e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended:
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
or
|
|
|
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission file number:
001-32678
DCP MIDSTREAM PARTNERS,
LP
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other
jurisdiction
of incorporation or organization)
|
|
03-0567133
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
370 17th Street,
Suite 2775
Denver, Colorado
(Address of principal
executive offices)
|
|
80202
(Zip Code)
|
Registrants
telephone number, including area code:
303-633-2900
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class:
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which
Registered:
|
Common Units Representing Limited
Partner Interests
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
NONE
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
and Exchange Act of 1934, or the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter
period that the registrant was required to file such reports),
and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated
filer (see definition of accelerated filer and large
accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2
of the Act) (Check one):
Large accelerated
filer o Accelerated
filer o Non-accelerated
filer þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the
Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of common limited partner units held
by non-affiliates of the registrant on December 30, 2005,
was approximately $251,044,000. The aggregate market value was
computed by reference to the last sale price ($24.50 per
common unit) of the registrants common units on the New
York Stock Exchange on December 30, 2005.
As of February 17, 2006, there were outstanding 10,357,143
common limited partner units and 7,142,857 subordinated units.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:
None.
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
Form 10-K
For the Year Ended December 31, 2005
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
i
CAUTIONARY
STATEMENT ABOUT FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Our reports, filings and other public announcements may from
time to time contain statements that do not directly or
exclusively relate to historical facts. Such statements are
forward-looking statements within the meaning of the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. You can
typically identify forward-looking statements by the use of
forward-looking words, such as may,
could, project, believe,
anticipate, expect,
estimate, potential, plan,
forecast and other similar words.
All statements that are not statements of historical facts,
including statements regarding our future financial position,
business strategy, budgets, projected costs and plans and
objectives of management for future operations, are
forward-looking statements.
These forward-looking statements reflect our intentions, plans,
expectations, assumptions and beliefs about future events and
are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of
which are outside our control. Important factors that could
cause actual results to differ materially from the expectations
expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements include
known and unknown risks. Known risks and uncertainties include,
but are not limited to, the risks set forth in
Item 1A. Risk Factors as well as the following
risks and uncertainties:
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to access the debt and equity markets, which will
depend on general market conditions and the credit ratings for
our debt obligations;
|
|
|
|
our use of derivative financial instruments to hedge commodity
and interest rate risks;
|
|
|
|
the level of creditworthiness of counterparties to transactions;
|
|
|
|
the amount of collateral required to be posted from time to time
in our transactions;
|
|
|
|
changes in laws and regulations, particularly with regard to
taxes, safety and protection of the environment or the increased
regulation of the gathering and processing industry;
|
|
|
|
the timing and extent of changes in commodity prices, interest
rates and demand for our services;
|
|
|
|
weather and other natural phenomena;
|
|
|
|
industry changes, including the impact of consolidations and
changes in competition;
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain required approvals for construction or
modernization of gathering and processing facilities, and the
timing of production from such facilities, which are dependent
on the issuance by federal, state and municipal governments, or
agencies thereof, of building, environmental and other permits,
the availability of specialized contractors and work force and
prices of and demand for products;
|
|
|
|
our ability to grow through acquisitions or internal growth
projects;
|
|
|
|
the extent of success in connecting natural gas supplies to
gathering and processing systems; and
|
|
|
|
general economic, market and business conditions.
|
In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the
events described in the forward-looking statements might not
occur or might occur to a different extent or at a different
time than we have described. We undertake no obligation to
publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements,
whether as a result of new information, future events or
otherwise.
Our
Partnership
We are a Delaware limited partnership recently formed by Duke
Energy Field Services, LLC, which we refer to as DEFS, to own,
operate, acquire and develop a diversified portfolio of
complementary midstream energy assets. We are currently engaged
in the business of gathering, compressing, treating, processing,
transporting and selling natural gas and the business of
transporting and selling natural gas liquids, or NGLs.
1
Supported by our relationship with DEFS and its parents, Duke
Energy Corporation, which we refer to as Duke Energy, and
ConocoPhillips, we intend to acquire and construct additional
assets and we have a management team dedicated to executing our
growth strategy.
Our operations are organized into two business segments, Natural
Gas Services and NGL Logistics.
Our Natural Gas Services segment is comprised of our North
Louisiana system, which is an approximately
1,430-mile
integrated pipeline system located in northern Louisiana and
southern Arkansas that gathers, compresses, treats, processes,
transports and sells natural gas received from approximately
1,100 receipt points, each of which represents production
from one or more wells in the adjacent area, and that sells
NGLs. This system consists of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
the Minden processing plant and gathering system, which includes
a cryogenic natural gas processing plant supplied by
approximately 700 miles of natural gas gathering pipelines,
connected to approximately 460 receipt points, with throughput
capacity of approximately 115 million cubic feet per day,
or MMcf/d;
|
|
|
|
the Ada processing plant and gathering system, which includes a
refrigeration natural gas processing plant supplied by
approximately 130 miles of natural gas gathering pipelines,
connected to approximately 210 receipt points, with throughput
capacity of approximately 80 MMcf/d; and
|
|
|
|
the PanEnergy Louisiana Intrastate pipeline system, or PELICO
system, an approximately
600-mile
intrastate natural gas gathering and transportation pipeline
with throughput capacity of approximately 250 MMcf/d and
connections to the Minden and Ada processing plants and
approximately 450 other receipt points. The PELICO system
delivers natural gas to multiple interstate and intrastate
pipelines, as well as directly to industrial and utility end-use
markets.
|
Our NGL Logistics segment consists of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
our Seabreeze pipeline, an approximately
68-mile
intrastate NGL pipeline in Texas with throughput capacity of 33
thousand barrels per day, or MBbls/d; and
|
|
|
|
our 45% interest in the Black Lake Pipe Line Company, or Black
Lake, the owner of an approximately
317-mile
interstate NGL pipeline in Louisiana and Texas with throughput
capacity of 40 MBbls/d.
|
Our
Business Strategies
Our primary business objective is to increase our cash
distribution per unit over time. We intend to accomplish this
objective by executing the following business strategies:
Optimize: maximize the profitability of existing
assets. We intend to optimize the profitability
of our existing assets by adding new volumes of natural gas and
NGLs and undertaking additional initiatives to enhance
utilization and improve operating efficiencies. Our natural gas
assets and NGL pipelines have excess capacity, which allows us
to connect new supplies of natural gas and NGLs at minimal
incremental cost.
Build: capitalize on organic expansion
opportunities. We continually evaluate
economically attractive organic expansion opportunities to
construct new midstream systems in new operating areas. For
example, we believe there are opportunities to expand our North
Louisiana system to transport increased volumes of natural gas
produced in east Texas to premium markets and interstate
pipeline connections on the eastern end of our North Louisiana
system.
Acquire: pursue strategic and accretive
acquisitions. We plan to pursue strategic and
accretive acquisition opportunities within the midstream energy
industry, both in new and existing lines of business and
geographic areas of operation. In light of the recent industry
trend of large energy companies divesting their midstream
assets, we believe there will continue to be acquisition
opportunities. We intend to pursue acquisition opportunities
both independently and jointly with DEFS and its parents, Duke
Energy and ConocoPhillips, and we may also acquire assets
directly from them, which will provide us with a broader array
of growth opportunities than those available to many of our
competitors.
2
Our
Competitive Strengths
We believe that we are well positioned to execute our primary
business objective and business strategies successfully because
of the following competitive strengths:
Affiliation with DEFS and its parents. Our
relationship with DEFS and its parents, Duke Energy and
ConocoPhillips, may provide us with significant business
opportunities. DEFS is one of the largest gatherers of natural
gas (based on wellhead volume), the largest producer of NGLs and
one of the largest marketers of NGLs in North America. Our
relationship with DEFS, Duke Energy and ConocoPhillips also
provides us with access to a significant pool of management
talent. We believe our strong relationships throughout the
energy industry, including with major producers of natural gas
and NGLs in the United States, will help facilitate
implementation of our strategies. Additionally, we believe DEFS
has established a reputation in the midstream business as a
reliable and cost-effective supplier of services to our
customers and has a track record of safe and efficient operation
of our facilities.
Strategically located assets. We own and
operate one of the largest integrated natural gas gathering,
compression, treating, processing and transportation systems in
northern Louisiana, an active natural gas producing area. This
system is also well positioned, and we believe there are
opportunities to expand this system, to transport increased
volumes of natural gas from east Texas and west Louisiana to
premium markets on the eastern end of our North Louisiana system
and to interconnections with major interstate natural gas
pipelines that transport natural gas to consumer markets in the
eastern and northeastern United States. Our NGL pipelines
are also strategically located to transport NGLs from plants
that process natural gas produced in Texas and northern
Louisiana to large fractionation facilities and a petrochemical
plant along the Gulf Coast.
Stable cash flows. Our operations consist of a
favorable mix of fee-based and margin-based services, which
together with our hedging activities, generate relatively stable
cash flows. While our
percentage-of-proceeds
gathering and processing contracts subject us to commodity price
risk, as of January 1, 2006 we have hedged approximately
80% of our natural gas and NGL commodity price risk related to
these arrangements through 2010. As part of our gathering
operations, we recover and sell condensate. As of
January 1, 2006, we have hedged approximately 80% of our
expected condensate commodity price risk relating to our natural
gas gathering operations through 2010. For additional
information regarding our hedging activities, please read
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operation Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk Hedging Strategies.
Integrated package of midstream services. We
provide an integrated package of services to natural gas
producers, including natural gas gathering, compression,
treating, processing, transportation and sales, and NGL sales.
We believe our ability to provide all of these services gives us
an advantage in competing for new supplies of natural gas
because we can provide substantially all of the services
producers, marketers and others require to move natural gas and
NGLs from wellhead to market on a cost-effective basis.
Experienced management team. Our senior
management team and board of directors includes some of the most
senior officers of DEFS and former senior officers from other
energy companies who have extensive experience in the midstream
industry. Our management team has a proven track record of
enhancing value through the acquisition, optimization and
integration of midstream assets.
Our
Relationship with DEFS and its Parents
One of our principal attributes is our relationship with DEFS
and its parents, Duke Energy and ConocoPhillips. DEFS commenced
operations in 2000 following the contribution to it of the
combined North American midstream natural gas gathering,
processing and marketing and NGL businesses of Duke Energy and
Phillips Petroleum Company (prior to its merger with Conoco
Inc.). Currently, DEFS is owned 50% by Duke Energy and 50% by
ConocoPhillips.
3
DEFS intends to use us as an important growth vehicle to pursue
the acquisition and expansion of midstream natural gas, NGL and
other complementary energy businesses and assets. We expect to
have the opportunity to make acquisitions directly from DEFS in
the future. However, we cannot say with any certainty which, if
any, of these acquisitions may be made available to us or if we
will choose to pursue any such opportunity. In addition, through
our relationship with DEFS and its parents, we will have access
to a significant pool of management talent, strong commercial
relationships throughout the energy industry and access to
DEFS broad operational, commercial, technical, risk
management and administrative infrastructure.
DEFS has a significant interest in our partnership through its
ownership of a 2% general partner interest in us, all of our
incentive distribution rights and a 40.0% limited partner
interest in us. We have entered into an Omnibus Agreement with
DEFS and some of its affiliates that governs our relationship
with them regarding certain reimbursement and indemnification
matters.
While our relationship with DEFS and its parents is a
significant attribute, it is also a source of potential
conflicts. For example, DEFS, Duke Energy, ConocoPhillips or
their affiliates are not restricted from competing with us. Each
of them may acquire, construct or dispose of midstream or other
assets in the future without any obligation to offer us the
opportunity to purchase or construct those assets.
Natural
Gas and NGLs Overview
The midstream natural gas industry is the link between
exploration and production of natural gas and the delivery of
its components to end-use markets, and consists of the
gathering, compression, treating, processing, transportation and
selling of natural gas, and the transportation and selling of
NGLs.
Natural
Gas Demand and Production
Natural gas is a critical component of energy consumption in the
United States. According to the Energy Information
Administration, or the EIA, total annual domestic consumption of
natural gas is expected to increase from approximately 22.1
trillion cubic feet, or Tcf, in 2004 to approximately 25.4 Tcf
in 2010, representing an average annual growth rate of over
2.3% per year. The industrial and electricity generation
sectors are the largest users of natural gas in the United
States. During the last three years, these sectors accounted for
approximately 61% of the total natural gas consumed in the
United States. In 2004, natural gas represented approximately
24% of all end-user domestic energy requirements. During the
last five years, the United States has on average consumed
approximately 22.5 Tcf per year, with average annual domestic
production of approximately 19.1 Tcf during the same period.
Driven by growth in natural gas demand and high natural gas
prices, domestic natural gas production is projected to increase
from 18.9 Tcf per year to 20.4 Tcf per year between 2004
and 2010.
Midstream
Natural Gas Industry
Once natural gas is produced from wells, producers then seek to
deliver the natural gas and its components to end-use markets.
The following diagram illustrates the natural gas gathering,
processing, fractionation, storage and transportation process,
which ultimately results in natural gas and its components being
delivered to end-users.
4
Natural
Gas Gathering
The natural gas gathering process begins with the drilling of
wells into gas-bearing rock formations. Once the well is
completed, the well is connected to a gathering system. Onshore
gathering systems generally consist of a network of small
diameter pipelines that collect natural gas from points near
producing wells and transport it to larger pipelines for further
transmission.
Natural
Gas Compression
Gathering systems are operated at design pressures that will
maximize the total throughput from all connected wells. Since
wells produce at progressively lower field pressures as they
age, it becomes increasingly difficult to deliver the remaining
production from the ground against a higher pressure that exists
in the connecting gathering system. Natural gas compression is a
mechanical process in which a volume of wellhead gas is
compressed to a desired higher pressure, allowing gas flow into
a higher pressure downstream pipeline to be brought to market.
Field compression is typically used to lower the pressure of a
gathering system to operate at a lower pressure or provide
sufficient pressure to deliver gas into a higher pressure
downstream pipeline. If field compression is not installed, then
the remaining natural gas in the ground will not be produced
because it cannot overcome the higher gathering system pressure.
In contrast, if field compression is installed, then a well can
continue delivering production that otherwise would not be
produced.
Natural
Gas Processing and Transportation
The principal component of natural gas is methane, but most
natural gas also contains varying amounts of NGLs including
ethane, propane, normal butane, isobutane and natural gasoline.
NGLs have economic value and are utilized as a feedstock in the
petrochemical and oil refining industries or directly as
heating, engine or industrial fuels. Long-haul natural gas
pipelines have specifications as to the maximum NGL content of
the gas to be shipped. In order to meet quality standards for
long-haul pipeline transportation, natural gas collected through
a gathering system may need to be processed to separate
hydrocarbon liquids that can have higher values as mixed NGLs
from the natural gas. NGLs are typically recovered by cooling
the natural gas until the mixed NGLs become separated through
condensation. Cryogenic recovery methods are processes where
this is accomplished at temperatures lower than minus
150ºF. These methods provide higher NGL recovery yields.
After being extracted from natural gas, the mixed NGLs are
typically transported via NGL pipelines or trucks to a
fractionator for separation of the NGLs into their component
parts.
In addition to NGLs, natural gas collected through a gathering
system may also contain impurities, such as water, sulfur
compounds, nitrogen or helium. As a result, a natural gas
processing plant will typically provide ancillary services such
as dehydration and condensate separation prior to processing.
Dehydration removes water from the natural gas stream, which can
form ice when combined with natural gas and cause corrosion when
combined with carbon dioxide or hydrogen sulfide. Condensate
separation involves the removal of hydrocarbons from the natural
gas stream. Once the condensate has been removed, it may be
stabilized for transportation away from the processing plant via
truck, rail or pipeline. Natural gas with a carbon dioxide or
hydrogen sulfide content higher than permitted by pipeline
quality standards requires treatment with chemicals called
amines at a separate treatment plant prior to processing.
Natural
Gas Services Segment
General
Our Natural Gas Services segment consists of the North Louisiana
system, which is a large integrated midstream natural gas system
that offers the following services:
|
|
|
|
|
gathering;
|
|
|
|
compression;
|
|
|
|
treating;
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
processing;
|
|
|
|
transportation; and
|
|
|
|
sales of natural gas, NGLs and condensate.
|
The system covers ten parishes in northern Louisiana and two
counties in southern Arkansas. Through our North Louisiana
system, we offer producers and customers
wellhead-to-market
services. The North Louisiana system has numerous market outlets
for the natural gas that we gather, including several intrastate
and interstate pipelines, eight major industrial end-users and
three major power plants. The system is strategically located to
facilitate the transportation of natural gas from eastern Texas
and northern Louisiana to pipeline connections linking to
markets in the eastern and northeastern areas of the United
States.
The North Louisiana system consists of:
|
|
|
|
|
our Minden processing plant, which has a processing capacity of
approximately 115 MMcf/d, and gathering system, which is an
approximately
700-mile
natural gas gathering system with throughput capacity of
approximately 115 MMcf/d;
|
|
|
|
our Ada processing plant, which has a processing capacity of
approximately 45 MMcf/d, and gathering system, which is an
approximately
130-mile
natural gas gathering system with throughput capacity of
approximately 80 MMcf/d; and
|
|
|
|
our PELICO system, an approximately
600-mile
intrastate natural gas pipeline with throughput capacity of
approximately 250 MMcf/d.
|
A map representing the location of the assets that comprise the
North Louisiana system is set forth below:
Gathering
Systems
The North Louisiana natural gas gathering system, consisting of
the Minden and Ada gathering systems, has approximately
830 miles of natural gas gathering pipelines, ranging in
size from two inches to twelve inches in diameter. The system
has aggregate throughput capacity of approximately
195 MMcf/d and average
6
throughput on the system was approximately 134 MMcf/d in
2005. There are 26 compressor stations located within the
system, comprised of 60 units with an aggregate of
approximately 70,000 horsepower.
The Minden gathering system is an approximately
700-mile
natural gas gathering system located in Bossier, Claiborne,
Jackson, Lincoln, Ouachita and Webster parishes, Louisiana and
two Arkansas counties. The system gathers natural gas from
producers at approximately 460 receipt points and delivers it
for processing to the Minden processing plant. The Minden
gathering system also delivers NGLs produced at the Minden
processing plant to the Black Lake pipeline. The Minden
gathering system has throughput capacity of approximately
115 MMcf/d, and had aggregate throughput of approximately
66 MMcf/d in 2005.
The Ada gathering system is an approximately
130-mile
natural gas gathering system located in Bienville and Webster
parishes, Louisiana. The system gathers natural gas from
producers at approximately 210 receipt points and delivers it
for processing to the Ada processing plant. The Ada gathering
system has throughput capacity of approximately 80 MMcf/d,
and had throughput of approximately 68 MMcf/d in 2005.
Processing
Plants
The Minden processing plant is a cryogenic natural gas
processing and treating plant located in Webster parish,
Louisiana. The Minden processing plant has a design capacity of
115 MMcf/d. In 2005, the Minden processing plant processed
approximately 66 MMcf/d of natural gas and produced
approximately 4,300 Bbls/d of NGLs. This processing plant
has amine treating and ethane recovery and rejection
capabilities such that we can recover approximately 80% of the
ethane contained in the natural gas stream. In addition, the
processing plant is able to reject ethane of effectively 13%
when justified by market economics. This processing flexibility
enables us to maximize the value of ethane for our customers. In
2002, we upgraded the Minden processing plant to enable greater
ethane recovery and rejection capabilities. As part of that
project, we reached an agreement with our customers to receive
100% of the realized margin attributable to the incremental
value of ethane recovered as an NGL from the natural gas stream
when appropriate market conditions exist and until a defined
return on the initial investment is reached.
The Ada processing plant is a refrigeration natural gas
processing plant located in Bienville parish, Louisiana. The Ada
processing plant has a design capacity of 45 MMcf/d. In
2005, the facility processed approximately 53 MMcf/d of
natural gas and produced approximately 200 Bbls/d of NGLs.
Transportation
System
The PELICO system is an approximately
600-mile
intrastate natural gas gathering and transportation pipeline
with 250 MMcf/d of capacity and average throughput of
approximately 223 MMcf/d in 2005. The PELICO system gathers
and transports natural gas that does not require processing from
producers in the area at approximately 450 meter locations.
Additionally, the PELICO system transports processed gas from
the Minden and Ada processing plants and natural gas supplied
from third party interstate and intrastate natural gas
pipelines. The PELICO system also receives natural gas produced
in eastern Texas through its interconnect with other pipelines
that transport natural gas from eastern Texas into western
Louisiana.
Natural
Gas Markets
The North Louisiana system has numerous market outlets for the
natural gas that we gather on the system. Our natural gas
pipelines connect to the Perryville Market Hub, a natural gas
marketing hub that provides connection to four intrastate or
interstate pipelines, including pipelines owned by Southern
Natural Gas Company, Texas Gas Transmission, LLC, CenterPoint
Energy Mississippi River Transmission Corporation and
CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company. In addition, our
natural gas pipelines also have access to gas that flows through
pipelines owned by Texas Eastern Transmission, LP, Crosstex LIG,
LLC, Gulf South Pipeline Company, Tennessee Natural Gas Company
and Regency Intrastate Gas, LLC. The North Louisiana system is
also connected to eight major industrial end-users and makes
deliveries to three power plants. Generally, the gas flows from
our Minden and Ada gathering systems and PELICO system from west
to east toward the industrial and interstate markets with the
exception of some industrial end-users located near the
central-southern section of the PELICO system. This flow pattern
changes somewhat during the summer when
7
utility loads increase deliveries off the same central-southern
section of the PELICO system. Our access to numerous market
outlets, including interstate pipelines in northeastern
Louisiana that deliver natural gas to premium markets on the
northeast and east coast, and to several end-users located on
our system provides us with the flexibility to deliver our
natural gas supply to markets with the most attractive pricing.
The NGLs extracted from the natural gas at the Minden processing
plant are delivered to the Black Lake pipeline through our
wholly-owned approximately
9-mile
Minden NGL pipeline. The NGLs are sold at market index prices to
an affiliate of DEFS and transported to the Mont Belvieu hub via
the Black Lake pipeline of which we own a 45% interest. The NGLs
extracted from natural gas at the Ada processing plant are sold
at market index prices to third parties and are delivered to the
third parties trucks at the tailgate of the plant.
Customers
and Contracts
The primary suppliers of natural gas to our North Louisiana
system are Anadarko Petroleum Corporation and ConocoPhillips
(one of our affiliates), which collectively represented
approximately 48% of the 355 MMcf/d of natural gas supplied
to this system in 2005, 48% of the 328 MMcf/d natural gas
supplied to this system in 2004 and 48% of the 322 MMcf/d
natural gas supplied to this system in 2003. We actively seek
new supplies of natural gas to increase throughput volume and to
offset natural declines in the production from connected wells.
We obtain new natural gas supplies in our operating areas by
contracting for production from new wells, by connecting new
wells drilled on dedicated acreage and by obtaining natural gas
that has been released from other gathering systems. (see
Financial Statements and Supplementary
Data for further discussion of our significant customers).
We currently have approximately 1,100 receipt points on the
North Louisiana system receiving natural gas production from
individual wells or groups of wells. Approximately 60% of these
receipt points are located on our Minden gathering system and
our Ada gathering system. The remaining 40% of these receipt
points are located on the PELICO system. The natural gas
supplied to the North Louisiana system is generally dedicated to
us under individually negotiated long-term contracts that
provide for the commitment by the producer of all natural gas
produced from designated properties. Generally, the initial term
of these purchase agreements is for three to five years or, in
some cases, the life of the lease. Our PELICO system receives
natural gas from our Minden and Ada gathering systems and
processing plants as well as from interconnects with other
intrastate pipelines that deliver gas from other producing areas
in eastern Texas and northern Louisiana, and from other wellhead
receipt points directly connected to the system.
For natural gas that is gathered and then processed at our
Minden or Ada processing plants, we purchase the wellhead
natural gas from the producers primarily under
percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements or fee-based arrangements. Our gross margin
generated from
percentage-of-proceeds
gathering and processing contracts is directly correlated to the
price of natural gas, NGLs and condensate. To minimize this
potential future volatility, in September 2005 we entered into a
series of derivative financial instrument agreements to hedge
our natural gas, NGLs and condensate. As a result of these
transactions, we have hedged effective January 1, 2006,
approximately 80% of our share of anticipated natural gas, NGL
and condensate attributable to these contracts through 2010. We
gather and transport natural gas on the PELICO system under a
combination of fee-based transportation agreements and merchant
arrangements. Under our merchant arrangements, we, directly or
through a subsidiary of DEFS as our agent, purchase natural gas
at the wellhead and from third parties and related parties at
pipeline interconnect points, as well as residue gas from our
Minden and Ada processing plants, and then resell the aggregated
natural gas to third parties and related parties. We have
entered into a contractual arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS
that provides that DEFS will purchase natural gas and transport
it into our PELICO system where we will buy the gas from DEFS at
their weighted average cost plus a contractually agreed to
marketing fee. In addition, for a significant portion of the gas
that we sell out of our PELICO system, we have entered into a
contractual arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS that provides
that DEFS will purchase that natural gas from us and transport
it to a sales point at a price equal to their net weighted
average sales price less a contractually agreed to marketing
fee. These agreements have a two year term beginning in December
2005. In the case where we purchase and sell from related
parties, we may buy and sell natural gas from a subsidiary of
DEFS, which in turn would transport and buy and sell these
volumes from third parties using their transportation or
purchase and sales contracts. In the case of certain
8
industrial end-user customers, from time to time we may sell
aggregated natural gas to a subsidiary of DEFS which in turn
would resell natural gas to these customers. Under these
arrangements, we expect that this subsidiary of DEFS would make
a profit on these transactions.
Competition
The North Louisiana system experiences competition in all of its
local markets. The North Louisiana systems principal areas
of competition include obtaining natural gas supplies for the
Minden processing plant and Ada processing plant and natural gas
transportation customers for the PELICO system. The North
Louisiana systems competitors include major integrated oil
and gas companies, interstate and intrastate pipelines, and
companies that gather, compress, treat, process, transport
and/or
market natural gas. The PELICO system competes with interstate
and intrastate pipelines. These include pipelines owned by
Regency Intrastate Gas, LLC, Gulf South Pipeline Company and
Tennessee Natural Gas Company. The Minden and Ada processing
plants compete with other natural gas gathering and processing
systems owned by XTO Energy Inc., Regency Intrastate Gas, LLC,
Optigas Inc. and Gulf South Pipeline Company, as well as
producer-owned systems.
NGL
Logistics Segment
NGL
Pipelines
General. Our NGL transportation assets consist
of our wholly-owned approximately
68-mile
Seabreeze intrastate NGL pipeline located in Texas and a 45%
interest in the approximately
317-mile
Black Lake interstate NGL pipeline located in Louisiana and
Texas. These NGL pipelines transport mixed NGLs from natural gas
processing plants to fractionation facilities, a petrochemical
plant and an underground NGL storage facility. In aggregate, our
NGL transportation business has 73 MBbls/d of capacity and
in 2005 average throughput was approximately 27 MBbls/d.
In the markets we serve, our pipelines are the sole pipeline
facility transporting NGLs from the supply source. Our pipelines
provide transportation services to customers on a fee basis.
Therefore, the results of operations for this business are
generally dependent upon the volume of product transported and
the level of fees charged to customers. The volumes of NGLs
transported on our pipelines are dependent on the level of
production of NGLs from processing plants connected to our NGL
pipelines. When natural gas prices are high relative to NGL
prices, it is less profitable to process natural gas because of
the higher value of natural gas compared to the value of NGLs
and because of the increased cost of separating the mixed NGLs
from the natural gas. As a result, we have experienced periods
in the past, and will likely experience periods in the future,
that higher natural gas prices reduce the volume of NGLs
produced at plants connected to our NGL pipelines.
Seabreeze Pipeline. Our Seabreeze pipeline is
an approximately
68-mile
private NGL pipeline with current capacity configured at
33 MBbls/d. It is located along the Gulf Coast area of
southeastern Texas. For 2005, average throughput on the pipeline
was approximately 16 MBbls/d. Throughput on the pipeline
during 2005 was negatively impacted by a shut down of a third
party NGL pipeline from March 2004 until June 2005 due to
pipeline integrity repairs. The Seabreeze pipeline was put into
service in 2002 to deliver an NGL mix to the Formosa Point
Comfort Chemical Complex from Williams Markham Gas Plant,
a large processing plant with processing capacity of
approximately 340 MMcf/d located in Matagorda County,
Texas; Enterprise Products Matagorda Plant, a large
processing plant with capacity of approximately 250 MMcf/d
located in Matagorda County, Texas; and TEPPCO Partners,
L.P.s South Dean NGL pipeline. The Seabreeze pipeline is
the sole NGL pipeline for the two processing plants and is the
only delivery point for the South Dean NGL pipeline. This third
party NGL pipeline transports NGLs from five natural gas
processing plants located in southeastern Texas that have
aggregate processing capacity of approximately 1.6 Bcf/d.
Three of these processing plants are owned by DEFS. The seven
processing plants that produce NGLs that flow into the Seabreeze
pipeline process natural gas produced in southern Texas and
offshore in the Gulf of Mexico (Boomvang and Nansen offshore
production platforms and the Matagorda Island Production
Facility). The
9
Seabreeze pipeline delivers the NGLs it receives from these
sources to a fractionator at the Formosa Point Comfort Chemical
Complex and the Texas Brine Salt Dome storage facility.
In February 2006, we announced our plans to construct a new
37-mile NGL
pipeline to connect a DEFS gas processing plant to the Seabreeze
pipeline. The project is estimated to be completed during the
fourth quarter of 2006 and is supported by a
10-year NGL
product dedication by DEFS. Volumes from DEFS are estimated to
be approximately 5.3 MBbls/d.
A map illustrating the location of the Seabreeze pipeline is set
forth below:
Effective December 1, 2005, we entered into a contractual
arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS that provides that DEFS
will purchase the NGLs that were historically purchased by us,
and DEFS will pay us to transport the NGLs pursuant to a
fee-based rate that will be applied to the volumes transported.
We have entered into this fee-based contractual arrangement with
the objective of generating approximately the same operating
income per barrel transported that we realized when we were the
purchaser and seller of NGLs. We do not take title to the
products transported on the NGL pipeline; rather, the shipper
retains title and the associated commodity price risk. DEFS is
the sole shipper on the Seabreeze pipeline under a
17-year
transportation agreement expiring in 2022. The Seabreeze
pipeline only collects fee-based transportation revenue under
this agreement. DEFS receives its supply of NGLs that it then
transports on the Seabreeze pipeline under a
20-year NGL
purchase agreement with Williams expiring in 2022 and a
5-year NGL
purchase agreement with Enterprise Products Partners expiring in
2007. Under these agreements, Williams and Enterprise Products
Partners have each dedicated all of their respective NGL
production from these processing plants to DEFS. The Seabreeze
pipeline delivers all of DEFS volumes to a fractionator at
the Formosa Point Comfort Chemical Complex and the Texas Brine
Salt Dome storage facility operated by Underground Services
Markam. DEFS has a
20-year
long-term sales agreement with Formosa expiring in 2022.
Additionally, DEFS has a
10-year
transportation agreement with TEPPCO Partners, L.P. expiring in
2012 that covers all of the NGL volumes transported on TEPPCO
Partners, L.P.s South Dean NGL pipeline for delivery to
the Seabreeze pipeline.
10
Black Lake Pipeline. We own a 45% interest in
Black Lake, which owns an approximately
317-mile
FERC-regulated interstate NGL pipeline with 40 MBbls/d of
capacity. For 2005, average throughput on the pipeline was
approximately 11 MBbls/d. A map representing the location
of the Black Lake pipeline is set forth below:
The Black Lake pipeline was constructed in 1967 and delivers
NGLs from processing plants in northern Louisiana and
southeastern Texas to fractionation plants at Mont Belvieu on
the Texas Gulf Coast. The Black Lake pipeline receives NGL mix
from three natural gas processing plants in northern Louisiana,
including our Minden plant, Regency Intrastate Gas, LLCs
Dubach processing plant and Chesapeake Energy Corporations
Black Lake processing plant, which have aggregate natural gas
processing capacity of approximately 345 MMcf/d. The Black
Lake pipeline is the sole NGL pipeline for all of these natural
gas processing plants in northern Louisiana. In addition, the
Black Lake pipeline receives a NGL mix from DEFS Jasper
pipeline, which has NGL throughput capacity of approximately
18 MBbls/d and is the sole NGL pipeline for the Brookeland
gas plant. The Brookeland gas plant, which is located in
southeastern Texas, is 80% owned by DEFS. In December 2005, DEFS
entered into an agreement to sell its interest in the Brookeland
gas plant and Jasper pipeline to an unaffiliated third party.
The sale of Brookeland gas plant and Jasper pipeline is
scheduled to close in the first half of 2006. In conjunction
with the purchase and sale agreement, the parties entered into
an NGL dedication agreement whereby the purchaser must dedicate
all NGLs from the related assets to and for the benefit of a
subsidiary of DEFS for transportation on the Black Lake
pipeline. This dedication agreement will commence on the closing
date of the Brookeland gas plant sale and will expire on the
fifth anniversary of such date.
There are currently five active shippers on the pipeline, with
DEFS historically being the largest, representing approximately
5.4 MBbls/d in 2005. The Black Lake pipeline generates
revenues through a FERC-regulated tariff. The current average
rate per barrel is $0.91 for 2005.
Black Lake is a partnership that is owned 45% by us, 5% by an
affiliate of DEFS and 50% by BP. BP is the operator of the
pipeline. Black Lake is required by its partnership agreement to
make monthly cash distributions equal to 100% of its available
cash for each month, which is defined generally as receipts plus
reductions in cash reserves less disbursements and increases in
cash reserves. In anticipation of a pipeline integrity project,
Black Lake suspended making monthly cash distributions in
December 2004 in order to reserve cash to pay the expenses of
this project. We expect that this project will be completed in
2007; however, we anticipate cash distributions will resume
prior to the completion of this project.
Safety
and Maintenance Regulation
We are subject to regulation by the United States Department of
Transportation, referred to as DOT, under the Accountable
Pipeline and Safety Partnership Act of 1996, referred to as the
Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act, and comparable state
statutes with respect to design, installation, testing,
construction,
11
operation, replacement and management of pipeline facilities.
The Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act covers petroleum and
petroleum products and requires any entity that owns or operates
pipeline facilities to comply with such regulations, to permit
access to and copying of records and to file certain reports and
provide information as required by the United States Secretary
of Transportation. These regulations include potential fines and
penalties for violations. We believe that we are in material
compliance with these Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Act
regulations.
We are also subject to the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of
1968, referred to as NGPSA, and the Pipeline Safety Improvement
Act of 2002. The NGPSA regulates safety requirements in the
design, construction, operation and maintenance of gas pipeline
facilities while the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act establishes
mandatory inspections for all United States oil and natural gas
transportation pipelines and some gathering lines in
high-consequence areas within 10 years. The DOT has
developed regulations implementing the Pipeline Safety
Improvement Act that will require pipeline operators to
implement integrity management programs, including more frequent
inspections and other safety protections in areas where the
consequences of potential pipeline accidents pose the greatest
risk to people and their property. We currently estimate we will
incur costs of approximately $6.1 million between 2006 and
2010 to implement integrity management program testing along
certain segments of our natural gas and NGL pipelines. This does
not include the costs, if any, of repair, remediation,
preventative or mitigating actions that may be determined to be
necessary as a result of the testing program. DEFS has agreed to
indemnify us for up to $5.3 million of our pro rata share
of any capital contributions required to be made by us to Black
Lake associated with any repairs to the Black Lake pipeline that
are determined to be necessary as a result of the currently
ongoing pipeline integrity testing occurring from 2005 through
2007 and up to $4.0 million of the costs associated with
any repairs to the Seabreeze pipeline that are determined to be
necessary as a result of the scheduled pipeline integrity
testing occurring during 2006 and 2007.
States are largely preempted by federal law from regulating
pipeline safety but may assume responsibility for enforcing
federal intrastate pipeline regulations and inspection of
intrastate pipelines. In practice, states vary considerably in
their authority and capacity to address pipeline safety. We do
not anticipate any significant problems in complying with
applicable state laws and regulations in those states in which
we or the entities in which we own an interest operate. Our
natural gas pipelines have continuous inspection and compliance
programs designed to keep the facilities in compliance with
pipeline safety and pollution control requirements.
In addition, we are subject to a number of federal and state
laws and regulations, including the federal Occupational Safety
and Health Act, referred to as OSHA, and comparable state
statutes, whose purpose is to protect the health and safety of
workers, both generally and within the pipeline industry. In
addition, the OSHA hazard communication standard, the EPA
community
right-to-know
regulations under Title III of the federal Superfund
Amendment and Reauthorization Act and comparable state statutes
require that information be maintained concerning hazardous
materials used or produced in our operations and that this
information be provided to employees, state and local government
authorities and citizens. We and the entities in which we own an
interest are also subject to OSHA Process Safety Management
regulations, which are designed to prevent or minimize the
consequences of catastrophic releases of toxic, reactive,
flammable or explosive chemicals. These regulations apply to any
process which involves a chemical at or above the specified
thresholds or any process which involves flammable liquid or
gas, pressurized tanks, caverns and wells in excess of 10,000
pounds at various locations. Flammable liquids stored in
atmospheric tanks below their normal boiling point without the
benefit of chilling or refrigeration are exempt. We have an
internal program of inspection designed to monitor and enforce
compliance with worker safety requirements. We believe that we
are in material compliance with all applicable laws and
regulations relating to worker health and safety.
Regulation
of Operations
Regulation of pipeline gathering and transportation services,
natural gas sales and transportation of NGLs may affect certain
aspects of our business and the market for our products and
services.
12
Intrastate
Natural Gas Pipeline Regulation
Intrastate natural gas pipeline operations are not generally
subject to rate regulation by FERC, but they are subject to
regulation by various agencies in the respective states where
they are located. However, to the extent that an intrastate
pipeline system transports natural gas in interstate commerce,
the rates, terms and conditions of such transportation service
are subject to FERC jurisdiction under Section 311 of the
NGPA. Under Section 311, intrastate pipelines providing
interstate service may avoid jurisdiction that would otherwise
apply under the Natural Gas Act. Section 311 regulates,
among other things, the provision of transportation services by
an intrastate natural gas pipeline on behalf of a local
distribution company or an interstate natural gas pipeline.
Under Section 311, rates charged for transportation must be
fair and equitable, and amounts collected in excess of fair and
equitable rates are subject to refund with interest.
Additionally, the terms and conditions of service set forth in
the intrastate pipelines Statement of Operating Conditions
are subject to FERC approval. Failure to observe the service
limitations applicable to transportation services provided under
Section 311, failure to comply with the rates approved by
FERC for Section 311 service, and failure to comply with
the terms and conditions of service established in the
pipelines FERC-approved Statement of Operating Conditions
could result in the assertion of federal Natural Gas Act
jurisdiction by FERC
and/or the
imposition of administrative, civil and criminal penalties. The
PELICO system is subject to FERC jurisdiction under
Section 311 of the NGPA. The maximum rate that the PELICO
system may currently charge is $0.1965 per MMBtu. Pursuant
to a FERC order, the PELICO system is required to file a new
Section 311 rate case with FERC in 2006 at which time the
PELICO systems rates, terms and conditions of service may
be subject to change, which we do not expect to have a material
adverse effect on our business.
Gathering
Pipeline Regulation
Section 1(b) of the Natural Gas Act exempts natural gas
gathering facilities from the jurisdiction of FERC under the
Natural Gas Act. We believe that the natural gas pipelines in
our North Louisiana system meet the traditional tests FERC has
used to establish a pipelines status as a gatherer not
subject to FERC jurisdiction. However, the distinction between
FERC-regulated transmission services and federally unregulated
gathering services is the subject of substantial, on-going
litigation, so the classification and regulation of our
gathering facilities are subject to change based on future
determinations by FERC and the courts. State regulation of
gathering facilities generally includes various safety,
environmental and, in some circumstances, nondiscriminatory take
requirements, and in some instances complaint-based rate
regulation.
Louisianas Pipeline Operations Section of the Department
of Natural Resources Office of Conservation is generally
responsible for regulating intrastate pipelines and gathering
facilities in Louisiana, and has authority to review and
authorize natural gas transportation transactions, and the
construction, acquisition, abandonment and interconnection of
physical facilities. Historically, apart from pipeline safety,
it has not acted to exercise this jurisdiction respecting
gathering facilities.
