Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for standing by and welcome to the CONSOL Energy's First Quarter 2017 Earnings Results Conference Call. As a reminder, today's call is being record. I would now like to turn the conference over to the Vice President of Investor Relations, Tyler Lewis.

Thanks, Nick, and good morning to everybody. Welcome to CONSOL Energy's first quarter conference call. We have in our room today Nick DeIuliis, our President and CEO; Dave Khani, our Chief Financial Officer; and Tim Dugan, our Chief Operating Officer. Today, we will be discussing our first quarter results, and we've posted an updated slide presentation to our website. As a reminder, any forward-looking statements we make or comments about future expectations are subject to business risks, which we've laid out for you in our press release today, as well as in our previous Securities and Exchange Commission filings. We'll begin our call today with prepared remarks by Nick, followed by Dave and then Tim. And then, we will open the call up for Q&A. With that, let me turn the call over to you, Nick.

Well, thanks, Tyler, and good morning, everybody. Highlighted in the morning's press release, there were three important and critical achievements that developed this quarter. Now the first one was from an operations standpoint. And if you look at our operational performance, cycle times have been dramatically reduced, capital efficiency is up, and the type curves have been further optimized in some of our fields. All of these items have contributed to 2017 and 2018 production guidance increasing. So, for 2017, we're increasing guidance to 420 to 440 Bcf. And for 2018, we're increasing guidance to 490 to 520 Bcf. Those both compare to the prior guidance numbers of 415 Bcf for 2017 and 485 Bcf for 208. And we did that without increasing our previously announced 2017 and 2018 capital plans. So, that's a really significant achievement and, of course, a driver of our NAV per share. Now the second development was that we monetized over $100 million in non-core E&P assets to-date so far this year. We expect to be over halfway to the high-end of our $400 million to $600 million asset sales target by the end of the second quarter. So we got off to a good start there. And then the third development that was significant, we generated approximately $100 million in organic free cash flow in the first quarter that excludes asset sales, and we used the organic free cash flow to pay down debt at a discount and further reduce interest expense. So these are three very important achievements. They're fundamental drivers, as we continue to pursue our strategic goals in 2017 and beyond. And taking a step back, beyond these critical achievements so far this year, we'd like to add how a unique situation for the Appalachian Basin, perhaps for all of E&P,…

Thanks, Nick, and good morning, everyone. I have five key takeaways in the quarter. First, since our last earnings call, production guidance is up, prices are up and costs are up slightly. We increased our 2018 to 2020 hedge position by another 25%. This all results in higher margins, returns and a second EBITDA guidance increase for the full year since the Analyst Day. Second, we posted solid free cash flow numbers and our leverage ratio declined by 0.5 turn to 3.9x and we are on pace to exit the year around 2x. Once we drop below the 2.5 times level, we will have increasing flexibility to use free cash flow to drive our NAV per share growth even faster. Third, we executed a significant portion of asset sales, as Nick highlighted. This, along with our improved E&P operating cash flow, increased our free cash flow outlook for 2017 and 2018. Fourth, CNXC reported first quarter results and raised guidance by 5%. Coverage ratio has hit 1.2 times for first quarter 2017. The improved forecast will help our separation process. And fifth, we hope this call answers two main questions we consistently receive on the E&P front: Can we grow production meaningfully? And do we have the outlets to sell it at a reasonable margin, despite not having an extremely large FT book? Shifting to the results for the quarter and highlighted on slide 18, CONSOL reported adjusted income and EBITDA from continuing operations of $38 million or $0.17 per diluted share and $217 million, respectively. On a GAAP basis, the company reported net loss from continuing operations of $39 million, attributable to CONSOL shareholders, primarily reflecting $138 million impairment related to the sale of Knox and Coalfield assets, the $25 million unrealized gain on commodity derivatives, and $5 million…

Thanks, Dave, and good morning, everyone. We're very focused on driving the rate of change within our organization and have tackled another meaningful step-change in drilling and completion efficiencies and how we manage production from our wells. In the quarter, we continue down the path of continuous improvement, highlighted primarily by reduced cycle times and optimized type curves from enhancements to our production protocols in certain areas. This has enabled us to improve our capital efficiency, increase our production, and drive our NAV higher. We continue to drive down the correlation between production growth, rig count and TIL count, which will have the benefit of canceling out any inflation pressures from the service industry. Just to highlight this, our quarterly costs are lower year-over-year and will continue to be driven lower throughout 2017 as production increases. We will continue to run two drilling rigs and two frac crews throughout the year and our capital efficiency will more than offset any service cost inflation. These latest operational efficiency improvements have outpaced even our own expectations. As discussed on past calls, our improvements have been significant and we have shown that it is continuous and sustainable. In fact, our rate of improvement may be greater now than it has been at any time over the last several years. So how do we continue to make such significant step-changes, particularly while shifting to the more challenging deep dry Utica? The advancement of our model-based approach during the period of inactivity in late 2015 and early 2016 allowed us to evaluate variances in rock properties and operational techniques, so we can now quickly determine if a change is NAV-accretive and instantly implement it in our operations, thus seeing immediate results. It seems a little counterintuitive to what normally happens, but we were able to…

Thanks, Tim. This concludes our prepared remarks. Nick, can you please open the line up for questions at this time?

Certainly. The first question today comes from the line of Joe Allman with FBR. Please go ahead. Joseph Allman - FBR Capital Markets & Co.: Thank you, operator. Good morning, everybody.

Morning.

