epdform8k_121809.htm
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
8-K
CURRENT
REPORT PURSUANT
TO
SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Date of
report (Date of earliest event reported): October 26,
2009
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.
(Exact
Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
Delaware
|
1-14323
|
76-0568219
|
(State
or Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation
or Organization)
|
(Commission
File
Number)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
Identification
No.)
|
1100 Louisiana, 10th Floor, Houston,
Texas
(Address of
Principal Executive Offices)
|
77002
(Zip
Code)
|
(713)
381-6500
(Registrant’s
Telephone Number, including Area
Code)
|
Check the
appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously
satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following
provisions:
¨ Written communications
pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)
¨ Soliciting material
pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)
¨ Pre-commencement
communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR
240.14d-2(b))
¨ Pre-commencement
communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR
240.13e-4(c))
Item
8.01. Other Events.
Unless
the context requires otherwise, references in this Current Report on Form 8-K to
“we,” “us,” or “our” are intended to mean the business and operations of
Enterprise Products GP, LLC (“EPGP”) and its consolidated subsidiaries, which
include Enterprise Products Partners L.P. (“Enterprise Products Partners”) and
its consolidated subsidiaries. EPGP is the general partner of Enterprise
Products Partners.
As
described in our Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 16, 2009 and within
this Current Report on Form 8-K, Enterprise Products Partners completed the
related mergers of its wholly owned subsidiaries with TEPPCO Partners, L.P.
(“TEPPCO”) and its general partner, Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC
(“TEPPCO GP”), on October 26, 2009 (such related mergers referred to herein
individually and together as the “TEPPCO Merger”).
The TEPPCO Merger transactions were
accounted for as a reorganization of entities under common control in a manner
similar to a pooling of interests. The financial and operating
activities of Enterprise Products Partners, TEPPCO and Enterprise GP Holdings
L.P. and their respective general partners, and EPCO, Inc. and its privately
held subsidiaries, are under the common control of Dan L.
Duncan. The purpose of the disclosures presented in this
Current Report on Form 8-K is to recast certain financial and other information
of EPGP to include TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP.
The
inclusion of TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP in the supplemental consolidated balance
sheets and other disclosures presented within this Current Report on Form 8-K
was effective January 1, 2005 since an affiliate of EPCO under common control
with Enterprise Products Partners originally acquired ownership interests in
TEPPCO GP in February 2005.
Our
supplemental consolidated balance sheets prior to the effective date of the
TEPPCO Merger reflect the combined financial information of EPGP, TEPPCO and
TEPPCO GP on a 100% basis. Third party and related party ownership
interests in TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP prior to the merger have been reflected as
“Former owners of TEPPCO,” which is a component of noncontrolling
interest.
We
revised our business segments and related disclosures to reflect the TEPPCO
Merger. Our reorganized business segments reflect the manner in which
these businesses are managed and reviewed by the chief executive officer of
EPGP. Under our new business segment structure, we have five
reportable business segments: (i) NGL Pipelines & Services; (ii)
Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines & Services; (iii) Onshore Crude Oil Pipelines
& Services; (iv) Offshore Pipelines & Services; and (v) Petrochemical
& Refined Products Services.
Item
9.01. Financial Statements and Exhibits.
(d) Exhibits.
Exhibit No.
|
Description
|
23.1
|
Consent
of Deloitte & Touche LLP
|
99.1
|
Recast
of Exhibit 99.2 of Enterprise Products Partners L.P.’s Current Report on
Form 8-K dated
|
|
July
8, 2009.
|
99.2
|
Recast
of Exhibit 99.1 of Enterprise Products Partners L.P.’s Current Report on
Form 8-K dated
November 16,
2009.
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to
be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly
authorized.
|
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: Enterprise
Products GP, LLC, as General Partner
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date:
December 18, 2009
|
|
By:
|
/s/
Michael J. Knesek
|
|
|
Name:
|
Michael
J. Knesek
|
|
|
Title:
|
Senior
Vice President, Controller
and
Principal Accounting Officer of
Enterprise
Products GP, LLC
|
epdexhibit23_1.htm
EXHIBIT
23.1
CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
We
consent to the incorporation by reference in (i) Registration Statement Nos.
333-36856, 333-82486, 333-115633, 333-115634, 333-150680, 333-162666 of
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. on Form S-8; (ii) Registration Statement No.
333-145709 of Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and Enterprise Products
Operating LLC on Form S-3; and (iii) Registration Statement No. 333-142106 of
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. on Form S-3 of our report dated December 18,
2009 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an
explanatory paragraph concerning the retroactive effects of the common control
acquisition of TEPPCO Partners, L.P. and Texas Eastern Products Pipeline
Company, LLC by Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and the related change in
business segments described in Note 1), relating to the supplemental
consolidated balance sheet of Enterprise Products GP, LLC and subsidiaries at
December 31, 2008, appearing in this Current Report on Form 8-K of Enterprise
Products Partners L.P.
/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Houston,
Texas
December
18, 2009
epdexhibit99_1.htm
EXHIBIT
99.1
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
RECAST
OF EXHIBIT 99.2 FROM CURRENT REPORT ON FORM 8-K DATED JULY 8, 2009
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
|
|
Page
No.
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
2
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2008
|
3
|
|
|
|
Notes
to Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet
|
|
|
Note
1 – Company Organization and Basis of Presentation
|
4
|
|
Note
2 – General Accounting Matters
|
6
|
|
Note
3 – Recent Accounting Developments
|
13
|
|
Note
4 – Accounting for Equity Awards
|
15
|
|
Note
5 – Employee Benefit Plans
|
22
|
|
Note
6 – Derivative Instruments, Hedging Activities and Fair Value
Measurements
|
23
|
|
Note
7 – Inventories
|
29
|
|
Note
8 – Property, Plant and Equipment
|
30
|
|
Note
9 – Investments in Unconsolidated Affiliates
|
32
|
|
Note
10 – Business Combinations
|
35
|
|
Note
11 – Intangible Assets and Goodwill
|
37
|
|
Note
12 – Debt Obligations
|
41
|
|
Note
13 – Equity
|
51
|
|
Note
14 – Business Segments
|
52
|
|
Note
15 – Related Party Transactions
|
53
|
|
Note
16 – Provision for Income Taxes
|
61
|
|
Note
17 – Commitments and Contingencies
|
62
|
|
Note
18 – Significant Risks and Uncertainties
|
67
|
|
Note
19 – Subsequent Events
|
69
|
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the
Board of Directors of Enterprise Products GP, LLC
Houston,
Texas
We have
audited the accompanying supplemental consolidated balance sheet of Enterprise
Products GP, LLC (the "Company") at December 31, 2008. This
supplemental consolidated financial statement is the responsibility of the
Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
this supplemental consolidated financial statement based on our
audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The
Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its
internal control over financial reporting. Our audit included
consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for
designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not
for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s
internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no
such opinion. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall supplemental consolidated balance sheet
presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion.
In our
opinion, such supplemental consolidated balance sheet presents fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of the Company at December 31, 2008,
in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of America.
The
supplemental consolidated balance sheet gives retroactive effect to the
acquisition of TEPPCO Partners, L.P. (“TEPPCO”) and Texas Eastern Products
Pipeline Company, LLC (“TEPPCO GP”) by Enterprise Products Partners L.P. on
October 26, 2009, which has been accounted for at historical cost as a
reorganization of entities under common control as described in Note 1 to the
supplemental consolidated balance sheet. Also as discussed in Note 1
to the supplemental consolidated balance sheet, the disclosures in the
accompanying supplemental consolidated balance sheet have been retrospectively
adjusted for a change in the composition of reportable segments as a result of
the acquisition TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP by Enterprise Products Partners L.P.
/s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Houston,
Texas
December
18, 2009
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
SUPPLEMENTAL
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
AT
DECEMBER 31, 2008
(Dollars
in millions)
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
61.8 |
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
|
203.8 |
|
Accounts
and notes receivable – trade, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of
$17.7
|
|
|
2,028.5 |
|
Accounts
receivable – related parties
|
|
|
35.3 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
405.0 |
|
Derivative
assets
|
|
|
218.6 |
|
Prepaid
and other current assets
|
|
|
149.8 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
3,102.8 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
16,732.8 |
|
Investments
in unconsolidated affiliates
|
|
|
911.9 |
|
Intangible
assets, net of accumulated amortization of $675.1
|
|
|
1,182.9 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
2,019.6 |
|
Deferred
tax asset
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
261.3 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
24,211.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable – trade
|
|
$ |
388.9 |
|
Accounts
payable – related parties
|
|
|
17.4 |
|
Accrued
product payables
|
|
|
1,845.7 |
|
Accrued
interest payable
|
|
|
188.3 |
|
Other
accrued expenses
|
|
|
65.7 |
|
Derivative
liabilities
|
|
|
302.9 |
|
Other
current liabilities
|
|
|
292.3 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
3,101.2 |
|
Long-term debt: (see
Note 12)
|
|
|
|
|
Senior
debt obligations – principal
|
|
|
10,030.1 |
|
Junior
subordinated notes – principal
|
|
|
1,532.7 |
|
Other
|
|
|
75.1 |
|
Total
long-term debt
|
|
|
11,637.9 |
|
Deferred
tax liabilities
|
|
|
66.1 |
|
Other
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
110.6 |
|
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
Equity: (see Note
13)
|
|
|
|
|
Member’s
interest
|
|
|
526.8 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
Total
member’s equity
|
|
|
524.8 |
|
Noncontrolling
interest
|
|
|
8,771.1 |
|
Total
equity
|
|
|
9,295.9 |
|
Total
liabilities and equity
|
|
$ |
24,211.7 |
|
See Notes
to Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Except
per unit amounts, or as noted within the context of each footnote disclosure,
the dollar amounts presented in the tabular data within these footnote
disclosures are stated in millions of dollars.
Note
1. Company Organization and Basis of Presentation
Company
Organization
Enterprise Products GP, LLC is a
Delaware limited liability company that was formed in April 1998 to become the
general partner of Enterprise Products Partners L.P. The business
purpose of Enterprise Products GP, LLC is to manage the affairs and operations
of Enterprise Products Partners L.P. At December 31, 2008, Enterprise
GP Holdings L.P. owned 100% of the membership interests of Enterprise Products
GP, LLC.
Unless
the context requires otherwise, references to “we,” “us,” “our” or “the Company”
are intended to mean and include the business and operations of Enterprise
Products GP, LLC, as well as its consolidated subsidiaries, which include
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and its consolidated
subsidiaries.
References
to “Enterprise Products Partners” mean the business and operations of Enterprise
Products Partners L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries, which now include
TEPPCO Partners, L.P. and its general partner. Enterprise Products
Partners is a publicly traded Delaware limited partnership, the registered
common units of which are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under
the ticker symbol “EPD.” References to “EPGP” mean Enterprise
Products GP, LLC, individually as the general partner of Enterprise Products
Partners, and not on a consolidated basis. Enterprise Products
Partners has no business activities outside those conducted by its operating
subsidiary, Enterprise Products Operating LLC (“EPO”). Enterprise
Products Partners and EPO were formed to acquire, own and operate certain
natural gas liquids (“NGLs”) related businesses of EPCO, Inc.
References
to “Enterprise GP Holdings” mean the business and operations of Enterprise GP
Holdings L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries. Enterprise GP
Holdings is a publicly traded Delaware limited partnership, the registered units
of which are listed on the NYSE under the ticker symbol
“EPE.” References to “EPE Holdings” mean EPE Holdings, LLC, which is
the general partner of Enterprise GP Holdings.
References
to “TEPPCO” and “TEPPCO GP” mean TEPPCO Partners, L.P. and Texas Eastern
Products Pipeline Company, LLC (which is the general partner of TEPPCO),
respectively, prior to their mergers with subsidiaries of Enterprise Products
Partners. On October 26, 2009, Enterprise Products Partners completed
the mergers with TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP (such related mergers referred to herein
individually and together as the “TEPPCO Merger”). See “TEPPCO Merger
and Basis of Presentation” within this Note 1 for additional information
regarding the TEPPCO Merger.
References
to “Energy Transfer Equity” mean the business and operations of Energy Transfer
Equity, L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries. References to “LE GP”
mean LE GP, LLC, which is the general partner of Energy Transfer
Equity. On May 7, 2007, Enterprise GP Holdings acquired
noncontrolling interests in both LE GP and Energy Transfer
Equity. Enterprise GP Holdings accounts for its investments in LE GP
and Energy Transfer Equity using the equity method of accounting.
References
to “Employee Partnerships” mean EPE Unit L.P. (“EPE Unit I”), EPE Unit II, L.P.
(“EPE Unit II”), EPE Unit III, L.P. (“EPE Unit III”), Enterprise Unit L.P.
(“Enterprise Unit”), EPCO Unit L.P. (“EPCO Unit”), TEPPCO Unit L.P. (“TEPPCO
Unit I”), and TEPPCO Unit II L.P. (“TEPPCO Unit II”), collectively, all of which
are private company affiliates of EPCO.
On
February 5, 2007, a consolidated subsidiary of EPO, Duncan Energy Partners L.P.
(“Duncan Energy Partners”), completed an initial public offering of its common
units (see Note 15). Duncan Energy Partners owns equity interests in
certain of our midstream energy businesses. References to “DEP
GP”
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
mean DEP
Holdings, LLC, which is the general partner of Duncan Energy Partners and is
wholly owned by EPO.
References
to “EPCO” mean EPCO, Inc. and its wholly-owned private company affiliates, which
are related parties to all of the foregoing named entities. Dan L.
Duncan is the Group Co-Chairman and controlling shareholder of
EPCO.
For
financial reporting purposes, Enterprise Products Partners consolidates the
balance sheet of Duncan Energy Partners with that of its
own. Enterprise Products Partners controls Duncan Energy Partners
through the ownership of its general partner. Public ownership of
Duncan Energy Partners’ net assets is presented as a component of noncontrolling
interest in our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet. The
borrowings of Duncan Energy Partners are presented as part of our consolidated
debt; however, neither Enterprise Products Partners nor EPGP have any obligation
for the payment of interest or repayment of borrowings incurred by Duncan Energy
Partners.
TEPPCO
Merger and Basis of Presentation
General. EPGP
owns a 2% general partner interest in Enterprise Products Partners, which
conducts substantially all of its business. EPGP has no independent
operations and no material assets outside those of Enterprise Products
Partners. The number of reconciling items between our consolidated
balance sheet and that of Enterprise Products Partners are few. The
most significant difference is that relating to noncontrolling interest
ownership in our net assets by the limited partners of Enterprise Products
Partners, and the elimination of our investment in Enterprise Products Partners
with our underlying partner’s capital account in Enterprise Products
Partners. See Note 13 for additional information regarding
noncontrolling interest in our consolidated subsidiaries.
TEPPCO
Merger. On October 26, 2009, the related mergers of wholly
owned subsidiaries of Enterprise Products Partners with TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP
were completed. Under terms of the merger agreements, TEPPCO and
TEPPCO GP became wholly owned subsidiaries of Enterprise Products Partners and
each of TEPPCO's unitholders, except for a privately held affiliate of EPCO,
were entitled to receive 1.24 common units of Enterprise Products Partners for
each TEPPCO unit. In total, Enterprise Products Partners issued an
aggregate of 126,932,318 common units and 4,520,431 Class B units (described
below) as consideration in the TEPPCO Merger for both TEPPCO units and the
TEPPCO GP membership interests. TEPPCO’s units, which had been
trading on the NYSE under the ticker symbol TPP, have been delisted and are no
longer publicly traded.
A
privately held affiliate of EPCO exchanged a portion of its TEPPCO units, based
on the 1.24 exchange rate, for 4,520,431 Class B units of Enterprise Products
Partners in lieu of common units. The Class B units are not entitled
to regular quarterly cash distributions for the first sixteen quarters following
the closing date of the merger. The Class B units automatically
convert into the same number of common units on the date immediately following
the payment date for the sixteenth quarterly distribution following the closing
date of the merger. The Class B units are entitled to vote together
with the common units as a single class on partnership matters and, except for
the payment of distributions, have the same rights and privileges as Enterprise
Products Partners’ common units.
Under the
terms of the TEPPCO Merger agreements, Enterprise GP Holdings received 1,331,681
common units of Enterprise Products Partners and an increase in the capital
account of EPGP to maintain its 2% general partner interest in Enterprise
Products Partners as consideration for 100% of the membership interests of
TEPPCO GP. Following the closing of the TEPPCO Merger, affiliates of
EPCO owned approximately 31.3% of Enterprise Products Partners’ outstanding
limited partner units, including 3.4% owned by Enterprise GP
Holdings.
Since
Enterprise Products Partners, TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP are under common control of
Mr. Duncan, the TEPPCO Merger was accounted for at historical costs as a
reorganization of entities under common control in a manner similar to a pooling
of interests. The inclusion of TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP in our
Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet was effective January 1, 2005 since an
affiliate of EPCO
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
under
common control with Enterprise Products Partners originally acquired ownership
interests in TEPPCO GP in February 2005.
Our
Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2008 reflects the
combined balance sheet of Enterprise Products Partners, TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP on
a 100% basis. Third party and related party ownership interests in
TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP prior to the merger have been reflected as “Former owners
of TEPPCO” a component of noncontrolling interest.
Our
supplemental balance sheet has been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”). The balance sheets of TEPPCO
and TEPPCO GP were prepared from the separate accounting records maintained by
TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP. All intercompany balances and transactions were
eliminated in consolidation.
We
revised our business segments and related disclosures to reflect the TEPPCO
Merger. Our reorganized business segments reflect the manner in which
these businesses are managed and reviewed by the chief executive officer of our
general partner. Under our new business segment structure, we have
five reportable business segments: (i) NGL Pipelines & Services;
(ii) Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines & Services; (iii) Onshore Crude Oil
Pipelines & Services; (iv) Offshore Pipelines & Services; and (v)
Petrochemical & Refined Products Services.
Note
2. General Accounting Matters
Allowance
for Doubtful Accounts
Our
allowance for doubtful accounts is determined based on specific identification
and estimates of future uncollectible accounts. Our procedure for
determining the allowance for doubtful accounts is based on (i) historical
experience with customers, (ii) the perceived financial stability of customers
based on our research and (iii) the levels of credit we grant to
customers. In addition, we may increase the allowance account in
response to the specific identification of customers involved in bankruptcy
proceedings and similar financial difficulties. On a routine basis,
we review estimates associated with the allowance for doubtful accounts to
ensure that we have recorded sufficient reserves to cover potential
losses. Our allowance also includes estimates for uncollectible
natural gas imbalances based on specific identification of
accounts.
The
following table presents the activity of our allowance for doubtful accounts for
the year ended December 31, 2008:
Balance
at beginning of period
|
|
$ |
21.8 |
|
Charges
to expense
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
Deductions
|
|
|
(7.6 |
) |
Balance
at end of period
|
|
$ |
17.7 |
|
See “Credit Risk Due to Industry
Concentrations” in Note 18 for more information.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash and
cash equivalents represent unrestricted cash on hand and highly liquid
investments with original maturities of less than three months from the date of
purchase.
Consolidation
Policy
Our
Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet includes our accounts and those of our
majority-owned subsidiaries in which we have a controlling interest, after the
elimination of all material intercompany accounts and
transactions. We also consolidate other entities and ventures in
which we possess a controlling financial interest as well as partnership
interests where we are the sole general partner
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
of the
partnership. We evaluate our financial interests in business
enterprises to determine if they represent variable interest entities where we
are the primary beneficiary. If such criteria are met, we consolidate
the balance sheet of such businesses with that of our own.
We
consolidate the balance sheet of Enterprise Products Partners with that of
EPGP. This accounting consolidation is required because EPGP owns
100% of the general partnership interest in Enterprise Products Partners, which
gives EPGP the ability to exercise control over Enterprise Products
Partners.
If the entity is organized as a limited
partnership or limited liability company and maintains separate ownership
accounts, we account for our investment using the equity method if our ownership
interest is between 3% and 50% and we exercise significant influence over the
entity’s operating and financial policies. For all other types of
investments, we apply the equity method of accounting if our ownership interest
is between 20% and 50% and we exercise significant influence over the entity’s
operating and financial policies. In consolidation we eliminate our
proportionate share of profits and losses from transactions with equity method
unconsolidated affiliates to the extent such amounts are material and remain on
our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet (or those of our equity method
investments) in inventory or similar accounts.
If our ownership interest in an entity
does not provide us with either control or significant influence we account for
the investment using the cost method. We currently do not have any
investments accounted for using the cost method.
Contingencies
Certain conditions may exist as of the
date our supplemental balance sheet is issued, which may result in a loss to us
but which will only be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to
occur. Our management and its legal counsel assess such contingent
liabilities, and such assessment inherently involves an exercise in
judgment. In assessing loss contingencies related to legal
proceedings that are pending against us or unasserted claims that may result in
proceedings, our management and legal counsel evaluate the perceived merits of
any legal proceedings or unasserted claims as well as the perceived merits of
the amount of relief sought or expected to be sought therein.
If the assessment of a contingency
indicates that it is probable that a material loss has been incurred and the
amount of liability can be estimated, then the estimated liability would be
accrued in our supplemental balance sheet. If the assessment
indicates that a potentially material loss contingency is not probable but is
reasonably possible, or is probable but cannot be estimated, then the nature of
the contingent liability, together with an estimate of the range of possible
loss (if determinable and material), is disclosed.
Loss contingencies considered remote
are generally not disclosed unless they involve guarantees, in which case the
guarantees would be disclosed.
Current
Assets and Current Liabilities
We
present, as individual captions in our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet,
all components of current assets and current liabilities that exceed 5% of total
current assets and liabilities, respectively.
Deferred
Revenues
Amounts
billed in advance of the period in which the service is rendered or product
delivered are recorded as deferred revenue. At December 31, 2008,
deferred revenues totaled $118.5 million and were recorded as a component of
other current and long-term liabilities, as appropriate, on our Supplemental
Consolidated Balance Sheet.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Employee
Benefit Plans
SFAS
158, Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other
Postretirement Plans, an amendment of SFAS 87, 88, 106, and 132(R),
requires businesses to record the over-funded or under-funded status of defined
benefit pension and other postretirement plans as an asset or liability at a
measurement date and to recognize annual changes in the funded status of each
plan through other comprehensive income (loss).
Our
consolidated results reflect immaterial amounts related to active and terminated
benefit plans. See Note 5 for additional information regarding our
current employee benefit plans.
Environmental
Costs
Environmental
costs for remediation are accrued based on estimates of known remediation
requirements. Such accruals are based on management’s best estimate of the
ultimate cost to remediate a site and are adjusted as further information and
circumstances develop. Those estimates may change substantially depending
on information about the nature and extent of contamination, appropriate
remediation technologies and regulatory approvals. Expenditures to
mitigate or prevent future environmental contamination are capitalized.
Ongoing environmental compliance costs are charged to expense as incurred.
In accruing for environmental remediation liabilities, costs of future
expenditures for environmental remediation are not discounted to their present
value, unless the amount and timing of the expenditures are fixed or reliably
determinable. At December 31, 2008, none of our estimated environmental
remediation liabilities are discounted to present value since the ultimate
amount and timing of cash payments for such liabilities are not readily
determinable.
Environmental
costs and related accruals were not significant prior to the GulfTerra
Merger. As a result of the merger, we assumed an environmental liability
for remediation costs associated with mercury gas meters. The balance of
this environmental liability was $6.3 million at December 31, 2008. At
December 31, 2008, total reserves for environmental liabilities, including those
related to the mercury gas meters, were $22.3 million. At December 31,
2008, $5.3 million of these amounts are classified as current
liabilities.
The
following table presents the activity of our environmental reserves for the year
ended December 31, 2008:
Balance
at beginning of period
|
|
$ |
30.5 |
|
Charges
to expense
|
|
|
5.9 |
|
Deductions
|
|
|
(14.1 |
) |
Balance
at end of period
|
|
$ |
22.3 |
|
Equity
Awards
See Note
4 for information regarding our accounting for equity awards.
Estimates
Preparing
our supplemental balance sheet in conformity with GAAP requires management to
make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts presented in the supplemental
balance sheet (i.e. assets and liabilities) and disclosures about contingent
assets and liabilities. Our actual results could differ from these
estimates. On an ongoing basis, management reviews its estimates
based on currently available information. Changes in facts and
circumstances may result in revised estimates.
We
revised the remaining useful lives of certain assets, most notably the assets
that constitute our Texas Intrastate System, effective January 1,
2008. This revision adjusted the remaining useful life of such assets
to incorporate recent data showing that proved natural gas reserves supporting
throughput and processing volumes for these assets have changed since our
original determination made in September
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
2004. These
revisions will prospectively reduce our depreciation expense on assets having
carrying values totaling $2.72 billion at January 1, 2008. For
additional information regarding this change in estimate, see Note
8.
Exchange
Contracts
Exchanges
are contractual agreements for the movements of NGLs and certain petrochemical
products between parties to satisfy timing and logistical needs of the
parties. Net exchange volumes borrowed from us under such agreements
are valued at market-based prices and included in accounts receivable, and net
exchange volumes loaned to us under such agreements are valued at market-based
prices and accrued as a liability in accrued product payables.
Receivables and payables arising from
exchange transactions are settled with movements of products rather than with
cash. When payment or receipt of monetary consideration is required
for product differentials and service costs, such items are recognized in our
Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet on a net basis.
Derivative
Instruments
We use
derivative instruments such as swaps, forwards and other contracts to manage
price risks associated with inventories, firm commitments, interest rates,
foreign currency and certain anticipated transactions. We recognize
these transactions as assets or liabilities on our Supplemental Consolidated
Balance Sheet based on the instrument’s fair value. Fair value is
generally defined as the amount at which a derivative instrument could be
exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, not in a forced or
liquidation sale.
Changes
in fair value of derivative instrument contracts are recognized in earnings in
the current period (i.e., using mark-to-market accounting) unless specific hedge
accounting criteria are met. If the derivative instrument meets the
criteria of a fair value hedge, gains and losses incurred on the instrument will
be recorded in earnings to offset corresponding losses and gains on the hedged
item. If the derivative instrument meets the criteria of a cash flow
hedge, gains and losses incurred on the instrument are recorded in accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss), which is generally referred to as
“AOCI.” Gains and losses on cash flow hedges are reclassified from
accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) to earnings when the forecasted
transaction occurs or, as appropriate, over the economic life of the hedged
item. A contract designated as a hedge of an anticipated transaction
that is no longer likely to occur is immediately recognized in
earnings.
To qualify for hedge accounting, the
item to be hedged must expose us to risk and the related hedging instrument must
reduce the exposure and meet the hedging requirements of SFAS 133, Accounting
for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities (as amended and
interpreted). We formally designate the derivative instrument as a
hedge and document and assess the effectiveness of the hedge at its inception
and thereafter on a quarterly basis. Any hedge ineffectiveness is
immediately recognized in earnings. See Note 6 for additional
information regarding our derivative instruments.
Foreign
Currency Translation
We own a
NGL marketing business located in Canada. The financial statements of
this foreign subsidiary are translated into U.S. dollars from the Canadian
dollar, which is the subsidiary’s functional currency, using the current rate
method. Its assets and liabilities are translated at the rate of
exchange in effect at the balance sheet date. Exchange gains and
losses arising from foreign currency translation adjustments are reflected as
separate components of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in the
accompanying Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet. Our net cash
flows from this Canadian subsidiary may be adversely affected by changes in
foreign currency exchange rates. See Note 6 for information regarding
our hedging of currency risk.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Impairment
Testing for Goodwill
Our
goodwill amounts are assessed for impairment (i) on a routine annual basis or
(ii) when impairment indicators are present. If such indicators occur
(e.g., the loss of a significant customer, economic obsolescence of plant
assets, etc.), the estimated fair value of the reporting unit to which the
goodwill is assigned is determined and compared to its book value. If
the fair value of the reporting unit exceeds its book value including associated
goodwill amounts, the goodwill is considered to be unimpaired and no impairment
charge is required. If the fair value of the reporting unit is less
than its book value including associated goodwill amounts, a charge to earnings
is recorded to reduce the carrying value of the goodwill to its implied fair
value. See Note 11 for additional information regarding our
goodwill.
Impairment
Testing for Long-Lived Assets
Long-lived
assets (including intangible assets with finite useful lives and property, plant
and equipment) are reviewed for impairment when events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of such assets may not be
recoverable.
Long-lived
assets with carrying values that are not expected to be recovered through future
cash flows are written-down to their estimated fair values in accordance with
SFAS 144. The carrying value of a long-lived asset is deemed not
recoverable if it exceeds the sum of undiscounted cash flows expected to result
from the use and eventual disposition of the asset. If the asset
carrying value exceeds the sum of its undiscounted cash flows, a non-cash asset
impairment charge equal to the excess of the asset’s carrying value over its
estimated fair value is recorded. Fair value is defined as the amount
at which an asset or liability could be bought or settled in an arm’s-length
transaction. We measure fair value using market price indicators or,
in the absence of such data, appropriate valuation techniques.
Impairment
Testing for Unconsolidated Affiliates
We
evaluate our equity method investments for impairment when events or changes in
circumstances indicate that there is a loss in value of the investment
attributable to an other than temporary decline. Examples of such
events or changes in circumstances include continuing operating losses of the
entity and/or long-term negative changes in the entity’s industry. In
the event we determine that the loss in value of an investment is other than a
temporary decline, we record a charge to earnings to adjust the carrying value
of the investment to its estimated fair value. See Note 9 for
additional information regarding our equity method investments.
Income
Taxes
Provision
for income taxes is primarily applicable to our state tax obligations under the
Revised Texas Franchise Tax and certain federal and state tax obligations of
Seminole Pipeline Company (“Seminole”) and Dixie Pipeline Company (“Dixie”),
both of which are consolidated subsidiaries of ours. Deferred income
tax assets and liabilities are recognized for temporary differences between the
assets and liabilities of our tax paying entities for financial reporting and
tax purposes.
In
general, legal entities that conduct business in Texas are subject to the
Revised Texas Franchise Tax. In May 2006, the State of Texas expanded its
pre-existing franchise tax, which applied to corporations and limited liability
companies, to include limited partnerships and limited liability
partnerships. As a result of the change in tax law, our tax status in the
State of Texas changed from non-taxable to taxable.
Since we
are structured as a pass-through entity, we are not subject to federal income
taxes. As a result, our partners are individually responsible for
paying federal income taxes on their share of our taxable
income. Since we do not have access to information regarding each
partner’s tax basis, we cannot readily determine the total difference in the
basis of our net assets for financial and tax reporting
purposes.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
In
accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, we must recognize the tax effects of
any uncertain tax positions we may adopt, if the position taken by us is more
likely than not sustainable. If a tax position meets such criteria,
the tax effect to be recognized by us would be the largest amount of benefit
with more than a 50% chance of being realized upon settlement. This
guidance was effective January 1, 2007, and our adoption of this guidance had no
material impact on our financial position. See Note 16 for additional
information regarding our income taxes.
Inventories
Inventories
primarily consist of NGLs, petroleum products, certain petrochemical products
and natural gas volumes that are valued at the lower of average cost or
market. We capitalize, as a cost of inventory, shipping and handling
charges directly related to volumes we purchase from third parties or take title
to in connection with processing or other agreements. As these
volumes are sold and delivered out of inventory, the average cost of these
products (including freight-in charges that have been capitalized) are charged
to operating costs and expenses. Shipping and handling fees
associated with products we sell and deliver to customers are charged to
operating costs and expenses as incurred. See Note 7 for additional
information regarding our inventories.
Natural
Gas Imbalances
In the
natural gas pipeline transportation business, imbalances frequently result from
differences in natural gas volumes received from and delivered to our
customers. Such differences occur when a customer delivers more or
less gas into our pipelines than is physically redelivered back to them during a
particular time period. We have various fee-based agreements with
customers to transport their natural gas through our pipelines. Our
customers retain ownership of their natural gas shipped through our
pipelines. As such, our pipeline transportation activities are not
intended to create physical volume differences that would result in significant
accounting or economic events for either our customers or us during the course
of the arrangement.
We settle
pipeline gas imbalances through either (i) physical delivery of in-kind gas or
(ii) in cash. These settlements follow contractual guidelines or common industry
practices. As imbalances occur, they may be settled (i) on a monthly
basis, (ii) at the end of the agreement or (iii) in accordance with industry
practice, including negotiated settlements. Certain of our natural
gas pipelines have a regulated tariff rate mechanism requiring customer
imbalance settlements each month at current market prices.
However,
the vast majority of our settlements are through in-kind arrangements whereby
incremental volumes are delivered to a customer (in the case of an imbalance
payable) or received from a customer (in the case of an imbalance
receivable). Such in-kind deliveries are on-going and take place over
several periods. In some cases, settlements of imbalances built up over a period
of time are ultimately cashed out and are generally negotiated at values which
approximate average market prices over a period of time. For those
gas imbalances that are ultimately settled over future periods, we estimate the
value of such current assets and liabilities using average market prices, which
is representative of the estimated value of the imbalances upon final
settlement. Changes in natural gas prices may impact our
estimates.
At
December 31, 2008, our natural gas imbalance receivables, net of allowance for
doubtful accounts, were $63.4 million and are reflected as a component of
“Accounts and notes receivable – trade” on our Supplemental Consolidated Balance
Sheet. At December 31, 2008, our imbalance payables were $50.8
million and are reflected as a component of “Accrued product payables” on our
Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Noncontrolling
Interest
As
presented in our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet, noncontrolling
interest represents third-party and affiliate ownership interests in the net
assets of our consolidated subsidiaries. For financial reporting
purposes, the assets and liabilities of our controlled subsidiaries, including
Enterprise Products
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Partners,
Duncan Energy Partners, TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP, are consolidated with those of our
own, with any third-party or affiliate ownership in such amounts presented as
noncontrolling interest. See Note 13 for information regarding
noncontrolling interest.
Property,
Plant and Equipment
Property,
plant and equipment is recorded at cost. Expenditures for additions,
improvements and other enhancements to property, plant and equipment are
capitalized and minor replacements, maintenance, and repairs that do not extend
asset life or add value are charged to expense as incurred. When
property, plant and equipment assets are retired or otherwise disposed of, the
related cost and accumulated depreciation is removed from the accounts and any
resulting gain or loss is included in the results of operations for the
respective period.
In
general, depreciation is the systematic and rational allocation of an asset’s
cost, less its residual value (if any), to the periods it
benefits. The majority of our property, plant and equipment is
depreciated using the straight-line method, which results in depreciation
expense being incurred evenly over the life of the assets. Our
estimate of depreciation incorporates assumptions regarding the useful economic
lives and residual values of our assets. At the time we place our
assets in service, we believe such assumptions are reasonable. Under
our depreciation policy for midstream energy assets, the remaining economic
lives of such assets are limited to the estimated life of the natural resource
basins (based on proved reserves at the time of the analysis) from which such
assets derive their throughput or processing volumes. Our forecast of
the remaining life for the applicable resource basins is based on several
factors, including information published by the U.S. Energy Information
Administration. Where appropriate, we use other depreciation methods
(generally accelerated) for tax purposes.
Leasehold
improvements are recorded as a component of property, plant and
equipment. The cost of leasehold improvements is charged to earnings
using the straight-line method over the shorter of the remaining lease term or
the estimated useful lives of the improvements. We consider renewal
terms that are deemed reasonably assured when estimating remaining lease
terms.
Our assumptions regarding the useful
economic lives and residual values of our assets may change in response to new
facts and circumstances, which would change our depreciation amounts
prospectively. Examples of such circumstances include, but are not
limited to, the following: (i) changes in laws and regulations that limit the
estimated economic life of an asset; (ii) changes in technology that render
an asset obsolete; (iii) changes in expected salvage values; or (iv)
significant changes in the forecast life of proved reserves of applicable
resource basins, if any. See Note 8 for additional information
regarding our property, plant and equipment, including a change in depreciation
expense beginning January 1, 2008 resulting from a change in the estimated
useful life of certain assets.
Certain of our plant operations entail
periodic planned outages for major maintenance activities. These
planned shutdowns typically result in significant expenditures, which are
principally comprised of amounts paid to third parties for materials, contract
services and related items. We use the expense-as-incurred method for
our planned major maintenance activities; however, the cost of annual planned
major maintenance projects are deferred and recognized ratably over the
remaining portion of the calendar year in which such projects
occur.
Asset retirement obligations (“AROs”)
are legal obligations associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived
assets that result from their acquisition, construction, development and/or
normal operation. When an ARO is incurred, we record a liability for
the ARO and capitalize an equal amount as an increase in the carrying value of
the related long-lived asset. Over time, the liability is accreted to
its present value (accretion expense) and the capitalized amount is depreciated
over the remaining useful life of the related long-lived asset. We
will incur a gain or loss to the extent that our ARO liabilities are not settled
at their recorded amounts.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Restricted
Cash
Restricted
cash represents amounts held in connection with our commodity derivative
instruments portfolio and New York Mercantile Exchange (“NYMEX”) physical
natural gas purchases. Additional cash may be restricted to maintain
our positions as commodity prices fluctuate or deposit requirements
change. During 2008, virtually all proceeds from the Petal GO Zone
bonds were released by the trustee to fund construction costs associated with
the expansion of our Petal, Mississippi storage facility. The
following table presents the components of our restricted cash balances at
December 31, 2008:
Amounts
held in brokerage accounts related to
|
|
|
|
commodity
hedging activities and physical natural gas purchases
|
|
$ |
203.8 |
|
Total
restricted cash
|
|
$ |
203.8 |
|
Note
3. Recent Accounting Developments
The accounting standard setting bodies
have recently issued the following accounting guidance that will affect our
future financial statements: SFAS 141(R), Business
Combinations; FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) SFAS 142-3,
Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible Assets; SFAS 157, Fair
Value Measurements; SFAS 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements – An amendment of ARB 51; SFAS 161,
Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities – An Amendment
of SFAS 133; and Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) 08-6, Equity Method
Investment Accounting Considerations.
SFAS
141(R), Business Combinations. SFAS 141(R) replaces SFAS
141, Business Combinations and was effective January 1, 2009. SFAS
141(R) retains the fundamental requirements of SFAS 141 in that the acquisition
method of accounting (previously termed the “purchase method”) be used for all
business combinations and for the “acquirer” to be identified in each business
combination. SFAS 141(R) defines the acquirer as the entity that
obtains control of one or more businesses in a business combination and
establishes the acquisition date as the date that the acquirer achieves
control. This new guidance also retains guidance in SFAS 141 for
identifying and recognizing intangible assets separately from
goodwill. SFAS 141(R) will have an impact on the way in which
we evaluate acquisitions.
The
objective of SFAS 141(R) is to improve the relevance, representational
faithfulness, and comparability of the information a reporting entity provides
in its financial reports about business combinations and their
effects. To accomplish this, SFAS 141(R) establishes principles and
requirements for how the acquirer:
§
|
Recognizes
and measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets acquired,
the liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interests in the
acquiree.
|
§
|
Recognizes
and measures any goodwill acquired in the business combination or a gain
resulting from a bargain purchase. SFAS 141(R) defines a
bargain purchase as a business combination in which the total
acquisition-date fair value of the identifiable net assets acquired
exceeds the fair value of the consideration transferred plus any
noncontrolling interest in the acquiree, and requires the acquirer to
recognize that excess in net income as a gain attributable to the
acquirer.
|
§
|
Determines
what information to disclose to enable users of the financial statements
to evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business
combination.
|
SFAS
141(R) also requires that direct costs of an acquisition (e.g. finder’s fees,
outside consultants, etc.) be expensed as incurred and not capitalized as part
of the purchase price.
FSP
FAS 142-3, Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible
Assets.
FSP 142-3 revised the factors that should be considered in developing
renewal or extension assumptions used in determining the useful life of
recognized intangible assets under SFAS 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets. These
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
revisions
are intended to improve consistency between the useful life of a recognized
intangible asset under SFAS 142 and the period of expected cash flows used
to measure the fair value of such assets under SFAS 141(R) and other
accounting guidance. The measurement and disclosure requirements of this new
guidance will be applied to intangible assets acquired after January 1,
2009. Our adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a
material impact on our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet.
SFAS
157, Fair Value Measurements. SFAS 157 defines fair
value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures
about fair value measurements. Although certain provisions of SFAS 157
were effective January 1, 2008, the remaining guidance of this new standard
applicable to nonfinancial assets and liabilities was effective January 1,
2009. See Note 6 for information regarding fair value-related
disclosures required for 2008 in connection with SFAS 157.
SFAS 157
applies to fair-value measurements that are already required (or permitted) by
other accounting standards and is expected to increase the consistency of those
measurements. SFAS 157 emphasizes that fair value is a market-based
measurement that should be determined based on the assumptions that market
participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. Companies are required
to disclose the extent to which fair value is used to measure assets and
liabilities, the inputs used to develop such measurements, and the effect of
certain of the measurements on earnings (or changes in net assets) during a
period. Our adoption of this guidance is not expected to have a material
impact on our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet. SFAS 157 will
impact the valuation of assets and liabilities (and related disclosures) in
connection with future business combinations and impairment
testing.
