Item 1 and 2. BUSINESS AND PROPERTIES
Overview
BP Midstream Partners LP is a Delaware limited partnership formed on May 22, 2017 by BP Pipelines, an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of BP, a “foreign private issuer” within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. On October 30, 2017, the Partnership completed its initial public offering (the "IPO") of common units representing limited partner interests.
We are a fee-based, growth-oriented master limited partnership formed by BP Pipelines, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of BP, to own, operate, develop and acquire pipelines and other midstream assets. Partnership assets consist of interests in entities that own crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent pipelines and refined product terminals serving as key infrastructure for BP and other customers to transport onshore crude oil production to BP’s Whiting Refinery and offshore crude oil and natural gas production to key refining markets and trading and distribution hubs. Certain Partnership assets deliver refined products and diluent from the Whiting Refinery and other U.S. supply hubs to major demand centers.
Merger Transactions
Take Private Proposal
On August 4, 2021, the board of directors of BP Midstream Partners GP LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and the general partner of our Partnership (the “General Partner”) received a non-binding preliminary proposal letter from BP Pipelines, through its wholly-owned subsidiary BP Midstream Partners Holdings LLC, to acquire all of our issued and outstanding common units not already owned by BP Pipelines or its affiliates at a to-be-determined fixed exchange ratio.
Merger Agreement
On December 19, 2021, BP Midstream Partners LP, BP Midstream Partners GP LLC, BP p.l.c., BP Midstream Partners Holdings LLC, (“Holdings”), and BP Midstream RTMS LLC (“Merger Sub”), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”), pursuant to which Merger Sub will merge with and into the Partnership, with the Partnership surviving as an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of BP (the “Merger”).
Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, at the effective time of the Merger, (i) each outstanding common unit other than those owned by BP and its subsidiaries (each, a “Public Common Unit”) will be converted into the right to receive 0.575 BP American Depositary Shares (“ADSs”) each representing six ordinary shares of BP (the “Merger Consideration” and such ratio, the “Exchange Ratio”). In connection with the Merger, (i) any partnership interests that are owned by the Partnership or any of the Partnership’s subsidiaries will be cancelled; and (ii) the common units owned by Parent and its subsidiaries, the General Partner’s general partner interest and the incentive distribution rights in the Partnership will not be cancelled, will not be converted into the right to receive Merger Consideration and will remain outstanding following the Merger.
The Partnership has entered into a Support Agreement, dated as of December 19, 2021 (the “Support Agreement”), with Holdings, pursuant to which Holdings has irrevocably and unconditionally agreed to deliver a written consent covering all of the common units beneficially owned by it in favor of the Merger, the approval of the Merger Agreement and the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement and any other matter necessary or desirable for the consummation of the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement (the “Support Written Consent”), within two business days following the effectiveness of the registration statement.
Registration Statement
A registration statement on Form F-4 registering 165,164,448 shares of BP Ordinary Shares, which will be issued in the form of American depositary shares, each representing six BP Ordinary Shares (“BP ADSs”), to effectuate such acquisition of Public Common Units was filed by BP on January 31, 2022, as amended (Registration No. 333-262425) (the “Registration Statement”) and declared effective by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) on March 4, 2022. Completion of the transaction is expected in the second quarter, subject to customary closing conditions. Upon completion, the Partnership Common Units will cease to be listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) and will be subsequently deregistered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. For more information, see the risks and uncertainties discussed in Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to the Merger in this Annual Report.
Businesses and Assets
As of December 31, 2021, the Partnership's assets consisted of the following:
•BP Two Pipeline Company LLC, which owns the BP#2 crude oil pipeline system (“BP2”).
•BP River Rouge Pipeline Company LLC, which owns the Whiting to River Rouge refined products pipeline system (“River Rouge”).
•BP D-B Pipeline Company LLC, which owns the Diamondback diluent pipeline system (“Diamondback”). BP2, River Rouge, and Diamondback together are referred to as the "Wholly Owned Assets".
•28.5% ownership interest in Mars Oil Pipeline Company, LLC (“Mars”), which owns a major corridor crude oil pipeline system in the Gulf of Mexico.
•65% ownership interest and 100% managing member interest in Mardi Gras Transportation System Company, LLC (“Mardi Gras”), which holds the following investments in joint ventures located in the Gulf of Mexico:
•56% ownership interest in Caesar Oil Pipeline Company, LLC (“Caesar”),
•53% ownership interest in Cleopatra Gas Gathering Company, LLC (“Cleopatra”),
•65% ownership interest in Proteus Oil Pipeline Company, LLC (“Proteus”), and,
•65% ownership interest in Endymion Oil Pipeline Company, LLC (“Endymion”). Together Endymion, Caesar, Cleopatra and Proteus are referred to as the “Mardi Gras Joint Ventures.”
•22.7% ownership interest in Ursa Oil Pipeline Company, LLC ("Ursa").
•25% ownership interest in KM Phoenix Holdings, LLC ("KM Phoenix").
The Partnership generates a majority of revenue by charging fees for the transportation of crude oil, refined products and diluent through pipelines under long-term agreements with minimum volume commitments (“MVC”). We do not engage in the marketing and trading of any commodities. All operations are conducted in the United States, and all long-lived assets are located in the United States. Partnership operations consist of one reportable segment.
Certain Partnership businesses are subject to regulation by various authorities including, but not limited to, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC"). Regulatory bodies exercise statutory authority over matters such as common carrier tariffs, construction, rates and ratemaking and agreements with customers.
Organizational Structure
The following simplified diagram depicts our organizational structure as of December 31, 2021.
____________________
(1) The remainder of Mardi Gras is held 34% by BP Pipelines and 1% by an affiliate of BP.
(2) The Partnership’s interest in Mardi Gras is a managing member interest that provides us with the right to vote 100% of Mardi Gras' ownership interest in the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures.
Our Assets and Operations
The table below sets forth certain information regarding our assets as of December 31, 2021:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Entity/Asset | | Product Type | | Our
Ownership
Interest | | | | BP Pipelines
Retained
Ownership
Interest | | Pipeline
Length
(Miles) | | Capacity
(kbpd)(1) | | | | Contract Structure | | |
| BP2 | | Crude | | 100.0 | % | | | | — | | | 12 | | | 475 | | | | | MVCs/FERC tariff Long term contract | | (3) | |
| River Rouge | | Refined Products | | 100.0 | % | | | | — | | | 244 | | | 80 | | | | | MVCs/FERC tariff Long term contract | | (3) | |
| Diamondback | | Diluent | | 100.0 | % | | | | — | | | 42 | | | 135 | | | | | MVCs/FERC tariff/
Long term contract | | (3) | |
| Mars | | Crude | | 28.5 | % | | | | — | | | 163 | | | 400 | | | (2) | | | FERC and state
tariffs/Lease
dedication; Portion
with guaranteed return | |
|
| Mardi Gras(4): | | | | 65.0 | % | | (5) | | | 35.0 | % | | | | | | | | | | |
| Caesar | | Crude | | 36.4 | % | | | | 19.6 | % | | 115 | | | 450 | | | | | Lease dedication | | |
| Cleopatra | | Natural Gas | | 34.5 | % | | | | 18.5 | % | | 115 | | | 500 | | | | | Lease dedication | | |
| Proteus | | Crude | | 42.3 | % | | | | 22.7 | % | | 70 | | | 425 | | | | | Lease dedication | | |
| Endymion | | Crude | | 42.3 | % | | | | 22.7 | % | | 90 | | | 425 | | | | | Lease dedication | | |
| Ursa | | Crude | | 22.7 | % | | | | — | | | 47 | | | 150 | | | | | Joint tariff | | |
| KM Phoenix | | Storage | | 25.0 | % | | | | — | | | | | | | | | Commercial agreements | | |
________________________
(1)The approximate capacity information presented is in kbpd with the exception of the approximate capacity related to Cleopatra gas gathering system, which are presented in MMscf/d. Pipeline capacities are based on current operations and vary depending on the specific products being transported and delivery point, among other factors.
(2)Represents Mars capacity of the approximately 54 mile segment from the connections to Ursa, Medusa and Olympus pipelines at the West Delta 143 platform complex to Fourchon, Louisiana where Mars has a connection with Amberjack pipeline for ultimate delivery to Clovelly, Louisiana. The capacity of the Mars pipeline system ranges from 100 kbpd to 600 kbpd depending on the pipeline segment and the type of crude oil transported.
(3)BP has historically been the sole shipper on BP2 and River Rouge. Substantially all of our revenue on BP2, Diamondback and River Rouge is supported by commercial agreements with BP Products.
(4)Our ownership interest and BP Pipelines’ and its affiliates’ retained ownership interest in each of Caesar, Cleopatra, Proteus and Endymion represents 65% and 35%, respectively, of the 56%, 53%, 65% and 65% ownership interests in such Mardi Gras Joint Ventures, respectively, held by Mardi Gras.
(5)Our 65% interest in Mardi Gras includes a managing member interest that provides us with the right to vote Mardi Gras’ retained ownership interest in the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures.
Onshore Crude Oil, Refined Products and Diluent Pipelines
Offshore Crude Oil and Natural Gas Pipelines
Our Commercial Agreements with BP
Minimum Volume Commitment Agreements
Our onshore assets provide vital movements to and from, and are integral to the operation of, BP’s Whiting Refinery. We have commercial agreements with BP Products for our onshore pipelines that include minimum volume commitments and support substantially all of our aggregate revenue on BP2, River Rouge and Diamondback. Under these fee-based agreements, we provide transportation services to BP Products, and BP Products has committed to pay us for minimum volumes of crude oil, refined products and diluent, regardless of whether such volumes are physically shipped by BP Products through our pipelines during the term of the agreements.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Pipeline | | Period | | Annual Minimum
Throughput Commitment (kbpd)* |
| BP2 | | 2021 | | 300 |
| | 2022 | | 290 |
| | 2023 | | 280 |
| River Rouge | | 2021 - 2023 | | 60 |
| Diamondback | | Q3 2017 - Q2 2022 | | 23 |
| | 2021 - 2023 | | 10 |
* Transportation fee rate is the posted tariff.
Under each of our throughput and deficiency, or “minimum volume commitment,” agreements, BP Products is obligated to throughput certain minimum volumes of crude oil, refined products and diluent on our onshore pipelines and pay the applicable tariff rates with respect to such volumes.
The following sets forth additional information regarding each of our minimum volume commitment agreements:
BP2 Throughput and Deficiency Agreement. Under this agreement, if BP Products fails to transport its minimum throughput volume on our BP2 pipeline from Griffith, Indiana to the Whiting Refinery during any month through December 31, 2023, then BP Products will pay us a deficiency payment equal to the volume of the deficiency multiplied by the contractual rate, which is calculated based on the applicable tariff rate then in effect (the “Deficiency Payment”). The amount of any deficiency payment paid by BP Products under this agreement may be applied as a credit for any volumes transported on our BP2 pipeline in excess of BP Products’ minimum volume commitment during the calendar year in which such credits arose, after which time any unused credits will expire.
River Rouge Throughput and Deficiency Agreement. Under this agreement, if BP Products fails to transport its minimum throughput volume on River Rouge from Whiting, Indiana to various terminals along the pipeline during any month through December 31, 2023, then BP Products will pay us a Deficiency Payment. The amount of any deficiency payment paid by BP Products under this agreement may be applied as a credit for any volumes transported on River Rouge in excess of BP Products’ minimum volume commitment during the calendar year in which such credits arose, after which time any unused credits will expire.
Diamondback Throughput and Deficiency Agreements. Under this agreement, if BP Products fails to transport its minimum throughput volume on our Diamondback pipeline from Gary, Indiana to Manhattan, Illinois during any month through December 31, 2023, then BP Products will pay us, during such period, a deficiency payment. The amount of any Deficiency Payment paid by BP Products under this agreement may be applied as a credit for any volumes transported on our Diamondback pipeline in excess of BP Products’ minimum volume commitment during the calendar year in which such credits arose, after which time any unused credits will expire.
In addition, we are a party to one throughput and deficiency agreement with BP Products and one dedication agreement with a third party for Diamondback. The dedication agreement with a third party on Diamondback automatically renewed in 2021 and will now expire in June 2022. This contract is subject to successive one-year renewal periods at the election of the parties. The throughput and deficiency agreement for Diamondback automatically renewed in 2021 and will now expire in June 2022.
Termination of Throughput and Deficiency Agreements. BP Products has the right to terminate these agreements if we fail to perform any of our material obligations and fail to correct such non-performance within specified periods, or in the event of a change of control of our general partner.
BP Products is not permitted to suspend or reduce its obligations under these agreements in connection with the shutdown of the Whiting Refinery for any reason other than certain force majeure events, including for scheduled maintenance or other regular servicing or maintenance.
Under these agreements, if a force majeure event occurs and renders us or BP Products unable to meet our respective obligations under the agreement and continues for 365 consecutive days or more, then the party not claiming non-performance due to such force majeure event shall have the right to terminate the agreement on no less than 30 days’ prior written notice to the other party.
Right of First Offer
We have entered into an omnibus agreement with BP Pipelines under which BP Pipelines granted us a ROFO, for a period ending on the earlier of (i) seven years after the IPO or (ii) the date on which BP Pipelines or its affiliates cease to control our general partner. Pursuant to the ROFO, BP Pipelines has agreed and will cause its affiliates to agree that if BP Pipelines or any of its affiliates decide to attempt to sell (other than to another affiliate of BP Pipelines) BP Pipelines’ retained ownership interest in Mardi Gras and all of BP Pipelines’ interests in midstream pipeline systems and assets related thereto in the contiguous United States and offshore Gulf of Mexico that were owned by BP Pipelines at the closing of the IPO (the “Subject Assets”), BP Pipelines or its affiliate will notify us of its desire to sell such Subject Assets and, prior to selling such Subject Assets to a third party, will allow us 45 days from such notice to make a binding written offer regarding such Subject Assets. In addition to BP Pipelines’ retained ownership interest in Mardi Gras, the assets subject to our ROFO include three crude oil and natural gas liquid pipeline systems with an aggregate gross length of approximately 1,550 miles and an aggregate gross capacity of approximately 1,800 kbpd and nine refined products pipeline systems with an aggregate gross length of approximately 1,940 miles and an aggregate gross capacity of approximately 620 kbpd, as of December 31, 2021.
The consideration to be paid by us for the Subject Assets, as well as the consummation and timing of any acquisition by us of those assets, would depend upon, among other things, the timing of BP Pipelines’ decision to sell those assets and our ability to successfully negotiate a price and other mutually agreeable purchase terms for those assets. Refer to Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business—If we are unable to make acquisitions on economically acceptable terms from BP or third parties, our future growth would be limited, and any acquisitions we may make may reduce, rather than increase, our cash flows and ability to make distributions to unitholders.
Payment of Administrative Fee and Reimbursement of Expenses
Under the omnibus agreement, we pay BP Pipelines an administrative fee annually (payable in equal monthly installments), to reimburse BP Pipelines and its affiliates for the provision of certain general and administrative services for our benefit, including services related to the following areas: executive management services; financial management and administrative services (such as treasury and accounting); information technology services; legal services; health, safety and environmental services; land and real property management services; human resources services; procurement services; corporate engineering services; business development services; investor relations, communications and external affairs; insurance administration and tax related services.
Under this agreement, we also reimburse BP Pipelines and its affiliates for all other direct or allocated costs and expenses incurred by BP Pipelines in providing these services to us, including personnel costs related to the direct operation, management, maintenance and repair of the assets. This reimbursement is in addition to our reimbursement of our general partner and its affiliates for certain costs and expenses incurred on our behalf for managing and controlling our business and operations as required by our partnership agreement.
We paid our Parent an annual fee of $15.5 million, $14.0 million and $13.6 million in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively, under the omnibus agreement.
Our general partner, in good faith, may adjust the administrative fee to reflect, among others, any change in the level or complexity of our operations, a change in the scope or cost of services provided to us, inflation or a change in law or other regulatory requirements, the contribution, acquisition or disposition of our assets or any material change in our operation activities.
