Bill Barrett 8K Regulation FD Disclosure | BBG 17 Jun 08

1099

Street,

Suite

2300

Denver,

Colorado

80202

303.312.8155,

fax

303.291.0420

www.billbarrettcorp.com

NYSE:

BBG

Investor

Relations

contact:

Jennifer

Martin

jmartin@billbarrettcorp.com

A Premier Rocky Mountain E&P Company

June 2008

Piceance Basin, Colorado

Wachovia Basin Teach-In

Piceance Basin –

Development

Paradox Basin –

Exploration

Exhibit 99.1

Premier Rockies E&P Company

Fred Barrett

Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

Visible Development Growth

Powder River

Basin

Piceance

Basin

Wind River Basin

West Tavaputs

Gas Prone Area

Oil Prone Area

Development Project

CBM

Big George

Gibson Gulch

Lower Risk, Repeatable,

High Quality ROR Inventory

•

95%+ natural gas

•

97% operated –

increases

control

•

94% average working interest –

concentrates staff resources

•

Visibility for 20+% CAGR in

production going forward

•

400-500 wells/year with existing

inventory going forward

Uinta Basin

558

Bcfe

Proved

558

Bcfe

Proved

2.7 Tcfe*

3P Resources

2.7 Tcfe*

3P Resources

2.0 Tcfe

Development

Projects

2.0 Tcfe

Development

Projects

*as of May 2008

0.1

Tcfe

0.1

Tcfe

Strong Resource Base

to Generate Reserve Growth

Strong Resource Base

to Generate Reserve Growth

as of May 2008

558 Bcfe

Proved

558 Bcfe

Proved

2.7 Tcfe*

3P Resources

2.7 Tcfe*

3P Resources

1.6 Tcfe

Increased

Density

1.6 Tcfe

Increased

Density

0.5 Tcfe

Other

Probable

& Possible

0.5 Tcfe

Other

Probable

& Possible

2.7 Tcfe*

3P Resources

2.7 Tcfe*

3P Resources

8-10 Tcfe

Unrisked

Potential

8-10 Tcfe

Unrisked

Potential

Capital Expenditures

Exploration

10% +/-

Exploration

10% +/-

Development

80%

Development

80%

Delineation1

0% +/-

Delineation1

0% +/-

Piceance

40%

Piceance

40%

Uinta

33%

Uinta

33%

WRB 5%

Exploration

& Other 15%

PRB 7%

2005

2006

2007

2008E

$347

$385

$49

$444

$575-

600

$575-

600

2008 CAPEX

$575 –

$600 million est.

F&D

($/Mcfe)

$3.67

$2.80

$1.83

2005

2006

2007

CH4 acquisition (PRB), net of subsequent divestiture and non-cash deferred tax liability

Base Capex

Capex

(Millions)

2008 CAPEX

$575 –

$600 million est.

Vernal

Glenwood

Springs

Grand

Junction

Price

San Rafael

Uplift

U T A H

C O L O R A D O

Uinta Mtns

Uinta and Piceance Basins

UTAH

COLORADO

Uinta

Basin

Piceance

Basin

Barrett Acreage

Gas Producing Area

Oil Producing Area

W. Tavaputs

Development

Altamont/

Bluebell

Monument Butte

Natural

Buttes

San

Arroyo

Grand Valley,

Parachute,

Rulison,

Mamm Creek

Silt

Gibson Gulch

Development

Hook Shale Gas

Exploration

Blacktail Ridge –

Lake Canyon

Delineation

Piceance

Creek

White River

Dome

Uinta and Piceance Basins

UTAH

COLORADO

Uinta

Basin

Piceance

Basin

Wasatch

Green River

Wasatch

Castlegate

Price River

Williams Fork

Cameo Coals

Blackhawk

Sego Sandstone

Upper Cozzette

Lower Cozzette

Upper Corcoran

Lower Corcoran

West

Tavaputs

Mamm

Creek

Rulison

Parachute

Grand

Valley

Mancos Shale

Note: Diagrammatic only

Prickly

Pear

Structure

Dry Canyon

Compressor site

Peters

Point

Structure

•

Proved reserves: 238 Bcfe (shallow and deep) (12/07)

•

Net production 76 MMcfe/d (shallow and deep) (04/08)

•

40,600 net acres; 28,600 net undeveloped acres (12/07)

•

94% working interest

•

Rig

winter;

Rigs

post

winter

stips

(shallow)

•

EIS in process, record of decision expected 2H ‘08

•

3P resources 1.4 Tcfe, low risk (shallow &

deep)