SFAS
160, Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements – an
amendment of ARB No. 51. SFAS 160
established accounting and reporting standards for noncontrolling interests,
which have been referred to as minority interests in prior accounting
literature. SFAS 160 was effective January 1, 2009. A
noncontrolling interest is that portion of equity in a consolidated subsidiary
not attributable, directly or indirectly, to a reporting entity. This
new standard requires, among other things, that (i) ownership interests of
noncontrolling interests be presented as a component of equity on the balance
sheet (i.e., elimination of the “mezzanine” presentation); (ii) elimination of
minority interest expense as a line item on the statement of income and, as a
result, that net income be allocated between the reporting entity and
noncontrolling interests on the face of the statement of income; and (iii)
enhanced disclosures regarding noncontrolling interests.
Effective
January 1, 2009, we adopted the provisions of SFAS 160. The
presentation and disclosure requirements of SFAS 160 have been applied
retrospectively to the Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet and Notes
included in this Exhibit 99.1.
SFAS
161, Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities - An
Amendment of SFAS 133. SFAS 161 revised
the disclosure requirements for derivative instruments and related hedging
activities to provide users of financial statements with an enhanced
understanding of (i) why and how an entity uses derivative instruments, (ii) how
an entity accounts for derivative instruments and related hedged items under
SFAS 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
(including related interpretations), and (iii) how derivative instruments and
related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position.
SFAS 161
requires qualitative disclosures about objectives and strategies for using
derivative instruments, quantitative disclosures about fair value amounts of and
gains and losses on derivative instruments, and disclosures about credit
risk-related contingent features in derivative instrument
agreements. SFAS 161 was effective January 1, 2009 and we will apply
its requirements beginning with the first quarter of 2009.
EITF
08-6, Equity Method Investment Accounting Considerations. EITF
08-6 clarifies the accounting for certain transactions and impairment
considerations involving equity method investments under SFAS 141(R) and SFAS
160. EITF 08-6 generally requires that (i) transaction costs should
be included in the initial carrying value of an equity method investment; (ii)
an equity method investor shall not test separately an investee’s underlying
assets for impairment, rather such testing should be performed
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
in
accordance with Opinion 18 (i.e., on the equity method investment itself); (iii)
an equity method investor shall account for a share issuance by an investee as
if the investor had sold a proportionate share of its investment (any gain or
loss to the investor resulting from the investee’s share issuance shall be
recognized in earnings); and (iv) a gain or loss should not be
recognized when changing the method of accounting for an investment from the
equity method to the cost method. EITF 08-6 was effective January 1,
2009.
Note
4. Accounting for Equity Awards
We
account for equity awards in accordance with SFAS 123(R), Share-Based
Payment. SFAS 123(R) requires us to recognize compensation expense
related to equity awards based on the fair value of the award at grant
date. The fair value of restricted unit awards is based on the market
price of the underlying common units on the date of grant. The fair value of
other equity awards is estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing
model. The fair value of an equity-classified award (such as a
restricted unit award) is amortized to earnings on a straight-line basis over
the requisite service or vesting period. Compensation expense for
liability-classified awards (such as unit appreciation rights (“UARs”)) is
recognized over the requisite service or vesting period of an award based on the
fair value of the award remeasured at each reporting
period. Liability-classified awards are settled in cash upon
vesting.
As used
in the context of the EPCO plans, the term “restricted unit” represents a
time-vested unit under SFAS 123(R). Such awards are non-vested until
the required service period expires.
Employee
Partnerships
As
long-term incentive arrangements, EPCO has granted its key employees who perform
services on behalf of us, EPCO and other affiliated companies, “profits
interests” in seven limited partnerships (the “Employee Partnerships”), which
are private company affiliates of EPCO. The employees were issued
Class B limited partner interests and admitted as Class B limited partners in
the Employee Partnerships without capital contributions. As discussed
and defined in Note 1, the Employee Partnerships are: EPE Unit I; EPE
Unit II; EPE Unit III; Enterprise Unit; EPCO Unit; TEPPCO Unit and TEPPCO Unit
II. Enterprise Unit, EPCO Unit, TEPPCO Unit and TEPPCO
Unit II were formed in 2008.
The
Class B limited partner interests entitle each holder to participate in the
appreciation in value of the publicly traded limited partner units owned by the
underlying Employee Partnership. The Employee Partnerships own either
Enterprise GP Holdings units (“EPE units”) or Enterprise Products Partners’
common units (“EPD units”) or both. TEPPCO Unit and TEPPCO Unit II
owned units of TEPPCO (“TPP units”) prior to their conversion to EPD units in
connection with the TEPPCO Merger. The Class B limited partner
interests are subject to forfeiture if the participating employee’s employment
with EPCO is terminated prior to vesting, with customary exceptions for death,
disability and certain retirements and upon certain change of control
events.
We
account for the profits interest awards under SFAS 123(R). As a
result, the compensation expense attributable to these awards is based on the
estimated grant date fair value of each award. An allocated portion
of the fair value of these equity-based awards is charged to us under the EPCO
administrative services agreement (“ASA”) (see Note 15). We are not
responsible for reimbursing EPCO for any expenses of the Employee Partnerships,
including the value of any contributions of cash or limited partner units made
by private company affiliates of EPCO at the formation of each Employee
Partnership. However, pursuant to the ASA, beginning in February
2009, we will reimburse EPCO for our allocated share of distributions of cash or
securities made to the Class B limited partners of EPCO Unit and TEPPCO Unit
II.
Each
Employee Partnership has a single Class A limited partner, which is a privately
held indirect subsidiary of EPCO, and a varying number of Class B limited
partners. At formation, the Class A limited partner either
contributes cash or limited partner units it owns to the Employee
Partnership. If cash is contributed, the Employee Partnership
uses these funds to acquire limited partner units on the open
market. In general, the Class A limited partner earns a preferred
return (either fixed or variable depending on the
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
partnership
agreement) on its investment (“Capital Base”) in the Employee Partnership and
any residual quarterly cash amounts, if any, are distributed to the Class B
limited partners. Upon liquidation, Employee Partnership assets
having a fair market value equal to the Class A limited partner’s Capital Base,
plus any preferred return for the period in which liquidation occurs, will be
distributed to the Class A limited partner. Any remaining
assets will be distributed to the Class B limited partner(s) as a residual
profits interest.
The
following table summarizes key elements of each Employee Partnership as of
December 31, 2008:
|
|
Initial
|
Class
A
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class
A
|
Partner
|
Award
|
Grant
Date
|
Unrecognized
|
Employee
|
Description
|
Capital
|
Preferred
|
Vesting
|
Fair
Value
|
Compensation
|
Partnership
|
of
Assets
|
Base
|
Return
|
Date
(1)
|
of
Awards (2)
|
Cost
(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPE
Unit I
|
1,821,428
EPE units
|
$51.0
million
|
4.50% to
5.725% (4)
|
November
2012
|
$17.0
million
|
$9.3
million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPE
Unit II
|
40,725
EPE units
|
$1.5
million
|
4.50% to
5.725% (4)
|
February
2014
|
$0.3
million
|
$0.2
million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPE
Unit III
|
4,421,326
EPE units
|
$170.0
million
|
3.80%
|
May
2014
|
$32.7
million
|
$25.1
million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise
Unit
|
881,836
EPE units
844,552
EPD units
|
$51.5
million
|
5.00%
|
February
2014
|
$4.2
million
|
$3.7
million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPCO
Unit
|
779,102
EPD units
|
$17.0
million
|
4.87%
|
November
2013
|
$7.2
million
|
$7.0
million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEPPCO
Unit
|
241,380
TPP units
|
$7.0
million
|
4.50%
to
5.725%
|
September
2013
|
$2.1
million
|
$1.7
million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TEPPCO
Unit II
|
123,185
TPP units
|
$3.1
million
|
6.31%
|
November
2013
|
$1.4
million
|
$1.4
million
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
The
vesting date may be accelerated for change of control and other events as
described in the underlying partnership agreements.
(2)
Our
estimated grant date fair values were determined using a Black-Scholes
option pricing model and reflect adjustments for forfeitures, regrants and
other modifications. See following table for information
regarding our fair value assumptions.
(3)
Unrecognized
compensation cost represents the total future expense to be recognized by
the EPCO group of companies as of December 31, 2008. We
expect to recognize our allocated share of such costs in the future in
accordance with the ASA. The period over which the
unrecognized compensation cost will be recognized is as follows for each
Employee Partnership: 3.9 years, EPE Unit I; 5.1 years, EPE
Unit II; 5.4 years, EPE Unit III; 5.1 years, Enterprise Unit; 4.9 years,
EPCO Unit; 4.7 years, TEPPCO Unit; and 4.9 years, TEPPCO Unit
II.
(4)
In
July 2008, the Class A preferred return was reduced from 6.25% to the
floating amounts presented.
|
The
following table summarizes the assumptions we used in deriving the estimated
grant date fair value for each of the Employee Partnerships using a
Black-Scholes option pricing model:
|
Expected
|
Risk-Free
|
|
Expected
|
|
Expected
|
Employee
|
Life
|
Interest
|
|
Distribution
Yield
|
|
Unit
Price Volatility
|
Partnership
|
of
Award
|
Rate
|
|
EPE/EPD
units
|
TPP
units
|
|
EPE/EPD
units
|
TPP
units
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPE
Unit I
|
3
to 5 years
|
2.7%
to 5.0%
|
|
3.0%
to 4.8%
|
n/a
|
|
16.6%
to 30.0%
|
n/a
|
EPE
Unit II
|
5
to 6 years
|
3.3%
to 4.4%
|
|
3.8%
to 4.8%
|
n/a
|
|
18.7%
to 19.4%
|
n/a
|
EPE
Unit III
|
4
to 6 years
|
3.2%
to 4.9%
|
|
4.0%
to 4.8%
|
n/a
|
|
16.6%
to 19.4%
|
n/a
|
Enterprise
Unit
|
6
years
|
2.7%
to 3.9%
|
|
4.5%
to 8.0%
|
n/a
|
|
15.3%
to 22.1%
|
n/a
|
EPCO
Unit
|
5
years
|
2.4%
|
|
11.1%
|
n/a
|
|
50.0%
|
n/a
|
TEPPCO
Unit
|
5
years
|
2.9%
|
|
n/a
|
7.3%
|
|
n/a
|
16.4%
|
TEPPCO
Unit II
|
5
years
|
2.4%
|
|
n/a
|
13.9%
|
|
n/a
|
66.4%
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
EPCO
1998 Plan
Unit
option awards. Under the EPCO 1998 Long-Term Incentive Plan
(“EPCO 1998 Plan”), non-qualified incentive options to purchase a fixed number
of Enterprise Products Partners’ common units may be granted to key employees of
EPCO who perform management, administrative or operational functions for
us. When issued, the exercise price of each option grant is
equivalent to the market price of the underlying equity on the date of
grant. During 2008, in response to changes in the federal tax code
applicable to certain types of equity awards, Enterprise Products Partners
amended the terms of certain of its outstanding unit options. In general,
the expiration dates of these awards were modified from May and August 2017 to
December 2012.
In order
to fund its obligations under the EPCO 1998 Plan, EPCO may purchase common units
at fair value either in the open market or directly from Enterprise Products
Partners. When employees exercise unit options, we reimburse EPCO for
the cash difference between the strike price paid by the employee and the actual
purchase price paid by EPCO for the units issued to the employee.
The fair
value of each unit option is estimated on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model, which incorporates various assumptions
including expected life of the options, risk-free interest rates, expected
distribution yield on Enterprise Products Partners’ common units, and expected
unit price volatility of Enterprise Products Partners’ common
units. In general, our assumption of expected life of the options
represents the period of time that the options are expected to be outstanding
based on an analysis of historical option activity. Our selection of
the risk-free interest rate is based on published yields for U.S. government
securities with comparable terms. The expected distribution yield and
unit price volatility is estimated based on several factors, which include an
analysis of Enterprise Products Partners’ historical unit price volatility and
distribution yield over a period equal to the expected life of the
option.
The EPCO
1998 Plan provides for the issuance of up to 7,000,000 of Enterprise Products
Partners’ common units. After giving effect to outstanding
option awards at December 31, 2008 and the issuance and forfeiture of restricted
unit awards through December 31, 2008, a total of 814,674 additional common
units could be issued under the EPCO 1998 Plan.
The
following table presents unit option activity under the EPCO 1998 Plan for the
year ended December 31, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Number
of
|
|
|
Strike
Price
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
(dollars/unit)
|
|
|
Term
(in years)
|
|
|
Value
(1)
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2007 (2)
|
|
|
2,315,000 |
|
|
|
26.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(61,500 |
) |
|
|
20.38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(85,000 |
) |
|
|
26.72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2008 (3)
|
|
|
2,168,500 |
|
|
|
26.32 |
|
|
|
5.19 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
Options
exercisable at:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December
31, 2008 (3)
|
|
|
548,500 |
|
|
$ |
21.47 |
|
|
|
4.08 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Aggregate
intrinsic value reflects fully vested unit options at the date
indicated.
(2)
During
2008, Enterprise Products Partners amended the terms of certain of its
outstanding unit options. In general, the expiration dates of these
awards were modified from May and August 2017 to December
2012.
(3)
Enterprise
Products Partners was committed to issue 2,168,500 and 2,315,000 of its
common units at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively, if all
outstanding options awarded under the EPCO 1998 Plan (as of these dates)
were exercised. An additional 365,000, 480,000 and 775,000 of these
options are exercisable in 2009, 2010 and 2012,
respectively.
|
|
The total
intrinsic value of option awards exercised during the year ended December 31,
2008 was $0.6 million. During the year ended December 31, 2008, we
received cash of $0.7 million from the exercise of option awards granted under
the EPCO 1998 Plan. Conversely, our option-related reimbursements to
EPCO were $0.6 million.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Restricted
unit awards. Under the EPCO 1998 Plan, we may also issue
restricted common units of Enterprise Products Partners to key employees of EPCO
and directors of EPGP. In general, the restricted unit awards of
Enterprise Products Partners allow recipients to acquire the underlying common
units at no cost to the recipient once a defined cliff vesting period expires,
subject to certain forfeiture provisions. The restrictions on such
units generally lapse four years from the date of grant. Fair value
of such restricted units is based on the market price of the underlying common
units on the date of grant and an allowance for estimated
forfeitures.
The
following table presents restricted unit activity under the EPCO 1998 Plan for
the year ended December 31, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
Grant
|
|
|
|
Number
of
|
|
|
Date
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
per Unit
(1)
|
|
Restricted
units at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
1,688,540 |
|
|
|
|
Granted
(2)
|
|
|
766,200 |
|
|
$ |
24.93 |
|
Vested
|
|
|
(285,363 |
) |
|
$ |
23.11 |
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(88,777 |
) |
|
$ |
26.98 |
|
Restricted
units at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
2,080,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Determined
by dividing the aggregate grant date fair value of awards by the number of
awards issued. The weighted-average grant date fair value per unit
for forfeited and vested awards is determined before an allowance for
forfeitures.
(2)
Aggregate
grant date fair value of restricted unit awards issued during 2008 was
$19.1 million based on grant date market prices of Enterprise Products
Partners’ common units ranging from $25.00 to $32.31 per unit and an
estimated forfeiture rate of 17.0%.
|
|
The total
fair value of restricted unit awards that vested during the year ended December
31, 2008 was $6.6 million.
Phantom
unit awards. The EPCO 1998 Plan also provides for the issuance
of phantom unit awards. These liability awards are automatically
redeemed for cash based on the vested portion of the fair market value of the
phantom units at redemption dates in each award. The fair market
value of each phantom unit award is equal to the market closing price of
Enterprise Products Partners’ common units on the redemption
date. Each participant is required to redeem their phantom units as
they vest, which typically is four years from the date the award is
granted. No phantom unit awards have been issued to date under the
EPCO 1998 Plan.
The EPCO 1998 Plan also provides for
the award of distribution equivalent rights (“DERs”) in tandem with its phantom
unit awards. A DER entitles the participant to cash distributions
equal to the product of the number of phantom units outstanding for the
participant and the cash distribution rate paid by Enterprise Products Partners
to its unitholders. No DERs have been issued as of December 31, 2008
under the EPCO 1998 Plan.
EPD
2008 LTIP
On January 29, 2008, Enterprise
Products Partners’ unitholders approved the Enterprise Products Partners 2008
Long-Term Incentive Plan (“EPD 2008 LTIP”), which provides for awards of
Enterprise Products Partners’ common units and other rights to our non-employee
directors and to consultants and employees of EPCO and its affiliates providing
services to us. Awards under the EPD 2008 LTIP may be granted in the
form of unit options, restricted units, phantom units, UARs and
DERs. The EPD 2008 LTIP is administered by EPGP’s Audit, Conflicts
and Governance (“ACG”) Committee. The EPD 2008 LTIP provides for the
issuance of up to 10,000,000 of Enterprise Products Partners’ common
units. After giving effect to option awards outstanding at December
31, 2008, a total of 9,205,000 additional common units could be issued under the
EPD 2008 LTIP.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The EPD
2008 LTIP may be amended or terminated at any time by the Board of Directors of
EPCO or EPGP’s ACG Committee; however, the rules of the NYSE require that any
material amendment, such as a significant increase in the number of common units
available under the plan or a change in the types of awards available under the
plan, would require the approval of Enterprise Products Partners’
unitholders. The ACG Committee is also authorized to make adjustments
in the terms and conditions of, and the criteria included in, awards under the
plan in specified circumstances. The EPD 2008 LTIP is effective until
the earlier of January 29, 2018 or the time which all available units under
the incentive plan have been delivered to participants or the time of
termination of the plan by EPCO or EPGP’s ACG Committee.
Unit
option awards. The exercise price of
unit options awarded to participants is determined by the ACG Committee (at its
discretion) at the date of grant and may be no less than the fair market value
of Enterprise Products Partners’ common units at the date of
grant. The following table presents unit option activity under the
EPD 2008 LTIP for the period indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
Number
of
|
|
|
Strike
Price
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
(dollars/unit)
|
|
|
Term
(in years)
|
|
Outstanding
at January 1, 2008
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
(1)
|
|
|
795,000 |
|
|
$ |
30.93 |
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2008 (2)
|
|
|
795,000 |
|
|
$ |
30.93 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Aggregate
grant date fair value of these unit options issued during 2008 was $1.6
million based on the following assumptions: (i) a grant date market price
of Enterprise Products Partners’ common units of $30.93 per unit; (ii)
expected life of options of 4.7 years; (iii) risk-free interest rate of
3.3%; (iv) expected distribution yield on Enterprise Products Partners’
common units of 7.0%; (v) expected unit price volatility on Enterprise
Products Partners’ common units of 19.8%; and (vi) an estimated forfeiture
rate of 17.0%.
(2)
The
795,000 units outstanding at December 31, 2008 will become exercisable in
2013.
|
|
Phantom
unit awards. The EPD 2008 LTIP also provides for the issuance
of phantom unit awards. These liability awards are automatically
redeemed for cash based on the vested portion of the fair market value of the
phantom units at redemption dates in each award. The fair market
value of each phantom unit award is equal to the market closing price of
Enterprise Products Partners’ common units on the redemption
date. Each participant is required to redeem their phantom units as
they vest, which typically is three years from the date the award is
granted. There were a total of 4,400 phantom units granted under the
EPD 2008 LTIP during the fourth quarter of 2008 and outstanding at December 31,
2008. These awards cliff vest in 2011. At December 31,
2008, we had an accrued liability of $5 thousand for compensation related to
these phantom unit awards.
DEP
GP UARs
The
non-employee directors of DEP GP, the general partner of Duncan Energy Partners,
have been granted UARs in the form of letter agreements. These
liability awards are not part of any established long-term incentive plan of
EPCO, Enterprise GP Holdings, Duncan Energy Partners or Enterprise Products
Partners. These UARs entitle each non-employee director to receive a
cash payment on the vesting date equal to the excess, if any, of the fair market
value of EPE units (determined as of a future vesting date) over the grant date
fair value. If a director resigns prior to vesting, his UAR awards
are forfeited. These UARs are accounted for similar to liability
awards under SFAS 123(R) since they will be settled with cash.
As of December 31, 2008, a total of
90,000 UARs had been granted to non-employee directors of DEP GP that cliff vest
in 2012. If a director resigns prior to vesting, his UAR awards are
forfeited. The grant date fair value with respect to these UARs is
based on an EPE unit price of $36.68.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
TEPPCO
1999 Plan
The TEPPCO 1999 Phantom Unit Retention
Plan (“TEPPCO 1999 Plan”) provides for the issuance of phantom unit awards as
incentives to key employees of EPCO working on behalf of
TEPPCO. These liability awards are settled for cash based on the fair
market value of the vested portion of the phantom units at redemption dates in
each award. The fair market value of each phantom unit award is equal
to the closing price of TEPPCO’s units on the NYSE on the redemption
date. Each participant is required to redeem their phantom units as
they vest. In addition, each participant is entitled to cash
distributions equal to the product of the number of phantom unit awards granted
under the TEPPCO 1999 Plan and the cash distribution per unit paid by TEPPCO on
its units. Grants under the 1999 Plan are subject to forfeiture if
the participant’s employment with EPCO is terminated.
A total of 18,600 phantom units were
outstanding under the TEPPCO 1999 Plan at December 31, 2008. In April
2008, 13,000 phantom units vested and $0.4 million was paid out to a participant
in the second quarter of 2008. The awards outstanding at December 31,
2008 cliff vest as follows: 13,000 in April 2009 and 5,600 in January
2010. At December 31, 2008, we had an accrued liability balance of
$0.4 million related to the TEPPCO 1999 Plan.
TEPPCO
2000 LTIP
The TEPPCO 2000 Long-Term Incentive
Plan (“TEPPCO 2000 LTIP”) provides key employees of EPCO working on behalf of
TEPPCO incentives to achieve improvements in TEPPCO’s financial
performance. Generally, upon the close of a three-year performance
period, each recipient will receive a cash payment equal to (i) the applicable
“performance percentage” (as defined in the award agreement) multiplied by (ii)
the number of phantom units granted under the TEPPCO 2000 LTIP multiplied by
(iii) the average of the closing prices of TEPPCO units over the ten consecutive
days immediately preceding the last day of the specified performance
period. In addition, during the performance period, each participant
is entitled to cash distributions equal to the product of the number of phantom
units granted under the TEPPCO 2000 LTIP and the cash distribution per unit paid
by TEPPCO on its units. Grants under the TEPPCO 2000 LTIP are
accounted for as liability awards and are subject to forfeiture if the
recipient’s employment with EPCO is terminated, with customary exceptions for
death, disability or retirement.
A participant’s “performance
percentage” is based upon an improvement in Economic Value Added for TEPPCO
during a given three-year performance period over the Economic Value Added for
the three-year period immediately preceding the performance
period. The term “Economic Value Added” means TEPPCO’s average annual
EBITDA for the performance period minus the product of TEPPCO’s average asset
base and its cost of capital for the performance period. In this
context, EBITDA means TEPPCO’s earnings before net interest expense, other
income, depreciation and amortization and TEPPCO’s proportional interest in the
EBITDA of its joint ventures, except that the chief executive officer of TEPPCO
may exclude gains or losses from extraordinary, unusual or non-recurring items.
Average asset base means the quarterly average, during the performance period,
of TEPPCO’s gross carrying value of property, plant and equipment, plus
long-term inventory, and the gross carrying value of intangible assets and
equity investments. TEPPCO’s cost of capital is determined at the
date each award was granted.
At December 31, 2008, a total of 11,300
phantom units were outstanding under the TEPPCO 2000 LTIP that cliff vested on
December 31, 2008 and will be paid out to participants in the first quarter of
2009. At December 31, 2008, we had an accrued liability balance of
$0.2 million related to the TEPPCO 2000 LTIP. After payout in the
first quarter of 2009 on awards which vested on December 31, 2008, there will be
no remaining phantom units outstanding under the TEPPCO 2000 LTIP.
TEPPCO
2005 Phantom Unit Plan
The TEPPCO 2005 Phantom Unit Plan
(“TEPPCO 2005 Phantom Unit Plan”) provides key employees of EPCO working on
behalf of TEPPCO incentives to achieve improvements in TEPPCO’s financial
performance. Generally, upon the close of a three-year performance
period, the recipient will receive a cash payment equal to (i) the recipient’s
vested percentage (as defined in the award agreement)
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
multiplied
by (ii) the number of phantom units granted under the TEPPCO 2005 Phantom Unit
Plan multiplied by (iii) the average of the closing prices of TEPPCO units over
the ten consecutive days immediately preceding the last day of the specified
performance period. In addition, during the performance period, each
recipient is entitled to cash distributions equal to the product of the number
of phantom units granted under the TEPPCO 2005 Phantom Unit Plan and the cash
distribution per unit paid by TEPPCO on its units. Grants under the
TEPPCO 2005 Phantom Unit Plan are accounted for as liability awards and are
subject to forfeiture if the recipient’s employment with EPCO is terminated,
with customary exceptions for death, disability or retirement.
Generally, a participant’s vested
percentage is based upon an improvement in TEPPCO’s EBITDA during a given
three-year performance period over TEPPCO’s EBITDA for the three-year period
preceding the performance period. In this context, EBITDA means
TEPPCO’s earnings before noncontrolling interest, net interest expense, other
income, income taxes, depreciation and amortization and TEPPCO’s proportional
interest in the EBITDA of its joint ventures, except that the chief executive
officer of TEPPCO may exclude gains or losses from extraordinary, unusual or
non-recurring items.
At December 31, 2008 a total of 36,600
phantom units were outstanding under the TEPPCO 2005 Phantom Unit Plan that
cliff vested on December 31, 2008 and will be paid out to participants in the
first quarter of 2009. At December 31, 2008, we had an accrued
liability balance of $0.6 million related to the TEPPCO 2005 Phantom Unit
Plan. After the payout in the first quarter of 2009 on awards which
vested on December 31, 2008, there will be no remaining phantom units
outstanding under the TEPPCO 2005 Phantom Unit Plan.
TEPPCO
2006 LTIP
The EPCO
2006 TPP Long-Term Incentive Plan (“TEPPCO 2006 LTIP”) provide for awards of
TEPPCO units and other rights to its non-employee directors and to certain
employees of EPCO working on behalf of TEPPCO. Awards granted under
the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP may be in the form of restricted units, phantom units, unit
options, UARs and DERs. The TEPPCO 2006 LTIP provides for the
issuance of up to 5,000,000 units of TEPPCO in connection with these
awards. After giving effect to outstanding unit options and
restricted units at December 31, 2008, and the forfeiture of restricted units
through December 31, 2008, a total of 4,487,084 additional units of TEPPCO could
be issued under the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP in the future.
Unit
option awards. The following table presents unit option
activity under the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP for year ended December 31,
2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
Number
of
|
|
|
Strike
Price
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
(dollars/unit)
|
|
|
Term
(in years)
|
|
Outstanding
at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
155,000 |
|
|
$ |
45.35 |
|
|
|
|
Granted (1)
|
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
$ |
35.86 |
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31,
2008 (2)
|
|
|
355,000 |
|
|
$ |
40.00 |
|
|
|
4.57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
The
total grant date fair value of these unit options issued on May 19, 2008
was $0.3 million based on the following assumptions: (i) expected
life of the option of 4.7 years; (ii) risk-free interest rate of 3.3%;
(iii) expected distribution yield on TEPPCO units of 7.9%; (iv) estimated
forfeiture rate of 17.0%; and (v) expected unit price volatility on
TEPPCO’s units of 18.7%.
(2)
No
unit options were exercisable at December 31, 2008.
|
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Restricted
unit awards. The
following table presents restricted unit activity under the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP for
the year ended December 31, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
Grant
|
|
|
|
Number
of
|
|
|
Date
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
per Unit
(1)
|
|
Restricted
units at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
62,400 |
|
|
|
|
Granted
(2)
|
|
|
96,900 |
|
|
$ |
29.54 |
|
Vested
|
|
|
(1,000 |
) |
|
$ |
40.61 |
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(1,000 |
) |
|
$ |
35.86 |
|
Restricted
units at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
157,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Determined
by dividing the aggregate grant date fair value of awards by the number of
awards issued. The weighted-average grant date fair value per unit
for forfeited and vested awards is determined before an allowance for
forfeitures.
(2)
Aggregate
grant date fair value of restricted unit awards issued during 2008 was
$2.8 million based on grant date market prices of TEPPCO’s units ranging
from $34.63 to $35.86 per unit and an estimated forfeiture rate of
17.0%.
|
|
The total
fair value of restricted unit awards that vested during the year ended December
31, 2008 was $24 thousand.
UARs and
phantom units. At December 31, 2008, there were a total of
95,654 UARs outstanding that had been granted to non-employee directors of
TEPPCO GP and 335,723 UARs outstanding that were granted to certain employees of
EPCO who worked on behalf of TEPPCO. These UAR awards are subject to
five year cliff vesting. If the non-employee director or employee
resigns prior to vesting, their UAR awards are forfeited. These UAR
awards are accounted for similar to liability awards under SFAS 123(R) since
they will be settled with cash.
As of
December 31, 2008, there were a total of 1,647 phantom unit awards outstanding
that had been granted to non-employee directors of TEPPCO GP. Each
phantom unit will be redeemed in cash the earlier of (i) April 2011 or (ii) when
the director is no longer serving on the board of TEPPCO GP. In
addition, during the vesting period, each participant is entitled to cash
distributions equal to the product of the number of phantom units outstanding
for the participant and the cash distribution per unit paid by TEPPCO on its
units. Phantom units awarded to non-employee directors are accounted
for similar to liability awards.
The
TEPPCO 2006 LTIP provides for the award of DERs in tandem with its phantom unit
and UAR awards. With respect to DERs granted in connection with
phantom units, the participant is entitled to cash distributions equal to the
product of the number of phantom units outstanding for the participant and the
cash distribution rate paid by TEPPCO to its unitholders. With respect to DERs
granted in connection with UARs, the participant is entitled to the product of
the number of UARs outstanding for the participant and the difference between
the current declared cash distribution rate paid by TEPPCO and the declared cash
distribution rate paid by TEPPCO at the time the UAR was
granted. Since phantom units and UARs do not represent issued
securities, the cash payments with respect to DERs are expensed by TEPPCO as
paid.
Note
5. Employee Benefit Plans
Dixie
Dixie
employs the personnel that operate its pipeline system and certain of these
employees are eligible to participate in a defined contribution plan and pension
and postretirement benefit plans. Due to the immaterial nature of
Dixie’s employee benefit plans to our consolidated financial position, our
discussion is limited to the following:
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Defined
Contribution Plan. Dixie contributed $0.3 million to its
company-sponsored defined contribution plan for the year ended December 31,
2008.
Pension
and Postretirement Benefit Plans. Dixie’s pension plan is a
noncontributory defined benefit plan that provides for the payment of benefits
to retirees based on their age at retirement, years of service and average
compensation. Dixie’s postretirement benefit plan also provides
medical and life insurance to retired employees. The medical plan is
contributory and the life insurance plan is noncontributory. Dixie
employees hired after July 1, 2004 are not eligible for pension and other
benefit plans after retirement.
The
following table presents Dixie’s benefit obligations, fair value of plan assets
and funded status at December 31, 2008:
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
Projected
benefit obligation
|
|
$ |
7.7 |
|
|
$ |
5.0 |
|
Accumulated
benefit obligation
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
Fair
value of plan assets
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
Funded
status
|
|
|
(3.7 |
) |
|
|
(5.0 |
) |
Projected
benefit obligations and net periodic benefit costs are based on actuarial
estimates and assumptions. The weighted-average actuarial assumptions
used in determining the projected benefit obligation at December 31, 2008 were
as follows: discount rate of 6.4%; rate of compensation increase of
4.0% for both the pension and postretirement plans; and a medical trend rate of
8.5% for 2009 grading to an ultimate trend of 5.0% for 2015 and later
years.
Future
benefits expected to be paid from Dixie’s pension and postretirement plans are
as follows for the periods indicated:
|
|
Pension
|
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
|
Plan
|
|
2009
|
|
$ |
0.3 |
|
|
$ |
0.3 |
|
2010
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
2011
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
2012
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
2013
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
2014
through 2017
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
6.5 |
|
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
Included
in accumulated other comprehensive loss on the Supplemental Consolidated Balance
Sheet at December 31, 2008 are the following amounts that have not been
recognized in net periodic pension costs:
Unrecognized
transition obligation
|
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
Net
of tax
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized
prior service cost credit
|
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
Net
of tax
|
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized
net actuarial loss
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
Net
of tax
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
Note
6. Derivative Instruments, Hedging Activities and Fair Value
Measurements
We are
exposed to financial market risks, including changes in commodity prices,
interest rates and foreign exchange rates. We may use derivative
instruments (e.g., futures, forwards, swaps, options and other derivative
instruments with similar characteristics) to mitigate the risks of certain
identifiable and
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
anticipated
transactions. In general, the types of risks we attempt to hedge are
those related to (i) the variability of future earnings, (ii) fair values of
certain debt obligations and (iii) cash flows resulting from changes in
applicable interest rates, commodity prices or exchange rates. See Note 12 for
information regarding our consolidated debt obligations.
We
routinely review our outstanding derivative instruments in light of current
market conditions. If market conditions warrant, some derivative
instruments may be closed out in advance of their contractual settlement dates
thus realizing income or loss depending on the specific hedging
criteria. When this occurs, we may enter into a new derivative
instrument to reestablish the hedge to which the closed instrument
relates.
The
following table provides additional information regarding derivative assets and
derivative liabilities included in our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet
at December 31, 2008:
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
Derivative
assets:
|
|
|
|
Interest
rate risk hedging portfolio
|
|
$ |
7.8 |
|
Commodity
risk hedging portfolio
|
|
|
201.5 |
|
Foreign
currency risk hedging portfolio
|
|
|
9.3 |
|
Total
derivative assets – current
|
|
$ |
218.6 |
|
Other
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
rate risk hedging portfolio
|
|
$ |
38.9 |
|
Total
derivative assets – long-term
|
|
$ |
38.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
rate risk hedging portfolio
|
|
$ |
5.9 |
|
Commodity
risk hedging portfolio
|
|
|
296.9 |
|
Foreign
currency risk hedging portfolio
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Total
derivative liabilities – current
|
|
$ |
302.9 |
|
Other
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
rate risk hedging portfolio
|
|
$ |
3.9 |
|
Commodity
risk hedging portfolio
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
Total
derivative liabilities– long-term
|
|
$ |
4.1 |
|
The following information summarizes
the principal elements of our interest rate risk, commodity risk and foreign
currency risk hedging portfolios. For amounts recorded on our supplemental
balance sheet related to our consolidated hedging activities, please refer to
the preceding table.
Interest
Rate Risk Hedging Portfolio
Our interest rate exposure results from
variable and fixed rate borrowings under various debt agreements. The following
information summarizes significant components of our interest rate risk hedging
portfolio:
Fair
value hedges – interest rate swaps
We manage
a portion of our interest rate exposure by utilizing interest rate swaps and
similar arrangements, which allow us to convert a portion of fixed rate debt
into variable rate debt or a portion of variable rate debt into fixed rate debt.
At December 31, 2008, we had four interest rate swap agreements outstanding
having an aggregate notional value of $400.0 million that were accounted for as
fair value hedges. The aggregate fair value of these interest rate
swaps at December 31, 2008, was $46.7 million (an asset), with an offsetting
increase in the fair value of the underlying debt.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The
following table summarizes our interest rate swaps outstanding at December 31,
2008.
|
Number
|
Period
Covered
|
Termination
|
Fixed
to
|
Notional
|
|
Hedged
Fixed Rate Debt
|
of
Swaps
|
by
Swap
|
Date
of Swap
|
Variable Rate
(1)
|
Value
|
|
Senior
Notes C, 6.375% fixed rate, due Feb. 2013
|
1
|
Jan.
2004 to Feb. 2013
|
Feb.
2013
|
6.375% to
5.015%
|
$100.0
million
|
|
Senior
Notes G, 5.60% fixed rate, due Oct. 2014
|
3
|
4th
Qtr. 2004 to Oct. 2014
|
Oct.
2014
|
5.60%
to 5.297%
|
$300.0
million
|
|
(1)
The variable rate indicated is the all-in variable rate for the current
settlement period.
|
We have designated these interest rate
swaps as fair value hedges under SFAS 133 since they mitigate changes in the
fair value of the underlying fixed rate debt. As effective fair value
hedges, an increase in the fair value of these interest rate swaps is equally
offset by an increase in the fair value of the underlying hedged
debt.
Cash
flow hedges – Duncan Energy Partners’ interest rate swaps
At
December 31, 2008, Duncan Energy Partners had interest rate swap agreements
outstanding having an aggregate notional value of $175.0
million. These swaps were accounted for as cash flow
hedges. The purpose of these derivative instruments is to reduce the
sensitivity of Duncan Energy Partners’ earnings to the variable interest rates
charged under its revolving credit facility. The aggregate fair value
of these interest rate swaps at December 31, 2008 was a liability of $9.8
million. The following table summarizes Duncan Energy Partners’
interest rate swaps outstanding at December 31, 2008.
|
Number
|
Period
Covered
|
Termination
|
Variable
to
|
Notional
|
|
Hedged
Variable Rate Debt
|
of
Swaps
|
by
Swap
|
Date
of Swap
|
Fixed Rate
(1)
|
Value
|
|
DEP
I Revolving Credit Facility, due Feb. 2011
|
3
|
Sep.
2007 to Sep. 2010
|
Sep.
2010
|
1.47% to
4.62%
|
$175.0
million
|
|
|
(1)
Amounts
receivable from or payable to the swap counterparties are settled every
three months (the “settlement
period”).
|
Commodity
Risk Hedging Portfolio
Our
commodity risk hedging portfolio was impacted by a significant decline in
natural gas and crude oil prices during the second half of
2008. As a result of the global recession, commodity prices
have continued to be volatile during the first quarter of 2009. We
may experience additional losses related to our commodity risk hedging portfolio
in 2009.
The
prices of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and certain petrochemical products are
subject to fluctuations in response to changes in supply, market uncertainty and
a variety of additional factors that are beyond our control. In order
to manage the price risks associated with such products, we may enter into
commodity derivative instruments.
The
primary purpose of our commodity risk management activities is to reduce our
exposure to price risks associated with (i) natural gas purchases, (ii) the
value of NGL and crude oil production and inventories, (iii) related firm
commitments, (iv) fluctuations in transportation revenues where the underlying
fees are based on natural gas index prices and (v) certain anticipated
transactions involving either natural gas, NGLs, crude oil or certain
petrochemical products. From time to time, we inject natural gas into
storage and may utilize hedging instruments to lock in the value of its
inventory positions. The commodity derivative instruments we utilize
are settled in cash.
We have segregated our commodity
derivative instruments portfolio between those derivative instruments utilized
in connection with our natural gas marketing activities, our crude oil marketing
activities and our NGL and petrochemical operations.
A
significant number of the derivative instruments in this portfolio hedge the
purchase of physical natural gas. If natural gas prices fall below
the price stipulated in such derivative instruments, we recognize a liability
for the difference; however, if prices partially or fully recover, this
liability would be reduced or eliminated, as appropriate. Our
restricted cash balance at December 31, 2008 was $203.8 million in order to meet
commodity exchange deposit requirements and the negative change in the fair
value of our natural gas hedge positions.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Natural
gas marketing activities
At
December 31, 2008, the aggregate fair value of those derivative instruments
utilized in connection with our natural gas marketing activities was an asset of
$6.5 million. Almost all of the derivative instruments within this
portion of the commodity derivative instruments portfolio are accounted for
using mark-to-market accounting, with a small number accounted for as cash flow
hedges. We did not have any cash flow hedges related to our natural
gas marketing activities at December 31, 2008.
Crude
oil marketing activities
The fair
value of the open positions at December 31, 2008 was an asset of $3
thousand. At December 31, 2008, we had no commodity derivative
instruments that were accounted for as cash flow hedges. We have some
commodity derivative instruments that do not qualify for hedge
accounting.
NGL
and petrochemical operations
At
December 31, 2008, the aggregate fair value of those derivative instruments
utilized in connection with our NGL and petrochemical operations were
liabilities of $102.1 million. Almost all of the derivative
instruments within this portion of the commodity derivative instruments
portfolio are accounted for as cash flow hedges, with a small number accounted
for using mark-to-market accounting.
We have employed a program to
economically hedge a portion of our earnings from natural gas processing in the
Rocky Mountain region. This program consists of (i) the forward sale
of a portion of our expected equity NGL production volumes at fixed prices
through 2009 and (ii) the purchase, using commodity derivative instruments, of
the amount of natural gas expected to be consumed as plant thermal reduction
(“PTR”) in the production of such equity NGL volumes. The objective of this
strategy is to hedge a level of gross margins (i.e., NGL sales revenues less
actual costs for PTR and the gain or loss on the PTR hedge) associated with the
forward sales contracts by fixing the cost of natural gas used for PTR, through
the use of commodity derivative instruments. At December 31, 2008,
this hedging program had hedged future expected gross margins (before plant
operating expenses) of $483.9 million on 22.5 million barrels of forecasted NGL
forward sales transactions extending through 2009.
Our NGL forward sales contracts are not
accounted for as derivative instruments under SFAS 133 since they meet normal
purchase and sale exception criteria; therefore, changes in the aggregate
economic value of these sales contracts are not reflected in net income and
other comprehensive income until the volumes are delivered to
customers. On the other hand, the commodity derivative instruments
used to purchase the related quantities of PTR (i.e., “PTR hedges”) are
accounted for as cash flow hedges; therefore, changes in the aggregate fair
value of the PTR hedges are presented in other comprehensive
income. Once the forecasted NGL forward sales transactions occur, any
realized gains and losses on the cash flow hedges would be reclassified into net
income in that period.