Morning. Joseph Allman - FBR Capital Markets & Co.: Do you have any comments on CONE in light of the NBL upstream asset sale announcement this morning? Do you have any preferential rights there and would you have an interest in buying NBL's interest if it were available? And is there any value impact on CONE based on this change in ownership?

Joe, I think that looking at it as an owner in CONE, the announcement today should be viewed as a bullish indicator. And the reason we say that is that, call it, roughly half of the acreage dedication that sits there at CONE today is changed ownership and it's now in the hands of someone that I'm assuming has plans to develop it, and CONE is looking forward to working with a new customer. So, from a growth perspective and what that means for distributions and whatnot, I think that's positive news. Beyond that, really can't comment other than what you've read and I've read out there in the public space. Joseph Allman - FBR Capital Markets & Co.: Okay. Very helpful. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Your next question comes from the line of Holly Stewart with Scotia Howard Weil.

Good morning, gentlemen. Maybe the first question, just strategically. Nick, you listed kind of all the strategic options, the three strategic options, that you're looking at. And then, Dave, I think you hit on the kind of hitting the leverage targets of 2.5 times. Should we expect some of these levers to start being pulled before or after your decision of separation? Or how do we think about the two being linked?

I think the ability to allocate capital across either increased activity set on the E&P side or share count reduction, additional debt reduction or acreage acquisition, really doesn't so much come down to what and when we decide to do with splitting the two segments of coal and E&P. I think it's more driven by getting that leverage ratio down to the mid- to the low-2xs. And that should be, again, something that happens sooner within 2017 as opposed to later.

Yeah. And I would just add that the coal separation can only enhance probably our flexibility.

Perfect. Thank you. And then I don't know if Don would take this one, but just on the marketing portfolio, you mentioned some of the stuff that you'd done on East Tennessee. Just some color there in terms of letting the FT roll-off those sales contracts that you've done. I'm assuming that looks like the pie has shifted a little bit maybe due to that East Tennessee firm transport. And then maybe an additional one to that, where does NEXUS kind of fall into those pie numbers for 2017, 2018?

Well, Holly, we've got, with the NEXUS, it looks like there's potentially a delay there, although they're still saying it will be in service by the end of 2017, but looking more and more like there will be a delay. And we do have a bit of our FT on NEXUS. But we continue to push for a balanced FT book that keeps our costs down. We've been able to release some capacity that we no longer need and move it off the books. But we'll continue working down that path to keep the FT under that $0.30 target that we've laid out over the last several quarters.

I think it's our ability to be able to sculpt the transportation aspect and where we ship our gas, without having to have a very rigid FT aspect of it. We allow the existing FT owner to be able to optimize his own book as opposed to us trying to fill in a whole bunch of production. So it just allows us then to not have stranded FT or open FT, and enable an existing FTR to be able to make a win-win between both sides.

Okay. So, maybe just to make sure we understand, you've essentially released some FT on East Tennessee, but you've entered into some firm sales contracts on that same line?

Correct.

Got it. Okay. Thanks, guys.

You're welcome.

And we will go to the line of Neal Dingmann with SunTrust.

Morning, guys. Nick, I think a question maybe for you or David, just real quick on the asset sales. Did that include any of the – or maybe for David, any of the existing minerals? And if not, any change in plans for the minerals that are associated with all those leases in Appalachia?

Yes. One of the asset sales does has some fee in there as well, yes, so which enhanced the value that we we're getting. And as far as the second question, are we looking to do anything on our fee mineral position in general, which is fairly large, I'd just say, if we do, we'll announce it if we do something.

Okay. And then maybe a question for Tim, just on that slide, Tim, that slide 8 you referred to, I really like those, obviously, those revised type curves are flattening and showing the production hanging on earlier. With that, I mean, does that change your EUR estimate? I didn't notice if it has, but it certainly appears those curves by flattening or improving, would that mean that your EURs would improve or have improved as well?

Right now, we haven't changed the EURs on those wells. We've changed the shape of the curve by holding production flat for a longer period of time and have adjusted the decline, the B factor, on our decline, once the wells start to decline. So we have not changed the EURs at this point.

Okay. And then, just one last one on that slide, the following slide, slide 9, when you talked about on the Gaut, kind of installing the tubing. I guess my question is just more broadly, Tim, when you guys look at some of these wells, like the Gaut or some of these other existing ones, are there going to be continuing to be a number of things like installed tubing or things like that that you can do to continue to boost that line pressure? It's certainly a noticeable increase on this one. So I'm just wondering are there other things like that that we should assume you can do for a relatively minimal expense going forward.

Well, the tubing install, it's an expected, anticipated and managed step. We watch our critical velocities and ability to unload the wells and keep the gas flowing, and install the tubing when it's appropriate. But, obviously, there's opportunities to put wells on compression and things like that where we can continue to manage the pressure drawdown.

Very good. Thanks, guys.

Thank you.

We do have a follow-up question from Holly Stewart.

Hey, guys. Just maybe one more because you lay out the turned in lines in 2018 was just a little bit more to the Utica? But I guess, what do you need to see to make this a bigger shift in 2018 towards the Utica?

Well, I think that's really being driven by results, Holly. As I said, we just TD-ed the Aikens well, which is an offset to the Gaut, and so far everything up in that area has met our expectations. And as more and more results come in, we will continue our push towards the Utica. We're laying out additional wells and we're working on our development plans as we move forward. So I think just continued results as we've seen and continued push to get more wells drilled and turned in line.

All right. Thanks, guys.

With that, speakers, there are no further questions in queue.

Okay. Great. Thank you everyone for joining us this morning. We look forward to speaking with you again next quarter. Thank you.