Customers
BP is our primary customer. Total revenue from BP represented 98.0%, 97.8%, and 97.7% of our revenues in the years
ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. BP’s volumes represented approximately 95.8%, 95.2% and 95.1% of the aggregate total volumes transported on the Wholly Owned Assets for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively.
In addition, we transport crude oil, natural gas and diluent for a mix of third-party customers, including crude oil producers, refiners, marketers and traders, and Partnership assets are connected to other crude oil, natural gas and diluent pipeline systems. In addition to serving directly connected Midwestern U.S. and Gulf Coast markets, our pipelines have access to customers in various regions of the United States and Canada through interconnections with other major pipelines. Our customers use our transportation services for a variety of reasons. Producers of crude oil require the ability to deliver their product to market and frequently enter into firm transportation contracts to ensure that they will have sufficient capacity available to deliver their product to delivery points with greatest market liquidity. Marketers and traders generate income from buying and selling crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent to capitalize on price differentials over time or between markets. Our customer mix can vary over time and largely depends on the crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent supply and demand dynamics in our markets.
Competition
Our pipelines face competition from a variety of alternative transportation methods including rail, water borne movements including barging and shipping, trucking and other pipelines that service the same markets as our pipelines. Our terminals compete for throughput and storage opportunities in the geographic areas in which they operate.
Competition for refined products in the Midwest is affected by supply and demand. Supply is driven by the volume of products produced by refineries in that area, the availability of products to get transported to the area and the cost of transportation to that area from other geographies. As a result of our affiliate relationships and the scope and scale of our refined products pipeline system, we believe that our refined product pipeline will not face significant new competition in the near-term.
Even though our offshore lines are supported by fee-based life-of-lease transportation agreements, our offshore pipelines compete for new production on the basis of geographic proximity to the production, cost of connection, available capacity, transportation rates and access to onshore markets. The principal competition for our offshore pipelines includes other crude oil and natural gas pipeline systems as well as producers who may elect to build or utilize their own transportation assets, although the barrier to new entrants is high due to the cost and environmental permitting required. In addition, the ability of our offshore pipelines to access future reserves will be subject to our ability, or the producers’ ability, to fund the significant capital expenditures required to connect to the new production. In general, except for Mars, our offshore pipelines are not currently subject to regulatory rate-making authority, and the rates our offshore pipelines charges for services are dependent on market and economic conditions.
We also face increased indirect competition from alternative energy sources, such as wind or solar power, and these alternative energy sources could become even more competitive as various states and the federal government develop renewable energy and climate related policies, including taking actions to restrict the production of oil and gas.
FERC and Common Carrier Regulations
Our common carrier pipeline systems are subject to regulation by various federal, state and local agencies.
FERC regulates interstate transportation on our common carrier refined products, diluent, and crude oil pipeline systems under the ICA as modified by the Elkins Act, the EPAct and the rules and regulations promulgated under those laws. FERC regulations require that rates and terms and conditions of service for interstate service pipelines that transport crude oil, refined products and diluent (collectively referred to as “petroleum pipelines”) and certain other liquids, be just and reasonable and must not be unduly discriminatory or confer any undue preference upon any shipper. FERC’s regulations also require interstate common carrier petroleum pipelines to file with FERC and publicly post tariffs stating their interstate transportation rates and terms and conditions of service. Failure to comply with the requirements of the ICA could result in the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
Under the ICA, FERC or interested persons may challenge either existing or proposed new or changed rates, services, or terms and conditions of service. FERC is authorized to investigate such charges and may suspend the effectiveness of a new rate for up to seven months. Under certain circumstances, FERC could limit a common carrier pipeline’s ability to charge rates until completion of an investigation during which FERC could find that the new or changed rate is unlawful. In contrast, FERC has clarified that initial rates and terms of service agreed upon with committed shippers in a transportation services agreement
are not subject to protest or a cost-of-service analysis where the pipeline held an open season offering all potential shippers service on the same terms.
A successful rate challenge could result in a common carrier pipeline paying refunds of revenue collected in excess of the just and reasonable rate, together with interest for the period, if any, that the rate was in effect. FERC may also order a pipeline to reduce its rates prospectively and may require a common carrier pipeline to pay shippers reparations retroactively for rate overages for a period of up to two years prior to the date the complaint was filed. FERC also has the authority to require changes to a pipeline's terms and conditions of service if it determines that they are unjust or unreasonable or unduly discriminatory or preferential. We may at any time also be required to respond to governmental requests for information, including compliance audits conducted by FERC.
The EPAct required FERC to establish a simplified and generally applicable methodology to adjust tariff rates for inflation for interstate petroleum pipelines. As a result, FERC adopted an indexing rate methodology which, as currently in effect, allows common carriers to change their rates within prescribed ceiling levels that are tied to changes in the Producer’s Price Index for Finished Goods (“PPI-FG”). The indexing methodology is applicable to existing rates, with the exclusion of market-based rates. FERC’s indexing methodology is subject to review every five years. On December 17, 2020, in Docket No. RM20-14-000, FERC issued an order establishing a new index level of PPI-FG plus 0.78% for the five-year period commencing July 1, 2021 ("December 2020 Order"). Requests for rehearing of the December 2020 Order were filed with FERC. On January 20, 2022, FERC issued an order on rehearing that reverses its December 2020 Order on the five-year review of the oil pipeline rate index. FERC lowered the index from PPI-FG plus 0.78% to PPI-FG minus 0.21%. The rehearing order also directs oil pipelines to recompute their rate ceiling levels for July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, based upon the index of PPI-FG minus 0.21%, to be effective March 1, 2022. Additionally, FERC issued a notice that adjusts the annual change in the oil pipeline rate index for the period July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022, to implement the PPI-FG minus 0.21% index, explaining that oil pipelines must multiply their July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021 index ceiling levels by positive 0.984288 to recompute their July 1, 2021 through June 30, 2022 index ceiling levels.
We cannot predict whether or to what extent the index factor may change in the future. A pipeline is not required to raise its rates up to the index ceiling, but it is permitted to do so. Rate increases made under the index are presumed to be just and reasonable and require a protesting party to demonstrate that the portion of the rate increase resulting from application of the index is substantially in excess of the pipeline’s increase in costs. Despite these procedural limits on challenging the indexing of rates, the overall rates are not entitled to any specific protection against rate challenges. Under the indexing rate methodology, in any year in which the index is negative, pipelines must file to lower their rates if those rates would otherwise be above the rate ceiling. Many existing pipelines, including BP2, River Rouge, Diamondback, and Mars, utilize the FERC oil index to change transportation rates annually every July 1.
While common carrier pipelines often use the indexing methodology to change their rates, common carrier pipelines may elect to support proposed rates by using other methodologies such as cost-of-service ratemaking, market-based rates, and settlement rates. A common carrier pipeline can propose a cost-of-service approach when seeking to increase its rates above the rate ceiling (or when seeking to avoid lowering rates to the reduced rate ceiling), but must establish that a substantial divergence exists between the actual costs experienced by the pipeline and the rates resulting from application of the indexing methodology. A common carrier can charge market-based rates if it establishes that it lacks significant market power in the affected markets. A common carrier can change existing rates under settlement if agreed upon by all current shippers. Initial rates for a new service on a common carrier pipeline can be established through a negotiated rate with an unaffiliated shipper, but if challenged must be supported by a cost of service.
Intrastate services provided by certain of our pipeline systems are subject to regulation by state regulatory authorities, such as the Louisiana Public Service Commission, which currently regulates Mars. State agencies typically require intrastate petroleum pipelines to file their rates with the agencies and permit shippers to challenge existing rates and proposed rate increases. State agencies may also investigate rates, services, and terms and conditions of service on their own initiative. State regulatory commissions could limit our ability to increase our rates or to set rates based on our costs or order us to reduce our rates and require the payment of refunds to shippers.
If our rate levels were investigated by FERC or a state commission, the inquiry could result in an investigation of our costs, including:
•the overall cost of service, including operating costs and overhead;
•the allocation of overhead and other administrative and general expenses to the regulated entity;
•the appropriate capital structure to be utilized in calculating rates;
•the appropriate rate of return on equity and interest rates on debt;
•the rate base, including the proper starting rate base;
•the throughput underlying the rate; and
•the proper allowance for federal and state income taxes.
FERC or a state commission could order us to change our rates, services, or terms and conditions of service or require us to pay shippers reparations, together with interest and subject to the applicable statute of limitations, if it were determined that an established rate, service, or terms and conditions of service were unjust or unreasonable or unduly discriminatory or preferential.
The FERC implements the OCSLA pertaining to transportation and pipeline issues, which requires that all pipelines operating on or across the outer continental shelf provide non-discriminatory transportation service. The Caesar, Ursa, Cleopatra, Proteus, and portions of Endymion and Mars pipelines are located in the Outer Continental Shelf and are subject to the non-discrimination requirements in the OCSLA.
Safety
Our assets are subject to stringent safety laws and regulations. Our transportation of crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent involves a risk that hazardous liquids or flammable gases may be released into the environment, potentially causing harm to the public or the environment. In turn, such incidents may result in substantial expenditures for response actions, significant government penalties, liability to government agencies for natural resources damages, and significant business interruption. PHMSA of DOT has adopted safety regulations with respect to the design, construction, operation, maintenance, inspection and management of our assets. BSEE of DOI has adopted similar regulations for offshore pipelines under its jurisdiction. These regulations contain requirements for the development and implementation of pipeline integrity management programs, which include the inspection and testing of pipelines and necessary maintenance or repairs. These regulations also require that pipeline operation and maintenance personnel meet certain qualifications and that pipeline operators develop comprehensive spill response plans.
Pipeline safety laws and regulations are subject to change over time. Changes in existing laws and regulations could require us to install new or modified safety controls, pursue additional capital projects, or conduct maintenance programs on an accelerated basis, any or all of which could result in our incurring increased operating costs that could be significant and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition. For example, PHMSA issued the Safety of Hazardous Liquids Pipelines final rule on October 1, 2019. This final rule addressed topics such as: inspections of onshore and offshore pipelines following extreme weather events or natural disasters, periodic assessment of pipelines not currently subject to integrity management, expanded use of leak detection systems, increased use of in-line inspection tools, and other requirements. The new PHMSA rule requires operators of onshore pipeline segments that can accommodate in-line inspection (“ILI”) tools that are not currently subject to integrity management requirements to complete assessments using ILI tools at least once every ten years. The new rule also requires that all hazardous liquids pipelines located in high consequence areas (“HCAs”) or areas that could affect HCAs be capable of accommodating ILI tools within 20 years unless certain limited exceptions apply. PHMSA at times issues additional rulemakings related to pipeline safety. For example, in June 2021, PHMSA issued an Advisory Bulletin advising pipeline and pipeline facility operators of applicable requirements to update their inspection and maintenance plans for the elimination of hazardous leaks and minimization of natural gas released from pipeline facilities in accordance with the PIPES Act of 2020. PHMSA, together with state regulators, are expected to commence and complete inspection of these plans in 2022.
For the pipelines we operate (BP2, River Rouge and Diamondback), we monitor the structural integrity of our pipelines through a program of periodic internal assessments using high resolution internal inspection tools, as well as hydrostatic testing that conforms to federal standards. We accompany these assessments with a review of the data and repair anomalies, as required, to ensure the integrity of each pipeline. We compare these inspection and testing results with other inspection data to ensure that the highest risk pipelines receive the highest priority for consideration of additional integrity assessments or repairs. We use external coatings and impressed current cathodic protection systems to protect against external corrosion. We conduct all cathodic protection work in accordance with all state and federal regulations, and we regularly monitor, test, and record the effectiveness of these corrosion inhibiting systems.
Mars, the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures, and Ursa are operated in a similar manner by an affiliate of Shell. KM Phoenix's terminalling assets are operated in a similar manner by an affiliate of Kinder Morgan.
Security
We are subject to the Transportation Security Administration’s Pipeline Security Guidelines, and some of the pipelines have been identified as Critical Infrastructure Assets. Further, the SP 89E platform associated with Proteus is subject to Maritime Transportation Safety Act requirements through the U.S. Coast Guard. We have an internal program of inspection designed to monitor and enforce compliance with all of these requirements. We believe that we are in material compliance with all applicable laws and regulations regarding the security of our facilities.
BP experiences cyber attacks and other attempts to gain unauthorized access to their systems on a regular basis. As we use BP’s systems to support our operations as provided in the omnibus agreement, we are exposed to the same attempts to gain unauthorized access. We may experience future security issues, whether due to employee error or malfeasance or system errors or vulnerabilities in BP’s or other parties’ systems, which could result in significant legal and financial exposure. Government inquiries and enforcement actions, litigation, and adverse press coverage could harm our business. We and BP may be unable to anticipate or detect attacks or vulnerabilities or implement adequate preventative measures. Attacks and security issues could also compromise trade secrets and other sensitive information, harming our business.
On May 27, 2021, the Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration (“TSA”) announced Security Directive Pipeline-2021-01 that requires us, as a critical pipeline owner, to report confirmed and potential cybersecurity incidents to the DHS Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (“CISA”) and to designate a Cybersecurity Coordinator. It also requires BP Pipelines and the third-party operators of our assets to review current practices as well as to identify any gaps and related remediation measures to address cyber-related risks and report the results to TSA and CISA within 30 days. We designated a Cybersecurity Coordinator, developed a plan to comply with mandatory reporting timeframes and completed the vulnerability assessment required under this directive on June 25, 2021. On July 20, 2021, the TSA issued a second Security Directive. We have evaluated the impacts of this second directive to our pipeline business and have made significant progress in compliance.
While BP has dedicated significant resources to security incident response capabilities, including dedicated worldwide incident response teams to protect our systems, BP’s and our response process, particularly during times of a natural disaster or pandemic (including COVID-19), may not be adequate, may fail to accurately assess the severity of an incident, may not respond quickly enough, or may fail to sufficiently remediate an incident. As a result, we may suffer significant legal, reputational, or financial exposure, which could harm our business, financial condition, and operating results.
Environmental Matters
General. Our operations are subject to federal, state and local laws, regulations and ordinances relating to the protection of the environment and natural resources. Among other things, these laws and regulations govern the emission or discharge of pollutants into or onto the land, air and water, the handling and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes and the remediation of contamination. Compliance with existing and anticipated environmental laws and regulations increases our overall cost of business, including our capital costs to construct, maintain, operate and upgrade equipment and facilities. While these laws and regulations affect our maintenance capital expenditures and net income, we believe they do not affect our competitive position, as the operations of our competitors are similarly affected. These laws and regulations are subject to changes, or to changes in the interpretation of such laws and regulations, by regulatory authorities, and continued and future compliance with such laws and regulations may require us to incur significant expenditures. Violation of environmental laws, regulations, and permits can result in the imposition of significant administrative, civil and criminal penalties, injunctions limiting our operations, investigatory or remedial liabilities or construction bans or delays in the construction of additional facilities or equipment. Additionally, a release of hydrocarbons or hazardous substances into the environment could, to the extent the event is not insured, subject us to substantial expenses, including costs to comply with applicable laws and regulations and to resolve claims by third parties for personal injury or property damage, or by the U.S. federal government or state governments for natural resources damages. These impacts could directly and indirectly affect our business and have an adverse impact on our financial position, results of operations, and liquidity. We cannot currently determine the amounts of such future impacts.
Air Emissions. Our operations are subject to the federal Clean Air Act and its regulations and comparable state and local statutes and regulations in connection with air emissions from our operations. Under these laws, permits may be required before construction can commence on a new source of potentially significant air emissions, and operating permits may be required for sources that are already constructed. These permits may require controls on our air emission sources, and we may become subject to more stringent regulations requiring the installation of additional emission control technologies.
We cannot predict the potential impact of climate change legislation and regulations to address air emissions in the United States or of any climate-related litigation on our future consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash
flows. However, changes in laws, regulations, policies and obligations relating to climate change, including carbon pricing, could impact our assets, costs, revenue generation and growth opportunities. Refer to Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business for additional information.