Our purchasing, gathering and intrastate transportation
operations are subject to Louisiana and Arkansas ratable take
and common purchaser statutes. The ratable take statutes
generally require gatherers to take, without undue
discrimination, natural gas production that may be tendered to
the gatherer for handling. Similarly, common purchaser statutes
generally require gatherers to purchase without undue
discrimination as to source of supply or producer. These
statutes are designed to prohibit discrimination in favor of one
producer over another producer or one source of supply over
another source of supply. These statutes have the effect of
restricting our right as an owner of gathering facilities to
decide with whom we contract to purchase or transport natural
gas.
Natural gas gathering may receive greater regulatory scrutiny at
both the state and federal levels now that FERC has taken a more
light-handed approach to regulation of the gathering activities
of interstate pipeline transmission companies and a number of
such companies have transferred gathering facilities to
unregulated affiliates. Many of the producing states have
adopted some form of complaint-based regulation that generally
allows natural gas producers and shippers to file complaints
with state regulators in an effort to resolve grievances
relating to natural gas gathering access and rate
discrimination. Our gathering operations could be adversely
affected should they be subject in the future to the application
of state or federal regulation of rates
13
and services. Our gathering operations also may be or become
subject to safety and operational regulations relating to the
design, installation, testing, construction, operation,
replacement and management of gathering facilities. Additional
rules and legislation pertaining to these matters are considered
or adopted from time to time. We cannot predict what effect, if
any, such changes might have on our operations, but the industry
could be required to incur additional capital expenditures and
increased costs depending on future legislative and regulatory
changes.
Sales
of Natural Gas
The price at which we buy and sell natural gas currently is not
subject to federal regulation and, for the most part, is not
subject to state regulation. Our sales of natural gas are
affected by the availability, terms and cost of pipeline
transportation. As noted above, the price and terms of access to
pipeline transportation are subject to extensive federal and
state regulation. The FERC is continually proposing and
implementing new rules and regulations affecting those segments
of the natural gas industry, most notably interstate natural gas
transmission companies that remain subject to the FERCs
jurisdiction. These initiatives also may affect the intrastate
transportation of natural gas under certain circumstances. The
stated purpose of many of these regulatory changes is to promote
competition among the various sectors of the natural gas
industry, and these initiatives generally reflect more
light-handed regulation. We cannot predict the ultimate impact
of these regulatory changes to our natural gas marketing
operations, and we note that some of the FERCs more recent
proposals may adversely affect the availability and reliability
of interruptible transportation service on interstate pipelines.
We do not believe that we will be affected by any such FERC
action materially differently than other natural gas marketers
with whom we compete.
Interstate
NGL Pipeline Regulation
The Black Lake pipeline is an interstate NGL pipeline subject to
FERC regulation. The FERC regulates interstate NGL pipelines
under its Oil Pipeline Regulations, the Interstate Commerce Act
(ICA) and the Elkins Act. FERC requires that interstate NGL
pipelines file tariffs containing all the rates, charges and
other terms for services performed. The ICA requires that
tariffs apply to the interstate movement of NGLs, usually
meaning that the origin point and destination point are in
different states, as is the case with the Black Lake pipeline.
Pursuant to the ICA, rates can be challenged at FERC either by
protest when they are initially filed or increased, or by
complaint at any time they remain on file with FERC.
Environmental
Matters
General
Our operation of pipelines, plants and other facilities for
gathering, transporting, processing or storing natural gas, NGLs
and other products is subject to stringent and complex federal,
state and local laws and regulations governing the discharge of
materials into the environment or otherwise relating to the
protection of the environment.
As an owner or operator of these facilities, we must comply with
these laws and regulations at the federal, state and local
levels. These laws and regulations can restrict or impact our
business activities in many ways, such as:
|
|
|
|
|
restricting the way we can handle or dispose of our wastes;
|
|
|
|
limiting or prohibiting construction activities in sensitive
areas such as wetlands, coastal regions or areas inhabited by
endangered species;
|
|
|
|
requiring remedial action to mitigate pollution conditions
caused by our operations or attributable to former
operations; and
|
|
|
|
enjoining the operations of facilities deemed in non-compliance
with permits issued pursuant to such environmental laws and
regulations.
|
14
Failure to comply with these laws and regulations may trigger a
variety of administrative, civil and criminal enforcement
measures, including the assessment of monetary penalties, the
imposition of remedial requirements and the issuance of orders
enjoining future operations. Certain environmental statutes
impose strict joint and several liability for costs required to
clean up and restore sites where hazardous substances have been
disposed or otherwise released. Moreover, it is not uncommon for
neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims
for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by the
release of substances or other waste products into the
environment.
The trend in environmental regulation is to place more
restrictions and limitations on activities that may affect the
environment, and thus there can be no assurance as to the amount
or timing of future expenditures for environmental compliance or
remediation, and actual future expenditures may be different
from the amounts we currently anticipate. We try to anticipate
future regulatory requirements that might be imposed and plan
accordingly to remain in compliance with changing environmental
laws and regulations and to minimize the costs of such
compliance. We also actively participate in industry groups that
help formulate recommendations for addressing existing or future
regulations.
We do not believe that compliance with federal, state or local
environmental laws and regulations will have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial position or results of
operations. In addition, we believe that the various
environmental activities in which we are presently engaged are
not expected to materially interrupt or diminish our operational
ability to gather, compress, treat, fractionate and process
natural gas. We cannot assure you, however, that future events,
such as changes in existing laws, the promulgation of new laws,
or the development or discovery of new facts or conditions will
cause us to incur significant costs. Below is a discussion of
the material environmental laws and regulations that relate to
our business. We believe that we are in substantial compliance
with all of these environmental laws and regulations.
We or the entities in which we own an interest inspect the
pipelines regularly using equipment rented from third-party
suppliers. Third parties also assist us in interpreting the
results of the inspections.
DEFS has agreed to indemnify us in an aggregate amount not to
exceed $15.0 million for three years from the closing of
our initial public offering for environmental noncompliance and
remediation liabilities associated with the assets transferred
to us and occurring or existing before the closing date of
December 7, 2005.
Air
Emissions
Our operations are subject to the federal Clean Air Act and
comparable state laws and regulations. These laws and
regulations regulate emissions of air pollutants from various
industrial sources, including our processing plants and
compressor stations, and also impose various monitoring and
reporting requirements. Such laws and regulations may require
that we obtain pre-approval for the construction or modification
of certain projects or facilities expected to produce or
significantly increase air emissions, obtain and strictly comply
with air permits containing various emissions and operational
limitations, and utilize specific emission control technologies
to limit emissions. Our failure to comply with these
requirements could subject us to monetary penalties,
injunctions, conditions or restrictions on operations, and
potentially criminal enforcement actions. We believe that we are
in substantial compliance with these requirements. We may be
required to incur certain capital expenditures in the future for
air pollution control equipment in connection with obtaining and
maintaining operating permits and approvals for air emissions.
We believe, however, that our operations will not be materially
adversely affected by such requirements, and the requirements
are not expected to be any more burdensome to us than to any
other similarly situated companies.
Hazardous
Substances and Waste
Our operations are subject to environmental laws and regulations
relating to the management and release of hazardous substances
or solid wastes (including petroleum hydrocarbons). These laws
generally regulate the generation, storage, treatment,
transportation and disposal of solid and hazardous waste, and
may impose strict, joint and several liability for the
investigation and remediation of areas, at a facility where
hazardous
15
substances may have been released or disposed. For instance, the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act, referred to as CERCLA or the Superfund law, and
comparable state laws impose liability, without regard to fault
or the legality of the original conduct, on certain classes of
persons that contributed to the release of a hazardous
substance into the environment. These persons include
current and prior owners or operators of the site where the
release occurred and companies that disposed or arranged for the
disposal of the hazardous substances found at the site. Under
CERCLA, these persons may be subject to joint and several strict
liability for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances
that have been released into the environment, for damages to
natural resources and for the costs of certain health studies.
CERCLA also authorizes the EPA and, in some instances, third
parties to act in response to threats to the public health or
the environment and to seek to recover from the responsible
classes of persons the costs they incur. It is not uncommon for
neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims
for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by
hazardous substances or other pollutants released into the
environment. Despite the petroleum exclusion of
CERCLA Section 101(14) that currently encompasses natural
gas, we may nonetheless handle hazardous substances
within the meaning of CERCLA, or similar state statutes, in the
course of our ordinary operations and, as a result, may be
jointly and severally liable under CERCLA for all or part of the
costs required to clean up sites at which these hazardous
substances have been released into the environment.
We also generate solid wastes, including hazardous wastes, that
are subject to the requirements of the Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, referred to as RCRA, and comparable state
statutes. While RCRA regulates both solid and hazardous wastes,
it imposes strict requirements on the generation, storage,
treatment, transportation and disposal of hazardous wastes.
Certain petroleum production wastes are excluded from
RCRAs hazardous waste regulations. However, it is possible
that these wastes, which could include wastes currently
generated during our operations, will in the future be
designated as hazardous wastes and therefore be
subject to more rigorous and costly disposal requirements. Any
such changes in the laws and regulations could have a material
adverse effect on our maintenance capital expenditures and
operating expenses.
We currently own or lease, and our predecessor has in the past
owned or leased, properties where hydrocarbons are being or have
been handled for many years. Although we have utilized operating
and disposal practices that were standard in the industry at the
time, hydrocarbons or other wastes may have been disposed of or
released on or under the properties owned or leased by us or on
or under the other locations where these hydrocarbons and wastes
have been taken for treatment or disposal. In addition, certain
of these properties have been operated by third parties whose
treatment and disposal or release of hydrocarbons or other
wastes was not under our control. These properties and wastes
disposed thereon may be subject to CERCLA, RCRA and analogous
state laws. Under these laws, we could be required to remove or
remediate previously disposed wastes (including wastes disposed
of or released by prior owners or operators), to clean up
contaminated property (including contaminated groundwater) or to
perform remedial operations to prevent future contamination. We
are not currently aware of any facts, events or conditions
relating to such requirements that could reasonably have a
material impact on our operations or financial condition.
Water
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, also referred
to as the Clean Water Act, or CWA, and analogous state laws
impose restrictions and strict controls regarding the discharge
of pollutants into navigable waters. Pursuant to the CWA and
analogous state laws, permits must be obtained to discharge
pollutants into state and federal waters. The CWA imposes
substantial potential civil and criminal penalties for
non-compliance. State laws for the control of water pollution
also provide varying civil and criminal penalties and
liabilities. In addition, some states maintain groundwater
protection programs that require permits for discharges or
operations that may impact groundwater conditions. The EPA has
promulgated regulations that require us to have permits in order
to discharge certain storm water run-off. The EPA has entered
into agreements with certain states in which we operate whereby
the permits are issued and administered by the respective
states. These permits may require us to monitor and sample the
storm water run-off. We believe that compliance with existing
permits and compliance with foreseeable new permit requirements
will not have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition or results of operations.
16
Title to
Properties and
Rights-of-Way
Our real property falls into two categories: (1) parcels
that we own in fee and (2) parcels in which our interest
derives from leases, easements,
rights-of-way,
permits or licenses from landowners or governmental authorities
permitting the use of such land for our operations. Portions of
the land on which our plants and other major facilities are
located are owned by us in fee title, and we believe that we
have satisfactory title to these lands. The remainder of the
land on which our plant sites and major facilities are located
are held by us pursuant to ground leases between us, as lessee,
and the fee owner of the lands, as lessors. We, or our
predecessors, have leased these lands for many years without any
material challenge known to us relating to the title to the land
upon which the assets are located, and we believe that we have
satisfactory leasehold estates to such lands. We have no
knowledge of any challenge to the underlying fee title of any
material lease, easement,
right-of-way,
permit or license held by us or to our title to any material
lease, easement,
right-of-way,
permit or lease, and we believe that we have satisfactory title
to all of our material leases, easements,
rights-of-way,
permits and licenses.
Employees
DCP Midstream GP, LLC or its affiliates employs nine people
directly and approximately 55 people through DEFS who provide
direct support for our operations. None of these employees are
covered by collective bargaining agreements. Our general partner
considers its employee relations to be good.
General
We make certain filings with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, or SEC, including our annual report on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K,
and all amendments and exhibits to those reports, available free
of charge through our website, http://www.dcppartners.com, as
soon as reasonably practicable after they are filed with the
SEC. The filings are also available through the SEC at the
SECs Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E.,
Washington, D.C. 20549 or by calling
1-800-SEC-0330.
Also, these filings are available on the internet at
http://www.sec.gov. Our annual reports to unitholders, press
releases and recent analyst presentations are also available on
our website.
Item 1A. Risk
Factors
Limited partner interests are inherently different from
capital stock of a corporation, although many of the business
risks to which we are subject are similar to those that would be
faced by a corporation engaged in similar businesses. You should
consider carefully the following risk factors together with all
of the other information included in this annual report in
evaluating an investment in our common units.
If any of the following risks were actually to occur, our
business, financial condition or results of operations could be
materially adversely affected. In that case, we might not be
able to pay the minimum quarterly distribution on our common
units, the trading price of our common units could decline and
you could lose all or part of your investment.
Risks
Related to Our Business
We may
not have sufficient cash from operations following the
establishment of cash reserves and payment of fees and expenses,
including cost reimbursements to our general partner, to enable
us to make cash distributions to holders of our common units and
subordinated units at the initial distribution rate under our
cash distribution policy.
In order to make our cash distributions at our initial
distribution rate of $0.35 per common unit per complete
quarter, or $1.40 per unit per year, we require available
cash of approximately $6.25 million per quarter, or
$25.0 million per year, based on the common units and
subordinated units currently outstanding. We may not have
sufficient available cash from operating surplus each quarter to
enable us to make cash distributions at the initial distribution
rate under our cash distribution policy. The amount of cash we
can
17
distribute on our units principally depends upon the amount of
cash we generate from our operations, which will fluctuate from
quarter to quarter based on, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
the fees we charge and the margins we realize for our services;
|
|
|
|
the prices of, level of production of, and demand for, natural
gas, NGLs, and condensate;
|
|
|
|
the volume of natural gas we gather, treat, compress, process,
transport and sell, and the volume of NGLs we transport and sell;
|
|
|
|
the relationship between natural gas and NGL prices;
|
|
|
|
the level of competition from other midstream energy companies;
|
|
|
|
the level of our operating and maintenance and general and
administrative costs; and
|
|
|
|
prevailing economic conditions.
|
In addition, the actual amount of cash we will have available
for distribution will depend on other factors, some of which are
beyond our control, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the level of capital expenditures we make;
|
|
|
|
the cost and form of payment of acquisitions;
|
|
|
|
our debt service requirements and other liabilities;
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in our working capital needs;
|
|
|
|
our ability to borrow funds and access capital markets;
|
|
|
|
restrictions contained in our debt agreements; and
|
|
|
|
the amount of cash reserves established by our general partner.
|
The
amount of cash we have available for distribution to holders of
our common units and subordinated units depends primarily on our
cash flow and not solely on profitability.
You should be aware that the amount of cash we have available
for distribution depends primarily upon our cash flow and not
solely on profitability, which will be affected by non-cash
items. As a result, we may make cash distributions during
periods when we record losses for financial accounting purposes
and may not make cash distributions during periods when we
record net earnings for financial accounting purposes.
Because
of the natural decline in production from existing wells, our
success depends on our ability to obtain new sources of supplies
of natural gas and NGLs, which are dependent on certain factors
beyond our control. Any decrease in supplies of natural gas or
NGLs could adversely affect our business and operating
results.
Our gathering and transportation pipeline systems are connected
to or dependent on the level of production from natural gas
wells, from which production will naturally decline over time.
As a result, our cash flows associated with these wells will
also decline over time. In order to maintain or increase
throughput levels on our gathering and transportation pipeline
systems and NGL pipelines and the asset utilization rates at our
natural gas processing plants, we must continually obtain new
supplies. The primary factors affecting our ability to obtain
new supplies of natural gas and NGLs and attract new customers
to our assets include: (1) the level of successful drilling
activity near these systems and (2) our ability to compete
for volumes from successful new wells.
The level of drilling activity is dependent on economic and
business factors beyond our control. The primary factor that
impacts drilling decisions is natural gas prices. Currently,
natural gas prices are high in relation to historical prices.
For example, the rolling twelve-month average NYMEX daily
settlement price of natural gas has increased from
$4.10 per MMBtu as of June 30, 2000 to $8.59 per
MMBtu as of December 31, 2005. If the high price for
natural gas were to decline, the level of drilling activity
could decrease. A sustained
18
decline in natural gas prices could result in a decrease in
exploration and development activities in the fields served by
our gathering and pipeline transportation systems and our
natural gas treating and processing plants, which would lead to
reduced utilization of these assets. Other factors that impact
production decisions include producers capital budgets,
the ability of producers to obtain necessary drilling and other
governmental permits, and regulatory changes. Because of these
factors, even if new natural gas reserves are discovered in
areas served by our assets, producers may choose not to develop
those reserves. If we are not able to obtain new supplies of
natural gas to replace the natural decline in volumes from
existing wells due to reductions in drilling activity or
competition, throughput on our pipelines and the utilization
rates of our treating and processing facilities would decline,
which could have a material adverse effect on our business,
results of operations, financial condition and ability to make
cash distributions to you.
The
cash flow from our Natural Gas Services segment is affected by
natural gas, NGL and condensate prices, and decreases in these
prices could adversely affect our ability to make distributions
to holders of our common units and subordinated
units.
Our Natural Gas Services segment is affected by the level of
natural gas, NGL and condensate prices. NGL and condensate
prices generally fluctuate on a basis that correlates to
fluctuations in crude oil prices. In the past, the prices of
natural gas and crude oil have been extremely volatile, and we
expect this volatility to continue. The markets and prices for
natural gas, NGLs, condensate and crude oil depend upon factors
beyond our control. These factors include demand for these
commodities, which fluctuate with changes in market and economic
conditions and other factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the impact of weather;
|
|
|
|
the level of domestic and offshore production;
|
|
|
|
the availability of imported natural gas, NGLs and crude oil;
|
|
|
|
actions taken by foreign oil and gas producing nations;
|
|
|
|
the availability of local, intrastate and interstate
transportation systems;
|
|
|
|
the availability and marketing of competitive fuels;
|
|
|
|
the impact of energy conservation efforts; and
|
|
|
|
the extent of governmental regulation and taxation.
|
Our primary natural gas gathering and processing arrangements
that expose us to commodity price risk are our
percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements. Under
percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements, we generally purchase natural gas from producers
for an agreed percentage of the proceeds from the sale of
residue gas and NGLs resulting from our processing activities,
and then sell the resulting residue gas and NGLs at market
prices. Under these types of arrangements, our revenues and our
cash flows increase or decrease, whichever is applicable, as the
price of natural gas and NGLs fluctuate. As of January 1,
2006, we have hedged approximately 80% of our share of
anticipated natural gas and NGL commodity price risk associated
with these arrangements through 2010. Additionally, as part of
our gathering operations, we recover and sell condensate. The
margins we earn from condensate sales are directly correlated
with crude oil prices. As of January 1, 2006, we have
hedged approximately 80% of our share of anticipated condensate
commodity price risk through 2010. For additional information
regarding our hedging activities, please read
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operation Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk Commodity Price
Risk Hedging Strategies.
Our
hedging activities may have a material adverse effect on our
earnings, profitability, cash flows and financial
condition.
As of January 1, 2006, we have hedged approximately 80% of
our expected natural gas and NGL commodity price risk relating
to our percentage of proceeds gathering and processing contracts
through 2010 by entering into derivative financial instruments
relating to the future price of natural gas and crude oil. In
19
addition, as of January 1, 2006 we have hedged
approximately 80% of our expected condensate commodity price
risk relating to condensate recovered from our gathering
operations through 2010 by entering into derivative financial
instruments relating to the future price of crude oil. The
intent of these arrangements is to reduce the volatility in our
cash flows resulting from fluctuations in commodity prices.
For periods after 2010, our management will evaluate whether to
enter into any new hedging arrangements, but there can be no
assurance that we will enter into any new hedging arrangement or
that our future hedging arrangements will be on terms similar to
our existing hedging arrangements. Also, we may seek in the
future to further limit our exposure to changes in natural gas,
NGL and condensate commodity prices and we may seek to limit our
exposure to changes in interest rates by using financial
derivative instruments and other hedging mechanisms from time to
time. To the extent we hedge our commodity price and interest
rate risk, we will forego the benefits we would otherwise
experience if commodity prices or interest rates were to change
in our favor.
Despite our hedging program, we remain exposed to risks
associated with fluctuations in commodity prices. The extent of
our commodity price risk is related largely to the effectiveness
and scope of our hedging activities. For example, the derivative
instruments we utilize are based on posted market prices, which
may differ significantly from the actual natural gas, NGL and
condensate prices that we realize in our operations.
Furthermore, we have entered into derivative transactions
related to only a portion of the volume of our expected natural
gas supply and production of NGLs and condensate from our
processing plants; as a result, we will continue to have direct
commodity price risk to the unhedged portion. Our actual future
production may be significantly higher or lower than we estimate
at the time we entered into the derivative transactions for that
period. If the actual amount is higher than we estimate, we will
have greater commodity price risk than we intended. If the
actual amount is lower than the amount that is subject to our
derivative financial instruments, we might be forced to satisfy
all or a portion of our derivative transactions without the
benefit of the cash flow from our sale of the underlying
physical commodity, resulting in a reduction of our liquidity.
As a result of these factors, our hedging activities may not be
as effective as we intend in reducing the volatility of our cash
flows, and in certain circumstances may actually increase the
volatility of our cash flows. In addition, even though our
management monitors our hedging activities, these activities can
result in substantial losses. Such losses could occur under
various circumstances, including if a counterparty does not
perform its obligations under the applicable hedging
arrangement, the hedging arrangement is imperfect or
ineffective, or our hedging policies and procedures are not
properly followed or do not work as planned. We cannot assure
you that the steps we take to monitor our hedging activities
will detect and prevent violations of our risk management
policies and procedures, particularly if deception or other
intentional misconduct is involved. For additional information
regarding our hedging activities, please read
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operation Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk Commodity Price
Risk Hedging Strategies.
We
typically do not obtain independent evaluations of natural gas
reserves dedicated to our gathering and pipeline systems;
therefore, volumes of natural gas on our systems in the future
could be less than we anticipate.
We typically do not obtain independent evaluations of natural
gas reserves connected to our systems due to the unwillingness
of producers to provide reserve information as well as the cost
of such evaluations. Accordingly, we do not have independent
estimates of total reserves dedicated to our systems or the
anticipated life of such reserves. If the total reserves or
estimated life of the reserves connected to our gathering
systems is less than we anticipate and we are unable to secure
additional sources of natural gas, then the volumes of natural
gas on our systems in the future could be less than we
anticipate. A decline in the volumes of natural gas on our
systems could have a material adverse effect on our business,
results of operations, financial condition and our ability to
make cash distributions to you.
20
We
depend on certain natural gas producer customers for a
significant portion of our supply of natural gas and NGLs. The
loss of any of these customers could result in a decline in our
volumes, revenues and cash available for
distribution.
We rely on certain natural gas producer customers for a
significant portion of our natural gas and NGL supply. Our two
largest suppliers for the year ended December 31, 2005,
Anadarko Petroleum Corporation and ConocoPhillips, accounted for
approximately 28% and 20%, respectively, of our 2005 natural gas
supply in our Natural Gas segment. Our largest NGL supplier, an
affiliate of The Williams Companies, Inc., accounted for
approximately 77% of our NGL supply for the year ended
December 31, 2005 in our NGL Logistics segment. While some
of these customers are subject to long-term contracts, we may be
unable to negotiate extensions or replacements of these
contracts, on favorable terms, if at all. The loss of all or
even a portion of the natural gas and NGL volumes supplied by
these customers, as a result of competition or otherwise, could
have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
operations and financial condition, unless we were able to
acquire comparable volumes from other sources.
We may
not be able to grow or effectively manage our
growth.
A principal focus of our strategy is to continue to grow the per
unit distribution on our units by expanding our business. Our
future growth will depend upon a number of factors, some of
which we can control and some of which we cannot. These factors
include our ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
identify businesses engaged in managing, operating or owning
pipelines, processing and storage assets or other midstream
assets for acquisitions, joint ventures and construction
projects;
|
|
|
|
consummate accretive acquisitions or joint ventures and complete
construction projects;
|
|
|
|
appropriately identify any liabilities associated with any
acquired businesses or assets;
|
|
|
|
integrate any acquired or constructed businesses or assets
successfully with our existing operations and into our operating
and financial systems and controls;
|
|
|
|
hire, train and retain qualified personnel to manage and operate
our growing business; and
|
|
|
|
obtain required financing for our existing and new operations.
|
A deficiency in any of these factors could adversely affect our
ability to achieve growth in the level of our cash flows or
realize benefits from acquisitions, joint ventures or
construction projects. In addition, competition from other
buyers could reduce our acquisition opportunities or cause us to
pay a higher price than we might otherwise pay. In addition,
DEFS and its affiliates are not restricted from competing with
us. DEFS and its affiliates may acquire, construct or dispose of
midstream or other assets in the future without any obligation
to offer us the opportunity to purchase or construct those
assets.
We may
not successfully balance our purchases and sales of natural gas,
which would increase our exposure to commodity price
risks.
We purchase from producers and other customers a substantial
amount of the natural gas that flows through our natural gas
gathering, processing and transportation systems for resale to
third parties, including natural gas marketers and end-users. We
may not be successful in balancing our purchases and sales. A
producer or supplier could fail to deliver contracted volumes or
deliver in excess of contracted volumes, or a purchaser could
purchase less than contracted volumes. Any of these actions
could cause our purchases and sales to be unbalanced. While we
attempt to balance our purchases and sales, if our purchases and
sales are unbalanced, we will face increased exposure to
commodity price risks and could have increased volatility in our
operating income and cash flows.
21
Our
NGL pipelines could be adversely affected by any decrease in NGL
prices relative to the price of natural gas.
The profitability of our NGL pipelines is dependent on the level
of production of NGLs from processing plants connected to our
NGL pipelines. When natural gas prices are high relative to NGL
prices, it is less profitable to process natural gas because of
the higher value of natural gas compared to the value of NGLs
and because of the increased cost (principally that of natural
gas as a feedstock and fuel) of separating the mixed NGLs from
the natural gas. As a result, we may experience periods in which
higher natural gas prices reduce the volume of natural gas
processed at plants connected to our NGL pipelines, which would
reduce the volumes and gross margins attributable to our NGL
pipelines.
If
third-party pipelines and other facilities interconnected to our
natural gas and NGL pipelines and facilities become unavailable
to transport or produce natural gas and NGLs, our revenues and
cash available for distribution could be adversely
affected.
We depend upon third party pipelines and other facilities that
provide delivery options to and from our pipelines and
facilities for the benefit of our customers. For example, the
volumes of NGLs that are transported on our Seabreeze pipeline
and the Black Lake pipeline are dependent upon a number of
processing plants and NGL pipelines owned and operated by DEFS
and other third parties, including Williams Markham Gas
Plant, Enterprise Products Matagorda Plant, TEPPCO
Partners, L.P.s South Dean NGL pipeline, Regency
Intrastate Gas, LLCs Dubach processing plant and
Chesapeake Energy Corporations Black Lake processing
plant. In addition, our PELICO pipeline system is interconnected
to several third-party intrastate and interstate pipelines,
including pipelines owned by Southern Natural Gas Company, Texas
Gas Transmission, LLC, CenterPoint Energy Mississippi River
Transmission Corporation, Texas Eastern Transmission LP,
CenterPoint Energy Gas Transmission Company, Crosstex LIG, LLC,
Gulf South Pipeline Company, Tennessee Natural Gas Company and
Regency Intrastate Gas, LLC. Since we do not own or operate any
of these pipelines or other facilities, their continuing
operation is not within our control. If any of these third-party
pipelines and other facilities become unavailable to transport
or produce natural gas and NGLs, our revenues and cash available
for distribution could be adversely affected. For example,
throughput for our Seabreeze pipeline was negatively impacted by
a shut down of a third party NGL pipeline from March 2004 until
June 2005 due to pipeline integrity repairs, which have now been
completed.
Our
industry is highly competitive, and increased competitive
pressure could adversely affect our business and operating
results.
We compete with similar enterprises in our respective areas of
operation. Some of our competitors are large oil, natural gas
and petrochemical companies that have greater financial
resources and access to supplies of natural gas and NGLs than we
do. Some of these competitors may expand or construct gathering,
processing and transportation systems that would create
additional competition for the services we provide to our
customers. In addition, our customers who are significant
producers of natural gas may develop their own gathering,
processing and transportation systems in lieu of using ours.
Likewise, our customers who produce NGLs may develop their own
systems to transport NGLs in lieu of using ours. Our ability to
renew or replace existing contracts with our customers at rates
sufficient to maintain current revenues and cash flows could be
adversely affected by the activities of our competitors and our
customers. All of these competitive pressures could have a
material adverse effect on our business, results of operations,
financial condition and ability to make cash distributions to
you.
A
change in the jurisdictional characterization of some of our
assets by federal, state or local regulatory agencies or a
change in policy by those agencies may result in increased
regulation of our assets, which may cause our revenues to
decline and operating expenses to increase.
Our natural gas gathering and intrastate transportation
operations are generally exempt from Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission, or FERC, regulation under the Natural Gas Act of
1938, or NGA, except for Section 311 as discussed below,
but FERC regulation still affects these businesses and the
markets for products derived from these businesses. FERCs
policies and practices across the range of its oil and natural
gas
22
regulatory activities, including, for example, its policies on
open access transportation, ratemaking, capacity release and
market center promotion, indirectly affect intrastate markets.
In recent years, FERC has pursued pro-competitive policies in
its regulation of interstate oil and natural gas pipelines.
However, we cannot assure you that FERC will continue this
approach as it considers matters such as pipeline rates and
rules and policies that may affect rights of access to oil and
natural gas transportation capacity. In addition, the
distinction between FERC-regulated transmission services and
federally unregulated gathering services has been the subject of
regular litigation, so, in such a circumstance, the
classification and regulation of some of our gathering
facilities and intrastate transportation pipelines may be
subject to change based on future determinations by FERC and the
courts.
In addition, the rates, terms and conditions of some of the
transportation services we provide on our PELICO pipeline system
is subject to FERC regulation under Section 311 of the
Natural Gas Policy Act, or NGPA. Under Section 311, rates
charged for transportation must be fair and equitable, and
amounts collected in excess of fair and equitable rates are
subject to refund with interest. The PELICO system is currently
charging rates for its Section 311 transportation services
that were deemed fair and equitable under a rate settlement with
FERC. The PELICO system is obligated to make a new rate filing
in 2006, at which time the rates, terms and conditions of the
PELICO systems Section 311 transportation services
may be subject to change. The Black Lake pipeline system is an
interstate transporter of NGLs and is subject to FERC
jurisdiction under the Interstate Commerce Act and the Elkins
Act. For more information regarding regulation of our
operations, please read
Business Regulation of Operations.
Other state and local regulations also affect our business. Our
non-proprietary gathering lines are subject to ratable take and
common purchaser statutes in Louisiana. Ratable take statutes
generally require gatherers to take, without undue
discrimination, oil or natural gas production that may be
tendered to the gatherer for handling. Similarly, common
purchaser statutes generally require gatherers to purchase
without undue discrimination as to source of supply or producer.
These statutes restrict our right as an owner of gathering
facilities to decide with whom we contract to purchase or
transport oil or natural gas. Federal law leaves any economic
regulation of natural gas gathering to the states. The states in
which we operate have adopted complaint-based regulation of oil
and natural gas gathering activities, which allows oil and
natural gas producers and shippers to file complaints with state
regulators in an effort to resolve grievances relating to oil
and natural gas gathering access and rate discrimination. Other
state regulations may not directly regulate our business, but
may nonetheless affect the availability of natural gas for
purchase, processing and sale, including state regulation of
production rates and maximum daily production allowable from gas
wells. While our proprietary gathering lines currently are
subject to limited state regulation, there is a risk that state
laws will be changed, which may give producers a stronger basis
to challenge proprietary status of a line, or the rates, terms
and conditions of a gathering line providing transportation
service. Please read Business Regulation
of Operations.
We may
incur significant costs and liabilities in the future resulting
from a failure to comply with new or existing environmental
regulations or an accidental release of hazardous substances or
hydrocarbons into the environment.
Our operations are subject to stringent and complex federal,
state and local environmental laws and regulations. These
include, for example, (1) the federal Clean Air Act and
comparable state laws and regulations that impose obligations
related to air emissions, (2) the federal Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act, or RCRA, and comparable state
laws that impose requirements for the discharge of waste from
our facilities and (3) the Comprehensive Environmental
Response Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, or CERCLA, also
known as Superfund, and comparable state laws that
regulate the cleanup of hazardous substances that may have been
released at properties currently or previously owned or operated
by us or locations to which we have sent waste for disposal.
Failure to comply with these laws and regulations or newly
adopted laws or regulations may trigger a variety of
administrative, civil and criminal enforcement measures,
including the assessment of monetary penalties, the imposition
of remedial requirements, and the issuance of orders enjoining
future operations. Certain environmental regulations, including
CERCLA and analogous state laws and regulations, impose strict,
joint and several liability for costs required to clean up and
23
restore sites where hazardous substances or hydrocarbons have
been disposed or otherwise released. Moreover, it is not
uncommon for neighboring landowners and other third parties to
file claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly
caused by the release of hazardous substances, hydrocarbons or
other waste products into the environment.
There is inherent risk of the incurrence of environmental costs
and liabilities in our business due to our handling of natural
gas and other petroleum products, air emissions related to our
operations, and historical industry operations and waste
disposal practices. For example, an accidental release from one
of our facilities could subject us to substantial liabilities
arising from environmental cleanup and restoration costs, claims
made by neighboring landowners and other third parties for
personal injury and property damage and fines or penalties for
related violations of environmental laws or regulations.
Moreover, the possibility exists that stricter laws, regulations
or enforcement policies could significantly increase our
compliance costs and the cost of any remediation that may become
necessary. We may not be able to recover these costs from
insurance or from indemnification from DEFS. Please read
Business Environmental Matters.
We may
incur significant costs and liabilities resulting from pipeline
integrity programs and related repairs.
Pursuant to the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002, the
United States Department of Transportation (DOT) has
adopted regulations requiring pipeline operators to develop
integrity management programs for transportation pipelines
located where a leak or rupture could do the most harm in
high consequence areas. The regulations require
operators to:
|
|
|
|
|
perform ongoing assessments of pipeline integrity;
|
|
|
|
identify and characterize applicable threats to pipeline
segments that could impact a high consequence area;
|
|
|
|
improve data collection, integration and analysis;
|
|
|
|
repair and remediate the pipeline as necessary; and
|
|
|
|
implement preventive and mitigating actions.
|
We currently estimate that we will incur costs of approximately
$6.1 million between 2006 and 2010 to implement pipeline
integrity management program testing along certain segments of
our natural gas and NGL pipelines. This does not include the
costs, if any, of any repair, remediation, preventative or
mitigating actions that may be determined to be necessary as a
result of the testing program, which costs could be substantial.
While DEFS has agreed to indemnify us for certain repair costs
relating to the Black Lake pipeline and our Seabreeze pipelines
resulting from such testing program, the actual costs of making
such repairs, including any lost cash flows resulting from
shutting down our pipelines during the pendency of such repairs,
could substantially exceed the amount of such indemnity.
We currently transport all of the NGLs produced at our Minden
plant on the Black Lake pipeline. According, in the event that
the Black Lake pipeline becomes inoperable due to any necessary
repairs resulting from our integrity testing program or for any
other reason for any significant period of time, we would need
to transport NGLs by other means. The Minden plant has an
existing alternate pipeline connection that would permit the
transportation of NGLs to a local fractionator for processing
and distribution with sufficient pipeline takeaway and
fractionation capacity to handle all of the Minden plans
NGL production. We do not, however, currently have commercial
arrangements in place with the alternative pipeline. While we
believe we could establish alternate transportation arrangements
on competitive terms, there can be no assurance that we will in
fact be able to enter into such arrangements on favorable terms
in the future.
24
Our
construction of new assets may not result in revenue increases
and is subject to regulatory, environmental, political, legal
and economic risks, which could adversely affect our results of
operations and financial condition.
One of the ways we intend to grow our business is through the
construction of new midstream assets. The construction of
additions or modifications to our existing systems, and the
construction of new midstream assets involves numerous
regulatory, environmental, political and legal uncertainties
beyond our control and may require the expenditure of
significant amounts of capital. If we undertake these projects,
they may not be completed on schedule or at the budgeted cost,
or at all. Moreover, our revenues may not increase immediately
upon the expenditure of funds on a particular project. For
instance, if we expand a new pipeline, the construction may
occur over an extended period of time, and we will not receive
any material increases in revenues until the project is
completed. Moreover, we may construct facilities to capture
anticipated future growth in production in a region in which
such growth does not materialize. Since we are not engaged in
the exploration for and development of natural gas and oil
reserves, we often do not have access to third-party estimates
of potential reserves in an area prior to constructing
facilities in such area. To the extent we rely on estimates of
future production in our decision to construct additions to our
systems, such estimates may prove to be inaccurate because there
are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of
future production. As a result, new facilities may not be able
to attract enough throughput to achieve our expected investment
return, which could adversely affect our results of operations
and financial condition. In addition, the construction of
additions to our existing gathering and transportation assets
may require us to obtain new
rights-of-way
prior to constructing new pipelines. We may be unable to obtain
such
rights-of-way
to connect new natural gas supplies to our existing gathering
lines or capitalize on other attractive expansion opportunities.
Additionally, it may become more expensive for us to obtain new
rights-of-way
or to renew existing
rights-of-way.
If the cost of renewing or obtaining new
rights-of-way
increases, our cash flows could be adversely affected.
If we
do not make acquisitions on economically acceptable terms, our
future growth will be limited.
Our ability to grow depends, in part, on our ability to make
acquisitions that result in an increase in the cash generated
from operations per unit. If we are unable to make these
accretive acquisitions either because we are: (1) unable to
identify attractive acquisition candidates or negotiate
acceptable purchase contracts with them, (2) unable to
obtain financing for these acquisitions on economically
acceptable terms, or (3) outbid by competitors, then our
future growth and ability to increase distributions will be
limited. Furthermore, even if we do make acquisitions that we
believe will be accretive, these acquisitions may nevertheless
result in a decrease in the cash generated from operations per
unit.
Any acquisition involves potential risks, including, among other
things:
|
|
|
|
|
mistaken assumptions about volumes, revenues and costs,
including synergies;
|
|
|
|
an inability to integrate successfully the businesses we acquire;
|
|
|
|
the assumption of unknown liabilities;
|
|
|
|
limitations on rights to indemnity from the seller;
|
|
|
|
mistaken assumptions about the overall costs of equity or debt;
|
|
|
|
the diversion of managements and employees attention
from other business concerns;
|
|
|
|
unforeseen difficulties operating in new product areas or new
geographic areas; and
|
|
|
|
customer or key employee losses at the acquired businesses.
|
If we consummate any future acquisitions, our capitalization and
results of operations may change significantly, and you will not
have the opportunity to evaluate the economic, financial and
other relevant information that we will consider in determining
the application of these funds and other resources.
25
Our acquisition strategy is based, in part, on our expectation
of ongoing divestitures of energy assets by industry
participants. A material decrease in such divestitures would
limit our opportunities for future acquisitions and could
adversely affect our operations and cash flows available for
distribution to our unitholders.
We do
not own all of the land on which our pipelines and facilities
are located, which could disrupt our operations.
We do not own all of the land on which our pipelines and
facilities have been constructed, and we are therefore subject
to the possibility of more onerous terms
and/or
increased costs to retain necessary land use if we do not have
valid rights of way or if such rights of way lapse or terminate.
We obtain the rights to construct and operate our pipelines on
land owned by third parties and governmental agencies for a
specific period of time. Our loss of these rights, through our
inability to renew
right-of-way
contracts or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on
our business, results of operations and financial condition and
our ability to make cash distributions to you.
Our
business involves many hazards and operational risks, some of
which may not be fully covered by insurance. If a significant
accident or event occurs that is not fully insured, our
operations and financial results could be adversely
affected.
Our operations are subject to many hazards inherent in the
gathering, compressing, treating, processing and transporting of
natural gas and NGLs, including:
|
|
|
|
|
damage to pipelines and plants, related equipment and
surrounding properties caused by hurricanes, tornadoes, floods,
fires and other natural disasters and acts of terrorism;
|
|
|
|
inadvertent damage from construction, farm and utility equipment;
|
|
|
|
leaks of natural gas, NGLs and other hydrocarbons or losses of
natural gas or NGLs as a result of the malfunction of equipment
or facilities;
|
|
|
|
fires and explosions; and
|
|
|
|
other hazards that could also result in personal injury and loss
of life, pollution and suspension of operations.
|
These risks could result in substantial losses due to personal
injury
and/or loss
of life, severe damage to and destruction of property and
equipment and pollution or other environmental damage and may
result in curtailment or suspension of our related operations. A
natural disaster or other hazard affecting the areas in which we
operate could have a material adverse effect on our operations.
