REGISTRY INFORMATION SESSION

1. REGISTRY INFORMATION SESSION December 2, 2003

2. Agenda • Introductions (Ross – 5 minutes) 2. Registry Update (Wally – 15 minutes) - Overview • Industry and Registry Performance 3. EUB Non-compliance (Eileen- 15 minutes) - Overview - Appeal and Escalation process 4. IRT Update(Ross – 30 minutes) - Issue/ Opportunity Identification - Preliminary Benefits Assessment Leverage List - Industry Registry Enhancements- Current - Industry Registry Enhancements- Future 5. Question & Answer (all) 6. Possibilities Meeting (10:30 – 11:30 a.m.)

3. Overview:One Year of Operation • 9000 user accounts • 3,000,000 on-line hits and 60,000 batches/ month • Initial performance/start-up issues resolved • Training and change management processes effective and ongoing • First round of enhancements proposed, approved and funded by Industry • Stakeholders endorsing of new initiatives

4. Registry Performance • Key Performance Indicators Impacting Industry Stakeholders • Batch Turnaround • Batch Completion • On-line Performance • WIP Performance • Change Management (defect correction) • Service Desk Response • Hours of Operation • Provisional Assessments • EUB Non-compliance Errors

5. Batch Turnaround (“Daytime” Batches)Average Minutes to Complete an Industry Batch

6. Online Targets & Performance“Minimal ‘Timeouts’ and 95% or better turnaround in less than 5 seconds”

7. Change Management Targets • “Incidents” are Registry defects and approved change items • Incidents are categorized by criteria of “Impact” and “Scope” • Industry proposed: • By March 04 be under 50 “Critical”, “High” and “Medium” Incidents • Registry Management recommends: • By March 04 ‘Critical’ incidents resolved in 1 month, ‘Highs’ resolved in 3 months • Alternate approach accounts for varying levels of Registry change activity

8. Provisional Assessment Trends

9. PA - Sept 03 vs. Aug 03

10. EUB Non-Compliance

11. EUB Non-compliance Trends

12. EUB Non-complianceCumulative Billable Errors

13. EUB Non-complianceAppeals of Enforcement Decisions • Appeals must be received by Dec 10th 2003 • Refer to Alerts for EUB Appeal Process for Volumetric Deficiencies and Template • Heat ticket/VI is only accepted when the error being appealed is due to a Registry/EUB system problem

14. EUB Non-complianceAppeals of Enforcement Decisions • EUB Process • EUB logs the appeal and notifies the requester of the assigned log # (24 hours) • EUB reviews the appeal (10 days approx.) • EUB will mail a letter with appeal decision • Include the name/title that the letter should be addressed in the appeal • If name/title not included the letter will be mailed to Manager Production Accounting

15. EUB Non-complianceEscalation • EUB Process • EUB does not receive a response to “correct the error” will result in escalation to Level 2 • If the operator responds within the timeline they are not escalated to Level 2. • Correct the error • Appeal the error • Submit a plan for correction of the error that is approved by the EUB • Interim Escalation Process • Two months between Level 1 and Level 2 for a period of six months • At the end of six months move back to one month between Level 1 and Level 2

16. Industry Registry Team Update • Issue/ Opportunity Identification Processes • Preliminary Benefits Assessment Leverage List • Industry Registry Enhancements- Current • Industry Registry Enhancements- Future

17. Issue/ Opportunity Identification • Registry Service Desk calls • IBC • CAPP/ SEPAC Committees • RAC • Periodic “all operator” surveys (E.g. Recent call-out related to EUB “live billing”) • Preliminary Benefits Assessment

18. IRT Call-out Re: EUB “Live Billing” - Companies listed 737 - Companies with errors 368 - Contacts 280 - Interviews ~160 General Feedback: • ~15% of companies indicated that they appreciated the reminder • In general comments “decidedly more positive than negative” Major problems by type:#% (of BA’s Interviewed) 1 Errors caused by others 54 34% • Increased workload 23 14% • More hours of operation 12 8% 4 Delay in reports 5 3% Major compliment: “Great service desk” 20 13%

19. Preliminary Benefits Assessment:Leverage List • IBC Review/Action Items (15) • Performance Issues (6) • Vendor Issues (13) • Training Matters (17) • Resolved/Response Provided (74) • -Leverage List is key IBC/ IRT tool. Major issues aggressively being pursued. Your involvement is welcome! (See Handout)

20. Leverage List:Update on Some High Priority Items • Continued Industry participation IRT and IBC • BII has approved funding for 2004 • While total is less than requested, panel strongly endorsed ongoing Industry involvement, encouraged identification of longer-term funding approach • CAPP actively reviewing options

21. Leverage List:Update on Some High Priority Items 2. Late filing of “Receipts” (auto-disposition) • Clearly major issue for many operators • Past and recommended current practice: • Call the other operator, resolve, agree on target timing • Standard “request letter” to other operator approved by IBC • IRT following up with “problem companies” • EUB appeals template will assist in analysis • Vendor system constraints? • EUB follow-up; IRT analysis; Deadline extension? Other?