Prior to actual settlement, if the
market price of natural gas is less than the price stipulated in a commodity
derivative instrument, we recognize an unrealized loss in other comprehensive
loss for the excess of the natural gas price stated in the hedge over the market
price. To the extent that we realize such financial losses upon
settlement of the instrument, the losses are added to the actual cost we pay for
PTR, which would then be based on the lower market price. Conversely,
if the market price of natural gas is greater than the price stipulated in such
hedges, we recognize an unrealized gain in other comprehensive income for the
excess of the market price over the natural gas price stated in the PTR
hedge. If realized, the gains on the derivative instrument
would serve to reduce the actual cost paid for PTR, which would then be based on
the higher market price. The net effect of these hedging
relationships is that our total cost of natural gas used for PTR approximates
the amount it originally hedged under this program.
Foreign
Currency Hedging Portfolio
We are exposed to foreign currency
exchange rate risk primarily through a Canadian NGL marketing
subsidiary. As a result, we could be adversely affected by
fluctuations in the foreign currency
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
exchange
rate between the U.S. dollar and the Canadian dollar. We attempt to
hedge this risk using foreign exchange purchase contracts to fix the exchange
rate. Mark-to-market accounting is utilized for these contracts,
which typically have a duration of one month.
In
addition, we are exposed to foreign currency exchange rate risk through our
Japanese Yen Term Loan Agreement (“Yen Term Loan”) that EPO entered into in
November 2008. As a result, we could be adversely affected by
fluctuations in the foreign currency exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and
the Japanese yen. We hedged this risk by entering into a foreign
exchange purchase contract to fix the exchange rate. This purchase
contract was designated as a cash flow hedge. At December 31, 2008,
the fair value of this contract was $9.3 million. This contract will
be settled in March 2009 upon repayment of the Yen Term Loan.
Adoption
of SFAS 157 - Fair Value Measurements
On
January 1, 2008, we adopted the provisions of SFAS 157 that apply to
financial assets and liabilities. We adopted the provisions of SFAS 157 that
apply to nonfinancial assets and liabilities on January 1, 2009. SFAS
157 defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or
paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market
participants at a specified measurement date.
Our fair
value estimates are based on either (i) actual market data or (ii) assumptions
that other market participants would use in pricing an asset or
liability. These assumptions include estimates of risk.
Recognized valuation techniques employ inputs such as product prices, operating
costs, discount factors and business growth rates. These inputs
may be either readily observable, corroborated by market data or generally
unobservable. In developing our estimates of fair value, we endeavor
to utilize the best information available and apply market-based data to the
extent possible. Accordingly, we utilize valuation techniques (such
as the market approach) that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize
the use of unobservable inputs.
SFAS 157
established a three-tier hierarchy that classifies fair value amounts recognized
or disclosed in the financial statements based on the observability of inputs
used to estimate such fair values. The hierarchy considers fair value
amounts based on observable inputs (Levels 1 and 2) to be more reliable and
predictable than those based primarily on unobservable inputs (Level 3). At each
balance sheet reporting date, we categorize our financial assets and liabilities
using this hierarchy. The characteristics of fair value amounts
classified within each level of the SFAS 157 hierarchy are described as
follows:
§
|
Level
1 fair values are based on quoted prices, which are available in active
markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the measurement
date. Active markets are defined as those in which transactions
for identical assets or liabilities occur in sufficient frequency so as to
provide pricing information on an ongoing basis (e.g., the NYSE or
NYMEX). Level 1 primarily consists of financial assets and
liabilities such as exchange-traded derivative instruments,
publicly-traded equity securities and U.S. government treasury
securities.
|
§
|
Level
2 fair values are based on pricing inputs other than quoted prices in
active markets (as reflected in Level 1 fair values) and are either
directly or indirectly observable as of the measurement
date. Level 2 fair values include instruments that are valued
using financial models or other appropriate valuation
methodologies. Such financial models are primarily
industry-standard models that consider various assumptions, including
quoted forward prices for commodities, time value of money, volatility
factors for stocks and current market and contractual prices for the
underlying instruments, as well as other relevant economic
measures. Substantially all of these assumptions are (i)
observable in the marketplace throughout the full term of the instrument,
(ii) can be derived from observable data or (iii) are validated by inputs
other than quoted prices (e.g., interest rate and yield curves at commonly
quoted intervals). Level 2 includes non-exchange-traded
instruments such as over-the-counter forward contracts, options and
repurchase agreements.
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
§
|
Level
3 fair values are based on unobservable inputs. Unobservable
inputs are used to measure fair value to the extent that observable inputs
are not available, thereby allowing for situations in which there is
little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability at the
measurement date. Unobservable inputs reflect the reporting
entity’s own ideas about the assumptions that market participants would
use in pricing an asset or liability (including assumptions about
risk). Unobservable inputs are based on the best information
available in the circumstances, which might include the reporting entity’s
internally-developed data. The reporting entity must not ignore
information about market participant assumptions that is reasonably
available without undue cost and effort. Level 3 inputs are
typically used in connection with internally developed valuation
methodologies where management makes its best estimate of an instrument’s
fair value. Level 3 generally includes specialized or unique
derivative instruments that are tailored to meet a customer’s specific
needs. At December 31, 2008, our Level 3 financial assets
consisted of ethane based contracts with a range of two to twelve months
in term. This classification is primarily due to our reliance
on broker quotes for this product due to the forward ethane markets being
less than highly active.
|
The
following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, our
financial assets and liabilities measured on a recurring basis at December 31,
2008. These financial assets and liabilities are classified in their
entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair
value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular
input to the fair value measurement requires judgment, and may affect the
valuation of the fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within
the fair value hierarchy levels.
|
|
Level
1
|
|
|
Level
2
|
|
|
Level
3
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Financial
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
derivative instruments
|
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
|
$ |
164.7 |
|
|
$ |
32.8 |
|
|
$ |
201.5 |
|
Foreign
currency derivative instruments
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
9.3 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
9.3 |
|
Interest
rate derivative instruments
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
46.7 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
46.7 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
|
$ |
220.7 |
|
|
$ |
32.8 |
|
|
$ |
257.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
derivative l instruments
|
|
$ |
7.1 |
|
|
$ |
289.6 |
|
|
$ |
0.4 |
|
|
$ |
297.1 |
|
Foreign
currency derivative instruments
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Interest
rate derivative instruments
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
9.8 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
9.8 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
7.1 |
|
|
$ |
299.5 |
|
|
$ |
0.4 |
|
|
$ |
307.0 |
|
Net
financial assets, Level 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
32.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
values associated with our interest rate, commodity and foreign currency
derivative instrument portfolios were developed using available market
information and appropriate valuation techniques in accordance with SFAS
157.
The
following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in the fair value of our
Level 3 financial assets and liabilities during the year ended December 31,
2008:
Balance,
January 1, 2008
|
|
$ |
(5.0 |
) |
Total
gains (losses) included in:
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
|
(34.6 |
) |
Other
comprehensive loss
|
|
|
37.2 |
|
Purchases,
issuances, settlements
|
|
|
34.8 |
|
Balance,
December 31, 2008
|
|
$ |
32.4 |
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Fair
Value Information
Cash and
cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued expenses are
carried at amounts which reasonably approximate their fair values due to their
short-term nature. The estimated fair values of our fixed rate debt
are based on quoted market prices for such debt or debt of similar terms and
maturities. The carrying amounts of our variable rate debt
obligations reasonably approximate their fair values due to their variable
interest rates. The fair values associated with our interest rate and
commodity hedging portfolios were developed using available market information
and appropriate valuation techniques. The following table presents
the estimated fair values of our derivative instruments at December 31,
2008:
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
Derivative
Instruments
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Value
|
|
Financial
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents, including restricted cash
|
|
$ |
265.6 |
|
|
$ |
265.6 |
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
2,063.8 |
|
|
|
2,063.8 |
|
Commodity
derivative instruments (1)
|
|
|
201.5 |
|
|
|
201.5 |
|
Foreign
currency hedging derivative instruments (2)
|
|
|
9.3 |
|
|
|
9.3 |
|
Interest
rate hedging derivative instruments (3)
|
|
|
46.7 |
|
|
|
46.7 |
|
Financial
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
|
|
2,506.0 |
|
|
|
2,506.0 |
|
Fixed-rate
debt (principal amount) (4)
|
|
|
9,704.3 |
|
|
|
8,192.2 |
|
Variable-rate
debt
|
|
|
1,858.5 |
|
|
|
1,858.5 |
|
Commodity
derivative instruments (1)
|
|
|
297.1 |
|
|
|
297.1 |
|
Foreign
currency hedging derivative instruments (2)
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Interest
rate hedging derivative instruments (3)
|
|
|
9.8 |
|
|
|
9.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Represent
commodity derivative instrument transactions that either have not settled
or have settled and not been invoiced. Settled and invoiced
transactions are reflected in either accounts receivable or accounts
payable depending on the outcome of the transaction.
(2)
Relates
to the hedging of our exposure to fluctuations in the Canadian dollar and
Japanese yen.
(3)
Represent
interest rate hedging derivative instrument transactions that have not
settled. Settled transactions are reflected in either accounts
receivable or accounts payable depending on the outcome of the
transaction.
(4)
Due
to the distress in the capital markets following the collapse of several
major financial entities and uncertainty in the credit markets during
2008, corporate debt securities were trading at significant
discounts.
|
|
Note
7. Inventories
Our
inventory amounts were as follows at December 31, 2008:
Working
inventory (1)
|
|
$ |
211.9 |
|
Forward
sales inventory (2)
|
|
|
193.1 |
|
Total
inventory
|
|
$ |
405.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Working
inventory is comprised of inventories of natural gas, crude oil, refined
products, lubrication oils, NGLs and certain petrochemical products that
are either available-for-sale or used in the provision for
services.
(2)
Forward
sales inventory consists of identified natural gas, crude oil and NGL
volumes dedicated to the fulfillment of forward sales
contracts.
|
|
Our
inventory values reflect payments for product purchases, freight charges
associated with such purchase volumes, terminal and storage fees, vessel
inspection costs, demurrage charges and other related costs. We value
our inventories at the lower of average cost or market.
In those
instances where we take ownership of inventory volumes through
percent-of-liquids contracts and similar arrangements (as opposed to actually
purchasing volumes for cash from third parties), these volumes are valued at
market-related prices during the month in which they are acquired. We
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
capitalize
as a component of inventory those ancillary costs (e.g. freight-in and other
handling and processing charges) incurred in connection with volumes obtained
through such contracts.
Due to
fluctuating commodity prices, we recognize lower of cost or market (“LCM”)
adjustments when the carrying value of our inventories exceed their net
realizable value.
Note
8. Property, Plant and Equipment
Our
property, plant and equipment values and accumulated depreciation balances were
as follows at December 31, 2008:
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Useful
Life
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In
Years
|
|
|
|
|
Plants
and pipelines (1)
|
|
3-40
(6) |
|
|
$ |
15,266.7 |
|
Underground
and other storage facilities (2)
|
|
5-40
(7) |
|
|
|
1,203.9 |
|
Platforms
and facilities (3)
|
|
20-31 |
|
|
|
634.8 |
|
Transportation
equipment (4)
|
|
3-10 |
|
|
|
50.9 |
|
Marine
vessels (5)
|
|
20-30 |
|
|
|
453.0 |
|
Land
|
|
|
|
|
|
254.5 |
|
Construction
in progress
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,015.4 |
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,879.2 |
|
Less
accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,146.4 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
16,732.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Plants
and pipelines include processing plants; NGL, petrochemical, crude oil and
natural gas pipelines; terminal loading and unloading facilities; office
furniture and equipment; buildings; laboratory and shop equipment; and
related assets.
(2)
Underground
and other storage facilities include underground product storage caverns;
above ground storage tanks; water wells; and related assets.
(3)
Platforms
and facilities include offshore platforms and related facilities and other
associated assets.
(4)
Transportation
equipment includes vehicles and similar assets used in our
operations.
(5)
See
Note 10 for additional information regarding the acquisition of marine
services businesses in February 2008.
(6)
In
general, the estimated useful lives of major components of this category
are as follows: processing plants, 20-35 years; pipelines and related
equipment, 5-40 years; terminal facilities, 10-35 years; delivery
facilities, 20-40 years; office furniture and equipment, 3-20 years;
buildings, 20-40 years; and laboratory and shop equipment, 5-35
years.
(7)
In
general, the estimated useful lives of major components of this category
are as follows: underground storage facilities, 5-35 years; storage
tanks, 10-40 years; and water wells, 5-35 years.
|
|
We recorded $90.7 million in
capitalized interest during the year ended December 31, 2008.
We
reviewed assumptions underlying the estimated remaining useful lives of certain
of our assets during the first quarter of 2008. As a result of our
review, effective January 1, 2008, we revised the remaining useful lives of
these assets, most notably the assets that constitute our Texas Intrastate
System. This revision increased the remaining useful life of such
assets to incorporate recent data showing that proved natural gas reserves
supporting throughput and processing volumes for these assets have changed since
our original determination made in September 2004. These revisions
will prospectively reduce our depreciation expense on assets having carrying
values totaling $2.72 billion as of January 1, 2008.
In
August 2008, we, together with Oiltanking Holding Americas, Inc.
(“Oiltanking”), announced the formation of the Texas Offshore Port System (or
“TOPS”), which was a joint venture to design, construct, operate and own a Texas
offshore crude oil port and related pipeline and storage system that would
facilitate delivery of waterborne crude oil cargoes to refining centers located
along the upper Texas Gulf Coast. We owned a two-thirds
interest in TOPS, with Oiltanking owning the remaining one-third
interest. Construction in progress amounts at December 31, 2008
included $90.6 million attributable to TOPS, which is a consolidated subsidiary
of ours. See Note 19 for subsequent event information regarding
our dissociation from TOPS in April 2009.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Asset
retirement obligations
We have
recorded AROs related to legal requirements to perform retirement activities as
specified in contractual arrangements and/or governmental
regulations. In general, our AROs primarily result from (i)
right-of-way agreements associated with our pipeline operations, (ii) leases of
plant sites and (iii) regulatory requirements triggered by the abandonment or
retirement of certain underground storage assets and offshore
facilities. In addition, our AROs may result from the renovation or
demolition of certain assets containing hazardous substances such as
asbestos.
The
following table presents information regarding our AROs since December 31,
2007:
ARO
liability balance, December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
42.2 |
|
Liabilities
incurred
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
Liabilities
settled
|
|
|
(8.2 |
) |
Revisions
in estimated cash flows
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
Accretion
expense
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
ARO
liability balance, December 31, 2008
|
|
$ |
42.2 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment at December 31, 2008 includes $11.7 of asset retirement
costs capitalized as an increase in the associated long-lived
asset.
Certain
of our unconsolidated affiliates have AROs recorded at December 31, 2008
relating to contractual agreements and regulatory requirements. These
amounts are immaterial to our Supplemental Consolidated Balance
Sheet.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Note
9. Investments in Unconsolidated Affiliates
We own
interests in a number of related businesses that are accounted for using the
equity method of accounting. Our investments in unconsolidated
affiliates are grouped according to the business segment to which they
relate. See Note 14 for a general discussion of our business
segments. The following table shows our investments in unconsolidated
affiliates at December 31, 2008:
|
|
Ownership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
|
|
NGL
Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Venice
Energy Service Company, L.L.C. (“VESCO”)
|
|
13.1% |
|
|
$ |
37.7 |
|
K/D/S
Promix, L.L.C. (“Promix”)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
46.4 |
|
Baton
Rouge Fractionators LLC (“BRF”)
|
|
32.2% |
|
|
|
24.2 |
|
Skelly-Belvieu
Pipeline Company, L.L.C. (“Skelly-Belvieu”) (1)
|
|
49% |
|
|
|
36.0 |
|
Onshore
Natural Gas Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evangeline
(2)
|
|
49.5% |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
White
River Hub, LLC (“White River Hub”) (3)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
21.4 |
|
Onshore
Crude Oil Pipelines & Services
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seaway
Crude Pipeline Company (“Seaway”)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
186.2 |
|
Offshore
Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poseidon
Oil Pipeline, L.L.C. (“Poseidon”)
|
|
36% |
|
|
|
60.2 |
|
Cameron
Highway Oil Pipeline Company (“Cameron Highway”)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
250.9 |
|
Deepwater
Gateway, L.L.C. (“Deepwater Gateway”)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
104.8 |
|
Neptune
|
|
25.7% |
|
|
|
52.7 |
|
Nemo
|
|
33.9% |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
Petrochemical
& Refined Products Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baton
Rouge Propylene Concentrator, LLC (“BRPC”)
|
|
30% |
|
|
|
12.6 |
|
La
Porte (4)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
Centennial
Pipeline LLC (“Centennial”)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
69.7 |
|
Other
|
|
25% |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
911.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
In
December 2008, we acquired a 49% ownership interest in
Skelly-Belvieu.
(2)
Refers
to our ownership interests in Evangeline Gas Pipeline Company, L.P. and
Evangeline Gas Corp., collectively.
(3)
In
February 2008, we acquired a 50% ownership interest in White River
Hub.
(4)
Refers
to our ownership interests in La Porte Pipeline Company, L.P. and La Porte
GP, LLC, collectively.
|
|
On
occasion, the price we pay to acquire an ownership interest in a company exceeds
the underlying book value of the capital accounts we acquire. Such
excess cost amounts are included within the carrying values of our investments
in and advances to unconsolidated affiliates. At December 31, 2008,
our investments in Promix, Skelly-Belvieu, La Porte, Neptune, Poseidon, Cameron
Highway, Seaway and Centennial included excess cost amounts totaling $75.6
million, all of which were attributable to the fair value of the underlying
tangible assets of these entities exceeding their book carrying values at the
time of our acquisition of interests in these entities.
NGL
Pipelines & Services
At December 31, 2008, our NGL Pipelines
& Services segment included the following unconsolidated affiliates
accounted for using the equity method:
VESCO. We own a 13.1% interest in
VESCO, which owns a natural gas processing facility and related assets located
in south Louisiana.
Promix. We own a 50%
interest in Promix, which owns an NGL fractionation facility and related storage
and pipeline assets located in south Louisiana.
BRF. We own an
approximate 32.2% interest in BRF, which owns an NGL fractionation facility
located in south Louisiana.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Skelly-Belvieu. In
December 2008, we acquired a 49% interest in Skelly-Belvieu for $36.0
million. Skelly-Belvieu owns a 570-mile pipeline that transports
mixed NGLs to markets in southeast Texas.
The
combined balance sheet information at December 31, 2008 of this segment’s
current unconsolidated affiliates is summarized below.
Current
assets
|
|
$ |
64.1 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
368.1 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
434.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
|
$ |
50.2 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
24.3 |
|
Combined
equity
|
|
|
359.7 |
|
Total
liabilities and combined equity
|
|
$ |
434.2 |
|
Onshore
Natural Gas Pipelines & Services
At December 31, 2008, our Onshore
Natural Gas Pipelines & Services segment included the
following unconsolidated affiliates accounted for using the equity
method:
Evangeline. We own an
approximate 49.5% aggregate interest in Evangeline, which owns a natural gas
pipeline located in south Louisiana. A subsidiary of Acadian Gas, LLC
owns the Evangeline interests, which were contributed to Duncan Energy Partners
in February 2007 in connection with its initial public offering (see Note
15).
Coyote. We owned a 50% interest in
Coyote during 2005, which owns a natural gas treating facility located in the
San Juan Basin of southwestern Colorado.
White
River Hub. We own a 50% interest in White River Hub, which owns a natural
gas hub located in northwest Colorado. The hub was completed in
December 2008.
The
combined balance sheet information at December 31, 2008 of this segment’s
current unconsolidated affiliates is summarized below.
Current
assets
|
|
$ |
43.6 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
60.2 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
17.5 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
121.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
|
$ |
33.9 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
21.5 |
|
Combined
equity
|
|
|
65.9 |
|
Total
liabilities and combined equity
|
|
$ |
121.3 |
|
Onshore
Crude Oil Pipelines & Services
At
December 31, 2008, our Onshore Crude Oil Pipelines & Services segment included the
following unconsolidated affiliate accounted for using the equity
method:
Seaway. We own a 50%
interest in Seaway, which owns a pipeline that transports crude oil from a
marine terminal located in Freeport, Texas, to Cushing, Oklahoma, and from a
marine terminal located in Texas City, Texas, to refineries in the Texas City
and Houston, Texas areas.
The
balance sheet information at December 31, 2008 this segment’s current
unconsolidated affiliate is summarized below.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Current
assets
|
|
$ |
31.3 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
248.0 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
279.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
|
$ |
6.1 |
|
Equity
|
|
|
273.2 |
|
Total
liabilities and equity
|
|
$ |
279.3 |
|
Offshore
Pipelines & Services
At December 31, 2008, our Offshore
Pipelines & Services segment included the following unconsolidated
affiliates accounted for using the equity method:
Poseidon. We
own a 36% interest in Poseidon, which owns a crude oil pipeline that gathers
production from the outer continental shelf and deepwater areas of the Gulf of
Mexico for delivery to onshore locations in south Louisiana.
Cameron
Highway. We own a 50%
interest in Cameron Highway, which owns a crude oil pipeline that gathers
production from deepwater areas of the Gulf of Mexico, primarily the South Green
Canyon area, for delivery to refineries and terminals in southeast
Texas.
Deepwater
Gateway. We own a 50%
interest in Deepwater Gateway, which owns the Marco Polo platform located in the
Gulf of Mexico. The Marco Polo platform processes crude oil and
natural gas production from the Marco Polo, K2, K2 North and Genghis Khan fields
located in the South Green Canyon area of the Gulf of Mexico.
Neptune.
We own a
25.7% interest in Neptune, which owns Manta Ray Offshore Gathering System
(“Manta Ray”) and Nautilus Pipeline System (“Nautilus”), which are natural gas
pipelines located in the Gulf of Mexico.
Nemo.
We own a
33.9% interest in Nemo, which owns the Nemo Gathering System, which is a
natural gas pipeline located in the Gulf of Mexico.
The
combined balance sheet information at December 31, 2008 of this segment’s
current unconsolidated affiliates is summarized below.
Current
assets
|
|
$ |
85.3 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
1,093.9 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
1,182.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
|
$ |
53.3 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
116.7 |
|
Combined
equity
|
|
|
1,012.8 |
|
Total
liabilities and combined equity
|
|
$ |
1,182.8 |
|
Petrochemical
& Refined Products Services
At December 31, 2008, our Petrochemical
& Refined Products Services segment included the following unconsolidated
affiliates accounted for using the equity method:
BRPC. We own a 30%
interest in BRPC, which owns a propylene fractionation facility located in south
Louisiana.
La
Porte. We own an
aggregate 50% interest in La Porte, which owns a propylene pipeline extending
from Mont Belvieu, Texas to La Porte, Texas.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Centennial. We own a 50%
interest in Centennial, which owns an interstate refined petroleum products
pipeline extending from the upper Texas Gulf Coast to central
Illinois. Prior to April 2002, our refined products pipeline system
was bottlenecked between Beaumont, Texas and El Dorado, Arkansas, which limited
our ability to transport refined products and NGLs during peak
periods. When the Centennial pipeline commenced operations in 2002,
it effectively looped our refined products pipeline system, thus providing
incremental transportation capacity into Mid-continent markets.
The combined balance sheet
information at December 31, 2009 of this segment’s current unconsolidated
affiliates is summarized below.
Current
assets
|
|
$ |
16.5 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
283.1 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
299.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
|
$ |
22.4 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
120.3 |
|
Combined
equity
|
|
|
156.9 |
|
Total
liabilities and combined equity
|
|
$ |
299.6 |
|
Note
10. Business Combinations
Our
expenditures for business combinations during the year ended December 31, 2008
were $553.4 million and primarily reflect the acquisitions described
below.
Great
Divide Gathering System Acquisition. In December 2008, one
of our subsidiaries, Enterprise Gas Processing, LLC, purchased a 100% membership
interest in Great Divide Gathering, LLC (“Great Divide”) for cash consideration
of $125.2 million. Great Divide was wholly owned by EnCana Oil & Gas
(“EnCana”).
The
assets of Great Divide consist of a 31-mile natural gas gathering system, the
Great Divide Gathering System, located in the Piceance Basin of northwestern
Colorado. The Great Divide Gathering System extends from the southern
portion of the Piceance Basin, including production from EnCana’s Mamm Creek
field, to a pipeline interconnection with our Piceance Basin Gathering
System. Volumes of natural gas originating on the Great Divide
Gathering System are transported through our Piceance Creek Gathering System to
our 1.4 Bcf/d Meeker natural gas treating and processing complex. A
significant portion of these volumes are produced by EnCana, one of the largest
natural gas producers in the region, and are dedicated the Great Divide and
Piceance Creek Gathering Systems for the life of the associated lease
holdings.
Tri-States
and Belle Rose Acquisitions. In October 2008, we
acquired additional 16.7% membership interests in both Tri-States NGL Pipeline,
L.L.C. (“Tri-States”) and Belle Rose NGL Pipeline, L.L.C. (“Belle Rose”) for
total cash consideration of $19.9 million. As a result of this
transaction, our ownership interest in Tri-States increased to
83.3%. We now own 100% of the membership interests in Belle
Rose.
Tri-States
owns a 194-mile NGL pipeline located along the Mississippi, Alabama and
Louisiana Gulf Coast. Belle Rose owns a 48-mile NGL pipeline located in
Louisiana. These systems, in conjunction with the Wilprise pipeline,
transport mixed NGLs to the BRF, Norco and Promix NGL fractionators located in
south Louisiana.
Acquisition
of Remaining Interest in Dixie. In August 2008, we
acquired the remaining 25.8% ownership interests in Dixie for cash consideration
of $57.1 million. As a result of this transaction, we own 100% of Dixie,
which owns a 1,371-mile pipeline system that delivers NGLs (primarily propane
and other chemical feedstock) to customers along the U.S. Gulf Coast and
southeastern United States.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Cenac
and Horizon Acquisitions. In February
2008, TEPPCO entered the marine transportation business for refined products,
crude oil and condensate through the purchase of assets from Cenac Towing Co.,
Inc., Cenac Offshore, L.L.C., and Mr. Arlen B. Cenac, Jr. (collectively
“Cenac”). The aggregate value of total consideration TEPPCO paid or issued to
complete this business combination was $444.7 million, which consisted of $258.1
million in cash and approximately 4.9 million newly issued TEPPCO
units. Additionally, TEPPCO assumed approximately $63.2 million of
Cenac’s debt in the transaction. TEPPCO acquired 42 tow boats, 89
tank barges and the economic benefit of certain related commercial
agreements. This business serves refineries and storage terminals
along the Mississippi, Illinois and Ohio rivers and the Intracoastal Waterway
between Texas and Florida. These assets also gather crude oil from
production facilities and platforms along the U.S. Gulf Coast. TEPPCO
used its Short-Term Credit Facility to finance the cash portion of the
acquisition price and to repay the $63.2 million of debt assumed in this
transaction.
Also in
February 2008, TEPPCO purchased related marine assets from Horizon Maritime,
L.L.C. (“Horizon”), a privately held Houston-based company and an affiliate of
Mr. Cenac, for $80.8 million in cash. In this transaction, TEPPCO acquired 7 tow
boats, 17 tank barges, rights to 2 tow boats under construction and the economic
benefit of certain related commercial agreements. In April 2008,
TEPPCO paid an additional $3.0 million to Horizon pursuant to the purchase
agreement upon delivery of one of the tow boats under construction, and in June
2008, TEPPCO paid an additional $3.8 million upon delivery of the second tow
boat. These vessels transport asphalt, heavy fuel oil and other
heated oil products to storage facilities and refineries along the Mississippi,
Illinois and Ohio Rivers and the Intracoastal Waterway. TEPPCO used
its Short-Term Credit Facility to finance this acquisition.
Purchase
Price Allocations. We accounted for our business combinations
completed during 2008 using the purchase method of accounting and, accordingly,
such costs have been allocated to assets acquired and liabilities assumed based
on estimated preliminary fair values. Such preliminary values have
been developed using recognized business valuation techniques and are subject to
change pending a final valuation analysis.
|
|
Cenac
|
|
|
Horizon
|
|
|
Great
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
|
|
|
Acquisition
|
|
|
Divide
|
|
|
Dixie
|
|
|
Other
(1)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Assets
acquired in business combination:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
|
$ |
2.6 |
|
|
$ |
6.6 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
362.9 |
|
|
|
72.2 |
|
|
|
70.6 |
|
|
|
33.7 |
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
|
549.5 |
|
Intangible
assets
|
|
|
63.5 |
|
|
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
9.8 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
12.7 |
|
|
|
92.5 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
Total
assets acquired
|
|
|
426.4 |
|
|
|
78.7 |
|
|
|
80.4 |
|
|
|
38.1 |
|
|
|
25.4 |
|
|
|
649.0 |
|
Liabilities
assumed in business combination:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
(3.2 |
) |
Long-term
debt
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
Other
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
(63.2 |
) |
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(46.2 |
) |
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
(109.5 |
) |
Total
liabilities assumed
|
|
|
(63.2 |
) |
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(51.4 |
) |
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
(115.3 |
) |
Total
assets acquired plus liabilities assumed
|
|
|
363.2 |
|
|
|
78.7 |
|
|
|
80.3 |
|
|
|
(13.3 |
) |
|
|
24.8 |
|
|
|
533.7 |
|
Fair
value of 4,854,899 TEPPCO units
|
|
|
186.6 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
186.6 |
|
Total
cash used for business combinations
|
|
|
258.1 |
|
|
|
87.6 |
|
|
|
125.2 |
|
|
|
57.1 |
|
|
|
25.4 |
|
|
|
553.4 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
$ |
81.5 |
|
|
$ |
8.9 |
|
|
$ |
44.9 |
|
|
$ |
70.4 |
|
|
$ |
0.6 |
|
|
$ |
206.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Primarily
represents (i) non-cash reclassification adjustments to December 2007
preliminary fair value estimates for assets acquired in the South Monco
natural gas pipeline acquisition, (ii) the purchase of lubrication and
other fuel assets in August 2008 and (iii) the purchase of additional
interests in Tri-States and Belle Rose in October 2008.
|
|
As a
result of our 100% ownership interest in Dixie, we used push-down accounting to
record this business combination. In doing so, a temporary tax
difference was created between the assets and liabilities of Dixie for financial
reporting and tax purposes. Dixie recorded a deferred income tax
liability of $45.1 million attributable to the temporary tax
difference.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Note
11. Intangible Assets and Goodwill
Identifiable
Intangible Assets
The
following table summarizes our intangible assets at December 31,
2008:
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Accum.
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Amort.
|
|
|
Value
|
|
NGL Pipelines & Services:
(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer
relationship intangibles
|
|
$ |
237.4 |
|
|
$ |
(68.7 |
) |
|
$ |
168.7 |
|
Contract-based
intangibles
|
|
|
320.3 |
|
|
|
(137.6 |
) |
|
|
182.7 |
|
Segment
total
|
|
|
557.7 |
|
|
|
(206.3 |
) |
|
|
351.4 |
|
Onshore
Natural Gas Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer
relationship intangibles (2)
|
|
|
372.0 |
|
|
|
(103.2 |
) |
|
|
268.8 |
|
Gas
gathering agreements
|
|
|
464.0 |
|
|
|
(213.1 |
) |
|
|
250.9 |
|
Other
contract-based intangibles
|
|
|
101.3 |
|
|
|
(36.6 |
) |
|
|
64.7 |
|
Segment
total
|
|
|
937.3 |
|
|
|
(352.9 |
) |
|
|
584.4 |
|
Onshore
Crude Oil Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract-based
intangibles
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
|
6.9 |
|
Segment
total
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
|
6.9 |
|
Offshore
Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer
relationship intangibles
|
|
|
205.8 |
|
|
|
(90.7 |
) |
|
|
115.1 |
|
Contract-based
intangibles
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
1.1 |
|
Segment
total
|
|
|
207.0 |
|
|
|
(90.8 |
) |
|
|
116.2 |
|
Petrochemical
& Refined Products Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer
relationship intangibles
|
|
|
104.9 |
|
|
|
(13.8 |
) |
|
|
91.1 |
|
Contract-based
intangibles
|
|
|
41.1 |
|
|
|
(8.2 |
) |
|
|
32.9 |
|
Segment
total
|
|
|
146.0 |
|
|
|
(22.0 |
) |
|
|
124.0 |
|
Total
all segments
|
|
$ |
1,858.0 |
|
|
$ |
(675.1 |
) |
|
$ |
1,182.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
In
2008, we acquired $6.0 million of certain permits related to our Mont
Belvieu complex and had $12.7 million of purchase price allocation
adjustments related to San Felipe customer relationships from the December
2007 South Monco acquisition.
(2) In
2008, we acquired $9.8 million of customer relationships due to the Great
Divide business combination.
|
|
In
general, our intangible assets fall within two categories – contract-based
intangible assets and customer relationships. The values assigned to such
intangible assets are amortized to earnings using either (i) a straight-line
approach or (ii) other methods that closely resemble the pattern in which the
economic benefits of associated resource bases are estimated to be consumed or
otherwise used, as appropriate.
Customer
relationship intangible assets. Customer relationship
intangible assets represent the estimated economic value assigned to certain
relationships acquired in connection with business combinations and asset
purchases whereby (i) we acquired information about or access to customers and
now have regular contact with them and (ii) the customers now have the ability
to make direct contact with us. Customer relationships may arise from
contractual arrangements (such as supplier contracts and service contracts) and
through means other than contracts, such as through regular contact by sales or
service representatives.
At
December 31, 2008, the carrying value of our customer relationship intangible
assets was $643.7 million. The following information summarizes the
significant components of this category of intangible assets:
§
|
San
Juan Gathering System customer relationships – We acquired these customer
relationships in connection with the GulfTerra Merger, which was completed
on September 30, 2004. At December 31, 2008, the carrying value
of this group of intangible assets was $238.8 million. These
intangible assets are being amortized to earnings over their estimated
economic life of 35 years through 2039. Amortization expense is
recorded using a method that closely resembles the pattern in which the
economic benefits of the underlying natural gas resource bases are
expected to be consumed or otherwise
used.
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
§
|
Offshore
Pipeline & Platform customer relationships – We acquired these
customer relationships in connection with the GulfTerra
Merger. At December 31, 2008, the carrying value of this group
of intangible assets was $115.2 million. These intangible
assets are being amortized to earnings over their estimated economic life
of 33 years through 2037. Amortization expense is recorded
using a method that closely resembles the pattern in which the economic
benefits of the underlying crude oil and natural gas resource bases are
expected to be consumed or otherwise
used.
|
§
|
Encinal
natural gas processing customer relationship – We acquired this customer
relationship in connection with our Encinal acquisition in
2006. At December 31, 2008, the carrying value of this
intangible asset was $99.1 million. This intangible asset is
being amortized to earnings over its estimated economic life of 20 years
through 2026. Amortization expense is recorded using a method
that closely resembles the pattern in which the economic benefit of the
underlying natural gas resource bases are expected to be consumed or
otherwise used.
|
Contract-based
intangible assets. Contract-based intangible assets represent
specific commercial rights we acquired in connection with business combinations
or asset purchases. At December 31, 2008, the carrying value of our
contract-based intangible assets was $539.2 million. The following
information summarizes the significant components of this category of intangible
assets:
§
|
Jonah
natural gas gathering agreements – These intangible assets represent the
value attributed to certain of Jonah’s natural gas gathering contracts
that were originally acquired by TEPPCO in 2001. At December
31, 2008, the carrying value of this group of intangible assets was $136.0
million. These intangible assets are being amortized to
earnings using a units-of-production method based on throughput volumes on
the Jonah system.
|
§
|
Val
Verde natural gas gathering agreements – These intangible assets represent
the value attributed to certain natural gas gathering agreements
associated with our Val Verde Gathering System that was originally
acquired by TEPPCO in 2002. At December 31, 2008, the carrying
value of these intangible assets was $113.8 million. These
intangible assets are being amortized to earnings using a
units-of-production method based on throughput volumes on the Val Verde
Gathering System.
|
§
|
Shell
Processing Agreement – This margin-band/keepwhole processing agreement
grants us the right to process Shell Oil Company’s (or its assignee’s)
current and future natural gas production of within the state and federal
waters of the Gulf of Mexico. We acquired the Shell Processing
Agreement in connection with our 1999 purchase of certain of Shell’s
midstream energy assets located along the U.S. Gulf Coast. At
December 31, 2008, the carrying value of this intangible asset was $116.9
million. This intangible asset is being amortized to earnings
on a straight-line basis over its estimated economic life of 20 years
through 2019.
|
§
|
Mississippi
natural gas storage contracts – These intangible assets represent the
value assigned by us to certain natural gas storage contracts associated
with our Petal and Hattiesburg, Mississippi storage
facilities. These facilities were acquired in connection
with the GulfTerra Merger. At December 31, 2008, the carrying
value of these intangible assets was $64.0 million. These
intangible assets are being amortized to earnings on a straight-line basis
over the remainder of their respective contract terms, which range from
eight to 18 years (i.e. 2012 through
2022).
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Goodwill
Goodwill
represents the excess of the purchase price of an acquired business over the
amounts assigned to assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the
transaction. We do not amortize goodwill; however, we test goodwill
for impairment annually, or more frequently if circumstances indicate that it is
more likely than not that the fair value of goodwill is less than its carrying
value. The following table summarizes our goodwill amounts by
business segment at December 31, 2008:
NGL
Pipelines & Services
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
of ownership interests in TEPPCO
|
|
$ |
72.2 |
|
GulfTerra
Merger
|
|
|
23.8 |
|
Acquisition
of Encinal
|
|
|
95.3 |
|
Acquisition
of additional ownership interests in Dixie
|
|
|
80.3 |
|
Acquisition
of Great Divide
|
|
|
44.9 |
|
Acquisition
of Indian Springs natural gas processing business
|
|
|
13.2 |
|
Other
|
|
|
11.5 |
|
Onshore
Natural Gas Pipelines & Services
|
|
|
|
|
GulfTerra
Merger
|
|
|
279.9 |
|
Other
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
Onshore
Crude Oil Pipeline & Services
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
of ownership interests in TEPPCO
|
|
|
288.8 |
|
Acquisition
of crude oil pipeline and services business
|
|
|
14.2 |
|
Offshore
Pipelines & Services
|
|
|
|
|
GulfTerra
Merger
|
|
|
82.1 |
|
Petrochemical
& Refined Products Services
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
of ownership interests in TEPPCO
|
|
|
842.3 |
|
Acquisition
of Mont Belvieu propylene fractionation business
|
|
|
73.7 |
|
Acquisition
of marine transportation businesses
|
|
|
90.4 |
|
Other
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
2,019.6 |
|
Changes
in goodwill amounts during 2008. In 2008, our only significant
changes to goodwill were the recording of $70.4 million in connection with our
acquisition of the remaining third party interest in Dixie, $44.9 million in
connection with the acquisition of Great Divide and $90.4 million in connection
with our acquisitions of Cenac and Horizon. The remaining ownership
interests in Dixie were acquired from Amoco Pipeline Holding Company in August
2008. Management attributes the goodwill to future earnings growth on
the Dixie Pipeline. Specifically, a 100% ownership interest in the
Dixie Pipeline will increase our flexibility to pursue future
opportunities. Great Divide was acquired from EnCana in December
2008. The Great Divide goodwill is attributable to management’s
expectations of future economics benefits derived from incremental natural gas
processing margins and other downstream activities.
The Dixie
and Great Divide goodwill amounts are recorded as part of the NGL Pipelines
& Services business segment due to management’s belief that such future
benefits will accrue to businesses classified within this
segment. The marine services businesses goodwill amounts are recorded
as part of the Petrochemical & Refined Products Services business segment
due to management’s belief of potential future economic benefits we expect to
realize as a result of acquiring these assets. See Note 10 for
additional information regarding our 2008 acquisitions that resulted in the
recording of goodwill.
Goodwill
attributable to the acquisition of ownership interests in
TEPPCO. As a result of our ownership of 100% of the
limited and general partner interests of TEPPCO following the recently completed
TEPPCO Merger, we applied push-down accounting to the $1.2 billion of goodwill
recorded by affiliates of EPCO (which are under common control with us) when
they acquired 100% of the membership interests of TEPPCO GP and 4.4 million
TEPPCO limited partner units from a third party in February 2005. The
$1.2 billion in push down goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price
paid by such affiliates to acquire ownership interests in TEPPCO in February
2005 over the respective fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed
in the February 2005 transaction. Management attributes the $1.2
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
billion
of goodwill to the future economic benefits we may realize from our ownership of
TEPPCO, including anticipated commercial synergies and cost
savings.
TEPPCO
owns and operates an extensive network of assets that facilitate the movement,
marketing, gathering and storage services of various commodities and
energy-related products. TEPPCO’s pipeline network is comprised of
approximately 12,500 miles of pipelines that gather and transport refined
petroleum products, crude oil, natural gas and NGLs, including one of the
largest common carrier pipelines for refined products in the United
States. TEPPCO also owns a marine services business that transports
refined petroleum products, crude oil, asphalt, condensate, heavy fuel oil and
other heated oil products via tow boats and tank barges. In addition,
TEPPCO owns interests in the Seaway and Centennial pipeline
systems.