We are not fully insured against all risks inherent to our
business. In accordance with typical industry practice, we do
not have any property insurance on any of our underground
pipeline systems that would cover damage to the pipelines. We
are not insured against all environmental accidents that might
occur which may include toxic tort claims, other than those
considered to be sudden and accidental. If a significant
accident or event occurs that is not fully insured, it could
adversely affect our operations and financial condition. In
addition, we may not be able to maintain or obtain insurance of
the type and amount we desire at reasonable rates. As a result
of market conditions, premiums and deductibles for certain of
our insurance policies have increased substantially, and could
escalate further. In some instances, certain insurance could
become unavailable or available only for reduced amounts of
coverage.
Our
costs may increase in the event that our credit obligations
under hedging and other contractual arrangements are not
guaranteed by DEFS.
DEFS has provided a guaranty to the third party counterparties
for the financial hedging arrangements that we have entered into
for the purpose of hedging our exposure to fluctuations in
commodity prices through late 2010. DEFS is only required to
maintain its credit support for our obligations related to
derivative financial instruments, such as commodity price
hedging contracts, that are in effect as of the closing of our
26
initial public offering as of December 7, 2005 until the
earlier to occur of the fifth anniversary of the closing of our
initial public offering or such time as we obtain an investment
grade credit rating from either Moodys Investor Services,
Inc. or Standard & Poors Ratings Group. As a
result, we anticipate that DEFS will not provide a guaranty of
any replacement hedging arrangements after the termination of
the hedging arrangements that we have contracted to be in place
through late 2010. In such event, we would expect that it could
be more costly for us to manage our commodity price risk through
certain types of financial hedging arrangements unless we are
able to achieve creditworthiness at that time similar to the
current creditworthiness of DEFS. As a result, we anticipate
that as these commercial arrangements expire or are renewed or
replaced by new commercial arrangements, DEFS would not continue
to provide credit support. In such event, we may need to provide
our own credit support arrangements, which may increase our
costs. DEFS is under no obligation to provide any new or
additional credit support to us.
Our
debt levels may limit our flexibility in obtaining additional
financing and in pursuing other business
opportunities.
As of December 7, 2005, we entered into a credit facility,
consisting of a $100.1 million collateralized term loan
facility and a $250 million revolving credit facility for
working capital and other general partnership purposes. We had
outstanding balances of $100.1 million under the term loan
facility and $110.0 million under the revolving credit
facility as of December 31, 2005. The term loan facility
maximum borrowing is $100.1 million, and once repaid such
amount may not be reborrowed. However, once a portion of the
term loan is repaid, the revolving credit facility will increase
ratably. We continue to have the ability to incur additional
debt, subject to limitations in our credit facility. Our level
of debt could have important consequences to us, including the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to obtain additional financing, if necessary, for
working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions or other
purposes may be impaired or such financing may not be available
on favorable terms;
|
|
|
|
we will need a portion of our cash flow to make interest
payments on our debt, reducing the funds that would otherwise be
available for operations, future business opportunities and
distributions to unitholders;
|
|
|
|
our debt level will make us more vulnerable to competitive
pressures or a downturn in our business or the economy
generally; and
|
|
|
|
our debt level may limit our flexibility in responding to
changing business and economic conditions.
|
Our ability to service our debt will depend upon, among other
things, our future financial and operating performance, which
will be affected by prevailing economic conditions and
financial, business, regulatory and other factors, some of which
are beyond our control. In addition, our ability to service debt
under our revolving credit facility will depend on market
interest rates, since we anticipate that the interest rates
applicable to our borrowings will fluctuate with movements in
interest rate markets. If our operating results are not
sufficient to service our current or future indebtedness, we
will be forced to take actions such as reducing distributions,
reducing or delaying our business activities, acquisitions,
investments or capital expenditures, selling assets,
restructuring or refinancing our debt, or seeking additional
equity capital. We may not be able to effect any of these
actions on satisfactory terms, or at all. We may consider
entering into interest rate hedging transactions, the affect of
which would be to effectively lock the floating interest rate
for the period of the hedge. In February 2006, the board of
directors approved management to hedge up to 85% of outstanding
floating rate debt. As of March 1, 2006, no interest rate
swaps have been executed.
Restrictions
in our credit facility will limit our ability to make
distributions to you and may limit our ability to capitalize on
acquisitions and other business opportunities.
Our credit facility contains covenants limiting our ability to
make distributions, incur indebtedness, grant liens, make
acquisitions, investments or dispositions and engage in
transactions with affiliates. Furthermore, our credit facility
contains covenants requiring us to maintain certain financial
ratios and tests. Any subsequent
27
replacement of our credit facility or any new indebtedness could
have similar or greater restrictions. Please read
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Capital
Requirements.
Increases
in interest rates, which have recently experienced record lows,
could adversely impact our unit price and our ability to issue
additional equity to make acquisitions, incur debt or for other
purposes.
The credit markets recently have experienced
50-year
record lows in interest rates. As the overall economy
strengthens, it is likely that monetary policy will continue to
tighten further, resulting in higher interest rates to counter
possible inflation. Interest rates on future credit facilities
and debt offerings could be higher than current levels, causing
our financing costs to increase accordingly. As with other
yield-oriented securities, our unit price is impacted by the
level of our cash distributions and implied distribution yield.
The distribution yield is often used by investors to compare and
rank related yield-oriented securities for investment
decision-making purposes. Therefore, changes in interest rates,
either positive or negative, may affect the yield requirements
of investors who invest in our units, and a rising interest rate
environment could have an adverse impact on our unit price and
our ability to issue additional equity to make acquisitions,
incur debt or for other purposes.
Due to
our lack of industry and geographic diversification, adverse
developments in our midstream operations or operating areas
would reduce our ability to make distributions to our
unitholders.
We rely on the revenues generated from our midstream energy
businesses, and as a result, our financial condition depends
upon prices of, and continued demand for, natural gas, NGLs and
condensate. Furthermore, all of our assets are located in
northern Louisiana, southern Arkansas and eastern Texas. Due to
our lack of diversification in industry type and location, an
adverse development in one of these businesses or operating
areas would have a significantly greater impact on our financial
condition and results of operations than if we maintained more
diverse assets and operating areas.
We are
exposed to the credit risks of our key producer customers, and
any material nonpayment or nonperformance by our key producer
customers could reduce our ability to make distributions to our
unitholders.
We are subject to risks of loss resulting from nonpayment or
nonperformance by our producer customers. Any material
nonpayment or nonperformance by our key producer customers could
reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
Furthermore, some of our producer customers may be highly
leveraged and subject to their own operating and regulatory
risks, which could increase the risk that they may default on
their obligations to us.
Terrorist
attacks, and the threat of terrorist attacks, have resulted in
increased costs to our business. Continued hostilities in the
Middle East or other sustained military campaigns may adversely
impact our results of operations.
The long-term impact of terrorist attacks, such as the attacks
that occurred on September 11, 2001 or the attacks in
London, and the threat of future terrorist attacks on our
industry in general, and on us in particular, is not known at
this time. Increased security measures taken by us as a
precaution against possible terrorist attacks have resulted in
increased costs to our business. Uncertainty surrounding
continued hostilities in the Middle East or other sustained
military campaigns may affect our operations in unpredictable
ways, including disruptions of crude oil supplies and markets
for refined products, and the possibility that infrastructure
facilities could be direct targets of, or indirect casualties
of, an act of terror.
Changes in the insurance markets attributable to terrorist
attacks may make certain types of insurance more difficult for
us to obtain. Moreover, the insurance that may be available to
us may be significantly more expensive than our existing
insurance coverage. Instability in the financial markets as a
result of terrorism or war could also affect our ability to
raise capital.
28
Risks
Inherent in an Investment in Us
DEFS
controls our general partner, which has sole responsibility for
conducting our business and managing our operations. DEFS has
conflicts of interest, which may permit it to favor its own
interests to your detriment.
DEFS owns and controls our general partner. Some of our general
partners directors, and some of its executive officers,
are directors or officers of DEFS or its parents. Therefore,
conflicts of interest may arise between DEFS and its affiliates,
including our general partner, on the one hand, and us and our
unitholders, on the other hand. In resolving these conflicts of
interest, our general partner may favor its own interests and
the interests of its affiliates over the interests of our
unitholders. These conflicts include, among others, the
following situations:
|
|
|
|
|
neither our partnership agreement nor any other agreement
requires DEFS to pursue a business strategy that favors us.
DEFS directors and officers have a fiduciary duty to make
these decisions in the best interests of the owners of DEFS,
which may be contrary to our interests;
|
|
|
|
our general partner is allowed to take into account the
interests of parties other than us, such as DEFS and its
affiliates, in resolving conflicts of interest;
|
|
|
|
DEFS and its affiliates, including Duke Energy and
ConocoPhillips, are not limited in their ability to compete with
us. Please read DEFS and its affiliates are
not limited in their ability to compete with us below;
|
|
|
|
Our general partner may make a determination to receive a
quantity of our Class B units in exchange for resetting the
target distribution levels related to its incentive distribution
rights without the approval of the special committee of our
general partner or our unitholders;
|
|
|
|
some officers of DEFS who provide services to us also will
devote significant time to the business of DEFS, and will be
compensated by DEFS for the services rendered to it;
|
|
|
|
our general partner has limited its liability and reduced its
fiduciary duties, and has also restricted the remedies available
to our unitholders for actions that, without the limitations,
might constitute breaches of fiduciary duty;
|
|
|
|
our general partner determines the amount and timing of asset
purchases and sales, borrowings, issuance of additional
partnership securities and reserves, each of which can affect
the amount of cash that is distributed to unitholders;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our general partner determines the amount and timing of any
capital expenditures and whether a capital expenditure is a
maintenance capital expenditure, which reduces operating
surplus, or an expansion capital expenditure, which does not
reduce operating surplus. This determination can affect the
amount of cash that is distributed to our unitholders and the
ability of the subordinated units to convert to common units;
|
|
|
|
|
|
our general partner determines which costs incurred by it and
its affiliates are reimbursable by us;
|
|
|
|
our partnership agreement does not restrict our general partner
from causing us to pay it or its affiliates for any services
rendered to us or entering into additional contractual
arrangements with any of these entities on our behalf;
|
|
|
|
our general partner intends to limit its liability regarding our
contractual and other obligations and, in some circumstances, is
entitled to be indemnified by us;
|
|
|
|
our general partner may exercise its limited right to call and
purchase common units if it and its affiliates own more than 80%
of the common units;
|
|
|
|
our general partner controls the enforcement of obligations owed
to us by our general partner and its affiliates; and
|
|
|
|
our general partner decides whether to retain separate counsel,
accountants or others to perform services for us.
|
29
DEFS
and its affiliates are not limited in their ability to compete
with us, which could cause conflicts of interest and limit our
ability to acquire additional assets or businesses which in turn
could adversely affect our results of operations and cash
available for distribution to our unitholders.
Neither our partnership agreement nor the Omnibus Agreement
between us, DEFS and others will prohibit DEFS and its
affiliates, including Duke Energy and ConocoPhillips, from
owning assets or engaging in businesses that compete directly or
indirectly with us. In addition, DEFS and its affiliates,
including Duke Energy and ConocoPhillips, may acquire, construct
or dispose of additional midstream or other assets in the
future, without any obligation to offer us the opportunity to
purchase or construct any of those assets. Each of these
entities is a large, established participant in the midstream
energy business, and each has significantly greater resources
and experience than we have, which factors may make it more
difficult for us to compete with these entities with respect to
commercial activities as well as for acquisition candidates. As
a result, competition from these entities could adversely impact
our results of operations and cash available for distribution.
Cost
reimbursements due to our general partner and its affiliates for
services provided, which will be determined by our general
partner, will be substantial and will reduce our cash available
for distribution to you.
Pursuant to the Omnibus Agreement we entered into with DEFS, our
general partner and others upon the closing of our initial
public offering, DEFS will receive reimbursement for the payment
of operating expenses related to our operations and for the
provision of various general and administrative services for our
benefit. Payments for these services will be substantial and
will reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to
unitholders. Please read Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions Omnibus Agreement. In
addition, under Delaware partnership law, our general partner
has unlimited liability for our obligations, such as our debts
and environmental liabilities, except for our contractual
obligations that are expressly made without recourse to our
general partner. To the extent our general partner incurs
obligations on our behalf, we are obligated to reimburse or
indemnify it. If we are unable or unwilling to reimburse or
indemnify our general partner, our general partner may take
actions to cause us to make payments of these obligations and
liabilities. Any such payments could reduce the amount of cash
otherwise available for distribution to our unitholders.
Our
partnership agreement limits our general partners
fiduciary duties to holders of our common units and subordinated
units.
Although our general partner has a fiduciary duty to manage us
in a manner beneficial to us and our unitholders, the directors
and officers of our general partner have a fiduciary duty to
manage our general partner in a manner beneficial to its owner,
DEFS. Our partnership agreement contains provisions that reduce
the standards to which our general partner would otherwise be
held by state fiduciary duty laws. For example, our partnership
agreement permits our general partner to make a number of
decisions either in its individual capacity, as opposed to in
its capacity as our general partner or otherwise free of
fiduciary duties to us and our unitholders. This entitles our
general partner to consider only the interests and factors that
it desires, and it has no duty or obligation to give any
consideration to any interest of, or factors affecting, us, our
affiliates or any limited partner. Examples include:
|
|
|
|
|
the exercise of its right to reset the target distribution
levels of its incentive distribution rights at higher levels and
receive, in connection with this reset, a number of Class B
units that are convertible at any time following the first
anniversary of the issuance of these Class B units into
common units;
|
|
|
|
its limited call right;
|
|
|
|
its voting rights with respect to the units it owns;
|
|
|
|
its registration rights; and
|
|
|
|
its determination whether or not to consent to any merger or
consolidation of the partnership or amendment to the partnership
agreement.
|
30
By purchasing a common unit, a common unitholder will agree to
become bound by the provisions in the partnership agreement,
including the provisions discussed above.
Our
partnership agreement restricts the remedies available to
holders of our common units and subordinated units for actions
taken by our general partner that might otherwise constitute
breaches of fiduciary duty.
Our partnership agreement contains provisions that restrict the
remedies available to unitholders for actions taken by our
general partner that might otherwise constitute breaches of
fiduciary duty. For example, our partnership agreement:
|
|
|
|
|
provides that our general partner will not have any liability to
us or our unitholders for decisions made in its capacity as a
general partner so long as it acted in good faith, meaning it
believed the decision was in the best interests of our
partnership;
|
|
|
|
generally provides that affiliated transactions and resolutions
of conflicts of interest not approved by the special committee
of the board of directors of our general partner and not
involving a vote of unitholders must be on terms no less
favorable to us than those generally being provided to or
available from unrelated third parties or must be fair and
reasonable to us, as determined by our general partner in
good faith and that, in determining whether a transaction or
resolution is fair and reasonable, our general
partner may consider the totality of the relationships between
the parties involved, including other transactions that may be
particularly advantageous or beneficial to us; and
|
|
|
|
provides that our general partner and its officers and directors
will not be liable for monetary damages to us, our limited
partners or assignees for any acts or omissions unless there has
been a final and non-appealable judgment entered by a court of
competent jurisdiction determining that the general partner or
those other persons acted in bad faith or engaged in fraud or
willful misconduct or, in the case of a criminal matter, acted
with knowledge that the conduct was criminal.
|
Our
general partner may elect to cause us to issue Class B
units to it in connection with a resetting of the target
distribution levels related to our general partners
incentive distribution rights without the approval of the
special committee of our general partner or holders of our
common units and subordinated units. This may result in lower
distributions to holders of our common units in certain
situations.
Our general partner has the right, at a time when there are no
subordinated units outstanding and it has received incentive
distributions at the highest level to which it is entitled (48%)
for each of the prior four consecutive fiscal quarters, to reset
the initial cash target distribution levels at higher levels
based on the distribution at the time of the exercise of the
reset election. Following a reset election by our general
partner, the minimum quarterly distribution amount will be reset
to an amount equal to the average cash distribution amount per
common unit for the two fiscal quarters immediately preceding
the reset election (such amount is referred to as the
reset minimum quarterly distribution) and the target
distribution levels will be reset to correspondingly higher
levels based on percentage increases above the reset minimum
quarterly distribution amount.
In connection with resetting these target distribution levels,
our general partner will be entitled to receive a number of
Class B units. The Class B units will be entitled to
the same cash distributions per unit as our common units and
will be convertible into an equal number of common units. The
number of Class B units to be issued will be equal to that
number of common units whose aggregate quarterly cash
distributions equaled the average of the distributions to our
general partner on the incentive distribution rights in the
prior two quarters. We anticipate that our general partner would
exercise this reset right in order to facilitate acquisitions or
internal growth projects that would not be sufficiently
accretive to cash distributions per common unit without such
conversion; however, it is possible that our general partner
could exercise this reset election at a time when it is
experiencing, or may be expected to experience, declines in the
cash distributions it receives related to its incentive
distribution rights and may therefore desire to be issued our
Class B units, which are entitled to receive cash
distributions from us on the same priority as our common units,
rather than retain the right to receive incentive distributions
based on the initial target distribution levels. As a result, a
reset election
31
may cause our common unitholders to experience dilution in the
amount of cash distributions that they would have otherwise
received had we not issued new Class B units to our general
partner in connection with resetting the target distribution
levels related to our general partner incentive distribution
rights.
Holders
of our common units have limited voting rights and are not
entitled to elect our general partner or its
directors.
Unlike the holders of common stock in a corporation, unitholders
have only limited voting rights on matters affecting our
business and, therefore, limited ability to influence
managements decisions regarding our business. Unitholders
will not elect our general partner or its board of directors,
and will have no right to elect our general partner or its board
of directors on an annual or other continuing basis. The board
of directors of DCP Midstream GP, LLC will be chosen by the
members of DCP Midstream GP, LLC. Furthermore, if the
unitholders were dissatisfied with the performance of our
general partner, they will have little ability to remove our
general partner. As a result of these limitations, the price at
which the common units will trade could be diminished because of
the absence or reduction of a takeover premium in the trading
price.
Even
if holders of our common units are dissatisfied, they cannot
initially remove our general partner without its
consent.
The unitholders will be unable initially to remove our general
partner without its consent because our general partner and its
affiliates owned sufficient units upon completion of our initial
public offering to be able to prevent its removal. The vote of
the holders of at least
662/3%
of all outstanding units voting together as a single class is
required to remove the general partner. Following the closing of
our initial public offering, our general partner and its
affiliates owned an approximate 42% of our aggregate outstanding
common and subordinated units. Also, if our general partner is
removed without cause during the subordination period and units
held by our general partner and its affiliates are not voted in
favor of that removal, all remaining subordinated units will
automatically convert into common units and any existing
arrearages on our common units will be extinguished. A removal
of our general partner under these circumstances would adversely
affect our common units by prematurely eliminating their
distribution and liquidation preference over our subordinated
units, which would otherwise have continued until we had met
certain distribution and performance tests. Cause is narrowly
defined to mean that a court of competent jurisdiction has
entered a final, non-appealable judgment finding the general
partner liable for actual fraud or willful or wanton misconduct
in its capacity as our general partner. Cause does not include
most cases of charges of poor management of the business, so the
removal of the general partner because of the unitholders
dissatisfaction with our general partners performance in
managing our partnership will most likely result in the
termination of the subordination period and conversion of all
subordinated units to common units.
Our
partnership agreement restricts the voting rights of unitholders
owning 20% or more of our common units.
Unitholders voting rights are further restricted by the
partnership agreement provision providing that any units held by
a person that owns 20% or more of any class of units then
outstanding, other than our general partner, its affiliates,
their transferees and persons who acquired such units with the
prior approval of the board of directors of our general partner,
cannot vote on any matter. Our partnership agreement also
contains provisions limiting the ability of unitholders to call
meetings or to acquire information about our operations, as well
as other provisions limiting the unitholders ability to
influence the manner or direction of management.
Control
of our general partner may be transferred to a third party
without unitholder consent.
Our general partner may transfer its general partner interest to
a third party in a merger or in a sale of all or substantially
all of its assets without the consent of the unitholders.
Furthermore, our partnership agreement does not restrict the
ability of the owners of our general partner or DCP Midstream
GP, LLC from transferring all or a portion of their respective
ownership interest in our general partner or DCP Midstream GP,
LLC to a
32
third party. The new owners of our general partner or DCP
Midstream GP, LLC would then be in a position to replace the
board of directors and officers of DCP Midstream GP, LLC with
its own choices and thereby influence the decisions taken by the
board of directors and officers.
We may
issue additional units without your approval, which would dilute
your existing ownership interests.
Our partnership agreement does not limit the number of
additional limited partner interests that we may issue at any
time without the approval of our unitholders. The issuance by us
of additional common units or other equity securities of equal
or senior rank will have the following effects:
|
|
|
|
|
our unitholders proportionate ownership interest in us
will decrease;
|
|
|
|
the amount of cash available for distribution on each unit may
decrease;
|
|
|
|
because a lower percentage of total outstanding units will be
subordinated units, the risk that a shortfall in the payment of
the minimum quarterly distribution will be borne by our common
unitholders will increase;
|
|
|
|
the ratio of taxable income to distributions may increase;
|
|
|
|
the relative voting strength of each previously outstanding unit
may be diminished; and
|
|
|
|
the market price of the common units may decline.
|
Affiliates
of our general partner may sell common units in the public
markets, which sales could have an adverse impact on the trading
price of the common units.
DEFS and its affiliates hold an aggregate of 7,143 common units
and 7,142,857 subordinated units. All of the subordinated units
will convert into common units at the end of the subordination
period, as set forth in our partnership agreement, and some may
convert earlier. The sale of these units in the public markets
could have an adverse impact on the price of the common units or
on any trading market that may develop.
Our
general partner has a limited call right that may require you to
sell your units at an undesirable time or price.
If at any time our general partner and its affiliates own more
than 80% of the common units, our general partner will have the
right, but not the obligation, which it may assign to any of its
affiliates or to us, to acquire all, but not less than all, of
the common units held by unaffiliated persons at a price not
less than their then-current market price. As a result, you may
be required to sell your common units at an undesirable time or
price and may not receive any return on your investment. You may
also incur a tax liability upon a sale of your units. Our
general partner and its affiliates own less than 1% of our
outstanding common units. At the expiration of the subordination
period, assuming no additional issuances of common units, our
general partner and its affiliates will own approximately 40% of
our outstanding common units.
The
liability of holders of limited partner interests may not be
limited if a court finds that unitholder action constitutes
control of our business.
A general partner of a partnership generally has unlimited
liability for the obligations of the partnership, except for
those contractual obligations of the partnership that are
expressly made without recourse to the general partner. Our
partnership is organized under Delaware law and we conduct
business in a number of other states. The limitations on the
liability of holders of limited partner interests for the
obligations of a limited partnership have not been clearly
established in some of the other states in which we do business.
33
Holders of limited partner interests could be liable for any and
all of our obligations as if such holder were a general partner
if:
|
|
|
|
|
a court or government agency determined that we were conducting
business in a state but had not complied with that particular
states partnership statute; or
|
|
|
|
the right of holders of limited partner interests to act with
other unitholders to remove or replace the general partner, to
approve some amendments to our partnership agreement or to take
other actions under our partnership agreement constitute
control of our business.
|
Unitholders
may have liability to repay distributions that were wrongfully
distributed to them.
Under certain circumstances, unitholders may have to repay
amounts wrongfully returned or distributed to them. Under
Section 17-607
of the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, we may
not make a distribution to you if the distribution would cause
our liabilities to exceed the fair value of our assets. Delaware
law provides that for a period of three years from the date of
the impermissible distribution, limited partners who received
the distribution and who knew at the time of the distribution
that it violated Delaware law will be liable to the limited
partnership for the distribution amount. Substituted limited
partners are liable for the obligations of the assignor to make
contributions to the partnership that are known to the
substituted limited partner at the time it became a limited
partner and for unknown obligations if the liabilities could be
determined from the partnership agreement. Liabilities to
partners on account of their partnership interest and
liabilities that are non-recourse to the partnership are not
counted for purposes of determining whether a distribution is
permitted.
We
will incur increased costs as a result of being a
publicly-traded company.
We have limited history operating as a publicly-traded company.
As a publicly-traded company, we will incur significant legal,
accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private
company. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as
new rules subsequently implemented by the SEC and the New York
Stock Exchange, have required changes in corporate governance
practices of publicly-traded companies. We expect these new
rules and regulations to increase our legal and financial
compliance costs and to make activities more time-consuming and
costly. For example, as a result of becoming a publicly-traded
company, we are required to have at least three independent
directors, create additional board committees and adopt policies
regarding internal controls and disclosure controls and
procedures, including the preparation of reports on internal
controls over financial reporting. In addition, we will incur
additional costs associated with our publicly-traded company
reporting requirements. We also expect these new rules and
regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for our
general partner to obtain director and officer liability
insurance and it may be required to accept reduced policy limits
and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the
same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult
for our general partner to attract and retain qualified persons
to serve on its board of directors or as executive officers.
Tax Risks
to Common Unitholders
Our
tax treatment depends on our status as a partnership for federal
income tax purposes, as well as our not being subject to
entity-level taxation by individual states. If the Internal
Revenue Service treats us as a corporation or we become subject
to entity-level taxation for state tax purposes, it would
substantially reduce the amount of cash available for
distribution to our unitholders.
The anticipated after-tax economic benefit of an investment in
the common units depends largely on our being treated as a
partnership for federal income tax purposes. We have not
requested, and do not plan to request, a ruling from the
Internal Revenue Service, which we refer to as the IRS, on this
or any other tax matter affecting us.
If we were treated as a corporation for federal income tax
purposes, we would pay federal income tax on our income at the
corporate tax rate, which is currently a maximum of 35% and
would likely pay state income tax at varying rates.
Distributions to the unitholder would generally be taxed again
as corporate distributions,
34
and no income, gains, losses or deductions would flow through to
them. Because a tax would be imposed upon us as a corporation,
our cash available for distribution to the unitholder would be
substantially reduced. Therefore, our treatment as a corporation
would result in a material reduction in the anticipated cash
flow and after-tax return to the unitholders, likely causing a
substantial reduction in the value of our common units.
Current law may change so as to cause us to be treated as a
corporation for federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject
us to entity-level taxation. In addition, because of widespread
state budget deficits, several states are evaluating ways to
subject partnerships to entity-level taxation through the
imposition of state income, franchise and other forms of
taxation. If any of these states were to impose a tax on us, the
cash available for distribution to the unitholder would be
reduced. The partnership agreement provides that if a law is
enacted or existing law is modified or interpreted in a manner
that subjects us to taxation as a corporation or otherwise
subjects us to entity-level taxation for federal, state or local
income tax purposes, the minimum quarterly distribution amount
and the target distribution levels will be adjusted to reflect
the impact of that law on us.
An IRS
contest of the federal income tax positions we take may
adversely affect the market for our common units, and the cost
of any IRS contest will reduce our cash available for
distribution to our unitholders.
We have not requested a ruling from the IRS with respect to our
treatment as a partnership for federal income tax purposes or
any other matter affecting us. Any contest with the IRS may
materially and adversely impact the market for our common units
and the price at which they trade. In addition, our costs of any
contest with the IRS will be borne indirectly by our unitholders
and our general partner because the costs will reduce our cash
available for distribution.
The
unitholder may be required to pay taxes on income from us even
if the unitholder does not receive any cash distributions from
us.
Because our unitholders will be treated as partners to whom we
will allocate taxable income which could be different in amount
than the cash we distribute, the unitholder will be required to
pay any federal income taxes and, in some cases, state and local
income taxes on your share of our taxable income even if you
receive no cash distributions from us. The unitholders may not
receive cash distributions from us equal to their share of our
taxable income or even equal to the tax liability that results
from that income.
Tax
gain or loss on disposition of common units could be more or
less than expected.
If the unitholder sells their common units, they will recognize
a gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount
realized and their tax basis in those common units. Prior
distributions to the unitholders in excess of the total net
taxable income allocated to them for a common unit, which
decreased their tax basis in that common unit, will, in effect,
become taxable income to them if the common unit is sold at a
price greater than their tax basis in that common unit, even if
the price is less than their original cost. A substantial
portion of the amount realized, whether or not representing
gain, may be ordinary income. In addition, if the unitholder
sells their units, they may incur a tax liability in excess of
the amount of cash they receive from the sale.
Tax-exempt
entities and foreign persons face unique tax issues from owning
common units that may result in adverse tax consequences to
them.
Investment in common units by tax-exempt entities, such as
individual retirement accounts (known as IRAs), other retirement
plans and
non-U.S.
persons raises issues unique to them. For example, virtually all
of our income allocated to organizations that are exempt from
federal income tax, including IRAs and other retirement plans,
will be unrelated business taxable income and will be taxable to
them. Distributions to
non-U.S. persons
will be reduced by withholding taxes at the highest applicable
effective tax rate, and
non-U.S.
persons will be required to file United States federal tax
returns and pay tax on their share of our
35
taxable income. If the unitholder is a tax-exempt entity or a
foreign person, they should consult their tax advisor before
investing in our common units.
We
will treat each purchaser of our common units as having the same
tax benefits without regard to the actual common units
purchased. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could
adversely affect the value of the common units.
Because we cannot match transferors and transferees of common
units and because of other reasons, we will take depreciation
and amortization positions that may not conform to all aspects
of existing Treasury regulations. A successful IRS challenge to
those positions could adversely affect the amount of tax
benefits available to the unitholder. It also could affect the
timing of these tax benefits or the amount of gain from the sale
of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of
our common units or result in audit adjustments to your tax
returns.
Unitholders
may be subject to state and local taxes and return filing
requirements.
In addition to federal income taxes, the unitholder will likely
be subject to other taxes, including foreign, state and local
taxes, unincorporated business taxes and estate, inheritance or
intangible taxes that are imposed by the various jurisdictions
in which we do business or own property, even if you do not live
in any of those jurisdictions. The unitholder will likely be
required to file foreign, state and local income tax returns and
pay state and local income taxes in some or all of these
jurisdictions. Further, the unitholder may be subject to
penalties for failure to comply with those requirements. We will
initially own assets and do business in the States of Louisiana,
Texas and Arkansas. Each of these states, other than Texas,
currently imposes a personal income tax as well as an income tax
on corporations and other entities. Texas imposes a franchise
tax (which is based in part on net income) on corporations and
limited liability companies. As we make acquisitions or expand
our business, we may own assets or do business in additional
states that impose a personal income tax. It is your
responsibility to file all United States federal, foreign, state
and local tax returns. Our counsel has not rendered an opinion
on the foreign, state or local tax consequences of an investment
in the common units.
The
sale or exchange of 50% or more of our capital and profits
interests will result in the termination of our partnership for
federal income tax purposes.
We will be considered to have terminated our partnership for
federal income tax purposes if there is a sale or exchange of
50% or more of the total interests in our capital and profits
within a
12-month
period. Our termination would, among other things, result in the
closing of our taxable year for all unitholders and could result
in a deferral of depreciation deductions allowable in computing
our taxable income.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
As of February 17, 2006, we operated two processing plants
and gathering systems and one pipeline system located in
Louisiana and Arkansas within our Natural Gas Services segment,
and one pipeline located in Texas within our NGL Logistics
segment, all of which are owned by us. In addition, we owned a
45% interest in the Black Lake pipeline within our NGL Logistics
segment, which is operated by a third party. For additional
details on these plants and pipeline systems, please read
Business Natural Gas Services
Segment and Business NGL Logistics
Segment. We believe that our properties are generally in
good condition, well maintained and are generally suitable and
adequate to carry on our business at capacity for the
foreseeable future.
Our principal executive offices are located at 370
17th Street,
Suite 2775, Denver, Colorado 80202, and our telephone
number is
303-633-2900.
36
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
We are not a party to any significant legal proceedings but are
a party to various administrative and regulatory proceedings
that have arisen in the ordinary course of our business. Please
read Business Regulation of
Operations Intrastate Natural Gas Pipeline
Regulation and
Business Environmental Matters.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Unitholders
|
No matters were submitted to a vote of our limited partner
unitholders, through solicitation of proxies or otherwise,
during the fourth quarter of 2005.
Part II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Unitholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Market
Information
Our common units have been listed on the New York Stock
Exchange, or the NYSE, under the symbol DPM since
December 2, 2005. Prior to December 2, 2005, our
equity securities were not listed on any exchange or traded on
any public trading market. The following table sets forth the
high and low closing sales prices of the common units, as
reported by the NYSE, as well as the amount of cash
distributions to be paid for the period from December 7,
2005, the closing of our initial public offering, through
December 31, 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution per
|
|
|
Distribution per
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Subordinated
|
|
Period
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Unit
|
|
|
Unit
|
|
|
December 7,
2005 December 31, 2005
|
|
$
|
24.92
|
|
|
$
|
23.08
|
|
|
$
|
0.095
|
|
|
$
|
0.095
|
|
As of February 17, 2006, there were approximately
30 unitholders of record of our common units. This number
does not include unitholders whose units are held in trust by
other entities. The actual number of unitholders is greater than
the number of holders of record.
We have also issued 7,142,857 subordinated units, for which
there is no established public trading market. The subordinated
units are held by our general partner and its affiliates. Our
general partner and its affiliates will receive a quarterly
distribution on these units only after sufficient funds have
been paid to the common units.
Distributions
of Available Cash
General. Our partnership agreement requires
that, within 45 days after the end of each quarter,
beginning with the quarter ending December 31, 2005, we
distribute all of our available cash to unitholders of record on
the applicable record date, as determined by our general partner.
Definition of Available Cash. Available cash,
for any quarter, consists of all cash and cash equivalents on
hand at the end of that quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
less the amount of cash reserves established by our general
partner to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
provide for the proper conduct of our business;
|
|
|
|
comply with applicable law, any of our debt instruments or other
agreements; or
|
|
|
|
provide funds for distributions to our unitholders and to our
general partner for any one or more of the next four quarters;
|
|
|
|
|
|
plus, if our general partner so determines, all or a portion of
cash on hand on the date of determination of available cash for
the quarter.
|
37
Intent to Distribute the Minimum Quarterly
Distribution. We intend to distribute to the
holders of common units and subordinated units on a quarterly
basis at least the minimum quarterly distribution of
$0.35 per unit, or $1.40 per year, to the extent we have
sufficient cash from our operations after establishment of cash
reserves and payment of fees and expenses, including payments to
our general partner. However, there is no guarantee that we will
pay the minimum quarterly distribution on the units in any
quarter. Even if our cash distribution policy is not modified or
revoked, the amount of distributions paid under our policy and
the decision to make any distribution is determined by our
general partner, taking into consideration the terms of our
partnership agreement. We will be prohibited from making any
distributions to unitholders if it would cause an event of
default, or an event of default is existing, under our credit
agreement. Please read Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Capital
Requirements Description of Credit
Agreement for a discussion of the restrictions included in
our credit agreement that may restrict our ability to make
distributions.
General Partner Interest and Incentive Distribution
Rights. Our general partner is entitled to 2% of
all quarterly distributions that we make prior to our
liquidation. This general partner interest is represented by
357,143 general partner units. Our general partner has the
right, but not the obligation, to contribute a proportionate
amount of capital to us to maintain its current general partner
interest. The general partners initial 2% interest in
these distributions will be reduced if we issue additional units
in the future and our general partner does not contribute a
proportionate amount of capital to us to maintain its 2% general
partner interest.
Our general partner also currently holds rights that entitle it
to receive increasing percentages, up to a maximum of 50%, of
the cash we distribute in excess of $0.4025 per unit per
quarter. The maximum distribution of 50% includes distributions
paid to our general partner on its 2% general partner interest
and assumes that our general partner maintains its general
partner interest at 2%. The maximum distribution of 50% does not
include any distributions that our general partner may receive
on limited partner units that it owns.
On January 25, 2006, we announced the declaration of a cash
distribution of $0.095 per unit, payable on
February 13, 2006 to unitholders of record on
February 3, 2006. That distribution represents the pro rata
portion of our minimum quarterly cash distribution of
$0.35 per unit for the period December 7, 2005,
the closing of our initial public offering, through
December 31, 2005.
Sales of
Unregistered Units
There were no unregistered units issued during the fourth
quarter of 2005.
Purchase
of Equity by DCP Midstream Partners, LP
None.
Equity
Compensation Plans
The information relating to our equity compensation plans
required by Item 5 is incorporated by reference to such
information as set forth in Item 12. Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
contained herein.
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
The following table shows selected financial data of DCP
Midstream Partners, LP for the periods and as of the dates
indicated. The selected financial data as of December 31,
2005, 2004 and 2003, as well as the selected financial data for
the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, 2003 and 2002, are
derived from our audited consolidated financial statements,
which include our accounts, and prior to December 7, 2005,
the assets, liabilities and operations contributed to us by DEFS
and its wholly-owned subsidiaries (DCP Midstream Partners
Predecessor) upon the closing of the initial public
offering. The selected financial data as
38
of December 31, 2001 and for the year ended
December 31, 2001 is derived from DCP Midstream Partners
Predecessors unaudited consolidated financial statements.
Our operating results incorporate a number of significant
estimates and uncertainties. Such matters could cause the data
included herein to not be indicative of our future financial
conditions or results of operations. A discussion on our
critical accounting estimates is included in
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations.
We derived the information in the following table from DCP
Midstream Partners Predecessor and our consolidated financial
statements, and that information should be read together with
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to, the
consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes
included elsewhere in this
Form 10-K.
The table should be read together with Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DCP Midstream Partners,
LP
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2002
|
|
|
2001
|
|
|
|
($ in millions except per unit
data)
|
|
|
Statements of Operations
Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
$
|
784.5
|
|
|
$
|
509.5
|
|
|
$
|
475.1
|
|
|
$
|
297.2
|
|
|
$
|
347.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
|
|
|
709.3
|
|
|
|
452.6
|
|
|
|
430.6
|
|
|
|
256.8
|
|
|
|
304.1
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
14.2
|
|
|
|
13.6
|
|
|
|
15.0
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
13.3
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
12.6
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
|
|
12.3
|
|
|
|
11.3
|
|
General and administrative expense
|
|
|
11.4
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses
|
|
|
746.6
|
|
|
|
485.3
|
|
|
|
465.5
|
|
|
|
289.2
|
|
|
|
334.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
37.9
|
|
|
|
24.2
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
13.6
|
|
Earnings from equity method
investment
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
Impairment of equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
|
$
|
8.5
|
|
|
$
|
15.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to DCP
Midstream Partners Predecessor
|
|
|
(33.3
|
)
|
|
|
(20.4
|
)
|
|
|
(10.0
|
)
|
|
|
(8.5
|
)
|
|
|
(15.0
|
)
|
General partner interest in net
income
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocable to limited
partners
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per limited partner
unit-basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Distributions paid
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data (at period
end):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
168.9
|
|
|
$
|
172.0
|
|
|
$
|
181.9
|
|
|
$
|
193.5
|
|
|
$
|
187.2
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
407.3
|
|
|
$
|
241.1
|
|
|
$
|
239.5
|
|
|
$
|
249.3
|
|
|
$
|
232.2
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
87.0
|
|
|
$
|
39.8
|
|
|
$
|
35.5
|
|
|
$
|
26.0
|
|
|
$
|
15.7
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
210.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Partners equity
|
|
$
|
100.9
|
|
|
$
|
198.4
|
|
|
$
|
201.1
|
|
|
$
|
220.7
|
|
|
$
|
211.1
|
|
39
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion And Analysis Of Financial Condition And Results Of
Operations
|
The following discussion analyzes our financial condition and
results of operations. You should read the following discussion
of our financial condition and results of operations in
conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and notes
included elsewhere in this annual report. We refer to the
assets, liabilities and operations contributed to us by Duke
Energy Field Services, LLC and its wholly-owned subsidiaries
upon the closing of our initial public offering as DCP Midstream
Partners Predecessor.