Waste Management and Related Liabilities. To a large extent, the environmental laws and regulations affecting our operations relate to the release of hydrocarbons, hazardous substances or solid wastes into soils, groundwater, and surface water, and include measures to control pollution of the environment. These laws generally regulate the generation, storage, treatment, transportation, and disposal of solid and hazardous waste. They also require corrective action, including investigation and remediation, at a facility where such waste may have been released or disposed.
CERCLA. CERCLA and comparable state laws impose liability, without regard to fault or to 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 the former and present owner or operator of the site where the release occurred and the transporters and generators of the hazardous substances found at the site.
Under CERCLA, these classes of persons may be subject to joint and several 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. In the course of our ordinary operations, we generate waste that falls within CERCLA’s definition of a “hazardous substance” and, as a result, may be jointly and severally liable under CERCLA for all or part of the costs required to clean up sites and any natural resource damages. We also may have similar liabilities under state laws comparable to CERCLA.
RCRA. We also generate solid wastes, including hazardous wastes, that are subject to the requirements of the federal RCRA statute and its implementing regulations, and comparable state statutes. From time to time, the EPA and states consider the adoption of stricter disposal standards for non-hazardous wastes. Hazardous wastes are subject to more rigorous and costly disposal requirements than are non-hazardous wastes. Significant changes in the regulations could increase our maintenance capital expenditures and operating expenses.
Hydrocarbon Wastes. We currently own and lease properties where hydrocarbons are being or for many years have been handled. Over time, hydrocarbons or waste may have been disposed of or released on or under our properties or on or under other locations where hydrocarbons and wastes were taken for disposal. In addition, many of these properties and locations have been operated by third parties whose treatment and disposal or release of hydrocarbons or wastes was not under our control. These properties and hydrocarbons and wastes disposed thereon may be subject to regulation under 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 take actions to prevent further contamination.
Indemnity Under the Omnibus Agreement. Under our omnibus agreement, our Parent will indemnify us for certain environmental liabilities, litigation and other matters attributable to the ownership or operation of our assets prior to our ownership. Indemnification for certain identified environmental liabilities is subject to a cap of $25 million without any deductible. Other matters covered by the omnibus agreement are subject to a cap of $15.0 million and an aggregate deductible of $0.5 million before we are entitled to indemnification. Indemnification for any unknown environmental liabilities was limited to liabilities due to occurrences on or before October 30, 2017, which were identified prior to October 30, 2020. We continue to maintain indemnification by our General Partner for matters previously discovered. To the extent that unknown environmental liabilities arise relating to prior ownership, the Partnership will be liable.
Water. Our operations can result in the discharge of pollutants, including crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent. Regulations under the Clean Water Act, OPA-90 and state laws impose regulatory burdens on our operations. The discharge of pollutants into jurisdictional waters is prohibited, except in accordance with the terms of a permit issued by the EPA, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the “Corps”), or a delegated state agency. We obtain discharge permits as required under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program of the Clean Water Act or state laws as needed for maintenance or hydrostatic testing activities. In addition, the Clean Water Act and analogous state laws require coverage under general permits for discharges of storm water runoff from certain types of facilities.
The transportation of crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent over and adjacent to water involves risk and subjects us to the liability provisions of and certain regulations issued pursuant to OPA-90 and related state requirements.
Among other requirements, OPA-90 requires the owner or operator of a tank vessel or a facility to maintain an emergency plan to respond to releases of oil or hazardous substances. PHMSA and BSEE have promulgated regulations requiring such plans that apply to our onshore and offshore pipelines. With respect to statutory liability, in case of any such release, OPA-90 requires the responsible company to pay resulting removal costs and damages. OPA-90 also provides for civil penalties and imposes criminal sanctions for violations of its provisions. We operate facilities at which releases of oil and hazardous substances could occur. OPA-90 applies joint and several liability, without regard to fault, to each liable party for oil removal costs and a variety of public and private damages. Although defenses exist, they are limited. As such, a violation of the OPA-90 has the potential to adversely affect our operations.
Construction or maintenance of our pipelines may impact “waters of the United States” (“WOTUS”) under the Clean Water Act. A 2015 rule defining the scope of federal jurisdiction over such waters was repealed in December 2019, re-establishing the pre-2015 rule until it was replaced in June 2020 when the EPA’s Navigable Waters Protection Rule ("NWPR"), finalized in January 2020, became effective. The NWPR narrowed the definition of WOTUS relative to the prior 2015 rulemaking. On August 30, 2021, a federal district court vacated the NWPR. On December 7, 2021, the EPA issued a proposed rule revising the definition of WOTUS and proposing to return to the more expansive pre-2015 definition. Additionally, in January 2022, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case on the scope and authority of the Clean Water Act and the definition of WOTUS. If the scope of federal jurisdiction over such waters is revised in the future and expands the range of properties subject to the Clean Water Act’s jurisdiction, certain energy companies could face increased costs and delays with respect to obtaining permits for dredge and fill activities in wetland areas, which in turn could reduce demand for our services. Regulatory requirements governing wetlands or river crossings (including associated mitigation projects) may result in the delay of our pipeline projects while we obtain necessary permits and may increase the cost of new projects and maintenance activities.
Employee Safety. We are subject to the requirements of the OSHA and comparable state statutes that regulate the protection of the health and safety of workers. In addition, the OSHA hazard communication standard requires that information be maintained about hazardous materials used or produced in operations and that this information be provided to employees, state and local government authorities and citizens.
Endangered Species Act. The Endangered Species Act restricts activities that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. While some of our facilities are in areas that may be designated as habitat for endangered species, to date, we have not experienced any material adverse impacts as a result of compliance with the Endangered Species Act. If current or future-listed endangered or threatened species or critical habitat are located in areas of the underlying properties where we wish to conduct development activities associated with construction, such work could be prohibited or delayed or expensive mitigation may be required. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service periodically makes determinations on listing of numerous species as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. The discovery of previously unidentified endangered species or threatened species or the designation and listing of new endangered or threatened species could cause us to incur additional costs or become subject to operating restrictions or bans in the affected area.
National Environmental Policy Act. Major federal actions, such as the issuance of permits associated with construction, can require the completion of certain reviews under the NEPA. NEPA requires federal agencies, including the Corps, to evaluate major agency actions having the potential to significantly impact the environment. The process involves the preparation of either an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement depending on whether the specific circumstances surrounding the proposed federal action will have a significant impact on the human environment. The NEPA process involves public input through comments which can alter the nature of a proposed project either by limiting the scope of the project or requiring resource-specific mitigation. NEPA decisions can be appealed through the court system by process participants. This process may result in delaying the permitting and development of projects, increase the costs of permitting and developing some facilities and could result in certain instances in the abandonment of proposed projects. In July 2020, the Council on Environmental Quality ("CEQ") finalized revisions to update the NEPA regulations. On October 7, 2021, the CEQ published a proposed rule proposing to modify certain aspects of the NEPA regulations to generally restore regulatory provisions that were in existence prior to 2020. A final rule is expected in 2022. The impact of any changes to the NEPA regulations, if adopted, on our pipeline projects is uncertain.
Seasonality
Demand for crude oil, refined products and diluent generally decreases during the spring and fall months and increases during the summer and winter months. However, seasonal anomalies such as mild winters or mild summers sometimes lessen this fluctuation. This can also lessen seasonal demand fluctuations. These seasonal anomalies can increase demand during the summer and winter months and decrease demand during the spring and fall months. In respect of our midstream systems, we do not expect seasonal conditions to have a material impact on our throughput volumes, as many effects of seasonality on our revenue will be substantially mitigated through the use of our fee-based long-term agreements with BP Products that include minimum volume commitments. Severe or prolonged winters may, however, impact our ability to complete maintenance and construction projects, which may impact our revenues and results of operations.
Title to Real Property Interests and Permits
While there are a limited number of fee-owned properties associated with certain of our pipeline assets, substantially all of our pipelines are constructed on rights-of-way granted by the apparent record owners of the property and in some instances these rights-of-way are revocable at the election of the grantor. In many instances, lands over which rights-of-way have been obtained are subject to prior liens that may not have been subordinated to the rights-of-way ("ROW") grants. We have obtained permits from public authorities to cross over or under, or to lay facilities in or along, watercourses, county roads, municipal streets, and state highways and, in some instances, these permits are revocable at the election of the grantor. We have also obtained permits from railroad companies to cross over or under lands or rights-of-way, many of which are also revocable at the grantor’s election. In some states and under some circumstances, we have the right to seek the use of eminent domain power to acquire rights-of-way and lands necessary for our common carrier pipelines.
Insurance
Our assets are either self-insured or insured with third parties for certain property damage, business interruption and third-party liabilities, and such coverage includes sudden and accidental pollution liabilities, in amounts which management believes are reasonable and appropriate, and excludes named windstorm coverage.
Human Capital Resources
Our operations are conducted through, and our assets are owned by, various subsidiaries. However, neither we nor our subsidiaries have any employees. Our general partner has the sole responsibility for providing the personnel necessary to conduct our operations, whether through directly hiring personnel or by obtaining services of personnel employed by BP, BP Pipelines or third parties, but we sometimes refer to these individuals, for drafting convenience only, in this Annual Report as our employees because they provide services directly to us. These operations personnel primarily provide services with respect to the assets we operate: BP2, River Rouge and Diamondback. Mars, the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures, and Ursa are operated by an affiliate of Shell. KM Phoenix is operated by an affiliate of Kinder Morgan. Under the omnibus agreement we are required to reimburse BP for all costs attributable to operating personnel services. A portion of the operations personnel who provide services for our onshore assets are represented by labor unions. We consider our labor relations to be satisfactory and have not experienced any material work stoppages or other material labor disputes within the last five years.
Pipeline Control Operations
BP2, River Rouge, and Diamondback, which are operated by BP Pipelines' employees, are controlled from a central control center located in Tulsa, Oklahoma. A fully functional back-up operations center is also maintained and routinely operated throughout the year with the aim of ensuring safe, reliable, and compliant operations. Mars, the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures, and Ursa are operated in a similar manner by an affiliate of Shell. The KM Phoenix storage and terminalling systems are operated by an affiliate of Kinder Morgan.
Website
Our Internet website address is http://www.bpmidstreampartners.com. Information contained on our Internet website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K, as well as any amendments and exhibits to these reports, filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, are available on our website, free of charge, as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Alternatively, you may access these reports at the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov. We also post on our website our
beneficial ownership reports filed by officers and directors of our general partner, as well as principal security holders, under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, corporate governance guidelines, audit committee charter, code of business conduct and ethics, financial code of ethics and information on how to communicate directly with our general partner’s Board of Directors.
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS
Investing in our limited partner interests involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider all information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K prior to investing in our limited partner interests. In addition to the factors discussed elsewhere in this report, the following risks and uncertainties, some of which have occurred and any of which may occur in the future, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and our ability to pay minimum quarterly distributions to our unitholders may be reduced or the trading price of our units could decline and you could lose all or part of your investment. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Risk Factors Summary
Risks Related to the Merger
Our Merger Agreement. Our stakeholders could be impacted by risks related to the Merger Agreement, including:
•The Merger Agreement is subject to conditions, including some conditions that may not be satisfied on a timely basis, if at all. Failure to complete the Merger, or significant delays in completing the Merger, could negatively affect our business and financial results and the trading prices of our common units.
•We will be subject to business uncertainties while the Merger is pending, which could adversely affect our business.
•Because the Exchange Ratio is fixed and because the market price of the BP ADSs will fluctuate prior to the completion of the Merger, our public unitholders cannot be sure of the market value of the BP ADSs they will receive as Merger Consideration relative to the value of our common units they exchange.
Risks Related to the Partnership’s Business
Results of Operations and Financial Condition. Our operations and financial condition could be impacted by many risks that are beyond our control, including the following:
•fluctuations in the demand for and price of oil, refined products and other commodities;
•the outbreak of COVID-19 and recent geopolitical developments in the crude oil market;
•BP’s transition to an integrated energy company focused on low carbon energy;
•our ability to pay minimum quarterly distributions following the establishment of cash reserves and payment of fees and expenses, including those to our general partner;
•the potential of BP Products’ refusal to enter into new minimum volume commitment agreements or termination of such existing agreements under certain conditions;
•our limited control over certain assets owned through joint ventures;
•our ability to obtain capital or financing on satisfactory terms sufficient to fund future expansions;
•our ability to make acquisitions on economically acceptable terms from BP or third parties;
•the exposure of our operations to risks and operational hazards and the potential of events resulting in business interruption or shutdown;
•our ability to maintain current volumes of crude oil, natural gas, refined products or diluent that we transport and our dependence on third-party pipelines, production platforms, refineries, caverns and other facilities to transport, produce, refine and store such volumes;
•our reliance on BP for a substantial majority of the crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent that we transport;
•a material decrease in the utilization of and/or demand for products or diluent from the Whiting Refinery;
•the impact of hurricanes and other severe weather disruptions to our offshore pipelines in the Gulf of Mexico;
•the expiration of our environmental indemnification notification period with our general partner;
•cybersecurity breaches and other disruptions or failures of our information systems; and
•restrictions involving our credit facility and any future debt we incur.
Regulatory Matters. Our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial conditions, and future growth could be impacted by the following:
•compliance with complex laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment and natural resources, the regulation of energy transportation pipeline safety and occupational health and safety;
•compliance with such laws and regulations may result in considerable costs or other constraints on our operations;
•failure to comply with such requirements may result in substantial fines or may require corrective actions, which could likewise have material effects on our operations;
•although environmental laws and regulations address numerous areas, we are subject to particular risks from new or more stringent requirements relating to pipeline safety and climate change, as well as from potentially restricted access to capital as a result of climate change concerns;
•increasing attention to ESG matters and conservation matters may adversely impact our business; and
•actions by the Biden Administration may limit the amount of production available to deliver through our pipelines.
Risks Inherent in an Investment in Us
Cash Distributions to Unitholders. Our cash distributions could be impacted by the following:
•cash distributions are not guaranteed and may fluctuate with our performance and other external factors;
•our expectation to distribute a significant portion of our cash available for distribution to our partners;
•limitations on cash available for distribution that are imposed by our cash distribution policy and any modifications or revocations of such policy by our general partner.
Our General Partner. Our stakeholders could be impacted by risks related to our general partner, including:
•the potential that our general partner and its affiliates have conflicts of interest with us and limited duties to us;
•substantial cost reimbursements due to our general partner; and
•the limited voting rights of unitholders in matters related to our general partner.
Tax Risks to our Common Unitholders
•our tax treatment depends on our status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, and not being subject to a material amount of entity-level taxation. Our cash available for distribution to unitholders may be substantially reduced if we become subject to entity-level taxation as a result of the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) treating us as a corporation or legislative, judicial or administrative changes, and may also be reduced by any audit adjustments if imposed directly on the partnership;
•even if unitholders do not receive any cash distributions from us, unitholders will be required to pay taxes on their share of our taxable income and a unitholder’s share of our taxable income may be increased as a result of the IRS successfully contesting any of the federal income tax positions we take; and
•tax exempt entities and non-U.S. unitholders face unique tax issues from owning our common units that may result in adverse tax consequences to them.
In addition to the factors discussed elsewhere in this report, the following risks and uncertainties, some of which have occurred and any of which may occur in the future, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Risks Related to the Merger
There are material risks and uncertainties associated with the consummation of the Merger. For a complete discussion of the Partnership’s risks and uncertainties related to the Merger, refer to the risk factors included under the caption “Risk Factors” in the Registration Statement on Form F-4 filed by BP on January 31, 2022 and the following risk factors:
The Merger Agreement is subject to conditions, including some conditions that may not be satisfied on a timely basis, if at all. Failure to complete the Merger, or significant delays in completing the Merger, could negatively affect our business and financial results and the trading prices of our common units.
The completion of the Merger is not assured and is subject to certain risks, including the risk that certain conditions of the Merger Agreement, some of which are beyond are control, are not satisfied or waived, which may prevent, delay or otherwise result in the Merger not occurring. If the Merger is not completed, or if there are significant delays in the Merger, our future business and financial results and the trading price of our common units could be negatively affected.
We will be subject to business uncertainties while the Merger is pending, which could adversely affect our business.
