Greetings and welcome to the Clean Energy Fuels Fourth Quarter 2016 Earnings Call. At this time, all participants are in a listen-only mode. A brief question-and-answer session will follow the formal presentation. [Operator Instructions] As a reminder, this conference is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Tony Kritzer, Director of Investor Relations. Thank you. Please begin.

Thank you, operator. Earlier this afternoon, Clean Energy released financial results for the fourth quarter and full-year ending December 31, 2016. If you do not receive the release, it is available on the Investor Relations section of the company's website at www.cleanenergyfuels.com where the call is also being webcast. There will be a replay available on the website for 30 days. Before we begin, we’d like to remind you that some of the information contained in the news release and on this conference call contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Words of expression reflecting optimism, satisfaction with current prospects, as well as words such as believe, intend, expect, plan, should, anticipate and similar variations identify forward-looking statements, but their absence does not mean that the statement is not forward-looking. Such forward-looking statements are not a guarantee of performance and the company's actual results could differ materially from those contained in such statements. Several factors that could cause or contribute to such differences are described in detail in the Risk Factors section of Clean Energy’s Form 10-K filed March 7, 2016. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this release. The company undertakes no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements or supply new information regarding the circumstances after the date of this release. The company’s non-GAAP EPS and adjusted EBITDA will be reviewed on this call and exclude certain expenses that the company's management does not believe are indicative of the company's core business operating results. Non-GAAP financial measures should be considered in addition to results prepared in accordance with GAAP and should not be considered as a substitute for or superior to GAAP results. The directly comparable GAAP information, reasons why management uses non-GAAP information, a definition of non-GAAP EPS and adjusted EBITDA, and a reconciliation between these non-GAAP and GAAP figures is provided in the company's press release, which has been furnished to the SEC on Form 8-K today. Participating on today's call from the company is President and Chief Executive Officer, Andrew Littlefair; and Chief Financial Officer, Bob Vreeland. And with that, I will turn the call over to Andrew.

Thank you, Tony. Good afternoon everyone and thank you for joining us. I’m pleased to review our fourth quarter and full-year 2016 results. For the fourth quarter, the company delivered 84 million gallons, a 7.4% increase over the fourth quarter 2015. For the full year, we delivered 329 million gallons, a 7% increase over the 308 million gallons we delivered in 2015. Our fourth quarter revenue was $102 million and for the full-year 2016, revenue was $403 million, a 5% increase over 2015. Bob will be going into more detail in a moment, but it's important to note that we recorded a full year of VETC in the fourth quarter of 2015, but only one quarter of VETC in the fourth quarter of 2016. We reported $18 million of adjusted EBITDA in the fourth quarter, our sixth consecutive quarter of positive adjusted EBITDA. For the year, we reported $85 million of adjusted EBITDA compared to $27 million in 2015. In the beginning of 2016, we stated that our main focus as a company would be to grow our fuel sales, deleverage our balance sheet and conserve our cash. As we review the year, I feel that we have accomplished those goals but understand that there is more work to do. Specifically, we reduced our outstanding convertible debt by $285 million in 2016 which provides $18 million of interest savings annually. We reduced our SG&A by 7% year-over-year, while increasing our margin per gallon 25% over 2015. For the year, our CapEx was $23.6 million which was more than a 50% reduction from 2015. And for 2017, we anticipate our CapEx budget to be around $22 million with an additional $7 million for potential growth projects at NG Advantage. At the end of the year, we had $110 million of cash…

Thank you Andrew and good afternoon to everyone. I'll make my comments on the fourth quarter and year end and then spend a moment discussing our BP deal relative to our financials. For our 2016 fourth quarter, our volume and financial results continued on positive trends. Our volume growth of 7.4% in the fourth quarter versus a year ago resulted from growth in CNG gallons, offset partially by lower LNG and RNG gallons. For CNG we saw 11% volume growth led by our refuse and transit sectors. The LNG gallon decline of 600,000 gallons was bulk supply related. Our RNG gallons declined as a result of selling more RNG redeem gallons into our vehicle fueling network and those redeemed gallons are included in our CNG and LNG gallons. Redeem volume for the quarter was 14.9 million gallons and approximately 60 million gallons for the year. Our revenue for the fourth quarter of 2016 was $101.8 million. In 2015, our revenue was $119.3 million. However 2015 included a full-year of VETC revenue in the amount of $31 million, whereas 2016 included one quarter of VETC revenue in the amount of $7 million. Looking further at the components of our revenue for the fourth quarter, you'll see that our volume related revenue of $73 million increased almost 13% from the fourth quarter of 2015. This increase was driven by volume growth including our redeem fuel and related environmental credit revenue. Our station construction revenue of $16.9 was up $6.6 million or 64% over 2015 as we had a large transit station build in 2016 that contributed to most of that increase. Our compression revenue is down by about $8 million from a year ago, due to a softness in global demand for compressors. We continued to address the operating costs at our…

[Operator Instructions] Our first question comes from the line of Eric Stine with Craig-Hallum. Please proceed.

Hi, everyone. Nice quarter. So I know obviously just announced last week and very early, but curious what the market response has been to the BP announcement since I know that one of the issues has just been lack of supply and that's limited some growth. So any color on feedback from fleets and then longer term, as you think about BP's plan, is there any reason why this can't be a couple of hundred million gallons a year or more as we look at a few years out?