Overview
We are a Delaware limited partnership recently formed by Duke
Energy Field Services, LLC (DEFS) to own, operate,
acquire and develop a diversified portfolio of complementary
midstream energy assets. We operate two business segments:
|
|
|
|
|
our Natural Gas Services segment, which consists of our North
Louisiana natural gas gathering, processing and transportation
system; and
|
|
|
|
our NGL Logistics segment, which consists of our interests in
two NGL pipelines.
|
The historical financial statements of DCP Midstream Partners
Predecessor included in this annual report and discussed
elsewhere herein include DCP Midstream Partners
Predecessors 50% ownership interest in Black Lake Pipe
Line Company, or Black Lake. However, effective December 7,
2005, DEFS retained a 5% interest and we own a 45% interest in
Black Lake.
Factors
That Significantly Affect Our Results
Our results of operations for our Natural Gas Services segment
are impacted by increases and decreases in the volume of natural
gas that we gather and transport through our systems, which we
refer to as throughput volume. Throughput volumes and capacity
utilization rates generally are driven by wellhead production
and our competitive position on a regional basis and more
broadly by demand for natural gas, NGLs and condensate.
Our results of operations for our Natural Gas Services segment
are also impacted by the fees we receive and the margins we
generate. Our processing contract arrangements can have a
significant impact on our profitability. Because of the
volatility of the prices for natural gas, NGLs and condensate,
as of January 1, 2006 we have hedged approximately 80% of
our commodity price risk associated with our gathering and
processing arrangements through 2010 with natural gas and crude
oil swaps. With these swaps, we have substantially reduced our
exposure to commodity price movements with respect to those
volumes under these types of contractual arrangements for this
period. For additional information regarding our hedging
activities, please read Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk Commodity Price
Risk Hedging Strategies. Actual contract
terms will be based upon a variety of factors, including natural
gas quality, geographic location, the competitive commodity and
pricing environment at the time the contract is executed and
customer requirements. Our gathering and processing contract mix
and, accordingly, our exposure to natural gas, NGL and
condensate prices, may change as a result of producer
preferences, our expansion in regions where some types of
contracts are more common and other market factors.
In addition, during the fourth quarter of 2005, we were able to
benefit from marketing activities and increased throughput
related to atypical and significant differences in natural gas
prices at various receipt and delivery points on our PELICO
intrastate pipeline system.
Our results of operations for our NGL Logistics segment are
impacted by the throughput volumes of the NGLs we transport on
our two NGL pipelines. Both of these NGL pipelines transport
NGLs exclusively on a fee basis.
Upon the closing of our initial public offering, DEFS
contributed to us the assets, liabilities and operations
reflected in the historical financial statements other than the
accounts receivable of DCP Midstream Partners Predecessor and a
5% interest in Black Lake, which were not contributed to us. The
historical financial statements of DCP Midstream Partners
Predecessor do not give effect to various items that will affect
40
our results of operations and liquidity following the closing of
our initial public offering, including the items described below:
|
|
|
|
|
the indebtedness we incurred at the closing of our initial
public offering increased our interest expense from the interest
expense reflected in our historical financial statements;
|
|
|
|
we have entered into long-term hedging arrangements for
approximately 80% of our expected natural gas, NGL and
condensate commodity price risk relating to our gathering and
processing arrangements through 2010; and
|
|
|
|
we anticipate initially incurring approximately
$8.4 million annually, some of which will be allocated to
us by DEFS, of additional general and administrative expenses
relating to operating as a separate publicly held limited
partnership, including compensation and benefit expenses of our
executive management personnel, costs associated with annual and
quarterly reports to unitholders, tax return and
Schedule K-1
preparation and distribution, independent auditor fees, investor
relations activities, registrar and transfer agent fees,
incremental director and officer liability insurance costs, and
director compensation.
|
In addition, our results of operations for the year ended
December 31, 2005 benefited from higher throughput volumes
in our Seabreeze pipeline as a result of the completion of
pipeline integrity repairs on a third party NGL pipeline in
mid-2005. As a result of pipeline integrity testing that is
scheduled for 2006, we anticipate experiencing lower volumes and
increased repair costs on the Seabreeze pipeline. The Black Lake
pipeline is currently experiencing increased operating costs due
to pipeline integrity testing that commenced in 2005 and will
continue into 2007. We expect that our results of operations
related to our non-controlling interest in the Black Lake
pipeline will benefit in 2007 from the completion of this
pipeline integrity testing, although it is possible that the
integrity testing will result in the need for pipeline repairs,
in which case the operations of this pipeline may be interrupted
while the repairs are being made. DEFS has agreed to indemnify
us for up to $5.3 million of our pro rata share of any
capital contributions required to be made by us to Black Lake
associated with repairing the Black Lake pipeline that are
determined to be necessary as a result of the pipeline integrity
testing and up to $4.0 million of the costs associated with
any repairs to the Seabreeze pipeline that are determined to be
necessary as a result of the pipeline integrity testing.
Finally, we intend to make cash distributions to our unitholders
and our general partner at an initial distribution rate of
$0.35 per common unit per quarter ($1.40 per common
unit on an annualized basis). Due to our cash distribution
policy, we expect that we will distribute to our unitholders
most of the cash generated by our operations. As a result, we
expect that we will rely upon external financing sources,
including commercial borrowings and other debt and common unit
issuances, to fund our acquisition and expansion capital
expenditures, as well as our working capital needs.
General
Trends and Outlook
We expect our business to continue to be affected by the
following key trends. Our expectations are based on assumptions
made by us and information currently available to us. To the
extent our underlying assumptions about or interpretations of
available information prove to be incorrect, our actual results
may vary materially from our expected results.
Natural Gas Supply and Outlook. We believe
that current natural gas prices will continue to cause
relatively high levels of natural gas-related drilling in the
United States as producers seek to increase their level of
natural gas production. Although the number of natural gas wells
drilled in the United States has increased overall in recent
years, a corresponding increase in production has not been
realized, primarily as a result of smaller discoveries and the
decline in production from existing wells. We believe that an
increase in United States drilling activity, additional sources
of supply such as liquified natural gas, and imports of natural
gas will be required for the natural gas industry to meet the
expected increased demand for, and to compensate for the slowing
production of, natural gas in the United States. A number of the
areas in which we operate are experiencing significant drilling
activity as a result of recent high natural gas prices, new
increased drilling for deeper natural gas formations and the
implementation of new exploration and production techniques.
41
While we anticipate continued high levels of exploration and
production activities in a number of the areas in which we
operate, fluctuations in energy prices can greatly affect
production rates and investments by third parties in the
development of new natural gas reserves. Drilling activity
generally decreases as natural gas prices decrease. We have no
control over the level of drilling activity in the areas of our
operations.
Processing Margins. During 2005, our overall
processing margin benefited from rising natural gas, NGL and
condensate prices, primarily as a result of our
percentage-of-proceeds
contracts which perform better in the current natural gas, NGL
and condensate price environment. Our processing profitability
is dependent upon pricing and market demand for natural gas,
NGLs and condensate, which are beyond our control and have been
volatile. We have mitigated our exposure to commodity price
movements for these commodities by entering into hedging
arrangements in September 2005, which were effective as of
January 1, 2006, for approximately 80% of our currently
anticipated natural gas, NGL and condensate price risk
associated with our
percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements and gathering operations through 2010. For
additional information regarding our hedging activities, please
read Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures
about Market Risk Commodity Price
Risk Hedging Strategies.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita caused extensive damage to the Texas, Louisiana
and Mississippi Gulf Coast in late August and mid-September of
2005. These storms did not cause any significant damage to our
properties; however, these storms have negatively affected the
nations short term energy supply, resulting in natural gas
and NGL prices increasing significantly in the fourth quarter of
2005. We do not expect any supply or pricing changes that
resulted from these hurricanes to have an adverse impact on our
results of operations.
Impact of Inflation. Inflation in the United
States has been relatively low in recent years and did not have
a material impact on our results of operations for the five-year
period ended December 31, 2005. It may in the future,
however, increase the cost to acquire or replace property, plant
and equipment and may increase the costs of labor and supplies.
To the extent permitted by competition, regulation and our
existing agreements, we have and will continue to pass along
increased costs to our customers in the form of higher fees.
Our
Operations
We manage our business and analyze and report our results of
operations on a segment basis. Our operations are divided into
our Natural Gas Services segment and our NGL Logistics segment.
Natural
Gas Services Segment
Results of operations from our Natural Gas Services segment are
determined primarily by the volumes of natural gas gathered,
compressed, treated, processed, transported and sold through our
gathering, processing and pipeline systems; the volumes of NGLs
and condensate sold; and the level of our realized natural gas,
NGL and condensate prices. We generate our revenues and our
gross margins for our Natural Gas Services segment principally
under the following types of contractual arrangements:
|
|
|
|
|
Fee-based arrangements. Under fee-based
arrangements, we receive a fee or fees for one or more of the
following services: gathering, compressing, treating, processing
or transporting natural gas. Our fee-based arrangements include
natural gas purchase arrangements pursuant to which we purchase
natural gas at the wellhead or other receipt points at an index
related price at the delivery point less a specified amount,
which specified amount is generally the same as the
transportation fees we would otherwise charge for transportation
of natural gas from the wellhead location to the delivery point.
Revenues associated with these arrangements may be included as
sales of natural gas, NGLs and condensate or transportation and
processing services. The revenue we earn is directly related to
the volume of natural gas that flows through our systems and is
not directly dependent on commodity prices. To the extent a
sustained decline in commodity prices results in a decline in
volumes, however, our revenues from these arrangements would be
reduced.
|
|
|
|
Percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements. Under
percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements, we generally purchase natural gas from producers
at the wellhead, transport the wellhead natural gas through our
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
gathering system, treat and process the natural gas, and then
sell the resulting residue natural gas and NGLs at index prices
based on published index market prices. We remit to the
producers either an agreed upon percentage of the actual
proceeds that we receive from our sales of the residue natural
gas and NGLs or an agreed upon percentage of the proceeds based
on index related prices for the natural gas and the NGLs,
regardless of the actual amount of the sales proceeds we
receive. Under these types of arrangements, our revenues
correlate directly with the price of natural gas and NGLs.
|
As of January 1, 2006, we have hedged approximately 80% of
our currently anticipated natural gas and NGL commodity price
risk associated with the
percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements through 2010 with natural gas and crude oil swaps.
With these swaps, we expect our exposure to commodity price
movements to be substantially reduced. Additionally, as part of
our gathering operations, we recover and sell condensate. The
margins we earn from condensate sales are directly correlated
with crude oil prices. As of January 1, 2006, we have
hedged approximately 80% of our currently anticipated condensate
price risk through 2010 with crude oil swaps. For additional
information regarding our hedging activities, please read
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about
Market Risk Commodity Price
Risk Hedging Strategies.
We also purchase a small portion of our natural gas under
percentage-of-index
arrangements. Under
percentage-of-index
arrangements, we purchase natural gas from the producers at the
wellhead at a price that is either at a fixed percentage of the
index price for the natural gas that they produce or at an index
based price less a fixed fee to gather, compress, treat
and/or
process their natural gas. We then gather, compress treat
and/or
process the natural gas and then sell the residue natural gas
and NGLs at index related prices. Under these types of
arrangements, our costs to purchase the natural gas from the
producer is based on the price of natural gas. As a result, our
gross margin under these arrangements increases as the price of
NGLs increases relative to the price of natural gas, and our
gross margin under these arrangements decreases as the price of
natural gas increases relative to the price of NGLs.
The natural gas supply for the gathering pipelines and
processing plants in our North Louisiana system is derived
primarily from natural gas wells located in five parishes in
northern Louisiana. The PELICO system also receives natural gas
produced in east Texas through its interconnect with other
pipelines that transport natural gas from east Texas into
western Louisiana. This five parish area has experienced
significant levels of drilling activity, providing us with
opportunities to access newly developed natural gas supplies.
Our primary suppliers of natural gas to the North Louisiana
system are Anadarko Petroleum Corporation and ConocoPhillips
(one of our affiliates), which collectively represented
approximately 48% of the 355 MMcf/d of natural gas supplied
to this system in 2005. We actively seek new supplies of natural
gas, both to offset natural declines in the production from
connected wells and to increase throughput volume. We obtain new
natural gas supplies in our operating areas by contracting for
production from new wells, connecting new wells drilled on
dedicated acreage, or by obtaining natural gas that has been
released from other gathering systems.
We sell natural gas to marketing affiliates of natural gas
pipelines, marketing affiliates of integrated oil companies,
national wholesale marketers, industrial end-users and gas-fired
power plants. We typically sell natural gas under market index
related pricing terms. In addition, under our merchant
arrangements, we use a subsidiary of DEFS (Duke Energy Field
Services Marketing, LP) as our agent to purchase natural gas
from third parties at pipeline interconnect points, as well as
residue gas from our Minden and Ada processing plants, and then
resell the aggregated natural gas to third parties. We also have
entered into a contractual arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS
(Duke Energy Field Services Marketing, LP) that provides that
DEFS will purchase natural gas and transport it into our PELICO
system where we will buy the gas from DEFS at their weighted
average cost plus a contractually agreed to marketing fee. In
addition, for a significant portion of the gas that we sell out
of our PELICO system, we have entered into a contractual
arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS that provides that DEFS
will purchase that natural gas from us and transport it to a
sales point at a price equal to their net weighted average sales
price less a contractually agreed to marketing fee. To the
extent possible, we match the pricing of our supply portfolio to
our sales portfolio in order to lock in value and reduce our
overall commodity price risk. We manage the commodity price risk
of our supply portfolio and sales portfolio with both physical
and financial transactions. As a service to our customers, we
may enter into physical fixed price natural gas purchases and
sales, utilizing financial derivatives to swap this fixed price
risk back to market index. We account for such a physical fixed
price transaction and the related financial
43
derivative as a fair value hedge. We occasionally will enter
into financial derivatives to lock in price differentials across
the PELICO system to maximize the value of pipeline capacity.
These financial derivatives are accounted for using
mark-to-market
accounting. We also gather, process and transport natural gas
under fee-based transportation contracts.
The NGLs extracted from the natural gas at the Minden processing
plant are sold at market index prices to an affiliate of DEFS
and transported to the Mont Belvieu hub via the Black Lake
pipeline. The NGLs extracted from the natural gas at the Ada
processing plant are sold at market index prices to third
parties and are delivered to the third parties trucks at
the tailgate of the plant.
NGL
Logistics Segment
Historically, we have gathered and transported NGLs either under
fee-based transportation contracts or through purchasing the
NGLs at the inlet of the pipeline and selling the NGLs at the
outlet. In conjunction with our formation, we entered into a
contractual arrangement with DEFS that requires DEFS to purchase
the NGLs that were historically purchased by us, and to pay us
to transport the NGLs pursuant to a fee-based rate that is
applied to the volumes transported. We entered into this
fee-based contractual arrangement with the objective of
generating approximately the same operating income per barrel
transported that we realized when we were the purchaser and
seller of NGLs.
Our pipelines provide transportation services to customers on a
fee basis. Therefore, the results of operations for this
business are generally dependent upon the volume of product
transported and the level of fees charged to customers. We will
not take title to the products transported on our NGL pipelines;
rather, the shipper retains title and the associated commodity
price risk. For the Seabreeze pipeline, we are responsible for
any line loss or gain in NGLs. For the Black Lake pipeline, any
line loss or gain in NGLs is allocated to the shipper. The
volumes of NGLs transported on our pipelines are dependent on
the level of production of NGLs from processing plants connected
to our NGL pipelines. When natural gas prices are high relative
to NGL prices, it is less profitable to process natural gas
because of the higher value of natural gas compared to the value
of NGLs and because of the increased cost of separating the
mixed NGLs from the natural gas. As a result, we have
experienced periods in the past, and will likely experience
periods in the future, in which higher natural gas prices reduce
the volume of natural gas processed at plants connected to our
NGL pipelines and, in turn, lower the NGL throughput on our
assets. In the markets we serve, our pipelines are the sole
pipeline facility transporting NGLs from the supply source.
How We
Evaluate Our Operations
Our management uses a variety of financial and operational
measurements to analyze our performance. These measurements
include the following: (1) volumes, (2) gross margin,
including segment gross margin, (3) operating and
maintenance expense and general and administrative expense,
(4) EBITDA and (5) distributable cash flow. Gross
margin, segment gross margin, EBITDA and distributable cash flow
measurements are non-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
(non-GAAP) financial measures. We provide
reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to their most
directly comparable financial measures as calculated and
presented in accordance with GAAP. Our gross margin may not be
comparable to a similarly titled measure of another company
because other entities may not calculate gross margin in the
same manner.
Volumes. We view throughput volumes on our
North Louisiana system and the Seabreeze and Black Lake
pipelines as an important factor affecting our profitability. We
gather and transport some of the natural gas and NGLs under
fee-based transportation contracts. Revenue from these contracts
is derived by applying the rates stipulated to the volumes
transported. Pipeline throughput volumes from existing wells
connected to our pipelines will naturally decline over time as
wells deplete. Accordingly, to maintain or to increase
throughput levels on these pipelines and the utilization rate of
the North Louisiana systems natural gas processing plants,
we must continually obtain new supplies of natural gas and NGLs.
Our ability to maintain existing supplies of natural gas and
NGLs and obtain new supplies are impacted by (1) the level
of workovers or recompletions of existing connected wells and
successful drilling activity in areas currently dedicated to our
pipelines and (2) our ability to compete for volumes from
successful new wells in other areas. The throughput
44
volumes of NGLs on our Seabreeze pipeline and the Black Lake
pipeline are substantially dependent upon the quantities of NGLs
produced at our processing plants as well as NGLs produced at
other processing plants that have pipeline connections with the
NGL pipelines. We regularly monitor producer activity in the
areas served by the North Louisiana system and the Seabreeze and
Black Lake pipelines and pursue opportunities to connect new
supply to these pipelines.
Gross Margin. We view our gross margin as an
important performance measure of the core profitability of our
operations. We review our gross margin monthly for consistency
and trend analysis.
We define gross margin as total operating revenues less
purchases of natural gas and natural gas liquids, and we define
segment gross margin for each segment as total operating
revenues for that segment less purchases of natural gas and
natural gas liquids for that segment. Our gross margin equals
the sum of our segment gross margins. Gross margin is included
as a supplemental disclosure because it is a primary performance
measure used by management as it represents the results of
product sales and purchases, a key component of our operations.
As an indicator of our operating performance, gross margin
should not be considered an alternative to, or more meaningful
than, net income, operating income, cash flows from operating
activities or any other measure of financial performance
presented in accordance with GAAP.
With respect to our Natural Gas Services segment, we calculate
our gross margin as our total operating revenue for this segment
less natural gas and NGL purchases. Operating revenue consists
of sales of natural gas, NGLs and condensate resulting from our
gathering, compression, treating, processing and transportation
activities, fees associated with the gathering of natural gas,
and any gains and losses realized from our non-trading
derivative activity related to our natural gas asset-based
marketing. Purchases include the cost of natural gas and NGLs
purchased by us. Our gross margin is impacted by our contract
portfolio. We purchase the wellhead natural gas from the
producers under fee-based arrangements,
percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements or
percentage-of-index
arrangements. Our gross margin generated from
percentage-of-proceeds
gathering and processing contracts is directly correlated to the
price of natural gas and NGLs. Under
percentage-of-index
arrangements, our gross margin is adversely affected when the
price of NGLs falls in relation to the price of natural gas.
Generally, our contract structure allows for us to allocate fuel
costs and other measurement losses to the producer or shipper
and, therefore, does not impact gross margin. Additionally, as
part of our gathering operations, we recover and sell
condensate. The margins we earn from condensate sales are
directly correlated with crude oil prices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
Reconciliation of Non-GAAP
Measures
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Reconciliation of
gross margin to net income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings from equity method
investment
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Add:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
14.2
|
|
|
|
13.6
|
|
|
|
15.0
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
12.6
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
General and administrative expense
|
|
|
11.4
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
$
|
75.2
|
|
|
$
|
56.9
|
|
|
$
|
44.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
Reconciliation of Non-GAAP
Measures
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Reconciliation of
segment gross
margin to
segment net income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas Services
segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
46.6
|
|
|
$
|
28.5
|
|
|
$
|
15.6
|
|
Add: Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
11.9
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
13.4
|
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment gross margin
|
|
$
|
71.4
|
|
|
$
|
53.6
|
|
|
$
|
42.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NGL Logistics
segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
3.1
|
|
|
$
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
Add:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Impairment of equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Earnings from equity method
investment
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment gross margin
|
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
|
$
|
3.3
|
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating and Maintenance Expense and General and
Administrative Expense. Operating and
maintenance expense are costs associated with the operation of a
specific asset. Direct labor, ad valorem taxes, repairs and
maintenance, utilities and contract services comprise the most
significant portion of our operating and maintenance expense.
These expenses are relatively independent of the volumes through
our systems but may fluctuate slightly depending on the
activities performed during a specific period.
In addition, we also review our general and administrative
expense, a substantial amount of which is incurred through DEFS
and allocated to us. For the year ended December 31, 2005,
our general and administrative expense was $11.4 million,
which included directly incurred costs as a result of our
initial public offering for audit, legal, printing and insurance
fees. Under our Omnibus Agreement with DEFS, we will reimburse
DEFS up to $4.8 million for 2006, for the provision by DEFS
or its affiliates of various general and administrative services
to us. This allocated general and administrative expense relates
to the assets being contributed to us at the closing of our
initial public offering. For the two years following the first
year after our initial public offering, the fee shall be
increased by the percentage increase in the consumer price index
for the applicable year. In addition, our general partner will
have the right to agree to further increases in connection with
expansions of our operations through the acquisition or
construction of new assets or businesses with the concurrence of
our special committee. We will also be obligated to reimburse
DEFS for our allocable share of insurance expenses related to
our businesses and properties as well as insurance expenses
related to director and officer liability coverage. We expect
that our allocable share of these insurance expenses will be
approximately $1.2 million in 2006.
We anticipate initially incurring approximately
$8.4 million annually of general and administrative
expense, some of which will be allocated to us by DEFS,
associated with being a separate publicly held limited
partnership. These public limited partnership expenses are
related to compensation and benefit expenses of the personnel
who provide direct support to our operations. Also included in
the public limited partnership expenses are expenses associated
with annual and quarterly reports to unitholders, tax return and
Schedule K-1
preparation and distribution, independent auditor fees, investor
relations activities, registrar and transfer agent fees,
incremental director and officer liability insurance costs and
director compensation.
EBITDA. We define EBITDA as net income plus
net interest expense and depreciation and amortization expense.
EBITDA is used as a supplemental liquidity measure by our
management and by external users of our financial statements,
such as investors, commercial banks, research analysts and
others, to assess the ability of our assets to generate cash
sufficient to pay interest costs, support our indebtedness, make
cash
46
distributions to our unitholders and general partner and finance
maintenance capital expenditures. EBITDA is also a financial
measurement that is reported to our lenders and used as a gauge
for compliance with our financial covenants under our credit
facility, which requires us to maintain 1) a leverage ratio
(the ratio of our consolidated indebtedness to our consolidated
EBITDA, in each case as is defined by the credit agreement) of
not more than 4.75 to 1.0 and on a temporary basis for not more
than three consecutive quarters following the consummation of
asset acquisitions in the midstream energy business, not more
than 5.25 to 1.0; and 2) an interest coverage ratio (the
ratio of our consolidated EBITDA to our consolidated interest
expense, in each case as is defined by the credit agreement) of
greater than or equal to 3.0 to 1.0 determined as of the last
day of each quarter for the four-quarter period ending on the
date of determination. Our EBITDA may not be comparable to a
similarly titled measure of another company because other
entities may not calculate EBITDA in the same manner.
EBITDA is also used as a supplemental performance measure by our
management and by external users of our financial statements,
such as investors, commercial banks, research analysts and
others, to assess:
|
|
|
|
|
financial performance of our assets without regard to financing
methods, capital structure or historical cost basis;
|
|
|
|
our operating performance and return on capital as compared to
those of other companies in the midstream energy industry,
without regard to financing methods or capital
structure; and
|
|
|
|
the viability of acquisitions and capital expenditure projects
and the overall rates of return on alternative investment
opportunities.
|
EBITDA should not be considered an alternative to, or more
meaningful than, net income, operating income, cash flows from
operating activities or any other measure of financial
performance presented in accordance with GAAP as measures of
operating performance, liquidity or ability to service debt
obligations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
Reconciliation of Non-GAAP
Measures
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Reconciliation of net income to
EBITDA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
Add:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
12.6
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
$
|
50.0
|
|
|
$
|
33.0
|
|
|
$
|
22.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation of cash provided
by operating activities to EBITDA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by operating
activities
|
|
$
|
75.5
|
|
|
$
|
25.6
|
|
|
$
|
30.8
|
|
Net changes in working capital
accounts, including net changes in price risk management assets
and liabilities
|
|
|
(26.2
|
)
|
|
|
11.2
|
|
|
|
(7.8
|
)
|
Non-cash impairment of equity
method investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other, including changes in
noncurrent assets and liabilities
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA
|
|
$
|
50.0
|
|
|
$
|
33.0
|
|
|
$
|
22.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributable Cash Flow. We define
distributable cash flow as EBITDA, less maintenance capital
expenditures and net interest expense (see
Liquidity and Capital Resources for
further definition of maintenance capital expenditures).
Distributable cash flow is used as a supplemented financial
measure by our
47
management and by external users of our financial statements,
such as investors, commercial banks, research analysts and
other, to assess our ability to make cash distributions to our
unitholders and our general partner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
Reconciliation of Non-GAAP
Measures
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Reconciliation of cash provided
by operating activities
to
distributable cash flow:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by operating
activities
|
|
$
|
75.5
|
|
|
$
|
25.6
|
|
|
$
|
30.8
|
|
Adjustments to cash provided by
operating activities to derive distributable cash flow:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance capital expenditures
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
Earnings from equity method
investment
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Distributions from equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
Net changes in working capital
accounts, including net changes in price risk management assets
and liabilities
|
|
|
(26.2
|
)
|
|
|
11.2
|
|
|
|
(7.8
|
)
|
Non-cash impairment of equity
method investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other, including changes in
noncurrent assets and liabilities
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributable cash flow
|
|
$
|
46.0
|
|
|
$
|
30.5
|
|
|
$
|
21.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our financial statements reflect the selection and application
of accounting policies that require management to make estimates
and assumptions. We believe that the following are the more
critical judgment areas in the application of our accounting
policies that currently affect our financial condition and
results of operations.
Revenue Recognition Our primary types of
sales and service activities reported as operating revenue
include:
|
|
|
|
|
sales of natural gas, NGLs and condensate;
|
|
|
|
natural gas gathering, processing and transportation, from which
we generate revenues primarily through the compression,
gathering, treating, processing and transportation of natural
gas; and
|
|
|
|
NGL transportation from which we generate revenues from
transportation fees.
|
Revenues associated with sales of natural gas, NGLs and
condensate are recognized when title passes to the customer,
which is when the risk of ownership passes to the purchaser and
physical delivery occurs. Revenues associated with
transportation and processing are recognized when the service is
provided.
For gathering services, we receive fees from natural gas
producers to transport the natural gas from the wellhead to the
processing plant. For processing services, we either receive
fees or commodities as payment for these services, depending on
the type of contract. Commodities received are in turn sold and
recognized as revenue in accordance with the criteria outlined
above. Under the
percentage-of-proceeds
contract type, we are paid for our services by keeping a
percentage of the NGLs produced and the residue gas resulting
from processing the natural gas. Under the
percentage-of-index
contract type, we purchase wellhead natural gas and sell
processed natural gas and NGLs to third parties.
We recognize revenues for non-trading derivative activity net in
the consolidated statements of operations as (losses) gains from
non-trading derivative activity, in accordance with EITF Issue
No. 02-03,
Issues Involved in Accounting for Derivative Contracts
Held for Trading Purposes and Contracts Involved in Energy
Trading and Risk Management Activities. These
activities include
mark-to-market
gains and losses on energy derivative contracts and the
financial or physical settlement of energy derivative contracts.
We generally report revenues gross in the consolidated
statements of operations, in accordance with EITF Issue
No. 99-19,
Reporting Revenue Gross as a Principal versus Net as an
Agent. Except for fee-based
48
arrangements, we act as the principal in these transactions,
take title to the product, and incur the risks and rewards of
ownership.
Impairment of Long-Lived
Assets Management periodically evaluates
whether the carrying value of long-lived assets has been
impaired when circumstances indicate the carrying value of those
assets may not be recoverable. This evaluation is based on
undiscounted cash flow projections. The carrying amount is not
recoverable if it exceeds the undiscounted sum of cash flows
expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the
asset. Management considers various factors when determining if
these assets should be evaluated for impairment, including but
not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
significant adverse changes in legal factors or in the business
climate;
|
|
|
|
a current-period operating or cash flow loss combined with a
history of operating or cash flow losses or a projection or
forecast that demonstrates continuing losses associated with the
use of a long-lived asset;
|
|
|
|
an accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount
originally expected for the acquisition or construction of a
long-lived asset;
|
|
|
|
significant adverse changes in the extent or manner in which an
asset is used or in its physical condition;
|
|
|
|
a significant change in the market value of an asset; and
|
|
|
|
a current expectation that, more likely than not, an asset will
be sold or otherwise disposed of before the end of its estimated
useful life.
|
If the carrying value is not recoverable, the impairment loss is
measured as the excess of the assets carrying value over
its fair value. Management assesses the fair value of long-lived
assets using commonly accepted techniques, and may use more than
one method, including, but not limited to, recent third party
comparable sales, internally developed discounted cash flow
analysis and analysis from outside advisors. Significant changes
in market conditions resulting from events such as the condition
of an asset or a change in managements intent to utilize
the asset would generally require management to reassess the
cash flows related to the long-lived assets.
Impairment of Equity Method
Investment We evaluate our equity method
investment for impairment when events or changes in
circumstances indicate, in managements judgment, that the
carrying value of such investment may have experienced an
other-than-temporary
decline in value. When evidence of loss in value has occurred,
management compares the estimated fair value of the investment
to the carrying value of the investment to determine whether an
impairment has occurred. Management assesses the fair value of
our equity method investment using commonly accepted techniques,
and may use more than one method, including, but not limited to,
recent third party comparable sales, internally developed
discounted cash flow analysis and analysis from outside
advisors. If the estimated fair value is less than the carrying
value and management considers the decline in value to be other
than temporary, the excess of the carrying value over the
estimated fair value is recognized in the financial statements
as an impairment.
Accounting for Risk Management and Hedging Activities and
Financial Instruments Each derivative not
qualifying for the normal purchases and normal sales exception
under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 133, or
SFAS 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments
and Hedging Activities as amended, is recorded on a
gross basis in the consolidated balance sheets at its fair value
as unrealized gains or unrealized losses on non-trading
derivative and hedging transactions. Derivative assets and
liabilities remain classified in our consolidated balance sheets
as unrealized gains or unrealized losses on non-trading
derivative and hedging transactions at fair value until the
contractual settlement period occurs.
All derivative activity reflected in the combined financial
statements was transacted by us and DEFS and its subsidiaries
prior to our initial public offering and was transferred
and/or
allocated to us for periods prior to December 7, 2005. All
derivative activity reflected in the consolidated financial
statements from December 7, 2005 and going forward has been
and will be transacted by us. Certain non-trading
49
derivatives are further designated as either a hedge of a
forecasted transaction or future cash flow (cash flow hedge), a
hedge of a recognized asset, liability or firm commitment (fair
value hedge), or normal purchases or normal sales, while certain
non-trading derivatives, which are related to asset-based
activity, are designated as non-trading derivative activity. For
the periods presented, we did not have any trading activity,
however, we do have cash flow and fair value hedge activity,
normal purchases and normal sales activity, and non-trading
derivative activity included in the consolidated financial
statements. For each derivative, the accounting method and
presentation of gains and losses or revenue and expense in the
consolidated statements of operations are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Classification of
Contract
|
|
Accounting Method
|
|
Presentation of Gains &
Losses or Revenue & Expense
|
|
Non-Trading Derivative Activity
|
|
Mark-to-market(a)
|
|
Net basis in gains and losses from
non-trading derivative activity
|
Cash Flow Hedge
|
|
Hedge method(b)
|
|
Gross basis in the same statement
of operations category as the related hedged item
|
Fair Value Hedge
|
|
Hedge method(b)
|
|
Gross basis in the same statement
of operations category as the related hedged item
|
Normal Purchases or Normal Sales
|
|
Accrual method(c)
|
|
Gross basis upon settlement in the
corresponding statement of operations category based on purchase
or sale
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Mark-to-market An
accounting method whereby the change in the fair value of the
asset or liability is recognized in the results of operations in
gains and losses from non-trading derivative activity during the
current period. |
|
(b) |
|
Hedge method An accounting method whereby the
effective portion of the change in the fair value of the asset
or liability is recorded as a balance sheet adjustment and there
is no recognition in the results of operations for the effective
portion until the service is provided or the associated delivery
period occurs. |
|
(c) |
|
Accrual method An accounting method whereby
there is no recognition in the results of operations for changes
in fair value of a contract until the service is provided or the
associated delivery period occurs. |
Cash Flow and Fair Value Hedges For
derivatives designated as a cash flow hedge or a fair value
hedge, management prepares formal documentation of the hedge in
accordance with SFAS 133. In addition, management formally
assesses, both at the inception of the hedge and on an ongoing
basis, whether the hedge contract is highly effective in
offsetting changes in fair values of hedged items. All
components of each derivative gain or loss are included in the
assessment of hedge effectiveness, unless otherwise noted.
The fair value of a derivative designated as a cash flow hedge
is recorded for balance sheet purposes as unrealized gains or
unrealized losses on non-trading derivative and hedging
transactions. The effective portion of the change in fair value
of a derivative designated as a cash flow hedge is recorded in
partners equity as accumulated other comprehensive income,
or AOCI, and the ineffective portion is recorded in the
consolidated statements of operations. During the period in
which the hedged transaction occurs, amounts in AOCI associated
with the hedged transaction are reclassified to the consolidated
statements of operations in the same accounts as the item being
hedged. Hedge accounting is discontinued prospectively when it
is determined that the derivative no longer qualifies as an
effective hedge, or when it is no longer probable that the
hedged transaction will occur. When hedge accounting is
discontinued because the derivative no longer qualifies as an
effective hedge, the derivative is subject to the
mark-to-market
accounting method prospectively. The derivative continues to be
carried on the consolidated balance sheets at its fair value;
however, subsequent changes in its fair value are recognized in
current period earnings. Gains and losses related to
discontinued hedges that were previously accumulated in AOCI
will remain in AOCI until the hedged transaction occurs, unless
it is no longer probable that the hedged transaction will occur,
in which case, the gains and losses that were previously
deferred in AOCI will be immediately recognized in current
period earnings.
The fair value of a derivative designated as a cash flow hedge
or a fair value hedge is recorded for balance sheet purposes as
unrealized gains or unrealized losses on non-trading derivative
and hedging
50
transactions. We recognize the gain or loss on the derivative
instrument, as well as the offsetting loss or gain on the hedged
item in earnings in the current period. All derivatives
designated and accounted for as fair value hedges are classified
in the same category as the item being hedged in the results of
operations.
Valuation When available, quoted market
prices or prices obtained through external sources are used to
verify a contracts fair value. For contracts with a
delivery location or duration for which quoted market prices are
not available, fair value is determined based on pricing models
developed primarily from historical and expected correlations
with quoted market prices.
Values are adjusted to reflect the credit risk inherent in the
transaction as well as the potential impact of liquidating open
positions in an orderly manner over a reasonable time period
under current conditions. Changes in market prices and
management estimates directly affect the estimated fair value of
these contracts. Accordingly, it is reasonably possible that
such estimates may change in the near term.
Natural Gas and NGL Imbalance
Accounting Quantities of natural gas or
NGLs over-delivered or under-delivered related to imbalance
agreements with customers, producers or pipelines are recorded
monthly as other receivables or other payables using then
current market prices or the weighted average prices of natural
gas or NGLs at the plant or system. These imbalances are settled
with deliveries of natural gas or NGLs or with cash.
Accounting for Equity-Based
Compensation We adopted a long-term
incentive plan which permits for the grant of units as described
further in Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements in Item 8. Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data. The expense related to this equity based
compensation is accounted for using estimates of the percentage
of equity that will vest at the end of the incentive period.
These estimates are based on the projected performance of our
equity during the incentive period. If actual results are not
consistent with our assumptions and judgments, we may be exposed
to changes in compensation expense that could be material.
51
Results
of Operations
Consolidated
Overview
The following table and discussion is a summary of our
consolidated results of operations for the three years ended
December 31, 2005. The results of operations by segment are
discussed in further detail following this consolidated overview
discussion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions except operating
data)
|
|
|
Operating revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of natural gas, NGLs and
condensate
|
|
$
|
762.3
|
|
|
$
|
489.7
|
|
|
$
|
454.0
|
|
Transportation and processing
services
|
|
|
22.9
|
|
|
|
19.9
|
|
|
|
18.6
|
|
(Losses) gains from non-trading
derivative activity
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
|
784.5
|
|
|
|
509.5
|
|
|
|
475.1
|
|
Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
|
|
|
709.3
|
|
|
|
452.6
|
|
|
|
430.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin(a)
|
|
|
75.2
|
|
|
|
56.9
|
|
|
|
44.5
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
14.2
|
|
|
|
13.6
|
|
|
|
15.0
|
|
General and administrative expense
|
|
|
11.4
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
Earnings from equity method
investment(c)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Impairment of equity method
investment(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA(b)
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
|
|
33.0
|
|
|
|
22.8
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
12.6
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment financial and operating
data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas Services
Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin(a)
|
|
$
|
71.4
|
|
|
$
|
53.6
|
|
|
$
|
42.2
|
|
Operating data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas throughput (MMcf/d)
|
|
|
356
|
|
|
|
328
|
|
|
|
348
|
|
NGL gross production (Bbls/d)
|
|
|
4,543
|
|
|
|
4,690
|
|
|
|
4,381
|
|
NGL Logistics Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin(a)
|
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
|
$
|
3.3
|
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
Operating data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seabreeze throughput (Bbls/d)
|
|
|
15,797
|
|
|
|
14,966
|
|
|
|
14,685
|
|
Black Lake throughput (Bbls/d)(c)
|
|
|
4,768
|
|
|
|
5,256
|
|
|
|
5,547
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Gross margin consists of total operating revenues less purchases
of natural gas and NGLs and segment gross margin for each
segment consists of total operating revenues for that segment
less purchases of natural gas and NGLs for that segment. Please
read How We Evaluate Our Operations on page 44. |
|
(b) |
|
EBITDA consists of net income plus depreciation and amortization
expense. Please read How We Evaluate Our Operations
on page 44. |
52
|
|
|
(c) |
|
Represents 50% of the throughput volumes and earnings of Black
Lake in 2003, 2004 and the period from January 1, 2005
through December 6, 2005. Upon closing of our initial
public offering on December 7, 2005, DEFS retained a 5%
interest in Black Lake. We own a 45% interest in Black Lake. |
Year
Ended December 31, 2005 vs. Year Ended December 31,
2004
Total Operating Revenues Total operating
revenues increased $275.0 million, or 54%, to
$784.5 million in 2005 from $509.5 million in 2004.
This increase was primarily due to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$239.5 million increase attributable primarily to higher
commodity prices and natural gas sales volumes for our Natural
Gas Services segment;
|
|
|
|
$35.5 million increase primarily attributable to higher NGL
prices and increased throughput for our Seabreeze pipeline.
|
Purchases of Natural Gas and
NGLs Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
increased $256.7 million, or 57%, to $709.3 million in
2005 from $452.6 million in 2004. This increase was
primarily due to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$221.7 million increase attributable to higher costs of raw
natural gas supply driven primarily by higher commodity prices
for our Natural Gas Services segment; and
|
|
|
|
$35.0 million increase attributable to higher NGL prices
and increased throughput for our Seabreeze pipeline.
|
Gross Margin Gross margin increased
$18.3 million, or 32%, to $75.2 million in 2005 from
$56.9 million in 2004, primarily as a result of the
following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$17.8 million increase attributable primarily to higher
commodity prices and an increase in marketing activity and
increased throughput across the PELICO system due to atypical
and significant differences in natural gas prices at various
receipt and delivery points across the system for our Natural
Gas Services segment. The market conditions causing these
significant differences in the natural gas prices at various
receipt and delivery points across the PELICO system are unusual
and may not continue in the future, and we may not be able to
capture the upside related to the market condition in the
future; and
|
|
|
|
$0.5 million increase due to increased throughput volumes
for our Seabreeze pipeline.
|
Impact of Hurricane Katrina and
Rita Hurricanes Katrina and Rita caused
extensive damage to the Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi Gulf
Coast in late August and mid-September of 2005. These storms did
not cause any significant damage to our properties. However, in
September 2005, we experienced operational disruptions for
several days as a result of the impact of Hurricane Rita on the
energy industry in our areas of operations. These disruptions
reduced our total operating revenues by approximately
$10.1 million, our purchases by approximately
$9.5 million and our gross margin by approximately
$0.6 million in September 2005.