22. Leverage List:Update on Some High Priority Items • Training Items • IRT and Training Team have met and identified specific recommendations for IBC meeting (Jan) • One issue: Changes to Training System • Red folders: what’s changed, what’s important • Handout identifies all changes since Registry Go-Live, plus all Enhancement training • Will also be posted to web site and kept current • Recommend trying the Red folder system: • Only important changes result in Red • Clicking the folder will direct you to the module summary page, which lists changes and links to the changes • Reviewing the changes will result in folder turning black

23. Leverage List:Update on Some High Priority Items 4. Hours of Operation • Standard hours have been extended, and one Sunday per month now available • Current hours meet the needs of great majority of users, but significant minority requesting more • As performance and stability further enhanced, additional extensions will be reviewed • Server-to-Server functionality extends hours for this type of operation • Your input requested (See Questionnaire)

24. Leverage List:Update on Some High Priority Items 5. Volume Variance prorating • Potential royalty impact • Potential Partner reporting impact • IRT analysis • CSV version enhancements • Target January 5, 2004 • Summary and Detail report • Details for each stream/owner

26. Volume Variance Report • Average “go-live” to 2003-08 -- 18% of allocations have a variance • Sample Month of 2003-08 • 2606 allocations with a variance across 166 BA ID’s • 1987 (76%) of the allocations with a variance pertain to royalty trigger activities

27. Analysis of Royalty Trigger Variances for 2003-08

28. Analysis of Royalty Trigger Variances for 2003-08

29. Volume Variance Prorating Conclusions • Significant number of allocations are being prorated • Industry needs to review to determine • Crown Royalty impact • Partner Reporting impact • CSV enhancements will assist in analysis

30. 2003/4 Industry Enhancements • Base Functionality Enhancements • Enhanced notification item identification and sorting • Enhanced Inbox navigation • “Sortable” (CSV) version of EUB non-compliance report • Final Partner Reporting Components • Oil Royalty/ “net-after-royalty” communication • Security modifications • Save Report Request Parameters • Server-to-Server functionality

31. 2003/4 Industry Enhancements • All these changes are in production, or will be by Jan 04 • All were funded by voluntary payments from Industry’s top producers. (62/63 companies invoiced have elected to participate so far) • Change Leader Handbook Update available to help you get up to speed on these enhancements • Possibilities Meeting will review value added opportunities from Server-to-Server functionality

32. 2003/4 Industry Enhancements 3. Additional Pipeline Splits Components • Modified approach identified and approved by IBC • Endorsed by specific pipeline companies and vendors • Final design work targeted Q1 and 2 2004 • Implementation Q 4 2004 for specific pipelines • Additional pipelines expected to be added over time

33. Possible Future Industry Initiatives and Opportunities • Other Jurisdictions: BC, Yukon, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, NEB • Stats Can (greenhouse gas related) • Joint Venture Initiatives (operations/audit) • Freehold interests • Mineral tax • Mapping interfaces • Analysis data • Other IBC, RAC, CAPP committees currently reviewing and prioritizing opportunities for near-term focus

34. Future Initiatives and Opportunities • The Registry provides an excellent foundation to build on: • Definitive infrastructure, volumetric data • Web-based standardized venue now used by all operators • Efficient automated tools in place (server-to-server) • Effective access and security

35. Questions & Answers

36. Possibilities Meeting

37. The Petroleum Registry of AlbertaEnergizing the flow of information Server to Server Possibilities

38. “Server to Server”How it Works Kevin RobsonSolution Architect (Fujitsu)

39. What Is Server to Server? • One computer working with another computer to carry out a task without manual intervention • Within the scope of this enhancement, server to server deals with automating the transfer of data to and from the Registry • An extension of services already being offered by the Registry

40. What Is Covered? • Batch submission (uploads) • Monthly submissions • Infrastructure updates • Requests for industry downloads • Information retrieval (downloads) • Batch submission validation notifications • Industry download results • DOES NOT cover report results • Server to Server communication was seen as initially being most valuable in providing large volumes of information to another system…all the data available in Registry reports is also available in industry downloads

41. Submission Example Before Server to Server Industry System Petroleum Registry Volumetric Submission Volumetric Submission Submission Response

42. Submission Example With Server to Server Industry System Petroleum Registry Volumetric Submission Submission Response Volumetric Submission

43. Result Checking Example Before Server to Server Industry System Petroleum Registry Check Inbox/ Open Results

44. Result Checking Example With Server to Server Industry System Petroleum Registry List Available Downloads Return List of Available Downloads Request Specific Result Download Return Specific Download

45. Polling Details List Available Downloads Check for Results Wait for XX minutes Anything For me? Yes No Download Next Result Request Specific Result Download Update System Yes More on This list? No

46. Security Considerations • All Registry security processes still apply to Server to Server • Userid used in server to server needs to be a valid Registry userid for the BA • Each request will have to be valid for the BA/userid • Each request will verify the userid/password • Requests are only through Registry interfaces • Not directly hitting the Registry database

47. Server to Server Usage • Each company needs to decide how they are going to use Server to Server • Who is submitting? • Who should be able to view the results? • Need to determine batching and frequency of submissions • Need to determine frequency and timing of polling

48. Server to Server Registry Guidelines • Operational approaches and guidelines will evolve over time as the use of Server to Server increases • Frequency of polling • Recommended timing of large requests • Immediate impact will be extension of hours of operation • Server to Server activity can approach 24/7 unlike on-line Registry operation • Only constrained by activities such as planned maintenance, nightly processing etc.

49. Possibilities for Server to Server Application Joanne Quirk-WilliamsIndustry Registry Team

50. Short-term Opportunities • Uploads to the Registry • Create the batch in your system and upload • Currently this is a “manual” process • NEW – your system “sends” the file • Possibilities • Data control – no manipulation of files after creation in your system • Reduce Manual Intervention