are times in early or later winter when warm weather 3 persists and, at the Company s judgement, it may pursue release opportunities. 4 However, these are exceptions to the general policy of the Company that5it holds storage Q Q withdrawal capacity during the winter season. PLESE EXPLIN THE PEPL M THT MGUC ENTERED INTO FOR NOVEMBER 1, 2016 THROUGH MRCH 31, The Company entered into an M through the RFP process 10 using PEPL capacity of 42,193 Dth/day and a primary path of PEPL Field 11 Zone to MGUC. MGUC only accepted bids for this full quantity in conjunction 12with delivered firm baseload and swing supplies. MGUC released the capacity to 13the sset Manager on a recallable basis with baseload and swing option purchases 14 delivered to MGUC s PEPL delivery point at the volumes outlined below:15 NOV 2016 Baseload (15,000 Dth/day) Swing (0-27, Dth/day) DEC 2016 Baseload (24,000 Dth/day) Swing (0-18,193 Dth/day) JN 2017 Baseload (32,000 Dth/day) Swing (0-10, Dth/day) FEB 2017 Baseload (31,000 Dth/day) Swing (0-11, Dth/day) MR 2017 Baseload (25,000 Dth/day) Swing (0-17, Dth/day) WHT RE THE BENEFITS OF THE PEPL M TO MGUC? MGUC was able to not only streamline the process of releasing 24 excess capacity into one process at a reasonable price, but was also able to25 secure baseload and swing volumes for the winter period at a reasonable pricing26 mechanism as listed 14

23 below. Supplier 4 PEPL M in Exhibit -2 (RTL-2) 1 signifies the gas 2 purchases made through the M. 3 4 Q HOW DID MGUC CLCULTE THE INTRINSIC VLUE OF THE PEPL CPCITY? 7 17 This was calculated using the forward curve on the day that the5 bids were due and factoring in variable charges to transport gas to MGUC. The steps 6 included: 1. Obtaining November 2016 March 2017 forward curve 8 for : a. Panhandle (receipt point for released capacity). 9 b. MichCon (delivery point for released capacity) Determining the basis spread between Panhandle and 11 MichCon. 3. Calculating variable charges to move gas from Panhandle 12 to MichCon. 4. Determining the intrinsic value per Dth of the13pepl capacity by subtracting the variable charges from the basis spread Determining the total intrinsic value of the released 15 capacity by multiplying the intrinsic value per Dth of the PEPL 16 capacity times the estimated quantity of capacity to be released. Since MGUC had the contractual right to call on the swing 18 option supply at any time, it was expected that suppliers would plan to have less than 19 the total capacity available. The capacity release credits, therefore, were expected 20 to be less than the total intrinsic value due to volume uncertainty. Based on 21 historical experience with PEPL capacity that MGUC had released over the last 22few years, and the current intrinsic value per Dth, MGUC estimated that the 23 current value of the released capacity was approximately $279,000. This value24was determined by 15

24 projecting the volume that a supplier may assume to be available 1 after meeting MGUC s needs (i.e. full pipeline capacity, minus baseload, minus 2 potential swing option supply, minus an uncertainty holdback amount). The reasonableness 3 of the M credit offered by suppliers was determined by a judgment 4 comparison to Q the calculated intrinsic value. DID MGUC RECEIVE BIDS BOVE $279,000 FOR THE PEPL M? Yes, MGUC received five bids in excess of $279,000 and five 8 that were below this amount. The Company accepted the largest conforming bid9 of $780, Q HOW WERE THE BSELOD ND SWING SUPPLIES PRICED FOR THE PEPL M? The Baseload commodity charge for delivered and sold quantities 13 was the price per MMBtu first published each month in Inside FERC s 14 Gas Market Report under the headings Daily Prices of Spot Gas Delivered to Pipelines, 15 Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co., Texas, Oklahoma (mainline) plus 16 PEPL transportation fuel, commodity charges, and nnual Charge djustment 17 ( C ) charges to deliver to the MGU point. Daily Swing Supply commodity charges for the delivered and 20sold quantity were the price per MMBtu set forth in "Platts Gas Daily" under21the headings Daily Price Survey, Oklahoma, Panhandle, TX.-Okla., Midpoint 22 plus PEPL transportation fuel, commodity charges, and C charges 23 to deliver to the MGUC point. 16