Operating and Maintenance
Expense Operating and maintenance expense
increased $0.6 million, or 4%, to $14.2 million in
2005 from $13.6 million in 2004. This increase was
primarily the result of higher maintenance and pipeline
integrity costs for our Natural Gas Services segment.
General and Administrative
Expense General and administrative expense
increased $4.9 million, or 75%, to $11.4 million in
2005 from $6.5 million in 2004. This increase was primarily
the result of public offering costs of approximately
$4.0 million and higher allocated costs from DEFS of
approximately $0.9 million due to higher overall DEFS
general and administrative costs primarily as a result of
increased insurance premiums. Due to general trends in the
insurance industry, our property and casualty insurance
deductibles have significantly increased in 2006.
53
Earnings from Equity Method
Investment Earnings from equity method
investment decreased $0.2 million, to $0.4 million in
2005 from $0.6 million in 2004. This decrease was primarily
due to an increase in Black Lake operating costs as a result of
pipeline integrity testing during the fourth quarter of 2005.
Impairment of Equity Method
Investment In 2004, we recorded an
impairment totaling $4.4 million as impairment of equity
method investment, which is included in the NGL Logistics
segment.
Depreciation and Amortization
Expense Depreciation and amortization
expense decreased $0.9 million, or 7%, to
$11.7 million in 2005 from $12.6 million in 2004 as a
result of an asset that became fully depreciated at the
beginning of 2005.
Year
Ended December 31, 2004 vs. Year Ended December 31,
2003
Total Operating Revenues Total operating
revenues increased $34.4 million, or 7%, to
$509.5 million in 2004 from $475.1 million in 2003.
This increase was primarily due to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$24.8 million increase attributable primarily to higher
commodity prices for our Seabreeze pipeline; and
|
|
|
|
$9.6 million increase attributable primarily to higher
commodity prices, partially offset by lower sales volumes for
our Natural Gas Services segment.
|
Purchases of Natural Gas and
NGLs Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
increased $22.0 million, or 5%, to $452.6 million in
2004 from $430.6 million in 2003. This increase was
primarily due to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$23.8 million increase attributable to higher commodity
prices in our Seabreeze pipeline; and
|
|
|
|
$1.8 million decrease attributable to lower natural gas
throughput in our Natural Gas Services segment, offset by higher
raw natural gas supply prices.
|
Gross Margin Gross margin increased
$12.4 million, or 28%, to $56.9 million in 2004 from
$44.5 million in 2003, primarily as a result of the
following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$11.4 million increase attributable to
percentage-of-proceeds
processing arrangements, mainly due to higher commodity prices
and improved per unit margin from our PELICO system; and
|
|
|
|
$1.0 million increase attributable to higher per unit
margins for our Seabreeze pipeline.
|
Operating and Maintenance
Expense Operating and maintenance expense
decreased $1.4 million, or 9%, to $13.6 million in
2004 from $15.0 million in 2003. This decrease was
primarily the result of lower repairs and maintenance for our
Natural Gas Services segment.
General and Administrative
Expense General and administrative expense
decreased $0.6 million, or 8%, to $6.5 million in 2004
from $7.1 million in 2003. This decrease was primarily the
result of lower allocated costs from DEFS due to lower overall
DEFS general and administrative costs.
Earnings from Equity Method
Investment Earnings from equity method
investment increased $0.2 million, to $0.6 million in
2004 from $0.4 million in 2003. This increase was primarily
the result of lower Black Lake operating and administrative
costs.
Impairment of Equity Method
Investment In 2004, we recorded an
impairment totaling $4.4 million as impairment of equity
method investment, which is included in the NGL Logistics
segment.
Depreciation and Amortization
Expense Depreciation and amortization
expense decreased $0.2 million, or 2%, to
$12.6 million in 2004 from $12.8 million in 2003,
primarily as a result of certain assets that became fully
depreciated at the beginning of 2004.
54
Results
of Operations Natural Gas Services
Segment
This segment consists of our North Louisiana system, which
includes our PELICO system and our Minden and Ada processing
plants and gathering systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions except operating
data)
|
|
|
Operating revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of natural gas, NGLs and
condensate
|
|
$
|
570.9
|
|
|
$
|
333.5
|
|
|
$
|
322.6
|
|
Transportation and processing
services
|
|
|
22.6
|
|
|
|
19.9
|
|
|
|
18.6
|
|
(Losses) gains from non-trading
derivative activity
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
|
592.8
|
|
|
|
353.3
|
|
|
|
343.7
|
|
Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
|
|
|
521.4
|
|
|
|
299.7
|
|
|
|
301.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin(a)
|
|
|
71.4
|
|
|
|
53.6
|
|
|
|
42.2
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
13.4
|
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
11.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas Services segment net
income
|
|
$
|
46.6
|
|
|
$
|
28.5
|
|
|
$
|
15.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas throughput (MMcf/d)
|
|
|
356
|
|
|
|
328
|
|
|
|
348
|
|
NGL gross production (Bbls/d)
|
|
|
4,543
|
|
|
|
4,690
|
|
|
|
4,381
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Segment gross margin for each segment consists of total
operating revenues for that segment less purchases of natural
gas and NGLs for that segment. Please read How We Evaluate
Our Operations on page 44. |
Year
Ended December 31, 2005 vs. Year Ended December 31,
2004
Total Operating Revenues Total operating
revenues increased $239.5 million, or 68%, to
$592.8 million in 2005 from $353.3 million in 2004.
This increase was primarily due to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$169.6 million increase attributable to an increase in
natural gas prices;
|
|
|
|
$15.0 million increase attributable to an increase in NGL
and condensate prices;
|
|
|
|
$52.8 million increase attributable to higher natural gas
sales volumes driven primarily by incremental natural gas demand
at our Minden and Ada processing plants related to our merchant
arrangements, higher gas supply volumes for our Ada processing
plant and gathering system and an increase in marketing activity
and increased throughput across the PELICO system due to
atypical and significant differences in natural gas prices at
various receipt and delivery points across the system. The
market conditions causing these significant differences in the
natural gas prices at various receipt and delivery points across
the PELICO system are unusual and may not continue in the
future, and we may not be able to capture the upside related to
the market condition in the future;
|
|
|
|
$2.7 million increase attributable to higher processing
fees primarily driven by incremental fee based services of our
Ada gathering system and higher transportation fees primarily
driven by an increase in volumes on our PELICO system; and
|
|
|
|
$0.6 million decrease attributable to lower non-trading
derivative activity primarily due to natural gas asset-based
marketing.
|
Purchases of Natural Gas and
NGLs Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
increased $221.7 million, or 74%, to $521.4 million in
2005 from $299.7 million in 2004. This increase was
primarily due to higher costs of raw natural gas supply driven
by higher commodity prices.
55
Gross Margin Gross margin increased
$17.8 million, or 33%, to $71.4 million in 2005 from
$53.6 million in 2004, primarily as a result of the
following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$8.7 million increase attributable to higher commodity
prices;
|
|
|
|
$9.3 million increase attributable to an increase in
marketing activity and increased throughput across the PELICO
system due to atypical and significant differences in natural
gas prices at various receipt and delivery points across the
system. The market conditions causing these significant
differences in the natural gas prices at various receipt and
delivery points across the PELICO system are unusual and may not
continue in the future, and we may not be able to capture the
upside related to the market condition in the future;
|
|
|
|
$2.7 million increase attributable to higher processing
fees primarily driven by incremental fee based services of our
Ada gathering system and higher transportation fees primarily
driven by an increase in volumes on our PELICO system;
|
|
|
|
$2.3 million decrease attributable to lower contractual
fees charged to customers related to pipeline imbalances and a
decrease in NGL recoveries at Minden as a result of unfavorable
processing economics in the fourth quarter of 2005; and
|
|
|
|
$0.6 million decrease attributable to lower non-trading
derivative activity primarily due to natural gas asset-based
marketing.
|
Operating and Maintenance
Expense Operating and maintenance expense
increased $0.6 million, or 4%, to $14.0 million in
2005 from $13.4 million in 2004. This increase was
primarily the result of higher outside services, parts, supplies
and labor for maintenance and pipeline integrity testing.
NGL production during 2005 decreased 147 Bbls/d, or 3%, to
4,543 Bbls/d from 4,690 Bbls/d in 2004 due primarily
to unfavorable market economics for processing NGLs in the
fourth quarter of 2005. Natural gas transported
and/or
processed during 2005 increased 28 MMcf/d, or 9%, to
356 MMcf/d from 328 MMcf/d in 2004 primarily as a
result of higher natural gas volumes for our PELICO system.
Year
Ended December 31, 2004 vs. Year Ended December 31,
2003
Total Operating Revenues Total operating
revenues increased $9.6 million, or 3%, to
$353.3 million in 2004 from $343.7 million in 2003.
This increase was primarily due to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$17.0 million increase attributable to higher natural gas
prices;
|
|
|
|
$12.5 million increase attributable to higher NGL and
condensate prices;
|
|
|
|
$4.5 million increase attributable to higher NGL sales
volume due to favorable market economics for processing NGLs;
|
|
|
|
$1.2 million increase attributable to higher transportation
and processing fees due primarily to the incremental fee based
services of our Ada gathering system offset by gas supply
declines;
|
|
|
|
$23.1 million decrease attributable to lower natural gas
sales volume driven by wellhead gas supply decline and higher
NGL recoveries; and
|
|
|
|
$2.6 million decrease attributable to lower non-trading
derivative activity primarily due to natural gas asset-based
marketing.
|
Purchases of Natural Gas and
NGLs Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
decreased $1.8 million to $299.7 million in 2004 from
$301.5 million in 2003. This decrease was primarily due to
the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$23.3 million decrease attributable to lower raw natural
gas supply volume due to declining wellhead production; and
|
|
|
|
$21.5 million increase attributable to higher costs of raw
natural gas supply which is primarily due to higher commodity
prices.
|
56
Gross Margin Gross margin increased
$11.4 million, or 27%, to $53.6 million in 2004 from
$42.2 million in 2003, primarily as a result of the
following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$8.0 million increase attributable to
percentage-of-proceeds
processing arrangements, mainly due to higher commodity prices;
|
|
|
|
$2.3 million increase attributable to higher per unit
margins for our PELICO system primarily due to higher
contractual premiums charged to customers related to pipeline
imbalances; and
|
|
|
|
$1.2 million increase attributable to higher transportation
and processing fees as described above.
|
NGL production during 2004 increased 309 Bbls/d, or 7%, to
4,690 Bbls/d in 2004 from 4,381 Bbls/d during 2003 as
a result of favorable market economics for processing NGLs.
Natural gas transported
and/or
processed during 2004 decreased 20 MMcf/d, or 6%, to
328 MMcf/d from 348 MMcf/d during 2003 as a result of
lower natural gas supply.
Operating and Maintenance
Expense Operating and maintenance expense
decreased $1.3 million, or 9%, to $13.4 million in
2004 from $14.7 million during 2003. This decrease was
primarily the result of lower outside services for repairs and
maintenance.
Results
of Operations NGL Logistics
Segment
This segment includes our NGL transportation pipelines, which
includes our Seabreeze pipeline and our interest in Black Lake.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions except operating
data)
|
|
|
Operating revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of NGLs
|
|
$
|
191.4
|
|
|
$
|
156.2
|
|
|
$
|
131.4
|
|
Transportation and processing
services
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
|
191.7
|
|
|
|
156.2
|
|
|
|
131.4
|
|
Purchases of NGLs
|
|
|
187.9
|
|
|
|
152.9
|
|
|
|
129.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin(a)
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Earnings from equity method
investment
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Impairment of equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NGL Logistics segment net income
|
|
$
|
3.1
|
|
|
$
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seabreeze throughput (Bbls/d)
|
|
|
15,797
|
|
|
|
14,966
|
|
|
|
14,685
|
|
Black Lake throughput (Bbls/d)(b)
|
|
|
4,768
|
|
|
|
5,256
|
|
|
|
5,547
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Segment gross margin for each segment consists of total
operating revenues for that segment less purchases of natural
gas and NGLs for that segment. Please read How We Evaluate
Our Operations on page 44. |
|
(b) |
|
Represents 50% of the throughput volumes of the Black Lake
pipeline in 2003, 2004 and the period from January 1, 2005
through December 6, 2005. Upon closing of our initial
public offering on December 7, 2005, DEFS retained a 5%
interest in Black Lake. We own a 45% interest in Black Lake. |
57
Year
Ended December 31, 2005 vs. Year Ended December 31,
2004
Total Operating Revenues Total operating
revenues increased $35.5 million, or 23%, to
$191.7 million in the 2005 from $156.2 million in
2004. This increase was primarily due to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$39.7 million increase attributable to higher NGL prices
for our Seabreeze pipeline;
|
|
|
|
$4.5 million decrease attributable to lower sales volume
for our Seabreeze pipeline primarily due to a change in contract
terms in December 2005 from a purchase and sale arrangement to a
fee-based contractual transportation arrangement; and
|
|
|
|
$0.3 million increase in transportation revenue
attributable to the change in contract terms in December 2005,
between DEFS and Seabreeze, from a purchase and redeliver
arrangement to a fee-based transport contractual arrangement.
|
Overall, our Seabreeze pipeline experienced an increase in
throughput volumes during 2005 as a result of a temporary
disruption in supply from a third-party pipeline in March 2004,
which was restored in June 2005.
Purchases of NGLs Purchases of NGLs
increased $35.0 million, or 23%, to $187.9 million in
2005 from $152.9 million 2004. The increase was due
primarily to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$39.7 million increase attributable to higher NGL prices
for our Seabreeze pipeline; and
|
|
|
|
$4.7 million decrease attributable to the change in
contract terms in December 2005 from a purchase and sale
arrangement to a fee-based contractual transportation
arrangement.
|
Gross Margin Gross margin increased
$0.5 million, or 15%, to $3.8 million in 2005 from
$3.3 million in 2004 mainly as a result of higher volumes
on our Seabreeze pipeline.
Earnings from Equity Method
Investment Earnings from equity method
investment decreased $0.2 million, to $0.4 million in
2005 from $0.6 million in 2004. This decrease was primarily
due to an increase in Black Lake operating costs as a result of
pipeline integrity testing during the fourth quarter of 2005.
Impairment of Equity Method
Investment In 2004, we recorded an
impairment totaling $4.4 million as impairment of equity
method investment. We did not record an impairment in 2005.
Year
Ended December 31, 2004 vs. Year Ended December 31,
2003
Total Operating Revenues Total operating
revenues increased $24.8 million, or 19%, to
$156.2 million in 2004 from $131.4 million in 2003.
This increase was primarily due to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$22.3 million increase attributable to higher commodity
prices for our Seabreeze pipeline; and
|
|
|
|
$2.5 million increase attributable to higher throughput
volumes for our Seabreeze pipeline due to additional supply
sources.
|
Purchases of NGLs Purchases of NGLs
increased $23.8 million, or 18%, to $152.9 million in
2004 from $129.1 million in 2003. The increase was due
primarily to the following factors:
|
|
|
|
|
$21.3 million increase attributable to higher NGL prices
for our Seabreeze pipeline; and
|
|
|
|
$2.5 million increase attributable to higher throughput
volumes for our Seabreeze pipeline as described above.
|
Gross Margin Gross margin increased
$1.0 million, or 43%, to $3.3 million in 2004 from
$2.3 million in 2003 mainly as a result of higher per unit
margin for our Seabreeze pipeline driven primarily by our
Seabreeze pipeline transporting a larger portion of our volumes
under higher margin supply contracts.
Earnings from Equity Method
Investment Earnings from equity method
investment increased $0.2 million to $0.6 million in
2004 from $0.4 million in 2003. This increase was primarily
the result of lower Black Lake operating and administrative
costs.
58
Impairment of Equity Method
Investment In 2004, we recorded an
impairment totaling $4.4 million as impairment of equity
method investment.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Historically, our sources of liquidity included cash generated
from operations and funding from DEFS. Our cash receipts were
deposited in DEFS bank accounts and all cash disbursements
were made from these accounts. Thus, historically our financial
statements have reflected no cash balances. Cash transactions
handled by DEFS for us were reflected in partners equity
as intercompany advances between DEFS and us. Following our
initial public offering, we maintain our own bank accounts,
which are managed by DEFS.
We expect our sources of liquidity to include:
|
|
|
|
|
cash generated from operations;
|
|
|
|
cash distributions from Black Lake;
|
|
|
|
borrowings under our revolving credit facility;
|
|
|
|
cash realized from the liquidation of securities that are
pledged under our term loan facility;
|
|
|
|
issuance of additional partnership units; and
|
|
|
|
debt offerings.
|
We used a portion of our retained $206.4 million from our
initial public offering to: 1) purchase $100.1 million
of high-grade securities, which were used as collateral to
secure the term loan portion of our credit facility, 2) pay
approximately $4.0 million of expenses associated with our
initial public offering and related formation transactions,
3) distribute approximately $8.6 million in cash to
subsidiaries of DEFS as reimbursement for capital expenditures
incurred by subsidiaries of DEFS prior to our initial public
offering related to assets contributed to us upon the closing of
our initial public offering, which distribution was made in
partial consideration of the assets contributed to us upon the
closing of our initial public offering, and 4) use the
remaining amount of approximately $93.7 million to fund
payables and future capital expenditures (including potential
acquisitions), working capital and other general partnership
purposes.
We believe that cash generated from these sources will be
sufficient to meet our short-term working capital requirements,
long-term capital expenditure requirements and quarterly cash
distributions. Our hedging program may require us to post
collateral depending on commodity price movements. DEFS has
issued parental guarantees for transactions that have been
executed under our hedging program, which may reduce our
requirement to post collateral.
Changes in natural gas, NGL and condensate prices and the terms
of our processing arrangements have a direct impact on our
generation and use of cash from operations due to their impact
on net income, along with the resulting changes in working
capital. As of January 1, 2006, we have hedged
approximately 80% of our share of anticipated natural gas and
NGL price risk associated with our
percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements through 2010 with natural gas and crude oil swaps.
Additionally, as part of our gathering operations, we recover
and sell condensate. As of January 1, 2006, we have hedged
approximately 80% of our share of anticipated condensate price
risk associated with our gathering operations through 2010 with
crude oil swaps. For additional information regarding our
hedging activities, please read Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk Commodity Price
Risk Hedging Strategies.
Working Capital Working capital is the
amount by which current assets exceed current liabilities. Our
working capital requirements are primarily driven by changes in
accounts receivable and accounts payable. These changes are
impacted by changes in the prices of commodities that we buy and
sell. In general, our working capital requirements increase in
periods of rising commodity prices and decline in periods of
falling commodity prices. However, our working capital needs do
not necessarily change at the same rate as commodity prices
because both accounts receivable and accounts payable are
impacted by the same commodity prices. In addition, the timing
of payments received by our customers or paid to our suppliers
can also cause fluctuations in working capital because we settle
with most of our larger suppliers and customers
59
on a monthly basis and often near the end of the month. We had
working capital of $31.1 million as of December 31,
2005, compared to working capital of $18.5 million as of
December 31, 2004. During these periods, the increasing
working capital trend was primarily attributable to higher
commodity prices and the timing of fluctuations in accounts
receivable and accounts payable as described above. We expect
that our future working capital requirements will be impacted by
these same factors.
Cash flow Net cash provided by operating
activities, net cash used in investing activities and net cash
provided by (used in) financing activities for the years ended
December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating
activities
|
|
$
|
75.5
|
|
|
$
|
25.6
|
|
|
$
|
30.8
|
|
Net cash used in investing
activities
|
|
$
|
(107.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.2
|
)
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
financing activities
|
|
$
|
73.7
|
|
|
$
|
(23.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(29.6
|
)
|
Cash Flows Provided by Operating
Activities The changes in net cash provided
by operating activities are attributable to our net income
adjusted for non-cash charges as presented in the consolidated
statements of cash flows and changes in working capital as
discussed above.
Cash Flows Used in Investing
Activities Net cash used in investing
activities in 2005 primarily consisted of purchases of
available-for-sale
securities in the amount of $100.1 million to provide
collateral for the term loan portion of our credit facility. Net
cash used in investing activities from 2003 through 2005 was
generally used for capital expenditures, which generally
consisted of expenditures for construction and expansion of our
infrastructure in addition to well connections and other
upgrades to our existing facilities.
Cash Flows Provided By/Used in Financing
Activities Net cash provided by/used in
financing activities from 2003 through 2005 represents the pass
through of our net cash flows to DEFS under its cash management
program as discussed above. Net cash provided by financing
activities in 2005 was also a result of proceeds from the
issuance of common units, offset by related distributions to
DEFS and borrowings under the term loan and credit facilities.
We expect to incur future financing cash outflows as a result of
distributions to our unitholders and general partners. See
Item 5. Distributions of Available Cash.
Capital
Requirements
The midstream energy business can be capital intensive,
requiring significant investment to maintain and upgrade
existing operations. In our Natural Gas Services segment, a
significant portion of the cost of constructing new gathering
lines to connect to our gathering system is generally paid for
by the natural gas producer. In this segment, our expansion
capital expenditures may include the construction of new
pipelines that would facilitate greater movement of natural gas
from western Louisiana and eastern Texas to the market hub that
the PELICO system is connected to near Perryville, Louisiana.
This hub provides access to several intrastate and interstate
pipelines, including pipelines that transport natural gas to the
northeastern United States.
Our capital requirements have consisted primarily of, and we
anticipate will continue to consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
maintenance capital expenditures, which are cash expenditures
where we add on to or improve capital assets owned or acquire or
construct new capital assets if such expenditures are made to
maintain, including over the long term, our operating capacity
or revenues; and
|
|
|
|
expansion capital expenditures, which are cash expenditures for
acquisitions or capital improvements (where we add on to or
improve the capital assets owned, or acquire or construct new
gathering lines, treating facilities, processing plants,
fractionation facilities, pipelines, terminals, docks, truck
racks, tankage and other storage, distribution or transportation
facilities and related or similar midstream
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
assets) in each case if such addition, improvement, acquisition
or construction is made to increase the operating capacity or
revenues of us or our equity interests.
|
Given our objective of growth through acquisitions, expansion of
existing assets and other internal growth projects, we
anticipate that we will continue to invest significant amounts
of capital to grow and acquire assets. We actively consider a
variety of assets for potential acquisitions and expansion
projects.
We have budgeted maintenance capital expenditures of
$2.2 million and expansion capital expenditures of
$13.0 million for the year ending December 31, 2006.
During 2005, our capital expenditures totaled $7.9 million,
including maintenance capital expenditures of $3.3 million
and expansion capital expenditures of $4.6 million.
Maintenance capital expenditures in 2006 are expected to be
lower than 2005 as a result of the completion of a 2005 project
to add and modify compression and flow lines to increase volumes
at the Ada processing plant. Expansion capital expenditures in
2006 are expected to increase as a result of the new expansion
NGL project, for which expansion capital expenditures are
expected to be approximately $12 million. We expect to fund
future capital expenditures with restricted investments, funds
generated from our operations, borrowings under our credit
facility, the issuance of additional partnership units as
appropriate given market conditions and the liquidation of
high-grade securities that have been pledged under our credit
facility.
Description of Credit Agreement. On
December 7, 2005, we entered into a
5-year
credit agreement that consists of:
|
|
|
|
|
a $250.0 million revolving credit facility; and
|
|
|
|
a $100.1 million term loan facility.
|
The revolving credit facility is available for general
partnership purposes, including working capital, letters of
credit, capital expenditures, acquisitions and cash
distributions. We had outstanding debt of $110.0 million
under our revolving credit facility as of December 31,
2005. The undrawn portion of the revolving credit facility is
available for letters of credit.
We had outstanding indebtedness of $100.1 million under the
term loan facility as of December 31, 2005. Amounts repaid
under the term loan facility may not be reborrowed. The full
balance on the term loan was collateralized by investments in
high-grade securities as of December 31, 2005 for future
use in funding capital expenditures (including potential
acquisitions) and in order to reduce our cost of borrowings
under the term loan facility.
We have the option of increasing the size of the revolving
credit facility to $550 million with the consent of the
issuing lenders.
Our obligations under the revolving credit facility are
unsecured and the term loan facility is secured at all times by
high-grade securities in an amount equal to or greater than the
outstanding principal amount of the term loan. We may sell any
portion of the collateral for the term loan facility at any time
as long as we use the proceeds from the sale to repay term loan
borrowings. Upon any prepayment of term loan borrowings, the
amount of our revolving credit facility will automatically
increase to the extent that the repayment of our term loan
facility is made in connection with an acquisition of assets in
the midstream energy business. Indebtedness under the credit
agreement ranks equally with all of our outstanding unsecured
and unsubordinated debt (except that the term loan facility has
a priority claim to the high-grade securities pledged to
secure it).
We may prepay all loans at any time without penalty, subject to
the reimbursement of lender breakage costs in the case of
prepayment of London Interbank Offered Rate, or LIBOR,
borrowings. Indebtedness under the revolving credit facility
bears interest, at our option, at either (1) the higher of
Wachovia Banks prime rate or the federal funds rate plus
0.50% or (2) LIBOR plus an applicable margin which ranges
from 0.27% to 1.025% dependent upon the leverage level
and/or
credit rating. As of December 31, 2005, approximately
$0.1 million of the term loan facility bears interest at
the higher of Wachovia Banks prime rate or the federal
funds rate plus a 0.50%, and the remaining $100.0 million
of the term loan facility bears interest at LIBOR plus a rate
per annum of 0.15%. The revolving credit facility incurs an
annual facility fee of 0.08% to 0.35%
61
depending on the applicable leverage level or debt rating. This
fee is paid on drawn and undrawn portions of the revolving
credit facility.
The credit agreement prohibits us from making distributions of
available cash to unitholders if any default or event of default
(as defined in the credit agreement) exists. Commencing with the
quarter ending March 31, 2006, the credit agreement will
require us to maintain a leverage ratio (the ratio of our
consolidated indebtedness to our consolidated EBITDA, in each
case as is defined by the credit agreement) of not more than
4.75 to 1.0 and on a temporary basis for not more than three
consecutive quarters following the consummation of asset
acquisitions in the midstream energy business of not more than
5.25 to 1.0. Commencing with the quarter ending March 31,
2006, the credit agreement also will require us to maintain an
interest coverage ratio (the ratio of our consolidated EBITDA to
our consolidated interest expense, in each case as is defined by
the credit agreement) of equal or greater than 3.0 to 1.0
determined as of the last day of each quarter for the
four-quarter period ending on the date of determination.
Total Contractual Cash Obligations. A summary
of our total contractual cash obligations as of
December 31, 2005, is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 and
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007-2008
|
|
|
2009-2010
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Long-term debt(a)
|
|
$
|
210.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
210.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Operating lease obligations
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase obligations(b)
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other long-term liabilities(c)
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
213.3
|
|
|
$
|
2.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
210.1
|
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Interest payments on long-term debt are not included as they are
based on floating interest rates and we cannot determine with
accuracy the repayment date or the amount of the interest
payment. |
|
(b) |
|
Purchase obligations total $2.7 million of various
non-cancelable commitments for capital projects expected to be
completed in 2006. Purchase obligations exclude
$87.0 million of accounts payable, $0.8 million of
accrued interest payable and $3.2 million of other current
liabilities recognized on the December 31, 2005
consolidated balance sheet. Purchase obligations also exclude
$2.4 million of current and $2.5 million of long-term
unrealized losses on non-trading derivative and hedging
transactions included on the December 31, 2005 consolidated
balance sheet. These amounts represent the current fair value of
various derivative contracts and do not represent future cash
purchase obligations. These contracts may be settled financially
at the difference between the future market price and the
contractual price and may result in cash payments or cash
receipts in the future, but generally do not require delivery of
physical quantities. In addition, many of our gas purchase
contracts include short- and long-term commitments to purchase
produced gas at market prices. These contracts, which have no
minimum quantities, are excluded from the table. |
|
(c) |
|
Other long-term liabilities include $0.3 million of asset
retirement obligations and $0.1 million of environmental
reserves recognized on the December 31, 2005 consolidated
balance sheet. |
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
New Accounting Standards SFAS 154,
Accounting Changes and Error
Corrections In June 2005, the FASB
issued SFAS 154, a replacement of APB Opinion No. 20,
Accounting Changes and FASB Statement
No. 3, Reporting Accounting Changes in Interim
Financial Statements. Among other changes,
SFAS 154 requires that a voluntary change in accounting
principle be applied retrospectively with all prior period
financial statements presented on the new accounting principle,
unless it is impracticable to do so. SFAS 154 also provides
that (1) a change in method of depreciating or amortizing a
long-lived nonfinancial asset be accounted for as a change in
estimate (prospectively) that was effected by a change in
accounting principle, and (2) correction of errors in
previously issued financial statements should be termed a
62
restatement. The new standard is effective for
accounting changes and correction of errors made in fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2005. Early adoption of this
standard is permitted for accounting changes and correction of
errors made in fiscal years beginning after June 1, 2005.
The impact of SFAS 154 will depend on the nature and extent
of any changes in accounting principles after the effective
date, but we do not currently expect SFAS 154 to have a
material impact on our consolidated results of operations, cash
flows or financial position.
Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation
No. 47, or FIN 47, Accounting for Conditional
Asset Retirement Obligations In March
2005, the FASB issued FIN 47, which clarifies the
accounting for conditional asset retirement obligations as used
in SFAS 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement
Obligations. A conditional asset retirement obligation
is an unconditional legal obligation to perform an asset
retirement activity in which the timing
and/or
method of settlement are conditional on a future event that may
or may not be within the control of the entity. Therefore, an
entity is required to recognize a liability for the fair value
of a conditional asset retirement obligation under SFAS 143
if the fair value of the liability can be reasonably estimated.
FIN 47 permits, but does not require, restatement of
interim financial information. The provisions of FIN 47 are
effective for reporting periods ending after December 15,
2005. The adoption of FIN 47 did not have a material impact
on our consolidated results of operations, cash flows or
financial position.
SFAS 153, Exchanges of Nonmonetary
Assets an amendment of APB Opinion
No. 29 In December of 2004, the
FASB issued SFAS 153, which amends APB Opinion No. 29,
or APB 29, by eliminating the exception to the fair-value
principle for exchanges of similar productive assets, which were
accounted for under APB 29 based on the book value of the
asset surrendered with no gain or loss recognition.
SFAS 153 also eliminates APB 29s concept of
culmination of an earnings process. The amendment requires that
an exchange of nonmonetary assets be accounted for at fair value
if the exchange has commercial substance and fair value is
determinable within reasonable limits. Commercial substance is
assessed by comparing the entitys expected cash flows
immediately before and after the exchange. If the difference is
significant, the transaction is considered to have commercial
substance and should be recognized at fair value. SFAS 153
is effective for nonmonetary transactions occurring in fiscal
periods beginning after June 15, 2005. The adoption of
SFAS 153 did not have a material impact on our consolidated
results of operations, cash flows or financial position.
SFAS 123 (Revised 2004), or SFAS 123R,
Share-Based Payment In December
of 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 123R, which replaces
SFAS 123 and supersedes APB Opinion No. 25, or
APB 25. SFAS 123R requires all share-based payments to
employees, including grants of employee stock options, for
public entities, to be recognized in the financial statements
based on their fair values beginning with the first interim or
annual period after June 15, 2005. The pro forma
disclosures previously permitted under SFAS 123 no longer
will be an alternative to financial statement recognition. We do
not currently expect SFAS 123R to have a material impact on
our consolidated results of operations, cash flows, or financial
position.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
Risk
and Accounting Policies
Management has established comprehensive risk management
policies and a risk management committee to monitor and manage
market risks associated with commodity prices, counterparty
credit and interest rates. Our risk management committee is
composed of senior executives who receive regular briefings on
positions and exposures, credit exposures and overall risk
management in the context of market activities. The committee is
responsible for the overall management of credit risk and
commodity price risk, including monitoring exposure limits. The
Risk Management Policy was adopted and the committee was formed
effective with our board of directors approval effective
February 8, 2006. Prior to the formation of the committee,
we were utilizing DEFS risk management policies and
procedures and risk management committee.
See Critical Accounting Policies and
Estimates Revenue Recognition for further
discussion of the accounting for derivative contracts.
63
Credit
Risk
Our principal customers in the Natural Gas Services segment are
large, natural gas marketing services and industrial end-users.
Substantially all of our natural gas and NGL sales are made at
market-based prices. This concentration of credit risk may
affect our overall credit risk in that these customers may be
similarly affected by changes in economic, regulatory or other
factors. Where exposed to credit risk, we analyze the
counterparties financial condition prior to entering into
an agreement, establish credit limits and monitor the
appropriateness of these limits on an ongoing basis. We operate
under DEFS credit policy. DEFS credit policy
promotes the use of master collateral agreements to mitigate
credit exposure. Collateral agreements provide for a
counterparty to post cash or letters of credit for exposure in
excess of the established threshold. The threshold amount
represents an open credit limit, determined in accordance with
DEFS credit policy. The collateral agreements also provide
that the inability to post collateral is sufficient cause to
terminate a contract and liquidate all positions. In addition,
our standard gas and NGL sales contracts contain adequate
assurance provisions which allow us to suspend deliveries,
cancel agreements or continue deliveries to the buyer after the
buyer provides security for payment in a form satisfactory to us.
Physical forward contracts and financial derivatives are
generally cash settled at the expiration of the contract term.
These transactions are generally subject to specific credit
provisions within the contracts that would allow the seller, at
its discretion, to suspend deliveries, cancel agreements or
continue deliveries to the buyer after the buyer provides
security for payment satisfactory to the seller.
Interest
Rate Risk
The credit markets recently have experienced
50-year
record lows in interest rates. As the overall economy
strengthens, it is likely that monetary policy will continue to
tighten further, resulting in higher interest rates to counter
possible inflation. Interest rates on future credit facility
draws and debt offerings could be higher than current levels,
causing our financing costs to increase accordingly. Although
this could limit our ability to raise funds in the debt capital
markets, we expect to remain competitive with respect to
acquisitions and capital projects, as our competitors would face
similar circumstances. Based on the borrowings under our
revolving credit facility as of December 31, 2005 of
$110 million, a 0.5% movement in the base rate or LIBOR
rate would result in an approximately $0.6 million
annualized increase or decrease in interest expense. In February
2006, the board of directors approved management to hedge up to
85% of outstanding floating rate debt. As of March 1, 2006,
no interest rate swaps have been executed.
We are exposed to the impact of market fluctuations in the
prices of natural gas, NGLs and condensate as a result of our
gathering, processing and sales activities. We employ
established policies and procedures to manage our risks
associated with these market fluctuations using various
commodity derivatives, including forward contracts, swaps and
futures. All derivative activity reflected in the combined
financial statements for periods prior to December 7, 2005
was transacted by us and DEFS prior to our initial public
offering and was transferred
and/or
allocated to us, as more fully discussed in the notes to our
consolidated financial statements. All derivative activity
reflected in the consolidated financial statements from
December 7, 2005 and going forward has been and will be
transacted by us.
For the year ending December 31, 2006, we expect that a
$1.00 per MMBtu change in price of natural gas, a
$0.10 per gallon change in NGL prices and a $5.00 per
barrel change in condensate prices would change our gross margin
by approximately $0.2 million, $0.3 million and
$0.3 million, respectively. These sensitivities include the
effect of our hedging strategies executed in September 2005.
Please read Quantitative and Qualitative
Disclosures about Market Risk Commodity Price
Risk Hedging Strategies for more
information about these hedging strategies. The magnitude of the
impact on gross margin of changes in natural gas, NGL and
condensate prices presented may not be representative of the
magnitude of the impact on gross margin for different commodity
prices or contract portfolios. Prices for these products can
also affect our profitability indirectly by influencing the
level of drilling activity and related opportunities for our
services.
64
Valuation Valuation of a contracts
fair value is validated by an internal group independent of the
trading areas of DEFS. While common industry practices are used
to develop valuation techniques, changes in pricing
methodologies or the underlying assumptions could result in
significantly different fair values and income recognition. When
available, quoted market prices or prices obtained through
external sources are used to verify a contracts fair
value. For contracts with a delivery location or duration for
which quoted market prices are not available, fair value is
determined based on pricing models developed primarily from
historical and expected correlations with quoted market prices.
Values are adjusted to reflect the credit risk inherent in the
transaction as well as the potential impact of liquidating open
positions in an orderly manner over a reasonable time period
under current conditions. Changes in market prices and
management estimates directly affect the estimated fair value of
these contracts. Accordingly, it is reasonably possible that
such estimates may change in the near term.
Hedging Strategies We closely monitor
the risks associated with these commodity price changes on our
future operations and, where appropriate, use various commodity
instruments such as natural gas and crude oil contracts to
mitigate the effect pricing fluctuations may have on the value
of our assets and operations.
In September 2005, we executed a series of derivative financial
instruments which have been designated as cash flow hedges of
the price risk associated with our forecasted sales of natural
gas, NGLs and condensate. Because of the strong correlation
between NGL prices and crude oil prices and the lack of
liquidity in the NGL financial market, we have used crude oil
swaps to hedge NGL price risk. As a result of these
transactions, effective January 1, 2006 we have
hedged approximately 80% of our expected natural gas and NGL
commodity price risk relating to our percentage of proceeds
gathering and processing contracts and condensate commodity
price risk relating to condensate recovered from our gathering
operations through 2010.
The natural gas and NGL price risk is associated with our
percentage-of-proceeds
arrangements. The condensate price risk is associated with our
gathering operations where we recover and sell condensate. The
margins we earn from condensate sales are directly correlated
with crude oil prices. We continually monitor our hedging
program and expect to continue to adjust our hedge position as
conditions warrant.
The derivative financial instruments we have entered into are
typically referred to as swap contracts. These
swap contracts entitle us to receive payment from
the counterparty to the contract to the extent that the
reference price is below the swap price stated in
the contract, and we are required to make payment to the
counterparty to the extent that the reference price is higher
than the swap price stated in the contract. The swap
contracts we have entered into to hedge our exposure to price
risk associated with natural gas relate to the price of natural
gas, settle on a monthly basis and provide that the reference
price for each settlement period are the monthly index price for
natural gas delivered into the Texas Gas Transmission pipeline
in the North Louisiana area as published by an independent
industry publication. The swap price for each of
these natural gas hedge contracts is $9.20 per MMBtu, and
the notional volume for each period covered, and time periods
covered, by these contracts is set forth in the table below. The
swap contracts we have entered into to hedge our exposure to
price risk associated with NGLs and condensate relate to the
price of crude oil, settle on a monthly basis and provide that
the reference price for each settlement period are the average
price for the month in which the NYMEX futures contracts for
light, sweet crude delivered at Cushing, Oklahoma. The weighted
average swap price for these crude oil hedge
contracts is $63.27 per barrel, and the notional volume for
each period covered, and the time periods covered, by these
contracts is set forth in the table below.
The counterparties to each of the swap contracts we have entered
into are investment-grade rated financial institutions. Under
these contracts, we may be required to provide collateral to the
counterparties in the event that our potential payment exposure
exceeds a predetermined collateral threshold. Based
on the five-year forward price curve for NYMEX crude oil
contracts, our exposure to a counterparty could exceed a
predetermined collateral threshold if the forward curve price
exceeds $83.50 per barrel of light, sweet crude oil and
with the other counterparty if this forward curve price exceeds
$96.31 per barrel of light, sweet crude oil. As the swap
contracts settle and the notional volume outstanding decreases,
the forward curve price at which point collateral is required
would be higher. Predetermined collateral thresholds are
generally dependent
65
on DEFS credit rating and would be reduced to $0 in the
event DEFS credit rating were to fall below investment
grade. DEFS has provided guarantees to support the hedging
contracts.