Goodwill
attributable to GulfTerra Merger. Goodwill recorded in
connection with the GulfTerra Merger can be attributed to our belief (at the
time the merger was consummated) that the combined partnerships would benefit
from the strategic location of each partnership’s assets and the industry
relationships that each possessed. In addition, we expected that
various operating synergies could develop (such as reduced general and
administrative costs and interest savings) that would result in improved
financial results for the merged entity. Based on miles of pipelines,
GulfTerra was one of the largest natural gas gathering and transportation
companies in the United States, serving producers in the central and western
Gulf of Mexico and onshore in Texas and New Mexico. These regions
offer us significant growth potential through the acquisition and construction
of additional pipelines, platforms, processing and storage facilities and other
midstream energy infrastructure.
Acquisition
of Encinal. Management attributes goodwill recorded in
connection with the Encinal acquisition to potential future benefits we may
realize from our other south Texas processing and NGL businesses as a result of
acquiring the Encinal business. Specifically, our acquisition of the
long-term dedication rights associated with the Encinal business is expected to
add value to our south Texas processing facilities and related NGL businesses
due to increased volumes. The Encinal goodwill is recorded as part of
the NGL Pipelines & Services business segment due to management’s belief
that such future benefits will accrue to businesses classified within this
segment.
Other
goodwill amounts. The remainder of our goodwill amounts are
associated with prior acquisitions, principally that of our crude oil pipeline
and services business originally purchased by TEPPCO in 2001, our purchase of a
propylene fractionation business in February 2002 and our acquisition of
indirect ownership interests in the Indian Springs natural gas gathering and
processing business in January 2005.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Note
12. Debt Obligations
Our
consolidated debt obligations consisted of the following at December 31,
2008:
EPO
senior debt obligations:
|
|
|
|
Multi-Year
Revolving Credit Facility, variable rate, due November
2012
|
|
$ |
800.0 |
|
Pascagoula
MBFC Loan, 8.70% fixed-rate, due March 2010
|
|
|
54.0 |
|
Petal
GO Zone Bonds, variable rate, due August 2037
|
|
|
57.5 |
|
Yen
Term Loan, 4.93% fixed-rate, due March 2009 (1)
|
|
|
217.6 |
|
Senior
Notes B, 7.50% fixed-rate, due February 2011
|
|
|
450.0 |
|
Senior
Notes C, 6.375% fixed-rate, due February 2013
|
|
|
350.0 |
|
Senior
Notes D, 6.875% fixed-rate, due March 2033
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
Senior
Notes F, 4.625% fixed-rate, due October 2009 (1)
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
Senior
Notes G, 5.60% fixed-rate, due October 2014
|
|
|
650.0 |
|
Senior
Notes H, 6.65% fixed-rate, due October 2034
|
|
|
350.0 |
|
Senior
Notes I, 5.00% fixed-rate, due March 2015
|
|
|
250.0 |
|
Senior
Notes J, 5.75% fixed-rate, due March 2035
|
|
|
250.0 |
|
Senior
Notes K, 4.950% fixed-rate, due June 2010
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
Senior
Notes L, 6.30% fixed-rate, due September 2017
|
|
|
800.0 |
|
Senior
Notes M, 5.65% fixed-rate, due April 2013
|
|
|
400.0 |
|
Senior
Notes N, 6.50% fixed-rate, due January 2019
|
|
|
700.0 |
|
Senior
Notes O, 9.75% fixed-rate, due January 2014
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
TEPPCO
senior debt obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
TEPPCO
Revolving Credit Facility, variable rate, due December
2012
|
|
|
516.7 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes,7.625% fixed-rate, due February 2012
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes, 6.125% fixed-rate, due February 2013
|
|
|
200.0 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes, 5.90% fixed-rate, due April 2013
|
|
|
250.0 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes, 6.65% fixed-rate, due April 2018
|
|
|
350.0 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes, 7.55% fixed-rate, due April 2038
|
|
|
400.0 |
|
Duncan
Energy Partners’ debt obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
DEP
I Revolving Credit Facility, variable rate, due February
2011
|
|
|
202.0 |
|
DEP
II Term Loan Agreement, variable rate, due December 2011
|
|
|
282.3 |
|
Total
principal amount of senior debt obligations
|
|
|
10,030.1 |
|
EPO
Junior Subordinated Notes A, fixed/variable rate, due August
2066
|
|
|
550.0 |
|
EPO
Junior Subordinated Notes B, fixed/variable rate, due January
2068
|
|
|
682.7 |
|
TEPPCO
Junior Subordinated Notes, fixed/variable rate, due June
2067
|
|
|
300.0 |
|
Total
principal amount of senior and junior debt obligations
|
|
|
11,562.8 |
|
Other,
non-principal amounts:
|
|
|
|
|
Change
in fair value of debt-related derivative instruments (see Note
6)
|
|
|
51.9 |
|
Unamortized
discounts, net of premiums
|
|
|
(12.6 |
) |
Unamortized
deferred net gains related to terminated interest rate swaps (see Note
6)
|
|
|
35.8 |
|
Total
other, non-principal amounts
|
|
|
75.1 |
|
Total
long-term debt
|
|
$ |
11,637.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standby
letters of credit outstanding
|
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
In
accordance with SFAS 6, Classification of Short-Term Obligations Expected
to be Refinanced, long-term and current maturities of debt reflects the
classification of such obligations at December 31, 2008. With
respect to the Yen Term Loan and Senior Notes F due in October 2009,
we have the ability to use available credit capacity under EPO’s
Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility to fund the repayment of this
debt.
(2)
The
Dixie Revolving Credit Facility was terminated in January
2009.
|
|
Letters
of credit
At
December 31, 2008, we had $1.0 million in standby letters outstanding under
Duncan Energy Partners’ DEP I Revolving Credit Facility.
Parent-Subsidiary
guarantor relationships
Enterprise
Products Partners L.P. acts as guarantor of the consolidated debt obligations of
EPO with the exception of the DEP I Revolving Credit Facility and the DEP II
Term Loan Agreement. If EPO
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
were to
default on any of its guaranteed debt, Enterprise Products Partners L.P. would
be responsible for full repayment of that obligation.
TE
Products Pipeline Company, LLC (“TE Products”), TCTM, L.P., TEPPCO Midstream
Companies, LLC, and Val Verde Gas Gathering Company, L.P. (collectively, the
“Subsidiary Guarantors”) act as guarantors of TEPPCO’s senior notes and
Revolving Credit Facility. The Subsidiary Guarantors also act as
guarantors, on a junior subordinated basis, of TEPPCO’s junior subordinated
notes. The guarantees are full, unconditional and joint and
several. If TEPPCO were to default on any of its guaranteed debt, the
Subsidiary Guarantors would be responsible for full repayment of that
obligation. TEPPCO’s debt obligations are non-recourse to Enterprise
Products Partners L.P. As a result of the debt exchanges related to
the TEPPCO Merger and the repayment and termination of the TEPPCO Revolving
Credit Facility by EPO in October 2009, only $54.3 million of the TEPPCO senior
and junior subordinated notes outstanding at December 31, 2008 (or 2.2%) remain
guaranteed by the Guarantor Subsidiaries. These subsidiary guarantees
were terminated in November 2009.
EPO’s
debt obligations
Multi-Year
Revolving Credit Facility. In November 2007, EPO executed an
amended and restated Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility totaling $1.75
billion, which replaced an existing $1.25 billion multi-year revolving credit
agreement. Amounts borrowed under the amended and restated credit
agreement mature in November 2012, although EPO is permitted, 30 to 60 days
before the maturity date in effect, to convert the principal balance of the
revolving loans then outstanding into a non-revolving, one-year term loan (the
“term-out option”). There is no sublimit on the amount of standby
letters of credit that can be outstanding under the amended facility. EPO’s
borrowings under this agreement are unsecured general obligations that are
non-recourse to EPGP. We have guaranteed repayment of amounts due
under this revolving credit agreement through an unsecured
guarantee.
As defined by the credit agreement,
variable interest rates charged under this facility bear interest at a
Eurodollar rate plus an applicable margin. In addition, EPO is
required to pay a quarterly facility fee on each lender’s commitment
irrespective of commitment usage.
The
applicable margins will be increased by 0.10% per annum for each day that the
total outstanding loans and letter of credit obligations under the facility
exceeds 50% of the total lender commitments. Also, upon the conversion of the
revolving loans to term loans pursuant to the term-out option described above,
the applicable margin will increase by 0.125% per annum and, if immediately
prior to such conversion, the total amount of outstanding loans and letter of
credit obligations under the facility exceeds 50% of the total lender
commitments, the applicable margin with respect to the term loans will increase
by an additional 0.10% per annum.
EPO may increase the amount that may be
borrowed under the facility, without the consent of the lenders, by an amount
not exceeding $500.0 million by adding to the facility one or more new
lenders and/or requesting that the commitments of existing lenders be increased,
although none of the existing lenders has agreed to or is obligated to increase
its existing commitment. EPO may request unlimited one-year extensions of the
maturity date by delivering a written request to the administrative agent, but
any such extension shall be effective only if consented to by the required
lenders in their sole discretion.
The
Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility contains various covenants related to EPO’s
ability to incur certain indebtedness; grant certain liens; enter into certain
merger or consolidation transactions; and make certain investments. The loan
agreement also requires EPO to satisfy certain financial covenants at the end of
each fiscal quarter. The credit agreement also restricts EPO’s
ability to pay cash distributions to us if a default or an event of default (as
defined in the credit agreement) has occurred and is continuing at the time such
distribution is scheduled to be paid.
Pascagoula
MBFC Loan. In connection with the construction of our
Pascagoula, Mississippi natural gas processing plant in 2000, EPO entered into a
ten-year fixed-rate loan with the Mississippi Business Finance Corporation
(“MBFC”). This loan is subject to a make-whole redemption right and
is
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
guaranteed
by us through an unsecured and unsubordinated guarantee. The
Pascagoula MBFC Loan contains certain covenants including the maintenance of
appropriate levels of insurance on the Pascagoula facility.
The indenture agreement for this loan
contains an acceleration clause whereby if EPO’s credit rating by Moody’s
declines below Baa3 in combination with our credit rating at Standard &
Poor’s declining below BBB-, the $54.0 million principal balance of this loan,
together with all accrued and unpaid interest, would become immediately due and
payable 120 days following such event. If such an event occurred, we
would have to either redeem the Pascagoula MBFC Loan or provide an alternative
credit agreement to support our obligation under this loan.
Petal GO
Zone Bonds. In August 2007,
Petal borrowed $57.5 million from the MBFC pursuant to a loan agreement and
promissory note between Petal Gas Storage, L.L.C. (“Petal”) and the MBFC to pay
a portion of the costs of certain natural gas storage facilities located in
Petal, Mississippi. The promissory note between Petal and MBFC is
guaranteed by EPO and supported by a letter of credit issued by
Petal. On the same date, the MBFC issued $57.5 million in Gulf
Opportunity Zone Tax-Exempt (“GO Zone”) bonds to various third
parties. A portion of the GO Zone bond proceeds were being held by a
third party trustee and reflected as a component of other assets on our balance
sheet. During 2008, virtually all proceeds from the GO Zone bonds
were released by the trustee to fund construction costs associated with the
expansion of our Petal, Mississippi storage
facility. The promissory note and the GO Zone bonds have
identical terms including floating interest rates and maturities of 30
years. The bonds and the associated tax incentives are authorized under
the Mississippi Business Finance Act and the Gulf Opportunity Zone Act of
2005.
Petal
MBFC Loan. In August 2007,
Petal, a wholly owned subsidiary of EPO, entered into a loan agreement and a
promissory note with the MBFC under which Petal may borrow up to $29.5
million. On the same date, the MBFC issued taxable bonds to EPO in the
maximum amount of $29.5 million. As of December 31, 2008, there was $8.9
million outstanding under the loan and the bonds. EPO will make advances
on the bonds to the MBFC and the MBFC will in turn make identical advances to
Petal under the promissory note. The promissory note and the taxable bonds
have identical terms including fixed interest rates of 5.90% and maturities
of fifteen years. The bonds and the associated tax incentives are
authorized under the Mississippi Business Finance Act. Petal may prepay on
the promissory note without penalty, and thus cause the bonds to be redeemed,
any time after one year from their date of issue. The loan and bonds are
netted in preparing our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Japanese
Yen Term Loan. In November
2008, EPO executed the Yen Term Loan in the amount of approximately 20.7 billion
yen (approximately $217.6 million U.S. Dollar equivalent on the closing
date). EPO’s obligations under the Yen Term Loan are not secured by
any collateral; however, the obligations are guaranteed by Enterprise Products
Partners L.P. pursuant to a guaranty agreement. The Yen Term Loan
will mature on March 30, 2009.
Under the
Yen Term Loan, interest accrues on the loan at the Tokyo Interbank Offered Rate
(“TIBOR”) plus 2.0%. EPO entered into foreign exchange currency swaps
that effectively convert the TIBOR loan into a U.S. Dollar loan with a fixed
interest rate (including the cost of the swaps) through maturity of
approximately 4.93%. As a result, EPO received US$217.6 million net
from this transaction. In addition, EPO executed a forward purchase
exchange (yen principal and interest due) for March 30, 2009 at an exchange rate
of 94.515 to eliminate foreign exchange risk, resulting in a payment of US$221.6
million on March 30, 2009. For additional information see Note
6.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The
364-Day Revolving Credit Facility offers the following loans, each having
different interest requirements: (i) LIBOR loans bear interest at a rate
per annum equal to LIBOR plus the applicable LIBOR
margin and (ii) Base Rate loans bear interest each day at a
rate per annum equal to the higher of (a) the rate of
interest announced by the administrative agent as its prime rate,
(b) 0.5% per annum above the Federal Funds Rate in effect on such
date , and (c) 1.0% per annum above LIBOR in effect on such date plus,
in each case, the applicable Base Rate margin.
The
commitments may be increased by an amount not to exceed $1.0 billion by adding
one or more new lenders to the facility or increasing the commitments of
existing lenders, although none of the existing lenders has agreed to or is
obligated to increase its existing commitment. With certain exceptions and after
certain time periods, if EPO issues debt with a maturity of more than three
years, the lenders’ commitments under the 364-Day Revolving Credit Facility will
be reduced to the extent of any debt proceeds, and any outstanding loans in
excess of such reduced commitments must be repaid.
Senior
Notes B through L. These fixed-rate notes are unsecured
obligations of EPO and rank equally with its existing and future unsecured and
unsubordinated indebtedness. They are senior to any future
subordinated indebtedness. EPO’s borrowings under these notes are
non-recourse to EPGP. We have guaranteed repayment of amounts due
under these notes through an unsecured and unsubordinated
guarantee. Our guarantee of such notes is non-recourse to
EPGP. The Senior Notes are subject to make-whole redemption rights
and were issued under indentures containing certain covenants, which generally
restrict EPO’s ability, with certain exceptions, to incur debt secured by liens
and engage in sale and leaseback transactions.
Senior
Notes M and N. In April 2008,
EPO sold $400.0 million in principal amount of 5-year senior unsecured notes
(“Senior Notes M”) and $700.0 million in principal amount of 10-year senior
unsecured notes (“Senior Notes N”) under its universal registration
statement. Senior Notes M were issued at 99.906% of their principal
amount, have a fixed interest rate of 5.65% and mature in April
2013. Senior Notes N were issued at 99.866% of their principal
amount, have a fixed interest rate of 6.50% and mature in January
2019.
Senior
Notes M pay interest semi-annually in arrears on April 1 and October 1 of each
year. Senior Notes N pay interest semi-annually in arrears on January
31 and July 31 of each year. Net proceeds from the issuance of Senior
Notes M and N were used to temporarily reduce indebtedness outstanding under the
EPO Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility.
Senior
Notes M and N rank equal with EPO’s existing and future unsecured and
unsubordinated indebtedness. They are senior to any existing and
future subordinated indebtedness of EPO. EPO’s borrowings under these
notes are non-recourse to EPGP. Senior Notes M and N are subject to
make-whole redemption rights and were issued under indentures containing certain
covenants, which generally restrict EPO’s ability, with certain exceptions, to
incur debt secured by liens and engage in sale and leaseback
transactions.
Senior
Notes O. In
December 2008, EPO sold $500.0 million in principal amount of 5-year senior
unsecured notes (“Senior Notes O”) under its universal registration
statement. Senior Notes O were issued at 100% of their principal
amount, have a fixed interest rate of 9.75% and mature in January
2014.
Senior
Notes O pay interest semi-annually in arrears on January 31 and July 31 of each
year, commencing January 31, 2009. Net proceeds from the issuance of
Senior Notes O were used to temporarily reduce indebtedness outstanding under
the EPO Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility.
Senior
Notes O rank equal with EPO’s existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated
indebtedness. They are senior to any existing and future subordinated
indebtedness of EPO. EPO’s borrowings under these notes are
non-recourse to EPGP. Senior Notes O are subject to make-whole
redemption rights and were issued under indentures containing certain covenants,
which generally restrict EPO’s ability, with certain exceptions, to incur debt
secured by liens and engage in sale and leaseback transactions.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Junior
Notes A. In the third quarter of 2006, EPO sold $550.0 million
in principal amount of fixed/floating, unsecured, long-term subordinated notes
due 2066 (“Junior Notes A”). EPO used the proceeds from this
subordinated debt to temporarily reduce borrowings outstanding under its
Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility and for general partnership
purposes. EPO’s payment obligations under Junior Notes A are
subordinated to all of its current and future senior indebtedness (as defined in
the related indenture agreement). Enterprise Products Partners L.P.
has guaranteed EPO’s repayment of amounts due under Junior Notes A through an
unsecured and subordinated guarantee.
The indenture agreement governing
Junior Notes A allows EPO to defer interest payments on one or more occasions
for up to ten consecutive years, subject to certain conditions. The
indenture agreement also provides that, unless (i) all deferred interest on
Junior Notes A has been paid in full as of the most recent interest payment
date, (ii) no event of default under the indenture agreement has occurred and is
continuing and (iii) we are not in default of our obligations under related
guarantee agreements, neither we nor EPO cannot declare or make any
distributions to any of our respective equity securities or make any payments on
indebtedness or other obligations that rank pari passu with or are
subordinated to the Junior Notes A.
The
Junior Notes A bear interest at a fixed annual rate of 8.375% from July 2006 to
August 2016, payable semi-annually in arrears in February and August of each
year, which commenced in February 2007. After August 2016, the Junior
Notes A will bear variable rate interest at an annual rate equal to the 3-month
LIBOR rate for the related interest period plus 3.708%, payable quarterly in
arrears in February, May, August and November of each year commencing in
November 2016. Interest payments may be deferred on a cumulative
basis for up to ten consecutive years, subject to the certain
provisions. The Junior Notes A mature in August 2066 and are not
redeemable by EPO prior to August 2016 without payment of a make-whole
premium.
In connection with the issuance of
Junior Notes A, EPO entered into a Replacement Capital Covenant in favor of the
covered debt holders (as defined in the underlying documents) pursuant to which
EPO agreed for the benefit of such debt holders that it would not redeem or
repurchase such junior notes unless such redemption or repurchase is made using
proceeds from the issuance of certain securities.
Junior
Notes B. EPO sold $700.0 million in principal amount of
fixed/floating, unsecured, long-term subordinated notes due January 2068
(“Junior Notes B”) during the second quarter of 2007. EPO used the
proceeds from this subordinated debt to temporarily reduce borrowings
outstanding under its Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility and for general
partnership purposes. EPO’s payment obligations under Junior Notes B
are subordinated to all of its current and future senior indebtedness (as
defined in the Indenture Agreement). Enterprise Products Partners
L.P. has guaranteed repayment of amounts due under Junior Notes B through an
unsecured and subordinated guarantee.
The indenture agreement governing
Junior Notes B allows EPO to defer interest payments on one or more occasions
for up to ten consecutive years subject to certain conditions. During
any period in which interest payments are deferred and subject to certain
exceptions, neither we nor EPO can declare or make any distributions to any of
our respective equity securities or make any payments on indebtedness or other
obligations that rank pari passu with or are subordinate
to Junior Notes B. Junior Notes B rank pari passu with Junior Notes
A.
The
Junior Notes B will bear interest at a fixed annual rate of 7.034% through
January 15, 2018, payable semi-annually in arrears in January and July of each
year, which commenced in January 2008. After January 2018, the Junior
Notes B will bear variable rate interest at the greater of (1) the sum of the
3-month LIBOR for the related interest period plus a spread of 268 basis points
or (2) 7.034% per annum, payable quarterly in arrears in January, April, July
and October of each year commencing in April 2018. Interest payments
may be deferred on a cumulative basis for up to ten consecutive years, subject
to certain provisions. The Junior Notes B mature in January 2068 and
are not redeemable by EPO prior to January 2018 without payment of a make-whole
premium.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
In
connection with the issuance of Junior Notes B, we and EPO entered into a
Replacement Capital Covenant in favor of the covered debt holders (as named
therein) pursuant to which we and EPO agreed for the benefit of such debt
holders that neither we nor EPO would redeem or repurchase such junior notes on
or before January 15, 2038, unless such redemption or repurchase is made from
the proceeds of issuance of certain securities.
During
the fourth quarter of 2008, we retired $17.3 million of our Junior Notes B for
$10.2 million.
TEPPCO’s
debt obligations
TEPPCO
Revolving Credit Facility. This unsecured revolving credit
facility has a borrowing capacity of $950.0 million. In July 2008,
commitments under this facility were increased from $700.0 million to $950.0
million. This credit facility matures in December 2012, but we may
request unlimited extensions of the maturity date subject to certain
conditions. There is no limit on the total amount of standby letters
of credit that can be outstanding under this credit facility.
Variable
interest rates charged under this facility generally bear interest, at our
election at the time of each borrowing, at either (i) a LIBOR plus an applicable
margin (as defined in the credit agreement) or (ii) the lender’s base rate as
defined in the agreement.
The
revolving credit agreement contains various covenants related to our ability to,
among other things, incur certain indebtedness; grant certain liens; make
certain distributions; engage in specified transactions with affiliates; and
enter into certain merger or consolidation transactions. We must also
satisfy certain financial covenants at the end of each fiscal
quarter.
TEPPCO
Short-Term Credit Facility. At December 31, 2007, we had in
place an unsecured short term credit agreement (the “TEPPCO Short-Term Credit
Facility”) with a borrowing capacity of $1.00 billion. No amounts
were borrowed under this agreement at December 31, 2007. During the
first quarter of 2008, we borrowed $1.00 billion under this credit agreement to
finance the retirement of the TE Products’ senior notes, the acquisition of two
marine service businesses and for other general partnership
purposes. In March 2008, we repaid amounts borrowed under this credit
agreement, using proceeds from the TEPPCO Senior Notes offering, and terminated
the facility.
The
following table summarizes our borrowing and repayment activity under this
credit agreement during the first quarter of 2008:
Borrowings,
January 2008 (1)
|
|
$ |
355.0 |
|
Borrowings,
February 2008 (2)
|
|
|
645.0 |
|
Repayments,
March 2008
|
|
|
(1,000.0 |
) |
Balance,
March 27, 2008 (3)
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Funds
borrowed to finance the retirement of TE Products’ senior
notes.
(2)
Funds
borrowed to finance the marine services acquisitions and for general
partnership purposes.
(3)
TEPPCO’s
Short-Term Credit Facility was terminated on March 27, 2008 upon full
repayment of borrowings thereunder.
|
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes. In February 2002
and January 2003, TEPPCO issued 7.625% Senior Notes and 6.125% Senior Notes,
respectively. In March 2008, TEPPCO sold $250.0 million in principal
amount of 5-year senior unsecured notes, $350.0 million in principal amount of
10-year senior unsecured notes and $400.0 million in principal amount of 30-year
senior unsecured notes. The 5-year senior notes were issued at
99.922% of their principal amount, have a fixed interest rate of 5.90%, and
mature in April 2013. The 10-year senior notes were issued at 99.640%
of their principal amount, have a fixed interest rate of 6.65%, and mature in
April 2018. The 30-year senior notes were issued at 99.451% of their
principal amount, have a fixed interest rate of 7.55%, and mature in April
2038.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The
senior notes issued in March 2008 pay interest semi-annually in arrears on April
15 and October 15 of each year, beginning October 15, 2008. Net
proceeds from the issuance of these notes were used to repay and terminate the
TEPPCO Short-Term Credit Facility. The notes issued in March 2008
rank pari passu with our existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated
indebtedness. They are senior to any future subordinated
indebtedness.
The
TEPPCO Senior Notes are subject to make-whole redemption rights and are
redeemable at any time at our option. The indenture agreements governing these
notes contain certain covenants, including, but not limited to the creation of
liens securing indebtedness and sale and leaseback
transactions. However, the indentures do not limit our ability to
incur additional indebtedness.
TEPPCO
Junior Subordinated Notes. In May 2007, TEPPCO sold $300.0
million in principal amount of fixed/floating, unsecured, long-term subordinated
notes due June 1, 2067 (“TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes”). We used
the proceeds from this subordinated debt to temporarily reduce borrowings
outstanding under the TEPPCO Revolving Credit Facility and for general
partnership purposes. The payment obligations under the TEPPCO Junior
Subordinated Notes are subordinated to all of its current and future senior
indebtedness (as defined in the related indenture).
The
indenture governing the TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes does not limit our
ability to incur additional debt, including debt that ranks senior to or equally
with the TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes. The indenture allows us to
defer interest payments on one or more occasions for up to ten consecutive
years, subject to certain conditions. During any period in which
interest payments are deferred and subject to certain exceptions, (i) we cannot
declare or make any distributions to any of its respective equity securities and
(ii) neither we nor the Subsidiary Guarantors can make any payments on
indebtedness or other obligations that rank pari passu with or are subordinated
to the TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes.
The
TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes bear interest at a fixed annual rate of 7.0%
from May 2007 to June 1, 2017, payable semi-annually in
arrears. After June 1, 2017, the TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes
will bear interest at a variable annual rate equal to the 3-month LIBOR for the
related interest period plus 2.7775%, payable quarterly in
arrears. The TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes mature in June
2067. The TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes are redeemable in whole or
in part prior to June 1, 2017 for a “make-whole” redemption price and thereafter
at a redemption price equal to 100% of their principal amount plus accrued and
unpaid interest. The TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes are also
redeemable prior to June 1, 2017 in whole (but not in part) upon the occurrence
of certain tax or rating agency events at specified redemption
prices.
In
connection with the issuance of the TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes, we and the
Subsidiary Guarantors entered into a Replacement Capital Covenant in favor of
holders (as provided therein) pursuant to which we and the Subsidiary Guarantors
agreed for the benefit of such debt holders that it would not redeem or
repurchase the TEPPCO Junior Subordinated Notes on or before June 1, 2037,
unless such redemption or repurchase is from proceeds of issuance of certain
securities.
Duncan
Energy Partners’ debt obligations
We
consolidate the debt of Duncan Energy Partners with that of our own; however, we
do not have the obligation to make interest payments or debt payments with
respect to the debt of Duncan Energy Partners.
DEP I
Revolving Credit Facility. In February
2007, Duncan Energy Partners entered into a $300.0 million revolving credit
facility, all of which may be used for letters of credit, with a $30.0 million
sublimit for Swingline loans. Letters of credit outstanding under
this facility reduce the amount available for borrowings. At the
closing of its initial public offering, Duncan Energy Partners made its initial
borrowing of $200.0 million under the facility to fund a $198.9 million cash
distribution to EPO and the remainder to pay debt issuance costs. At
December 31, 2008, the principal balance outstanding under this facility was
$202.0 million.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
This
credit facility matures in February 2011 and will be used by Duncan Energy
Partners in the future to fund working capital and other capital requirements
and for general partnership purposes. Duncan Energy Partners may make
up to two requests for one-year extensions of the maturity date (subject to
certain restrictions). The revolving credit facility is available to
pay distributions upon the initial contribution of assets to Duncan Energy
Partners, fund working capital, make acquisitions and provide payment for
general purposes. Duncan Energy Partners can increase the revolving
credit facility, without consent of the lenders, by an amount not to exceed
$150.0 million by adding to the facility one or more new lenders and/or
increasing the commitments of existing lenders. No existing lender is
required to increase its commitment, unless it agrees to do so in its sole
discretion.
This revolving credit facility offers
the following unsecured loans, each having different interest requirements: (i)
a Eurodollar rate, plus the applicable Eurodollar margin (as defined in the
credit agreement), (ii) Base Rate loans bear interest at a rate per annum equal
to the higher of (a) the rate of interest publicly announced by the
administrative agent, Wachovia Bank, National Association, as its Base Rate and
(b) 0.5% per annum above the Federal Funds Rate in effect on such date and (iii)
Swingline loans bear interest at a rate per annum equal to LIBOR plus an
applicable LIBOR margin.
The Duncan Energy Partners’ credit
facility contains certain financial and other customary
covenants. Also, if an event of default exists under the credit
agreement, the lenders will be able to accelerate the maturity date of amounts
borrowed under the credit agreement and exercise other rights and
remedies.
DEP II
Term Loan Agreement. In April 2008,
Duncan Energy Partners entered into a standby term loan agreement consisting of
commitments for up to a $300.0 million senior unsecured term
loan. Subsequently, commitments under this agreement decreased to
$282.3 million due to bankruptcy of one of the lenders. Duncan Energy Partners
borrowed the full amount of $282.3 million on December 8, 2008 in connection
with the acquisition of equity interests in the DEP II Midstream
Businesses. See “Relationship with Duncan Energy Partners” in Note 15
for additional information regarding the DEP II Midstream
Businesses.
Loans under the term loan agreement are
due and payable on December 8, 2011. Duncan Energy Partners may also prepay
loans under the term loan agreement at any time, subject to prior notice in
accordance with the credit agreement. Loans may also be payable earlier in
connection with an event of default.
Loans under the term loan agreement
bear interest of the type specified in the applicable borrowing request, and
consist of either Alternate Base Rate (“ABR”) loans or Eurodollar
loans. The term loan agreement contains customary affirmative and
negative covenants.
Dixie
Revolving Credit Facility
Dixie’s
debt obligation consisted of a senior, unsecured revolving credit facility
having a borrowing capacity of $28.0 million. As of December 31,
2008, there were no debt obligations outstanding under the Dixie
Revolver. This credit facility was terminated in January
2009. EPO consolidated the debt of Dixie; however, EPO did not have
the obligation to make interest or debt payments with respect to Dixie’s
debt.
Variable
interest rates charged under this facility generally bore interest, at Dixie’s
election at the time of each borrowing, at either (i) a Eurodollar rate plus an
applicable margin or (ii) the greater of (a) the prime rate or (b) the Federal
Funds Effective Rate plus 0.5%.
Canadian
Debt Obligation
In May
2007, Canadian Enterprise Gas Products, Ltd. (“Canadian Enterprise”), a wholly
owned subsidiary of EPO, entered into a $30.0 million Canadian revolving credit
facility with The Bank of Nova
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Scotia. The
credit facility, which includes the issuance of letters of credit, matures in
October 2011. Letters of credit outstanding under this facility
reduce the amount available for borrowings.
Borrowings
may be made in Canadian or U.S. dollars. Canadian denominated
borrowings may be comprised of Canadian Prime Rate (“CPR”) loans or Bankers’
Acceptances and U.S. denominated borrowings may be comprised of ABR or
Eurodollar loans, each having different interest rate
requirements. CPR loans bear interest at a rate determined by
reference to the Canadian Prime Rate. ABR loans bear interest at a
rate determined by reference to an alternative base rate as defined in the
credit agreement. Eurodollar loans bear interest at a rate determined
by the LIBOR plus an applicable rate as defined in the credit
agreement. Bankers’ Acceptances carry interest at the rate for
Canadian bankers’ acceptances plus an applicable rate as defined in the credit
agreement.
The
credit facility contains customary covenants and events of
default. The restrictive covenants limit Canadian Enterprise from
materially changing the nature of its business or operations, dissolving, or
completing mergers. A continuing event of default would accelerate
the maturity of amounts borrowed under the credit facility. The
obligations under the credit facility are guaranteed by EPO. As of
December 31, 2008, there were no debt obligations outstanding under this credit
facility.
Covenants
We are in
compliance with the covenants of our consolidated debt agreements at December
31, 2008.
Information
regarding variable interest rates paid
The
following table presents the range of interest rates and weighted-average
interest rates paid on our consolidated variable-rate debt obligations during
the year ended December 31, 2008.
|
Range
of
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
Interest
Rates
|
Interest
Rate
|
|
Paid
|
Paid
|
EPO’s
Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility
|
0.97%
to 6.00%
|
3.54%
|
TEPPCO
Revolving Credit Facility
|
1.06%
to 2.24%
|
1.40%
|
TEPPCO
Short-Term Credit Facility
|
3.59%
to 4.96%
|
4.02%
|
DEP
I Revolving Credit Facility
|
1.30%
to 6.20%
|
4.25%
|
DEP
II Term Loan Agreement
|
2.93%
to 2.93%
|
2.93%
|
Dixie
Revolving Credit Facility
|
0.81%
to 5.50%
|
3.20%
|
Petal
GO Zone Bonds
|
0.78%
to 7.90%
|
2.24%
|
Consolidated
debt maturity table
The
following table presents scheduled maturities of our consolidated debt
obligations for the next five years, and in total thereafter.
2009
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
2010
|
|
|
554.0 |
|
2011
|
|
|
934.3 |
|
2012
|
|
|
2,534.3 |
|
2013
|
|
|
1,200.0 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
6,340.2 |
|
Total
scheduled principal payments
|
|
$ |
11,562.8 |
|
In
accordance with SFAS 6, long-term and current maturities of debt reflect the
classification of such obligations at December 31, 2008.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Debt
Obligations of Unconsolidated Affiliates
We have
three unconsolidated affiliates with long-term debt obligations. The
following table shows (i) the ownership interest in each entity at December 31,
2008, (ii) total debt of each unconsolidated affiliate at December 31, 2008 (on
a 100% basis to the unconsolidated affiliate) and (iii) the corresponding
scheduled maturities of such debt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scheduled
Maturities of Debt
|
|
|
|
Ownership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2013
|
|
Poseidon
|
|
36% |
|
|
$ |
109.0 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
109.0 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
Evangeline
|
|
49.5% |
|
|
|
15.7 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
Centennial
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
129.9 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
8.9 |
|
|
|
8.6 |
|
|
|
84.4 |
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
254.6 |
|
|
$ |
14.9 |
|
|
$ |
12.3 |
|
|
$ |
125.5 |
|
|
$ |
8.9 |
|
|
$ |
8.6 |
|
|
$ |
84.4 |
|
The
credit agreements of these unconsolidated affiliates include customary
covenants, including financial covenants. These businesses were in
compliance with such covenants at December 31, 2008. The credit
agreements of these unconsolidated affiliates restrict their ability to pay cash
dividends or distributions if a default or an event of default (as defined in
each credit agreement) has occurred and is continuing at the time such dividend
or distribution is scheduled to be paid.
The
following information summarizes the significant terms of the debt obligations
of these unconsolidated affiliates at December 31, 2008:
Poseidon. Poseidon
has a $150.0 million variable-rate revolving credit facility that matures in May
2011. This credit agreement is secured by substantially all of
Poseidon’s assets. The variable interest rates charged on this debt
at December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007 were 4.31% and 6.62%,
respectively.
Evangeline. At
December 31, 2008, Evangeline’s debt obligations consisted of (i) $8.2 million
of 9.90% fixed-rate Series B senior secured notes due December 2010 and (ii) a
$7.5 million subordinated note payable. The Series B senior secured notes are
collateralized by Evangeline’s property, plant and equipment; proceeds from a
gas sales contract and by a debt service reserve
requirement. Scheduled principal repayments on the Series B notes are
$5.0 million in 2009 with a final repayment in 2010 of approximately $3.2
million.
Evangeline
incurred the subordinated note payable as a result of its acquisition of a
contract-based intangible asset in the early 1990s. This note is subject to a
subordination agreement which prevents the repayment of principal and accrued
interest on the subordinated note until such time as the Series B noteholders
are either fully cash secured through debt service accounts or have been
completely repaid.
Variable rate interest accrues on the
subordinated note at a Eurodollar rate plus 0.5%. The variable
interest rates charged on this note at December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007
were 3.20% and 5.88%, respectively. Accrued interest payable related
to the subordinated note was $9.8 million and $9.1 million at December 31, 2008
and December 31, 2007, respectively.
Centennial. At
December 31, 2008, Centennial’s debt obligations consisted of $129.9 million
borrowed under a master shelf loan agreement. Borrowings under the
master shelf agreement mature in May 2024 and are collateralized by
substantially all of Centennial’s assets and severally guaranteed by
Centennial’s owners.
TEPPCO
and its joint venture partner in Centennial have each guaranteed one-half of
Centennial’s debt obligations. If Centennial defaults on its debt
obligations, the estimated payment obligation is $65.0 million. At
December 31, 2008, TEPPCO had recognized a liability of $9.0 million for its
share of the Centennial debt guaranty. A downgrade of our credit
ratings could result in our being required to post financial collateral up to
the amount of our guaranty of indebtedness. Further, from time to
time we enter
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
into
contracts in connection with our commodity and interest rate hedging activities
and crude oil marketing business that require the posting of financial
collateral, which may be substantial, if our credit were to be downgraded below
investment grade.
Note
13. Equity
At
December 31, 2008, equity consisted of the capital account of Enterprise GP
Holdings, accumulated other comprehensive loss and noncontrolling
interest. Enterprise GP Holdings is a publicly traded limited
partnership that completed an initial public offering of its common units in
August 2005 and trades on the NYSE under the ticker symbol “EPE.”
Accumulated
Other Comprehensive Loss
The
following table presents the components of accumulated other comprehensive loss
at December 31, 2008:
Commodity
financial instruments (1)
|
|
$ |
(114.1 |
) |
Interest
rate financial instruments (1)
|
|
|
(41.9 |
) |
Foreign
currency cash flow hedges (1)
|
|
|
10.6 |
|
Foreign
currency translation adjustment (2)
|
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
Pension
and postretirement benefit plans (3)
|
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
Subtotal
|
|
|
(147.5 |
) |
Amount
attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
145.5 |
|
Total
accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
in
member’s equity
|
|
$ |
(2.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
See
Note 6 for additional information regarding these components of
accumulated other comprehensive loss.
(2)
Relates
to transactions of our Canadian NGL marketing subsidiary.
(3)
See
Note 5 for additional information regarding pension and postretirement
benefit plans.
|
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Noncontrolling
Interest
Prior to
the completion of the TEPPCO Merger, effective October 26, 2009, we accounted
for our interest in TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP as noncontrolling
interest. Under this method of presentation our share of the net
assets of TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP are presented as noncontrolling interest, a
component of equity, on our Supplemental Consolidated Balance
Sheet. The following table shows the components of noncontrolling
interest at December 31, 2008:
Former
owners of TEPPCO (1)
|
|
$ |
2,827.6 |
|
Limited
partners of Enterprise Products Partners:
|
|
|
|
|
Third-party
owners of Enterprise Products Partners (2)
|
|
|
5,010.6 |
|
Related
party owners of Enterprise Products Partners (3)
|
|
|
649.3 |
|
Limited
partners of Duncan Energy Partners:
|
|
|
|
|
Third-party
owners of Duncan Energy Partners (4)
|
|
|
281.1 |
|
Joint
venture partners (5)
|
|
|
148.0 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss attributable to
|
|
|
|
|
noncontrolling
interest
|
|
|
(145.5 |
) |
Total
noncontrolling interest on Supplemental Consolidated Balance
Sheet
|
|
$ |
8,771.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Represents
former ownership interests in TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP (see Note 1 “TEPPCO
Merger and Basis of Presentation”). This amount excludes AOCI
attributable to former owners of TEPPCO.
(2)
Consists
of non-affiliate public unitholders of Enterprise Products
Partners.
(3)
Consists
of unitholders of Enterprise Products Partners that are related party
affiliates. This group is primarily comprised of EPCO and certain of
its private company consolidated subsidiaries.
(4)
Consists
of non-affiliate public unitholders of Duncan Energy
Partners.
(5)
Represents
third-party ownership interests in joint ventures that we consolidate,
including Seminole, Tri-States Pipeline, L.L.C. (“Tri-States”),
Independence Hub, LLC and Wilprise Pipeline Company, L.L.C.