25 Intra-Day Supply commodity charge was a negotiated fixed 1 price at time of purchase. The availability of Intra-Day Supplies were satisfied2 on a best efforts basis by the sset Manager. Q DID MGUC ENGGE IN NY OTHER M DURING THE GCR PERIOD? Yes, MGUC entered into a two other M in relation to MGUC s 6 NR SW capacity. Specifically, MGUC offered to bidders an amount of7 NR SW capacity for release in exchange for a Baseload volume delivered at MGUC s 8 discretion to either Benton Harbor or NR Storage. MGUC entered into two 9 such Ms, one for the summer period and one for the winter period, independent 10 of each other Q HOW DID MGUC BENEFIT FROM THESE NR SW Ms? MGUC received a discount on the commodity pricing of13 the supply. MGUC typically utilizes the NR SW transportation capacity to its14 fullest extent yearly and was able to extract a larger discount on the commodity 15 pricing than it possibly could have by purchasing at the NR SW Headstation 16 and transporting the supply to Benton Harbor or NR Storage. The winning17bid for the summer NR SW M was a commodity discount of $0.05. The18 winning bid for the winter NR SW M was a commodity discount of $ at the NR SW Headstation and a discount of $0.12 priced at NYMEX Last 20 Day Settle. The summer provider is identified as Supplier 6 SW M Summer, 21 and the winter provider is identified as Supplier 10 - SW M Winter, on Exhibit 22-2 (RTL-2). 17

26 Q CUSTOMER CHOICE WHT WERE MGUC S GCC PRTICIPTION LEVELS DURING THE PLN YER? MGUC experienced an increase in GCC participation this Plan4 year. s shown in Mr. Tyler s Exhibit -12 (DJT-3) page 4, the GCC customer 5 count increased from 21,875 in pril 2016 to 24,588 in March Q DID MGUC SSESS NY FILURE FEES UNDER THE GCC PROGRM? Yes. Each day, an GS is responsible for delivering its Daily10 Delivery Obligation ( DDO ) to the Company s designated Point of Receipt. When 11 an GS does not deliver the correct DDO during any given day, MGUC will12 implement a Failure Fee for failing to deliver the correct volume to the correct location. 13 Mr. Tyler s Exhibit -12, page 3 of 7, details the Failure Fees assessed and 14 collected over the Plan year. Q DO YOU BELIEVE THT MGUC S GS PURCHSE, TRNSPORTTION ND STORGE DECISIONS WERE RESONBLE ND PRUDENT DURING THE PLN PERIOD? Q Yes, I do. DOES THIS CONCLUDE YOUR TESTIMONY T THIS TIME? Yes, it does. 18

27 MICHIGN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Case No. U R Exhibit -1 (RTL-1) Witness: Russell T. Laursen Service reas and Pipeline ccessibility Western rea Coldwater rea Monroe rea Benton Harbor (NR) Coldwater (NR, CP, PEPL, MGU Storage) Monroe (NR, PEPL) Berrien Springs (NR) Coldwater Lake (NR) Fennville (NR) Morenci City (NR) South Haven (NR) Grand Haven (NR, DTE) Coopersville (NR) Otsego North (NR, CP) Otsego South (NR,CP)

28 MICHIGN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Case No. U R Exhibit -2 (RTL-2) Witness: Russell T. Laursen Page 1 of 2 Line # Start End Supplier Pipeline Volume Price Value Index Prices Type 1 pril /01/16 04/30/16 Supplier 1 NR-lliance/NR Int 5, ,677 NGI FOM Chicago CG USD/MMBtu $277, $ Spot 3 04/01/16 04/30/16 Supplier 15 NR-Fayetteville Exp 15, ,820 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $836, $ Spot 4 04/01/16 04/30/16 Supplier 14 PEPL-Field 14, ,920 IF Panhandle TX-OK USD/MMBtu $692, $ Spot 5 04/01/16 04/30/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-Benton Harbor 4,000 56,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $92, $ Term 6 04/01/16 04/30/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-PL StoFacilities 4,000 61,440 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $101, $ Term 7 04/01/16 04/30/16 Local Production 2 MGUP-Otsego IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $ $ Spot 8 04/01/16 04/30/16 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 3,412 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $6, $ Spot 9 04/09/16 04/11/16 Supplier 1 PEPL-MGU 4,000 12,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $24, $ Spot May /01/16 05/31/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-PL StoFacilities 4,000 92,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $167, $ Term 11 05/01/16 05/31/16 Supplier 15 NR-Fayetteville Exp 12, ,500 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $745, $ Spot 12 05/01/16 05/31/16 Supplier 14 PEPL-Field 14, ,384 IF Panhandle TX-OK USD/MMBtu $768, $ Spot 13 05/01/16 05/31/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-Benton Harbor 4,000 32,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $58, $ Term 14 05/01/16 05/31/16 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 4,239 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $7, $ Spot June /01/16 06/30/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-PL StoFacilities 4, ,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $216, $ Term 16 06/01/16 06/30/16 Supplier 2 PEPL-Field 300,000 IF Panhandle TX-OK USD/MMBtu $525, $ Spot 17 06/01/16 06/30/16 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 3,812 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $6, $ Spot 18 06/01/16 06/30/16 Supplier 1 NR-S E Headstation 12, ,000 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $677, $ Spot 19 06/07/16 06/08/16 Supplier 1 PEPL-MGU 8,000 16,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $35, $ Spot 20 06/09/16 06/09/16 Supplier 13 PEPL-MGU 3,000 3,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $6, $ Spot 21 06/14/16 06/14/16 Supplier 13 PEPL-MGU 4,600 4, USD/MMBtu $11, $ Fixed 22 06/15/16 06/15/16 Supplier 13 PEPL-MGU 5,000 5,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $12, $ Spot July /01/16 07/31/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-PL StoFacilities 4, ,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $321, $ Term 24 07/01/16 07/31/16 Supplier 2 NR-lliance/NR Int 5, ,270 NGI FOM Chicago CG USD/MMBtu $433, $ Spot 25 07/01/16 07/31/16 Supplier 3 NR-Fayetteville Exp 7, ,000 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $618, $ Spot 26 07/01/16 07/31/16 Supplier 2 PEPL-Field 14, ,000 IF Panhandle TX-OK USD/MMBtu $1,150, $ Spot 27 07/01/16 07/31/16 Supplier 1 PEPL-Field ,384 IF Panhandle TX-OK USD/MMBtu $38, $ Spot 28 07/01/16 07/31/16 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 4,685 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $12, $ Spot ugust /01/16 08/31/16 Supplier 17 NR-PL StoFacilities 5, ,943 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $405, $ Spot 30 08/01/16 08/31/16 Supplier 2 PEPL-Field 3 IF Panhandle TX-OK USD/MMBtu $750, $ Spot 31 08/01/16 08/31/16 Supplier 2 NR-lliance/NR Int 5, ,271 NGI FOM Chicago CG USD/MMBtu $410, $ Spot 32 08/01/16 08/31/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-PL StoFacilities 4, ,995 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $314, $ Term 33 08/01/16 08/31/16 Supplier 3 PEPL-Field 4, ,384 IF Panhandle TX-OK USD/MMBtu $335, $ Spot 34 08/01/16 08/31/16 Supplier 12 NR-Tiger Interconnect 4, ,000 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $322, $ Spot 35 08/01/16 08/31/16 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 3,575 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $8, $ Spot September /01/16 09/30/16 Supplier 3 NR-Fayetteville Exp 6, ,000 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $504, $ Spot 37 09/01/16 09/30/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-Benton Harbor 4,000 16,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $42, $ Term 38 09/01/16 09/30/16 Supplier 3 PEPL-Field 14, ,920 IF Panhandle TX-OK USD/MMBtu $1,120, $ Spot 39 09/01/16 09/30/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-PL StoFacilities 4, ,921 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $277, $ Term 40 09/01/16 09/30/16 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 4,924 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $12, $ Spot October /01/16 10/31/16 Supplier 3 NR-Fayetteville Exp 3,000 93,000 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $267, $ Spot 42 10/01/16 10/31/16 Supplier 10 NR-lliance/NR Int 5, ,943 NGI FOM Chicago CG USD/MMBtu $343, $ Spot 43 10/01/16 10/31/16 Supplier 3 PEPL-Field 14, ,384 IF Panhandle TX-OK USD/MMBtu $1,202, $ Spot 44 10/01/16 10/31/16 Supplier 15 NR-PL StoFacilities 6, ,000 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $323, $ Spot 45 10/01/16 10/31/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-PL StoFacilities 4,000 54,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $150, $ Term 46 10/01/16 10/31/16 Supplier 6 - SW M Summer NR-Benton Harbor 4,000 70,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $195, $ Term 47 10/01/16 10/31/16 Supplier 10 NR-Joliet Hub 5,041 10,082 NGI FOM Chicago CG USD/MMBtu $29, $ Spot 48 10/01/16 10/31/16 Supplier 15 NR-Benton Harbor 6,000 75,000 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $218, $ Spot 49 10/01/16 10/31/16 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 3,803 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $10, $ Spot 50 10/13/16 10/31/16 Supplier 10 NR-Will County Int 5,041 30,246 NGI FOM Chicago CG USD/MMBtu $89, $ Spot November /01/16 11/30/16 Supplier 2 NR-lliance/NR Int 3,000 90,000 NGI FOM Chicago CG USD/MMBtu $251, $ Spot 52 11/01/16 11/30/16 Supplier 5 PEPL-Field 5, ,000 NYMEX HH NG LD USD/MMBtu $393, $ Term 53 11/01/16 11/30/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 25, ,000 IFSP Panhandle + Variables $1,213, $ Term 54 11/01/16 11/30/16 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-PL StoFacilities 4,500 16,500 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $43, $ Term 55 11/01/16 11/30/16 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-Benton Harbor 4, ,500 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $311, $ Term 56 11/01/16 11/30/16 Supplier 3 NR-PL StoFacilities 2,500 12,500 NYMEXSP HH NG LD + MGU M $34, $ Term 57 11/01/16 11/30/16 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-Benton Harbor 