The following table sets forth additional information about our
natural gas and crude oil swaps:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
Commodity
|
|
Notional Volume
|
|
Reference Price
|
|
Swap Price
|
|
January
2006 December 2006
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
4,200 MMBtu/d
|
|
Texas Gas Transmission Price(1)
|
|
$9.20/MMBtu
|
January
2007 December 2007
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
4,100 MMBtu/d
|
|
Texas Gas Transmission Price(1)
|
|
$9.20/MMBtu
|
January
2008 December 2008
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
4,000 MMBtu/d
|
|
Texas Gas Transmission Price(1)
|
|
$9.20/MMBtu
|
January
2009 December 2009
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
4,000 MMBtu/d
|
|
Texas Gas Transmission Price(1)
|
|
$9.20/MMBtu
|
January
2010 December 2010
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
3,900 MMBtu/d
|
|
Texas Gas Transmission Price(1)
|
|
$9.20/MMBtu
|
January
2006 December 2006
|
|
Crude Oil
|
|
670 Bbls/d
|
|
NYMEX Index Price(2)
|
|
$63.27/Bbl
|
January
2007 December 2007
|
|
Crude Oil
|
|
660 Bbls/d
|
|
NYMEX Index Price(2)
|
|
$63.27/Bbl
|
January
2008 December 2008
|
|
Crude Oil
|
|
650 Bbls/d
|
|
NYMEX Index Price(2)
|
|
$63.27/Bbl
|
January
2009 December 2009
|
|
Crude Oil
|
|
650 Bbls/d
|
|
NYMEX Index Price(2)
|
|
$63.27/Bbl
|
January
2010 December 2010
|
|
Crude Oil
|
|
640 Bbls/d
|
|
NYMEX Index Price(2)
|
|
$63.27/Bbl
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
NYMEX index price for natural gas delivered into the Texas Gas
Transmission pipeline in the North Louisiana area. |
|
(2) |
|
NYMEX index price for light, sweet crude oil delivered at
Cushing, Oklahoma. |
At December 31, 2005, the fair value of the crude oil and
natural gas swaps described above was a $1.4 million gain
and a $0.7 million loss, respectively.
In addition, on an infrequent basis, we may allow customers to
manage their commodity price risk by offering natural gas at a
fixed price. When we enter into commercial arrangements with a
fixed price, we also transact an offsetting financial hedge with
another party. At December 31, 2005, there was one
financial hedge of this nature that had a fair value loss of
$0.1 million.
To the extent that a hedge is effective, there is no impact to
the consolidated statements of operations until delivery or
settlement occurs. Several factors influence the effectiveness
of a hedge contract, including the use of contracts with
different commodities or unmatched terms. Hedge effectiveness is
monitored regularly and measured quarterly.
The fair value of our qualifying hedge positions at a point in
time is not necessarily indicative of the results realized when
such contracts mature.
For contracts that are designated and qualify as effective hedge
positions of future cash flows, or fair values of assets,
liabilities or firm commitments, to the extent that the hedge
relationships are effective, their market value change impacts
are not recognized in current earnings. The unrealized gains or
losses on these contracts are deferred in AOCI for cash flow
hedges or included in other current or noncurrent assets or
liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets for fair value
hedges of firm commitments. Amounts in AOCI are realized in
earnings concurrently with the transaction being hedged.
However, in instances where the hedging contract no longer
qualifies for hedge accounting, amounts included in AOCI through
the date of de-designation remain in AOCI until the underlying
transaction actually occurs. The derivative contract (if
continued as an open position) will be marked to market
currently through earnings.
66
The fair value of our qualifying hedge positions is expected to
be realized in future periods, as detailed in the following
table. The amount of cash ultimately realized for these
contracts will differ from the amounts shown in the following
table due to factors such as market volatility, counterparty
default and other unforeseen events that could impact the amount
and/or
realization of these values.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value of Hedge Contracts as
of December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity in
|
|
|
Maturity in
|
|
|
Maturity in
|
|
|
2009 and
|
|
|
Total Fair
|
|
Sources of Fair Value
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Prices supported by quoted market
prices and other external sources
|
|
$
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(1.9
|
)
|
Prices based on models or other
valuation techniques
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
(2.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
|
$
|
4.4
|
|
|
$
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The prices supported by quoted market prices and other
external sources category includes our New York Mercantile
Exchange swap positions in crude oil which have currently quoted
monthly crude oil prices for the next 29 months. In
addition, this category includes our forward positions in
natural gas basis swaps at points for which
over-the-counter,
or OTC, broker quotes are available. On average, OTC quotes for
natural gas swaps extend 10 months into the future. These
positions are valued against internally developed forward market
price curves that are validated and recalibrated against OTC
broker quotes. This category also includes strip
transactions whose prices are obtained from external sources and
then modeled to daily or monthly prices as appropriate.
The Prices based on models and other valuation
methods category includes the value of transactions for
which an internally developed price curve was constructed as a
result of the long dated nature of the transaction or the
illiquidity of the market point.
Normal Purchases and Normal Sales If a
contract qualifies and is designated as a normal purchase or
normal sale, no recognition of the contracts fair value in
the consolidated financial statements is required until the
associated delivery period occurs. We have applied this
accounting election for contracts involving the purchase or sale
of physical natural gas or NGLs in future periods.
Natural Gas Asset-Based Marketing We
manage our natural gas activities with both physical and
financial transactions. To the extent possible, we match our
natural gas supply portfolio to our sales portfolio. The
majority of this financial activity is in the current or nearby
month and is accounted for using
mark-to-market
accounting with changes in fair value recognized in current
period earnings.
Our profitability is affected by changes in prevailing natural
gas, NGL and condensate prices. Historically, changes in the
prices of most NGL products and condensate have generally
correlated with changes in the price of crude oil. Natural gas,
NGL and condensate prices are volatile and are impacted by
changes in the supply and demand for natural gas, NGLs and
condensate as well as market uncertainty. For a discussion of
the volatility of natural gas and NGL prices, please read
Risk Factors Risks Related to Our
Business The cash flow from our Natural Gas
Services segment is affected by natural gas, NGL and condensate
prices, and decreases in these prices could adversely affect our
ability to make distributions to holders of our common units and
subordinated units.
67
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data.
|
INDEX TO
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
DCP MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
68
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors of
DCP Midstream Partners GP, LLC:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
DCP Midstream Partners, LP (the Company) as of
December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, comprehensive income, changes in
partners equity, and cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2005. Our audits
also included the financial statement schedule listed in
Item 15. These financial statements and financial statement
schedule are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
financial statements and financial statement schedule based on
our audits.
We conducted our audits 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 audits 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 Companys internal control over
financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An
audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements, assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating
the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that
our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial
position of the Company at December 31, 2005 and 2004 and
the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows
for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2005, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our
opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in
relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as
a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the
information set forth therein.
As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial
statements, on December 7, 2005, DCP Midstream Partners, LP
was formed and began operating as a separate company. Through
December 7, 2005, the accompanying consolidated financial
statements have been prepared from the separate records
maintained by Duke Energy Field Services, LLC and may not
necessarily be indicative of the conditions that would have
existed or the results of operations if the Company had been
operated as an unaffiliated entity. Portions of certain expenses
represent allocations made from, and are applicable to, Duke
Energy Field Services, LLC as a whole.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Denver, Colorado
March 1, 2006
69
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
42.2
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Accounts receivable:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade, net of allowance for
doubtful accounts of $0.1 million and $0.2 million,
respectively
|
|
|
24.4
|
|
|
|
59.0
|
|
Affiliates
|
|
|
56.5
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
Imbalances
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gains on non-trading
derivative and hedging transactions
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
124.5
|
|
|
|
61.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted investments
|
|
|
100.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
168.9
|
|
|
|
172.0
|
|
Intangible asset, net
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
Equity method investment
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
Unrealized gains on non-trading
derivative and hedging transactions
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-current assets
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
407.3
|
|
|
$
|
241.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS
EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade
|
|
$
|
42.5
|
|
|
$
|
35.2
|
|
Affiliates
|
|
|
42.0
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Imbalances
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
Unrealized losses on non-trading
derivative and hedging transactions
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Accrued interest payable
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
93.4
|
|
|
|
42.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
210.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized losses on non-trading
derivative and hedging transactions
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
306.4
|
|
|
|
42.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingent
liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partners equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DCP Midstream Partners Predecessor
equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
198.4
|
|
Common unitholders
(10,357,143 units issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2005)
|
|
|
215.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subordinated unitholders
(7,142,857 convertible units issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2005)
|
|
|
(109.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
General partner interest (2%
interest with 357,143 equivalent units outstanding at
December 31, 2005)
|
|
|
(5.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive
income
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total partners equity
|
|
|
100.9
|
|
|
|
198.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and
partners equity
|
|
$
|
407.3
|
|
|
$
|
241.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
70
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions, except
|
|
|
|
per unit amounts)
|
|
|
Operating revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of natural gas, NGLs and
condensate
|
|
$
|
647.8
|
|
|
$
|
412.7
|
|
|
$
|
319.3
|
|
Sales of natural gas, NGLs and
condensate to affiliates
|
|
|
114.5
|
|
|
|
77.0
|
|
|
|
134.7
|
|
Transportation and processing
services
|
|
|
12.3
|
|
|
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
9.5
|
|
Transportation and processing
services to affiliates
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
(Losses) gains from non-trading
derivative activity affiliate
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
|
784.5
|
|
|
|
509.5
|
|
|
|
475.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
|
|
|
601.4
|
|
|
|
404.1
|
|
|
|
309.3
|
|
Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
from affiliates
|
|
|
107.9
|
|
|
|
48.5
|
|
|
|
121.3
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
14.2
|
|
|
|
13.6
|
|
|
|
15.0
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
12.6
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
General and administrative expense
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
expense affiliates
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses
|
|
|
746.6
|
|
|
|
485.3
|
|
|
|
465.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
37.9
|
|
|
|
24.2
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings from equity method
investment
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Impairment of equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to DCP
Midstream Partners Predecessor
|
|
|
(33.3
|
)
|
|
|
(20.4
|
)
|
|
|
(10.0
|
)
|
General partner interest in net
income
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income allocable to limited
partners
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per limited
partners unit basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average limited
partners units outstanding basic and
diluted
|
|
|
17.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
71
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
Other comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on cash flow
hedges
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other comprehensive income
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
$
|
38.4
|
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
72
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DCP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Midstream
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partners
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Predecessor
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Subordinated
|
|
|
Partner
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Partners
|
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Unitholders
|
|
|
Unitholders
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Balance, January 1,
2003
|
|
$
|
220.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
220.7
|
|
Net change in parent advances
|
|
|
(29.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(29.6
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31,
2003
|
|
|
201.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
201.1
|
|
Net change in parent advances
|
|
|
(23.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23.1
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
20.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31,
2004
|
|
|
198.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
198.4
|
|
Net change in parent advances
|
|
|
(123.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(123.6
|
)
|
Other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Net income through
December 6, 2005
|
|
|
33.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33.3
|
|
Proceeds from initial public
offering of 10,350,000 common units
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222.5
|
|
Underwriters discount and
offering expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9.3
|
)
|
|
|
(6.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16.1
|
)
|
Distribution to Duke Energy Field
Services
|
|
|
(218.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(218.7
|
)
|
Allocation of DCP Midstream
Partners Predecessor equity in exchange for 7,143 common units,
7,142,857 subordinated units and a 2% general partnership
interest (represented by 357,143 equivalent units)
|
|
|
110.6
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(105.2
|
)
|
|
|
(5.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income from December 7,
2005 through December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31,
2005
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
215.8
|
|
|
$
|
(109.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
|
$
|
100.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
73
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net
income to net cash provided by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense and impairment charge
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
17.0
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
Change in operating assets and
liabilities which provided (used) cash:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
(20.8
|
)
|
|
|
(15.7
|
)
|
|
|
(2.1
|
)
|
Net unrealized (gains) losses on
non-trading derivative and hedging transactions
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
47.2
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
9.2
|
|
Accrued interest
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other current assets and
liabilities
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
Other noncurrent assets and
liabilities
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating
activities
|
|
|
75.5
|
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
|
|
30.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
(7.9
|
)
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
|
(2.7
|
)
|
Proceeds from sales of assets
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
Purchases of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
(731.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales of
available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
630.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other investing activities
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing
activities
|
|
|
(107.0
|
)
|
|
|
(2.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common
units, net of offering costs
|
|
|
206.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings under credit facility
|
|
|
110.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings under term loan facility
|
|
|
100.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to Duke Energy Field
Services
|
|
|
(218.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in advances from Duke
Energy Field Services
|
|
|
(123.6
|
)
|
|
|
(23.1
|
)
|
|
|
(29.6
|
)
|
Deferred financing costs
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
financing activities
|
|
|
73.7
|
|
|
|
(23.1
|
)
|
|
|
(29.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in cash and cash
equivalents
|
|
|
42.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents,
beginning of period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of
period
|
|
$
|
42.2
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.
74
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
Years Ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003
|
|
1.
|
Description
of Business and Basis of Presentation
|
DCP Midstream Partners, LP (with its consolidated subsidiaries,
the Partnership) is engaged in the business of
gathering, compressing, treating, processing, transporting and
selling natural gas and the business of transporting and selling
natural gas liquids, or NGLs.
The Partnership includes the results of operations, financial
position, cash flows and changes in partners equity in its
North Louisiana system assets (Minden,
Ada, and PELICO), its NGL transportation
pipeline (Seabreeze) and its 45% equity method
investment in Black Lake Pipe Line Company (Black
Lake) that were contributed to the Partnership on
December 7, 2005 by Duke Energy Field Services LLC
(DEFS or the Parent). DEFS is owned 50%
by Duke Energy Corporation (Duke Energy) and 50% by
ConocoPhillips. The consolidated financial statements include a
50% equity interest in Black Lake in 2003, 2004 and the period
beginning January 1, 2005 through December 6, 2005.
Upon closing of the Partnerships initial public offering
on December 7, 2005, DEFS retained a 5% interest of Black
Lake. The Partnership owns a 45% equity interest in Black Lake.
The Partnership closed its initial public offering of 10,350,000
common units at a price of $21.50 per unit on
December 7, 2005. Proceeds from the initial public offering
were $206.4 million, net of offering costs. In addition,
concurrent with the initial public offering, DEFS contributed to
the Partnership the assets described above and retained
(i) a 2% general partner interest in the Partnership;
(ii) 7,142,857 subordinated units; and (iii) 7,143
common units, representing in aggregate an approximate 42%
interest in the Partnership. The Partnerships general
partner is DCP Midstream GP, LP, a wholly-owned subsidiary of
DEFS. See Note 4 for information related to the
distribution rights of the common and subordinated unitholders
and the incentive distribution rights held by the general
partner.
DEFS directs the business operations of the Partnership through
its ownership and control of the Partnerships general
partner. DEFS and its affiliates employees provide
administrative support to the Partnership and operate its assets.
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
the Partnership, and prior to December 7, 2005 the assets,
liabilities and operations contributed to us by DEFS and its
wholly-owned subsidiaries (DCP Midstream Partners
Predecessor) upon the closing of the Partnerships
initial public offering, and have been prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America. The consolidated financial statements of DCP
Midstream Partners Predecessor have been prepared from the
separate records maintained by DEFS and may not necessarily be
indicative of the conditions that would have existed or the
results of operations if DCP Midstream Partners Predecessor had
been operated as an unaffiliated entity. All significant
intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated.
Transactions between the Partnership and other DEFS operations
have been identified in the consolidated financial statements as
transactions between affiliates (see Note 7).
|
|
2.
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
|
Use of Estimates Conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
requires management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and
notes. Although these estimates are based on managements
best available knowledge of current and expected future events,
actual results could be different from those estimates.
Cash and Cash Equivalents The
Partnership considers investments in highly liquid financial
instruments purchased with an original stated maturity of
90 days or less to be cash equivalents.
Restricted Investments Restricted
investments consist of $100.4 million in investments in
commercial paper and various other high-grade debt securities.
These investments are used as collateral to secure the term
75
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
loan portion of the credit facility and are to be used only for
future capital expenditures. These investments are classified as
available-for-sale
securities under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) 115 as management does not intend to hold
them to maturity nor are they bought or sold with the objective
of generating profits on short-term differences in prices. These
investments are recorded at fair value with changes in fair
market value recorded as unrealized holding gains or losses in
accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI). At
December 31, 2005, no amounts related to these investments
were deferred in AOCI. Due to the short-term, highly liquid
nature of the securities held by the Partnership and as interest
rates are re-set on a daily, weekly or monthly basis, the cost,
including accrued interest on investments, approximates fair
value. During 2004, the Partnership did not invest in these
instruments.
Accounting for Risk Management and Hedging Activities and
Financial Instruments Each derivative
not qualifying for the normal purchases and normal sales
exception under SFAS No. 133
(SFAS 133), Accounting for Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities as amended, is
recorded on a gross basis in the consolidated balance sheets at
its fair value as Unrealized gains or Unrealized losses on
non-trading derivative and hedging transactions. Derivative
assets and liabilities remain classified in the
Partnerships consolidated balance sheets as unrealized
gains or unrealized losses on non-trading derivative and hedging
transactions at fair value until the contractual settlement
period occurs.
All derivative activity reflected in the combined financial
statements for periods prior to December 7, 2005 was
transacted by the Partnership and DEFS and its subsidiaries
prior to the initial public offering and was transferred
and/or
allocated to the Partnership. All derivative activity reflected
in the consolidated financial statements from December 7,
2005 and going forward has been and will be transacted by the
Partnership. Management designates each energy commodity
derivative as either trading or non-trading. Certain non-trading
derivatives are further designated as either a hedge of a
forecasted transaction or future cash flow (cash flow hedge), a
hedge of a recognized asset, liability or firm commitment (fair
value hedge), or normal purchases or normal sales, while certain
non-trading derivatives, which are related to asset-based
activity, are designated as non-trading derivative activity. For
the periods presented, the Partnership did not have any trading
activity, however, the Partnership did have cash flow and fair
value hedge activity, normal purchases and normal sales
activity, and non-trading derivative activity included in these
consolidated financial statements. For each derivative, the
accounting method and presentation of gains and losses or
revenue and expense in the consolidated statements of operations
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Classification of
Contract
|
|
Accounting Method
|
|
Presentation of Gains &
Losses or Revenue & Expense
|
|
Non-Trading Derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Trading Derivative Activity
|
|
Mark-to-market(a)
|
|
Net basis in gains and losses from
non-trading derivative activity
|
Cash Flow Hedge
|
|
Hedge method(b)
|
|
Gross basis in the same statement
of operations category as the related hedged item
|
Fair Value Hedge
|
|
Hedge method(b)
|
|
Gross basis in the same statement
of operations category as the related hedged item
|
Normal Purchases or Normal Sales
|
|
Accrual method(c)
|
|
Gross basis upon settlement in the
corresponding statement of operations category based on purchase
or sale
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Mark-to-market An
accounting method whereby the change in the fair value of the
asset or liability is recognized in the results of operations in
gains and losses from non-trading derivative activity during the
current period. |
|
(b) |
|
Hedge method An accounting method whereby the
effective portion of the change in the fair value of the asset
or liability is recorded as a balance sheet adjustment and there
is no recognition in the results of operations for the effective
portion until the service is provided or the associated delivery
period occurs. |
76
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
(c) |
|
Accrual method An accounting method whereby
there is no recognition in the results of operations for changes
in fair value of a contract until the service is provided or the
associated delivery period occurs. |
Cash Flow and Fair Value Hedges For
derivatives designated as a cash flow hedge or a fair value
hedge, management prepares formal documentation of the hedge in
accordance with SFAS 133. In addition, management formally
assesses, both at the inception of the hedge and on an ongoing
basis, whether the hedge contract is highly effective in
offsetting changes in cash flows or fair values of hedged items.
All components of each derivative gain or loss are included in
the assessment of hedge effectiveness, unless otherwise noted.
The fair value of a derivative designated as a cash flow hedge
is recorded for balance sheet purposes as unrealized gains or
unrealized losses on non-trading derivative and hedging
transactions. The effective portion of the change in fair value
of a derivative designated as a cash flow hedge is recorded in
partners equity as accumulated other comprehensive income
and the ineffective portion is recorded in the consolidated
statements of operations. During the period in which the hedged
transaction occurs, amounts in AOCI associated with the hedged
transaction are reclassified to the consolidated statements of
operations in the same accounts as the item being hedged. Hedge
accounting is discontinued prospectively when it is determined
that the derivative no longer qualifies as an effective hedge,
or when it is no longer probable that the hedged transaction
will occur. When hedge accounting is discontinued because the
derivative no longer qualifies as an effective hedge, the
derivative is subject to the
mark-to-market
accounting method prospectively. The derivative continues to be
carried on the consolidated balance sheets at its fair value;
however, subsequent changes in its fair value are recognized in
current period earnings. Gains and losses related to
discontinued hedges that were previously accumulated in AOCI
will remain in AOCI until the hedged transaction occurs, unless
it is no longer probable that the hedged transaction will occur,
in which case, the gains and losses that were previously
deferred in AOCI will be immediately recognized in current
period earnings.
The fair value of a derivative designated as a fair value hedge
is recorded for balance sheet purposes as unrealized gains or
unrealized losses on non-trading derivative and hedging
transactions. The Partnership recognizes the gain or loss on the
derivative instrument, as well as the offsetting loss or gain on
the hedged item in earnings in the current period. All
derivatives designated and accounted for as fair value hedges
are classified in the same category as the item being hedged in
the results of operations.
Valuation When available, quoted market
prices or prices obtained through external sources are used to
verify a contracts fair value. For contracts with a
delivery location or duration for which quoted market prices are
not available, fair value is determined based on pricing models
developed primarily from historical and expected correlations
with quoted market prices.
Values are adjusted to reflect the credit risk inherent in the
transaction as well as the potential impact of liquidating open
positions in an orderly manner over a reasonable time period
under current conditions. Changes in market prices and
management estimates directly affect the estimated fair value of
these contracts. Accordingly, it is reasonably possible that
such estimates may change in the near term.
Property, Plant and
Equipment Property, plant and equipment
are recorded at historical cost. Depreciation is computed using
the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the
assets (see Note 8). The costs of maintenance and repairs,
which are not significant improvements, are expensed when
incurred. Expenditures to extend the useful lives of the assets
are capitalized.
The Partnership has adopted SFAS No. 143
(SFAS 143), Accounting for Asset
Retirement Obligations, and Financial Accounting
Standards Board Interpretation No. 47
(FIN 47), Accounting for Conditional
Asset Retirement Obligations, which address financial
accounting and reporting for obligations associated with the
retirement of tangible long-lived assets and the associated
asset retirement costs. The standard and interpretation apply to
legal obligations associated with the retirement of long-lived
assets that result from the acquisition, construction,
development
and/or
normal use of the asset. SFAS 143 requires that the fair
value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation be
recognized in the period in which it is
77
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
incurred, if a reasonable estimate of fair value can be made.
The fair value of the liability is added to the carrying amount
of the associated asset. This additional carrying amount is then
depreciated over the life of the asset. The liability increases
due to the passage of time based on the time value of money
until the obligation is settled. FIN 47 requires the
recognition of a liability of a conditional asset retirement
obligation as soon as the fair value of the liability can be
reasonably estimated. A conditional asset retirement obligation
is defined as an unconditional legal obligation to perform an
asset retirement activity in which the timing and (or) method of
settlement are conditional on a future event that may or may not
be within the control of the entity.
Impairment of Long-Lived
Assets Management periodically
evaluates whether the carrying value of long-lived assets has
been impaired when circumstances indicate the carrying value of
those assets may not be recoverable. This evaluation is based on
undiscounted cash flow projections. The carrying amount is not
recoverable if it exceeds the undiscounted sum of cash flows
expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the
asset. Management considers various factors when determining if
these assets should be evaluated for impairment, including but
not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
significant adverse change in legal factors or in the business
climate;
|
|
|
|
a current-period operating or cash flow loss combined with a
history of operating or cash flow losses or a projection or
forecast that demonstrates continuing losses associated with the
use of a long-lived asset;
|
|
|
|
an accumulation of costs significantly in excess of the amount
originally expected for the acquisition or construction of a
long-lived asset;
|
|
|
|
significant adverse changes in the extent or manner in which an
asset is used or in its physical condition;
|
|
|
|
a significant change in the market value of an asset; or
|
|
|
|
a current expectation that, more likely than not, an asset will
be sold or otherwise disposed of before the end of its estimated
useful life.
|
If the carrying value is not recoverable, the impairment loss is
measured as the excess of the assets carrying value over
its fair value. Management assesses the fair value of long-lived
assets using commonly accepted techniques, and may use more than
one method, including, but not limited to, recent third party
comparable sales, internally developed discounted cash flow
analysis and analysis from outside advisors. Significant changes
in market conditions resulting from events such as the condition
of an asset or a change in managements intent to utilize
the asset would generally require management to reassess the
cash flows related to the long-lived assets.
Intangible Asset Intangible asset
consists of a commodity contract. The commodity contract is
amortized on a straight-line basis over the period of expected
future benefit of approximately 25 years (see Note 9).
Equity Method Investment The
Partnership accounts for investments in 20% to 50% owned
affiliates, and investments in less than 20% owned affiliates
where the Partnership has the ability to exercise significant
influence, under the equity method.
Impairment of Equity Method
Investment The Partnership evaluates
its equity method investment for impairment when events or
changes in circumstances indicate, in managements
judgment, that the carrying value of such investment may have
experienced an
other-than-temporary
decline in value. When evidence of loss in value has occurred,
management compares the estimated fair value of the investment
to the carrying value of the investment to determine whether an
impairment has occurred. Management assesses the fair value of
its equity method investment using commonly accepted techniques,
and may use more than one method,
78
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
including, but not limited to, recent third party comparable
sales, internally developed discounted cash flow analysis and
analysis from outside advisors. If the estimated fair value is
less than the carrying value and management considers the
decline in value to be other than temporary, the excess of the
carrying value over the estimated fair value is recognized in
the financial statements as an impairment.
Revenue Recognition The
Partnerships primary types of sales and service activities
reported as operating revenue include:
|
|
|
|
|
sales of natural gas, NGLs and condensate;
|
|
|
|
natural gas gathering, processing and transportation, from which
the Partnership generates revenues primarily through the
compression, gathering, treating, processing and transportation
of natural gas; and
|
|
|
|
NGL transportation from which the Partnership generates revenues
from transportation fees.
|
Revenues associated with sales of natural gas, NGLs and
condensate are recognized when title passes to the customer,
which is when the risk of ownership passes to the purchaser and
physical delivery occurs. Revenues associated with
transportation and processing fees are recognized when the
service is provided.
For gathering and processing services, the Partnership receives
either fees or commodities from natural gas producers depending
on the type of contract. Commodities received are in turn sold
and recognized as revenue in accordance with the criteria
outlined above. Under the
percentage-of-proceeds
contract type, the Partnership is paid for its services by
keeping a percentage of the NGLs produced and a percentage of
the residue gas resulting from processing the natural gas. Under
the
percentage-of-index
contract type, the Partnership purchases wellhead natural gas
and sells processed natural gas and NGLs to third parties.
The Partnership recognizes revenues for non-trading derivative
activity net in the consolidated statements of operations as
(losses) gains from non-trading derivative activity, in
accordance with EITF Issue
No. 02-03,
Issues Involved in Accounting for Derivative Contracts
Held for Trading Purposes and Contracts Involved in Energy
Trading and Risk Management Activities. These
activities include
mark-to-market
gains and losses on energy derivative contracts and the
financial or physical settlement of energy derivative contracts.
The Partnership generally reports revenues gross in the
consolidated statements of operations, in accordance with EITF
Issue
No. 99-19,
Reporting Revenue Gross as a Principal versus Net as an
Agent. Except for fee-based agreements, the
Partnership acts as the principal in these transactions, takes
title to the product, and incurs the risks and rewards of
ownership.
Significant Customer The
Partnership had one customer, a third party, that accounted for
24%, 31% and 26% of total operating revenues for the years ended
December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Revenues
from this customer are reported in the NGL Logistics Segment.
The Partnership also had significant transactions with
affiliates (see Note 7).
Unamortized Debt Expense Expenses
incurred with the issuance of long-term debt are amortized over
the terms of the debt using the effective interest method. These
expenses are recorded on the consolidated balance sheet as other
non-current assets.
Environmental
Expenditures Environmental expenditures
are expensed or capitalized as appropriate, depending upon the
future economic benefit. Expenditures that relate to an existing
condition caused by past operations and that do not generate
current or future revenue are expensed. Liabilities for these
expenditures are recorded on an undiscounted basis when
environmental assessments
and/or
clean-ups are probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated.
Gas and NGL Imbalance
Accounting Quantities of natural gas or
NGLs over-delivered or under-delivered related to imbalance
agreements with customers, producers or pipelines are recorded
monthly as
79
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
other receivables or other payables using then current market
prices or the weighted average prices of natural gas or NGLs at
the plant or system. These balances are settled with deliveries
of natural gas or NGLs or with cash.
Equity-Based Compensation Under
the Partnerships Long Term Incentive Plan, equity
instruments may be granted to the Partnerships key
employees. The Partnership accounts for equity-based
compensation using the intrinsic value recognition and
measurement principles of Accounting Principles Board
(APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for
Stock Issued to Employees, and FASB Interpretation
No. 44, Accounting for Certain Transactions
Involving Stock Compensation (an Interpretation of APB Opinion
No. 25). The Partnership had not granted any
share-based instruments as of December 31, 2005.
DCP Midstream GP, LLC adopted a Long-Term Incentive Plan, or the
Plan, for employees, consultants and directors of DCP Midstream
GP, LLC and its affiliates who perform services for the
Partnership. The Plan provides for the grant of restricted
units, phantom units, unit options and substitute awards and,
with respect to unit options and phantom units, the grant of
distribution equivalent rights, or DERs. Subject to adjustment
for certain events, an aggregate of 850,000 common units may be
delivered pursuant to awards under the Plan. Units that are
cancelled, forfeited or are withheld to satisfy DCP Midstream
GP, LLCs tax withholding obligations are available for
delivery pursuant to other awards. The Plan is administered by
the compensation committee of DCP Midstream GP, LLCs board
of directors.
Net Income per Limited Partner
Unit Basic and diluted net income per
limited partner unit is calculated by dividing limited
partners interest in net income, less pro forma general
partner incentive distributions under EITF Issue
No. 03-6,
by the weighted average number of outstanding limited partner
units during the period (see Note 5).
|
|
3.
|
New
Accounting Standards
|
SFAS No. 154 (SFAS 154),
Accounting Changes and Error
Corrections. In June 2005, the FASB issued
SFAS 154, a replacement of APB Opinion No. 20,
Accounting Changes and FASB Statement
No. 3, Reporting Accounting Changes in Interim
Financial Statements. Among other changes,
SFAS 154 requires that a voluntary change in accounting
principle be applied retrospectively with all prior period
financial statements presented on the new accounting principle,
unless it is impracticable to do so. SFAS 154 also provides
that (1) a change in method of depreciating or amortizing a
long-lived nonfinancial asset be accounted for as a change in
estimate (prospectively) that was effected by a change in
accounting principle, and (2) correction of errors in
previously issued financial statements should be termed a
restatement. The new standard is effective for accounting
changes and correction of errors made in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2005. Early adoption of this standard is
permitted for accounting changes and correction of errors made
in fiscal years beginning after June 1, 2005. The impact of
SFAS 154 will depend on the nature and extent of any
changes in accounting principles after the effective date, but
the Partnership does not currently expect SFAS 154 to have
a material impact on its consolidated results of operations,
cash flows or financial position.
FIN No. 47 (FIN 47),
Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement
Obligations. In March 2005, the FASB issued
FIN 47, which clarifies the accounting for conditional
asset retirement obligations as used in SFAS No. 143
(SFAS 143). Accounting for Asset
Retirement Obligations. A conditional asset retirement
obligation is an unconditional legal obligation to perform an
asset retirement activity in which the timing and (or) method of
settlement are conditional on a future event that may or may not
be within the control of the entity. Therefore, an entity is
required to recognize a liability for the fair value of a
conditional asset retirement obligation under SFAS 143 if
the fair value of the liability can be reasonably estimated.
FIN 47 permits, but does not require, restatement of
interim financial information. The provisions of FIN 47 are
effective for reporting periods ending after December 15,
2005. The adoption of FIN 47 did not have a material impact
on the Partnerships consolidated results of operations,
cash flows or financial position.
80
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
SFAS No. 153 (SFAS 153),
Exchanges of Nonmonetary Assets an
amendment of APB Opinion No. 29. In
December of 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 153, which amends
APB Opinion No. 29 (APB 29) by eliminating
the exception to the fair-value principle for exchanges of
similar productive assets, which were accounted for under
APB 29 based on the book value of the asset surrendered
with no gain or loss recognition. SFAS 153 also eliminates
APB 29s concept of culmination of an earnings
process. The amendment requires that an exchange of nonmonetary
assets be accounted for at fair value if the exchange has
commercial substance and fair value is determinable within
reasonable limits. Commercial substance is assessed by comparing
the entitys expected cash flows immediately before and
after the exchange. If the difference is significant, the
transaction is considered to have commercial substance and
should be recognized at fair value. SFAS 153 is effective
for nonmonetary transactions occurring in fiscal periods
beginning after June 15, 2005. The adoption of
SFAS 153 did not have a material impact on the
Partnerships consolidated results of operations, cash
flows or financial position.
SFAS No. 123 (Revised 2004)
(SFAS 123R), Share-Based
Payment. In December of 2004, the FASB
issued SFAS 123R, which replaces SFAS 123 and
supersedes APB Opinion No. 25 (APB 25).
SFAS 123R requires all share-based payments to employees,
including grants of employee stock options, for public entities,
to be recognized in the financial statements based on their fair
values beginning with the first interim or annual period after
June 15, 2005. The pro forma disclosures previously
permitted under SFAS 123 no longer will be an alternative
to financial statement recognition. The Partnership does not
currently expect SFAS 123R to have a material impact on its
consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial
position.
|
|
4.
|
Partnership
Equity and Distributions
|
General. The partnership agreement requires
that, within 45 days after the end of each quarter, the
Partnership distribute all of its available cash to unitholders
of record on the applicable record date, as determined by the
general partner.
Definition of Available Cash. Available cash
and cash equivalents, for any quarter, consists of all cash on
hand at the end of that quarter:
|
|
|
|
|
less the amount of cash reserves established by the general
partner to:
|
|
|
|
|
|
provide for the proper conduct of the Partnerships
business;
|
|
|
|
comply with applicable law, any of the Partnerships debt
instruments or other agreements; or
|
|
|
|
provide funds for distributions to the unitholders and to the
general partner for any one or more of the next four quarters;
|
|
|
|
|
|
plus, if the general partner so determines, all or a portion of
cash and cash equivalents on hand on the date of determination
of available cash for the quarter.
|
General Partner Interest and Incentive Distribution
Rights. The general partner is entitled to 2% of
all quarterly distributions that the Partnership makes prior to
its liquidation. This general partner interest is represented by
357,143 general partner units. The general partner has the
right, but not the obligation, to contribute a proportionate
amount of capital to the Partnership to maintain its current
general partner interest. The general partners initial 2%
interest in these distributions will be reduced if the
Partnership issues additional units in the future and the
general partner does not contribute a proportionate amount of
capital to the Partnership to maintain its 2% general partner
interest.
The incentive distribution rights held by the general partner
entitles it to receive an increasing share of available cash
when pre-defined distribution targets are achieved. Please read
the Distributions of Available Cash during the Subordination
Period and Distributions of Available Cash after the
Subordination Period
81
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
sections below for more details about the distribution targets
and their impact on the general partners incentive
distribution rights.
Subordinated Units. All of the subordinated
units are held by DEFS. The partnership agreement provides that,
during the subordination period, the common units will have the
right to receive distributions of available cash each quarter in
an amount equal to $0.35 per common unit (the Minimum
Quarterly Distribution), plus any arrearages in the
payment of the Minimum Quarterly Distribution on the common
units from prior quarters, before any distributions of available
cash may be made on the subordinated units. These units are
deemed subordinated because for a period of time,
referred to as the subordination period, the subordinated units
will not be entitled to receive any distributions until the
common units have received the Minimum Quarterly Distribution
plus any arrearages from prior quarters. Furthermore, no
arrearages will be paid on the subordinated units. The practical
effect of the subordinated units is to increase the likelihood
that during the subordination period there will be available
cash to be distributed on the common units. The subordination
period will end, and the subordinated units will convert to
common units, on a one for one basis, when certain distribution
requirements, as defined in the partnership agreement, have been
met. The earliest date at which the subordination period may end
is December 31, 2008 and 50% of the subordinated units may
convert to common units as early as December 31, 2007. The
rights of the subordinated unitholders, other than the
distribution rights described above, are substantially the same
as the rights of the common unitholders.
Distributions of Available Cash during the Subordination
Period. The partnership agreement requires that
the Partnership makes distributions of available cash for any
quarter during the subordination period in the following manner:
|
|
|
|
|
first, 98% to the common unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to
the general partner, until the Partnership distributes for each
outstanding common unit an amount equal to the Minimum Quarterly
Distribution for that quarter;
|
|
|
|
second, 98% to the common unitholders, pro rata, and 2%
to the general partner, until the Partnership distributes for
each outstanding common unit an amount equal to any arrearages
in payment of the Minimum Quarterly Distribution on the common
units for any prior quarters during the subordination period;
|
|
|
|
third, 98% to the subordinated unitholders, pro rata, and
2% to the general partner, until the Partnership distributes for
each subordinated unit an amount equal to the Minimum Quarterly
Distribution for that quarter; and
|
|
|
|
fourth, 98% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to the
general partner, until each unitholder receives a total of
$0.4025 per unit for that quarter;
|
|
|
|
fifth, 85% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 15% to the
general partner, until each unitholder receives a total of
$0.4375 per unit for that quarter;
|
|
|
|
sixth, 75% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 25% to the
general partner, until each unitholder receives a total of
$0.525 per unit for that quarter; and
|
|
|
|
thereafter, 50% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 50% to
the general partner.
|
Distributions of Available Cash after the Subordination
Period. The partnership agreement requires that
the Partnership makes distributions of available cash from
operating surplus for any quarter after the subordination period
in the following manner:
|
|
|
|
|
first, 98% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to the
general partner, until each unitholder receives a total of
$0.4025 per unit for that quarter;
|
82
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
second, 85% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 15% to the
general partner, until each unitholder receives a total of
$0.4375 per unit for that quarter;
|
|
|
|
third, 75% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 25% to the
general partner, until each unitholder receives a total of
$0.525 per unit for that quarter; and
|
|
|
|
thereafter, 50% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 50% to
the general partner.
|
On January 25, 2006, the Partnership announced the
declaration of a cash distribution of $0.095 per unit,
payable on February 13, 2006 to unitholders of record on
February 3, 2006. That distribution represents the pro rata
portion of the Partnerships Minimum Quarterly Distribution
of $0.35 per unit for the period December 7, 2005, the
closing of the Partnerships initial public offering,
through December 31, 2005.
|
|
5.
|
Net
Income per Limited Partner Unit
|
The Partnerships net income is allocated to the general
partner and the limited partners, including the holders of the
subordinated units, in accordance with their respective
ownership percentages, after giving effect to incentive
distributions paid to the general partner.
EITF Issue
No. 03-6,
(EITF 03-6)Participating Securities and the
Two Class Method Under FASB Statement
No. 128, addresses the computation of earnings
per share by entities that have issued securities other than
common stock that contractually entitle the holder to
participate in dividends and earnings of the entity when, and
if, it declares dividends on its common stock.
EITF 03-6
requires that securities that meet the definition of a
participating security be considered for inclusion in the
computation of basic earnings per unit using the two-class
method. Under the two-class method, earnings per unit is
calculated as if all of the earnings for the period were
distributed under the terms of the partnership agreement,
regardless of whether the general partner has discretion over
the amount of distributions to be made in any particular period,
whether those earnings would actually be distributed during a
particular period from an economic or practical perspective, or
whether the general partner has other legal or contractual
limitations on its ability to pay distributions that would
prevent it from distributing all of the earnings for a
particular period.
EITF 03-6
does not impact the Partnerships overall net income or
other financial results; however, in periods in which aggregate
net income exceeds the Partnerships aggregate
distributions for such period, it will have the impact of
reducing net income per limited partner unit. This result occurs
as a larger portion of the Partnerships aggregate
earnings, as if distributed, is allocated to the incentive
distribution rights of the general partner, even though the
Partnership makes distributions on the basis of available cash
and not earnings. In periods in which the Partnerships
aggregate net income does not exceed its aggregate distributions
for such period,
EITF 03-6
does not have any impact on the Partnerships calculation
of earnings per limited partner unit.
Basic and diluted net income per limited partner unit is
calculated by dividing limited partners interest in net
income, less pro forma general partner incentive distributions
under
EITF 03-6,
by the weighted average number of outstanding limited partner
units during the period.