(“Wilprise”).
|
|
Note
14. Business Segments
As
previously mentioned in Note 1, we revised our business segments and related
disclosures as a result of the TEPPCO Merger. We have five reportable
business segments: NGL Pipelines & Services, Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines
& Services, Onshore Crude Oil Pipelines & Services, Offshore Pipelines
& Services and Petrochemical & Refined Products Services. Our
business segments are generally organized and managed according to the type of
services rendered (or technologies employed) and products produced and/or
sold. The following information summarizes the principal operations
and activities of each of our new business segments:
§
|
NGL Pipelines &
Services includes our (i) natural gas processing business and
related NGL marketing activities; (ii) NGL pipelines, including our
Mid-America Pipeline System; (iii) NGL and related product storage
facilities; and (iv) NGL fractionation facilities. This segment
also includes our import and export terminal
operations.
|
§
|
Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines
& Services includes our onshore natural gas pipeline systems
that provide for the gathering and transportation of natural gas in
Alabama, Colorado, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, Texas and
Wyoming. We own two salt dome natural gas storage facilities
located in Mississippi and lease natural gas storage facilities located in
Texas and Louisiana. This segment also includes our natural gas
marketing activities.
|
§
|
Onshore Crude Oil Pipelines
& Services business segment includes our onshore crude oil
pipelines and related storage terminals. This segment also
includes our related crude oil marketing
activities.
|
§
|
Offshore Pipelines &
Services includes our (i) offshore natural gas pipelines
strategically located to serve production areas including some of the most
active drilling and development regions in
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
|
the
Gulf of Mexico, (ii) offshore Gulf of Mexico crude oil pipeline systems
and (iii) six multi purpose offshore hub platforms located in the Gulf of
Mexico with crude oil or natural gas processing
capabilities.
|
§
|
Petrochemical & Refined
Products Services includes our (i) propylene fractionation plants
and related activities, (ii) butane isomerization facilities, (iii) octane
enhancement facility, (iv) refined products pipelines, including our
Products Pipeline System, and related activities and (v) marine
transportation assets and other
services.
|
The
majority of our plant-based operations are located in Texas, Louisiana,
Mississippi, New Mexico, Colorado and Wyoming. Our natural gas, NGL,
refined products and crude oil pipelines are located in a number of regions of
the United States including (i) the Gulf of Mexico offshore Texas, Louisiana,
and onshore in Colorado; (ii) the south and southeastern United States
(primarily in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama); (iii) the Midwestern
and northeastern United States; and (iv) certain regions of the central and
western United States, including the Rocky Mountains. Our marketing
activities are headquartered in Houston, Texas and Oklahoma City, Oklahoma and
serve customers in a number of regions of the United States including the Gulf
Coast, West Coast and Mid-Continent areas.
Consolidated property, plant and
equipment and investments in unconsolidated affiliates are assigned to each
segment on the basis of each asset’s or investment’s principal
operations. The principal reconciling difference between consolidated
property, plant and equipment and the total value of segment assets is
construction in progress. Segment assets represent the net book
carrying value of facilities and other assets that contribute to gross operating
margin of that particular segment. Since assets under construction
generally do not contribute to segment gross operating margin, such assets are
excluded from segment asset totals until they are placed in
service. Consolidated intangible assets and goodwill are assigned to
each segment based on the classification of the assets to which they
relate.
Information
by segment, together with reconciliations to our consolidated totals, is
presented in the following table at December 31, 2008:
|
|
Reportable
Segments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Onshore
|
|
|
Onshore
|
|
|
|
|
|
Petrochemical
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NGL
|
|
|
Natural
Gas
|
|
|
Crude
Oil
|
|
|
Offshore
|
|
|
&
Refined
|
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pipelines
|
|
|
Pipelines
|
|
|
Pipelines
|
|
|
Pipelines
|
|
|
Products
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
|
&
Services
|
|
|
&
Services
|
|
|
&
Services
|
|
|
&
Services
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
Segment
assets
|
|
$ |
5,622.4 |
|
|
$ |
5,223.6 |
|
|
$ |
386.9 |
|
|
$ |
1,394.5 |
|
|
$ |
2,090.0 |
|
|
$ |
2,015.4 |
|
|
$ |
16,732.8 |
|
Investments
in unconsolidated
affiliates
(see Note 9)
|
|
|
144.3 |
|
|
|
25.9 |
|
|
|
186.2 |
|
|
|
469.0 |
|
|
|
86.5 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
911.9 |
|
Intangible
assets, net (see Note 11)
|
|
|
351.4 |
|
|
|
584.4 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
|
|
116.2 |
|
|
|
124.0 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
1,182.9 |
|
Goodwill
(see Note 11)
|
|
|
341.2 |
|
|
|
284.9 |
|
|
|
303.0 |
|
|
|
82.1 |
|
|
|
1,008.4 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
2,019.6 |
|
Note
15. Related Party Transactions
The
following table summarizes our related party receivable and payable amounts at
December 31, 2008:
Accounts
receivable - related parties:
|
|
|
|
EPCO
and affiliates
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
Energy
Transfer Equity and subsidiaries
|
|
|
35.0 |
|
Other
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
35.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable - related parties:
|
|
|
|
|
EPCO
and affiliates
|
|
$ |
14.1 |
|
Energy
Transfer Equity and subsidiaries
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Other
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
17.4 |
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
We
believe that the terms and provisions of our related party agreements are fair
to us; however, such agreements and transactions may not be as favorable to us
as we could have obtained from unaffiliated third parties.
Relationship
with EPCO and affiliates
We have
an extensive and ongoing relationship with EPCO and its affiliates, which
include the following significant entities that are not a part of our
consolidated group of companies:
§
|
EPCO
and its private company
subsidiaries;
|
§
|
Enterprise
GP Holdings, which owns and controls EPGP;
and
|
§
|
the
Employee Partnerships (see Note 4).
|
We also
have an ongoing relationship with Duncan Energy Partners, the financial
statements of which are consolidated with those of our own. Our
transactions with Duncan Energy Partners are eliminated in
consolidation. A description of our relationship with Duncan Energy
Partners is presented within this Note 15.
EPCO is a
private company controlled by Dan L. Duncan, who is also a Director and Chairman
of EPGP, our general partner. At December 31, 2008, EPCO and its
affiliates beneficially owned 152,506,527 (or 34.5%) of Enterprise Products
Partners’ outstanding common units, which includes 13,670,925 of Enterprise
Products Partners’ common units owned by Enterprise GP Holdings. At
December 31, 2008, EPCO and affiliates beneficially owned 17,073,315 (or 16.3%)
of TEPPCO’s units, including 4,400,000 units owned by Enterprise GP
Holdings. In addition, at December 31, 2008, EPCO and its affiliates
beneficially owned 77.8% of the limited partner interests of Enterprise GP
Holdings and 100% of its general partner, EPE Holdings. Enterprise GP
Holdings owns all of the membership interests of EPGP and TEPPCO
GP. The principal business activity of EPGP is to act as our managing
partner. The principal business activity of TEPPCO GP is to act as
the sole general partner of TEPPCO. The executive officers and
certain of the directors of EPGP, TEPPCO GP and EPE Holdings are employees of
EPCO.
As
general partner of Enterprise Products Partners, EPGP received cash
distributions of $144.1 million during the year ended December 31,
2008. This amount includes incentive distributions of $125.9 million
for the year ended December 31, 2008.
Enterprise
Products Partners and EPGP are both separate legal entities apart from each
other and apart from EPCO, Enterprise GP Holdings and their respective other
affiliates, with assets and liabilities that are separate from those of EPCO,
Enterprise GP Holdings and their respective other affiliates. EPCO
and its private company subsidiaries depend on the cash distributions they
receive from Enterprise Products Partners, Enterprise GP Holdings and other
investments to fund their other operations and to meet their debt
obligations. EPCO and its private company affiliates received $439.8
million in cash distributions from Enterprise Products Partners and Enterprise
GP Holdings during the years ended December 31, 2008.
The ownership interests in Enterprise
Products Partners that are owned or controlled by Enterprise GP Holdings are
pledged as security under a credit facility of Enterprise GP
Holdings. In addition, substantially all of the ownership interests
in Enterprise Products Partners that are owned or controlled by EPCO and its
affiliates, other than those interests owned by Enterprise GP Holdings, Dan
Duncan LLC and certain trusts affiliated with Dan L. Duncan, are pledged as
security under the credit facility of a private company affiliate of
EPCO. This credit facility contains customary and other events of
default relating to EPCO and certain affiliates, including Enterprise GP
Holdings, TEPPCO and Enterprise Products Partners.
We have entered into an agreement with
an affiliate of EPCO to provide trucking services to us for the transportation
of NGLs and other products. We lease office space in various
buildings from affiliates of EPCO. The rental rates in these lease
agreements approximate market rates.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
EPCO
ASA
We have
no employees. All of our operating functions and general and administrative
support services are provided by employees of EPCO pursuant to the ASA or by
other service providers. Enterprise Products Partners, Duncan Energy
Partners, Enterprise GP Holdings and our respective general partners are parties
to the ASA. The significant terms of the ASA are as
follows:
§
|
EPCO
will provide selling, general and administrative services, and management
and operating services, as may be necessary to manage and operate our
businesses, properties and assets (all in accordance with prudent industry
practices). EPCO will employ or otherwise retain the services
of such personnel as may be necessary to provide such
services.
|
§
|
We
are required to reimburse EPCO for its services in an amount equal to the
sum of all costs and expenses incurred by EPCO which are directly or
indirectly related to our business or activities (including expenses
reasonably allocated to us by EPCO). In addition, we have
agreed to pay all sales, use, excise, value added or similar taxes, if
any, that may be applicable from time to time in respect of the services
provided to us by EPCO.
|
§
|
EPCO
will allow us to participate as a named insured in its overall insurance
program, with the associated premiums and other costs being allocated to
us.
|
Under the ASA, EPCO subleases to us
(for $1 per year) certain equipment which it holds pursuant to operating leases
and has assigned to us its purchase option under such leases (the “retained
leases”). EPCO remains liable for the actual cash lease payments
associated with these agreements. We record the full value of these
payments made by EPCO on our behalf as a non-cash related party operating lease
expense, with the offset to equity accounted for as a general contribution to
our partnership. We exercised our election under the retained leases
to purchase a cogeneration unit in December 2008 for $2.3
million. Should we decide to exercise the purchase option associated
with the remaining agreement, we would pay the original lessor $3.1 million in
June 2016.
Since the
vast majority of such expenses are charged to us on an actual basis (i.e. no
mark-up or subsidy is charged or received by EPCO), we believe that such
expenses are representative of what the amounts would have been on a stand alone
basis. With respect to allocated costs, we believe that the
proportional direct allocation method employed by EPCO is reasonable and
reflective of the estimated level of costs we would have incurred on a stand
alone basis.
The ASA also addresses potential
conflicts that may arise among Enterprise Products Partners (including EPGP),
Enterprise GP Holdings (including EPE Holdings), Duncan Energy Partners
(including DEP GP), and the EPCO Group with respect to business opportunities
with third parties. The EPCO Group includes EPCO and its other
affiliates, but excludes Enterprise Products Partners, Enterprise GP Holdings,
Duncan Energy Partners and their respective general partners. With
respect to potential conflicts with respect to third party business
opportunities, the ASA provides, among other things, that:
§
|
If
a business opportunity to acquire “equity securities” (as defined
below) is
presented to the EPCO Group, Enterprise Products Partners (including
EPGP), Enterprise GP Holdings (including EPE Holdings), Duncan Energy
Partners (including DEP GP), then Enterprise GP Holdings will have the
first right to pursue such opportunity. The term “equity
securities” is defined to
include:
|
§
|
general
partner interests (or securities which have characteristics similar to
general partner interests) or interests in “persons” that own or control
such general partner or similar interests (collectively, “GP Interests”)
and securities convertible, exercisable, exchangeable or otherwise
representing ownership or control of such GP Interests;
and
|
§
|
IDRs
and limited partner interests (or securities which have characteristics
similar to IDRs or limited partner interests) in publicly traded
partnerships or interests in “persons” that own or control such limited
partner or similar interests (collectively, “non-GP Interests”);
provided
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
|
that
such non-GP Interests are associated with GP Interests and are owned by
the owners of GP Interests or their respective
affiliates.
|
|
Enterprise
GP Holdings will be presumed to want to acquire the equity securities
until such time as EPE Holdings advises the EPCO Group, EPGP and DEP GP
that it has abandoned the pursuit of such business
opportunity. In the event that the purchase price of the equity
securities is reasonably likely to equal or exceed $100.0 million,
the decision to decline the acquisition will be made by the chief
executive officer of EPE Holdings after consultation with and subject to
the approval of the ACG Committee of EPE Holdings. If the
purchase price is reasonably likely to be less than $100.0 million, the
chief executive officer of EPE Holdings may make the determination to
decline the acquisition without consulting the ACG Committee of EPE
Holdings.
In
the event that Enterprise GP Holdings abandons the acquisition and so
notifies the EPCO Group, EPGP and DEP GP, Enterprise Products Partners
will have the second right to pursue such
acquisition. Enterprise Products Partners will be presumed to
want to acquire the equity securities until such time as EPGP advises the
EPCO Group and DEP GP that Enterprise Products Partners has abandoned the
pursuit of such acquisition. In determining whether or not to
pursue the acquisition, Enterprise Products Partners will follow the same
procedures applicable to Enterprise GP Holdings, as described above but
utilizing EPGP’s chief executive officer and ACG Committee.
In
its sole discretion, Enterprise Products Partners may affirmatively direct
such acquisition opportunity to Duncan Energy Partners. In the
event this occurs, Duncan Energy Partners may pursue such
acquisition.
|
§
|
If
any business opportunity not covered by the preceding bullet point (i.e.
not involving equity securities) is presented to the EPCO Group,
Enterprise Products Partners (including EPGP), Enterprise GP Holdings
(including EPE Holdings), or Duncan Energy Partners (including DEP GP),
Enterprise Products Partners will have the first right to pursue such
opportunity either for itself or, if desired by Enterprise Products
Partners in its sole discretion, for the benefit of Duncan Energy
Partners. It will be presumed that Enterprise Products Partners will
pursue the business opportunity until such time as its general partner
advises the EPCO Group, EPE Holdings and DEP GP that it has abandoned the
pursuit of such business opportunity.
In
the event the purchase price or cost associated with the business
opportunity is reasonably likely to equal or exceed $100.0 million,
any decision to decline the business opportunity will be made by the chief
executive officer of EPGP after consultation with and subject to the
approval of the ACG Committee of EPGP. If the purchase price or
cost is reasonably likely to be less than $100.0 million, the chief
executive officer of EPGP may make the determination to decline the
business opportunity without consulting EPGP’s ACG Committee.
In
its sole discretion, Enterprise Products Partners may affirmatively direct
such acquisition opportunity to Duncan Energy Partners. In the
event this occurs, Duncan Energy Partners may pursue such
acquisition.
In
the event that Enterprise Products Partners abandons the business
opportunity for itself and Duncan Energy Partners and so notifies the EPCO
Group, EPE Holdings and DEP GP, Enterprise GP Holdings will have the
second right to pursue such business opportunity. It will be
presumed that Enterprise GP Holdings will pursue such acquisition until
such time as its general partner declines such opportunity (in accordance
with the procedures described above for Enterprise Products Partners) and
advises the EPCO Group that it has abandoned the pursuit of such business
opportunity.
|
The ASA was amended on January 30,
2009 to provide for the cash reimbursement by us and Enterprise GP Holdings to
EPCO of distributions of cash or securities, if any, made by EPCO Unit to
its Class B limited partners. The ASA amendment also extended the term
under which EPCO provides
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
services
to the partnership entities from December 2010 to December 2013 and made other
updating and conforming changes.
Employee
Partnerships
EPCO
formed the Employee Partnerships to serve as an incentive arrangement for key
employees of EPCO by providing them a “profits interest” in such
partnerships. Certain EPCO employees who work on behalf of us and
EPCO were issued Class B limited partner interests and admitted as Class B
limited partners without any capital contribution. The profits
interest awards (i.e., the Class B limited partner interests) in the
Employee Partnerships entitles each holder to participate in the appreciation in
value of EPE common units, TEPPCO units and Enterprise Products Partners’ common
units. See Note 4 for additional information regarding the Employee
Partnerships.
Relationship
with Energy Transfer Equity
Enterprise
GP Holdings acquired equity method investments in Energy Transfer Equity and its
general partner in May 2007. As a result, Energy Transfer Equity and
its consolidated subsidiaries became related parties to our consolidated
businesses.
We have a
long-term revenue generating contract with Titan Energy Partners, L.P.
(“Titan”), a consolidated subsidiary of ETP. Titan purchases
substantially all of its propane requirements from us. The contract
continues until March 31, 2010 and contains renewal and extension
options. We and Energy Transfer Company (“ETC OLP”) transport natural
gas on each other’s systems and share operating expenses on certain
pipelines. ETC OLP also sells natural gas to us.
Relationship
with Duncan Energy Partners
Duncan
Energy Partners was formed in September 2006 and did not acquire any assets
prior to February 5, 2007, which was the date it completed its initial public
offering of 14,950,000 common units and acquired controlling interests in
certain midstream energy businesses of EPO. The business purpose of
Duncan Energy Partners is to acquire, own and operate a diversified portfolio of
midstream energy assets and to support the growth objectives of EPO and other
affiliates under common control. Duncan Energy Partners is
engaged in (i) the gathering, transportation and storage of natural gas; (ii)
NGL transportation and fractionation; (iii) the storage of NGL and petrochemical
products; (iv) the transportation of petrochemical products; and (v) the
marketing of NGLs and natural gas.
At December 31, 2008, Duncan Energy
Partners is owned 99.3% by its limited partners and 0.7% by its general partner,
DEP GP, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of EPO. DEP GP is
responsible for managing the business and operations of Duncan Energy
Partners. DEP OLP, a wholly owned subsidiary of Duncan Energy
Partners, conducts substantially all of Duncan Energy Partners’
business.
At December 31, 2008, EPO owned
approximately 74% of Duncan Energy Partners’ limited partner interests and 100%
of its general partner.
DEP
I Midstream Businesses
On February 5, 2007, EPO contributed a
66% controlling equity interest in each of the DEP I Midstream Businesses
(defined below) to Duncan Energy Partners in a dropdown of assets (the “DEP I
dropdown”). EPO retained the remaining 34% equity interest in each of
the DEP I Midstream Businesses. The DEP I Midstream Businesses
consist of (i) Mont Belvieu Caverns, LLC (“Mont Belvieu Caverns”); (ii) Acadian
Gas, LLC (“Acadian Gas”); (iii) Enterprise Lou-Tex Propylene Pipeline L.P.
(“Lou-Tex Propylene”), including its general partner; (iv) Sabine Propylene
Pipeline L.P. (“Sabine Propylene’), including its general partner; and (v) South
Texas NGL Pipelines, LLC (“South Texas NGL”).
As consideration for controlling equity
interests in the DEP I Midstream Businesses and reimbursement for capital
expenditures related to these businesses, Duncan Energy Partners distributed
to
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
EPO (i)
$260.6 million of the $290.5 million of net proceeds from its initial public
offering, (ii) $198.9 million in borrowings under its DEP I Revolving Credit
Facility and (iii) a net 5,351,571 common units of Duncan Energy
Partners. See Note 12 for information regarding the debt obligations
of Duncan Energy Partners.
DEP
II Midstream Businesses
On December 8, 2008, Duncan Energy
Partners entered into the DEP II Purchase Agreement with EPO and Enterprise GTM,
a wholly owned subsidiary of EPO. Pursuant to the DEP II Purchase
Agreement, DEP OLP acquired 100% of the membership interests in Enterprise III
from Enterprise GTM, thereby acquiring a 66% general partner interest in
Enterprise GC, a 51% general partner interest in Enterprise Intrastate and a 51%
membership interest in Enterprise Texas. Collectively, we refer to
Enterprise GC, Enterprise Intrastate and Enterprise Texas as the “DEP II
Midstream Businesses.” EPO was the sponsor of this second dropdown
transaction (the “DEP II dropdown”). Enterprise GTM retained the
remaining limited partner and member interests in the DEP II Midstream
Businesses.
As consideration for controlling equity
interests in the DEP II Midstream Businesses, EPO received $280.5 million in
cash and 37,333,887 Class B limited partner units having a market value of
$449.5 million from Duncan Energy Partners. The Class B limited
partner units automatically converted to common units of Duncan Energy Partners
on February 1, 2009. The total value of the consideration provided to
EPO and Enterprise GTM was $730.0 million. The cash portion of the
consideration provided by Duncan Energy Partners in this dropdown transaction
was derived from borrowings under the DEP II Term Loan Agreement. See
Note 12 for information regarding the debt obligations of Duncan Energy
Partners.
Generally, the DEP II dropdown
transaction documents provide that to the extent that the DEP II Midstream
Businesses generate cash sufficient to pay distributions to their partners or
members, such cash will be distributed to Enterprise III (a wholly owned
subsidiary of Duncan Energy Partners) and Enterprise GTM (our wholly owned
subsidiary) in an amount sufficient to generate an aggregate annualized return
on their respective investments of 11.85%. Distributions in excess of
this amount will be distributed 98% to Enterprise GTM and 2% to Enterprise
III. The initial annual fixed return amount of 11.85% will be
increased by 2% each calendar year beginning January 1, 2010. For example, the
fixed return in 2010, assuming no other adjustments, would be 102% of 11.85%, or
12.087%.
Duncan
Energy Partners paid a pro rated cash distribution of $0.1115 per unit on the
Class B units with respect to the fourth quarter of 2008.
The borrowings of Duncan Energy
Partners are presented as part of our consolidated debt; however, we do not have
any obligation for the payment of interest or repayment of borrowings incurred
by Duncan Energy Partners.
We may contribute other equity
interests in our subsidiaries to Duncan Energy Partners and use the proceeds we
receive from Duncan Energy Partners to fund our capital spending
program.
Omnibus
Agreement
On
December 8, 2008, we entered into an amended and restated Omnibus Agreement with
Duncan Energy Partners. The key provisions of this agreement are
summarized as follows:
§
|
indemnification
for certain environmental liabilities, tax liabilities and right-of-way
defects with respect to the DEP I and DEP II Midstream Businesses we
contributed to Duncan Energy Partners in connection with the
respective dropdown transactions;
|
§
|
funding
by EPO of 100% of post-February 5, 2007 capital expenditures incurred by
South Texas NGL and Mont Belvieu Caverns with respect to certain expansion
projects under construction at the time of Duncan Energy Partners’ initial
public offering;
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
§
|
funding
by EPO of 100% of post-December 8, 2008 capital expenditures (estimated at
$1.4 million) to complete the Sherman Extension natural gas
pipeline;
|
§
|
a
right of first refusal to EPO in our current and future subsidiaries and a
right of first refusal on the material assets of such subsidiaries, other
than sales of inventory and other assets in the ordinary course of
business; and
|
§
|
a
preemptive right with respect to equity securities issued by certain of
our subsidiaries, other than as consideration in an acquisition or in
connection with a loan or debt
financing.
|
We and Duncan Energy Partners have also
agreed to negotiate in good faith any necessary amendments to the partnership or
company agreements of the DEP II Midstream Businesses when either party believes
that business circumstances have changed.
Our general partner’s ACG Committee
must approve amendments to the Omnibus Agreement when such amendments would
adversely affect our unitholders.
EPO has
indemnified Duncan Energy Partners against certain environmental liabilities,
tax liabilities and right-of-way defects associated with the assets EPO
contributed to Duncan Energy Partners in connection with the DEP I
and DEP II dropdown transactions. These liabilities include both
known and unknown environmental and related liabilities. These
indemnifications terminate on February 5, 2010. There is an aggregate
cap of $15.0 million on the amount of indemnity coverage, and Duncan Energy
Partners is not entitled to indemnification until the aggregate amount of claims
it incurs exceeds $250 thousand. Environmental liabilities resulting
from a change of law after February 5, 2007 are excluded from the
indemnity. In addition, EPO has indemnified Duncan Energy Partners
for liabilities related to:
§
|
certain
defects in the easement rights or fee ownership interests in and to the
lands on which any assets contributed to Duncan Energy Partners in
connection with its initial public offering are located and failure to
obtain certain consents and permits necessary to conduct its business that
arise through February 5, 2010; and
|
§
|
certain
income tax liabilities attributable to the operation of the assets
contributed to Duncan Energy Partners in connection with its initial
public offering prior to February 5,
2007.
|
The Omnibus Agreement may not be
amended without the prior approval of the ACG Committee if the proposed
amendment will, in the reasonable discretion of DEP GP, adversely affect holders
of its common units.
Neither we, nor EPO and any of its
affiliates are restricted under the Omnibus Agreement from competing with Duncan
Energy Partners. Except as otherwise expressly agreed in the ASA, EPO
and any of its affiliates may acquire, construct or dispose of additional
midstream energy or other assets in the future without any obligation to offer
Duncan Energy Partners the opportunity to purchase or construct those
assets. These agreements are in addition to other agreements relating
to business opportunities and potential conflicts of interest set forth in the
ASA with EPO, EPCO and other affiliates of EPCO.
Under the Omnibus Agreement, EPO agreed
to make additional contributions to Duncan Energy Partners as reimbursement for
Duncan Energy Partners’ 66% share of any excess construction costs above the (i)
$28.6 million of estimated capital expenditures to complete Phase II expansions
of the DEP South Texas NGL Pipeline System and (ii) $14.1 million of estimated
construction costs for additional brine production capacity and above-ground
storage reservoir projects at Mont Belvieu, Texas. Both projects were
underway at the time of Duncan Energy Partners’ initial public
offering. EPO made cash contributions to Duncan Energy Partners of
$32.5 million in connection with the Omnibus Agreement during the year ended
December 31, 2008. The majority of these contributions related to
funding the Phase II expansion costs of the DEP South Texas NGL Pipeline
System. EPO will not receive an increased
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
allocation
of earnings or cash flows as a result of these contributions to South Texas NGL
and Mont Belvieu Caverns.
Mont
Belvieu Caverns’ LLC Agreement
The Mont
Belvieu Caverns’ LLC Agreement (the “Caverns LLC Agreement”) states that if
Duncan Energy Partners elects to not participate in certain projects of Mont
Belvieu Caverns, then EPO is responsible for funding 100% of such
projects. To the extent such non-participated projects generate
identifiable incremental cash flows for Mont Belvieu Caverns in the future, the
earnings and cash flows of Mont Belvieu Caverns will be adjusted to allocate
such incremental amounts to EPO by special allocation or
otherwise. Under the terms of the Caverns LLC Agreement, Duncan
Energy Partners may elect to acquire a 66% share of these projects from EPO
within 90 days of such projects being placed in service.
EPO made
cash contributions of $99.5 million under the Caverns LLC Agreement during the
year ended December 31, 2008 to fund 100% of certain storage-related projects
for the benefit of EPO’s NGL marketing activities. At present, Mont
Belvieu Caverns is not expected to generate any identifiable incremental cash
flows in connection with these projects; thus, the sharing ratio for Mont
Belvieu Caverns is not expected to change from the current sharing ratio of 66%
for Duncan Energy Partners and 34% for EPO. EPO expects to make
additional contributions of approximately $27.5 million to fund such projects in
2009. The constructed assets will be the property of Mont Belvieu
Caverns.
In
November 2008, the Caverns LLC Agreement was amended to provide that EPO would
prospectively receive a special allocation of 100% of the depreciation related
to projects that it has fully funded.
The
Caverns LLC Agreement also requires the allocation to EPO of operational
measurement gains and losses. Operational measurement gains and
losses are created when product is moved between storage wells and are
attributable to pipeline and well connection measurement variances.
Company and
Limited Partnership Agreements – DEP II Midstream Businesses
On
December 8, 2007, the DEP II Midstream Businesses amended and restated their
governing documents in connection with the DEP II dropdown
transaction. Collectively, these amended and restated agreements
provide for the following:
§
|
the
acquisition by Enterprise III (a wholly owned subsidiary of Duncan Energy
Partners) from Enterprise GTM (our wholly owned subsidiary) of a 66%
general partner interest in Enterprise GC, a 51% general partner interest
in Enterprise Intrastate and a 51% member interest in Enterprise
Texas;
|
§
|
the
payment of distributions in accordance with an overall “waterfall”
approach that stipulates that to the extent that the DEP II Midstream
Businesses collectively generate cash sufficient to pay distributions to
their partners or members, such cash will be distributed first to
Enterprise III (based on an initial defined investment of $730.0 million,
the “Enterprise III Distribution Base”) and then to Enterprise GTM (based
on an initial defined investment of $452.1 million, the “Enterprise GTM
Distribution Base”) in amounts sufficient to generate an aggregate
annualized fixed return on their respective investments of
11.85%. Distributions in excess of these amounts will be
distributed 98% to Enterprise GTM and 2.0% to Enterprise
III. The initial annual fixed return amount of 11.85% will be
increased by 2.0% each calendar year beginning January 1, 2010. For
example, the fixed return in 2010, assuming no other adjustments, would be
102% of 11.85%, or 12.087%;
|
§
|
the
funding of operating cash flow deficits in accordance with each owner’s
respective partner or member interest;
and
|
§
|
the
election by either owner to fund cash calls associated with expansion
capital
projects. Since
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
December
8, 2008, Enterprise III has elected to not participate in such cash calls and,
as a result, Enterprise GTM has funded 100% of the expansion project costs of
the DEP II Midstream Businesses. If Enterprise III later elects to
participate in an expansion projects, then Enterprise III will be required to
make a capital contribution for its share of the project costs.
Any
capital contributions to fund expansion projects made by either Enterprise III
or Enterprise GTM will increase such partner’s Distribution Base (and hence
future priority return amounts) under the Company Agreement of Enterprise
Texas. As noted, Enterprise III has declined participation in
expansion project spending since December 8, 2008. As a result, Enterprise GTM
has funded 100% of such growth capital spending and its Distribution Base has
increased from $452.1 million at December 8, 2008 to $473.4 million at December
31, 2008. The Enterprise III Distribution Base was unchanged at
$730.0 million at December 31, 2008.
Relationships
with Unconsolidated Affiliates
Many of
our unconsolidated affiliates perform supporting or complementary roles to our
other business operations. Since we and our affiliates hold ownership
interests in these entities and directly or indirectly benefit from our related
party transactions with such entities, they are presented here.
The
following information summarizes significant related party transactions with our
current unconsolidated affiliates:
§
|
We
sell natural gas to Evangeline, which, in turn, uses the natural gas to
satisfy supply commitments it has with a major Louisiana
utility. In addition, Duncan Energy Partners furnished $1.0
million in letters of credit on behalf of Evangeline at December 31,
2008.
|
§
|
We
pay Promix for the transportation, storage and fractionation of
NGLs. In addition, we sell natural gas to Promix for its plant
fuel requirements.
|
§
|
We
pay Centennial in connection with a pipeline capacity lease. In
addition, we pay Centennial for other pipeline transportation
services.
|
§
|
We
paid Seaway for transportation and tank rentals in connection with our
crude oil marketing activities.
|
§
|
We
perform management services for certain of our unconsolidated
affiliates.
|
Relationship
with Cenac
In connection with our marine services
acquisition in February 2008, Cenac and affiliates became a related party of
ours due to its ownership of TEPPCO units through October 26, 2009, which then
converted to common units of Enterprise Products Partners, and other
considerations. We entered into a transitional operating agreement
with Cenac in which our fleet of acquired tow boats and tank barges will
continue to be operated by employees of Cenac for a period of up to two years
following the acquisition. Under this agreement, we pay Cenac a
monthly operating fee and reimburse Cenac for personnel salaries and related
employee benefit expenses, certain repairs and maintenance expenses and
insurance premiums on the equipment.
Note
16. Provision for Income Taxes
Our
provision for income taxes relates primarily to federal and state income taxes
of Seminole and Dixie, our two largest corporations subject to such income
taxes. In addition, with the amendment of the Texas Franchise Tax in
2006, we have become a taxable entity in the state of Texas.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Significant
components of deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities as of December
31, 2008 are as follows:
Deferred
tax assets:
|
|
|
|
Net
operating loss carryovers
|
|
$ |
26.3 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
Employee
benefit plans
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
Reserve
for legal fees and damages
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
Equity
investment in partnerships
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
AROs
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Accruals
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
Total
deferred tax assets
|
|
|
32.6 |
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
Net
deferred tax assets
|
|
|
28.7 |
|
Deferred
tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Property,
plant and equipment
|
|
|
92.9 |
|
Other
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Total
deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
93.0 |
|
Total
net deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(64.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Current
portion of total net deferred tax assets
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
Long-term
portion of total net deferred tax liabilities
|
|
$ |
(65.7 |
) |
We had net operating loss carryovers of
$26.3 million at December 31, 2008. These losses expire in various
years between 2009 and 2028 and are subject to limitations on their
utilization. We record a valuation allowance to reduce our deferred
tax assets to the amount of future tax benefit that is more likely than not to
be realized. The valuation allowance was $3.9 million at December 31,
2008 and serves to reduce the recognized tax benefit associated with carryovers
of our corporate entities to an amount that will, more likely than not, be
realized.
We have
deferred tax liabilities on property plant and equipment of $92.9 million at
December 31, 2008. The 2008 balance includes $45.1 million related to
the difference in book and tax basis of property, plant and equipment resulting
from the acquisition of the remaining equity interest of Dixie
Pipeline. See Note 10 for additional information.
On May
18, 2006, the State of Texas enacted House Bill 3 which revised the pre-existing
state franchise tax. In general, legal entities that conduct business
in Texas are subject to the Revised Texas Franchise Tax, including previously
non-taxable entities such as limited liability companies, limited partnerships
and limited liability partnerships. The tax is assessed on Texas
sourced taxable margin which is defined as the lesser of (i) 70% of total
revenue or (ii) total revenue less (a) cost of goods sold or (b) compensation
and benefits.
Although
the bill states that the Revised Texas Franchise Tax is not an income tax, it
has the characteristics of an income tax since it is determined by applying a
tax rate to a base that considers both revenues and expenses. Due to
the enactment of the Revised Texas Franchise Tax, we recorded a net deferred tax
liability of $0.9 million during the years ended December 31, 2008.
Note
17. Commitments and Contingencies
Litigation
On
occasion, we or our unconsolidated affiliates are named as a defendant in
litigation relating to our normal business activities, including regulatory and
environmental matters. Although we are insured against various
business risks to the extent we believe it is prudent, there is no assurance
that the nature and amount of such insurance will be adequate, in every case, to
indemnify us against liabilities arising from
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
future
legal proceedings as a result of our ordinary business activities. We
are unaware of any significant litigation, pending or threatened, that could
have a significant adverse effect on our financial position.
On
September 18, 2006, Peter Brinckerhoff, a purported unitholder of TEPPCO, filed
a complaint in the Court of Chancery of New Castle County in the State of
Delaware, in his individual capacity, as a putative class action on behalf of
other unitholders of TEPPCO and derivatively on behalf of TEPPCO, concerning,
among other things, certain transactions involving TEPPCO and Enterprise
Products Partners or its affiliates. Mr. Brinkerhoff filed an amended
complaint on July 12, 2007. The amended complaint names as defendants (i)
TEPPCO, its current and certain former directors, and certain of its affiliates;
(ii) Enterprise Products Partners and certain of its affiliates; (iii) EPCO.;
and (iv) Dan L. Duncan.
The
amended complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants caused TEPPCO
to enter into certain transactions that were unfair to TEPPCO or otherwise
unfairly favored Enterprise Products Partners or its affiliates over
TEPPCO. These transactions are alleged to include: (i) the joint
venture to further expand the Jonah system entered into by TEPPCO and Enterprise
Products Partners in August 2006; (ii) the sale by TEPPCO of its Pioneer
natural gas processing plant to Enterprise Products Partners in March 2006;
and (iii) certain amendments to TEPPCO’s partnership agreement, including a
reduction in the maximum tier of TEPPCO’s IDRs in exchange for TEPPCO
units. The amended complaint seeks (i) rescission of the
amendments to TEPPCO’s partnership agreement; (ii) damages for profits and
special benefits allegedly obtained by defendants as a result of the alleged
wrongdoings in the amended complaint; and (iii) awarding plaintiff costs of
the action, including fees and expenses of his attorneys and experts. We believe
this lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend against
it.
On
February 14, 2007, EPO received a letter from the Environment and Natural
Resources Division (“ENRD”) of the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) related to
an ammonia release in Kingman County, Kansas on October 27, 2004 from a
pressurized anhydrous ammonia pipeline owned by a third party, Magellan Ammonia
Pipeline, L.P. (“Magellan”) and a previous release of ammonia on September 27,
2004 from the same pipeline. EPO was the operator of this pipeline until
July 1, 2008. The ENRD has indicated that it may pursue civil damages against
EPO and Magellan as a result of these incidents. Based on this
correspondence from the ENRD, the statutory maximum amount of civil fines that
could be assessed against EPO and Magellan is up to $17.4 million in the
aggregate. EPO is cooperating with the DOJ and is hopeful that an
expeditious resolution of this civil matter acceptable to all parties will be
reached in the near future. Magellan has agreed to indemnify EPO for the
civil matter. At this time, we do not believe that a final resolution
of the civil claims by the ENRD will have a material impact on our consolidated
financial position.
On October 25, 2006, a rupture in
the Magellan Ammonia Pipeline resulted in the release of ammonia near Clay
Center, Kansas. The pipeline has been repaired and environmental
remediation tasks related to this incident have been completed. At
this time, we do not believe that this incident will have a material impact on
our consolidated financial position.
Several
lawsuits have been filed by municipalities and other water suppliers against a
number of manufacturers of reformulated gasoline containing methyl tertiary
butyl ether (“MTBE”). In general, such suits have not named
manufacturers of MTBE as defendants, and there have been no such lawsuits filed
against our subsidiary that owns an octane-additive production
facility. It is possible, however, that former MTBE manufacturers
such as our subsidiary could ultimately be added as defendants in such lawsuits
or in new lawsuits.
The Attorney General of Colorado on
behalf of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment filed suit
against us and others on April 15, 2008 in connection with the construction of a
pipeline near Parachute, Colorado. The State sought a temporary
restraining order and an injunction to halt construction activities since it
alleged that the defendants failed to install measures to minimize damage to the
environment and to follow requirements for the pipeline’s stormwater permit and
appropriate stormwater plan. The State’s complaint also seeks penalties
for the above alleged failures. Defendants and the State agreed to
certain stipulations that, among other things, require us to install specified
environmental protection measures in the disturbed pipeline right-of-way to
comply with regulations. We
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
have
complied with the stipulations and the State has dismissed the portions of the
complaint seeking the temporary restraining order and injunction. The
State has not yet assessed penalties and we are unable to predict the amount of
penalties that may be assessed. At this time, we do not believe that
this incident will have a material impact on our consolidated financial
position.
In January 2009, the State of New
Mexico filed suit in District Court in Santa Fe County, New Mexico, under the
New Mexico Air Quality Control Act. The lawsuit arose out of a February
27, 2008 Notice Of Violation issued to Marathon as operator of the Indian Basin
natural gas processing facility located in Eddy County, New
Mexico. We own a 40.0% undivided interest in the assets comprising
the Indian Basin facility. The State alleges violations of its air
laws, and Marathon believes there has been no adverse impact to public health or
the environment, having implemented voluntary emission reduction measures over
the years. The State seeks penalties above $100,000. Marathon
continues to work with the State to determine if resolution of the case is
possible.
Contractual
Obligations
The
following table summarizes our various contractual obligations at December 31,
2008. A description of each type of contractual obligation
follows.
|
|
Payment
or Settlement due by Period
|
|
Contractual
Obligations
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
Scheduled
maturities of long-term debt
|
|
$ |
11,562.8 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
554.0 |
|
|
$ |
934.3 |
|
|
$ |
2,534.3 |
|
|
$ |
1,200.0 |
|
|
$ |
6,340.2 |
|
Estimated
cash interest payments
|
|
$ |
11,976.0 |
|
|
$ |
691.5 |
|
|
$ |
669.5 |
|
|
$ |
618.1 |
|
|
$ |
578.9 |
|
|
$ |
457.6 |
|
|
$ |
8,960.4 |
|
Operating
lease obligations
|
|
$ |
388.3 |
|
|
$ |
44.9 |
|
|
$ |
38.2 |
|
|
$ |
37.6 |
|
|
$ |
36.2 |
|
|
$ |
30.7 |
|
|
$ |
200.7 |
|
Purchase
obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
purchase commitments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated
payment obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude
oil
|
|
$ |
161.2 |
|
|
$ |
161.2 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
Refined
products
|
|
$ |
1.6 |
|
|
$ |
1.6 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
Natural
gas
|
|
$ |
5,225.1 |
|
|
$ |
323.3 |
|
|
$ |
515.1 |
|
|
$ |
635.0 |
|
|
$ |
660.6 |
|
|
$ |
488.0 |
|
|
$ |
2,603.1 |
|
NGLs
|
|
$ |
1,923.8 |
|
|
$ |
969.9 |
|
|
$ |
136.4 |
|
|
$ |
136.2 |
|
|
$ |
136.2 |
|
|
$ |
136.3 |
|
|
$ |
408.8 |
|
Petrochemicals
|
|
$ |
1,746.2 |
|
|
$ |
685.6 |
|
|
$ |
376.6 |
|
|
$ |
247.8 |
|
|
$ |
181.7 |
|
|
$ |
86.8 |
|
|
$ |
167.7 |
|
Other
|
|
$ |
66.7 |
|
|
$ |
24.2 |
|
|
$ |
7.6 |
|
|
$ |
7.0 |
|
|
$ |
6.3 |
|
|
$ |
6.2 |
|
|
$ |
15.4 |
|
Underlying
major volume commitments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude
oil (in MBbls)
|
|
|
3,404 |
|
|
|
3,404 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
Refined
products (in MBbls)
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
Natural
gas (in BBtus)
|
|
|
981,955 |
|
|
|
56,650 |
|
|
|
93,150 |
|
|
|
115,925 |
|
|
|
120,780 |
|
|
|
93,950 |
|
|
|
501,500 |
|
NGLs
(in MBbls)
|
|
|
56,622 |
|
|
|
23,576 |
|
|
|
4,726 |
|
|
|
4,720 |
|
|
|
4,720 |
|
|
|
4,720 |
|
|
|
14,160 |
|
Petrochemicals
(in MBbls)
|
|
|
67,696 |
|
|
|
24,949 |
|
|
|
13,420 |
|
|
|
10,428 |
|
|
|
7,906 |
|
|
|
3,759 |
|
|
|
7,234 |
|
Service
payment commitments
|
|
$ |
534.4 |
|
|
$ |
57.3 |
|
|
$ |
51.3 |
|
|
$ |
49.5 |
|
|
$ |
47.0 |
|
|
$ |
46.1 |
|
|
$ |
283.2 |
|
Capital
expenditure commitments
|
|
$ |
786.7 |
|
|
$ |
786.7 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
Scheduled
Maturities of Long-Term Debt. We have long-term and
short-term payment obligations under debt agreements. Amounts shown
in the preceding table represent our scheduled future maturities of debt
principal for the periods indicated. See Note 12 for additional
information regarding our consolidated debt obligations.