•

750 –

800 drilling locations

•

Deep: 6 producing wells

•

Upside: Expansion of deep & Mancos shale

Uinta Basin –

West Tavaputs

Shallow –

Wasatch, Mesaverde; Deep –

Navajo, Entrada, Dakota –

Utah

Uinta Basin –

West Tavaputs

Shallow –

Wasatch, Mesaverde; Deep –

Navajo, Entrada, Dakota –

Utah

Uinta

Basin

Scale:

640 ac

= 1 Mile

Questar interconnect

CURRENT STATUS

PROGRAM POTENTIAL

Interplanetary

compressor site

Questar interconnect

BBC Acreage

Gas Well

Existing Pipeline

Proposed Pipeline

Piceance Basin

Hollis Bairrington, Asset Manager

Steve Cumella,

Sr. Geologist

Piceance Basin –

Gibson Gulch

Williams Fork –

Colorado

Piceance Basin –

Gibson Gulch

Williams Fork –

Colorado

Silt

3-Component

3-D Seismic

Piceance

Basin

BBC acreage

BBC operated gas well

BBC non-operated gas well

Non-operated gas well

10 acre pilots

Overview/History

Piceance Basin, Colorado

Overview/History

Piceance Basin, Colorado

Piceance acreage purchased from Calpine in 2004

Initial production –

8.5 MMcfe/d gross

16,200 net acres (primarily undeveloped)

$140,000,000 purchase price ($8,642 per acre)

Acquisitions in the area by competitors @ up to $50,000 per acre

BBC’s acquisition evaluation of Calpine’s position was based on

0.7 -

0.8 BCF per well EUR’s

Drill costs less than $1.2 MM per well

Costs to drill initially averaged +$2 MM per well

EUR’s

initially averaged less than 0.5 BCF/Well

Results were less than expected through the 1st half of 2005

Dramatic turn around in results in late 2005 with change in frac

formula and perf

strategy

Data Collection

Piceance Basin, Colorado

Data Collection

Piceance Basin, Colorado

Production Logging Program initiated immediately

Shows intervals contributing and rate of contribution

Approximately 50 logs ran to date (15% of all wells drilled)

Formation Imaging Logs were ran at several locations in 2005

Indicates fracturing and gas seeps

CHDT (Cased Hole Pressure Data) program initiated immediately

Data collected strategically across the field in heavily produced areas

Greatly contributes to ability to predict interval depletion

Enabled us to identify depletion from open-hole logs

Determined that very few sands were depleted even in most highly

developed areas

Micro-Seismic data was collected in 2007 on an 11-well pad

Great tool for determining extent of fracture stimulation

Confirmed elliptical drainage orientation

Excellent data to confirm viability of 10-acre density

Overview of Piceance geology

Why does 10-acre density work in the Piceance?

Discontinuous fluvial sandstones

Highly elliptical drainage

Strong BBC well performance due in part to

unconventional pay picking

Outline for Geologic Presentation

Garfield County Gas Production

200000

400000

600000

800000

1000000

1200000

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Year

T10S-R95W

T3N-R89W

Piceance

Basin

Colorado

Structure

Contours Top

Rollins

(Johnson, 1989)

Isopach Williams

Fork Continuous

Gas Shows

(Yurewicz, 2005)

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

Huge Basin-Centered Gas Resource

Grand

Valley

Parachute

Rulison

Mamm

Creek

840,000 acres inside 1,500 ft Williams Fork

continuous gas column isopach

84,000 10-acre locations, 42,000 20-acre locations

Potential Productive Area

Piceance Basin, Colorado

Potential Productive Area

Piceance Basin, Colorado

Mesaverde Stratigraphic Cross Section along I-70 Corridor Fields

Structural Cross Section along I-70 Corridor Fields

Piceance Basin, Colorado

High well densities are required to produce a

reasonable amount of the gas in place due to very

low permeabilities, discontinuous sandstones, and

anisotropic drainage.

There is good evidence from Grand Valley, Parachute,

Rulison and Mamm Creek fields that 10-acre density

is the optimum well density.

Optimum Well Density

Piceance Basin, Colorado

Optimum Well Density

Piceance Basin, Colorado

Mesaverde Outcrop West Side Piceance Basin near Grand Junction

Rollins

Discontinuous

Williams Fork

Sandstone Lenses

Discontinuous

Williams Fork

Sandstone Lenses

6/17/2008 2:05 AM

Cross Section of Coal Canyon Sand Bodies

Mamm

Creek

Williams

Fork

Stratigraphic

Cross

Section

Acre

Density

Highly Elliptical Drainage Due to Nearly Parallel Natural and Hydraulic Fractures