83
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table illustrates the Partnerships
calculation of net income per limited partner unit for the year
ended December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
Net income applicable to the
period through December 6, 2005
|
|
|
(33.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income applicable to the
period December 7, 2005 through December 31, 2005
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
Less: General partner interest in
net income
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in
net income (see Note 4)
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
Additional earnings allocation to
general partner
|
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income available to limited
partners under
EITF 03-6
|
|
$
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per limited partner
unit basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.
|
Impairment
of Equity Method Investment
|
In the third quarter of 2004, the Partnership recognized an
other-than-temporary
impairment of its investment in Black Lake totaling
$4.4 million as impairment of equity method investment,
included in the consolidated statements of operations. This
investment was written down to fair value which was determined
based on managements best estimates of discounted future
cash flow models. The charge associated with this impairment is
recorded in the NGL Logistics segment.
|
|
7.
|
Agreements
and Transactions with Affiliates
|
DEFS
Omnibus
Agreement
The employees supporting the Partnerships operations are
employees of DEFS. The Partnership is required to reimburse DEFS
for salaries of operating personnel and employee benefits as
well as capital expenditures, maintenance and repair costs and
taxes. DEFS also provides centralized corporate functions on
behalf of the Partnership, including legal, accounting, cash
management, insurance administration and claims processing, risk
management, health, safety and environmental, information
technology, human resources, credit, payroll, internal audit,
taxes and engineering. DEFS records the accrued liabilities and
prepaid expenses for most general and administrative expenses in
its financial statements, including liabilities related to
payroll, short and long-term incentive plans, employee
retirement and medical plans, paid time off, audit, tax,
insurance and other service fees. The Partnerships share
of those costs has been allocated based on the
Partnerships proportionate net investment (consisting of
property, plant and equipment, net, equity method investment,
and intangible assets, net) compared to DEFS net
investment. In managements estimation, the allocation
methodologies used are reasonable and result in an allocation to
the Partnership of its costs of doing business borne by DEFS.
Upon the closing of the initial public offering, the Partnership
entered into an Omnibus Agreement with DEFS, its general partner
and others that addresses the following matters:
|
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships obligation to reimburse DEFS the payment
of operating expenses, including salary and benefits of
operating personnel, it incurs on the Partnerships behalf
in connection with the Partnerships business and
operations;
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships obligation to reimburse DEFS for
providing the Partnership with general and administrative
services with respect to its business and operations, which is
capped at a maximum of $4.8 million, subject to an increase
for 2007 and 2008 based on increases in the Consumer Price Index
|
84
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
and subject to further increases in connection with expansions
of the Partnerships operations through the acquisition or
construction of new assets or businesses with the concurrence of
the Partnerships special committee;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships obligation to reimburse DEFS for
insurance coverage expenses it incurs with respect to the
Partnerships business and operations and with respect to
director and officer liability coverage;
|
|
|
|
DEFS obligation to indemnify the Partnership for certain
liabilities and the Partnerships obligation to indemnify
DEFS for certain liabilities;
|
|
|
|
DEFS obligation to continue to maintain its credit
support, including without limitation guarantees and letters of
credit, for the Partnerships obligations related to
derivative financial instruments, such as commodity price
hedging contracts, to the extent that such credit support
arrangements are in effect as of the closing of the initial
public offering until the earlier to occur of the fifth
anniversary of the closing of the initial public offering or
such time as the Partnership obtains an investment grade credit
rating from either Moodys Investor Services, Inc. or
Standard & Poors Ratings Group with respect to
any of its unsecured indebtedness; and
|
|
|
|
DEFS obligation to continue to maintain its credit
support, including without limitation guarantees and letters of
credit, for the Partnerships obligations related to
commercial contracts with respect to its business or operations
that are in effect at the closing of the initial public offering
until the expiration of such contracts.
|
Any or all of the provisions of the Omnibus Agreement, other
than the indemnification provisions, will be terminable by DEFS
at its option if the general partner is removed without cause
and units held by the general partner and its affiliates are not
voted in favor of that removal. The Omnibus Agreement will also
terminate in the event of a change of control of the
Partnership, the general partner or the general partners
general partner.
Reimbursement
of Operating and General and Administrative Expense
Under the Omnibus Agreement the Partnership reimburses DEFS for
the payment of certain operating expenses and for the provision
of various general and administrative services for the
Partnerships benefit with respect to the assets
contributed to it at the closing of the initial public offering.
The Omnibus Agreement provides that the Partnership will
reimburse DEFS for its allocable portion of the premiums on
insurance policies covering its assets.
Pursuant to these arrangements, DEFS performs centralized
corporate functions for the Partnership, such as legal,
accounting, treasury, insurance administration and claims
processing, risk management, health, safety and environmental,
information technology, human resources, credit, payroll,
internal audit, taxes and engineering. The Partnership will
reimburse DEFS for the direct expenses to provide these services
as well as other direct expenses it incurs on the
Partnerships behalf, such as salaries of operational
personnel performing services for the Partnerships benefit
and the cost of their employee benefits, including 401(k),
pension and health insurance benefits.
Competition
None of DEFS nor any of its affiliates, including Duke Energy
and ConocoPhillips, is restricted, under either the partnership
agreement or the Omnibus Agreement, from competing with the
Partnership. DEFS and any of its affiliates, including Duke
Energy and ConocoPhillips, may acquire, construct or dispose of
additional midstream energy or other assets in the future
without any obligation to offer the Partnership the opportunity
to purchase or construct those assets.
85
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Indemnification
Under the Omnibus Agreement, DEFS will indemnify the Partnership
for three years after the closing of the initial public offering
against certain potential environmental claims, losses and
expenses associated with the operation of the assets and
occurring before the closing date of the initial public
offering. DEFS maximum liability for this indemnification
obligation does not exceed $15 million and DEFS does not
have any obligation under this indemnification until the
Partnerships aggregate losses exceed $250,000. DEFS has no
indemnification obligations with respect to environmental claims
made as a result of additions to or modifications of
environmental laws promulgated after the closing date of the
initial public offering. The Partnership has agreed to indemnify
DEFS against environmental liabilities related to the
Partnerships assets to the extent DEFS is not required to
indemnify the Partnership.
Additionally, DEFS will indemnify the Partnership for losses
attributable to title defects, retained assets and liabilities
(including preclosing litigation relating to contributed assets)
and income taxes attributable to pre-closing operations. The
Partnership will indemnify DEFS for all losses attributable to
the postclosing operations of the assets contributed to the
Partnership, to the extent not subject to DEFS
indemnification obligations. In addition, DEFS has agreed to
indemnify the Partnership for up to $5.3 million of its pro
rata share of any capital contributions required to be made by
the Partnership to Black Lake associated with any repairs to the
Black Lake pipeline that are determined to be necessary as a
result of the currently ongoing pipeline integrity testing
occurring from 2005 through 2007. DEFS has also agreed to
indemnify the Partnership for up to $4.0 million of the
costs associated with any repairs to the Seabreeze pipeline that
are determined to be necessary as a result of the scheduled
pipeline integrity testing occurring in 2006 and 2007.
Other
Agreements and Transactions with DEFS
Prior to the initial public offering on December 7, 2005,
the Partnership participated in DEFS cash management
program. As a result, the Partnership had no cash balances on
the consolidated balance sheets and all cash management activity
was performed by DEFS on behalf of the Partnership, including
collection of receivables, payment of payables, and the
settlement of sales and purchases transactions between the
Partnership and DEFS, which were recorded as parent advances and
included in accounts receivable affiliates or
accounts payable affiliates. Subsequent to the
initial public offering, the Partnership maintains separate cash
accounts, which are managed by DEFS.
The Partnership has entered into a contractual arrangement with
a subsidiary of DEFS that provides that DEFS will purchase
natural gas and transport it to the PELICO system where the
Partnership will buy the gas from DEFS at its weighted average
cost plus a contractually agreed to marketing fee. In addition,
for a significant portion of the gas that the Partnership sells
out of its PELICO system, the Partnership has entered into a
contractual arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS that provides
that DEFS will purchase that natural gas from the Partnership
and transport it to a sales point at a price equal to its net
weighted average sales price less a contractually agreed to
marketing fee. These agreements have a two year term beginning
in December 2005.
In addition, for certain industrial end-user customers of the
PELICO system, from time to time the Partnership may sell
aggregated natural gas to a subsidiary of DEFS which in turn
would resell natural gas to these customers. The sales price to
the subsidiary of DEFS is equal to that subsidiary of DEFS
net weighted average sales price less a contractually agreed to
marketing fee.
Effective December 1, 2005, the Partnership entered into a
contractual arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS that provides
that DEFS will purchase the NGLs that were historically
purchased by the Seabreeze pipeline, and DEFS will pay the
Partnership to transport the NGLs pursuant to a fee-based rate
that will be applied to the volumes transported. The Partnership
has entered into this fee-based contractual arrangement with the
objective of generating approximately the same operating income
per barrel transported that it
86
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
realized when it was the purchaser and seller of NGLs. The
Partnership does not take title to the products transported on
the NGL pipeline; rather, the shipper retains title and the
associated commodity price risk. DEFS is the sole shipper on the
Seabreeze pipeline under a
17-year
transportation agreement expiring in 2022. The Seabreeze
pipeline collects only fee-based transportation revenue under
this agreement.
The Partnership sells NGLs and condensate from its Minden and
Ada processing plants and the PELICO system to a subsidiary of
DEFS equal to that subsidiary of DEFS net weighted average
sales price.
Management anticipates continuing to purchase and sell these
commodities to DEFS in the ordinary course of business. DEFS was
a significant customer during the years ended December 31,
2005, 2004 and 2003.
Duke
Energy
The Partnership charges transportation fees, sells a portion of
its residue gas to, and purchases raw natural gas from, Duke
Energy and its affiliates. Management anticipates continuing to
purchase and sell these commodities to Duke Energy and its
affiliates in the ordinary course of business. Duke Energy was a
significant customer during the year ended December 31,
2003.
ConocoPhillips
The Partnership charges transportation fees and sells a portion
of its residue gas and NGLs to and purchases raw natural gas
from ConocoPhillips and its affiliates. The Partnership has a
fee-based contractual relationship with ConocoPhillips pursuant
to which ConocoPhillips has dedicated all of its natural gas
production within an area of mutual interest to the assets in
the Partnerships Natural Gas Services segment. Management
anticipates continuing to purchase and sell these commodities to
ConocoPhillips and its affiliates in the ordinary course of
business. In addition, the Partnership may be reimbursed by
ConocoPhillips for certain capital projects where the work is
performed by the Partnership. The Partnership received
$0.2 million, $0.3 million and $0.5 million of
capital reimbursements during the years ended December 31,
2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
The following table summarizes the transactions with DEFS, Duke
Energy and ConocoPhillips as described above ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Duke Energy Field Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of natural gas, NGLs and
condensate
|
|
$
|
105.8
|
|
|
$
|
63.0
|
|
|
$
|
50.0
|
|
Transportation and processing
services
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
|
|
$
|
86.1
|
|
|
$
|
26.7
|
|
|
$
|
87.8
|
|
(Losses) gains from non-trading
derivative activity
|
|
$
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
2.5
|
|
General and administrative expense
|
|
$
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
6.5
|
|
|
$
|
7.1
|
|
Duke Energy:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of natural gas, NGLs and
condensate
|
|
$
|
1.4
|
|
|
$
|
10.3
|
|
|
$
|
81.1
|
|
Transportation and processing
services
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.5
|
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
|
|
$
|
3.1
|
|
|
$
|
3.4
|
|
|
$
|
1.6
|
|
ConocoPhillips:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of natural gas, NGLs and
condensate
|
|
$
|
7.3
|
|
|
$
|
3.7
|
|
|
$
|
3.6
|
|
Transportation and processing
services
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
|
$
|
9.9
|
|
|
$
|
8.4
|
|
Purchases of natural gas and NGLs
|
|
$
|
18.7
|
|
|
$
|
18.4
|
|
|
$
|
31.9
|
|
87
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Partnership had accounts receivable and accounts payable
with affiliates as follows ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Duke Energy Field Services:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
$
|
53.5
|
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
15.9
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Duke Energy:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
23.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
ConocoPhillips:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
$
|
2.6
|
|
|
$
|
1.2
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
2.5
|
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
8.
|
Property,
Plant and Equipment
|
A summary of property, plant and equipment by classification is
as follows ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciable
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
Life
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Gathering systems
|
|
|
15 30 Years
|
|
|
$
|
95.9
|
|
|
$
|
92.9
|
|
Processing plants
|
|
|
25 30 Years
|
|
|
|
53.4
|
|
|
|
53.7
|
|
Transportation
|
|
|
25 30 Years
|
|
|
|
127.4
|
|
|
|
127.2
|
|
General plant
|
|
|
3 5 Years
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
Construction work in progress
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
287.9
|
|
|
|
279.6
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(119.0
|
)
|
|
|
(107.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
168.9
|
|
|
$
|
172.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expense was $11.6 million, $12.5 million,
$12.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2005,
2004 and 2003, respectively.
At December 31, 2005, the Partnership had non-cancelable
purchase obligations of $2.7 million for capital projects
expected to be completed in 2006. In addition, property, plant
and equipment includes $1.1 million and $0.1 million
of non-cash additions for the years ended December 31, 2005
and 2004, respectively. There were no non-cash additions to
property, plant and equipment in 2003.
Asset Retirement Obligations The
Partnerships asset retirement obligations relate primarily
to the retirement of various gathering pipelines and processing
facilities, obligations related to
right-of-way
easement agreements and contractual leases for land use.
SFAS 143 was effective for fiscal years beginning after
June 15, 2002, and was adopted by the Partnership on
January 1, 2003. At January 1, 2003, the
implementation of SFAS 143 resulted in a net increase in
total assets of $0.1 million, consisting of an increase in
net property, plant and equipment. Long-term liabilities
increased by $0.1 million, which represents the
establishment of an asset retirement obligation liability. A
cumulative-effect of a change in accounting principle
adjustment, which was not significant, was recorded on
January 1, 2003 as a reduction in earnings. Accretion
expense for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and
2003 was not significant.
The asset retirement obligation is adjusted each quarter for any
liabilities incurred or settled during the period, accretion
expense and any revisions made to the estimated cash flows. The
asset retirement obligation,
88
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
included in other long-term liabilities in the consolidated
balance sheets, as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 was
$0.3 million and $0.1 million, respectively.
One of the Partnerships owned gas processing plants
contains asbestos. If the portion of the plant containing
asbestos were to be dismantled, the Partnership would be legally
required to remove the asbestos. The Partnership currently has
no plans to take actions that would require the removal of the
asbestos in this plant. Accordingly, the fair value of the asset
retirement obligation related to this asbestos cannot be
estimated and no obligation has been recorded.
Intangible asset consists of a commodity contract. The gross
carrying amount and accumulated amortization for the commodity
contract is as follows ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Intangible asset
|
|
$
|
2.5
|
|
|
$
|
2.5
|
|
Accumulated amortization
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intangible asset, net
|
|
$
|
2.1
|
|
|
$
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For each of the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and
2003, the Partnership recorded amortization expense associated
with the commodity contract of $0.1 million. As of
December 31, 2005, the remaining amortization period for
this contract was 21.3 years.
Estimated future amortization for this contract is as follows ($
in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
2007
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
2008
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
2009
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
2010
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.
|
Equity
Method Investment
|
The Partnership has an investment in the following business
accounted for using the equity method, included in the NGL
Logistics segment ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Black Lake Pipe Line Company
|
|
$
|
5.3
|
|
|
$
|
5.8
|
|
Prior to December 7, 2005, DCP Midstream Partners
Predecessor held a 50% interest in Black Lake. Upon completion
of the Partnerships initial public offering, DEFS retained
a 5% interest in Black Lake. The investment above accounts for a
45% and 50% ownership interest as of December 31, 2005 and
2004, respectively.
Black Lake owns a 317 mile NGL pipeline, with a throughput
capacity of approximately 40 MBbls/d. The pipeline receives
NGLs from a number of gas plants in Louisiana and Texas. There
was a deficit between
89
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
the carrying amount of the investment and the underlying equity
of Black Lake of $7.0 million, $8.1 million and
$3.9 million at December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003,
respectively, which is associated with, and is being accreted
over the life of, the underlying long-lived assets of Black Lake.
Earnings from equity method investment amounted to the following
($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Black Lake Pipe Line Company
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
|
$
|
0.6
|
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
Distributions received were $0.6 million during the year
ended December 31, 2003. The Partnership did not receive
any distributions during the years ended December 31, 2005
and 2004.
The following summarizes financial information of Black Lake ($
in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Statements of operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating revenues
|
|
$
|
3.3
|
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.8
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance sheet:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
4.8
|
|
|
$
|
4.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent assets
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net assets
|
|
$
|
21.5
|
|
|
$
|
22.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.
|
Risk
Management and Hedging Activities, Credit Risk and Financial
Instruments
|
Commodity price risk The
Partnerships principal operations of gathering,
processing, and transportation of natural gas, and the
accompanying operations of transportation and marketing of NGLs
create commodity price risk due to market fluctuations in
commodity prices, primarily with respect to the prices of NGLs,
natural gas and crude oil. As an owner and operator of natural
gas processing and other midstream assets, the Partnership has
an inherent exposure to market variables and commodity price
risk. The amount and type of price risk is dependent on the
underlying natural gas contracts entered into to purchase and
process raw natural gas. Risk is also dependent on the types and
mechanisms for sales of natural gas and NGLs and related
products produced, processed, transported or stored.
Credit risk The Partnership sells
natural gas to marketing affiliates of natural gas pipelines,
marketing affiliates of integrated oil companies, marketing
affiliates of DEFS, national wholesale marketers, industrial
end-users and gas-fired power plants. In the NGL Logistics
segment, the Partnerships principal customers include an
affiliate of DEFS, producers and marketing companies.
Substantially all of the Partnerships natural gas and NGL
sales are made at market-based prices. This concentration of
credit risk may affect the Partnerships overall credit
risk in that these customers may be similarly affected by
changes in economic, regulatory or other factors. Where exposed
to credit risk, management analyzes the counterparties
financial condition prior to entering into an agreement,
establishes credit limits and monitors the appropriateness of
these limits on an ongoing basis. The Partnership operates under
DEFS corporate credit policy. DEFS corporate credit
policy prescribes the use of master collateral agreements to
mitigate credit exposure. Collateral agreements provide for a
counterparty to post cash or letters of credit for exposure in
excess of the established threshold. The threshold amount
represents an open credit limit, determined in accordance with
DEFS credit
90
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
policy. The collateral agreements also provide that the
inability to post collateral is sufficient cause to terminate a
contract and liquidate all positions. In addition, the
Partnerships standard natural gas and NGL sales contracts
contain adequate assurance provisions which allow the
Partnership to suspend deliveries, cancel agreements or continue
deliveries to the buyer after the buyer provides security for
payment in a form satisfactory to the Partnership.
Commodity cash flow hedges In September
2005, the Partnership executed a series of derivative financial
transactions which have been designated as cash flow hedges of
the price risk associated with its forecasted sales of natural
gas, NGLs and condensate. As a result of those transactions, the
Partnership hedged approximately 80% of its expected natural gas
and NGL commodity price risk effective January 1, 2006
relating to its percentage of proceeds gathering and processing
contracts and condensate commodity price risk relating to
condensate recovered from gathering operations through 2010.
The Partnership may, from time to time, use cash flow hedges, as
specifically defined by SFAS 133, to reduce the potential
negative impact that commodity price changes could have on its
earnings, and its ability to adequately plan for cash needed for
debt service, distributions and capital expenditures.
The Partnership used natural gas and crude oil swaps to hedge
the impact of market fluctuations in the price of NGLs, natural
gas and condensate. The effective portion of the change in fair
value of a derivative designated as a cash flow hedge is
accumulated in AOCI, and the ineffective portion is recorded in
the consolidated statements of operations. For the year ended
December 31, 2005, the amount of the ineffectiveness was a
gain of approximately $0.3 million. For the year ended
December 31, 2005, no derivative gains or losses were
reclassified from AOCI to current period earnings as a result of
the discontinuance of cash flow hedges related to certain
forecasted transactions that are not probable of occurring or
due to a derivative no longer qualifying as an effective hedge.
All components of each derivatives gain or loss are
included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness, unless
otherwise noted.
During the period in which the hedged transaction occurs,
amounts in AOCI associated with the hedged transaction will be
reclassified to the consolidated statements of operations in the
same accounts as the item being hedged. As of December 31,
2005, there were $0.4 million of net deferred gains related
to commodity cash flow derivative contracts in AOCI. As of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, no amounts related to cash flow
hedges were deferred in AOCI. As of December 31, 2005,
$2.4 million of deferred net losses on derivative
instruments in AOCI are expected to be reclassified into
earnings during the next 12 months as the hedged
transactions occur; however, due to the volatility of the
commodities markets, the corresponding value in AOCI is subject
to change prior to its reclassification into earnings.
Commodity fair value hedges The
Partnership uses fair value hedges to hedge exposure to changes
in the fair value of an asset or a liability (or an identified
portion thereof) that is attributable to fixed price risk. The
Partnership may hedge producer price locks (fixed price gas
purchases) to reduce its exposure to fixed price risk via
swapping the fixed price risk for a floating price position (New
York Mercantile Exchange or index-based).
For the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, the
gains or losses representing the ineffective portion of the
Partnerships fair value hedges were not material. All
components of each derivatives gain or loss are included
in the assessment of hedge effectiveness, unless otherwise
noted. At December 31, 2005 and 2004, there were no firm
commitments that no longer qualified as fair value hedge items
and therefore, the Partnership did not recognize an associated
gain or loss.
Commodity Non-Trading Derivative
Activity The marketing of energy related
products and services exposes the Partnership to the
fluctuations in the market values of exchanged instruments. The
Partnerships marketing program is designed to realize
margins related to fluctuations in commodity prices and
differences in natural gas prices at various receipt and
delivery points across the system for the Partnerships
Natural Gas
91
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Services segment. DEFS manages the Partnerships marketing
portfolios with strict policies which limit exposure to market
risk.
Credit Facility with Financial
Institutions On December 7, 2005, the
Partnership entered into a
5-year
credit agreement (the Credit Agreement), providing a
$250 million revolving and a $100.1 million term loan
facility. The Credit Agreement matures on December 7, 2010.
The Credit Agreement prohibits the Partnership from making
distributions of available cash to unitholders if any default or
event of default (as defined in the Credit Agreement) exists.
The Credit Agreement requires the Partnership to maintain at all
times (commencing with the quarter ending March 31,
2006) a leverage ratio (the ratio of its consolidated
indebtedness to its consolidated EBITDA, in each case as is
defined by the credit agreement) of less than or equal to 4.75
to 1.0 (and on a temporary basis for not more than three
consecutive quarters following the acquisition of assets in the
midstream energy business of not more than 5.25 to 1.0); and
maintain at the end of each fiscal quarter an interest coverage
ratio (defined to be the ratio of adjusted EBITDA, as defined by
the Credit Agreement to be earnings before interest, taxes and
depreciation and amortization and other non-cash adjustments,
for the four most recent quarters to interest expense for the
same period) of greater than or equal to 3.0 to 1.0. The term
loan bears interest at a rate equal to either LIBOR plus 0.15%,
the Federal Funds rate plus 0.5%, or the Wachovia Bank prime
rate. The revolving credit facility bears interest at a rate
equal to LIBOR plus an applicable margin, which ranges from
0.27% to 1.025% based on leverage level
and/or debt
rating, or at the Wachovia Bank prime rate plus an applicable
percentage based on leverage level
and/or debt
rating. At December 31, 2005, there was $110.0 million
outstanding on the revolving credit facility and
$100.1 million outstanding on the term loan facility, which
is fully collateralized by high-grade securities. As of
December 31, 2005, $0.8 million was recorded as
accrued interest. No interest was paid during 2005. There were
no letters of credit outstanding as of December 31, 2005.
In December 2005, the Partnership incurred $0.7 million of
debt issuance costs associated with the Credit Agreement. These
expenses are deferred as other non-current assets in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheet and will be amortized
over the term of the Credit Agreement.
Long-term debt at December 31, 2005 and 2004 was as follows
($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal Amount
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Due Date
|
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
Revolving credit facility
|
|
$
|
110.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
December 7, 2010
|
|
|
|
Varies
|
|
Term loan facility
|
|
|
100.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 7, 2010
|
|
|
|
Varies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
210.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future maturities of long-term debt in the year indicated are as
follows at December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt Maturities
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
2006
|
|
$
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
210.1
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt
|
|
$
|
210.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
13.
|
Estimated
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
|
The Partnership has determined the following fair value amounts
using available market information and appropriate valuation
methodologies. However, considerable judgment is required in
interpreting market data to develop the estimates of fair value.
Accordingly, the estimates presented herein are not necessarily
indicative of the amounts that the Partnership could realize in
a current market exchange. The use of different market
assumptions
and/or
estimation methods may have a material effect on the estimated
fair value amounts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Estimated Fair
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Estimated Fair
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Restricted investments
|
|
$
|
100.4
|
|
|
$
|
100.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
$
|
82.0
|
|
|
$
|
82.0
|
|
|
$
|
61.0
|
|
|
$
|
61.0
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
87.0
|
|
|
$
|
87.0
|
|
|
$
|
39.8
|
|
|
$
|
39.8
|
|
Unrealized gains (losses) on
mark-to-market
and hedging transactions
|
|
$
|
0.6
|
|
|
$
|
0.6
|
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$
|
210.1
|
|
|
$
|
210.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
The fair value of restricted investments, accounts receivable
and accounts payable are not materially different from their
carrying amounts because of the short term nature of these
instruments or the stated rates approximating market rates.
The fair value of the non-trading derivative and hedging
transactions is recorded on the consolidated balance sheets. The
fair value is determined by multiplying the difference between
the quoted termination prices for commodity contract prices by
the quantities under contract.
The carrying value of long-term debt approximated fair value as
the interest rate is variable and is reflective of current
market conditions.
|
|
14.
|
Commitments
and Contingent Liabilities
|
Litigation The Partnership is not a
party to any significant legal proceedings but is a party to
various administrative and regulatory proceedings that have
arisen in the ordinary course of the Partnerships
business. Management currently believes that the ultimate
resolution of the foregoing matters, taken as a whole, and after
consideration of amounts accrued, insurance coverage or other
indemnification arrangements, will not have a material adverse
effect upon the Partnerships future financial position,
operations and cash flows.
Insurance DEFS carries insurance
coverage which includes the assets and operations of the
Partnership, with an affiliate of Duke Energy, that management
believes is consistent with companies engaged in similar
commercial operations with similar type properties. DEFS
insurance coverage includes (1) commercial general public
liability insurance for liabilities arising to third parties for
bodily injury and property damage resulting from operations;
(2) workers compensation liability coverage to
required statutory limits; (3) automobile liability
insurance for all owned, non-owned and hired vehicles covering
liabilities to third parties for bodily injury and property
damage; (4) property insurance covering the replacement
value of all real and personal property damage, including
damages arising from boiler and machinery breakdowns,
earthquake, flood damage and business interruption/extra
expense; and (5) directors and officers insurance covering
the performance of the Partnerships directors and
officers duties as they relate to the Partnership. All
coverages are subject to certain deductibles, terms and
conditions common for companies with similar types of
operations. DEFS also maintains excess liability insurance
coverage above the established primary limits for commercial
general liability and automobile liability insurance. Limits,
terms, conditions and deductibles are comparable to those
carried by other energy companies of similar size. The cost of
general insurance
93
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
coverages continued to fluctuate over the past year reflecting
the changing conditions of the insurance markets.
A portion of the insurance costs described above are allocated
by DEFS to the Partnership through the allocation methodology
described in Note 7.
Environmental The operation of
pipelines, plants and other facilities for gathering,
transporting, processing, treating, or storing natural gas, NGLs
and other products is subject to stringent and complex laws and
regulations pertaining to health, safety and the environment. As
an owner or operator of these facilities, the Partnership must
comply with United States laws and regulations at the federal,
state and local levels that relate to air and water quality,
hazardous and solid waste management and disposal, and other
environmental matters. The cost of planning, designing,
constructing and operating pipelines, plants, and other
facilities must incorporate compliance with environmental laws
and regulations and safety standards. Failure to comply with
these laws and regulations may trigger a variety of
administrative, civil and potentially criminal enforcement
measures, including citizen suits, which can include the
assessment of monetary penalties, the imposition of remedial
requirements, and the issuance of injunctions or restrictions on
operation. Management believes that, based on currently known
information, compliance with these laws and regulations will not
have a material adverse effect on the Partnerships
consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash
flows.
Indemnification DEFS will indemnify the
Partnership for three years after the closing of the
Partnerships initial public offering against certain
potential environmental claims, losses and expenses associated
with the operation of the assets and occurring before the
closing date of the Partnerships initial public offering,
on December 7, 2005. DEFS maximum liability for this
indemnification obligation does not exceed $15.0 million
and DEFS does not have any obligation under this indemnification
until the Partnerships aggregate losses exceed $250,000.
DEFS has no indemnification obligations with respect to
environmental claims made as a result of additions to or
modifications of environmental laws promulgated after the
closing date of the Partnerships initial public offering.
The Partnership has agreed to indemnify DEFS against
environmental liabilities related to the Partnerships
assets to the extent DEFS is not required to indemnify the
Partnership.
Other Commitments and Contingencies The
Partnership utilizes assets under operating leases in several
areas of operation. Consolidated rental expense, including
leases with no continuing commitment, amounted to
$1.3 million, $1.4 million and $1.0 million for
the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003,
respectively. At December 31, 2005, minimum rental payments
totaling $0.1 million under the Partnerships
operating leases are scheduled to occur in 2006.
The Partnerships operations are located in the United
States and are organized into two reporting segments:
(1) Natural Gas Services; and (2) NGL Logistics.
Natural Gas Services The Natural Gas
Services segment consists of the North Louisiana system assets,
an integrated gas gathering, compression, treating, processing,
and transportation system located in northern Louisiana and
southern Arkansas that includes the Minden and Ada natural gas
processing plants and gathering systems and the PELICO
intrastate natural gas gathering and transportation pipeline.
NGL Logistics The NGL Logistics segment
consists of the Seabreeze NGL transportation pipeline located
along the Gulf Coast area of southeastern Texas and an interest
in Black Lake FERC-regulated interstate NGL pipeline located in
northern Louisiana and southeastern Texas of 50% in 2003, 2004
and the period from January 1, 2005 through
December 6, 2005 and of 45% from December 7, 2005
through December 31, 2005, in line with the closing of the
Partnerships initial public offering on December 7,
2005, whereby DEFS retained a 5% interest of Black Lake and an
affiliate of BP owns the remaining interest and is the operator
of Black Lake.
94
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
These segments are monitored separately by management for
performance against its internal forecast and are consistent
with internal financial reporting. These segments have been
identified based on the differing products and services,
regulatory environment and the expertise required for these
operations. Gross margin is a performance measure utilized by
management to monitor the business of each segment. The
accounting policies for the segments are the same as those
described in Note 2.
The following tables set forth the Partnerships segment
information.
Year ended December 31, 2005 ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
|
NGL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Logistics
|
|
|
Other(b)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
$
|
592.8
|
|
|
$
|
191.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
784.5
|
|
Gross margin(a)
|
|
$
|
71.4
|
|
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
75.2
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
(14.0
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14.2
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
(10.8
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11.7
|
)
|
General and administrative expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
General and administrative
expense affiliate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7.4
|
)
|
|
|
(7.4
|
)
|
Earnings from equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
46.6
|
|
|
$
|
3.1
|
|
|
$
|
(11.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
$
|
7.9
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
7.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2004 ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
|
NGL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Logistics
|
|
|
Other(b)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
$
|
353.3
|
|
|
$
|
156.2
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
509.5
|
|
Gross margin(a)
|
|
$
|
53.6
|
|
|
$
|
3.3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
56.9
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
(13.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13.6
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
(11.7
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12.6
|
)
|
General and administrative
expense affiliate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6.5
|
)
|
|
|
(6.5
|
)
|
Earnings from equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
Impairment of equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
28.5
|
|
|
$
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
$
|
2.8
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Year ended December 31, 2003 ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
|
NGL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services
|
|
|
Logistics
|
|
|
Other(b)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
$
|
343.7
|
|
|
$
|
131.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
475.1
|
|
Gross margin(a)
|
|
$
|
42.2
|
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
44.5
|
|
Operating and maintenance expense
|
|
|
(14.7
|
)
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15.0
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
expense
|
|
|
(11.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12.8
|
)
|
General and administrative
expense affiliate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7.1
|
)
|
|
|
(7.1
|
)
|
Earnings from equity method
investment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
15.6
|
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
$
|
(7.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
$
|
2.4
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table sets forth the Partnerships total
assets segment information ($ in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
Segment long-term assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas Services
|
|
$
|
152.8
|
|
|
$
|
154.9
|
|
NGL Logistics
|
|
|
23.5
|
|
|
|
25.1
|
|
Other(c)
|
|
|
106.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term assets
|
|
|
282.8
|
|
|
|
180.0
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
124.5
|
|
|
|
61.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
407.3
|
|
|
$
|
241.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Gross margin consists of total operating revenues less purchases
of natural gas and NGLs. Gross margin is viewed as a
non-Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)
measure under the rules of the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC), but is included as a supplemental
disclosure because it is a primary performance measure used by
management as it represents the results of product sales versus
product purchases. As an indicator of the Partnerships
operating performance, Gross margin should not be considered an
alternative to, or more meaningful than, net income or cash flow
as determined in accordance with GAAP. The Partnerships
Gross margin may not be comparable to a similarly titled measure
of another company because other entities may not calculate
gross margin in the same manner. |
|
(b) |
|
Other consists of general and administrative expense. |
|
(c) |
|
Other long-term assets not allocable to segments consist of
restricted investments of $100.4 million, $5.4 million
unrealized gain on non-trading derivative and hedging
transactions and deferred offering costs of $0.7 million. |
96
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
16.
|
Quarterly
Financial Data (Unaudited)
|
The Partnerships results of operations by quarter for the
years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 were as follows ($
in millions, except unit amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
$
|
127.4
|
|
|
$
|
150.4
|
|
|
$
|
233.1
|
|
|
$
|
273.6
|
|
|
$
|
784.5
|
|
Operating income
|
|
$
|
6.9
|
|
|
$
|
7.7
|
|
|
$
|
3.4
|
|
|
$
|
19.9
|
|
|
$
|
37.9
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
7.1
|
|
|
$
|
7.8
|
|
|
$
|
3.5
|
|
|
$
|
19.6
|
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
Basic net income per limited
partner unit(a)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
$
|
0.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third(b)
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Total operating revenues
|
|
$
|
116.3
|
|
|
$
|
126.2
|
|
|
$
|
126.8
|
|
|
$
|
140.2
|
|
|
$
|
509.5
|
|
Operating income
|
|
$
|
6.9
|
|
|
$
|
4.8
|
|
|
$
|
6.2
|
|
|
$
|
6.3
|
|
|
$
|
24.2
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
7.0
|
|
|
$
|
5.0
|
|
|
$
|
1.9
|
|
|
$
|
6.5
|
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
Basic net income per limited
partner unit
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Total basic net income per limited partner unit calculated using
net income of $3.5 million earned by the Partnership from
December 7, 2005 through December 31, 2005. See
Note 5. |
|
(b) |
|
A $4.4 million impairment of equity method investment was
recorded in the third quarter of 2004. |
On January 25, 2006, the board of directors of DCP
Midstream Partners general partner declared a prorated
quarterly distribution of $0.095 per unit, payable on
February 13, 2006 to unitholders of record on
February 3, 2006, for the period from the close of the
initial public offering of December 7, 2005 through
December 31, 2005.
In February 2006, the Partnership announced plans to construct a
new 37-mile
NGL pipeline to connect a DEFS gas processing plant to the
Seabreeze pipeline for a cost of approximately $12 million.
The project is estimated to be completed during the fourth
quarter of 2006 and is supported by a
10-year NGL
product dedication by DEFS. Volumes from DEFS are estimated to
be approximately 5.3 MBbls/d.
97
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure.
|
There were no changes in or disagreements with accountants on
accounting and financial disclosures during the year ended
December 31, 2005.
|
|
Item 9a.
|
Controls
and Procedures.
|
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed
to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the
reports that we file or submit to the Securities and Exchange
Commission under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within
the time periods specified by the Commissions rules and
forms, and that information is accumulated and communicated to
the management of our general partner, including our general
partners principal executive and principal financial
officers (whom we refer to as the Certifying Officers), as
appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required
disclosure. The management of our general partner evaluated,
with the participation of the Certifying Officers, the
effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of
December 31, 2005, pursuant to
Rule 13a-15(b)
under the Exchange Act. Based upon that evaluation, the
Certifying Officers concluded that, as of December 31,
2005, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
There were no significant changes in internal control over
financial reporting (as defined in
Rule 13a-15(f)
under the Exchange Act) that occurred during the fourth quarter
of 2005 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely
to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
|
|
Item 9b.
|
Other
Information.
|
No information was required to be disclosed in a report on
Form 8-K,
but not so reported, for the quarter ended December 31,
2005.
Part III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors
and Executive Officers of our General Partner.
|
Management
of DCP Midstream Partners, LP
We do not have directors or officers, which is commonly the case
with publicly traded partnerships. Our operations and activities
are managed by our general partner, DCP Midstream GP, LP, which
in turn is managed by its general partner, DCP Midstream GP,
LLC, which we refer to as our General Partner. Our General
Partner is wholly-owned by DEFS. The officers and directors of
our General Partner are responsible for managing us. All of the
directors of our General Partner are elected annually by DEFS
and all of the officers of our General Partner serve at the
discretion of the directors. Unitholders are not entitled to
participate, directly or indirectly, in our management or
operations.
Board of
Directors and Officers
The board of directors of our General Partner that oversees our
operations has ten members, five of whom are independent as
defined under the independence standards established by the New
York Stock Exchange. The New York Stock Exchange does not
require a listed limited partnership like us to have a majority
of independent directors on its general partners board of
directors or to establish a compensation committee or a
nominating committee. However, the board of our General Partner
has established an audit committee consisting of three
independent members of the board, a compensation committee and a
special committee to address conflict situations.
The Named Executive officers of our General Partner manage the
day-to-day
affairs of our business and devote all of their time to our
business and affairs. We also utilize a significant number of
employees of DEFS to operate our business and provide us with
general and administrative services.
98
Directors
and Executive Officers
The following table shows information regarding the current
directors and the Named Executive Officers of DCP Midstream GP,
LLC. Directors are elected for one-year terms.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position with DCP Midstream GP,
LLC
|
|
Jim W. Mogg
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
Chairman of the Board
|
Michael J. Bradley
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer
and Director
|
Thomas E. Long
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer
|
Michael S. Richards
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
Vice President, General Counsel
and Secretary
|
Greg K. Smith
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
Vice President, Business
Development
|
William H. Easter III
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
Director
|
Paul F. Ferguson, Jr.
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
Director
|
John E. Lowe
|
|
|
47
|
|
|
Director
|
Milton Carroll
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Director
|
Derrill Cody
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
Director
|
Frank A. McPherson
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
Director
|
Thomas C. Morris
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
Director
|
Michael J. Panatier
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
Director
|
Our directors hold office for one year or until the earlier of
their death, resignation, removal or disqualification or until
their successors have been elected and qualified. Officers serve
at the discretion of the board of directors. There are no family
relationships among any of our directors or executive officers.
Jim W. Mogg was elected Chairman of the Board of DCP
Midstream GP, LLC in August 2005. Mr. Mogg is Group Vice
President and Chief Development Officer of Duke Energy.
Mr. Mogg assumed his current position in January 2004. He
previously served as President and Chief Executive Officer of
DEFS from December 1994 and Chairman, President and Chief
Executive Officer of DEFS from 1999 through December 2003. In
these capacities, Mr. Mogg was significantly involved in
the development and growth of DEFS. From October 1997 until
March 2005, Mr. Mogg also served as a director of the
general partner of TEPPCO Partners, L.P. Mr. Mogg was
appointed Chairman of the compensation committee of the general
partner of TEPPCO Partners, L.P. in April 2000 and Chairman of
the Board in May 2002.
Michael J. Bradley was elected President and Chief
Executive Officer of DCP Midstream GP, LLC in August 2005 and
director in November 2005. Mr. Bradley has been Group Vice
President, Gathering and Processing of DEFS since July 2004.
From April 2002 until July 2004, Mr. Bradley was Executive
Vice President, Gathering and Processing of DEFS. From 1999
until April 2002, Mr. Bradley was Senior Vice President,
Northern Division of DEFS. Mr. Bradley joined DEFS in 1994
and served as Senior Vice President. In these capacities,
Mr. Bradley was significantly involved in the development
and growth of DEFS. From February 2003 until March 2005,
Mr. Bradley also served as a director of the general
partner of TEPPCO Partners, L.P.