Operating
Lease Obligations. We lease certain property, plant and
equipment under noncancelable and cancelable operating
leases. Amounts shown in the preceding table represent minimum cash
lease payment obligations under our operating leases with terms in excess of one
year.
Our
significant lease agreements involve (i) the lease of underground caverns for
the storage of natural gas and NGLs, (ii) leased office space with an affiliate
of EPCO, (iii) a railcar unloading terminal in Mont Belvieu, Texas and (iv) land
held pursuant to right-of-way agreements. In general, our material
lease agreements have original terms that range from 2 to 28 years and include
renewal options that could extend the agreements for up to an additional 20
years.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The
operating lease commitments shown in the preceding table exclude the non-cash,
related party expense associated with retained leases contributed to Enterprise
Products Partners by EPCO at its formation. EPCO remains liable for
the actual cash lease payments associated with these agreements, which it
accounts for as operating leases. At December 31, 2008, the retained
leases were for approximately 100 railcars. EPCO’s minimum future
rental payments under these leases are $0.7 million for each of the years 2009
through 2015 and $0.3 million for 2016. Enterprise Products Partners
records the full value of these payments made by EPCO on our behalf as a
non-cash related party operating lease expense, with the offset to equity
accounted for as a general contribution to the partnership.
The
retained lease agreements contain lessee purchase options, which are at prices
that approximate fair value of the underlying leased assets. EPCO has
assigned these purchase options to us. We have exercised
our election under the retained leases to purchase a cogeneration unit in
December 2008 for $2.3 million. Should we decide to exercise the
purchase option associated with the remaining agreement, we would pay the
original lessor $3.1 million in June 2016.
Purchase
Obligations.
We
define a purchase obligation as an agreement to purchase goods or services that
is enforceable and legally binding (unconditional) on us that specifies all
significant terms, including: fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased;
fixed, minimum or variable price provisions; and the approximate timing of the
transactions. We have classified our unconditional purchase
obligations into the following categories:
§
|
We
have long and short-term product purchase obligations for natural gas,
NGLs, crude oil, refined products and certain petrochemicals with
third-party suppliers. The prices that we are obligated to pay
under these contracts approximate market prices at the time we take
delivery of the volumes. The preceding table shows our volume
commitments and estimated payment obligations under these contracts for
the periods indicated. Our estimated future payment obligations
are based on the contractual price under each contract for purchases made
at December 31, 2008 applied to all future volume
commitments. Actual future payment obligations may vary
depending on market prices at the time of delivery. At December
31, 2008, we do not have any significant product purchase commitments with
fixed or minimum pricing provisions with remaining terms in excess of one
year.
|
§
|
We
have long and short-term commitments to pay third-party providers for
services such as equipment maintenance agreements. Our
contractual payment obligations vary by contract. The preceding
table shows our future payment obligations under these service
contracts.
|
§
|
We
have short-term payment obligations relating to our capital projects and
those of our unconsolidated affiliates. These commitments
represent unconditional payment obligations to vendors for services
rendered or products purchased. The preceding table presents
our share of such commitments for the periods
indicated.
|
Commitments
under equity compensation plans of EPCO
In accordance with our agreements with
EPCO, we reimburse EPCO for our share of its compensation expense associated
with certain employees who perform management, administrative and operating
functions for us (see Note 15). This includes costs associated with
unit option awards granted to these employees to purchase Enterprise Products
Partners’ common units. At December 31, 2008, there were 2,168,500
and 795,000 unit options outstanding under the EPCO 1998 Plan and EPD 2008 LTIP,
respectively, for which we were responsible for reimbursing EPCO for the costs
of such awards.
The weighted-average strike price of
unit option awards outstanding at December 31, 2008 was $26.32 and $30.93 per
common unit under the EPCO 1998 Plan and EPD 2008 LTIP,
respectively. At December 31, 2008, 548,500 of these unit options
were exercisable under the EPCO 1998 Plan. An additional 365,000,
480,000 and 775,000 of these unit options will be exercisable in 2009, 2010 and
2012, respectively under the EPCO 1998 Plan. The 795,000 unit options
outstanding under the EPD 2008 LTIP will become exercisable in
2013. As these options are exercised, we will reimburse EPCO in the
form of a
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
special
cash distribution for the difference between the strike price paid by the
employee and the actual purchase price paid for the units awarded to the
employee. See Note 4 for additional information regarding our
accounting for equity awards.
In order
to fund obligations under the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP, EPCO may purchase common units
of TEPPCO at fair value either in the open market or directly from
TEPPCO. When EPCO employees exercise options awarded under the TEPPCO
2006 LTIP, TEPPCO will reimburse EPCO for the cash difference between the strike
price paid by the employee and the actual purchase price paid by EPCO for the
common units. TEPPCO was committed to issue 355,000 of its common
units at December 31, 2008, respectively, if all outstanding options awarded
under the 2006 LTIP (as of this date) were exercised. The
weighted-average strike price of option awards outstanding at December 31, 2008
was $40.00 per common unit. There were no options immediately
exercisable under the 2006 LTIP at December 31, 2008. See Note 4 for
additional information regarding the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP.
Other
Claims
As part of our normal business
activities with joint venture partners and certain customers and suppliers, we
occasionally have claims made against us as a result of disputes related to
contractual agreements or similar arrangements. As of December 31,
2008, claims against us totaled approximately $15.4 million. These
matters are in various stages of assessment and the ultimate outcome of such
disputes cannot be reasonably estimated. However, in our opinion, the
likelihood of a material adverse outcome related to disputes against us is
remote. Accordingly, accruals for loss contingencies related to these
matters, if any, that might result from the resolution of such disputes have not
been reflected in our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Other
Commitments
We
transport and store natural gas, NGLs, crude oil, refined products and
petrochemicals for third parties under various processing, storage,
transportation and similar agreements. These volumes are (i) accrued
as product payables on our Supplemental Consolidated Balance Sheet, (ii) in
transit for delivery to our customers or (iii) held at our storage facilities
for redelivery to our customers. We are insured against any physical
loss of such volumes due to catastrophic events. Under the terms of
our natural gas, NGL and petrochemical storage agreements, we are generally
required to redeliver volumes to the owner on demand. At December 31,
2008, NGL, refined products and petrochemical products aggregating 40.9 million
barrels were due to be redelivered to their owners along with 18.5 BBtus of
natural gas and 5.2 million barrels of crude oil. See Note 2 for more
information regarding accrued product payables.
Centennial
Guarantees
We have
certain guarantee obligations in connection with our ownership interest in
Centennial. We have guaranteed one-half of Centennial’s debt
obligations, which obligates us to an estimated payment of $65.0 million in the
event of default by Centennial. At December 31, 2008, we had a
liability of $9.0 million representing the estimated fair value of our share of
the Centennial debt guaranty. See Note 12 for additional information
regarding Centennial’s debt obligations.
In lieu
of Centennial procuring insurance to satisfy third-party liabilities arising
from a catastrophic event, our and Centennial’s other joint venture partner has
entered a limited cash call agreement. We are obligated to contribute
up to a maximum of $50.0 million in proportion to our ownership interest in
Centennial in the event of a catastrophic event. At December 31,
2008, we had a liability of $3.9 million representing the estimated fair value
of our cash call guaranty. We insure against catastrophic
events. Cash contributions to Centennial under the limited cash call
agreement may be covered by our insurance depending on the nature of the
catastrophic event.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Note
18. Significant Risks and Uncertainties
Nature
of Operations in Midstream Energy Industry
Our operations are within the midstream
energy industry, which includes gathering, transporting, processing,
fractionating and storing natural gas, NGLs, crude oil, refined products and
certain petrochemicals. We also market natural gas, NGLs, crude oil
and other hydrocarbon products. As such, our financial position may
be affected by changes in the commodity prices of these hydrocarbon products,
including changes in the relative price levels among these products (e.g.,
natural gas processing margins are influenced by the ratio of natural gas prices
to crude oil prices). The prices of hydrocarbon products are subject
to fluctuation in response to changes in supply, market uncertainty and a
variety of additional factors that are beyond our control.
Our
profitability could be impacted by a decline in the volume of hydrocarbon
products transported, gathered, processed or stored at our
facilities. A material decrease in natural gas or crude oil
production or crude oil refining, for reasons such as depressed commodity prices
or a decrease in exploration and development activities, could result in a
decline in the volume of natural gas, NGLs, refined products and crude oil
handled by our facilities.
A reduction in demand for natural gas,
crude oil, NGL and other hydrocarbon products by the petrochemical, refining or
heating industries, whether because of (i) general economic conditions, (ii)
reduced demand by consumers for the end products made using such products, (iii)
increased competition from other products due to pricing differences, (iv)
adverse weather conditions, (v) government regulations affecting energy
commodity prices, production levels of hydrocarbons or the content of motor
gasoline or (vi) other reasons, could adversely affect our financial
position.
Credit
Risk due to Industry Concentrations
A
substantial portion of our revenues are derived from companies in the domestic
natural gas, NGL and petrochemical industries. This concentration
could affect our overall exposure to credit risk since these customers may be
affected by similar economic or other conditions. We generally do not
require collateral for our accounts receivable; however, we do attempt to
negotiate offset, prepayment, or automatic debit agreements with customers that
are deemed to be credit risks in order to minimize our potential exposure to any
defaults.
On
January 6, 2009, LyondellBasell Industries (“LBI”) announced that its U.S.
operations had voluntarily filed to reorganize under Chapter 11 of the U.S.
Bankruptcy Code. For 2008, LBI accounted for 5.9% of consolidated
revenues. At the time of the bankruptcy filing, we had approximately
$17.3 million of credit exposure to LBI, which was reduced to approximately
$10.0 million through remedies provided under certain pipeline
tariffs. In addition, we are seeking to have LBI accept certain
contracts and have filed claims pursuant to current Bankruptcy Court Orders that
we expect will allow us to recover the majority of the remaining credit
exposure.
Counterparty
Risk with Respect to Derivative Instruments
In those
situations where we are exposed to credit risk in our derivative instrument
transactions, we analyze the counterparty’s financial condition prior to
entering into an agreement, establish credit and/or margin limits and monitor
the appropriateness of these limits on an ongoing basis. Generally,
we do not require collateral nor do we anticipate nonperformance by our
counterparties.
Weather-Related
Risks
We
participate as a named insured in EPCO’s insurance program, which provides us
with property damage, business interruption and other coverages, the scope and
amounts of which are customary and sufficient for the nature and extent of our
operations. While we believe EPCO maintains adequate insurance
coverage on our behalf, insurance will not cover every type of damage or
interruption that might
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
occur. If
we were to incur a significant liability for which we were not fully insured, it
could have a material impact on our consolidated financial
position. In addition, the proceeds of any such insurance may not be
paid in a timely manner and may be insufficient to reimburse us for our repair
costs or lost income. Any event that interrupts the revenues
generated by our consolidated operations, or which causes us to make significant
expenditures not covered by insurance, could reduce our ability to pay
distributions to our partners and, accordingly, adversely affect the market
price of Enterprise Products Partners’ common units.
For
windstorm events such as hurricanes and tropical storms, EPCO’s deductible for
onshore physical damage is $10.0 million per storm. For
offshore assets, the windstorm deductible is $10.0 million per storm plus a
one-time $15.0 million aggregate deductible per policy period. For
non-windstorm events, EPCO’s deductible for onshore and offshore physical damage
is $5.0 million per occurrence. In meeting the deductible amounts,
property damage costs are aggregated for EPCO and its affiliates, including
us. Accordingly, our exposure with respect to the deductibles may be
equal to or less than the stated amounts depending on whether other EPCO or
affiliate assets are also affected by an event.
To
qualify for business interruption coverage in connection with a windstorm event,
covered assets must be out-of-service in excess of 60 days for onshore assets
and 75 days for offshore assets. To qualify for business
interruption coverage in connection with a non-windstorm event, covered onshore
and offshore assets must be out-of-service in excess of 60 days.
The following is a discussion of the
general status of our insurance claims related to recent significant storm
events. To the extent we include any estimate or range of estimates
regarding the dollar value of damages, please be aware that a change in our
estimates may occur as additional information becomes available.
Hurricane
Ivan insurance claims. During the year
ended December 31, 2008, we did not receive any reimbursements from insurance
carriers related to property damage claims associated with this
storm. We have submitted business interruption insurance claims for
our estimated losses caused by Hurricane Ivan, which struck the eastern U.S.
Gulf Coast region in September 2004. During the year ended December
31, 2008, we did not receive any proceeds from these claims. We are continuing
our efforts to collect residual balances from this storm.
Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita insurance claims. Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita, both significant storms, affected certain of our Gulf Coast
assets in August and September of 2005, respectively. With respect to
these storms, we have $30.5 million of estimated property damage claims
outstanding at December 31, 2008, that we believe are probable of collection
during the period 2009. We continue to pursue collection of our
property damage claims related to these named storms. As of December
31, 2008, we had received all proceeds from our business interruption claims
related to these storm events.
Hurricanes
Gustav and Ike insurance claims. In
the third quarter of 2008, our onshore and offshore facilities located along the
Gulf Coast of Texas and Louisiana were adversely impacted by Hurricanes Gustav
and Ike. The disruptions in natural gas, NGL and crude oil
production caused by these storms resulted in decreased volumes for some of our
pipeline systems, natural gas processing plants, NGL fractionators and offshore
platforms, which, in turn, caused a decrease in gross operating margin from
these operations. We expect to file property damage insurance claims
to the extent repair costs exceed deductible amounts. Due to the
recent nature of these storms, we are still evaluating the total cost of repairs
and the potential for business interruption claims on certain
assets.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO SUPPLEMENTAL CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Proceeds
from Business Interruption and Property Damage Claims
The
following table summarizes proceeds we received during the year ended December
31, 2008 from business interruption and property damage insurance claims with
respect to certain named storms:
Business
interruption proceeds:
|
|
|
|
Hurricane
Katrina
|
|
$ |
0.5 |
|
Hurricane
Rita
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
Total
proceeds
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
Property
damage proceeds:
|
|
|
|
|
Hurricane
Katrina
|
|
|
9.4 |
|
Hurricane
Rita
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
Total
proceeds
|
|
|
12.1 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
13.2 |
|
At
December 31, 2008, we have $39.0 million of estimated property damage claims
outstanding related to these storms that we believe are probable of collection
through 2009. In February 2009, we collected $20.8 million of the
amounts outstanding. To the extent we estimate the dollar value of
such damages, please be aware that a change in our estimates may occur as
additional information becomes available.
During
2008, we collected $0.2 million of business interruption proceeds that were not
related to storm events.
Note
19. Subsequent Events
We have evaluated subsequent events
through December 18, 2009, which is the date we filed this Exhibit 99.1 to
Current Report on Form 8-K with the SEC.
TOPS
Matters - April and September 2009
In April 2009, we dissociated (or
exited) from TOPS (see Note 8). As a result, we recorded a non-cash
charge of $68.4 million, which represented our cumulative investment in TOPS
through the date of dissociation. In addition, in September 2009, we
entered into a settlement agreement with certain affiliates of Oiltanking that
resolved all disputes between the parties related to the business and affairs of
TOPS. We recorded a charge of $67.0 million during the third quarter of 2009 in
connection with this cash settlement.
River
Terminal Charges in September 2009
In September 2009, TEPPCO determined
that its Aberdeen and Boligee river terminals were impaired due to the current
level of throughput volumes at the terminals and the indefinite suspension of
construction projects for three new proposed river terminals. As a
result, TEPPCO recorded a $17.6 million non-cash asset impairment charge during
the third quarter of 2009. The assets and operations related to
TEPPCO’s river terminals are part of our Petrochemical & Refined Products
Services business segment.
Also, TEPPCO is party to a 10-year
throughput and deficiency agreement with Colonial Pipeline Company (“Colonial”)
whereby Colonial agreed to provide transportation services to TEPPCO’s Boligee
river terminal. The agreement provided for minimum annual throughput
commitments. As a result of TEPPCO’s decision to indefinitely
suspend the three new proposed river terminal construction projects, TEPPCO
accrued a liability of $28.7 million for deficiency fees that it reasonably
estimated would be incurred over the term of the Colonial contract since the
minimum throughput volumes were no longer expected to be achieved.
epdexhibit99_2.htm
EXHIBIT
99.2
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
RECAST
OF EXHIBIT 99.1 FROM CURRENT REPORT
ON
FORM 8-K DATED NOVEMBER, 16, 2009
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Unaudited
Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet at September 30,
2009
|
2
|
|
|
Notes
to Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheet:
|
|
1. Company
Organization and Basis of Presentation
|
3
|
2. General
Accounting Matters
|
5
|
3. Accounting
for Equity Awards
|
7
|
4. Derivative
Instruments, Hedging Activities and Fair Value
Measurements
|
11
|
5. Inventories
|
18
|
6. Property,
Plant and Equipment
|
19
|
7. Investments
in Unconsolidated Affiliates
|
20
|
8. Business
Combinations
|
20
|
9. Intangible
Assets and Goodwill
|
21
|
10. Debt
Obligations
|
22
|
11. Equity
|
25
|
12. Business
Segments
|
26
|
13. Related
Party Transactions
|
26
|
14. Commitments
and Contingencies
|
29
|
15. Significant
Risks and Uncertainties
|
33
|
16. Subsequent
Events
|
34
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
UNAUDITED
SUPPLEMENTAL CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
AT
SEPTEMBER 30, 2009
(Dollars
in millions)
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
77.4 |
|
Restricted
cash
|
|
|
102.8 |
|
Accounts
and notes receivable – trade, net of allowance for doubtful
accounts of $17.0
|
|
|
2,579.6 |
|
Accounts
receivable – related parties
|
|
|
9.6 |
|
Inventories
(see Note 5)
|
|
|
1,220.6 |
|
Derivative
assets (see Note 4)
|
|
|
199.5 |
|
Prepaid
and other current assets
|
|
|
168.0 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
4,357.5 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
17,297.0 |
|
Investments
in unconsolidated affiliates
|
|
|
899.3 |
|
Intangible
assets, net of accumulated amortization of $765.6
|
|
|
1,093.2 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
2,018.3 |
|
Deferred
tax asset
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
264.9 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
25,931.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable – trade
|
|
$ |
399.7 |
|
Accounts
payable – related parties
|
|
|
44.2 |
|
Accrued
product payables
|
|
|
2,657.4 |
|
Accrued
interest payable
|
|
|
163.1 |
|
Other
accrued expenses
|
|
|
55.1 |
|
Derivative
liabilities (see Note 4)
|
|
|
264.6 |
|
Other
current liabilities
|
|
|
263.5 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
3,847.6 |
|
Long-term debt: (see
Note 10)
|
|
|
|
|
Senior
debt obligations – principal
|
|
|
10,404.0 |
|
Junior
subordinated notes – principal
|
|
|
1,532.7 |
|
Other
|
|
|
62.5 |
|
Total
long-term debt
|
|
|
11,999.2 |
|
Deferred
tax liabilities
|
|
|
69.6 |
|
Other
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
151.2 |
|
Commitments
and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
Equity: (see Note
11)
|
|
|
|
|
Member’s
interest
|
|
|
540.0 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
Total
member’s equity
|
|
|
538.6 |
|
Noncontrolling
interest
|
|
|
9,325.1 |
|
Total
equity
|
|
|
9,863.7 |
|
Total
liabilities and equity
|
|
$ |
25,931.3 |
|
See Notes
to Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Except per unit amounts, or as noted
within the context of each footnote disclosure, the dollar amounts presented in
the tabular data within these footnote disclosures are stated in millions of
dollars.
Note
1. Company Organization and Basis of Presentation
Company
Organization
Enterprise
Products GP, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company that was formed in
April 1998 to become the general partner of Enterprise Products Partners
L.P. The business purpose of Enterprise Products GP, LLC is to manage
the affairs and operations of Enterprise Products Partners L.P. At
September 30, 2009, Enterprise GP Holdings L.P. owned 100% of the membership
interests of Enterprise Products GP, LLC.
Unless
the context requires otherwise, references to “we,” “us,” “our” or “the Company”
are intended to mean and include the business and operations of Enterprise
Products GP, LLC, as well as its consolidated subsidiaries, which include
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and its consolidated
subsidiaries.
References
to “Enterprise Products Partners” mean the business and operations of Enterprise
Products Partners L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries, which now includes
TEPPCO Partners, L.P. and its general partner. Enterprise Products
Partners is a publicly traded Delaware limited partnership, the registered
common units of which are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under
the ticker symbol “EPD.” References to “EPGP” mean Enterprise
Products GP, LLC, individually as the general partner of Enterprise Products
Partners, and not on a consolidated basis. Enterprise Products
Partners has no business activities outside those conducted by its operating
subsidiary, Enterprise Products Operating LLC (“EPO”). Enterprise
Products Partners and EPO were formed to acquire, own and operate certain
natural gas liquids (“NGLs”) related businesses of EPCO, Inc.
References
to “Enterprise GP Holdings” mean the business and operations of Enterprise GP
Holdings L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries. Enterprise GP
Holdings is a publicly traded Delaware limited partnership, the registered units
of which are listed on the NYSE under the ticker symbol
“EPE.” References to “EPE Holdings” mean EPE Holdings, LLC, which is
the general partner of Enterprise GP Holdings.
References
to “TEPPCO” and “TEPPCO GP” mean TEPPCO Partners, L.P. and Texas Eastern
Products Pipeline Company, LLC (which is the general partner of TEPPCO),
respectively, prior to their mergers with subsidiaries of Enterprise Products
Partners. On October 26, 2009, Enterprise Products Partners completed
its mergers with TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP (such related mergers referred to herein
individually and together as the “TEPPCO Merger”). See Note 16 for
additional information regarding the TEPPCO Merger.
References
to “Energy Transfer Equity” mean the business and operations of Energy Transfer
Equity, L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries. References to “LE GP”
mean LE GP, LLC, which is the general partner of Energy Transfer
Equity. Enterprise GP Holdings owns noncontrolling interests in both
LE GP and Energy Transfer Equity. Enterprise GP Holdings accounts for
its investments in LE GP and Energy Transfer Equity using the equity method of
accounting.
References
to “Employee Partnerships” mean EPE Unit L.P., EPE Unit II, L.P., EPE Unit III,
L.P., Enterprise Unit L.P., EPCO Unit L.P., TEPPCO Unit L.P., and TEPPCO Unit II
L.P., collectively, all of which are privately held affiliates of EPCO,
Inc.
References
to “EPCO” mean EPCO, Inc. and its wholly-owned privately held affiliates, which
are related parties to all of the foregoing named entities. Dan L.
Duncan is the Group Co-Chairman and controlling shareholder of
EPCO.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
For
financial reporting purposes, Enterprise Products Partners consolidates the
balance sheet of Duncan Energy Partners L.P. (“Duncan Energy Partners”) with
that of its own. Enterprise Products Partners controls Duncan Energy
Partners through the ownership of its general partner, DEP Holdings, LLC (“DEP
GP”). Public ownership of Duncan Energy Partners’ net assets is
presented as a component of noncontrolling interest in our Unaudited
Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. The borrowings of
Duncan Energy Partners are presented as part of our consolidated debt; however,
neither Enterprise Products Partners nor EPGP have any obligation for the
payment of interest or repayment of borrowings incurred by Duncan Energy
Partners.
Basis
of Presentation
General. EPGP
owns a 2% general partner interest in Enterprise Products Partners, which
conducts substantially all of its business. EPGP has no independent
operations and no material assets outside those of Enterprise Products
Partners. The number of reconciling items between our consolidated
balance sheet and that of Enterprise Products Partners are few. The
most significant difference is that relating to noncontrolling interest
ownership in our net assets by the limited partners of Enterprise Products
Partners, and the elimination of our investment in Enterprise Products Partners
with our underlying capital account in Enterprise Products
Partners.
Noncontrolling
Interests. Effective January 1, 2009, we adopted new
accounting guidance that has been codified under Accounting Standards
Codification (“ASC”) 810, Consolidation, which established accounting and
reporting standards for noncontrolling interests, which were previously
identified as minority interest in our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheet. The new guidance requires, among other things, that
noncontrolling interests be presented as a component of equity on our Unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet (i.e., elimination of the “mezzanine”
presentation previously used for minority interest).
The
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet included in this
Exhibit 99.2 reflects the changes required under ASC 810. This
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet and Notes thereto
should be read in conjunction with the Audited Supplemental Consolidated Balance
Sheet and Notes thereto included in Exhibit 99.1 of this Current Report on Form
8-K.
TEPPCO
Merger. Since Enterprise Products Partners, TEPPCO and TEPPCO
GP are under common control of Mr. Duncan, the TEPPCO Merger was accounted for
at historical costs as a reorganization of entities under common control in a
manner similar to a pooling of interests. The inclusion of TEPPCO and
TEPPCO GP in our Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet was
effective January 1, 2005 because an affiliate of EPCO under common control with
Enterprise Products Partners originally acquired ownership interests in TEPPCO
GP in February 2005.
Our
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet prior to the TEPPCO
Merger reflects the combined financial information of Enterprise Products
Partners, TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP on a 100% basis. Third party and
related party ownership interests in TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP prior to the merger
have been reflected as “Former owners of TEPPCO” a component of noncontrolling
interest.
Our
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet has been prepared in
accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
(“GAAP”). The balance sheets of TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP were prepared
from the separate accounting records maintained by TEPPCO and TEPPCO
GP. All intercompany balances and transactions were eliminated in
consolidation.
We
revised our business segments and related disclosures to reflect the TEPPCO
Merger. Our reorganized business segments reflect the manner in which
these businesses are managed and reviewed by the chief executive officer of
EPGP. Under our new business segment structure, we have five
reportable business segments: (i) NGL Pipelines & Services; (ii)
Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines & Services; (iii)
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Onshore
Crude Oil Pipelines & Services; (iv) Offshore Pipelines & Services; and
(v) Petrochemical & Refined Products Services.
Note
2. General Accounting Matters
Estimates
Preparing
our supplemental balance sheet in conformity with GAAP requires management to
make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts presented in the supplemental
balance sheet (e.g. assets and liabilities) and disclosures about contingent
assets and liabilities. Our actual results could differ from these
estimates. On an ongoing basis, management reviews its estimates
based on currently available information. Changes in facts and
circumstances may result in revised estimates.
Fair
Value Information
Cash and
cash equivalents and restricted cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable and
accrued expenses, and other current liabilities are carried at amounts which
reasonably approximate their fair values due to their short-term
nature. The estimated fair values of our fixed rate debt are based on
quoted market prices for such debt or debt of similar terms and
maturities. The carrying amounts of our variable rate debt
obligations reasonably approximate their fair values due to their variable
interest rates. See Note 4 for fair value information associated with
our derivative instruments. The following table presents the
estimated fair values of our financial instruments at September 30,
2009:
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
Financial
Instruments
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Value
|
|
Financial
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents and restricted cash
|
|
$ |
180.2 |
|
|
$ |
180.2 |
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
2,589.2 |
|
|
|
2,589.2 |
|
Financial
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses
|
|
|
3,319.5 |
|
|
|
3,319.5 |
|
Other
current liabilities
|
|
|
263.5 |
|
|
|
263.5 |
|
Fixed-rate
debt (principal amount)
|
|
|
9,986.7 |
|
|
|
10,450.6 |
|
Variable-rate
debt
|
|
|
1,950.0 |
|
|
|
1,950.0 |
|
Recent
Accounting Developments
The
following information summarizes recently issued accounting guidance that will
or may affect our future balance sheets.
Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles. In June 2009,
the FASB published ASC 105, Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, as the
source of authoritative GAAP for U.S. companies. The ASC reorganized
GAAP into a topical format and significantly changes the way users research
accounting issues. For SEC registrants, the rules and interpretive
releases of the SEC under federal securities laws are also sources of
authoritative GAAP. References to specific GAAP now refer exclusively
to the ASC. We adopted the new codification on September 30,
2009.
Fair
Value Measurements. In April 2009,
the FASB issued ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, to clarify
fair value accounting rules. This new accounting guidance establishes a
process to determine whether a market is active and a transaction is consummated
under distress. Companies should review several factors and use
professional judgment to ascertain if a formerly active market has become
inactive. When estimating fair value, companies are required to place more
weight on observable transactions in orderly markets. Our adoption of
this new guidance on June 30, 2009 did not have any impact on our supplemental
consolidated balance sheet or related disclosures.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
In August
2009, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2009-05, Measuring Liabilities
at Fair Value, to clarify how an entity should estimate the fair value of
liabilities. If a quoted price in an active market for an identical
liability is not available, a company must measure the fair value of the
liability using one of several valuation techniques (e.g., quoted prices for
similar liabilities or present value of cash flows). Our adoption of
this new guidance on October 1, 2009 did not have any impact on our supplemental
consolidated balance sheet or related disclosures.
Financial
Instruments. In April 2009,
the FASB issued ASC 825, Financial Instruments, which requires companies to
provide in each interim report both qualitative and quantitative information
regarding fair value estimates for financial instruments not recorded on the
balance sheet at fair value. Previously, this was only an annual
requirement. Apart from adding the required fair value disclosures
within this Note 2, our adoption of this new guidance on June 30, 2009 did not
have a material impact on our supplemental consolidated balance sheet or related
disclosures.
Subsequent
Events. In May 2009, the
FASB issued ASC 855, Subsequent Events, which governs the accounting for, and
disclosure of, events that occur after the balance sheet date but before
financial statements are issued or are available to be issued. The
date through which an entity has evaluated subsequent events is now a required
disclosure. Our adoption of this guidance on June 30, 2009 did not
have any impact on our supplemental consolidated balance sheet.
Consolidation
of Variable Interest Entities. In June 2009,
the FASB amended consolidation guidance for variable interest entities (“VIEs”)
under ASC 810. VIEs are entities whose equity investors do not have
sufficient equity capital at risk such that the entity cannot finance its own
activities. When a business has a “controlling financial interest” in
a VIE, the assets, liabilities and profit or loss of that entity must be
consolidated. A business must also consolidate a VIE when that
business has a “variable interest” that (i) provides the business with the power
to direct the activities that most significantly impact the economic performance
of the VIE and (ii) funds most of the entity’s expected losses and/or receives
most of the entity’s anticipated residual returns. The amended
guidance:
§
|
eliminates
the scope exception for qualifying special-purpose
entities;
|
§
|
amends
certain guidance for determining whether an entity is a
VIE;
|
§
|
expands
the list of events that trigger reconsideration of whether an entity is a
VIE;
|
§
|
requires
a qualitative rather than a quantitative analysis to determine the primary
beneficiary of a VIE;
|
§
|
requires
continuous assessments of whether a company is the primary beneficiary of
a VIE; and
|
§
|
requires
enhanced disclosures about a company’s involvement with a
VIE.
|
The
amended guidance is effective for us on January 1, 2010. At September
30, 2009, we did not have any VIEs based on prior guidance. We are in
the process of evaluating the amended guidance; however, our adoption and
implementation of this guidance is not expected to have an impact on our
consolidated balance sheet.
Restricted
Cash
Restricted
cash represents amounts held in connection with our commodity derivative
instruments portfolio and related physical natural gas and NGL
purchases. Additional cash may be restricted to maintain this
portfolio as commodity prices fluctuate or deposit requirements
change. At September 30, 2009, our restricted cash amounts were
$102.8 million. See Note 4 for additional information regarding
derivative instruments and hedging activities.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Subsequent
Events
We have
evaluated subsequent events through December 18, 2009, which is the date of we
filed this Exhibit 99.2 to Current Report on Form 8-K.
Note
3. Accounting for Equity Awards
Certain
key employees of EPCO participate in long-term incentive compensation plans
managed by EPCO. We record our pro rata share of such costs based on
the percentage of time each employee spends on our consolidated business
activities. Such awards were not material to our consolidated
financial position.
EPCO
1998 Long-Term Incentive Plan
The EPCO
1998 Long-Term Incentive Plan (“EPCO 1998 Plan”) provides for the issuance of up
to 7,000,000 of Enterprise Products Partners’ common units. After
giving effect to the issuance or forfeiture of option awards and restricted unit
awards through September 30, 2009, a total of 428,847 additional common units
could be issued under the EPCO 1998 Plan.
Unit
Option Awards. The following table presents option activity
under the EPCO 1998 Plan for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Number
of
|
|
|
Strike
Price
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
(dollars/unit)
|
|
|
Term
(in years)
|
|
|
Value
(1)
|
|
Outstanding
at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
2,168,500 |
|
|
$ |
26.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
(2)
|
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
$ |
20.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(56,000 |
) |
|
$ |
15.66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(365,000 |
) |
|
$ |
26.38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at September 30, 2009
|
|
|
1,777,500 |
|
|
$ |
26.54 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
$ |
3.0 |
|
Options
exercisable at
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
30, 2009
|
|
|
652,500 |
|
|
$ |
23.71 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
$ |
3.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Aggregate
intrinsic value reflects fully vested unit options at September 30,
2009.
(2)
Aggregate
grant date fair value of these unit options issued during 2009 was $0.2
million based on the following assumptions: (i) a grant date market price
of Enterprise Products Partners’ common units of $20.08 per unit; (ii)
expected life of options of 5.0 years; (iii) risk-free interest rate of
1.81%; (iv) expected distribution yield on Enterprise Products Partners’
common units of 10%; and (v) expected unit price volatility on Enterprise
Products Partners’ common units of 72.76%.
|
|
The total
intrinsic value of option awards exercised during the three months ended
September 30, 2009 was $0.3 million. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2009, the total intrinsic value of option awards exercised was
$0.6 million.
During
the nine months ended September 30, 2009, we received cash of $0.5 million, from
the exercise of option awards granted under the EPCO 1998
Plan. Conversely, our option-related reimbursements to EPCO during
this period were $0.5 million.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Restricted
Unit Awards. The following table summarizes information
regarding our restricted unit awards under the EPCO 1998 Plan for the periods
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
Grant
|
|
|
|
Number
of
|
|
|
Date
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
per Unit
(1)
|
|
Restricted
units at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
2,080,600 |
|
|
|
|
Granted
(2)
|
|
|
1,016,950 |
|
|
$ |
20.65 |
|
Vested
|
|
|
(244,300 |
) |
|
$ |
26.66 |
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(194,400 |
) |
|
$ |
28.92 |
|
Restricted
units at September 30, 2009
|
|
|
2,658,850 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Determined
by dividing the aggregate grant date fair value of awards by the number of
awards issued. The weighted-average grant date fair value per unit
for forfeited and vested awards is determined before an allowance for
forfeitures.
(2)
Net
of forfeitures, aggregate grant date fair value of restricted unit awards
issued during 2009 was $21.0 million based on grant date market prices of
Enterprise Products Partners’ common units ranging from $20.08 to $27.66
per unit. Estimated forfeiture rates ranged between 4.6% and
17%.
|
|
The total
fair value of restricted unit awards that vested during the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2009 was $6.2 million and $6.5 million,
respectively.
Phantom
Unit Awards and Distribution Equivalent Rights. No phantom
unit awards or distribution equivalent rights have been issued as of September
30, 2009 under the EPCO 1998 Plan.
Enterprise
Products 2008 Long-Term Incentive Plan
The Enterprise Products 2008 Long-Term
Incentive Plan (“EPD 2008 LTIP”) provides for the issuance of up to 10,000,000
of Enterprise Products Partners’ common units. After giving effect to
the issuance or forfeiture of option awards through September 30, 2009, a total
of 7,865,000 additional common units could be issued under the EPD 2008
LTIP.
Unit
Option Awards. The following
table presents unit option activity under the EPD 2008 LTIP for the periods
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
Number
of
|
|
|
Strike
Price
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
(dollars/unit)
|
|
|
Term
(in years)
|
|
Outstanding
at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
795,000 |
|
|
$ |
30.93 |
|
|
|
|
Granted
(1)
|
|
|
1,430,000 |
|
|
$ |
23.53 |
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(90,000 |
) |
|
$ |
30.93 |
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at September 30,
2009 (2)
|
|
|
2,135,000 |
|
|
$ |
25.97 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Net
of forfeitures, aggregate grant date fair value of these unit options
issued during 2009 was $6.5 million based on the following assumptions:
(i) a weighted-average grant date market price of Enterprise Products
Partners’ common units of $23.53 per unit; (ii) weighted-average expected
life of options of 4.9 years; (iii) weighted-average risk-free interest
rate of 2.14%; (iv) expected weighted-average distribution yield on
Enterprise Products Partners’ common units of 9.37%; (v) expected
weighted-average unit price volatility on Enterprise Products Partners’
common units of 57.11%. An estimated forfeiture rate of 17% was
applied to awards granted during 2009.
(2)
No
unit options were exercisable as of September 30, 2009.
|
|
Phantom
Unit Awards. There were a total of 10,600 phantom units
outstanding at September 30, 2009 under the EPD 2008 LTIP. These
awards cliff vest in 2011 and 2012. At September 30, 2009, we had
accrued an immaterial liability for compensation related to these phantom unit
awards.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
DEP
GP Unit Appreciation Rights
At
September 30, 2009, we had a total of 90,000 outstanding unit appreciation
rights (“UARs”) granted to non-employee directors of DEP GP that cliff vest in
2012. If a director resigns prior to vesting, his UAR awards are
forfeited. At September 30, 2009, we had accrued an immaterial
liability for compensation related to these UARs.
TEPPCO
1999 Phantom Unit Retention Plan
There
were a total of 2,800 phantom units outstanding under the TEPPCO 1999 Phantom
Unit Retention Plan (“TEPPCO 1999 Plan”) at September 30, 2009, which cliff vest
in January 2010. During the first quarter of 2009, 2,800 phantom
units that were outstanding at December 31, 2008 under the TEPPCO 1999 Plan were
forfeited. Additionally, in April 2009, 13,000 phantom units vested,
resulting in a cash payment of $0.3 million. At September 30, 2009,
TEPPCO had accrued a liability balance of $0.1 million, for compensation related
to the TEPPCO 1999 Plan.
Effective
upon the consummation of the TEPPCO Merger (see Note 16), we assumed the
unvested phantom units outstanding on October 26, 2009 under the TEPPCO 1999
Plan and, based on the TEPPCO Merger exchange ratio, converted them into an
equivalent number of Enterprise Products Partners’ phantom units. The
vesting terms and other provisions remain unchanged.
TEPPCO
2000 Long-Term Incentive Plan
On
December 31, 2008, 11,300 phantom units vested and $0.2 million was paid out to
participants in the first quarter of 2009. There are no remaining
phantom units outstanding under the TEPPCO 2000 Long-Term Incentive
Plan.
TEPPCO
2005 Phantom Unit Plan
On
December 31, 2008, 36,600 phantom units vested and $0.6 million was paid out to
participants in the first quarter of 2009. There are no remaining phantom units
outstanding under the TEPPCO 2005 Phantom Unit Plan.
EPCO
2006 TPP Long-Term Incentive Plan
The EPCO
2006 TPP Long-Term Incentive Plan (“TEPPCO 2006 LTIP”) provides for the issuance
of up to 5,000,000 of TEPPCO’s units. After giving effect to the
issuance or forfeiture of unit options and restricted units through September
30, 2009, a total of 4,268,546 additional units of TEPPCO could be issued under
the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP. However, after giving effect to the TEPPCO
Merger, no additional units will be issued under the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP other than
our common units pursuant to awards we assumed under this plan in accordance
with the TEPPCO Merger agreements.
Effective
upon the consummation of the TEPPCO Merger (see Note 16), we assumed the
unvested awards outstanding on October 26, 2009 under the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP and,
based on the TEPPCO Merger exchange ratio, converted them into an equivalent
number of Enterprise Products Partners’ awards except for UARs and phantom unit
awards held by non-employee directors of TEPPCO GP which were settled in
cash. The vesting terms and other provisions remain
unchanged.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
TEPPCO
Unit Options. The following table presents unit option
activity under the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Strike
Price
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
|
of Units
|
|
|
(dollars/unit)
|
|
|
Term
(in years)
|
|
Outstanding
at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
355,000 |
|
|
$ |
40.00 |
|
|
|
|
Granted
(1)
|
|
|
329,000 |
|
|
$ |
24.84 |
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(205,000 |
) |
|
$ |
33.45 |
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at September 30,
2009 (2)
|
|
|
479,000 |
|
|
$ |
32.39 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Net
of forfeitures, aggregate grant date fair value of these awards granted
during 2009 was $1.4 million based on the following assumptions: (i)
weighted-average expected life of the options of 4.8 years; (ii)
weighted-average risk-free interest rate of 2.1%; (iii) weighted-average
expected distribution yield on TEPPCO’s units of 11.3% and (iv)
weighted-average expected unit price volatility on TEPPCO’s units of
59.3%. An estimated forfeiture rate of 17% was applied to awards
granted during 2009.