Uncertainty about the effect of the Merger on employees of our general partner and those that do business with us may have an adverse effect on the Partnership. These uncertainties may impair our general partner’s ability to attract, retain and motivate key personnel until the Merger is completed and for a period of time thereafter, and could cause those that transact with us to seek to change their existing business relationships with us.
Because the Exchange Ratio is fixed and because the market price of the BP ADSs will fluctuate prior to the completion of the Merger, our public unitholders cannot be sure of the market value of the BP ADSs they will receive as Merger Consideration relative to the value of our common units they exchange.
The market value of the consideration that our unitholders will receive in the Merger will depend on the trading price of BP ADSs at the closing of the Merger. The Exchange Ratio that determines the number of BP ADSs that our public unitholders will receive in the Merger is fixed at 0.575 BP ADSs for each Partnership common unit. This means that there is no mechanism contained in the Merger Agreement that would adjust the number of BP ADSs that our public unitholders will receive based on any decreases or increases in the trading price of BP ADSs. Stock or unit price changes may result from a variety of factors (many of which are beyond BP’s and the Partnership’s control), including:
•changes in BP’s or the Partnership’s business, operations and prospects;
•changes in market assessments of BP’s or the Partnership’s business, operations and prospects;
•changes in market assessments of the likelihood that the Merger will be completed;
•interest rates, commodity prices, general market, industry and economic conditions and other factors generally affecting the price of BP ADSs or the Partnership’s common units; and
•legislation, governmental regulation and legal developments in the business in which BP and the Partnership operate.
If the price of BP ADSs at the closing of the Merger is less than the price of BP ADSs on the date that the Merger Agreement was signed, then the market value of the Merger Consideration will be less than contemplated at the time the Merger Agreement was signed.
Risks Related to Our Business
Events outside of our control, including a pandemic such as the global outbreak of COVID-19, variants of COVID-19, and the potential global recession could have a material adverse impact on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
In 2020, the COVID-19 outbreak began to spread quickly across the globe. Federal, state and local governments mobilized to implement containment mechanisms and minimize impacts to their populations and economies. In the fourth quarter of 2021, a highly contagious variant of COVID-19, Omicron, was detected in multiple countries. Various containment measures were reinstituted, which included the quarantining of cities, regions and countries. The continued risks associated with COVID-19 have also impacted the BP Pipelines workforce and the methods, protocols, and processes undertaken to meet our business objectives.
The current commodity price environment may continue to fluctuate based on over-supply, decreasing demand and a potential global economic recession. With decreased demand and the storage and transportation constraints further adding to the pressure on commodities prices, refiners may curtailed output. If detection of new variants persist and containment measurers are reinstituted beyond 2022, we could continue to see a significant decline in demand for our services with respect to our onshore pipelines if volumes shipped on such pipelines remain below the existing MVCs. The MVC agreements executed on November 3, 2020 provide downside protection to the Partnership albeit at a lower level than in prior years on BP2 and Diamondback.
In addition, it is possible that volumes may be reduced on our offshore pipelines as well, which are not covered by any MVCs. In the short term, there is risk of decreased volumes with respect to the offshore operations if operators take actions to reduce operations in response to demand declines or increasingly limited storage availability or are unable to control COVID-19 infections on platforms and are required to shut-in. In the longer term, there is risk that our customers cease investing in additional offshore projects in a protracted low commodity price environment, which would harm our growth. Our profitability may be significantly affected by this decreased demand and these factors could lead to reductions in our distributions to unitholders.
In addition, outbreaks of COVID-19 could potentially further impact the BP Pipelines workforce. The infection of key personnel, and/or the infection of a significant amount of the BP Pipelines workforce, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
In addition to the risks stated above, our operations are subject to additional risks related to the current economic environment caused by the factors discussed above, including:
•our debt service requirements and other liabilities, and restrictions contained in our debt agreements;
•our ability to maintain sufficient cash available for distribution following the establishment of cash reserves and payment of fees and expenses, to enable us to pay minimum quarterly distributions to unitholders;
•unavailability of third-party pipelines, production platforms, refineries, caverns and other facilities interconnected to our pipelines to transport, produce, refine or store crude oil, natural gas, refined products or diluent;
•demand for refined products or diluent, continues to decrease; and
•the risk of further adverse changes to BP’s production or development plans, which we are dependent on for a majority of the crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent that we transport
The impacts of COVID-19 and the associated drop in consumer demand for refined products has had an unprecedented impact on the global economy, and the pipelines and refined products transportation sector in particular. We are unable to predict the impacts of these events on the global economy and the demand for our services, and as such, these events could have a material impact on our business, financial condition and results of our operations.
BP’s new business strategy to pivot from being an international oil company focused on producing resources to an integrated energy company focused on delivering solutions for customers may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.
In 2020, BP introduced a new strategy and new business structure, leadership team and core capabilities: operations, customers, low carbon and innovation. As part of this new strategy, BP has publicly disclosed that, within 10 years, BP aims to increase its annual low carbon investment 10-fold, build out an integrated portfolio of low carbon technologies, including renewables, bioenergy and early positions in hydrogen and carbon capture, use and storage. By 2030, BP aims to have developed around 50GW of net renewable generating capacity – a 20-fold increase from 2019 – and to have doubled its consumer interactions to 20 million a day. Over the same period, BP’s oil and gas production is expected to reduce by at least one million barrels of oil equivalent a day, or 40%, from 2019 levels. Its remaining hydrocarbon portfolio is expected to be more cost and carbon resilient.
In 2022, BP provided an update on strategic progress and accelerated its net zero ambition and aims. BP is now aiming to be net zero across operations, production and sales by 2050 or sooner. To accomplish this, BP now aims to reduce operational emissions by 50% by 2030, compared with an aim of 30-35% previously. BP is now also aiming for net zero lifecycle emissions from the energy products it sells by 2050 or sooner – a significant advance from the previous aim of a 50% reduction in their emissions intensity. Additionally, the aim’s scope is expanding to include physically traded sales of energy products. For 2030 bp is aiming for a 15-20% reduction in the lifecycle carbon intensity of these products.
Since we are dependent on BP for a substantial majority of the crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent that we transport, and BP plans to reduce its production of such products, we can offer no assurances that we will be able to effectively or efficiently integrate our operations with BP’s focus on low carbon energy. If we are unable to integrate our business with BP’s strategy, or if execution of such business structure and strategy requires more time than expected, our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders could be adversely affected.
We may not have sufficient cash available for distribution following the establishment of cash reserves and payment of fees and expenses, including cost reimbursements to our general partner and its affiliates, to enable us to pay minimum quarterly distributions to our unitholders.
The amount of cash available for distribution we must generate to support the payment for four quarters of minimum quarterly distributions on our common and subordinated units, outstanding as of December 31, 2021, is $110.0 million (or an average of approximately $27.5 million per quarter). However, we may not generate sufficient cash flows each quarter to enable us to maintain or grow our current distribution level, or to pay minimum quarterly distributions. The amount of cash we can 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, our throughput volumes, tariff rates and fees and prevailing economic conditions. In addition, the actual amount of cash flows we generate will also depend on other factors, some of which are beyond our control, including:
•the amount of our operating expenses and general and administrative expenses, including reimbursements to BP Pipelines and its affiliates with respect to those expenses;
•the amount and timing of capital expenditures and acquisitions we make;
•our debt service requirements and other liabilities, and restrictions contained in our debt agreements;
•fluctuations in our working capital needs;
•decisions made by BP with respect to the levels of production at its refineries that we serve and its obligations under our commercial agreements;
•our entitlements to payments associated with the minimum volume commitments under our commercial agreements with BP Products;
•the amount of cash distributed to us by the entities in which we own a non-controlling interest; and
•the amount of cash reserves established by our general partner.
BP Products is under no obligation to enter into new minimum volume commitment agreements following their respective terms and may terminate its obligations earlier under certain specified circumstances, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
BP Products is under no obligation to enter into new minimum volume commitment agreements following their respective terms. Minimum volume commitment agreements for BP2, River Rouge and Diamondback expire in 2023, with an additional Diamondback minimum volume commitment agreement expiring in 2022. In addition, BP Products has the right to terminate these agreements prior to the end of their terms under certain specified circumstances, including (i) if we fail to perform any of our material obligations and fail to correct such non-performance within specified periods, and (ii) in the event of a change of control of our general partner. Minimum volume commitments under these agreements support a substantial portion of our revenues. As a result, any such termination of BP Products’ obligations could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our unitholders. Please read “Business-Our Commercial Agreements with BP-Minimum Volume Commitment Agreements.”
We own certain assets through joint ventures that we do not operate, and our control of such assets is limited by provisions of the agreements we have entered into with our joint venture partners and by our percentage ownership in such joint ventures.
We own a (i) 28.5% interest in Mars, a joint venture with certain affiliates of Shell that is operated by an affiliate of Shell, (ii) a 65% managing member interest in Mardi Gras, which owns a 56% ownership interest in Caesar, a 53% interest in Cleopatra, a 65% interest in Proteus and a 65% interest in Endymion, each of which is operated by an affiliate of Shell, (iii) 22.7% interest in Ursa, a joint venture with certain affiliates of Shell that is operated by an affiliate of Shell, and (iv) a 25% interest in KM Phoenix Holdings, a joint venture with certain affiliates of Kinder Morgan that is operated by an affiliate of Kinder Morgan. Through our managing member interest in Mardi Gras, we have the right to vote Mardi Gras’ interest in the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures. As we do not operate the assets owned by these joint ventures, our control over their operations is limited by provisions of the agreements we have entered into with our joint venture partners and by our percentage ownership in such joint ventures. Our ability to make distributions to our unitholders depends on the performance of these joint ventures and their ability to distribute funds to us, and we may be unable to control the amount of cash we will receive from their operations, which could adversely affect our unitholders. More specifically:
•We do not control or operate Mars, Ursa, KM Phoenix or the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures and as a result, we only have limited ability to influence the business decisions of such joint venture entities.
•We do not directly control the amount of cash distributed by Mars, Ursa, KM Phoenix or any of the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures. We only influence the amount of cash distributed through our voting rights over the cash reserves made by such joint venture entities.
•We do not have the ability to unilaterally require Mars, Ursa, KM Phoenix or any of the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures to make capital expenditures.
•Our joint ventures may require us to make additional capital contributions to fund operating and maintenance expenses and maintenance capital expenditures, as well as to fund expansion capital expenditures, which would reduce the amount of cash otherwise available for distribution by us or require us to incur additional indebtedness.
In addition, because we have partial ownership in the joint ventures, we can only exercise limited review and perform limited queries into the accounting performed by the operators. We have no control over the actual day-to-day accounting performed by the operator. If our joint venture partners have control deficiencies in their accounting or financial reporting environments, it may result in reporting our percentage of the financial results for the joint venture that are inaccurate. This could result in a material misstatement in our reported consolidated financial results.
If we are unable to obtain needed capital or financing on satisfactory terms to fund any future expansions of our asset base, our ability to make quarterly cash distributions may be diminished or our financial leverage could increase. Other than our revolving credit facility and term loan facility, we do not have any commitment with any of our affiliates or third parties to provide any direct or indirect financial assistance to us.
We will be required to use cash from our operations, incur borrowings or access the capital markets in order to fund any future expansion capital expenditures. As of December 31, 2021, we have $132 million in available borrowings under our revolving credit facility, which terminates on October 31, 2022. The entities in which we own an interest may also incur borrowings or access the capital markets to fund future capital expenditures. Our and their ability to obtain financing or access the capital markets may be limited by our or their financial condition at such time as well as the covenants in our or their debt agreements, general economic conditions and contingencies, or other uncertainties that are beyond our control. The terms of any such financing could also limit our ability to pay distributions to our common unitholders. Incurring additional debt may significantly increase our interest expense and financial leverage, and issuing additional limited partner interests may result in significant common unitholder dilution and increase the aggregate amount of cash required to maintain the then-current distribution rate, which could materially decrease our ability to pay distributions at the then-current distribution rate.
If we are unable to make acquisitions on economically acceptable terms from BP or third parties, our future growth would be limited, and any acquisitions we may make may reduce, rather than increase, our cash flows and ability to make distributions to unitholders.
Our strategy to grow our business and increase distributions to unitholders is dependent in part on our ability to make acquisitions that result in an increase in cash available for distribution per unit. The consummation and timing of any future acquisitions will depend upon, among other things, whether we are able to:
•identify attractive acquisition candidates;
•negotiate acceptable purchase agreements;
•obtain financing for these acquisitions on economically acceptable terms; and
•outbid any competing bidders.
We have a ROFO pursuant to our omnibus agreement that requires BP Pipelines to allow us to make an offer with respect to the Subject Assets, to the extent BP Pipelines elects to sell those assets (other than to another affiliate of BP Pipelines). BP Pipelines is under no obligation to sell the Subject Assets or offer to sell us additional assets, we are under no obligation to buy any additional interests or assets from BP Pipelines and we do not know when or if BP Pipelines will decide to sell the Subject Assets or make any offers to sell assets to us. We may never purchase all or any portion of the assets subject to the ROFO for several reasons, including the following:
•BP Pipelines may choose not to sell the Subject Assets;
•we may not make acceptable offers for the Subject Assets;
•we and BP Pipelines may be unable to agree to terms acceptable to both parties;
•we may be unable to obtain financing to purchase the Subject Assets on acceptable terms or at all; or
•we may be prohibited by the terms of our debt agreements (including our credit facility) or other contracts from purchasing some or all of the Subject Assets, and BP Pipelines may be prohibited by the terms of its debt agreements or other contracts from selling some or all of the Subject Assets. If we or BP Pipelines must seek waivers of such provisions or refinance debt governed by such provisions in order to consummate a sale of the Subject Assets, we or BP Pipelines may be unable to do so in a timely manner or at all.
We can offer no assurance that we will be able to successfully consummate any future acquisitions, whether from BP or any third parties. If we are unable to make future acquisitions, our future growth and ability to increase distributions may be limited. Furthermore, even if we do consummate acquisitions that we believe will be accretive, they may in fact result in a decrease in cash available for distribution per unit as a result of incorrect assumptions in our evaluation of such acquisitions or unforeseen consequences or other external events beyond our control. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, including difficulties in integrating acquired businesses, inefficiencies and unexpected costs and liabilities.
Our operations are subject to many risks and operational hazards. If a significant accident or event occurs that results in a business interruption or shutdown for which we are not adequately insured, our operations and financial results could be materially and adversely affected.
Our operations are subject to all of the risks and operational hazards inherent in transporting crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent, including:
•damages to pipelines, facilities, offshore pipeline equipment and surrounding properties caused by third parties, severe weather, natural disasters, including hurricanes, and acts of terrorism;
•mechanical or structural failures at our or BP Pipelines’ facilities or at third-party facilities on which our customers’ or our operations are dependent, including electrical shortages, power disruptions and power grid failures;
•damages to, loss of availability of and delays in gaining access to interconnecting third-party pipelines, terminals and other means of delivering crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent;
•disruption or failure of information technology systems and network infrastructure due to various causes, including unauthorized access or attack;
•leaks of crude oil, natural gas, refined products or diluent as a result of the malfunction of equipment or facilities;
•unexpected business interruptions;
•curtailments of operations due to severe weather, natural disasters, including hurricanes; acts of terrorism; and
•riots, strikes, lockouts or other industrial disturbances.
For example, on June 13, 2019, a building fire occurred at the Griffith Station on BP2. For additional information, refer to Note 12 - Commitments and Contingencies in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Additionally, the operations of our offshore pipelines were adversely affected by Hurricane Ida, resulting in a reduction of approximately $8 million to $10 million to our cash available for distribution for the year ended December 31, 2021 relative to our financial outlook.
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, as well as business interruptions or shutdowns of our facilities. Any such event or unplanned shutdown could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our profitability and cash flow are dependent on our ability to maintain the current volumes of crude oil, natural gas, refined products or diluent that we transport, which often depend on actions and commitments by parties beyond our control. In order to maintain the volumes transported on our assets, our customers must continually obtain new supplies of crude oil, which is expensive, particularly in offshore Gulf of Mexico.