Eric, I think it can be that size of a couple of hundred million gallons or more a few years out. The reaction we've had is positive. Right? We've obviously -- because of the announcement, we've been talking to our customers and those that we work very closely with in the refuse business and the reaction has been positive that our partner and the upstream part of this will be BP. And it's actually generated a lot of interest by customers in other parts of the country. We've been a little bit more -- well a lot more advanced on getting Redeem in the California market, in the western states. As you know, we've grown it some into Texas, but we saw this week because of the announcement this week, we've had interest in other markets in Texas and actually on the East Coast. So our job, as I said, last week is to continue to grow this business -- it's a great product that our customers seem to like. It's a very clean product and it's one that we can to deliver really differentiating ourselves from our competitors because we have this capability, we have the relationship now with a really large supply with BP and we have a large network to be able to push it out to a customer. So I think the size that you’ve mentioned is very realistic and I think over time BP, I don’t want to speak for them, but I mean they think the biomethane business could be very large.

Right. And I mean just pricing wise, really it's not -- it's a little or no incremental cost to the customer and so this is -- I mean you would think that this is kind of a no brainer and should be good for volumes obviously. Okay. Then maybe –

That’s right. That's right.

Okay. Maybe just turning quick to the ports and the clean trucks program, you touched on it briefly, but maybe just next steps that we should look for as part of the process and then just curious, I've been following it and I know that any number of different technologies are under consideration. So it may be just some of the inroads or progress that natural gas trucks specifically are making versus some of the other technologies?

Good. Thank you, Eric. On the ports pacifically, so the clean air action plan 2 if you will is moving forward. The port of LA and the port of Long Beach have taken stock of the initial public comment period and they think they need a little bit more time. So we'll see this -- the formulation of this plan probably take at least another 90 days would be my guess and of course who knows how that will work out. It’s complicated. The clean air action plan is broader than just trucks. I mean, obviously that's where we're focused, but it takes into consideration other land use operations and marine uses. I like the way it's going. I think we're beginning to crystallize the decision that's before the ports as this. There are many that would love to see electric equipment and trucks at the port and that's fine. Those trucks aren't available today and so really when you get right down to that, what does that mean? Well, that means that you adopt, you could adopt a plan that would allow for diesel trucks to continue for maybe as many as five or ten more years. In fact, the draft plan, Eric, you may remember, said well, let's adopt a plan, one idea is let's adopt a plan allowing for diesel trucks, current model diesel trucks and every five years or so, look to see how the electric truck business is going. And then maybe in 10 years or so that we would then begin to put electric trucks into the port. Well, what that really means is that you have no cleaner trucks, no cleaner air in the port for the next decade at least. And so I think as people -- this has been able to…

Yeah. Thanks for all the detail.

That's why in my remarks, I think we're well poised of the near-term growth opportunities and we’ve got the product, we've got the fuel, we've got the renewable fuel and we've got the engines and really no other -- when you asked about other technologies, nobody else is ready to go like that.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Rob Brown with Lake Street Capital Markets. Please proceed.

Good afternoon. I think you mentioned in your CapEx numbers, some additional spending for NG Advantage, could you just give us some color on what would drive that? Is that additional customers signing up?

It is and you’ll notice I use the term potential. We think we've got a couple of big deals that would have contracts with large customers and other opportunities up and these would be in the northeast that we think could be significant and so we put it into our budget. That only happen though if you have a customer contract. So I'm hopeful we do, but if you kind of think about it as like-for-like, that's why I mentioned I broke it down for 22 million in terms of our station building program and frankly maintenance CapEx, our maintenance CapEx runs at about $5 million or $6 million. So you go in from years when you were spending $100 million, $87 million on station building to now kind of apples to apples. Our budget in 2017 is something closer to really $16 million in terms of station build. So we've spent, as we've said before in these calls, we've spent a significant amount of money to build up the network and it's really built and from here, it’s really doing our best to load and leverage that network.

Okay, good. Thank you. And then I think, Bob, you talked about margin per gallon in Q4, did that include the VETC number or was that without the VETC kind of sort of like for like basis, you said $0.34?

Yeah. Our margin per gallon does not include VETC, but both periods did include the environmental credits, the RINs and the LCFS. But the VETC is not in that margin per gallon.

Thank you. Our next question comes from the line of Pavel Molchanov with Raymond James. Please proceed.

Yeah. Thanks for taking the question guys. First, just a small housekeeping item on the income statement. So you talked about the EBITDA impact of the BP sale, what about depreciation. So it's 14.6 million this past quarter. Will that decline commensurately with revenue?

Well, there will be a, I’ll say a smaller impact on the depreciation. So commensurate with the revenue, yeah, probably just about.

Okay. And just to clarify, given that you’re going to be essentially operating these assets on behalf of BP, will the underlying RNG be a pass through source of revenue for you or is that going to show up on -- exclusively on BP's own income statement?

Yeah. For us, it'll be more of a service contract. So, I mean, it's -- I mean generally speaking on service contracts that we're supplying and servicing gallons, we made -- record those gallons, but it's really going to be a -- more of a service fee for us, so not a sale of fuel.

Got it. So is that going to show up as service revenue on the income statement?

Yes. It would be in that category. Yes.

Thank you. We have reached the end of our Q&A session. I would now like to return the call to management for closing remarks.

Thank you, operator and thank you everyone for joining us this afternoon. We look forward to updating you on our progress in the next quarter. Good day.

Thank you. This concludes today’s conference. You may disconnect your lines at this time and thank you for your participation.