(2)
No
unit options were exercisable as of September 30, 2009.
|
|
TEPPCO
Restricted Units. The following table
summarizes information regarding TEPPCO’s restricted unit awards under the
TEPPCO 2006 LTIP for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
Grant
|
|
|
|
Number
of
|
|
|
Date
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
per Unit
(1)
|
|
Restricted
units at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
157,300 |
|
|
|
|
Granted
(2)
|
|
|
141,950 |
|
|
$ |
23.98 |
|
Vested
|
|
|
(5,000 |
) |
|
$ |
34.63 |
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(45,850 |
) |
|
$ |
35.25 |
|
Restricted
units at September 30, 2009
|
|
|
248,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Determined
by dividing the aggregate grant date fair value of awards by the number of
awards issued. The weighted-average grant date fair value per unit
for forfeited awards is determined before an allowance for
forfeitures.
(2)
Net
of forfeitures, aggregate grant date fair value of restricted unit awards
issued during 2009 was $3.4 million based on grant date market prices of
TEPPCO’s units ranging from $28.81 to $34.40 per unit. An estimated
forfeiture rate of 17% was applied to awards granted during
2009.
|
|
The total
fair value of TEPPCO’s restricted unit awards that vested during the nine months
ended September 30, 2009 was $0.1 million.
TEPPCO
UARs and Phantom Units. At September 30, 2009, there were a
total of 95,654 UARs outstanding that had been granted under the TEPPCO 2006
LTIP to non-employee directors of TEPPCO GP and 265,160 UARs outstanding that
were granted to certain employees of EPCO who work on behalf of
TEPPCO. These UAR awards to employees are subject to five year cliff
vesting. If the employee resigns prior to vesting, their UAR awards
are forfeited. The UAR awards held by non-employee directors of
TEPPGO GP were settled in cash on the effective date of the TEPPCO
Merger.
As of
September 30, 2009, there were a total of 1,647 phantom unit awards outstanding
that had been granted under the TEPPCO 2006 LTIP to non-employee directors of
TEPPCO GP. The phantom unit awards were settled in cash on the
effective date of the TEPPCO Merger.
Employee
Partnerships
On
October 26, 2009, TEPPCO Unit was dissolved and its assets distributed to its
partners. Also on October 26, 2009, the 123,185 TEPPCO units held by
TEPPCO Unit II were exchanged for 152,749 of
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Enterprise
Products Partners’ common units in connection with the TEPPCO
Merger. See Note 16 for additional information regarding the TEPPCO
Merger.
Note
4. Derivative Instruments, Hedging Activities and Fair Value
Measurements
In the
course of our normal business operations, we are exposed to certain risks,
including changes in interest rates, commodity prices and, to a limited extent,
foreign exchange rates. In order to manage risks associated with
certain identifiable and anticipated transactions, we use derivative
instruments. Derivatives are financial instruments whose fair value
is determined by changes in a specified benchmark such as interest rates,
commodity prices or currency values. Typical derivative instruments
include futures, forward contracts, swaps and other instruments with similar
characteristics. Substantially all of our derivatives are used for
non-trading activities.
We are required to recognize derivative
instruments at fair value as either assets or liabilities on the balance
sheet. While all derivatives are required to be reported at fair
value on the balance sheet, changes in fair value of the derivative instruments
will be reported in different ways depending on the nature and effectiveness of
the hedging activities to which they are related. After meeting
specified conditions, a qualified derivative may be specifically designated as a
total or partial hedge of:
§
|
Changes
in the fair value of a recognized asset or liability, or an unrecognized
firm commitment.
|
§
|
Variable
cash flows of a forecasted
transaction.
|
§
|
Foreign
currency exposure, such as through an unrecognized firm
commitment.
|
An effective hedge is one in which the
change in fair value of a derivative instrument can be expected to offset 80% to
125% of changes in the fair value of a hedged item at inception and throughout
the life of the hedging relationship. The effective portion of a
hedge is the amount by which the derivative instrument exactly offsets the
change in fair value of the hedged item during the reporting
period. Conversely, ineffectiveness represents the change in the fair
value of the derivative instrument that does not exactly offset the change in
the fair value of the hedged item. Any ineffectiveness associated
with a hedge is recognized in earnings immediately. Ineffectiveness
can be caused by, among other things, changes in the timing of forecasted
transactions or a mismatch of terms between the derivative instrument and the
hedged item.
Interest
Rate Derivative Instruments
We utilize interest rate swaps,
treasury locks and similar derivative instruments to manage our exposure to
changes in the interest rates of certain consolidated debt
agreements. This strategy is a component in controlling our cost of
capital associated with such borrowings.
The following table summarizes our
interest rate derivative instruments outstanding at September 30, 2009, all of
which were designated
as hedging instruments under ASC 815-20, Hedging - General:
|
Number
and Type of
|
|
Notional
|
|
Period
of
|
Rate
|
Accounting
|
Hedged
Transaction
|
Derivative
Employed
|
|
Amount
|
|
Hedge
|
Swap
|
Treatment
|
Enterprise
Products Partners:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior
Notes C
|
1
fixed-to-floating swap
|
|
$ |
100.0 |
|
1/04
to 2/13
|
6.4%
to 2.8%
|
Fair
value hedge
|
Senior
Notes G
|
3
fixed-to-floating swaps
|
|
$ |
300.0 |
|
10/04
to 10/14
|
5.6%
to 2.6%
|
Fair
value hedge
|
Senior
Notes P
|
7
fixed-to-floating swaps
|
|
$ |
400.0 |
|
6/09
to 8/12
|
4.6%
to 2.7%
|
Fair
value hedge
|
Duncan
Energy Partners:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable-interest
rate borrowings
|
3
floating-to-fixed swaps
|
|
$ |
175.0 |
|
9/07
to 9/10
|
0.3%
to 4.6%
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
At times,
we may use treasury lock derivative instruments to hedge the underlying U.S.
treasury rates related to forecasted issuances of debt.
During
the nine months ended September 30, 2009, we entered into three forward starting
interest rate swaps to hedge the underlying benchmark interest payments related
to the forecasted issuances of debt.
|
Number
and Type of
|
|
Notional
|
|
Period
of
|
|
Average
Rate
|
|
Accounting
|
Hedged
Transaction
|
Derivative
Employed
|
|
Amount
|
|
Hedge
|
|
Locked
|
|
Treatment
|
Future
debt offering
|
1
forward starting swap
|
|
$ |
50.0 |
|
6/10
to 6/20
|
|
3.3% |
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
Future
debt offering
|
2
forward starting swaps
|
|
$ |
200.0 |
|
2/11
to 2/21
|
|
3.6% |
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
The fair market value of the forward
starting swaps was $8.1 million at September 30, 2009. We entered
into one additional forward starting swap for $50.0 million in October 2009 to
hedge the February 2011 to February 2021 future debt offering.
For
information regarding consolidated fair value amounts of interest rate
derivative instruments and related hedged items, see “Tabular Presentation of
Fair Value Amounts on Derivative Instruments and Related Hedged Items” within
this Note 4.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Commodity
Derivative Instruments
The prices of natural gas, NGLs and
certain petrochemical products are subject to fluctuations in response to
changes in supply, demand, general market uncertainty and a variety of
additional factors that are beyond our control. In order to manage the price
risk associated with such products, we enter into commodity derivative
instruments such as forwards, basis swaps and futures contracts. The
following table summarizes our commodity derivative instruments outstanding at
September 30, 2009:
|
Volume
(1)
|
Accounting
|
Derivative
Purpose
|
Current
|
Long-Term
(2)
|
Treatment
|
Derivatives
designated as hedging instruments:
|
|
|
|
Enterprise
Products Partners:
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas processing:
|
|
|
|
Forecasted
natural gas purchases for plant thermal reduction (“PTR”)
(3)
|
16.6
Bcf
|
n/a
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
Forecasted
NGL sales
|
1.0
MMBbls
|
n/a
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
Octane
enhancement:
|
|
|
|
Forecasted
purchases of NGLs
|
0.1
MMBbls
|
n/a
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
Forecasted
sales of NGLs
|
n/a
|
0.1
MMBbls
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
Forecasted
sales of octane enhancement products
|
1.0
MMBbls
|
n/a
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
Natural
gas marketing:
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas storage inventory management activities
|
7.2
Bcf
|
n/a
|
Fair
value hedge
|
Forecasted
purchases of natural gas
|
n/a
|
3.0
Bcf
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
Forecasted
sales of natural gas
|
4.2
Bcf
|
0.9
Bcf
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
NGL
marketing:
|
|
|
|
Forecasted
purchases of NGLs and related hydrocarbon products
|
2.7
MMBbls
|
0.1
MMBbls
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
Forecasted
sales of NGLs and related hydrocarbon products
|
7.0
MMBbls
|
0.4
MMBbls
|
Cash
flow hedge
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives
not designated as hedging instruments:
|
|
|
|
Enterprise
Products Partners:
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas risk management activities (4) (5)
|
313.3
Bcf
|
34.4
Bcf
|
Mark-to-market
|
Crude
oil risk management activities (6)
|
4.7
MMBbls
|
n/a
|
Mark-to-market
|
Duncan
Energy Partners:
|
|
|
|
Natural
gas risk management activities (5)
|
1.7
Bcf
|
n/a
|
Mark-to-market
|
(1)
Volume
for derivatives designated as hedging instruments reflects the total
amount of volumes hedged whereas volume for derivatives not designated as
hedging instruments reflects the absolute value of derivative notional
volumes.
(2)
The
maximum term for derivatives included in the long-term column is December
2012.
(3)
PTR
represents the British thermal unit equivalent of the NGLs extracted from
natural gas by a processing plant, and includes the natural gas used as
plant fuel to extract those liquids, plant flare and other
shortages. See the discussion below for the primary objective
of this strategy.
(4)
Volume
includes approximately 61.8 billion cubic feet (“Bcf”) of physical
derivative instruments that are predominantly priced as an index plus a
premium or minus a discount.
(5)
Reflects
the use of derivative instruments to manage risks associated with natural
gas transportation, processing and storage assets.
(6)
Reflects
the use of derivative instruments to manage risks associated with our
portfolio of crude oil storage
assets.
|
The table
above does not include additional hedges of forecasted NGL sales executed under
contracts that have been designated as normal purchase and sale
agreements. At September 30, 2009, the volume hedged under
these contracts was 4.6 million barrels (“MMBbls”).
Certain of our derivative instruments
do not meet hedge accounting requirements; therefore, they are accounted for as
economic hedges using mark-to-market accounting.
Our three
predominant hedging strategies are hedging natural gas processing margins,
hedging anticipated future sales of NGLs associated with volumes held in
inventory and hedging the fair value of natural gas in
inventory.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The
objective of our natural gas processing strategy is to hedge a level of gross
margins associated with the NGL forward sales contracts (i.e., NGL sales
revenues less actual costs for PTR and the gain or loss on the PTR hedge) by
locking in the cost of natural gas used for PTR through the use of commodity
derivative instruments. This program consists of:
§
|
the
forward sale of a portion of our expected equity NGL production at fixed
prices through December 2009, and
|
§
|
the
purchase, using commodity derivative instruments, of the amount of natural
gas expected to be consumed as PTR in the production of such equity NGL
production.
|
The objective of our NGL sales hedging
program is to hedge future sales of NGL inventory by locking in the sales price
through the use of commodity derivative instruments.
The objective of our natural gas
inventory hedging program is to hedge the fair value of natural gas currently
held in inventory by locking in the sales price of the inventory through the use
of commodity derivative instruments.
For
information regarding consolidated fair value amounts of commodity derivative
instruments and related hedged items, see “Tabular Presentation of Fair Value
Amounts on Derivative Instruments and Related Hedged Items” within this Note
4.
Foreign
Currency Derivative Instruments
We are exposed to foreign currency
exchange risk in connection with our NGL and natural gas marketing activities in
Canada. As a result, we could be adversely affected by fluctuations
in currency rates between the U.S. dollar and Canadian dollar. In
order to manage this risk, we may enter into foreign exchange purchase contracts
to lock in the exchange rate. Prior to 2009, these derivative
instruments were accounted for using mark-to-market
accounting. Beginning with the first quarter of 2009, the long-term
transactions (more than two months) are accounted for as cash flow
hedges. Shorter term transactions are accounted for using
mark-to-market accounting.
In addition, we were exposed to foreign
currency exchange risk in connection with a term loan denominated in Japanese
yen (see Note 10). We entered into this loan agreement in November
2008 and the loan matured in March 2009. The derivative instrument
used to hedge this risk was accounted for as a cash flow hedge and settled upon
repayment of the loan.
At
September 30, 2009, we had foreign currency derivative instruments outstanding
with a notional amount of $5.5 million Canadian. The fair market
value of these instruments was an asset of $0.3 million at September 30,
2009.
For
information regarding consolidated fair value amounts of foreign currency
derivative instruments and related hedged items, see “Tabular Presentation of
Fair Value Amounts on Derivative Instruments and Related Hedged Items” within
this Note 4.
Credit-Risk
Related Contingent Features in Derivative Instruments
A
limited number of our commodity derivative instruments include provisions
related to credit ratings and/or adequate assurance clauses. A credit
rating provision provides for a counterparty to demand immediate full or partial
payment to cover a net liability position upon the loss of a stipulated credit
rating. An adequate assurance clause provides for a counterparty to demand
immediate full or partial payment to cover a net liability position should
reasonable grounds for insecurity arise with respect to contractual performance
by either party. At September 30, 2009, the aggregate fair value of
our over-the-counter derivative instruments in a net liability position was $5.7
million, the total of which was subject to a credit
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
rating
contingent feature. If our credit ratings were downgraded to Ba2/BB,
approximately $5.0 million would be payable as a margin deposit to the
counterparties, and if our credit ratings were downgraded to Ba3/BB- or below,
approximately $5.7 million would be payable as a margin deposit to the
counterparties. Currently, no margin is required to be
deposited. The potential for derivatives with contingent features to
enter a net liability position may change in the future as positions and prices
fluctuate.
Tabular
Presentation of Fair Value Amounts on Derivative Instruments and Related Hedged
Items
The
following table provides a balance sheet overview of our derivative assets and
liabilities at September 30, 2009:
|
Asset
Derivatives
|
|
Liability
Derivatives
|
|
|
Balance
Sheet
|
|
Fair
|
|
Balance
Sheet
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Location
|
|
Value
|
|
Location
|
|
Value
|
|
Derivatives designated as hedging
instruments:
|
|
Interest
rate derivatives
|
Derivative
assets
|
|
$ |
23.2 |
|
Derivative
liabilities
|
|
$ |
6.0 |
|
Interest
rate derivatives
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
33.4 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
Total
interest rate derivatives
|
|
|
|
56.6 |
|
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
Commodity
derivatives
|
Derivative
assets
|
|
|
51.9 |
|
Derivative
liabilities
|
|
|
133.2 |
|
Commodity
derivatives
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Total
commodity derivatives (1)
|
|
|
|
52.1 |
|
|
|
|
135.3 |
|
Foreign
currency derivatives (2)
|
Derivative
assets
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
Derivative
liabilities
|
|
|
-- |
|
Total
derivatives designated as
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hedging
instruments
|
|
|
$ |
109.0 |
|
|
|
$ |
143.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging
instruments:
|
|
Commodity
derivatives
|
|
|
$ |
124.1 |
|
Derivative
liabilities
|
|
$ |
125.4 |
|
Commodity
derivatives
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
Other
liabilities
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
Total
commodity derivatives
|
|
|
|
125.2 |
|
|
|
|
127.8 |
|
Total
derivatives not designated as
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
hedging
instruments
|
|
|
$ |
125.2 |
|
|
|
$ |
127.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Represent
commodity derivative instrument transactions that either have not settled
or have settled and not been invoiced. Settled and invoiced
transactions are reflected in either accounts receivable or accounts
payable depending on the outcome of the transaction.
(2)
Relates
to the hedging of our exposure to fluctuations in the foreign currency
exchange rate related to our Canadian NGL marketing
subsidiary.
|
|
Fair
Value Measurements
Fair
value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to
transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at a
specified measurement date. Our fair value estimates are based on
either (i) actual market data or (ii) assumptions that other market participants
would use in pricing an asset or liability, including estimates of risk.
Recognized valuation techniques employ inputs such as product prices, operating
costs, discount factors and business growth rates. These inputs may
be either readily observable, corroborated by market data or generally
unobservable. In developing our estimates of fair value, we endeavor
to utilize the best information available and apply market-based data to the
extent possible. Accordingly, we utilize valuation techniques (such
as the market approach) that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize
the use of unobservable inputs.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
A
three-tier hierarchy has been established that classifies fair value amounts
recognized or disclosed in the financial statements based on the observability
of inputs used to estimate such fair values. The hierarchy considers fair value
amounts based on observable inputs (Levels 1 and 2) to be more reliable and
predictable than those based primarily on unobservable inputs (Level 3). At each
balance sheet reporting date, we categorize our financial assets and liabilities
using this hierarchy.
The
characteristics of fair value amounts classified within each level of the
hierarchy are described as follows:
§
|
Level
1 fair values are based on quoted prices, which are available in active
markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the measurement
date. Active markets are defined as those in which transactions
for identical assets or liabilities occur with sufficient frequency so as
to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis (e.g., the New York
Mercantile Exchange). Our Level 1 fair values primarily consist
of financial assets and liabilities such as exchange-traded commodity
financial instruments.
|
§
|
Level
2 fair values are based on pricing inputs other than quoted prices in
active markets (as reflected in Level 1 fair values) and are either
directly or indirectly observable as of the measurement
date. Level 2 fair values include instruments that are valued
using financial models or other appropriate valuation
methodologies. Such financial models are primarily
industry-standard models that consider various assumptions, including
quoted forward prices for commodities, the time value of money, volatility
factors, current market and contractual prices for the underlying
instruments and other relevant economic measures. Substantially
all of these assumptions are (i) observable in the marketplace throughout
the full term of the instrument, (ii) can be derived from observable data
or (iii) are validated by inputs other than quoted prices (e.g., interest
rate and yield curves at commonly quoted intervals). Our Level
2 fair values primarily consist of commodity financial instruments such as
forwards, swaps and other instruments transacted on an exchange or over
the counter. The fair values of these derivatives are based on
observable price quotes for similar products and locations. The
value of our interest rate derivatives are valued by using appropriate
financial models with the implied forward London Interbank
Offered Rate yield curve for the same period as the future interest swap
settlements.
|
§
|
Level
3 fair values are based on unobservable inputs. Unobservable
inputs are used to measure fair value to the extent that observable inputs
are not available, thereby allowing for situations in which there is
little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability at the
measurement date. Unobservable inputs reflect the reporting
entity’s own ideas about the assumptions that market participants would
use in pricing an asset or liability (including assumptions about
risk). Unobservable inputs are based on the best information
available in the circumstances, which might include the reporting entity’s
internally developed data. The reporting entity must not ignore
information about market participant assumptions that is reasonably
available without undue cost and effort. Level 3 inputs are
typically used in connection with internally developed valuation
methodologies where management makes its best estimate of an instrument’s
fair value. Our Level 3 fair values largely consist of ethane
and normal butane-based contracts with a range of two to twelve months in
term. We rely on broker quotes for these
products.
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The
following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, our
financial assets and liabilities measured on a recurring basis at September 30,
2009. These financial assets and liabilities are classified in their
entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair
value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular
input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the
valuation of the fair value assets and liabilities, in addition to their
placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.
|
|
Level
1
|
|
|
Level
2
|
|
|
Level
3
|
|
|
Total
|
|
Financial
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
rate derivative instruments
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
56.6 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
56.6 |
|
Commodity
derivative instruments
|
|
|
10.9 |
|
|
|
153.3 |
|
|
|
13.1 |
|
|
|
177.3 |
|
Foreign
currency derivative instruments
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
10.9 |
|
|
$ |
210.2 |
|
|
$ |
13.1 |
|
|
$ |
234.2 |
|
Financial
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
rate derivative instruments
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
8.0 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
8.0 |
|
Commodity
derivative instruments
|
|
|
36.7 |
|
|
|
212.6 |
|
|
|
13.8 |
|
|
|
263.1 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
36.7 |
|
|
$ |
220.6 |
|
|
$ |
13.8 |
|
|
$ |
271.1 |
|
The
following table sets forth a reconciliation of changes in the fair value of our
Level 3 financial assets and liabilities since December 31, 2008:
Balance,
January 1
|
|
$ |
32.4 |
|
Total
gains (losses) included in:
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
Other
comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
Purchases,
issuances, settlements
|
|
|
(12.3 |
) |
Balance,
March 31
|
|
|
34.5 |
|
Total
gains (losses) included in:
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
|
7.7 |
|
Other
comprehensive income
|
|
|
(23.1 |
) |
Purchases,
issuances, settlements
|
|
|
(8.1 |
) |
Transfer
in/out of Level 3
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
Balance,
June 30
|
|
|
10.8 |
|
Total
gains (losses) included in:
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
|
7.6 |
|
Other
comprehensive income
|
|
|
(10.1 |
) |
Purchases,
issuances, settlements
|
|
|
(6.7 |
) |
Transfer
in/out of Level 3
|
|
|
(2.3 |
) |
Balance,
September 30
|
|
$ |
(0.7 |
) |
Nonfinancial
Assets and Liabilities
Certain
nonfinancial assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring
basis and are subject to fair value adjustments in certain circumstances (e.g.,
when there is evidence of impairment). The following table presents the
estimated fair value of certain assets carried on our Unaudited Supplemental
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet by caption for which a nonrecurring change
in fair value has been recorded during the nine months ended September 30,
2009:
|
|
Level
3
|
|
|
Impairment
Charges
|
|
Property,
plant and equipment (see Note 6)
|
|
$ |
21.9 |
|
|
$ |
20.6 |
|
Intangible
assets (see Note 9)
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
Goodwill
(see Note 9)
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
Other
current assets
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
23.5 |
|
|
$ |
24.6 |
|
Using appropriate valuation techniques,
we adjusted the carrying value of certain river terminal and marine barge assets
to $20.5 million and recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $21.0 million
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
during
the third quarter of 2009. In addition, we recorded an impairment
charge of $1.3 million related to goodwill. The fair value adjustment
was allocated to property, plant and equipment, intangible assets and other
current assets. The current level of throughput volumes at certain
river terminals and the suspension of three new proposed river terminals were
contributing factors that led to the impairment charges associated with the
terminal assets. A determination that certain marine barges were
obsolete resulted in the remaining impairment charges. Our fair value
estimates for the terminal and marine assets were based primarily on an
evaluation of the future cash flows associated with each asset. See
Note 14 for information regarding a related $28.7 million charge for contractual
obligations associated with the terminal assets.
Using
appropriate valuation techniques, we adjusted the carrying value of an idle
river terminal to $3.0 million and recorded a non-cash impairment charge of $2.3
million during the second quarter of 2009. The fair value
adjustment was allocated to plant, property and equipment.
Note
5. Inventories
Our inventory amounts were as follows
at September 30, 2009:
Working
inventory (1)
|
|
$ |
533.3 |
|
Forward
sales inventory (2)
|
|
|
687.3 |
|
Total
inventory
|
|
$ |
1,220.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Working
inventory is comprised of inventories of natural gas, crude oil, refined
products, lubrication oils, NGLs and certain petrochemical products that
are either available-for-sale or used in the provision for
services.
(2)
Forward
sales inventory consists of identified natural gas, crude oil and NGL
volumes dedicated to the fulfillment of forward sales contracts. As a
result of energy market conditions, we significantly increased our
physical inventory purchases and related forward physical sales
commitments during 2009. In general, the significant increase in
volumes dedicated to forward physical sales contracts improves the overall
utilization and profitability of our fee-based assets.
|
|
Our
inventory values reflect payments for product purchases, freight charges
associated with such purchase volumes, terminal and storage fees, vessel
inspection costs, demurrage charges and other related
costs. Inventories are valued at the lower of average cost or
market.
Due to
fluctuating commodity prices, we recognize lower of average cost or market
(“LCM”) adjustments when the carrying value of our available-for-sale
inventories exceed their net realizable value. LCM adjustments may be
mitigated or offset through the use of commodity hedging instruments to the
extent such instruments affect net realizable value. See Note 4 for a
description of our commodity hedging activities.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Note
6. Property, Plant and Equipment
Our
property, plant and equipment values and accumulated depreciation balances were
as follows at September 30, 2009:
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Useful
Life
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in
Years
|
|
|
|
|
Plants
and pipelines (1)
|
|
3-45
(5) |
|
|
$ |
16,958.5 |
|
Underground
and other storage facilities (2)
|
|
5-40
(6) |
|
|
|
1,254.9 |
|
Platforms
and facilities (3)
|
|
20-31 |
|
|
|
637.6 |
|
Transportation
equipment (4)
|
|
3-10 |
|
|
|
56.3 |
|
Marine
vessels
|
|
20-30 |
|
|
|
527.0 |
|
Land
|
|
|
|
|
|
260.2 |
|
Construction
in progress
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,226.8 |
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,921.3 |
|
Less
accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,624.3 |
|
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
17,297.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Plants
and pipelines include processing plants; NGL, petrochemical, crude oil and
natural gas pipelines; terminal loading and unloading facilities; office
furniture and equipment; buildings; laboratory and shop equipment; and
related assets.
(2)
Underground
and other storage facilities include underground product storage caverns;
storage tanks; water wells; and related assets.
(3)
Platforms
and facilities include offshore platforms and related facilities and other
associated assets.
(4)
Transportation
equipment includes vehicles and similar assets used in our
operations.
(5)
In
general, the estimated useful lives of major components of this category
are as follows: processing plants, 20-35 years; pipelines and related
equipment, 18-45 years (with some equipment at 5 years); terminal
facilities, 10-35 years; delivery facilities, 20-40 years; office
furniture and equipment, 3-20 years; buildings, 20-40 years; and
laboratory and shop equipment, 5-35 years.
(6)
In
general, the estimated useful lives of major components of this category
are as follows: underground storage facilities, 20-35 years (with
some components at 5 years); storage tanks, 10-40 years; and water wells,
25-35 years (with some components at 5 years).
|
|
We recorded $11.4 million and $39.5
million in capitalized interest during the three and nine months ended September
30, 2009.
In August
2008, our wholly owned subsidiaries, together with Oiltanking Holding Americas,
Inc. (“Oiltanking”) formed the Texas Offshore Port System partnership
(“TOPS”). Effective April 16, 2009, our wholly owned subsidiaries
dissociated from TOPS.
TOPS was
a consolidated subsidiary of ours prior to the dissociation. The effect of
deconsolidation was to remove the accounts of TOPS, including Oiltanking’s
noncontrolling interest of $33.4 million, from our books and records, after
reflecting the $68.4 million aggregate write-off of the investment.
Asset
Retirement Obligations
Asset
retirement obligations (“AROs”) are legal obligations associated with the
retirement of certain tangible long-lived assets that result from acquisitions,
construction, development and/or normal operations. The following
table presents information regarding our AROs since December 31,
2008.
ARO
liability balance, December 31, 2008
|
|
$ |
42.2 |
|
Liabilities
incurred
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
Liabilities
settled
|
|
|
(15.2 |
) |
Revisions
in estimated cash flows
|
|
|
23.6 |
|
Accretion
expense
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
ARO
liability balance, September 30, 2009
|
|
$ |
53.1 |
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The
increase in our ARO liability balance during 2009 primarily reflects revised
estimates of the cost to comply with regulatory abandonment obligations
associated with our offshore facilities in the Gulf of Mexico. Our
consolidated property, plant and equipment at September 30, 2009 includes $26.3
million, of asset retirement costs capitalized as an increase in the associated
long-lived asset.
Note
7. Investments in Unconsolidated Affiliates
We own
interests in a number of related businesses that are accounted for using the
equity method of accounting. Our investments in unconsolidated
affiliates are grouped according to the business segment to which they
relate. See Note 12 for a general discussion of our business
segments. The following table shows our investments in unconsolidated
affiliates at September 30, 2009.
|
|
Ownership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
|
|
NGL
Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Venice
Energy Service Company, L.L.C.
|
|
13.1% |
|
|
$ |
33.1 |
|
K/D/S
Promix, L.L.C. (“Promix”)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
47.8 |
|
Baton
Rouge Fractionators LLC
|
|
32.2% |
|
|
|
23.6 |
|
Skelly-Belvieu
Pipeline Company, L.L.C. (“Skelly-Belvieu”)
|
|
49% |
|
|
|
37.4 |
|
Onshore
Natural Gas Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evangeline
(1)
|
|
49.5% |
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
White
River Hub, LLC
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
27.1 |
|
Onshore
Crude Oil Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seaway
Crude Pipeline Company (“Seaway”)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
181.0 |
|
Offshore
Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poseidon
Oil Pipeline, L.L.C. (“Poseidon”)
|
|
36% |
|
|
|
61.3 |
|
Cameron
Highway Oil Pipeline Company (“Cameron Highway”)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
243.2 |
|
Deepwater
Gateway, L.L.C.
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
102.8 |
|
Neptune
Pipeline Company, L.L.C. (“Neptune”)
|
|
25.7% |
|
|
|
54.4 |
|
Nemo
Gathering Company, LLC
|
|
33.9% |
|
|
|
-- |
|
Petrochemical
& Refined Products Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baton
Rouge Propylene Concentrator, LLC
|
|
30% |
|
|
|
11.4 |
|
La
Porte (2)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
Centennial
Pipeline LLC (“Centennial”)
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
66.8 |
|
Other
|
|
25% |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
899.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Refers
to our ownership interests in Evangeline Gas Pipeline Company, L.P. and
Evangeline Gas Corp., collectively.
(2)
Refers
to our ownership interests in La Porte Pipeline Company, L.P. and La Porte
GP, LLC, collectively.
|
|
At
September 30, 2009, our investments in Promix, Skelly-Belvieu, La Porte,
Neptune, Poseidon, Cameron Highway, Seaway and Centennial included excess cost
amounts totaling $70.5 million, all of which were attributable to the fair value
of the underlying tangible assets of these entities exceeding their book
carrying values at the time of our acquisition of interests in these
entities.
Note
8. Business Combinations
In May
2009, we acquired certain rail and truck terminal facilities located in Mont
Belvieu, Texas from Martin Midstream Partners L.P (“Martin”). Cash
consideration paid for this business combination was $23.7 million, all of which
was recorded as additions to property, plant and equipment. We used
our revolving credit facility to finance this acquisition.
In June 2009, TEPPCO expanded its
marine transportation business with the acquisition of 19 tow boats and 28 tank
barges from TransMontaigne Product Services Inc. for $50.0 million in
cash. The
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
acquired
vessels provide marine vessel fueling services for cruise liners and cargo
ships, referred to as bunkering, and other ship-assist services and transport
fuel oil for electric generation plants. The newly acquired assets
are generally supported by contracts that have a three to five year term and are
based primarily in Miami, Florida, with additional assets located in Mobile,
Alabama, and Houston, Texas. The cost of the acquisition has been
recorded as property, plant and equipment based on estimated fair
values. We used TEPPCO's revolving credit facility to finance this
acquisition.
These
acquisitions were accounted for as business combinations using the acquisition
method of accounting. All of the assets acquired in these
transactions were recognized at their acquisition-date fair
values. Such fair values have been developed using recognized
business valuation techniques.
Note
9. Intangible Assets and Goodwill
Identifiable
Intangible Assets
The
following table summarizes our intangible assets by segment at September 30,
2009:
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Accum.
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Amort.
|
|
|
Value
|
|
NGL
Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer
relationship intangibles
|
|
$ |
237.4 |
|
|
$ |
(82.2 |
) |
|
$ |
155.2 |
|
Contract-based
intangibles
|
|
|
320.5 |
|
|
|
(151.7 |
) |
|
|
168.8 |
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
557.9 |
|
|
|
(233.9 |
) |
|
|
324.0 |
|
Onshore
Natural Gas Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer
relationship intangibles
|
|
|
372.0 |
|
|
|
(119.1 |
) |
|
|
252.9 |
|
Gas
gathering agreements
|
|
|
464.0 |
|
|
|
(234.1 |
) |
|
|
229.9 |
|
Contract-based
intangibles
|
|
|
101.3 |
|
|
|
(43.1 |
) |
|
|
58.2 |
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
937.3 |
|
|
|
(396.3 |
) |
|
|
541.0 |
|
Onshore
Crude Oil Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract-based
intangibles
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
|
|
6.6 |
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
|
|
6.6 |
|
Offshore
Pipelines & Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer
relationship intangibles
|
|
|
205.8 |
|
|
|
(101.8 |
) |
|
|
104.0 |
|
Contract-based
intangibles
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
1.0 |
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
207.0 |
|
|
|
(102.0 |
) |
|
|
105.0 |
|
Petrochemical
& Refined Products Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Customer
relationship intangibles
|
|
|
104.6 |
|
|
|
(17.6 |
) |
|
|
87.0 |
|
Contract-based
intangibles
|
|
|
42.0 |
|
|
|
(12.4 |
) |
|
|
29.6 |
|
Subtotal
|
|
|
146.6 |
|
|
|
(30.0 |
) |
|
|
116.6 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,858.8 |
|
|
$ |
(765.6 |
) |
|
$ |
1,093.2 |
|
Goodwill
Goodwill
represents the excess of the purchase price of an acquired business over the
amounts assigned to assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the
transaction. We do not amortize goodwill; however, we test goodwill
for impairment annually, or more frequently if circumstances indicate that it is
more likely than not that the fair value of goodwill is less than its carrying
value. The following table summarizes our goodwill amounts by business segment
at September 30, 2009:
NGL
Pipelines & Services
|
|
$ |
341.2 |
|
Onshore
Natural Gas Pipelines & Services
|
|
|
284.9 |
|
Onshore
Crude Oil Pipelines & Services
|
|
|
303.0 |
|
Offshore
Pipelines & Services
|
|
|
82.1 |
|
Petrochemical
& Refined Products Services
|
|
|
1,007.1 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
2,018.3 |
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Note
10. Debt Obligations
Our
consolidated debt obligations consisted of the following at September 30,
2009:
EPO
senior debt obligations:
|
|
|
|
Multi-Year
Revolving Credit Facility, variable rate, due November
2012
|
|
$ |
638.0 |
|
Pascagoula
MBFC Loan, 8.70% fixed-rate, due March 2010 (1)
|
|
|
54.0 |
|
Petal
GO Zone Bonds, variable rate, due August 2037
|
|
|
57.5 |
|
Yen
Term Loan, 4.93% fixed-rate, due March 2009 (2)
|
|
|
-- |
|
Senior
Notes B, 7.50% fixed-rate, due February 2011
|
|
|
450.0 |
|
Senior
Notes C, 6.375% fixed-rate, due February 2013
|
|
|
350.0 |
|
Senior
Notes D, 6.875% fixed-rate, due March 2033
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
Senior
Notes F, 4.625% fixed-rate, due October 2009 (1)
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
Senior
Notes G, 5.60% fixed-rate, due October 2014
|
|
|
650.0 |
|
Senior
Notes H, 6.65% fixed-rate, due October 2034
|
|
|
350.0 |
|
Senior
Notes I, 5.00% fixed-rate, due March 2015
|
|
|
250.0 |
|
Senior
Notes J, 5.75% fixed-rate, due March 2035
|
|
|
250.0 |
|
Senior
Notes K, 4.950% fixed-rate, due June 2010 (1)
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
Senior
Notes L, 6.30% fixed-rate, due September 2017
|
|
|
800.0 |
|
Senior
Notes M, 5.65% fixed-rate, due April 2013
|
|
|
400.0 |
|
Senior
Notes N, 6.50% fixed-rate, due January 2019
|
|
|
700.0 |
|
Senior
Notes O, 9.75% fixed-rate, due January 2014
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
Senior
Notes P, 4.60% fixed-rate, due August 2012
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
TEPPCO
senior debt obligations: (3)
|
|
|
|
|
TEPPCO
Revolving Credit Facility, variable rate, due December
2012
|
|
|
791.7 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes, 7.625% fixed-rate, due February 2012
|
|
|
500.0 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes, 6.125% fixed-rate, due February 2013
|
|
|
200.0 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes, 5.90% fixed-rate, due April 2013
|
|
|
250.0 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes, 6.65% fixed-rate, due April 2018
|
|
|
350.0 |
|
TEPPCO
Senior Notes, 7.55% fixed-rate, due April 2038
|
|
|
400.0 |
|
Duncan
Energy Partners’ debt obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
DEP
Revolving Credit Facility, variable rate, due February
2011
|
|
|
180.5 |
|
DEP
Term Loan, variable rate, due December 2011
|
|
|
282.3 |
|
Total
principal amount of senior debt obligations
|
|
|
10,404.0 |
|
EPO
Junior Subordinated Notes A, fixed/variable rate, due August
2066
|
|
|
550.0 |
|
EPO
Junior Subordinated Notes B, fixed/variable rate, due January
2068
|
|
|
682.7 |
|
TEPPCO
Junior Subordinated Notes, fixed/variable rate, due June
2067
|
|
|
300.0 |
|
Total
principal amount of senior and junior debt obligations
|
|
|
11.936.7 |
|
Other,
non-principal amounts:
|
|
|
|
|
Change
in fair value of debt-related derivative instruments
|
|
|
47.6 |
|
Unamortized
discounts, net of premiums
|
|
|
(12.1 |
) |
Unamortized
deferred net gains related to terminated interest rate
swaps
|
|
|
27.0 |
|
Total
other, non-principal amounts
|
|
|
62.5 |
|
Total
long-term debt
|
|
$ |
11,999.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letters
of credit outstanding
|
|
$ |
109.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
In
accordance with ASC 470, Debt, long-term and current maturities of debt
reflect the classification of such obligations at September 30, 2009 after
taking into consideration EPO’s (i) $1.1 billion issuance of Senior Notes
in October 2009 and (ii) ability to use available borrowing capacity under
its Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility.
(2)
The
Yen Term Loan matured on March 30, 2009.
(3)
In
October 2009, EPO completed an exchange offer for TEPPCO notes (see
below).
|
|
Parent-Subsidiary
Guarantor Relationships
Enterprise
Products Partners L.P. acts as guarantor of the consolidated debt obligations of
EPO with the exception of the DEP Revolving Credit Facility and the DEP Term
Loan. If EPO were to default on any of its guaranteed debt,
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. would be responsible for full repayment of
that obligation.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Letters
of Credit
At
September 30, 2009, EPO had an outstanding $50.0 million letter of credit
relating to its commodity derivative instruments and a $58.3 million letter of
credit related to its Petal GO Zone Bonds. These letter of credit
facilities do not reduce the amount available for borrowing under EPO’s credit
facilities. In addition, at September 30, 2009, Duncan Energy
Partners had an outstanding letter of credit in the amount of $1.0 million which
reduces the amount available for borrowing under its credit
facility.
EPO’s
Debt Obligations
Apart
from that discussed below, there have been no significant changes in the terms
of our debt obligations since those reported in this Current Report on Form 8-K
under Exhibit 99.1.
$200.0
Million Term Loan. In April 2009,
EPO entered into a $200.0 Million Term Loan, which was subsequently repaid and
terminated in June 2009 using funds from the issuance of Senior Notes P (see
below).
Senior
Notes P. In June 2009,
EPO issued $500.0 million in principal amount of 3-year senior unsecured notes
(“Senior Notes P”). Senior Notes P were issued at 99.95% of their
principal amount, have a fixed interest rate of 4.60% and mature on August 1,
2012. Net proceeds from the issuance of Senior Notes P were used (i)
to repay amounts borrowed under the $200 Million Term Loan, (ii) to temporarily
reduce borrowings outstanding under EPO’s Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility
and (iii) for general partnership purposes.
Senior
Notes P rank equal with EPO’s existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated
indebtedness. They are senior to any existing and future subordinated
indebtedness of EPO. Senior Notes P are subject to make-whole
redemption rights and were issued under indentures containing certain covenants,
which generally restrict EPO’s ability, with certain exceptions, to incur debt
secured by liens and engage in sale and leaseback transactions.
364-Day
Revolving Credit Facility. In November 2008, EPO executed
a standby 364-Day Revolving Credit Agreement (the “364-Day Facility”) that had a
borrowing capacity of $375.0 million. The 364-Day Facility was
terminated in June 2009 under its terms as a result of the issuance of Senior
Notes P. No amounts were borrowed under this standby facility through
its termination date.
Senior
Notes Q and R. In October 2009,
EPO issued $500.0 million in principal amount of 10-year senior unsecured notes
(“Senior Notes Q”) and $600.0 million in principal amount of 30-year senior
unsecured notes (“Senior Notes R”). EPO used a portion of the net
proceeds it received from the issuance of Senior Notes Q and R to repay its
$500.0 million in principal amount unsecured notes (“Senior Notes F”) that
matured in October 2009. See Note 16 for additional information
regarding these debt issuances.
TEPPCO’s
Debt Obligations
Exchange
Offers for TEPPCO Notes. In September
2009, EPO commenced offers to exchange all outstanding notes issued by TEPPCO
for a corresponding series of new notes to be issued by EPO and guaranteed by
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. The aggregate principal amount of
the TEPPCO notes subject to the exchange was $2 billion. The exchange
offer was completed on October 27, 2009, resulting in the exchange of
approximately $1.95 billion of new EPO notes for existing TEPPCO
notes. See Note 16 for additional information regarding this exchange
offer.