Our profitability and cash flow are dependent on our ability to maintain the current volumes of crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent that we transport. A decision by BP Products not to enter into new minimum volume commitment agreements following their respective terms, or a decision by BP or another shipper to substantially reduce or cease to ship volumes of crude oil, refined products or diluent on our pipelines could cause a significant decline in our revenues. For example, we recognized approximately $3.0 million and $1.0 million of deficiency revenue under the throughput and deficiency agreements with BP Products with respect to BP2 and Diamondback, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2021. The throughput and deficiency agreement for BP2 expires in December 2023 and contains decreasing volume commitments of 10kbpd per year. The throughput and deficiency agreements for Diamondback expire in June 2022 and December 2023. If volumes on BP2 and Diamondback do not improve or we do not enter into new minimum volume commitment agreements after their expiration, our results will be adversely impacted. Additionally, our minimum volume commitment agreements only support our onshore operations. These agreements terminate at the expiration of their respective terms, and may be terminated earlier under certain specified circumstances, and BP Products is under no obligation to enter into new minimum volume commitment agreements. Please read “Business-Our Commercial Agreements with BP-Minimum Volume Commitment Agreements.”
In addition, although our offshore assets are generally subject to term agreements or life-of-lease agreements, these agreements generally do not contain minimum volume commitments and many do not have annual cost escalation features. The crude oil and natural gas available to us under these agreements are derived from reserves produced from existing wells, and these reserves naturally decline over time. The amount of crude oil reserves underlying wells in these areas may also be less than anticipated, and the rate at which production from these reserves declines may be greater than anticipated. Accordingly, to maintain or increase the volume of crude oil transported, or throughput, on our pipelines and cash flows associated with the transportation of crude oil, our customers must continually obtain new supplies of crude oil. In addition, we will not generate revenue under our life-of-lease agreements that do not include guaranteed rates-of-return to the extent that production in the area we serve declines or is shut in.
Finding and developing new reserves, particularly in offshore Gulf of Mexico, is capital intensive, requiring large expenditures by producers for exploration and development drilling, installing production facilities and constructing pipeline extensions to reach new wells. Many economic and business factors out of our control can adversely affect the decision by any producer to explore for and develop new reserves. These factors include the prevailing market price of the commodity, the
capital budgets of producers, the depletion rate of existing reservoirs, the success of new wells drilled, environmental concerns, regulatory initiatives, cost and availability of equipment, capital budget limitations or the lack of available capital and other matters beyond our control. Additional reserves, if discovered, may not be developed in the near future or at all.
Additionally, the volumes of crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent that we transport depend on the supply and demand for crude oil, gasoline, jet fuel and other refined products in our geographic areas and other factors driving the demand for crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent, including competition from alternative energy sources and the impact of new and more stringent regulations and standards affecting the exploration, production and refining industries.
If new supplies of crude oil and natural gas are not obtained, or if the demand for refined products or diluent decreases significantly, there would likely be a reduction in the volumes that we transport. Any such reduction could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition or cash flows, including our ability to make distributions.
If third-party pipelines, production platforms, refineries, caverns and other facilities interconnected to our pipelines become unavailable to transport, produce, refine or store crude oil, natural gas, refined products or diluent, our revenue and available cash could be adversely affected.
We depend upon third-party pipelines, production platforms, refineries, caverns and other facilities that provide delivery options to and from our pipelines. For example, Mars depends on a natural gas supply pipeline connecting to the West Delta 143 platform to power its equipment and deliver the volumes it transports to salt dome caverns in Clovelly, Louisiana. Additionally, Caesar and Cleopatra do not connect directly to onshore facilities and are dependent upon third-party pipelines for forward shipment onshore. Our onshore pipelines are dependent on interconnections with other pipelines and terminals to transport volumes to and from the Whiting Refinery.
Because we do not own these third-party pipelines, production platforms, refineries, caverns or facilities, their continuing operation is not within our control. For example, production platforms in the offshore Gulf of Mexico may be required to be shut in by the BSEE of the DOI following incidents such as loss of well control. If these or any other pipeline or terminal connection were to become unavailable for current or future volumes of crude oil, refined products or diluent due to repairs, damage to the facility, lack of capacity, shut in by regulators or any other reason, or if caverns to which we connect have cracks, leaks or leaching or require shut-in due to changes in law, our ability to operate efficiently and continue shipping crude oil, natural gas, refined products or diluent to major demand centers could be restricted, thereby reducing revenue. As an additional example, the volumes of crude oil that we transport on our BP2 system and refined products and diluent that we distribute on our River Rouge and Diamondback systems depend substantially on the economics of available crude supply for the Whiting Refinery and the economics for refined products and diluent demand in the markets that the pipelines serve. These economics are affected by numerous factors beyond our control.
Any temporary or permanent interruption at any key pipeline or terminal interconnect, at any key production platform or refinery or at caverns to which we deliver could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition or cash flows, including our ability to make distributions.
Substantially all of the volumes that we transport through our onshore pipelines are dependent on the ongoing operation of the Whiting Refinery. A material decrease in the utilization of and/or demand for refined products or diluent from the Whiting Refinery could materially reduce the volumes of crude oil, refined products or diluent that we handle, which could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
Substantially all of the volumes that we transport through our onshore pipelines are directly or indirectly dependent on the ongoing operation of the Whiting Refinery. For the year ended December 31, 2021, 100% of the volumes that we transported on BP2 and River Rouge were delivered to, or originated from the Whiting Refinery and some of the diluent that Diamondback transported from BP’s Black Oak Junction originated at the Whiting Refinery. Accordingly, any material decrease in the utilization of and/or demand for refined products or diluent from the Whiting Refinery could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
The utilization of the Whiting Refinery is dependent both upon: 1) the price of crude oil or other refinery feedstocks and the price of refined products and diluent and 2) availability of capacity to transport crude and product. Prices are affected by numerous factors beyond our or BP’s control, including the global supply and demand for crude oil, gasoline and other refined products. The availability of capacity to transport crude and products are affected by factors beyond our or BP's control including the availability of capacity to transport Canadian heavy crude from the Alberta oil sands.
In addition to current market conditions, there are long-term factors that may impact the supply and demand of refined products and diluent in the United States. These factors include:
•increased fuel efficiency standards for vehicles;
•more stringent refined products specifications;
•new or changing renewable fuels standards;
•availability of alternative energy sources;
•potential and enacted climate change legislation; and
•increased refining capacity or decreased refining capacity utilization.
If the demand for refined products or diluent, particularly in our primary market areas, decreases significantly, or if there were a material increase in the price of crude oil supplied to the Whiting Refinery without an increase in the value of the products produced by those refineries, either temporary or permanent, which caused production of refined products or diluent to be reduced at the Whiting Refinery, there would likely be a reduction in the volumes of crude oil, refined products and diluent we transport on BP2, River Rouge and Diamondback. Any such reduction could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
Further, the volumes of crude oil that we transport on our BP2 system and refined products and diluent that we distribute on our River Rouge and Diamondback systems depend substantially on the economics of available crude supply for the Whiting Refinery and the economics of refined products and diluent demand in the markets that the pipelines serve. These economics are affected by numerous factors, including maintenance at the Whiting Refinery and apportionment on the Enbridge mainline (which offers all of its capacity on an uncommitted basis), each of which can cause lower throughput on our BP2 system. Volumes are also affected by maintenance and corridor shutdowns due to tie-ins, among other things.
In addition, refineries generally schedule significant maintenance periodically, with additional, less significant maintenance experienced as needed. Maintenance at the Whiting Refinery involve numerous risks and uncertainties. These risks include delays and incurrence of additional and unforeseen costs. The maintenance allows BP to perform upgrades, overhaul and repair of process equipment and materials, during which time a portion of the Whiting Refinery will be under scheduled downtime resulting in a reduced service on our onshore pipelines and as a result, we will generate reduced revenue from the pipelines impacted by such downtime. Further, due to our lack of diversification in assets and geographic location, an adverse development at the Whiting Refinery could have a significantly greater impact on our results of operations and cash available for distribution to our common unitholders than if we maintained more diverse assets and locations.
We are dependent on BP for a substantial majority of the crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent that we transport. If BP changes its business strategy, is unable for any reason, including financial or other limitations, to satisfy its obligations under our commercial agreements or significantly reduces the volumes transported through our pipelines, our revenue would decline and our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and ability to make distributions to our unitholders would be materially and adversely affected.
We are dependent on BP for a substantial majority of the crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent that we transport. Total revenue from BP represented 98.0%, 97.8% and 97.7% of our revenues for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. BP is also a material customer of Mars, Ursa, KM Phoenix and each of the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures. BP’s volumes represented approximately 95.8%, 95.2% and 95.1% of the aggregate total volumes transported on the Wholly Owned Assets for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. BP’s volumes represented approximately 52.9% of the aggregate total pipeline volumes transported on the Wholly Owned Assets, Mars, the Mardi Gras Joint Ventures, and Ursa combined for the year ended December 31, 2021. It is likely that we will continue to derive a significant portion of our revenue from BP. Therefore, any event, whether in our area of operations or otherwise, that adversely affects BP’s production, financial condition, leverage, results of operations or cash flows may adversely affect our ability to sustain or increase cash distributions to our unitholders. Accordingly, we are indirectly subject to the business risks of BP, some of which are the following:
•the volatility of natural gas, NGL and oil prices, which could have a negative effect on the value of BP’s oil and natural gas properties, its drilling programs or its ability to finance its operations;
•the availability of capital on an economic basis to fund BP’s exploration and development activities;
•BP’s ability to replace reserves, sustain production and begin production on certain leases that may otherwise expire;
•uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of natural gas and oil reserves and projecting future rates of production;
BP’s drilling and operating risks, including potential environmental liabilities;
•transportation capacity constraints and interruptions;
•adverse effects of governmental and environmental regulation; and
•losses from pending or future litigation.
As discussed above, BP publicly introduced a new strategy, business structure, leadership team and core capabilities: operations, customers, low carbon and innovation. We can offer no assurances that we will be able to effectively or efficiently integrate our operations with BP’s focus on low carbon energy.
Additionally, BP may suffer a decrease in production volumes in the areas serviced by us and is not obligated to use our services with respect to volumes of crude oil, refined products or diluent in excess of the minimum volume commitments under its commercial agreements with us. Please read “Business-Our Commercial Agreements with BP-Minimum Volume Commitment Agreements.” The loss of a significant portion of the volumes supplied or shipped by BP would result in a material decline in our revenues and our cash available for distribution. For example, we recognized approximately $4.0 million of deficiency revenue under the throughput and deficiency agreements with BP Products with respect to BP2 and Diamondback for the year ended December 31, 2021. Our throughput and deficiency agreement with BP2 will expire December 2023, and our throughput and deficiency agreements with Diamondback will expire June 2021 and December 2023. If volumes on BP2 and Diamondback do not improve or we do not enter into new minimum volume commitment agreements after their expiration, our results will be adversely impacted. In particular, a subsidiary of BP Pipelines owns the BP1 pipeline, which also delivers crude oil from Cushing, Oklahoma to the Whiting Refinery. The capacity of BP1, when combined with BP2’s 475 kbpd current capacity significantly exceeds Whiting Refinery’s nameplate capacity of 430 kbpd. BP Products could choose to ship volumes to Whiting Refinery on BP1 instead of BP2, resulting in a material decline in volumes on BP2. BP may choose to ship on pipelines other than BP2, for example in the case of apportionment on certain pipelines feeding into BP2 or for other commercial reasons.
A shift in our customers’ focus away from our areas of operation could result in reduced throughput on our systems and a material decline in our revenues. For example, a decline in production at the Whiting Refinery could materially reduce the volume of refined products transported on River Rouge. If such declines were to occur or continue during a time at which we did not have a commercial agreement with respect to BP2, Diamondback and River Rouge requiring BP to pay us a fee upon failing to satisfy minimum volume commitments, such a decline could result in a significant reduction in revenues that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
Hurricanes and other severe weather conditions, natural disasters or other adverse events or conditions could damage our pipeline systems or disrupt the operations of our customers, which could adversely affect our operations and financial condition.
The operations of our offshore pipelines could be impacted by severe weather conditions or natural disasters, including hurricanes, or other adverse events or conditions. Additionally, such adverse events or conditions could impact our customers, and they may be unable to utilize our pipeline systems. The susceptibility of our assets to storm damage could be aggravated by wetland and barrier island erosion. In addition, neither we nor the entities in which we own an interest that own these offshore pipeline systems carry named windstorm insurance for any of our offshore pipeline systems. Weather-related risks could have a material adverse effect on our ability to continue operations and on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
For example, the operations of our offshore pipelines were adversely affected by Hurricane Ida, resulting in a reduction of approximately $8 million to $10 million to our cash available for distribution for the year ended December 31, 2021 relative to our financial outlook. Such events have been, and may in the future be material and may cause a serious business disruption or serious damage to our pipeline systems which could affect such systems’ ability to transport crude oil and natural gas. Additionally, such severe weather conditions may be exacerbated by climate change.
Our environmental indemnification notification period has expired with our general partner.
Under our omnibus agreement, indemnification for any unknown environmental liabilities was limited to liabilities due to occurrences on or before October 30, 2017, which were identified prior to October 30, 2020. We continue to maintain indemnification by our general partner for matters previously discovered. To the extent that unknown environmental liabilities arise relating to prior ownership, the Partnership will be liable. Any such event could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our crude oil transportation operations are dependent upon demand for crude oil by refiners concentrated in particular regions, primarily in the Midwest and Gulf Coast.
Any decrease in this demand for crude oil by those refineries or connecting carriers to which we deliver could adversely affect our cash flows. Those refineries’, including the Whiting Refinery’s, demand for crude oil also is dependent on the competition from other refineries, the impact of future economic conditions, fuel conservation measures, alternative fuel requirements, government regulation or technological advances in fuel economy and energy generation devices, all of which could reduce demand for our services.
We face intense competition to obtain crude oil, natural gas and refined products volumes.
Our competitors include integrated, large and small independent energy companies who vary widely in size, financial resources and experience. Some of these competitors have capital resources that are greater than ours and control substantially greater supplies of crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent.
Even if reserves exist or refined products and diluent are produced in the areas accessed by our facilities, we may not be chosen by the shippers to transport, store or otherwise handle any of these crude oil and natural gas reserves, refined products and diluent. We compete with others for any such volumes on the basis of many factors, including:
•geographic proximity to the production and/or refineries;
•costs of connection;
•available capacity;
•rates;
•logistical efficiency in all of our operations;
•customer relationships; and
•access to markets.
If we are unable to compete effectively for transportation of crude oil, natural gas, refined products or diluent, there would likely be a reduction in the volumes that we transport. Any such reduction could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition or cash flows, including our ability to make distributions.
Our insurance policies do not cover all losses, costs or liabilities that we may experience, and insurance companies that currently insure companies in the energy industry may cease to do so or substantially increase premiums.
Our assets are either self-insured or insured with third parties for certain property damage, business interruption and third-party liabilities, and such coverage includes sudden and accidental pollution liabilities. We are insured under certain of BP’s corporate insurance policies and losses would be subject to the shared deductibles and limits under those policies.
All of the insurance policies relating to our assets and operations are subject to policy limits. We and the entities in which we own an interest do not maintain insurance coverage against all potential losses and could suffer losses for uninsurable or uninsured risks or in amounts in excess of existing insurance coverage. Changes in the insurance markets subsequent to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks and Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, Gustav, Ike, Harvey and Ida have made it more difficult and more expensive to obtain certain types of coverage, and we have elected to self-insure portions of our asset portfolio or insure with third parties. For example, neither we nor the entities in which we own an interest that own our offshore pipeline systems carry named windstorm insurance for any of the offshore pipeline systems. Significant uninsured losses could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operation which could put pressure on our liquidity and cash flows.
We do not own all of the land on which our pipelines are located, which could result in disruptions to our operations.