2,500 62,200 NYMEXSP HH NG LD + MGU M $172, $ Term 58 11/01/16 11/30/16 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 4,011 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $10, $ Spot December /01/16 12/31/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 25, ,000 IFSP Panhandle + Variables $2,386, $ Term 60 12/01/16 12/31/16 Supplier 5 PEPL-Field 5, ,000 NYMEX HH NG LD USD/MMBtu $479, $ Term 61 12/01/16 12/31/16 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-MGUC - Grp 1 4, ,500 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $432, $ Term 62 12/01/16 12/31/16 Supplier 7 NR-S E Headstation 10, ,896 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $1,031, $ Term 63 12/01/16 12/31/16 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-MGUC - Grp 1 2,500 77,491 NYMEXSP HH NG LD + MGU M $252, $ Term 64 12/01/16 12/31/16 Local Production 2 MGUP-Otsego 15 7 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $21.00 $ Spot 65 12/01/16 12/31/16 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 3,748 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $11, $ Spot 66 12/13/16 12/13/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 18,193 18,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $66, $ Spot 67 12/14/16 12/14/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 18,193 18,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $66, $ Spot 68 12/14/16 12/14/16 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor 20,000 20,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $74, $ Spot 69 12/15/16 12/15/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 18,193 18,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $65, $ Spot 70 12/15/16 12/15/16 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor 20,000 20,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $73, $ Spot 71 12/15/16 12/15/16 Supplier 7 DTE-Wash 10-Rec 3,000 3,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $10, $ Peaking 72 12/16/16 12/16/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 8,000 8,000 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $29, $ Spot 73 12/17/16 12/17/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 5,000 5,000 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $19, $ Spot 74 12/17/16 12/17/16 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor 20,000 20,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $70, $ Spot 75 12/18/16 12/18/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 18,193 18,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $70, $ Spot 76 12/18/16 12/18/16 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor 20,000 20,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $70, $ Spot 77 12/19/16 12/19/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 18,193 18,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $70, $ Spot 78 12/19/16 12/19/16 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor 20,000 20,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $70, $ Spot 79 12/20/16 12/20/16 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $36, $ Spot January /01/17 01/31/17 Supplier 7 NR-S E Headstation 10, ,896 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $1,257, $ Term 81 01/01/17 01/31/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 25, ,000 IFSP Panhandle + Variables $3,852, $ Term 82 01/01/17 01/31/17 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-MGUC - Grp 1 2,500 77,500 NYMEXSP HH NG LD + MGU M $308, $ Term 83 01/01/17 01/31/17 Supplier 5 PEPL-Field 5, ,000 NYMEX HH NG LD USD/MMBtu $587, $ Term 84 01/01/17 01/31/17 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-MGUC - Grp 1 4, ,500 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $539, $ Term 85 01/01/17 01/31/17 Supplier 12 NR-S E Headstation 4, ,544 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $582, $ Spot 86 01/01/17 01/31/17 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 3,541 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $13, $ Spot 87 01/01/17 01/31/17 Local Production 2 MGUP-Otsego IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $2, $ Spot 88 01/04/17 01/04/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 10,193 10,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $36, $ Spot 89 01/05/17 01/05/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 10,193 10,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $36, $ Spot 90 01/05/17 01/05/17 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor 5,000 5,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $16, $ Spot