Drilling Induced

Natural

1,000 ft

24D

24C

24B

14D

13B

13A

14C

View angle

for view

parallel to Sh

max

Microseismic Shows Stimulated

Area Approximates 10-Acre Ellipse

with 6:1 Length/Width Ratio

•

Perf

picking

•

Frac interval staging

•

Perfing

(getting into formation, open perfs

calculations)

•

Type of sand (e.g., 20-40 vs

30-50, Ottawa vs

Brady)

•

Type of fluid (slickwater), additives (e.g., surfactants)

•

Sand concentration (e.g., 1 ppg

0.5 ppg)

•

Pump rate

•

Flow back (the sooner the better)

Important Factors in Piceance Fracing

First

Months

Production-Recent

0.5

PPG

Fraced

Wells

20-Acre Density

BBC Wells

Competitor Wells

Image Logs Show Gas Seeping from Thin, Tight

Zones That Are Not Usually Considered Pay

Production Logs Show Good Production from Thin, Tight Pay

Frac

Phase History

Frac

Phase History

Phase 1:

First wells completed by BBC in early 2005

Perforations are clustered in most obvious pay zones, while ignoring thin bedded conventional pay

zones

A variety of frac fluids were used including 10# and 15# linear gels (which are now believed to be

damaging) pumped at lower rates

Perforations were not typically broken down prior the main frac treatment

Phase 2:

Completions post June/July 2005

Higher

volume

using

slickwater

frac

fluids

with

ppg

sand

concentrations

Breakdown acid jobs prior to frac

More aggressive thin bed perforating

Phase 3:

Completions post Oct/Nov 2005

Even

aggressive

thin

bed

and

unconventional

pay

perforating

(e.g.,

tight

sands

above

below coal seams, apparent low porosity shaley/carbonate-cemented sands that have shown to be

gas productive on production logs)

1 ppg

sand concentrations

Higher quality perf

guns to assure that all perforations are open without the need for ball out acid

breakdown jobs.

Phase 4

Completions post 12/05

The

perforating

strategy

Phase

but

with

the

larger

0.5

ppg

jobs

(same

sand

volume,

twice

the

water)

The first 0.5 ppg

jobs were done in 12/05 and experiments continued until July 2006

These

experiments

compared

0.5

and

1.0

ppg

completions

the

same

pad

The

0.5

ppg

completions

were

superior

the

1.0

ppg

completions

0.5 ppg

completions became standard Sept 2006

Water Handling

Gross Water Costs

$6.00

$4.00

$2.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

Jan-07

Feb-07

Mar-07

Apr-07

May-07

Jun-07

Jul-07

Aug-07

Sep-07

Oct-07

Nov-07

Dec-07

Month

Typical Well Production Profile

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

Months

Piceance Basin, Colorado

•

IP-Instantaneous: 2300 Mcf/d

•

IP-30 day: 1800 Mcf/d

•

Spacing: 10-acre & 20-acre

•

Well Depth avg:7,400’

$ 6.75¹

0.90

$ 7.65

(0.97)

(0.43)

6.25

EUR (gross)

NRI

EUR (net)

Drilling

Completion

Total

Incremental D&C costs (per Mcfe)

Gas Price

MMBtu/ sales adjustment

Realized Price (per Mcfe)

LOE, Gathering & Transportation

Production taxes

Gross margin (cash flow)

ROR

CIG Price Required 10% ROR

Bcfe

1.3

81%

1.00+

$ 0.8

1.05

$1.85

$ 1.85

$mm

Piceance Basin -

Gibson Gulch

Williams Fork -

Colorado

Piceance Basin -

Gibson Gulch

Williams Fork -

Colorado

ILLUSTRATIVE DRILLING

AND COMPLETION COSTS

43%

$ 4.20

ILLUSTRATIVE ECONOMICS²

Typical Well Price Sensitivity

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

$4.20

$6.20

$8.20

$10.20

CIG Price -

$/Mmbtu

As of May 9, 2008, Rockies strip price through 2010 averages $8.15/MMBtu.

For illustrative purposes only, does not represent formal guidance

(See “Forward-Looking and Other Cautionary Statements”

on slide 2)

$8.15

Production wells on Specialty site

100

125

150

175

PRODUCTION

80 Wells

68 Wells

100 Wells

125 Wells

~110 Wells

Wells Drilled

~110 Wells

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Piceance Basin –

Gibson Gulch

Piceance Basin –

Gibson Gulch

Production

shut in due to

low Rockies

prices

Piceance Basin –

Gibson Gulch

Williams Fork –

Colorado

Piceance Basin –

Gibson Gulch

Williams Fork –

Colorado

Silt

3-Component

3-D Seismic

Piceance

Basin

CURRENT STATUS

PROGRAM POTENTIAL

•

3P resources 869 Bcfe

•

900-960 drilling locations (10-acre density)