We do not own all of the land on which our pipelines are located, and we are, therefore, subject to the possibility of more onerous terms and increased costs to retain necessary land use if we do not have valid leases, licenses or rights-of-way ("ROWs") or if such leases, licenses or 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, and some of our agreements may grant us those rights for only a specific period of time. Our failure to have or loss of any of these rights, through our inability to renew leases, ROW contracts or otherwise, or inability to obtain leases, licenses or ROWs at reasonable costs could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.
We are subject to pipeline safety laws and regulations, compliance with which may require significant capital expenditures, increase our cost of operations and affect or limit our business plans.
Our interstate and offshore pipeline operations are subject to pipeline safety regulations administered by the PHMSA of the DOT. These laws and regulations require us to comply with a significant set of requirements for the design, construction, operation, maintenance, inspection and management of our crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent pipeline systems.
These requirements are subject to change over time as a result of new pipeline safety laws and additional regulatory actions. For example, in January 2021, Congress reauthorized PHMSA through 2023 and directed the agency to move forward with several regulatory actions.
Changes to pipeline safety laws by Congress and regulations by PHMSA that result in more stringent or costly safety standards could have a significant adverse effect on us and similarly situated midstream operators. For example, PHMSA finalized new pipeline safety rules for hazardous liquids and gas transmission pipelines in October 2019. The Safety of Hazardous Liquids Pipelines final rule addressed topics such as: inspections of onshore and offshore pipelines following extreme weather events and natural disasters, periodic assessment of pipelines not currently subject to integrity management, expanded use of leak detection systems, increased use of in-line inspection tools, and other requirements. In June 2021, PHMSA issued an Advisory Bulletin advising pipeline and pipeline facility operators of applicable requirements to update their inspection and maintenance plans for the elimination of hazardous leaks and minimization of natural gas released from pipeline facilities in accordance with the PIPES Act of 2020. PHMSA, together with state regulators, are expected to commence and complete inspection of these plans in 2022. This and any future changes in existing laws and regulations could require us to install new or modified safety controls, pursue additional capital projects, or conduct maintenance programs on an accelerated basis, any or all of which tasks could result in our incurring increased operating costs that could be significant and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition. Our actual compliance implementation costs may also be affected by industry-wide demand for the associated contractors and service providers.
Pipeline failures or failures to comply with applicable regulations could result in shut-downs, capacity constraints or operational limitations to our pipelines. Failure to comply with applicable PHMSA regulations can also result in significant fines and penalties. PHMSA has the power to assess penalties of up to $225,134 per violation per day of violation, and up to $2,251,134 for a series of related violations. These amounts, moreover, are subject to future inflation adjustments.
Should any of these risks materialize, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.
Compliance with and changes in environmental, health and safety laws and regulations has a cost impact on our business, and failure to comply with such laws and regulations could have an impact on our assets, costs, revenue generation and growth opportunities. In addition, our customers are also subject to environmental laws and regulations, and any changes in these laws and regulations could result in significant added costs to comply with such requirements and delays or curtailment in pursuing production activities, which could reduce demand for our services.
Our operations are subject to extensive environmental, worker health and safety, and pipeline safety laws and regulations, including those relating to the discharge and remediation of materials in the environment, waste management, natural resource protection and preservation, pollution prevention, pipeline integrity and other safety-related regulations and characteristics and composition of fuels. Numerous governmental authorities, such as the EPA, PHMSA, BSEE, and analogous state agencies, have the power to enforce compliance with these laws and regulations and the permits issued under them, oftentimes requiring difficult and costly response actions. Our operations also pose risks of environmental liability due to leakage, migration, releases or spills from our operations to surface or subsurface soils, surface water or groundwater, as well as releases to the Gulf of Mexico from our offshore pipelines. Certain environmental laws impose strict as well as joint and several liability for costs required to remediate and restore sites where hazardous substances, hydrocarbons or solid wastes have been stored or released. We may be required to remediate contaminated properties currently or formerly owned or operated by us regardless of whether such contamination resulted from the conduct of others or from consequences of our own actions that were in compliance with all applicable laws at the time those actions were taken. In addition, claims for damages to persons or property, including natural resources, may result from the environmental, health and safety impacts of our operations. There can be no certainty that our operating management system, or other policies and procedures will adequately identify all process safety, personal safety and environmental risks or that all our operating activities will be conducted in conformance with these systems.
Failure to comply with these laws, regulations and permits may result in joint and several or strict liability or the assessment of administrative, civil and criminal penalties, the imposition of remedial obligations, and/or the issuance of injunctions limiting or preventing some or all of our operations. Private parties, including the owners of the properties through which our pipeline systems pass, may also have the right to pursue legal actions to enforce compliance, as well as to seek damages for non-
compliance, with environmental laws and regulations or for remediation costs, personal injury or property damage. In addition, we may experience a delay in obtaining or be unable to obtain required permits or approvals for projects related to our pipeline systems, which may cause us to lose potential and current customers, interrupt our operations and limit our growth and revenues, which in turn could affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make cash distributions. As new environmental laws and regulations are enacted, the level of expenditures required for environmental matters could increase. Current and future legislative action and regulatory initiatives could result in changes to operating permits, material changes in operations, increased capital expenditures and operating costs, increased costs of the goods we transport, and decreased demand for products we handle that cannot be assessed with certainty at this time. We may be required to make expenditures to modify operations or install pollution control equipment or release prevention and containment systems that could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity if these expenditures, as with all costs, are not ultimately reflected in the tariffs and other fees we receive for our services.
Our customers are also subject to environmental laws and regulations that affect their businesses, and changes in these laws or regulations could materially adversely affect their businesses or prospects. In addition, President Biden has announced that climate change will be a focus of his administration.
Our operations, and those of our customers and suppliers, are subject to a series of risks regarding climate change.
The threat of climate change continues to attract considerable attention in the United States and in foreign countries. As a result, our operations as well as the operations of our customers and suppliers are subject to a series of regulatory, political, litigation, and financial risks regarding climate change.
In the U.S., no comprehensive climate change legislation has been implemented at the federal level. However, President Biden has made climate change a focus of his administration and has issued several executive orders addressing climate change. Moreover, following the U.S. Supreme Court finding that GHG emissions constitute a pollutant under the CAA, the EPA has adopted regulations that, among other things, establish construction and operating permit reviews for GHG emissions from certain large stationary sources, require the monitoring and annual reporting of GHG emissions from certain petroleum and natural gas system sources in the United States, and together with the DOT, implementing GHG emissions limits on vehicles manufactured for operation in the United States. The regulation of methane from oil and gas facilities has been subject to uncertainty in recent years. In September 2020, the Trump Administration revised prior regulations to rescind certain methane standards and remove the transmission and storage segments from the source category for certain regulations. However, subsequently, the U.S. Congress approved, and President Biden signed into law, a resolution under the Congressional Review Act to repeal the September 2020 revisions to the methane standards, effectively reinstating the prior standards. Additionally, in November 2021, EPA issued a proposed rule that, if finalized, would establish OOOO(b) new source and OOOO(c) first-time existing source standards of performance for methane and volatile organic compound emissions for oil and gas facilities. Operators of affected facilities will have to comply with specific standards of performance to include leak detection using optical gas imaging and subsequent repair requirement, and reduction of emissions by 95% through capture and control systems. EPA plans to issue a supplemental proposal in 2022 containing additional requirements not included in the November 2021 proposed rule and anticipates the issuance of a final rule by the end of the year. We cannot predict the scope of any final methane regulatory requirements or the cost to comply with such requirements. However, given the long-term trend toward increasing regulation, future federal GHG regulations of the fossil fuel industry remain a significant possibility. Increased regulation of GHGs has the potential to result in increased compliance costs on our operations and the operations of our customers, and more stringent GHG regulations could adversely affect the production of or demand for crude oil, natural gas, or refined products, which may ultimately reduce demand for the services our assets provide.
Separately, various states and groups of states have adopted or are considering adopting legislation, regulation or other regulatory initiatives that are focused on such areas as GHG cap and trade programs, carbon taxes, reporting and tracking programs, and restriction of emissions. At the international level, the United Nations-sponsored "Paris Agreement" requires member states to submit non-binding, individually-determined reduction goals known as Nationally Determined Contributions (“NDCs”) every five years after 2020. Following President Biden’s executive order in January 2021, the United States rejoined the Paris Agreement and, in April 2021, established a goal of reducing economy-wide net GHG emissions 50-52% below 2005 levels by 2030. Additionally, at the 26th Conference of the Parties (“COP26”) in Glasgow in November 2021, the United States and the European Union jointly announced the launch of a Global Methane Pledge; an initiative committing to a collective goal of reducing global methane emissions by at least 30 percent from 2020 levels by 2030, including “all feasible reductions” in the energy sector. The full impact of these actions is uncertain at this time and it is unclear what additional initiatives may be adopted or implemented that may have adverse effects upon us and our customers’ operations.
Governmental, scientific, and public concern over the threat of climate change arising from GHG emissions has resulted in increasing political risks in the United States, including action taken by President Biden with respect to his climate change
related pledges. On January 27, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order that called for substantial action on climate change, including, among other things, the increased use of zero-emission vehicles by the federal government, the elimination of subsidies provided to the fossil fuel industry, and increased emphasis on climate-related risks across government agencies and economic sectors. The Biden Administration has also called for restrictions on leasing on federal land. For more information, see our risk factor titled “Actions by the Biden Administration may limit the amount of production available to deliver through our pipelines.” Other actions that could be pursued by the Biden Administration may include the imposition of more restrictive requirements for the establishment of pipeline infrastructure or more restrictive GHG emission limitations for oil and gas facilities. Litigation risks are also increasing as a number of parties have sought to bring suit against certain oil and natural gas companies in state or federal court, alleging among other things, that such companies created public nuisances by producing fuels that contributed to climate change or alleging that the companies have been aware of the adverse effects of climate change for some time but defrauded their investors or customers by failing to adequately disclose those impacts.
There are also increasing financial risks for companies in the fossil fuel sector as shareholders currently invested in such companies may elect in the future to shift some or all of their investments into other sectors. Institutional lenders who provide financing to fossil fuel energy companies also have become more attentive to sustainable lending practices and some of them may elect not to provide funding for fossil fuel energy companies. For example, at COP26, the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (“GFANZ”) announced that commitments from over 450 firms across 45 countries had resulted in over $130 trillion in capital committed to net zero goals. The various sub-alliances of GFANZ generally require participants to set short-term, sector-specific targets to transition their financing, investing, and/or underwriting activities to net zero emissions by 2050. There is also a risk that financial institutions will be required to adopt policies that have the effect of reducing the funding provided to the fossil fuel sector. In late 2020, the Federal Reserve announced that it had joined the Network for Greening the Financial System (“NGFS”), a consortium of financial regulators focused on addressing climate-related risks in the financial sector. Subsequently, in November 2021, the Federal Reserve issued a statement in support of the efforts of the NGFS to identify key issues and potential solutions for the climate-related challenges most relevant to central banks and supervisory authorities. Although we cannot predict the effects of these actions, such limitation of investments in and financing for fossil fuel energy companies could result in the restriction, delay or cancellation of drilling programs or development or production activities, which could reduce demand for our products and services. Additionally, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced its intention to promulgate rules requiring climate disclosures. Although the form and substance of these requirements is not yet known, this may result in additional costs to comply with any such disclosure requirements.
We cannot predict the potential impact of changes to climate change legislation and regulations to address GHG emissions in the United States or of any climate-related litigation on our future consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows; however, changes in laws, regulations, policies and obligations relating to climate change, including carbon pricing, could impact our assets, costs, revenue generation and growth opportunities. Additionally, political, litigation and financial risks may result in oil and natural gas companies restricting or cancelling production activities, incurring liability for infrastructure damages as a result of climatic changes, or impairing their ability to continue to operate in an economic manner, which also could reduce the demand for our services. One or more of these developments could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operation.
Climate change may also result in various physical risks, such as the increased frequency or intensity of extreme weather events or changes in meteorological and hydrological patterns, that could adversely impact our operations, as well as those of our customers or suppliers. Such physical risks may result in damage to our or our customers’ facilities, or otherwise adversely impact their operations, such as if they become subject to water use curtailments in response to drought, or demand for their products, such as to the extent warmer winters reduce the demand for energy for heating purposes, which may ultimately reduce demand for our services.
Increasing attention to ESG matters and conservation matters may impact our business.
Increasing attention to, and social expectations on companies to address, climate change and other environmental and social impacts, investor and societal explanations regarding voluntary ESG disclosures, and increased consumer demand for alternative forms of energy may result in increased costs, reduced demand for our products, reduced profits, increased investigations and litigation, and negative impacts on our stock price and access to capital markets. Increasing attention to climate change and environmental conservation, for example, may result in demand shifts for crude oil, natural gas, and refined products and additional governmental investigations and private litigation against us. To the extent that societal pressures or political or other factors are involved, it is possible that such liability could be imposed without regard to our causation or contribution to the asserted damage, or other mitigating factors. While we may participate, or consider participating, in various voluntary frameworks and certification programs to improve the ESG profile of our operations, we cannot guarantee that such participation or certification will have the intended results on our products’ ESG profiles.
Moreover, while we or our Parent may create and publish disclosures regarding ESG matters from time to time, many of the statements in such disclosures will be based on hypothetical expectations and assumptions that may or may not be representative of current or actual risks or events or forecasts of expected risks or events, including the costs associated therewith. Such expectations and assumptions are necessarily uncertain and may be prone to error or subject to misinterpretation given the long timelines involved and the lack of an established single approach to identifying, measuring, and reporting on many ESG matters.
In addition, organizations that provide information to investors on corporate governance and related matters have developed ratings processes for evaluating companies on their approach to ESG matters. Such ratings are used by some investors to inform their investment and voting decisions. Unfavorable ESG ratings may lead to increased negative investor sentiment toward us or our customers and to the diversion of investment or other industries which could have a negative impact on our stock price and/or our access to and costs of capital. Moreover, to the extent ESG matters negatively impact our reputation, we may not be able to compete as effectively or recruit or retain employees, which may adversely affect our operations.
Actions by the Biden Administration may limit the amount of production available to deliver through our pipelines.
The Biden Administration has taken several actions that may limit the extent of oil and gas development on federal lands and waters. On January 20, 2021, the Acting Secretary of the Department of the Interior issued an order temporarily suspending the issuance of new authorizations, including leases and permits, for such activities. On January 27, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order that suspends the issuance of new leases for oil and gas development on federal lands and waters to the extent permitted by law and calls for a review of existing leasing and permitting practices for such activities. The suspension of these federal leasing activities prompted legal action by several states against the Biden administration resulting in the issuance of a nationwide preliminary injunction by a federal district judge in Louisiana in June 2021, effectively halting implementation of the leasing suspension. The federal government is appealing the district court decision but, in the interim, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (“BOEM”) has resumed lease auctions, consistent with the preliminary injunction. Separately, the DOI released its report on federal gas leasing and permitting practices in November 2021, which contained several recommendations on how to revise the current program, including by adjusting royalty and bonding rates, prioritizing leasing in areas with known resource potential, and avoiding leasing that conflicts with recreation, wildlife habitat, conservation, and historical and cultural resources. Implementation of many of the recommendations in the DOI report would require Congressional action. All shippers production flowing through our offshore pipelines and expected future production for those pipelines are expected to come from offshore federal leases. Although the order does not apply to existing operations under valid leases, we cannot guarantee that further action will not be taken to curtail oil and gas development on federal lands and offshore waters, which could significantly reduce future volumes on our offshore system.
Subsidence and erosion could damage our pipelines, particularly along the Gulf Coast and offshore and the facilities that serve our customers, which could adversely affect our operations and financial condition.
Our pipeline operations along the Gulf Coast and offshore could be impacted by subsidence and erosion. Subsidence issues are also a concern for our Midwestern pipelines at major river crossings. Subsidence and erosion could cause serious damage to our pipelines, which could affect our ability to provide transportation services or result in leakage, migration, releases or spills from our operations to surface or subsurface soils, surface water, groundwater, or to the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, which could result in liability, remedial obligations, and/or otherwise have a negative impact on continued operations. Additionally, such subsidence and erosion processes could impact our customers and they may be unable to utilize our services. Subsidence and erosion could also expose our operations to increased risks associated with severe weather conditions and other adverse events and conditions, such as hurricanes and flooding. As a result, we may incur significant costs to repair and preserve our pipeline infrastructure. Such costs could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operation or cash flows. Moreover, local governments and landowners have filed several lawsuits in Louisiana against energy companies, alleging that their operations contributed to increased coastal erosion and seeking substantial damages.