29 MICHIGN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Case No. U R Exhibit -2 (RTL-2) Witness: Russell T. Laursen Page 2 of 2 Line # Start End Supplier Pipeline Volume Price Value Index Prices Type 91 01/06/17 01/06/17 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $32, $ Spot 92 01/06/17 01/06/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 10,193 10,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $34, $ Spot 93 01/07/17 01/07/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 10,193 10,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $34, $ Spot 94 01/08/17 01/08/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 10,193 10,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $34, $ Spot 95 01/09/17 01/09/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 10,193 10,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $34, $ Spot February /01/17 02/28/17 Supplier 7 NR-S E Headstation 10, ,648 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $966, $ Term 97 02/01/17 02/28/17 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-MGUC - Grp 1 4, ,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $346, $ Term 98 02/01/17 02/28/17 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-MGUC - Grp 1 2,500 59,999 NYMEXSP HH NG LD + MGU M $205, $ Term 99 02/01/17 02/28/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 25, ,000 IFSP Panhandle + Variables $2,919, $ Term /01/17 02/28/17 Supplier 5 PEPL-Field 5, ,000 NYMEX HH NG LD USD/MMBtu $455, $ Term /01/17 02/28/17 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 2,542 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $8, $ Spot /01/17 02/28/17 Local Production 2 MGUP-Otsego IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $2, $ Spot /02/17 02/02/17 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $31, $ Spot /02/17 02/02/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 11,193 11,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $34, $ Spot /03/17 02/03/17 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor 5,000 5,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $15, $ Spot /03/17 02/03/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 11,193 11,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $33, $ Spot /09/17 02/09/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 11,193 11,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $32, $ Spot /21/17 02/28/17 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-PL StoFacilities 4,500 18,000 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $57, $ Term /21/17 02/28/17 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-PL StoFacilities 2,500 NYMEXSP HH NG LD + MGU M $34, $ Term March /01/17 03/31/17 Supplier 7 NR-S E Headstation 10, ,896 IF NR L USD/MMBtu $815, $ Term /01/17 03/31/17 Supplier 5 PEPL-Field 5, ,000 NYMEX HH NG LD USD/MMBtu $385, $ Term /01/17 03/31/17 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-MGUC - Grp 1 2,500 77,186 NYMEXSP HH NG LD + MGU M $202, $ Term /01/17 03/31/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 25, ,000 IFSP Panhandle + Variables $1,921, $ Term /01/17 03/31/17 Supplier 10 - SW M Winter NR-MGUC - Grp 1 4, ,500 IFSP NR OK + MGU M $336, $ Term /01/17 03/31/17 Local Production 1 MGUP-Otsego 150 3,645 IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $8, $ Spot /01/17 03/31/17 Local Production 2 MGUP-Otsego IF Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $1, $ Spot /03/17 03/03/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 5,000 5,000 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $12, $ Spot /10/17 03/10/17 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor 5,000 5,000 GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $14, $ Spot /10/17 03/10/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 17,193 17,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $47, $ Spot /11/17 03/11/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 8,000 8,000 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $23, $ Spot /12/17 03/12/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 8,000 8,000 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $23, $ Spot /13/17 03/13/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 8,000 8,000 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $23, $ Spot /14/17 03/14/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 17,193 17,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $50, $ Spot /14/17 03/14/17 Supplier 9 NR-Benton Harbor GDD Mich Con CG USD/MMBtu $31, $ Spot /15/17 03/15/17 Supplier 4 - PEPL M PEPL-MGU 17,193 17,193 GDDSP Panhandle + Variables $49, $ Spot Daily Fixed Spot Price Purchases 0.03% 4,600 $ 2.53 $ 11, % Fixed 128 Index Term Price Purchases 54.39% 7,754,068 $ 3.08 $ 23,885, % Term Day and Daily Purchases 45.56% 6,495,194 $ 2.40 $ 15,592, % Spot 130 Peaking 0.02% 3,000 $ 3.64 $ 10, % Peaking ,256,862 $ 2.77 $ 39,501,009.49