Thomas E. Long was elected Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of DCP Midstream GP, LLC in September 2005.
Mr. Long has been Vice President of National Methanol
Company, Duke Energys international chemical joint
venture, since December 2004. From April 2002 until December
2004, Mr. Long served as Vice President and Treasurer of
DEFS. From April 1, 2000 until April 2002, Mr. Long
served as Vice President, Investor Relations of DEFS.
Mr. Long joined Duke Energy in 1979 and served in a variety
of positions in accounting, finance, tax, investor relations and
business development.
Michael S. Richards was elected Vice President, General
Counsel and Secretary of DCP Midstream GP, LLC in September
2005. Mr. Richards was previously Assistant General Counsel
and Assistant Secretary of DEFS since February 2000. He was
previously Assistant General Counsel and Assistant Secretary at
KN Energy, Inc. from December 1997 until he joined DEFS.
Prior to that, he was Senior Counsel and Risk
99
Manager at Total Petroleum (North America) Ltd. from 1994
through 1997. Mr. Richards was previously in private
practice where he focused on securities and corporate finance.
Greg K. Smith was elected Vice President, Business
Development of DCP Midstream GP, LLC in September 2005.
Mr. Smith was previously Vice President, Corporate
Development of DEFS since June 2002. From July 1996 until June
2002, Mr. Smith held several positions at DEFS, including
Commercial Director and Senior Attorney. Mr. Smith was
previously an attorney with El Paso Natural Gas from 1992
until July 1996.
William H. Easter III was elected as a director of
DCP Midstream GP, LLC in November 2005. Mr. Easter is
Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer of
DEFS. Prior to joining DEFS in January 2004, Mr. Easter
served as Vice President of State Government Affairs for
ConocoPhillips from 2002 through 2003. From 1998 to 2002,
Mr. Easter served as General Manager of the Gulf Coast
business unit for Conoco Inc. and from 1992 to 1998 he served as
Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Conoco Jet
Nordic in Stockholm, Sweden. From March 2004 until March 2005,
Mr. Easter served as a director of the general partner of
TEPPCO Partners, L.P.
Paul F. Ferguson, Jr. was elected as a director of
DCP Midstream GP, LLC in November 2005. Mr. Ferguson was a
director of the general partner of TEPPCO Partners, L.P. from
October 2004 until his resignation in 2005. Mr. Ferguson
was a member of the Compensation, Audit and special committees
of the general partner of TEPPCO Partners, L.P. He was elected
Chairman of the audit committee in October 2004. He served as
Senior Vice President and Treasurer of Duke Energy from June
1997 to June 1998, when he retired. Mr. Ferguson served as
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of PanEnergy
Corp. from September 1995 to June 1997. He held various other
financial positions with PanEnergy Corp. from 1989 to 1995 and
served as Treasurer of Texas Eastern Corporation from 1988 to
1989.
John E. Lowe was elected as a director of DCP Midstream
GP, LLC in November 2005. Mr. Lowe is Executive Vice
President, Planning, Strategy and Corporate Affairs of
ConocoPhillips. He has responsibility for planning and strategic
transactions, emerging businesses, government affairs and
communications. Mr. Lowe previously served as Senior Vice
President, Corporate Strategy and Development and was
responsible for the forward strategy, development opportunities
and public relations functions of Phillips Petroleum Company. He
was named to this position in 2001 after serving as Senior Vice
President of Planning and Strategic transactions in 2000 and
Vice President of Planning and Strategic Transactions in 1999.
Lowe currently serves on the board of directors for Chevron
Phillips Chemical Company, DEFS, the Houston Museum of Natural
Science and the National Association of Manufacturers. He is a
certified public accountant.
Milton Carroll was elected as a director of DCP Midstream
GP, LLC in December 2005. Mr. Carroll is chairman of
CenterPoint Energy, Inc., a Houston-based gas and electric
utility where he has served as a director since 1992.
Mr. Carroll is founder and chairman of Instrument Products,
Inc., an oil-tool manufacturing company in Houston, Texas. He
also serves as chairman of Healthcare Service Corporation and a
director of Eagle Global Logistics, Inc. At various times from
1985 to 2005, he served on the boards of PanEnergy Corp., the
Federal Reserve Bank of Houston and Dallas, Devon Energy
Corporation, the general partner of TEPPCO Partners, L.P., and
as chairman of both the Houston Endowment Foundation and the
Texas Southern University Board of Regents. He is also a former
Port Commissioner of the Port of Houston Authority.
Derrill Cody was elected as a director of DCP Midstream
GP, LLC in December 2005. Mr. Cody is presently of counsel
to the law firm of Tomlinson & OConnell in
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma since December 1, 2005. Prior to
that he was of counsel to the law firm of McKinney &
Stringer, P.C., in Oklahoma City from 1990. Mr. Cody
served as executive vice president of Texas Eastern Corporation
and chairman and chief executive officer of Texas Eastern Gas
Pipeline Company in Houston, Texas. Prior to joining Texas
Eastern in 1986, Mr. Cody held executive roles with both
Kerr McGee Corporation and Texas Gas Resources Corporation prior
to its merger with CSX Corporation. Mr. Cody currently
serves on the board of CenterPoint Energy, Inc. and the board of
regents of Seminole State College. He also previously served on
the boards of the general partner of TEPPCO Partners, L.P.;
Plains Petroleum Company from 1990 until its merger with Barrett
Resources Corporation in 1995; and Barrett Resources Corporation
from 1995 to 2001.
100
Frank A. McPherson was elected as a director of DCP
Midstream GP, LLC in December 2005. Mr. McPherson retired
as chairman and chief executive officer from Kerr McGee
Corporation in 1997 after a
40-year
career with the company. Mr. McPherson was chairman and
chief executive officer of Kerr McGee from 1983 to 1997. Prior
to that he served in various capacities in management of Kerr
McGee. Mr. McPherson joined Kerr McGee in 1957.
Mr. McPherson serves on the boards of Integris Health, Tri
Continental Corporation, Seligman Group of Mutual Funds, and
several non-profit organizations in Oklahoma. He previously
served on the boards of ConocoPhillips, Kimberly Clark
Corporation, MAPCO Inc., Bank of Oklahoma, the Federal Reserve
Bank of Kansas City, the Oklahoma State University Foundation
Board of Trustees and the American Petroleum Institute.
Thomas C. Morris was elected as a director of DCP
Midstream GP, LLC in December 2005. Mr. Morris is currently
retired, having served 34 years with Phillips Petroleum
Company. Mr. Morris served in various capacities with
Phillips, including vice president and treasurer and
subsequently senior vice president and chief financial officer
from 1994 until his retirement in 2001. Mr. Morris served
as vice chairman of the board of OK Mozart, is a former member
of the executive board of the American Petroleum Institute
finance committee and a former member of the Business
Development Council of Texas A&M University.
Michael J. Panatier was elected as a director of DCP
Midstream GP, LLC in December 2005. Mr. Panatier served as
a director of DEFS from March 2000 until his resignation in
August 2002 and was vice chairman of the board of DEFS through
2001. Mr. Panatier held several executive roles at Phillips
Petroleum Company and its subsidiaries, including executive vice
president of refining, marketing and transportation through
2002, senior vice president of gas processing and marketing from
1998 until 2000, and president and chief executive officer of
GPM Gas Corporation from 1994 until 2000.
Section 16(a)
Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
requires DCP Midstream GP, LLCs directors and executive
officers, and persons who own more than 10% of any class of our
equity securities to file with the SEC and the New York Stock
Exchange initial reports of ownership and reports of changes in
ownership of our common units and our other equity securities.
Specific due dates for those reports have been established, and
we are required to report herein any failure to file reports by
those due dates. Directors, executive officers and greater than
10% unitholders are also required by SEC regulations to furnish
us with copies of all Section 16(a) reports they file.
To our knowledge, based solely on a review of the copies of
reports furnished to us and written representations that no
other reports were required during the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2005, all Section 16(a) filing
requirements applicable to such reporting persons were complied
with except that Mr. Bradley filed a late Form 4
reporting the disposition of 19 common units to our employees,
officers
and/or board
members for the issuance of commemorative common unit
certificates associated with our initial public offering and
each of Messrs. Mogg, Long, Richards, Smith, Easter,
Ferguson, and Lowe filed a late Form 4 and each of
Messrs. Carroll, Cody, McPherson, Morris and Panatier filed
an amended Form 3, all reporting the acquisition of one
commemorative common unit issued as part of our initial public
offering. In addition Messrs. Bradley, Long, Richards,
Smith, Ferguson, Carroll, Cody, McPherson, Morris and Panatier
filed a late Form 4 reporting the acquisition of phantom
units in January 2006 under our Long-Term Incentive Plan.
Audit
Committee
The board of directors of DCP Midstream GP, LLC has a standing
audit committee. The audit committee is composed of three
directors, Paul Ferguson, Frank McPherson and Thomas Morris,
each of whom is able to understand fundamental financial
statements and at least one of whom has past experience in
accounting or related financial management experience. The board
has determined that each member of the audit committee is
independent under Section 303A.02 of the New York Stock
Exchange listing standards and Section 10A(m)(3) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. In making the
independence determination, the board considered the
requirements of the New York Stock Exchange and our Code of
Business Ethics. Among other factors, the board considered
current or previous employment with the Partnership, its
101
auditors or their affiliates by the director or his immediate
family members, ownership of our voting securities, and other
material relationships with the Partnership. The audit committee
has adopted a charter, which has been ratified and approved by
the board of directors.
With respect to material relationships, the following
relationships are not considered to be material for purposes of
assessing independence: service as an officer, director,
employee or trustee of, or greater than five percent beneficial
ownership in (a) a supplier to the partnership if the
annual sales to the partnership are less than one percent of the
sales of the supplier; (b) a lender to the partnership if
the total amount of the partnerships indebtedness is less
than one percent of the total consolidated assets of the lender;
or (c) a charitable organization if the total amount of the
partnerships annual charitable contributions to the
organization are less than three percent of that
organizations annual charitable receipts.
Mr. Ferguson has been designated by the board as the audit
committees financial expert meeting the requirements
promulgated by the SEC and set forth in Item 401(h) of
Regulation S-K
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 based upon his education
and employment experience as more fully detailed in
Mr. Fergusons biography set forth above.
Special
Committee
The board of directors of our General Partner has a standing
special committee, which is comprised of four directors, Frank
McPherson, Milton Carroll, Paul Ferguson and Thomas Morris. The
special committee will review specific matters that the board
believes may involve conflicts of interest. The special
committee will determine if the resolution of the conflict of
interest is fair and reasonable to us. The members of the
special committee may not be officers or employees of our
General Partner or directors, officers or employees of its
affiliates. Each of the members of the special committee meet
the independence and experience standards established by the New
York Stock Exchange and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended. Any matters approved by the special committee will be
conclusively deemed to be fair and reasonable to us, approved by
all of our partners, and not a breach by our General Partner of
any duties it may owe us or our unitholders.
Compensation
Committee
The board of directors of our General Partner has a standing
compensation committee, which is composed of six directors, Jim
Mogg, Milton Carroll, Derrill Cody, William Easter, Frank
McPherson and Michael Panatier. The compensation committee
oversees compensation decisions for the officers of our general
partner and administers the long-term incentive plan, selecting
individuals to be granted equity-based awards from among those
eligible to participate. The compensation committee has adopted
a charter, which has been ratified and approved by the board of
directors.
Code of
Business Ethics
We have adopted a Code of Business Ethics applicable to the
persons serving as our directors, officers (including without
limitation, the chief executive officer, chief financial officer
and principal accounting officer) and employees, which includes
the prompt disclosure to the SEC of a current report on
Form 8-K
of any waiver of the code for executive officers or directors
approved by the board of directors. A copy of our Code of
Business Ethics is available free of charge in print to any
unitholder who sends a request to the office of the Secretary of
DCP Midstream Partners, LP at 370
17th Street,
Suite 2775, Denver, Colorado 80202. The Code of Business
Ethics is also posted on our website at
www.dcppartners.com.
Communications
by Unitholders
Unitholders may communicate with any and all members of our
board by transmitting correspondence by mail or facsimile
addressed to one or more directors by name or to the chairman of
the board at the following address and fax number; Name of the
Director(s),
c/o Secretary,
DCP Midstream Partners, LP, 370
17th Street,
Suite 2775, Denver, Colorado 80202.
102
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation.
|
Executive
Compensation
The aggregate amount of base compensation paid to the Named
Executive Officers for services rendered to us for the period
from December 7, 2005, the date of our initial public
offering, through December 31, 2005 was approximately
$55,000.
Our General Partner and DCP Midstream GP, LLC were formed in
August 2005. Accordingly, DCP Midstream GP, LLC has not accrued
any obligations with respect to management incentive or
retirement benefits for its directors and officers for the 2004
or 2005 fiscal years. Our General Partner currently has nine
employees including the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief
Financial Officer, the general counsel, a senior business
development executive and support staff. The officers and
employees of our General Partner may participate in employee
benefit plans and arrangements sponsored by DEFS. Our General
Partner has not entered into any employment agreements with any
of its officers. The board of directors granted awards to our
key employees and our outside directors pursuant to the
Long-Term Incentive Plan in January 2006.
Compensation
of Directors
On February 8, 2006, the board of directors of our General
Partner approved a compensation package for directors who are
not officers or employees of affiliates of the General Partner
(Non-Employee Directors). Members of the board who
are also officers or employees of affiliates of our General
Partner do not receive additional compensation for serving on
the board. The board approved the payment to each Non-Employee
Director of an annual compensation package containing the
following: (i) a $35,000 retainer; (ii) a board
meeting fee of $1,000 for each board meeting attended;
(iii) a telephonic board meeting fee of $500 for each
telephonic meeting attended; (iv) an initial grant of 2,000
phantom units, under the Partnerships Long-Term Incentive
Plan, that represent an approximate equivalent value of common
units representing limited partnership interests in the
Partnership; and (v) following the first year, an annual
grant of 1,000 phantom units, under the Partnerships
Long-Term Incentive Plan, that represent an approximate
equivalent value of common units representing limited
partnership interests in the Partnership. The grant of phantom
units will vest ratably over three years. In addition, the Chair
of the audit committee of the board will receive an annual
retainer of $20,000 and the members of the audit committee will
receive $1,500 for each audit committee meeting attended. The
Chair of the special committee of the Board will likewise
receive an annual retainer of $20,000 and the members of the
special committee will receive $1,000 for each special committee
meeting attended. Finally, the members of the compensation
committee will receive $1,000 for each compensation committee
meeting attended. Such directors will also be reimbursed for
out-of-pocket
expenses in connection with attending meetings of the board of
directors and committees. Each director will be fully
indemnified by us for his actions associated with being a
director to the fullest extent permitted under Delaware law.
Long-Term
Incentive Plan
A complete description of our long-term incentive plan is
incorporated herein by reference to Note 2 of the
accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included
in Item 8 of this
Form 10-K.
103
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Unitholder Matters.
|
The following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of our
units and the related transactions held by:
|
|
|
|
|
each person who beneficially owns 5% or more of our outstanding
units as of February 17, 2006;
|
|
|
|
all of the directors of DCP Midstream GP, LLC;
|
|
|
|
each Named Executive Officer of DCP Midstream GP, LLC; and
|
|
|
|
all directors and Named Executive Officers of DCP Midstream GP,
LLC as a group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
Total Common and
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
Subordinated
|
|
|
Subordinated
|
|
|
Subordinated
|
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
Common Units
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
Units
|
|
|
|
Beneficially
|
|
|
Beneficially
|
|
|
Beneficially
|
|
|
Beneficially
|
|
|
Beneficially
|
|
Name of Beneficial
Owner(1)
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Duke Energy Field Services, LLC(2)
|
|
|
7,143
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
7,142,857
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
40.0
|
%
|
DCP LP Holdings, LP(3)
|
|
|
7,143
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
7,142,857
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
40.0
|
%
|
Williams, Jones &
Associates, Inc.(4)
|
|
|
911,500
|
|
|
|
8.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.8
|
%
|
Jim W. Mogg
|
|
|
13,001
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Michael J. Bradley
|
|
|
15,081
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Thomas E. Long
|
|
|
22,501
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Michael S. Richards
|
|
|
1,501
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Greg K. Smith
|
|
|
5,001
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
William H. Easter III
|
|
|
3,501
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Paul F. Ferguson, Jr.
|
|
|
1,001
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
John E. Lowe
|
|
|
10,001
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Milton Carroll
|
|
|
3,001
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Derrill Cody
|
|
|
15,001
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Frank A. McPherson
|
|
|
5,001
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Thomas C. Morris
|
|
|
5,001
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Michael J. Panatier
|
|
|
5,001
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
All directors and executive
officers as a group (13 persons)
|
|
|
104,593
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Less than 1%. |
|
(1) |
|
Unless otherwise indicated, the address for all beneficial
owners in this table is 370 17th Street, Suite 2775,
Denver, Colorado 80202. |
|
(2) |
|
Duke Energy Field Services is the ultimate parent company of DCP
LP Holdings, LP and may, therefore, be deemed to beneficially
own the units held by DCP LP Holdings, LP. Duke Energy Field
Services disclaims beneficial ownership of all of the units
owned by DCP LP Holdings, LP. The address of Duke Energy Field
Services is 370 17th Street, Suite 2500, Denver,
Colorado 80202. |
|
(3) |
|
The address of DCP LP Holdings, LP is 370 17th Street,
Suite 2500, Denver, Colorado 80202. |
|
(4) |
|
As set forth in a Schedule 13G filed on January 18,
2006. The address of Williams, Jones & Associates, Inc.
is 717 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York 10022. |
104
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The following table summarizes information about our equity
compensation plan as of December 31, 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Weighted-
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
|
Securities to be
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining Available for
|
|
|
|
Issued upon
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Future Issuance under
|
|
|
|
Exercise of
|
|
|
of Outstanding
|
|
|
Equity Compensation
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Options,
|
|
|
Plans (Excluding
|
|
|
|
Options, Warrants
|
|
|
Warrants and
|
|
|
Securities Reflected in
|
|
|
|
and Rights(1)
|
|
|
Rights
|
|
|
Column(a))
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved
by unitholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans not
approved by unitholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The long-term incentive plan currently permits the grant of
awards covering an aggregate of 850,000 units. For more
information on our long-term incentive plan, which did not
require approval by our limited partners, refer to Item 11.
Executive Compensation Long-Term Incentive Plan. |
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions.
|
Distributions
and Payments to our General Partner and its Affiliates
The following table summarizes the distributions and payments to
be made by us to our General Partner and its affiliates in
connection with our formation, ongoing operation, and
liquidation. These distributions and payments are determined by
and among affiliated entities and, consequently, are not the
result of arms-length negations.
|
|
|
Formation
Stage:
|
|
|
The consideration received by our
General Partner and its affiliates for the contribution of the
assets and liabilities
|
|
7,143
common units;
7,142,857 subordinated units;
2% general partner interest in DCP Midstream GP,
LP;
The incentive distribution rights; and
$8.6 million cash payment from the proceeds of
the offering and borrowings under our new credit facility, in
part to reimburse them for certain capital expenditures.
|
105
|
|
|
Operational Stage:
|
|
|
Distributions of available cash to
our General Partner and its affiliates
|
|
We will generally make cash
distributions 98% to the unitholders and 2% to our General
Partner. In addition, if distributions exceed the minimum
quarterly distribution and other higher target levels, our
General Partner will be entitled to increasing percentages of
the distributions, up to 50% of the distributions above the
highest target level.
For the period from December 7, 2005, the date of our
initial public offering, through December 31, 2005, we made
a prorated distribution of $0.095 per unit to our
unitholders, including DEFS and its affiliates. Assuming we have
sufficient available cash to pay the full minimum quarterly
distribution on all of our outstanding units for four quarters,
our general partner and its affiliates would receive an annual
distribution of approximately $0.5 million on the 2%
general partner interest and approximately $10.0 million on
their common units and subordinated units.
|
Payments to our General Partner
and its affiliates
|
|
We reimburse DEFS and its
affiliates up to $4.8 million per year for the provision of
various general and administrative services for our benefit. For
further information regarding the reimbursement, please see the
Omnibus Agreement section
below.
|
Withdrawal or removal of our
General Partner
|
|
If our General Partner withdraws
or is removed, its general partner interest and its incentive
distribution rights will either be sold to the new general
partner for cash or converted into common units, in each case
for an amount equal to the fair market value of those interests.
|
Liquidation
Stage:
|
|
|
Liquidation
|
|
Upon our liquidation, the
partners, including our General Partner, will be entitled to
receive liquidating distributions according to their respective
capital account balances.
|
Omnibus
Agreement
The employees supporting our operations are employees of DEFS.
We are required to reimburse DEFS for salaries of operating
personnel and employee benefits as well as capital expenditures,
maintenance and repair costs and taxes. DEFS also provides
centralized corporate functions on our behalf, including legal,
accounting, cash management, insurance administration and claims
processing, risk management, health, safety and environmental,
information technology, human resources, credit, payroll,
internal audit, taxes and engineering. DEFS records the accrued
liabilities and prepaid expenses for most general and
administrative expenses in its financial statements, including
liabilities related to payroll, short and long-term incentive
plans, employee retirement and medical plans, paid time off,
audit, tax, insurance and other service fees. Our share of those
costs has been allocated based on our proportionate net
investment (consisting of property, plant and equipment, net,
equity method investment, and intangible assets, net) compared
to DEFS net investment. In managements estimation,
the allocation methodologies used are reasonable and result in
an allocation to us of our costs of doing business borne by DEFS.
Upon the closing of our initial public offering, we entered into
an Omnibus Agreement with DEFS, our General Partner and others
that addresses the following matters:
|
|
|
|
|
our obligation to reimburse DEFS the payment of operating
expenses, including salary and benefits of operating personnel,
it incurs on our behalf in connection with our business and
operations;
|
106
|
|
|
|
|
our obligation to reimburse DEFS for providing us general and
administrative services with respect to our business and
operations, which is capped at a maximum of $4.8 million,
subject to an increase for 2007 and 2008 based on increases in
the Consumer Price Index and subject to further increases in
connection with expansions of our operations through the
acquisition or construction of new assets or businesses with the
concurrence of our special committee;
|
|
|
|
our obligation to reimburse DEFS for insurance coverage expenses
it incurs with respect to our business and operations and with
respect to director and officer liability coverage;
|
|
|
|
DEFS obligation to indemnify us for certain liabilities
and our obligation to indemnify DEFS for certain liabilities;
|
|
|
|
DEFS obligation to continue to maintain its credit
support, including without limitation guarantees and letters of
credit, for our obligations related to derivative financial
instruments, such as commodity price hedging contracts, to the
extent that such credit support arrangements are in effect as of
the closing of our initial public offering until the earlier to
occur of the fifth anniversary of the closing of our initial
public offering or such time as we obtain an investment grade
credit rating from either Moodys Investor Services, Inc.
or Standard & Poors Ratings Group with respect to
any of our unsecured indebtedness; and
|
|
|
|
DEFS obligation to continue to maintain its credit
support, including without limitation guarantees and letters of
credit, for our obligations related to commercial contracts with
respect to our business or operations that are in effect at the
closing of our initial public offering until the expiration of
such contracts.
|
Our General Partner and its affiliates will also receive
payments from us pursuant to the contractual arrangements
described below under the caption Contracts with
Affiliates.
Any or all of the provisions of the Omnibus Agreement, other
than the indemnification provisions described below, will be
terminable by DEFS at its option if our General Partner is
removed without cause and units held by our General Partner and
its affiliates are not voted in favor of that removal. The
Omnibus Agreement will also terminate in the event of a change
of control of us, our General Partner or the general partner of
our General Partner.
Reimbursement
of Operating and General and Administrative
Expense
Under the Omnibus Agreement we reimburse DEFS for the payment of
certain operating expenses and for the provision of various
general and administrative services for our benefit with respect
to the assets contributed to us at the closing of our initial
public offering. The Omnibus Agreement provides that we will
reimburse DEFS for our allocable portion of the premiums on
insurance policies covering our assets.
Pursuant to these arrangements, DEFS performs centralized
corporate functions for us, such as legal, accounting, treasury,
insurance administration and claims processing, risk management,
health, safety and environmental, information technology, human
resources, credit, payroll, internal audit, taxes and
engineering. We will reimburse DEFS for the direct expenses to
provide these services as well as other direct expenses it
incurs on our behalf, such as salaries of operational personnel
performing services for our benefit and the cost of their
employee benefits, including 401(k), pension and health
insurance benefits.
Competition
None of DEFS nor any of its affiliates, including Duke Energy
and ConocoPhillips, is restricted, under either our partnership
agreement or the Omnibus Agreement, from competing with us. DEFS
and any of its affiliates, including Duke Energy and
ConocoPhillips, may acquire, construct or dispose of additional
midstream energy or other assets in the future without any
obligation to offer us the opportunity to purchase or construct
those assets.
107
Indemnification
Under the Omnibus Agreement, DEFS will indemnify us for three
years after the closing of our initial public offering against
certain potential environmental claims, losses and expenses
associated with the operation of the assets and occurring before
the closing date of our initial public offering. DEFS
maximum liability for this indemnification obligation does not
exceed $15 million and DEFS does not have any obligation
under this indemnification until our aggregate losses exceed
$250,000. DEFS has no indemnification obligations with respect
to environmental claims made as a result of additions to or
modifications of environmental laws promulgated after the
closing date of our initial public offering. We have agreed to
indemnify DEFS against environmental liabilities related to our
assets to the extent DEFS is not required to indemnify us.
Additionally, DEFS will indemnify us for losses attributable to
title defects, retained assets and liabilities (including
preclosing litigation relating to contributed assets) and income
taxes attributable to pre-closing operations. We will indemnify
DEFS for all losses attributable to the postclosing operations
of the assets contributed to us, to the extent not subject to
DEFS indemnification obligations. In addition, DEFS has
agreed to indemnify us for up to $5.3 million of our pro
rata share of any capital contributions required to be made by
us to Black Lake associated with any repairs to the Black Lake
pipeline that are determined to be necessary as a result of the
currently ongoing pipeline integrity testing occurring from 2005
through 2007. DEFS has also agreed to indemnify us for up to
$4.0 million of the costs associated with any repairs to
the Seabreeze pipeline that are determined to be necessary as a
result of the scheduled pipeline integrity testing occurring in
2006 and 2007.
Contracts
with Affiliates
We charge transportation fees, sell a portion of our residue gas
and NGLs to, and purchase raw natural gas and NGLs from, DEFS,
ConocoPhillips, and their respective affiliates. Management
anticipates continuing to purchase and sell these commodities to
DEFS, ConocoPhillips and their respective affiliates in the
ordinary course of business.
Natural
Gas Gathering and Processing Arrangements
We have a fee-based contractual relationship with
ConocoPhillips, which includes multiple contracts, pursuant to
which ConocoPhillips has dedicated all of its natural gas
production within an area of mutual interest to our Ada, Minden
and PELICO systems under multiple agreements that have terms of
up to five years and are market based. These agreements provide
for the gathering, processing and transportation services at our
Ada and Minden gathering and processing systems and the PELICO
system. At our Ada gathering and processing system, we collect
fees from ConocoPhillips for gathering and compressing the
natural gas from the wellhead or receipt point and processing
the natural gas at the Ada processing plant. At our Minden
gathering and processing system, we purchase natural gas from
ConocoPhillips at the wellhead or receipt point, transport the
wellhead natural gas through our gathering system, treat and
process the natural gas, and then sell the resulting residue
natural gas and NGLs at index prices based on published index
market prices. At our PELICO system, we collect fees for
compression and transportation services. Please read
Business Natural Gas Services
Segment Customers and Contracts and
DCP Midstream Partners, LP Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements Agreements and Transactions with
Affiliates.
One of these arrangements is set forth in a natural gas
gathering agreement dated June 1, 1987, as amended, between
DEFS Assets Holding, LP (successor to the interest of
Cornerstone Natural Gas Company) and ConocoPhillips (successor
to interest of Phillips Petroleum Company). We succeeded to the
rights and obligations of DEFS Assets Holding, LP under this
agreement upon the closing of our initial public offering.
Pursuant to this agreement, we receive gathering and compression
fees from ConocoPhillips with respect to natural gas produced by
ConocoPhillips that we gather and compress in our Ada gathering
system from wells located in a designated area of mutual
interest located in northern Louisiana covering approximately
54 square miles. The fees we receive are based on market
rates for these types of services. To date, ConocoPhillips has
108
drilled and connected approximately 145 wells to our Ada
gathering system pursuant to this contract. This agreement
expires in 2011.
Merchant
Arrangements
Under our merchant arrangements, we use a subsidiary of DEFS
(Duke Energy Field Services Marketing, LP) as our agent to
purchase natural gas from third parties at pipeline interconnect
points, as well as residue gas from our Minden and Ada
processing plants, and then resell the aggregated natural gas
primarily to third parties. In the case of certain industrial
end-user customers, from time to time we may sell aggregated
natural gas to a subsidiary of DEFS which in turn would resell
natural gas to these customers. Under these arrangements, we
expect that this subsidiary of DEFS would make a profit on these
sales. We also have entered into a contractual arrangement with
a subsidiary of DEFS (Duke Energy Field Services Marketing, LP)
that provides that DEFS will purchase natural gas and transport
it into our PELICO system where we will buy the gas from DEFS at
their weighted average cost plus a contractually agreed to
marketing fee. In addition, for a significant portion of the gas
that we sell out of our PELICO system, we have entered into a
contractual arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS that provides
that DEFS will purchase that natural gas from us and transport
it to a sales point at a price equal to their net weighted
average sales price less a contractually agreed to marketing
fee. We also sell our NGLs at the Minden processing plant to a
subsidiary of DEFS (Duke Energy NGL Services, LP) who then
transports the NGLs on the Black Lake pipeline. We have also
entered into a fixed price natural gas purchase arrangement with
a third party customer. In connection with this third party
arrangement, we have also entered into a financial hedging
arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS (Duke Energy Field
Services Marketing, LP). Under this hedging arrangement, we have
reduced the fixed price risk related to the third party
arrangement. These arrangements will settle in March 2006.
Through October 2005, we had a condensate sales agreement with
TEPPCO Partners L.P. where we sold substantially all of our
condensate to them under a market-based agreement. In February
2005, DEFS sold its interest in TEPPCO Partners L.P. and as such
the revenues are no longer accounted for as affiliate
transactions. Please read DCP Midstream Partners, LP Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements Agreements
and Transactions with Affiliates.
Transportation
Arrangements
Effective December 2005, we entered into a contractual
arrangement with a subsidiary of DEFS (Duke Energy NGL Services,
LP) that provided that the DEFS subsidiary will pay us to
transport NGLs on our Seabreeze pipeline pursuant to a fee-based
rate that will be applied to the volumes transported. This
fee-based contract, as amended, is a
17-year
transportation agreement expiring in 2022. Under this agreement,
we are required to reserve sufficient capacity in the Seabreeze
pipeline to ensure our ability to accept up to
38,000 Bbls/d of NGLs tendered by the DEFS subsidiary each
day prior to utilizing the excess capacity for our own use or
for that of any third parties, and the DEFS subsidiary is
required to tender all NGLs processed at certain plants that it
owns, controls or otherwise has an obligation to market for
others. DEFS historically is also the largest shipper on the
Black Lake pipeline, primarily due to the NGLs delivered to it
from our Minden processing plant. Please read DCP
Midstream Partners, LP Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements Agreements and Transaction with
Affiliates.
Hedging
Arrangements
We have entered into long-term natural gas and crude oil swap
contracts whereby we receive a fixed price for natural gas and
crude oil and we pay a floating price. DEFS has issued
guarantees to our counterparties in these transactions. With
this credit support, we have more favorable collateral terms
than we would have otherwise received. For more information
regarding our hedging activities and credit support provided by
DEFS, please read Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Quantitative and Qualitative
Disclosures about Market Risk Commodity Price
Risk Hedging Strategies and
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations Liquidity
and Capital Resources.
109
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accounting Fees and Services.
|
The following table presents fees for professional services
rendered by Deloitte & Touche LLP
(Deloitte), our principal accountant, for the audit
of our financial statements for the year ended December 31,
2005, and the fees billed for other services rendered by
Deloitte during the year:
|
|
|
|
|
Type of Fees
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Audit Fees(a)
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
Audit-Related Fees
|
|
$
|
|
|
Tax Fees
|
|
$
|
|
|
All Other Fees
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fees
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Audit Fees are fees billed by Deloitte for professional services
for the audit of our consolidated financial statements included
in our annual report on
Form 10-K
and review of financial statements included in our quarterly
reports on
Form 10-Q,
services that are normally provided by Deloitte in connection
with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements or any
other service performed by Deloitte to comply with generally
accepted auditing standards and include comfort and consent
letters in connection with Securities and Exchange Commission
filings and financing transactions. |
Audit
Committee Pre-Approval Policy
The audit committee pre-approves all audit and permissible
non-audit services provided by the independent auditors on a
case-by-case
basis. These services may include audit services, audit-related
services, tax services and other services. The audit committee
does not delegate its responsibilities to pre-approve services
performed by the independent auditor to management or to an
individual member of the audit committee. The audit committee
may, however, from time to time delegate its authority to the
audit committee Chairman, who reports on the independent auditor
services approved by the Chairman at the next audit committee
meeting.
110
Part IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules.
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
Financial Statement Schedules.
|
DCP
MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP
SCHEDULE II CONSOLIDATED VALUATION AND
QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS AND RESERVES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charged to
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of
|
|
|
Statements of
|
|
|
Deductions/
|
|
|
Statements of
|
|
|
Balance at End
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Operations
|
|
|
of Period
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
December 31,
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
Environmental
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Other(a)
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
Environmental
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other(a)
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
Environmental
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other(a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
1.4
|
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Principally consists of other contingency liabilities which are
included in other current liabilities. |
A list of exhibits required by Item 601 of
Regulation S-K
to be filed as part of this report:
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
1
|
.1**
|
|
Underwriting Agreement, dated
December 1, 2005 among Duke Energy Field Services, LLC, DCP
Midstream Partners, LP, DCP Midstream GP, LP, DCP Midstream GP,
LLC, DCP Midstream Operating, LP and Lehman Brothers Inc. and
Citigroup Global Markets Inc. as representatives of the several
underwriters named therein.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
.1**
|
|
Amended and Restated Limited
Partnership Agreement of DCP Midstream Partners, LP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
.2**
|
|
First Amended and Restated Limited
Partnership Agreement of DCP Midstream GP, LP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
.3**
|
|
First Amended and Restated Limited
Liability Company Agreement of DCP Midstream GP, LLC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
.1**
|
|
Omnibus Agreement, dated
December 7, 2005, among Duke Energy Field Services, LLC,
DCP Midstream GP, LLC, DCP Midstream GP, LP, DCP Midstream
Partners, LP and DCP Midstream Operating, LP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
.2**
|
|
DCP Midstream Partners, LP
Long-Term Incentive Plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.3**
|
|
Contribution, Conveyance and
Assumption Agreement, dated December 7, 2005, among DCP
Midstream Partners, LP, DCP Midstream Operating, LP, DCP
Midstream GP, LLC, DCP Midstream GP, LP, Duke Energy Field
Services, LLC, DEFS Holding 1, LLC, DEFS Holding, LLC, DCP
Assets Holdings, LP, DCP Assets Holdings GP, LLC, Duke Energy
Guadalupe Pipeline Holdings, Inc., Duke Energy NGL Services, LP,
DCP LP Holdings, LP and DCP Black Lake Holdings, LLC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
.4**
|
|
Credit Agreement, dated
December 7, 2005, between DCP Midstream Operating, LP and
Wachovia Bank, National Association, as administrative agent for
the lenders named therein.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
.5*
|
|
Natural Gas Gathering Agreement,
dated June 1, 1987, as amended, between DEFS Assets
Holding, LP, successor to the interest of Cornerstone Natural
Gas Company and ConocoPhillips, successor to the interest of
Phillips Petroleum Company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
List of Subsidiaries of DCP
Midstream Partners, LP.
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Incorporated by reference from DCP Midstream Partners, LP
Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 18, 2005 (File
No. 333-128378). |
|
** |
|
Incorporated by reference from DCP Midstream Partners, LP
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
December 12, 2005 (File
No.001-32678). |
|
|
|
Portions of this exhibit have been omitted pursuant to a request
for confidential treatment. |
112
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly
caused this Report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the City of Denver,
State of Colorado, on March 1, 2006.
DCP Midstream Partners, LP
its General Partner
|
|
|
|
By:
|
DCP Midstream GP, LLC
|
its General Partner
|
|
|
|
By:
|
/s/ Michael J. Bradley
|
Name: Michael J. Bradley
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer
POWER OF
ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS that each person whose
signature appears below constitutes and appoints Michael J.
Bradley as his true and lawful
attorney-in-fact
and agent, with full power of substitution and resubstitution,
for him or in his name, place, and stead, in any and all
capacities, to sign any and all amendments (including
post-effective amendments) to this annual report, and to file
the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in
connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, granting unto said
attorney-in-fact
and agent full power and authority to do and perform each and
every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in
connection therewith, as fully to all intents and purposes as he
might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all
that said
attorney-in-fact
and agent or their or his substitute or substitutes, may
lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this Report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ Michael J.
Bradley
Michael
J. Bradley
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer
and Director
(Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas E. Long
Thomas
E. Long
|
|
Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Patrick J. Welch
Patrick
J. Welch
|
|
Vice President and Controller
(Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Jim W. Mogg
Jim
W. Mogg
|
|
Chairman of the Board
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
113
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ William H.
Easter III
William
H. Easter III
|
|
Director
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Paul F.
Ferguson, Jr.
Paul
F. Ferguson, Jr.
|
|
Director
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John E. Lowe
John
E. Lowe
|
|
Director
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Milton Carroll
Milton
Carroll
|
|
Director
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Derrill Cody
Derrill
Cody
|
|
Director
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Frank A.
McPherson
Frank
A. McPherson
|
|
Director
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thomas C. Morris
Thomas
C. Morris
|
|
Director
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Michael J.
Panatier
Michael
J. Panatier
|
|
Director
|
|
March 1, 2006
|
114
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
1
|
.1**
|
|
Underwriting Agreement, dated
December 1, 2005 among Duke Energy Field Services, LLC, DCP
Midstream Partners, LP, DCP Midstream GP, LP, DCP Midstream GP,
LLC, DCP Midstream Operating, LP and Lehman Brothers Inc. and
Citigroup Global Markets Inc. as representatives of the several
underwriters named therein.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
.1**
|
|
Amended and Restated Limited
Partnership Agreement of DCP Midstream Partners, LP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
.2**
|
|
First Amended and Restated Limited
Partnership Agreement of DCP Midstream GP, LP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
.3**
|
|
First Amended and Restated Limited
Liability Company Agreement of DCP Midstream GP, LLC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
.1**
|
|
Omnibus Agreement, dated
December 7, 2005, among Duke Energy Field Services, LLC,
DCP Midstream GP, LLC, DCP Midstream GP, LP, DCP Midstream
Partners, LP and DCP Midstream Operating, LP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
.2**
|
|
DCP Midstream Partners , LP
Long-Term Incentive Plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
.3**
|
|
Contribution, Conveyance and
Assumption Agreement, dated December 7, 2005, among DCP
Midstream Partners, LP, DCP Midstream Operating, LP, DCP
Midstream GP, LLC, DCP Midstream GP, LP, Duke Energy Field
Services, LLC, DEFS Holding 1, LLC, DEFS Holding, LLC, DCP
Assets Holdings, LP, DCP Assets Holdings GP, LLC, Duke Energy
Guadalupe Pipeline Holdings, Inc., Duke Energy NGL Services, LP,
DCP LP Holdings, LP and DCP Black Lake Holdings, LLC.
|
|
10
|
.4**
|
|
Credit Agreement, dated
December 7, 2005, between DCP Midstream Operating, LP and
Wachovia Bank, National Association, as administrative agent for
the lenders named therein.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
.5*
|
|
Natural Gas Gathering Agreement,
dated June 1, 1987, as amended, between DEFS Assets
Holding, LP, successor to the interest of Cornerstone Natural
Gas Company and ConocoPhillips, successor to the interest of
Phillips Petroleum Company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
List of Subsidiaries of DCP
Midstream Partners, LP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Incorporated by reference from DCP Midstream Partners, LP
Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement on
Form S-1
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 18, 2005 (File
No. 333-128378). |
|
** |
|
Incorporated by reference from DCP Midstream Partners, LP
Form 8-K
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
December 12, 2005 (File No.
001-32678). |
|
|
|
Portions of this exhibit have been omitted pursuant to a request
for confidential treatment. |
115