We may incur significant costs and liabilities as a result of pipeline integrity management program testing and any necessary pipeline repair or preventative or remedial measures.
PHMSA has adopted regulations requiring pipeline operators to develop integrity management programs for transportation pipelines, with enhanced measures required for pipelines located where a leak or rupture could harm a HCA or moderate consequence area (“MCA”). The regulations require operators to:
•perform ongoing assessments of pipeline integrity;
•identify and characterize applicable threats to pipeline segments that could affect an HCA or MCA;
•improve data collection, integration and analysis;
•repair and remediate the pipeline as necessary; and
•implement preventive and mitigating actions.
The BSEE has adopted similar pipeline safety and integrity management requirements related to the design, construction, and operation of offshore pipelines under DOI’s jurisdiction. At this time, we cannot predict the ultimate cost to maintain compliance with applicable pipeline integrity management regulations, as the cost will vary significantly depending on the number and extent of any repairs found to be necessary as a result of the pipeline integrity inspection and testing. We will continue our pipeline integrity inspection and testing programs to assess and maintain the integrity of our pipelines. The results of these inspections and tests could cause us to incur significant and unanticipated capital and operating expenditures for repairs or upgrades deemed necessary to ensure the continued safe and reliable operation of our pipelines. These expenditures could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition. Moreover, changes to pipeline safety laws over time may trigger future regulatory actions, which could lead to our incurring increased operating costs that could also be significant and have material adverse effects on our result of operations or financial condition.
We may be unable to obtain or renew permits necessary for our operations or for growth and expansion projects, which could inhibit our ability to do business.
Our facilities require a number of federal and state permits, licenses and approvals with terms and conditions containing a significant number of prescriptive limits and performance standards in order to operate. In addition, we implement maintenance, growth and expansion projects as necessary to pursue business opportunities, and these projects often require similar permits, licenses and approvals. These permits, licenses, approval limits and standards may require a significant amount of monitoring, record keeping and reporting in order to demonstrate compliance with the underlying permit, license, approval limit or standard. In some instances, for construction permits, extensive environmental assessments or impact analyses must be completed before a permit can be obtained, which has the potential to result in additional operational delays. Failure to obtain required permits or noncompliance or incomplete documentation of our compliance status with any permits that are obtained may result in the imposition of fines, penalties and injunctive relief. A decision by a government agency to deny or delay issuing a new or renewed permit or approval, or to revoke or substantially modify an existing permit or approval, could have a material adverse effect on our ability to continue operations and on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Moreover, judicial interpretations of environmental laws and regulations may also impede the issuance of permits for our pipeline projects. For example, following a Montana federal district court’s vacatur of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Nationwide Permit (“NWP”) 12 for utility line construction under the Clean Water Act and remand to the Corps for non-compliance with the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) in April 2020, there has been a succession of legal actions relating to NWP 12, including the federal court limiting the order by narrowing its applicability to the construction of new oil and gas pipelines, and litigation to stay the order that resulted in the U.S. Supreme Court granting an emergency stay of the order, except as it applies to the pipeline project that was the subject of the original case, Keystone XL. This ongoing litigation has created tremendous uncertainty within the pipeline industry regarding the scope of pipeline activities still allowed to use NWP 12 and concern over the potential long-term harms to pipeline projects throughout the country if the appeal of the district court’s order in the Ninth Circuit is unsuccessful. In response to the uncertainty, many companies have reconsidered permitting strategies for projects that were depending on the use of NWP 12. For example, companies have incurred additional costs and project delays by switching to alternative NWPs or the significantly more time-consuming individual permits. In some cases, companies have had to assume some risk in continuing to use NWP 12, particularly for those projects already in the construction phase. In January 2021, the Corps published in the Federal Register its final rule reissuing and modifying a subset of its suite of NWPs, including an amended NWP 12 that authorizes only oil and gas pipeline projects (but including refined products within the scope of oil and gas) and two new NWPs authorizing other utility line activities. However, in October 2021, the District Court for the Northern District of California issued a decision vacating a 2020 rule revising the Clean Water Act Section 401 certification process which several NWPs, including the revised NWP 12, relied on. Following a temporary pause on permitting decision in November 2021, the Corps announced that permitting under such NWPs would resume, with the Corps coordinating with certifying authorities for Section 401 certification as needed. Litigation regarding the use of NWP 12 is ongoing. As a result, there is significant uncertainty surrounding the future use of NWP 12. Any disruption in our ability to obtain coverage under NWP 12 or other general permits may result in increased costs and project delays if we are forced to seek individual permits from the Corps. This, in turn, could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operation. We are closely monitoring the litigation and proposed reissuance of NWP 12 and will continue to evaluate the impacts to our business.
Our asset inspection, maintenance or repair costs may increase in the future. In addition, there could be service interruptions due to unforeseen events or conditions or increased downtime associated with our pipelines that could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
Our pipelines were constructed over several decades. Pipelines are generally long-lived assets, and pipeline construction and coating techniques have varied over time. Depending on the condition and results of inspections, some assets will require additional maintenance, which could result in increased expenditures in the future. Any significant increase in these expenditures could adversely affect our results of operations, financial position or cash flows, as well as our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.
We maintain an integrity management program to monitor the condition of our assets. As there are many factors that are under our influence and others that are not, it is difficult to predict future expenditures related to integrity management inspections and repairs. Additionally, there could be service interruptions associated with these repairs or other unforeseen events. Similarly, laws and regulations may change which could also lead to increased integrity management expenditures. Any increase in these expenditures could adversely affect our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows which in turn could impact our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.
The tariff rates of our regulated assets are subject to review and possible adjustment by federal and state regulators, which could adversely affect our revenue and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
We provide both interstate and intrastate transportation services for refined products, diluent and crude oil. Our regulated pipelines are required to provide reasonable service to any shipper similarly situated to an existing shipper that requests transportation services on our pipelines. For more information on federal, state and local regulations affecting our business, please read “Business -FERC and Common Carrier Regulations.”
Mars, BP2, Diamondback, and River Rouge pipelines provide interstate transportation services that are subject to regulation by FERC under the ICA and Endymion could be subject to intrastate or FERC jurisdiction under certain circumstances in the future. FERC uses prescribed rate methodologies for developing and changing regulated rates for interstate pipelines, including price-indexing with inflation. The indexing method allows a pipeline to increase its rates based on a percentage change in the PPI-FG plus a FERC determined adder and is not based on pipeline-specific costs. If the index falls, we will be required to reduce our rates that are based on the FERC’s price indexing methodology if they exceed the new maximum available ceiling rate. However, changes in the index might not be large enough to fully reflect actual increases in our costs. If FERC changes its rate-making methodologies, the new methodologies may result in tariffs that generate lower revenues and cash flows. The FERC’s rate-making methodologies may limit our ability to set rates based on our true costs or may delay the use of rates that reflect increased costs. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our revenues and cash flows.
Shippers may protest (and FERC may investigate) the lawfulness of existing, new or changed tariff rates. FERC can suspend new or changed tariff rates for up to seven months and can allow new rates to be implemented subject to refund of amounts collected in excess of the rate ultimately found to be just and reasonable. Shippers may also file complaints that existing rates are unjust and unreasonable. If FERC finds a rate to be unjust and unreasonable, it may order payment of reparations for up to two years prior to the filing of a complaint or investigation, and FERC may prescribe new rates prospectively. We may at any time also be required to respond to governmental requests for information, including compliance audits conducted by FERC.
Whether a pipeline provides service in interstate commerce or intrastate commerce, or is otherwise non-FERC-jurisdictional, is highly fact-dependent and determined on a case-by-case basis. We cannot provide assurance that FERC will not at some point assert jurisdiction over some or all currently non-FERC jurisdictional transportation services that we provide based on a determination that a pipeline or pipelines are providing transportation service in interstate commerce and not exclusively intrastate commerce or otherwise non-FERC-jurisdictional. If the FERC were successful in asserting jurisdiction, its ratemaking methodologies may subject us to potentially burdensome and expensive operational, reporting and other requirements.
Caesar, Ursa, Cleopatra, Proteus, and portions of Endymion and Mars provide transportation services that are subject to regulation by FERC pursuant to OCSLA, which includes a duty to provide open and non-discriminatory access on their facilities. Shippers or other entities may protest the terms or conditions of these pipelines' transportation services as being inconsistent with the open access and non-discrimination requirements of OCSLA. If FERC grants such a protest, the pipeline may be required to modify the terms or conditions of its transportation services, which could adversely affect our revenue and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
Gas-gathering facilities are generally exempt from FERC’s jurisdiction under the NGA. Determinations as to whether a gas pipeline provides FERC-regulated transmission service or non-jurisdictional gathering service have been subject to substantial litigation over time. If FERC were to determine that the services provided by our gas-gathering facilities are not exempt from FERC regulation, then FERC could exercise authority over the rates and terms and conditions of service. Regulation by FERC could increase our operating costs, and could negatively affect our results of operations and financial condition, and failure to comply with the requirements of the NGA could result in the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
State agencies may also regulate the rates, terms and conditions of service for our pipelines offering intrastate transportation services, and such agencies could limit our ability to increase our rates or order us to reduce our rates and pay refunds to shippers. State agencies can also regulate whether a service may be provided or cancelled. If a state agency were to assert jurisdiction over services that are currently non-jurisdictional, we could be subject to these potentially burdensome and expensive requirements.
The FERC and most state agencies generally support light-handed regulation of common carrier refined products, diluent, and crude oil pipelines and have generally not investigated the rates, terms and conditions of service of pipelines in the absence of shipper complaints and may resolve complaints informally. Louisiana’s Public Service Commission has a more stringent review of rate increases and may prohibit or limit future rate increases for intrastate movements regulated by Louisiana.
Accepted tariffs do not, however, prevent any other new or prospective shipper, FERC or a state agency from challenging our tariff rates or our terms and conditions of service. Shippers can contest existing rates or terms at any time but must provide the burden of proof supporting their complaint of rates, rules, or discriminatory behavior.
Further, the FERC’s and state agencies’ actions are subject to court challenge, which may have broader implications for other regulated pipelines.
A successful challenge to any of our rates, or any changes to FERC’s approved rate or index methodologies, could adversely affect our revenue and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders. Similarly, if state agencies in the states in which we offer intrastate transportation services change their policies or aggressively regulate our rates or terms and conditions of service, it could also adversely affect our revenue and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
Our fixed loss allowance exposes us to commodity prices.
Some of our long-term transportation agreements and tariffs for crude oil shipments include an FLA, including certain agreements and tariffs on BP2 and Mars.
Mars collects FLA to reduce exposure to differences in crude oil measurement between origin and destination meters, which can fluctuate. This arrangement exposes Mars to risk of financial loss in some circumstances when the crude oil is received from a customer and there is a difference between our measurement and theirs; it is not always possible to completely mitigate the measurement differential. If the measurement differential exceeds the fixed loss allowance, the pipeline must make the customer whole for the difference in measured crude oil. Additionally, Mars takes title to any excess product that we transport when product losses are within the allowed levels, and we sell that product several times per year at prevailing market prices. This allowance oil revenue is subject to more volatility than transportation revenue, as it is directly dependent on measurement capability and prevailing commodity prices at the time of sale.
On BP2, we do not take physical possession of the allowance oil as a result of our services, due to lack of storage associated with this asset. Accordingly, on BP2, we settle allowance oil receivables monthly at prices reflective of the current market conditions. Allowance oil revenue accounted for 10.4%, 4.5%, and 8.0% of our total revenue in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively.
If we lose any of our key personnel, through attrition or reinvention, our ability to manage our business and continue our growth could be negatively impacted.
We depend on our senior management team and key technical personnel. If their services are unavailable to us for any reason, we may be required to hire other personnel to manage and operate our company and to develop our products and technology. We cannot assure you that we would be able to locate or employ such qualified personnel on acceptable terms or at all.
In the second half of 2020, BP introduced a new business structure, leadership team and core capabilities. In February 2022, BP publicly disclosed the company would generate $3 billion to $4 billion of cash cost savings, relative to 2019, through a continued relentless focus on cost efficiency, investment in digital and agile ways of working.
We depend on our senior management team and key technical personnel. If their services are unavailable to us for any reason, we may be required to hire other personnel to manage and operate our company partnership and to develop our products and technology. This may require us to renegotiate our omnibus agreement with BP Pipelines, which currently provides for general and administrative services, in addition to other management and maintenance costs. Refer to Part III, Item 13 — “Omnibus Agreement” for additional information.
For example, during the third and fourth quarters of 2020, certain members of our management team retired.
These retirements were not due to any disagreement with the Partnership on any matter relating to the Partnership’s operations, policies or practices. In response to this reorganization, the Board of Directors of our general partner announced new appointments to the management team. We cannot assure you that in the future we would be able to locate or employ such qualified personnel on acceptable terms or at all. Any such event could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Terrorist or cyber-attacks and threats, or escalation of military activity in response to these attacks, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Terrorist attacks and threats, cyber-attacks, or escalation of military activity in response to these attacks, may have significant effects on general economic conditions, fluctuations in consumer confidence and spending and market liquidity, each of which could materially and adversely affect our business. A breach or failure of our digital infrastructure due to intentional actions such as cyber-attacks, negligence or other reasons, could seriously disrupt our operations and could result in the loss or misuse of data or sensitive information, injury to people, disruption to our business, harm to the environment or our assets, legal or regulatory breaches and potential legal liability.
Strategic targets, such as energy-related assets and transportation assets, may be at greater risk of future terrorist or cyber-attacks than other targets in the United States. We do not maintain specialized insurance for possible liability or loss resulting from a cyber-attack on our assets that may shut down all or part of our business. Instability in the financial markets as a result of terrorism or war could also affect our ability to raise capital including our ability to repay or refinance debt. It is possible that any of these occurrences, or a combination of them, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Compliance with and changes in cybersecurity requirements has a cost impact on our business, and failure to comply with such laws and regulations could have an impact on our assets, costs, revenue generation and growth opportunities.
In the second quarter of 2021, the Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration (“TSA”) announced two new security directives. These directives require critical pipeline owners to comply with mandatory reporting measures and provide vulnerability assessments. We may be required to expend significant additional resources to respond to cyberattacks, to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures, or to assess, investigate and remediate any critical infrastructure security vulnerabilities. Any failure to remain in compliance with these government regulations may results in enforcement actions which may have a material adverse effect on our business and operations.
Our business could be negatively impacted by cyberattacks targeting our computer and telecommunications systems and infrastructure, or targeting those of our third-party service providers.
Our business, like other companies in the oil and gas industry, has become increasingly dependent on digital technologies, including technologies that are managed by third-party service providers on whom we rely to help us collect, host or process information. Such technologies are integrated into our business operations and used as a part of our production and distribution systems in the U.S. and abroad, including those systems used to transport production to market, to enable communications and to provide a host of other support services for our business. Use of the internet and other public networks for communications, services and storage, including “cloud” computing, exposes all users (including our business) to cybersecurity risks.
While BP and our third-party service providers commit resources to the design, implementation and monitoring of our information systems, there is no guarantee that our security measures will provide absolute security. Despite these security measures, BP may not be able to anticipate, detect, or prevent cyberattacks, particularly because the methodologies used by attackers change frequently or may not be recognized until launched, and because attackers are increasingly using techniques designed to circumvent controls and avoid detection. BP and our third-party service providers may therefore be vulnerable to security events that are beyond our control, and we may be the target of cyber-attacks, as well as physical attacks, which could result in information security breaches and significant disruption to our business. Such data breaches and cyberattacks could compromise our operational or other capabilities and cause significant damage to our business and our reputation.