Upon the
consummation of the TEPPCO Merger, EPO repaid and terminated indebtedness under
the TEPPCO Revolving Credit Facility.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Dixie
Revolving Credit Facility
The Dixie Revolving Credit Facility was
terminated in January 2009.
Covenants
We were
in compliance with the covenants of our consolidated debt agreements at
September 30, 2009.
Information
Regarding Variable Interest Rates Paid
The
following table shows the weighted-average interest rate paid on our
consolidated variable-rate debt obligations during the nine months ended
September 30, 2009.
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
Interest
Rate
|
|
Paid
|
EPO’s
Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility
|
0.97%
|
DEP
Revolving Credit Facility
|
1.64%
|
DEP
Term Loan
|
1.20%
|
Petal
GO Zone Bonds
|
0.76%
|
TEPPCO
Revolving Credit Facility
|
0.86%
|
Consolidated
Debt Maturity Table
The
following table presents the scheduled contractual maturities of principal
amounts of our debt obligations for the next five years and in total
thereafter.
2009
(1)
|
|
$ |
500.0 |
|
2010
(1)
|
|
|
554.0 |
|
2011
|
|
|
912.8 |
|
2012
|
|
|
2,429.7 |
|
2013
|
|
|
1,200.0 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
6,340.2 |
|
Total
scheduled principal payments
|
|
$ |
11,936.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Long-term
and current maturities of debt reflect the classification of such
obligations on our Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheet at September 30, 2009 after taking into consideration
EPO’s (i) $1.1 billion issuance of Senior Notes in October
2009 and (ii) ability to use available borrowing capacity under its
Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility.
|
|
Debt
Obligations of Unconsolidated Affiliates
We have
three unconsolidated affiliates with long-term debt obligations. The
following table shows (i) the ownership interest in each entity at September 30,
2009, (ii) total debt of each unconsolidated affiliate at September 30, 2009 (on
a 100% basis to the unconsolidated affiliate) and (iii) the corresponding
scheduled maturities of such debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scheduled
Maturities of Debt
|
|
|
|
Ownership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2013
|
|
Poseidon
|
|
36% |
|
|
$ |
92.0 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
92.0 |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
Evangeline
|
|
49.5% |
|
|
|
15.7 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
-- |
|
Centennial
|
|
50% |
|
|
|
122.4 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
8.9 |
|
|
|
8.6 |
|
|
|
84.4 |
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
230.1 |
|
|
$ |
7.4 |
|
|
$ |
12.3 |
|
|
$ |
108.5 |
|
|
$ |
8.9 |
|
|
$ |
8.6 |
|
|
$ |
84.4 |
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The
credit agreements of these unconsolidated affiliates contain various affirmative
and negative covenants, including financial covenants. These
businesses were in compliance with such covenants at September 30,
2009. The credit agreements of these unconsolidated affiliates also
restrict their ability to pay cash dividends or distributions if a default or an
event of default (as defined in each credit agreement) has occurred and is
continuing at the time such dividend or distribution is scheduled to be
paid.
There
have been no significant changes in the terms of the debt obligations of our
unconsolidated affiliates since those reported in this Current Report on Form
8-K under Exhibit 99.1.
Note
11. Equity
At
September 30, 2009, equity consisted of the capital account of Enterprise GP
Holdings, accumulated other comprehensive loss and noncontrolling
interest.
Accumulated
Other Comprehensive Loss
The
following table summarizes transactions affecting our accumulated other
comprehensive loss:
Balance,
December 31, 2008
|
|
$ |
(2.0 |
) |
Net
commodity financial instrument gains during period
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
Net
interest rate financial instrument gains during period
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
Net
foreign currency financial instrument gains
during period
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
Balance,
September 30, 2009
|
|
$ |
(1.4 |
) |
Noncontrolling
Interest
The
following table shows the components of noncontrolling interest at September 30,
2009:
Limited
partners of Enterprise Products Partners:
|
|
|
|
Third-party
owners of Enterprise Products Partners (1)
|
|
$ |
5,379.7 |
|
Related
party owners of Enterprise Products Partners (2)
|
|
|
922.0 |
|
Former
owners of TEPPCO (3)
|
|
|
2,608.7 |
|
Limited
partners of Duncan Energy Partners:
|
|
|
|
|
Third-party
owners of Duncan Energy Partners (4)
|
|
|
416.9 |
|
Joint
venture partners (5)
|
|
|
108.6 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss attributable to noncontrolling
interest
|
|
|
(110.8 |
) |
Total
noncontrolling interest on Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheet
|
|
$ |
9,325.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
Consists
of non-affiliate public unitholders of Enterprise Products
Partners.
(2)
Consists
of unitholders of Enterprise Products Partners that are related party
affiliates. This group is primarily comprised of EPCO and certain of
its private company consolidated subsidiaries.
(3)
Represents
former ownership interests in TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP (see Note 1 - “Basis of
Presentation”).
(4)
Consists
of non-affiliate public unitholders of Duncan Energy
Partners.
(5)
Represents
third-party ownership interests in joint ventures that we consolidate,
including Seminole Pipeline Company, Tri-States Pipeline, L.L.C.,
Independence Hub, LLC and Wilprise Pipeline Company,
L.L.C.
|
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Note
12. Business Segments
As
previously mentioned in Note 1, we revised our business segments as a result of
the TEPPCO Merger. We have five reportable business segments: NGL
Pipelines & Services, Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines & Services, Onshore
Crude Oil Pipelines & Services, Offshore Pipelines & Services and
Petrochemical & Refined Products Services. Our business segments
are generally organized and managed according to the type of services rendered
(or technologies employed) and products produced and/or sold.
Information
by segment, together with reconciliations to our consolidated totals, is
presented in the following table at September 30, 2009:
|
|
Reportable
Segments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Onshore
|
|
|
Onshore
|
|
|
|
|
|
Petrochemical
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NGL
|
|
|
Natural
Gas
|
|
|
Crude
Oil
|
|
|
Offshore
|
|
|
&
Refined
|
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pipelines
|
|
|
Pipelines
|
|
|
Pipelines
|
|
|
Pipelines
|
|
|
Products
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
|
&
Services
|
|
|
&
Services
|
|
|
&
Services
|
|
|
&
Services
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Totals
|
|
Segment
assets
|
|
$ |
6,280.3 |
|
|
$ |
5,761.5 |
|
|
$ |
391.6 |
|
|
$ |
1,488.4 |
|
|
$ |
2,148.4 |
|
|
$ |
1,226.8 |
|
|
$ |
17,297.0 |
|
Investments
in unconsolidated
affiliates (see Note
7)
|
|
|
141.9 |
|
|
|
32.5 |
|
|
|
181.0 |
|
|
|
461.7 |
|
|
|
82.2 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
899.3 |
|
Intangible assets, net:
(see Note 9)
|
|
|
324.0 |
|
|
|
541.0 |
|
|
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
105.0 |
|
|
|
116.6 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
1,093.2 |
|
Goodwill (see Note
9)
|
|
|
341.2 |
|
|
|
284.9 |
|
|
|
303.0 |
|
|
|
82.1 |
|
|
|
1,007.1 |
|
|
|
-- |
|
|
|
2,018.3 |
|
Note
13. Related Party Transactions
The
following table summarizes our related party receivable and payable amounts at
September 30, 2009:
Accounts
receivable - related parties:
|
|
|
|
EPCO
and affiliates
|
|
$ |
-- |
|
Energy
Transfer Equity and subsidiaries
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
Other
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
9.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable - related parties:
|
|
|
|
|
EPCO
and affiliates
|
|
$ |
12.0 |
|
Energy
Transfer Equity and subsidiaries
|
|
|
27.2 |
|
Other
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
44.2 |
|
We
believe that the terms and provisions of our related party agreements are fair
to us; however, such agreements and transactions may not be as favorable to us
as we could have obtained from unaffiliated third parties.
Significant
Relationships and Agreements with EPCO and affiliates
We have an extensive and ongoing
relationship with EPCO and its affiliates, which include the following
significant entities that are not a part of our consolidated group of
companies:
§
|
EPCO
and its privately held affiliates;
|
§
|
Enterprise
GP Holdings, which owns and controls EPGP;
and
|
§
|
the
Employee Partnerships.
|
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
We also
have an ongoing relationship with Duncan Energy Partners, the financial
statements of which are consolidated with our own financial
statements. Our transactions with Duncan Energy Partners are
eliminated in consolidation. A description of our relationship with
Duncan Energy Partners is presented within this Note 13.
EPCO is a
privately held company controlled by Dan L. Duncan, who is also a director and
Chairman of EPGP, our general partner. At September 30, 2009, EPCO
and its affiliates beneficially owned 168,005,206 (or 35.2%) of Enterprise
Products Partners’ outstanding common units, which includes 13,952,402 of
Enterprise Products Partners’ common units owned by Enterprise GP
Holdings. In addition, at September 30, 2009, EPCO and its affiliates
beneficially owned 77.8% of the limited partner interests of Enterprise GP
Holdings and 100% of its general partner, EPE Holdings. Enterprise GP
Holdings owns all of the membership interests of EPGP. The principal
business activity of EPGP is to act as Enterprise Products Partners’ managing
partner. The executive officers and certain of the directors of EPGP
and EPE Holdings are employees of EPCO.
In
connection with its general partner interest in Enterprise Products Partners,
EPGP received cash distributions of $124.9 million from Enterprise Products
Partners during the nine months ended September 30, 2009. This amount
includes incentive distributions of $109.9 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009.
Enterprise
Products Partners and EPGP are both separate legal entities apart from each
other and apart from EPCO, Enterprise GP Holdings and their respective other
affiliates, with assets and liabilities that are separate from those of EPCO,
Enterprise GP Holdings and their respective other affiliates. EPCO
and its privately held subsidiaries depend on the cash distributions they
receive from Enterprise Products Partners, Enterprise GP Holdings and other
investments to fund their other operations and to meet their debt
obligations. EPCO and its privately held affiliates received from
Enterprise Products Partners and Enterprise GP Holdings $354.9 million in cash
distributions during the nine months ended September 30, 2009.
EPCO
ASA. We have no
employees. Substantially all of our operating functions and general
and administrative support services are provided by employees of EPCO pursuant
to the ASA. We, Duncan Energy Partners, Enterprise GP Holdings and
our respective general partners are among the parties to the ASA.
Relationship
with Energy Transfer Equity
In May
2007, Enterprise GP Holdings acquired equity method investments in Energy
Transfer Equity and its general partner. As a result of common
control of us and Enterprise GP Holdings, Energy Transfer Equity and its
consolidated subsidiaries are related parties to our consolidated
businesses.
We have a
long-term revenue generating contract with Titan Energy Partners, L.P.
(“Titan”), a consolidated subsidiary of ETP. Titan purchases
substantially all of its propane requirements from us. The contract
continues until March 31, 2010 and contains renewal and extension
options. We and Energy Transfer Company (“ETC OLP”) transport natural
gas on each other’s systems and share operating expenses on certain
pipelines. ETC OLP also sells natural gas to us.
Relationship
with Duncan Energy Partners
Duncan
Energy Partners was formed in September 2006 and did not acquire any assets
prior to February 5, 2007, which was the date it completed its initial public
offering and acquired controlling interests in five midstream energy businesses
from EPO in a dropdown transaction (the “DEP I Midstream
Businesses”). On December 8, 2008, through a second dropdown
transaction, Duncan Energy Partners acquired controlling interests in three
additional midstream energy businesses from EPO (the “DEP II Midstream
Businesses”). The business purpose of Duncan Energy Partners is to
acquire, own and operate a diversified portfolio of midstream energy assets and
to support the growth objectives of EPO and other
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
affiliates
under common control. Duncan Energy Partners is engaged in (i) the gathering,
transportation and storage
of natural gas; (ii) NGL transportation and fractionation; (iii) the storage of
NGL and petrochemical products; (iv) the transportation of petrochemical
products; and (v) the marketing of NGLs and natural gas.
At September 30, 2009, Duncan Energy
Partners was owned 99.3% by its limited partners and 0.7% by its general
partner, DEP GP, which is a wholly owned subsidiary of EPO. DEP GP is
responsible for managing the business and operations of Duncan Energy
Partners. DEP Operating Partnership, L.P., a wholly owned subsidiary
of Duncan Energy Partners, conducts substantially all of Duncan Energy Partners’
business. At September 30, 2009, EPO beneficially owned approximately
58% of Duncan Energy Partners’ limited partner interests and 100% of its general
partner.
Enterprise Products Partners has
continued involvement with all of the subsidiaries of Duncan Energy Partners,
including the following types of transactions: (i) it utilizes Duncan
Energy Partners’ storage services to support its Mont Belvieu fractionation and
other businesses; (ii) it buys from, and sells to, Duncan Energy Partners
natural gas in connection with its normal business activities; and (iii) it is
currently the sole shipper on an NGL pipeline system located in South Texas that
is owned by Duncan Energy Partners.
Duncan Energy Partners issued an
aggregate 8,943,400 of its common units in June and July 2009, which generated
net proceeds of approximately $137.4 million. Duncan Energy Partners
used the net proceeds from its issuance of these units to repurchase and cancel
an equal number of its common units beneficially owned by EPO. The
repurchase of Duncan Energy Partners’ common units beneficially owned by EPO was
reviewed and approved by the ACG Committees of EPGP and DEP GP.
Omnibus
Agreement. Under the
Omnibus Agreement, EPO agreed to make additional contributions to Duncan Energy
Partners as reimbursement for Duncan Energy Partners’ 66% share of any excess
construction costs above the (i) $28.6 million of estimated capital expenditures
to complete Phase II expansions of the DEP South Texas NGL Pipeline System and
(ii) $14.1 million of estimated construction costs for additional brine
production capacity and above-ground storage reservoir projects at Mont Belvieu,
Texas. Both projects were underway at the time of Duncan Energy
Partners’ initial public offering. EPO made cash contributions to
Duncan Energy Partners of $1.4 million in connection with the Omnibus Agreement
during the nine months ended September 30, 2009. The majority of
these contributions related to funding the Phase II expansion costs of the DEP
South Texas NGL Pipeline System. EPO will not receive an increased
allocation of earnings or cash flows as a result of these contributions to South
Texas NGL and Mont Belvieu Caverns.
Mont
Belvieu Caverns’ LLC Agreement. EPO made cash
contributions of $14.1 million under the Mont Belvieu Caverns limited liability
company agreement during the nine months ended September 30, 2009, to fund 100%
of certain storage-related projects for the benefit of EPO’s NGL marketing
activities. At present, Mont Belvieu Caverns is not expected to
generate any identifiable incremental cash flows in connection with these
projects; thus, the sharing ratio for Mont Belvieu Caverns is not expected to
change from the current sharing ratio of 66% for Duncan Energy Partners and 34%
for EPO. EPO expects to make additional contributions of
approximately $9.1 million to fund such projects during the fourth quarter of
2009. The constructed assets will be the property of Mont Belvieu
Caverns.
Company
and Limited Partnership Agreements – DEP II Midstream Businesses. Enterprise
Holdings III, LLC (“Enterprise III”) has not yet participated in expansion
project spending with respect to the DEP II Midstream Businesses, although it
may elect to invest in existing or future expansion projects at a later
date. As a result, Enterprise GTM Holdings L.P. has funded 100% of
such growth capital spending and its Distribution Base has increased from $473.4
million at December 31, 2008 to $745.7 million at September 30,
2009. The Enterprise III Distribution Base was unchanged at $730.0
million at September 30, 2009.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Relationships
with Unconsolidated Affiliates
Our
significant related party transactions with unconsolidated affiliates consist of
the sale of natural gas to Evangeline and Promix. In addition, we
purchase NGL storage, transportation and fractionation services from
Promix. For additional information regarding our unconsolidated
affiliates, see Note 7.
Relationship
with Cenac
In
connection with our marine services acquisition in February 2008, Cenac and
affiliates became a related party of ours due to their ownership of TEPPCO units
through October 26, 2009, which converted to common units of Enterprise Products
Partners, and other considerations. We entered into a transitional
operating agreement with Cenac in which our fleet of tow boats and tank barges
(acquired from Cenac) continued to be operated by employees of Cenac for a
period of up to two years following the acquisition. Under this
agreement, we paid Cenac a monthly operating fee and reimbursed Cenac for
personnel salaries and related employee benefit expenses, certain repairs and
maintenance expenses and insurance premiums on the
equipment. Effective August 1, 2009, the transitional operating
agreement was terminated. Personnel providing services pursuant to
the agreement became employees of EPCO and will continue to provide services
under the ASA. Concurrently with the termination of the transitional
operating agreement, we entered into a two-year consulting agreement with Mr.
Cenac and Cenac Marine Services, L.L.C. under which Mr. Cenac has agreed to
supervise the day-to-day operations of our marine services business on a
part-time basis and, at our request, provide related management and transitional
services.
Note
14. Commitments and Contingencies
Litigation
On
occasion, we or our unconsolidated affiliates are named as a defendant in
litigation and legal proceedings, including regulatory and environmental
matters. Although we are insured against various risks to the extent
we believe it is prudent, there is no assurance that the nature and amount of
such insurance will be adequate, in every case, to indemnify us against
liabilities arising from future legal proceedings. We are unaware of
any litigation, pending or threatened, that we believe is reasonably likely to
have a significant adverse effect on our financial position.
We
evaluate our ongoing litigation based upon a combination of litigation and
settlement alternatives. These reviews are updated as the facts and
combinations of the cases develop or change. Assessing and predicting
the outcome of these matters involves substantial uncertainties. In
the event that the assumptions we used to evaluate these matters change in
future periods or new information becomes available, we may be required to
record a liability for an adverse outcome. In an effort to mitigate
potential adverse consequences of litigation, we could also seek to settle legal
proceedings brought against us. We have not recorded any significant
reserves for any litigation in our supplemental balance
sheet.
On
September 18, 2006, Peter Brinckerhoff, a purported unitholder of TEPPCO, filed
a complaint in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the “Delaware
Court”), in his individual capacity, as a putative class action on behalf of
other unitholders of TEPPCO and derivatively on behalf of TEPPCO, concerning,
among other things, certain transactions involving TEPPCO and Enterprise
Products Partners or its affiliates. Mr. Brinckerhoff filed an
amended complaint on July 12, 2007. The amended complaint names as
defendants (i) TEPPCO, certain of its current and former directors, and certain
of its affiliates, (ii) Enterprise Products Partners and certain of its
affiliates, (iii) EPCO and (iv) Dan L. Duncan.
The amended complaint alleges, among
other things, that the defendants caused TEPPCO to enter into specified
transactions that were unfair to TEPPCO or otherwise unfairly favored Enterprise
Products Partners or its affiliates over TEPPCO. These transactions
are alleged to include: (i) the joint venture to further expand the Jonah system
entered into by TEPPCO and Enterprise Products Partners in August
2006
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(the
plaintiff alleges that TEPPCO did not receive fair value for allowing Enterprise
Products Partners to participate in the joint venture); (ii) the sale by TEPPCO
of its Pioneer natural gas processing plant and certain gas processing rights to
Enterprise Products Partners in March 2006 (the plaintiff alleges that the
purchase price we paid did not provide fair value to TEPPCO); and (iii) certain
amendments to TEPPCO’s partnership agreement, including a reduction in the
maximum tier of TEPPCO’s incentive distribution rights in exchange for TEPPCO
units. The amended complaint seeks (i) rescission of the amendments
to TEPPCO’s partnership agreement, (ii) damages for profits and special benefits
allegedly obtained by defendants as a result of the alleged wrongdoings in the
amended complaint and (iii) an award to plaintiff of the costs of the action,
including fees and expenses of his attorneys and experts. By its
Opinion and Order dated November 25, 2008, the Delaware Court dismissed Mr.
Brinckerhoff’s individual and putative class action claims with respect to the
amendments to TEPPCO’s partnership agreement. We refer to this action
and the remaining claims in this action as the “Derivative Action.”
On April 29, 2009, Peter Brinckerhoff
and Renee Horowitz, as Attorney in Fact for Rae Kenrow, purported unitholders of
TEPPCO, filed separate complaints in the Delaware Court as putative class
actions on behalf of other unitholders of TEPPCO, concerning the TEPPCO
Merger. On May 11, 2009, these actions were consolidated under the
caption Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC Merger Litigation, C.A. No.
4548-VCL (“Merger Action”). The complaints name as defendants Enterprise
Products Partners, EPGP, TEPPCO GP, the directors of TEPPCO GP, EPCO and Dan L.
Duncan.
The Merger Action complaints allege,
among other things, that the terms of the merger (as proposed as of the time the
Merger Action complaints were filed) are grossly unfair to TEPPCO’s unitholders
and that the TEPPCO Merger is an attempt to extinguish the Derivative Action
without consideration. The complaints further allege that the process
through which the Special Committee of the ACG Committee of TEPPCO GP was
appointed to consider the TEPPCO Merger is contrary to the spirit and intent of
TEPPCO’s partnership agreement and constitutes a breach of the implied covenant
of fair dealing.
The complaints seek relief (i)
enjoining the defendants and all persons acting in concert with them from
pursuing the TEPPCO Merger, (ii) rescinding the TEPPCO Merger to the extent it
is consummated, or awarding rescissory damages in respect thereof, (iii)
directing the defendants to account for all damages suffered or to be suffered
by the plaintiffs and the purported class as a result of the defendants’ alleged
wrongful conduct, and (iv) awarding plaintiffs’ costs of the actions, including
fees and expenses of their attorneys and experts.
On June 28, 2009, the parties entered
into a Memorandum of Understanding pursuant to which Enterprise Products
Partners, TEPPCO, EPCO, TEPPCO GP, all other individual defendants and the
plaintiffs have proposed to settle the Merger Action and the Derivative
Action. The Memorandum of Understanding contemplated that the parties
would enter into a stipulation of settlement within 30 days from the date of the
Memorandum of Understanding. On August 5, 2009, the parties entered
into a Stipulation and Agreement of Compromise, Settlement and Release (the
“Settlement Agreement”) contemplated by the Memorandum of
Understanding. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the board of
directors of TEPPCO GP recommended to TEPPCO’s unitholders that they approve the
adoption of the merger agreement and took all necessary steps to seek unitholder
approval for the merger as soon as practicable. Pursuant to the
Settlement Agreement, approval of the merger required, in addition to votes
required under TEPPCO’s partnership agreement, that the actual votes cast in
favor of the proposal by holders of TEPPCO’s outstanding units, excluding those
held by defendants to the Derivative Action, exceed the actual votes cast
against the proposal by those holders. The Settlement Agreement
further provides that the Derivative Action was considered by TEPPCO GP’s
Special Committee to be a significant TEPPCO benefit for which fair value was
obtained in the merger consideration.
The Settlement Agreement is subject to
customary conditions, including Delaware Court approval. A hearing
regarding approval of the Settlement Agreement by the Delaware Court was held on
October 12, 2009, but the Delaware Court has yet to rule on the
settlement. There can be no assurance that the Delaware Court will
approve the settlement in the Settlement Agreement. In such event,
the proposed
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Additionally,
on June 29 and 30, 2009, respectively, M. Lee Arnold and Sharon Olesky,
purported unitholders of TEPPCO, filed separate complaints in the District
Courts of Harris County, Texas, as putative class actions on behalf of other
unitholders of TEPPCO, concerning the TEPPCO Merger (the “Texas
Actions”). The complaints name as defendants us, TEPPCO, TEPPCO GP,
EPGP, EPCO, Dan L. Duncan, Jerry Thompson, and the board of directors of TEPPCO
GP. The allegations in the complaints are similar to the complaints
filed in Delaware on April 29, 2009 and seek similar relief. The
named plaintiffs in the two Texas Actions (the “Texas Plaintiffs/Objectors”)
have also appeared in the Delaware proceedings as objectors to the settlement of
those cases which are awaiting court approval. On October 7, 2009,
the Texas Plaintiffs/Objectors and the parties to the Settlement Agreement
entered into a Stipulation to Withdraw Objection (the
“Stipulation”). In accordance with the Stipulation, TEPPCO made
certain supplemental disclosures and, if the Settlement Agreement obtains Final
Court Approval (as defined in the Settlement Agreement), the Texas
Plaintiffs/Objectors have agreed to dismiss the Texas Actions with prejudice
and, pending such Final Court Approval, will take no action to prosecute the
Texas Actions.
In
February 2007, EPO received a letter from the Environment and Natural Resources
Division of the U.S. Department of Justice related to an ammonia release in
Kingman County, Kansas on October 27, 2004 from a pressurized anhydrous ammonia
pipeline owned by a third party, Magellan Ammonia Pipeline, L.P. (“Magellan”),
and a previous release of ammonia on September 27, 2004 from the same
pipeline. EPO was the operator of this pipeline until July 1,
2008. This matter was settled in September 2009, and Magellan has
agreed to pay all assessed penalties.
The Attorney General of Colorado on
behalf of the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment filed suit
against us and others on April 15, 2008 in connection with the construction of a
pipeline near Parachute, Colorado. The State sought a temporary
restraining order and an injunction to halt construction activities since it
alleged that the defendants failed to install measures to minimize damage to the
environment and to follow requirements for the pipeline’s stormwater permit and
appropriate stormwater plan. We have entered into a settlement agreement
with the State that dismisses the suit and assesses a fine of approximately $0.2
million.
In
January 2009, the State of New Mexico filed suit in District Court in Santa Fe
County, New Mexico, under the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act. The
lawsuit arose out of a February 27, 2008 Notice Of Violation issued to Marathon
Oil Corp. (“Marathon”) as operator of the Indian Basin natural gas processing
facility located in Eddy County, New Mexico. We own a 42.4% undivided
interest in the assets comprising the Indian Basin facility. The
State alleges violations of its air laws, and Marathon is attempting to
negotiate an acceptable resolution with the state. The State seeks
penalties and remedial projects above $0.1 million. Marathon continues to
work with the State to determine if resolution of the case is
possible. We believe that any potential penalties will not have a
material impact on our consolidated financial position.
In
connection with our dissociation from TOPS (see Note 6), Oiltanking filed an
original petition against Enterprise Offshore Port System, LLC, EPO, TEPPCO O/S
Port System, LLC, TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP in the District Court of Harris County,
Texas, 61st Judicial District (Cause No. 2009-31367), asserting, among other
things, that the dissociation was wrongful and in breach of the TOPS partnership
agreement, citing provisions of the agreement that, if applicable, would
continue to obligate Enterprise Products Partners and TEPPCO to make capital
contributions to fund the project and impose liabilities on
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Enterprise
Products Partners and TEPPCO. On September 17, 2009, Enterprise
Products Partners and TEPPCO entered into a settlement agreement with certain
affiliates of Oiltanking and TOPS that resolved all disputes between the parties
related to the business and affairs of the TOPS project (including the
litigation described above).
Regulatory
Matters
Recent scientific studies have
suggested that emissions of certain gases, commonly referred to as “greenhouse
gases” or “GHGs” and including carbon dioxide and methane, may be contributing
to climate change. On April 17, 2009, the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (“EPA”) issued a notice of its proposed finding and
determination that emission of carbon dioxide, methane, and other GHGs present
an endangerment to human health and the environment because emissions of such
gases are, according to the EPA, contributing to warming of the earth’s
atmosphere. The EPA’s finding and determination would allow it to
begin regulating emissions of GHGs under existing provisions of the federal
Clean Air Act. Although it may take the EPA several years to adopt
and impose regulations limiting emissions of GHGs, any such regulation could
require us to incur costs to reduce emissions of GHGs associated with our
operations. In addition, on June 26, 2009, the U.S. House of
Representatives approved adoption of the “American Clean Energy and Security Act
of 2009,” also known as the “Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade legislation” or
“ACESA.” ACESA would establish an economy-wide cap on emissions of
GHGs in the United States and would require most sources of GHG emissions to
obtain GHG emission “allowances” corresponding to their annual emissions of
GHGs. The U.S. Senate has also begun work on its own legislation for
controlling and reducing emissions of GHGs in the United States. Any
laws or regulations that may be adopted to restrict or reduce emissions of GHGs
would likely require us to incur increased operating costs, and may have an
adverse effect on our business and financial position.
Contractual
Obligations
Scheduled
maturities of long-term debt. See
Notes 10 and 16 for information regarding changes in our consolidated debt
obligations.
Operating
lease obligations. During the second quarter of 2009, we
entered into a 20-year right-of-way agreement with the Jicarilla Apache Nation
in support of continued natural gas gathering activities on our San Juan
gathering system in Northwest New Mexico. Pending
approval of this agreement by the U.S. Department of the Interior, our minimum
lease obligations will be $3.0 million for the first year and $2.0 million per
year for each of the next succeeding four years. Aggregate minimum
lease commitments are $43.3 million over the 20-year contractual
term. The agreement also provides for contingent rentals that are
calculated annually based on actual throughput volumes and then current natural
gas and NGL prices. Our agreement with the Jicarilla Apache Nation
does not provide for renewal options beyond the 20-year lease
term.
Prior to
May 2009, we leased rail and truck terminal facilities in Mont Belvieu, Texas
from Martin. At December 31, 2008, our remaining aggregate minimum
lease commitments under this agreement were $56.8 million through the
contractual term ending in 2023. The lease agreement with Martin was
terminated upon our acquisition of such facilities in May 2009. See
Note 8 for additional information regarding our acquisition of certain rail and
truck terminal facilities from Martin.
Except
for the foregoing, there have been no material changes in our operating lease
commitments since December 31, 2008.
Purchase
obligations. Apart from that
discussed below, there have been no material changes in our consolidated
purchase obligations since December 31, 2008.
As a
result of our dissociation from TOPS, capital expenditure commitments decreased
by an estimated $203.0 million from that reported in this Current Report on Form
8-K under Exhibit 99.1. See Note 6 for additional information regarding
TOPS.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
In
January 2008, TEPPCO entered into an amended throughput and deficiency agreement
with Colonial Pipeline Company (“Colonial”) related to our Boligee river
terminal. Under terms of the agreement, Colonial agreed to provide
transportation services to the Boligee terminal for a period of 10-years
effective January 1, 2009. The minimum annual throughput commitment
to Colonial was approximately 8.0 million barrels of product. We
agreed to pay annual deficiency charges if it failed to meet its minimum annual
volume throughput commitment.
The
contractual annual minimum commitment of 8.0 million barrels was premised upon
expected throughput volumes at the Boligee terminal, which was designed to serve
several planned river terminals to be constructed. In September 2009, the
expansion river terminal construction projects were suspended. Based
on the current level of terminal volumes, we forecast that the Boligee terminal
will not be able to meet its annual minimum commitment to Colonial over the term
of the contract. As a result, we accrued a liability of $28.7 million
for deficiency fees that it reasonably estimates will be incurred due to the
expected level of throughput volumes at Boligee. In accordance with
applicable accounting standards, we will adjust its accrual if it determines
that it is probable that the amount it is obligated to pay Colonial changes in
the future.
At
September 30, 2009, the accrued liability was recorded as a component of other
current liabilities and other long-term liabilities, as appropriate, on our
Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Other
Claims
As part of our normal business
activities with joint venture partners and certain customers and suppliers, we
occasionally have claims made against us as a result of disputes related to
contractual agreements or similar arrangements. As of September 30,
2009, claims against us totaled approximately $4.8 million. These
matters are in various stages of assessment and the ultimate outcome of such
disputes cannot be reasonably estimated. However, in our opinion, the
likelihood of a material adverse outcome related to disputes against us is
remote. Accordingly, accruals for loss contingencies related to these
matters, if any, that might result from the resolution of such disputes have not
been reflected in our Unaudited Supplemental Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheet.
Note
15. Significant Risks and Uncertainties
Insurance
Matters
EPCO
completed its annual insurance renewal process during the second quarter of
2009. In light of recent hurricane and other weather-related events, the
renewal of policies for weather-related risks resulted in significant increases
in premiums and certain deductibles, as well as changes in the scope of
coverage.
EPCO’s
deductible for onshore physical damage from windstorms increased from $10.0
million per storm to $25.0 million per storm. EPCO’s onshore program
currently provides $150.0 million per occurrence for named windstorm events
compared to $175.0 million per occurrence in the prior year. With
respect to offshore assets, the windstorm deductible increased significantly
from $10.0 million per storm (with a one-time aggregate deductible of $15.0
million) to $75.0 million per storm. EPCO’s offshore program
currently provides $100.0 million in the aggregate compared to $175.0 million in
the aggregate for the prior year. For non-windstorm events, EPCO’s
deductible for both onshore and offshore physical damage remained at $5.0
million per occurrence. For certain of our major offshore assets, our
producer customers have agreed to provide a specified level of physical damage
insurance for named windstorms. For example, the producers associated
with our Independence Hub and Marco Polo platforms have agreed to cover
windstorm generated physical damage costs up to $250.0 million for each
platform.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Business
interruption coverage in connection with a windstorm event remains in place for
onshore assets, but was eliminated for offshore assets. Onshore
assets covered by business interruption insurance must be out-of-service in
excess of 60 days before any losses from business interruption will be
covered. Furthermore, pursuant to the current policy, we will now
absorb 50% of the first $50.0 million of any loss in excess of deductible
amounts for our onshore assets.
In the
third quarter of 2008, certain of our onshore and offshore facilities located
along the Gulf Coast of Texas and Louisiana were damaged by Hurricanes Gustav
and Ike. The disruptions in hydrocarbon production caused by these
storms resulted in decreased volumes for some of our pipeline systems, natural
gas processing plants, NGL fractionators and offshore platforms, which in turn
caused a decrease in gross operating margin from these operations. As
a result of our share of EPCO’s insurance deductibles for windstorm coverage, we
expensed a combined cumulative total of $48.8 million of repair costs for
property damage in connection with these two storms through September 30,
2009. We continue to file property damage claims in connection with
the damage caused by these storms. We recognize business interruption
proceeds as income when they are received in cash.
The
following table summarizes proceeds we received during the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 from business interruption and property damage insurance
claims with respect to certain named storms:
Business
interruption proceeds:
|
|
|
|
Hurricane
Ike
|
|
$ |
19.2 |
|
Property
damage proceeds:
|
|
|
|
|
Hurricane
Ivan
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
Hurricane
Katrina
|
|
|
26.7 |
|
Total
property damage proceeds
|
|
|
27.4 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
46.6 |
|
At
September 30, 2009, we had $22.6 million of estimated property damage claims
outstanding related to storms that we believe are probable of collection during
the next twelve months and $45.2 million thereafter. To the extent we
estimate the dollar value of such damages, please be aware that a change in our
estimates may occur, if and when additional information becomes
available.
Credit
Risk due to Industry Concentrations
On
January 6, 2009, LyondellBasell Industries and its affiliates (“LBI”) announced
that its U.S. operations had voluntarily filed to reorganize under Chapter 11 of
the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. At the time of the bankruptcy filing, we
had approximately $10.0 million of net credit exposure to LBI. We
resolved our outstanding claims with LBI in October 2009 with no gain or loss
being recorded in connection with the settlement. We continue to do
business with this important customer; however, we continue to monitor our
credit exposure to LBI.
Note
16. Subsequent Events
Issuance
of Senior Notes Q and R
On
October 5, 2009, EPO issued $500.0 million in principal amount of 10-year
unsecured Senior Notes Q and $600.0 million in principal amount of 30-year
unsecured Senior Notes R. Senior Notes Q were issued at 99.355% of
their principal amount, have a fixed interest rate of 5.25% and mature on
January 31, 2020. Senior Notes R were issued at 99.386% of their
principal amount, have a fixed interest rate of 6.125% and mature on October 15,
2039. Net proceeds from the issuance of Senior Notes Q and R were
used (i) to repay $500.0 million in aggregate principal amount of Senior Notes F
that matured in October 2009, (ii) to temporarily reduce borrowings outstanding
under EPO’s Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility and (iii) for general
partnership purposes.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
Senior
Notes Q and R rank equal with EPO’s existing and future unsecured and
unsubordinated indebtedness. They are senior to any existing and
future subordinated indebtedness of EPO. Senior Notes Q and R are
subject to make-whole redemption rights and were issued under indentures
containing certain covenants, which generally restrict EPO’s ability, with
certain exceptions, to incur debt secured by liens and engage in sale and
leaseback transactions.
Completion
of TEPPCO Merger
On October 26, 2009, the related
mergers of Enterprise Products Partners’ wholly owned subsidiaries with TEPPCO
and TEPPCO GP were completed. Under terms of the merger agreements,
TEPPCO and TEPPCO GP became wholly owned subsidiaries of Enterprise Products
Partners and each of TEPPCO's unitholders, except for a privately held affiliate
of EPCO, were entitled to receive 1.24 of Enterprise Products Partners’ common
units for each TEPPCO unit. In total, Enterprise Products Partners
issued an aggregate of 126,932,318 common units and 4,520,431 Class B units
(described below) as consideration in the TEPPCO Merger for both TEPPCO units
and the TEPPCO GP membership interests. TEPPCO’s units, which had
been trading on the NYSE under the ticker symbol TPP, have been delisted and are
no longer publicly traded.
A
privately held affiliate of EPCO exchanged a portion of its TEPPCO units, based
on the 1.24 exchange rate, for 4,520,431 of Enterprise Products Partners’ Class
B units in lieu of common units. The Class B units are not entitled
to regular quarterly cash distributions for the first sixteen quarters following
the closing date of the merger. The Class B units automatically
convert into the same number of common units on the date immediately following
the payment date for the sixteenth quarterly distribution following the closing
date of the merger. The Class B units are entitled to vote together
with the common units as a single class on partnership matters and, except for
the payment of distributions, have the same rights and privileges as Enterprise
Products Partners’ common units.
Under the
terms of the TEPPCO Merger agreements, Enterprise GP Holdings received 1,331,681
of Enterprise Products Partners’ common units and an increase in the capital
account of EPGP to maintain its 2% general partner interest in Enterprise
Products Partners as consideration for 100% of the membership interests of
TEPPCO GP. Following the closing of the TEPPCO Merger, affiliates of
EPCO owned approximately 31.3% of Enterprise Products Partners’ outstanding
limited partner units, including 3.4% owned by Enterprise GP
Holdings.
The
post-merger partnership, which retains the name Enterprise Products Partners
L.P., accesses the largest producing basins of natural gas, NGLs and crude oil
in the U.S., and serves some of the largest consuming regions for natural gas,
NGLs, refined products, crude oil and petrochemicals. The post-merger
partnership owns almost 48,000 miles of pipelines comprised of over 22,000 miles
of NGL, refined product and petrochemical pipelines, over 20,000 miles of
natural gas pipelines and more than 5,000 miles of crude oil
pipelines. The merged partnership’s logistical assets include
approximately 200 MMBbls of NGL, refined product and crude oil storage capacity;
27 Bcf of natural gas storage capacity; one of the largest NGL import/export
terminals in the U.S., located on the Houston Ship Channel; 60 NGL, refined
product and chemical terminals spanning the U.S. from the west coast to the east
coast; and crude oil import terminals on the Texas Gulf Coast. The
post-merger partnership owns interests in 17 fractionation plants with over 600
thousand barrels per day (“MBPD”) of net capacity; 25 natural gas processing
plants with a net capacity of approximately 9 Bcf/d; and 3 butane isomerization
facilities with a capacity of 116 MBPD. The post-merger partnership is also one
of the largest inland tank barge companies in the U.S.
The
merger transactions will be accounted for as a reorganization of entities under
common control. The financial and operating activities of Enterprise
Products Partners, TEPPCO and Enterprise GP Holdings and their respective
general partners, and EPCO and its privately held subsidiaries, are under the
common control of Dan L. Duncan.
ENTERPRISE
PRODUCTS GP, LLC
NOTES
TO UNAUDITED SUPPLEMENTAL
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
In
connection with the TEPPCO Merger, EPO commenced offers in September 2009 to
exchange all of TEPPCO’s outstanding notes for a corresponding series of new EPO
notes. The purpose of the exchange offer was to simplify our capital
structure following the TEPPCO Merger. The exchanges were completed
on October 27, 2009. The new EPO notes are guaranteed by Enterprise
Products Partners L.P. As presented in the following
table, the aggregate principal amount of the TEPPCO notes was $2 billion, of
which $1.95 billion was exchanged:
TEPPCO
Notes Exchanged
|
|
Principal
Amount
Exchanged
|
|
|
Principal
Amount
Not
Exchanged
|
|
7.625%
Senior Notes due 2012
|
|
$ |
490.5 |
|
|
$ |
9.5 |
|
6.125%
Senior Notes due 2013
|
|
|
182.5 |
|
|
|
17.5 |
|
5.90%
Senior Notes due 2013
|
|
|
237.6 |
|
|
|
12.4 |
|
6.65%
Senior Notes due 2018
|
|
|
349.7 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
7.55%
Senior Notes due 2038
|
|
|
399.6 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
7.00%
Junior Fixed/Floating Subordinated Notes due 2067
|
|
|
285.8 |
|
|
|
14.2 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,945.7 |
|
|
$ |
54.3 |
|
The EPO
notes issued in the exchange will be recorded at the same carrying value as the
TEPPCO notes being replaced. Accordingly, we will recognize no gain
or loss for accounting purposes related to this exchange. All note
exchange direct costs paid to third parties will be expensed.
In
addition to the debt exchange, we gained approval from the requisite TEPPCO
noteholders to eliminate substantially all of the restrictive covenants and
reporting requirements associated with the remaining TEPPCO notes.
Upon the
consummation of the TEPPCO Merger, EPO repaid and terminated indebtedness under
TEPPCO’s Revolving Credit Facility.