•

Developing on 10-acre density

•

Plan to drill 100+ wells/year

•

Proved reserves: 212 Bcfe (12/07)

•

Net production: 88 MMcfe/d (04/08)

•

16,200 net acres; 12,400 net undeveloped

acres

(12/07)

•

97% working interest

•

Four rigs operating

BBC acreage

BBC operated gas well

BBC non-operated gas well

Non-operated gas well

10 acre pilots

Regulatory

Duane Zavadil

VP Government Affairs & Regulatory

Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC) Rulemaking

Driven by HB 1341/1298

November 2007 Strawman

Two Months of “Workgroup”

meetings

March 31, 2008 Draft Rules

12 Days of Hearings June 10 to July 18, 2008

Adopt August 12, 2008

Effective November 2008

Major BBC Issues & Timing Limitations and Excessive Process

Consultation for Winter Waivers Initiated

Ballot Initiative 113

Eliminate Ad Valorem Credit

Reduces Stripper Exception Threshold

Flattens Severance Rate Around 5%

Net 153 percent Increase in Tax Burden

Currently Gathering Signatures

On November Ballot

Strong Industry Response

Colorado Regulatory/Legislative Issues

Paradox Basin

Peter Moreland

Sr. Geologist

Yellow Jacket Shale Gas Prospect

Gothic Shale –

Colorado

Yellow Jacket Shale Gas Prospect

Gothic Shale –

Colorado

Paradox

Basin

•

Expansive project area

•

Shallow

depths:

5,500’

–

7,500’

TDs

•

Estimated

Gothic

shale

thickness:

80’

–

150’

•

Encouraging gas contents and shale composition

•

Additional shale gas potential in Green Jacket

(Hovenweep)

PROGRAM POTENTIAL

•

55 -

100% working interest (operated)

•

183,000 net undeveloped acres (12/07)

•

Potential pay zones: Hovenweep and Gothic Shale

•

3 exploratory science wells drilled in late 2006/2007:

regional placement, varying frac technologies –

testing

•

Shooting 3-D to high-grade location for horizontal test

•

Drilling horizontal test

CURRENT STATUS

Gothic shale

1,850 sq mi

Hovenweep

shale

1,300 sq mi

Regional Play Concept Map

Ismay

(BBC)

Lower Ismay

(BBC)

Gothic (BBC)

Desert Creek (BBC)

Chimney Rock (BBC)

Hovenweep (BBC)

Yellow Jacket Shale Gas Prospect

Gothic Shale –

Colorado

Yellow Jacket Shale Gas Prospect

Gothic Shale –

Colorado

10 –

25 Miles

Core sample

To quantify presence of gas

Well #1

250 -

600 Mcfd

Well #3

50 -

100 Mcfd

Well #2

To be plugged

(casing design/stimulation)

2008 Program

Koskie

–

Brumley

Draw #3H-27-38-16

Paradox Basin –

Utah

Koskie

–

Brumley

Draw #3H-27-38-16

Paradox Basin –

Utah

KB 7133 ft.

Ground Elevation 7118 ft.

Salt Flank Production

CUM: 80 Bcf

Currently: 44 MMcfe/d

Pine Ridge

Salt Flank Play

21 sq mi 3-D in Fall 2005

Offset to key well with

250’

of gas shows

200 Bcf upside

(drilling 3Q 08)

New Salt Flank

Production

Andy’s Mesa

Double Eagle

Pine Ridge Prospect

Paradox Basin

Pine Ridge Prospect

Paradox Basin

Scale: 640 ac = 1 Mile

(with 40 ac grid)

UTAH

COLORADO

Paradox

Basin

Barrett Acreage

Barrett Prospect

Gas Well

Oil Well

Salt Anticlines

Pipeline

•

Net undeveloped acres: 30,000 (12/07)

Well defined acreage targets

•

Pine Ridge 21 sq. mi. 3-D acquired;

encouraged by 3-D interpretation

•

Pine Ridge exploratory test in 2008

Typical well

(~30 days to drill to 10,000’)

Salt Flank Prospect

Paradox Basin, Utah

Salt Flank Prospect

Paradox Basin, Utah

mile Fairway

•

Key show wells present

•

6 prospects assembled, building others

•

Multi-pay zones

•

8,000’

–

10,000’

TDs

•

Similar to Andy’s Mesa (~100+ Bcf)

and Double Eagle (~60+ Bcf) fields

PROGRAM POTENTIAL

CURRENT STATUS

Paradox

Basin

Summary

•

Positive Trends

•

BBC Advantages

•

Upside

•

Q&A

Bill Barrett (BBG) Inactive 8-KRegulation FD Disclosure