BP information systems have experienced threats to the security of our digital infrastructure, but none of these have had a significant impact on our business, operations or reputation relating to such attacks. BP maintains a 24/7 dedicated security operations center to anticipate, detect and prevent cyberattacks; however, there is no assurance that we will not suffer such losses or breaches in the future.
As cyberattacks continue to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to respond to cyberattacks, to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures, or to investigate and remediate any information systems and related infrastructure security vulnerabilities. We may also be subject to regulatory investigations or litigation relating from cybersecurity issues.
Restrictions in our revolving credit facility could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make quarterly cash distributions to our unitholders.
Our revolving credit facility limits our ability to, among other things:
•incur or guarantee additional debt;
•redeem or repurchase units or make distributions under certain circumstances; and
•incur certain liens or permit them to exist.
Our revolving credit facility contains covenants requiring us to maintain certain financial ratios. The provisions of our revolving credit facility may affect our ability to obtain future financing and to pursue attractive business opportunities and our flexibility in planning for, and reacting to, changes in business conditions. In addition, a failure to comply with the provisions of our revolving credit facility could result in a default or an event of default that could enable our lenders to declare the outstanding principal of that debt, together with accrued and unpaid interest, to be immediately due and payable. If the payment of our debt is accelerated, our assets may be insufficient to repay such debt in full, and our unitholders could experience a partial or total loss of their investment. Please read “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Capital Resources and Liquidity.”
Debt we incur in the future may limit our flexibility to obtain financing and to pursue other business opportunities.
Our future 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 or other purposes may be impaired or such financing may not be available on favorable terms;
•our funds available for operations, future business opportunities and distributions to unitholders will be reduced by that portion of our cash flow required to make interest payments on our debt;
•we may be more vulnerable to competitive pressures or a downturn in our business or the economy generally; and
•our flexibility in responding to changing business and economic conditions may be limited.
Our ability to service our debt depends 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. If our operating results are not sufficient to service any future indebtedness, we will be forced to take actions such as reducing distributions, reducing or delaying our business activities, investments or capital expenditures, selling assets or issuing equity. We may not be able to effect any of these actions on satisfactory terms or at all.
Increases in interest rates could adversely impact the price of our common units, our ability to issue equity or incur debt for acquisitions or other purposes and our ability to make cash distributions at our intended levels.
Our term loan facility uses a floating interest rate which 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 our level of our cash distributions and implied distribution yield. The distribution yield is often used by investors to compare and rank 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 the price of our common units, our ability to issue equity or incur debt for acquisitions or other purposes and our ability to make cash distributions at our intended levels.
The lack of diversification of our assets and geographic locations could adversely affect our ability to make distributions to our common unitholders.
We rely on revenue generated from our pipelines, which are primarily located offshore in the Gulf of Mexico and onshore in the mid-western U.S. Due to our lack of diversification in assets and geographic location, an adverse development in our businesses or areas of operations, including adverse developments due to catastrophic events, weather, regulatory action and decreases in demand for crude oil, natural gas, refined products and diluent, could have a significantly greater impact on our results of operations and cash available for distribution to our common unitholders than if we maintained more diverse assets and locations.
If we are deemed an “investment company” under the Investment Company Act of 1940, it could have a material adverse effect on our business and the price of our common units.
Our assets include partial ownership interests in Mars, Ursa, KM Phoenix and Mardi Gras, as well as wholly owned pipelines. If a sufficient amount of our assets, or other assets acquired in the future, are deemed to be “investment securities” within the meaning of the Investment Company Act of 1940, we may have to register as an “investment company” under the Investment Company Act, claim an exemption, obtain exemptive relief from the SEC or modify our organizational structure or our contract rights. Registering as an “investment company” could, among other things, materially limit our ability to engage in transactions with affiliates, including the purchase and sale of certain securities or other property to or from our affiliates, restrict our ability to borrow funds or engage in other transactions involving leverage, and require us to add additional directors who are independent of us or our affiliates. The occurrence of some of these events would adversely affect the price of our common units and could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Risks Inherent in an Investment in Us
BP Holdco owns and controls our general partner, which has sole responsibility for conducting our business and managing our operations. Our general partner and its affiliates, including BP Pipelines, may have conflicts of interest with us and have limited duties to us, and they may favor their own interests to our detriment and that of our unitholders.
BP Holdco, a wholly owned subsidiary of our sponsor, BP Pipelines, owns and controls our general partner and appoints all of the directors of our general partner. Although our general partner has a duty to manage us in a manner that it believes is not opposed to our interest, the executive officers and certain of the directors of our general partner have a fiduciary duty to manage our general partner in a manner beneficial to BP Holdco. In addition, all of our executive officers and certain of our directors have a fiduciary duty to BP Pipelines or its affiliates due to their position as officers and directors of BP Pipelines or its affiliates. Therefore, conflicts of interest may arise between BP Holdco, BP Pipelines or any of their respective affiliates, including our general partner, on the one hand, and us or any of 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 common unitholders. These conflicts include the following situations, among others:
•our general partner is allowed to take into account the interests of parties other than us, such as BP Holdco and BP Pipelines, in exercising certain rights under our partnership agreement;
•neither our partnership agreement nor any other agreement requires BP Holdco or its affiliates (including BP Pipelines) to pursue a business strategy that favors us;
•our partnership agreement replaces the fiduciary duties that would otherwise be owed by our general partner with contractual standards governing its duties and limits our general partner’s liabilities, which restricts the remedies available to our unitholders for actions that, without such limitations, might constitute breaches of fiduciary duty;
•except in limited circumstances, our general partner has the power and authority to conduct our business without unitholder approval;
•disputes may arise under agreements pursuant to which BP Pipelines and its affiliates are our customers;
•our general partner determines the amount and timing of asset purchases and sales, borrowings, issuances of additional partnership securities and the level of cash reserves, each of which can affect the amount of cash that is distributed to our unitholders;
•our general partner determines the amount and timing of any cash expenditure and whether an expenditure is classified as 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 from operating surplus that is distributed to our unitholders;
•our general partner may cause us to borrow funds in order to permit the payment of cash distributions, even if the purpose or effect of the borrowing is to make incentive distributions;
•our partnership agreement permits us to distribute up to $110.0 million as operating surplus, even if it is generated from asset sales, non-working capital borrowings or other sources that would otherwise constitute capital surplus. This cash may be used to fund distributions on the incentive distribution rights;
•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 its affiliates on our behalf;
•our general partner intends to limit its liability regarding our contractual and other obligations;
•our general partner may exercise its 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 that it and its affiliates owe to us;
•our general partner decides whether to retain separate counsel, accountants or others to perform services for us; and
•our general partner may elect to cause us to issue common units to it in connection with a resetting of the target distribution levels related to our general partner’s incentive distribution rights without the approval of the conflicts committee of the board of directors of our general partner or the unitholders. This election may result in lower distributions to the common unitholders in certain situations.
In addition, we may compete directly with BP Pipelines and entities in which it has an interest for acquisition opportunities and potentially will compete with these entities for new business or extensions of the existing services provided by us. Please read “BP Pipelines and other affiliates of our general partner may compete with us.”
The board of directors of our general partner may modify or revoke our cash distribution policy at any time at its discretion. Our partnership agreement does not require us to pay any distributions at all.
The board of directors of our general partner has adopted a cash distribution policy pursuant to which we intend to distribute quarterly at least $0.2625 per unit on all of our units to the extent we have sufficient cash after the establishment of cash reserves and the payment of our expenses, including payments to our general partner and its affiliates. However, the board of directors of our general partner may change such policy at any time at its discretion and could elect not to pay distributions for one or more quarters.
In addition, our partnership agreement does not require us to pay any distributions at all. However, the Merger Agreement contains a provision that, during the period from December 19, 2021 until consummation of the Merger, in no event will any regular quarterly cash distribution declared or paid to unitholders be less than $0.3475 per unit.
Accordingly, investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the permanence of such a policy in making an investment decision. Any modification or revocation of our cash distribution policy could substantially reduce or eliminate the amounts of distributions to our unitholders. The amount of distributions we make, if any, and the decision to make any distribution at all will be determined by the board of directors of our general partner, whose interests may differ from those of our common unitholders. Our general partner has limited duties to our unitholders, which may permit it to favor its own interests or the interests of BP Holdco or BP Pipelines or their affiliates to the detriment of our common unitholders.
Our general partner intends to limit its liability regarding our obligations.
Our general partner intends to limit its liability under contractual arrangements between us and third parties so that the counterparties to such arrangements have recourse only against our assets, and not against our general partner or its assets. Our general partner may therefore cause us to incur indebtedness or other obligations that are nonrecourse to our general partner, and our partnership agreement provides that our general partner may limit its liability without breaching our general partner’s duties, even if we could have obtained more favorable terms without the limitation on liability. In addition, we are obligated to reimburse or indemnify our general partner to the extent that it incurs obligations on our behalf. Any such reimbursement or indemnification payments would reduce the amount of cash otherwise available for distribution to our unitholders.
We expect to distribute a significant portion of our cash available for distribution to our partners, which could limit our ability to grow and make acquisitions.
We plan to distribute most of our cash available for distribution, which may cause our growth to proceed at a slower pace than that of businesses that reinvest their cash to expand ongoing operations. To the extent we issue additional units in connection with any acquisitions or expansion capital expenditures, the payment of distributions on those additional units may increase the risk that we will be unable to maintain or increase our per unit distribution level. There are no limitations in our partnership agreement on our ability to issue additional units, including units ranking senior to the common units. The incurrence of additional commercial borrowings or other debt to finance our growth strategy would result in increased interest expense, which, in turn, may impact the cash that we have available to distribute to our unitholders.
Our general partner will be required to deduct Estimated Total Maintenance Spend from our operating surplus, which may result in less cash available for distribution to unitholders from operating surplus than if actual Total Maintenance Spend (total maintenance expenses and maintenance capital expenditures) were deducted.
We track Total Maintenance Spend on an ongoing basis, which represents the sum of maintenance expenses and maintenance capital expenditures in any given financial reporting period. Collectively these expenditures are made to maintain over the near and long term our operating capacity and operating income. Our partnership agreement requires our general partner to deduct Estimated Total Maintenance Spend, rather than actual Total Maintenance Spend, from operating surplus in determining cash available for distribution from operating surplus.
The amount of Estimated Total Maintenance Spend deducted from operating surplus will be subject to review and change by our general partner’s board of directors at least once a year. Our partnership agreement does not cap the amount of Estimated Total Maintenance Spend that our general partner may estimate, and such estimate is intended to represent the average annual Total Maintenance Spend on a three-year basis, as fluctuations in actual amounts can vary substantially in any given year. In years when our Estimated Total Maintenance Spend is higher than actual Total Maintenance Spend, the amount of cash available for distribution to unitholders from operating surplus will be lower than if actual Total Maintenance Spend had been deducted from operating surplus. On the other hand, if our general partner underestimates the appropriate level of Estimated Total Maintenance Spend, we will have more cash available for distribution from operating surplus in the short term but will have less cash available for distribution from operating surplus in future periods when we have to increase our Estimated Total Maintenance Spend to account for the previous underestimation.
Our partnership agreement replaces our general partner’s fiduciary duties to holders of our units.
Our partnership agreement contains provisions that eliminate and replace the fiduciary standards to which our general partner would otherwise be held by state fiduciary duty law. For example, our partnership agreement permits our general partner to make a number of decisions 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 relieves it of any duty or obligation to give any consideration to any interest of, or factors affecting, us, our affiliates or our limited partners. Examples of decisions that our general partner may make in its individual capacity include:
•how to allocate business opportunities among us and its affiliates;
•whether to exercise its limited call right;
•whether to seek approval of the resolution of a conflict of interest by the conflicts committee of the board of directors of our general partner;
•how to exercise its voting rights with respect to the units it owns;
•whether to exercise its registration rights;
•whether to elect to reset target distribution levels; and
•whether or not to consent to any merger or consolidation of the partnership or amendment to the partnership agreement.
By purchasing a common unit, a unitholder agrees to be bound by our partnership agreement and approves the elimination and replacement of fiduciary duties discussed above.
Because our partnership agreement contains provisions that replace the standards to which our general partner would otherwise be held by state fiduciary duty law, it restricts the remedies available to holders of our units for actions taken by our general partner that might otherwise constitute breaches of fiduciary duty.
Because our partnership agreement contains provisions that replace the standards to which our general partner would otherwise be held by state fiduciary duty law, it restricts the remedies available to unitholders for actions taken by our general partner that might otherwise constitute breaches of fiduciary duty under state fiduciary duty law. For example, our partnership agreement provides that:
•whenever our general partner makes a determination or takes, or declines to take, any other action in its capacity as our general partner, our general partner is generally required to make such determination, or take or decline to take such other action, in good faith, meaning that it believed its actions or omission were not opposed to the interests of the partnership, and will not be subject to any higher standard imposed by our partnership agreement, Delaware law, or any other law, rule or regulation, or at equity;
•our general partner and its officers and directors will not be liable for monetary damages or otherwise to us or our limited partners resulting from any act or omission unless there has been a final and non-appealable judgment entered by a court of competent jurisdiction determining that such losses or liabilities were the result of conduct in which our general partner or its officers or directors engaged in bad faith, meaning that they believed that the decision was opposed to the interest of the partnership or, with respect to any criminal conduct, with knowledge that such conduct was unlawful; and
•our general partner will not be in breach of its obligations under the partnership agreement or its duties to us or our limited partners if a transaction with an affiliate or the resolution of a conflict of interest is:
◦approved by the conflicts committee of the board of directors of our general partner, although our general partner is not obligated to seek such approval; or
◦approved by the vote of a majority of the outstanding common units, excluding any common units owned by our general partner and its affiliates.
In connection with a situation involving a transaction with an affiliate or a conflict of interest, other than one where our general partner is permitted to act in its sole discretion, any determination by our general partner must be made in good faith, meaning that it believed its actions or omissions were not opposed to the interests of the partnership. If an affiliate transaction or the resolution of a conflict of interest is not approved by our common unitholders or the conflicts committee then it will be presumed that, in making its decision, taking any action or failing to act, the board of directors acted in good faith, and in any proceeding brought by or on behalf of any limited partner or the partnership, the person bringing or prosecuting such proceeding will have the burden of overcoming such presumption.
Our partnership agreement provides that the conflicts committee of the board of directors of our general partner may be comprised of one or more independent directors. For example, if as a result of resignation, disability, death or conflict of interest with respect to a party to a particular transaction, only one independent director is available or qualified to evaluate such transaction, your interests may not be as well served as if the conflicts committee acted with at least two independent directors. A single-member conflicts committee would not have the benefit of discussion with, and input from, other independent directors.
BP Pipelines and other affiliates of our general partner may choose other common carriers for supply.
Our partnership agreement provides that our general partner will be restricted from engaging in any business activities other than acting as our general partner, engaging in activities incidental to its ownership interest in us and providing management, advisory, and administrative services to its affiliates or to other persons. However, affiliates of our general partner, including BP Pipelines, are not prohibited from engaging in other businesses or activities, including those that might be in direct competition with us. For example, a subsidiary of BP Pipelines owns the BP1 pipeline, which also delivers crude oil from Cushing, Oklahoma to the Whiting Refinery. The capacity of BP1, when combined with BP2’s 475 kbpd current capacity, significantly exceeds Whiting Refinery’s nameplate capacity of 430 kbpd. BP Products could choose to ship volumes to the Whiting Refinery on BP1 instead of BP2, resulting in a material decline in volumes on BP2. If such decline in volumes on BP2 were to occur or continue following the expiration of BP’s obligation with respect to minimum volume commitments on BP2, such a decline could result in a significant reduction in revenues that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. BP may choose to ship on pipelines other than BP2, for example in the case of apportionment on certain pipelines feeding into BP2 or for other commercial reasons.
Pursuant to the terms of our partnership agreement, the doctrine of corporate opportunity, or any analogous doctrine, does not apply to our general partner or any of its affiliates, including its executive officers and directors and those of BP Pipelines. Any such person or entity that becomes aware of a potential transaction, agreement, arrangement or other matter that may be an opportunity for us will not have any duty to communicate or offer such opportunity to us. Any such person or entity will not be liable to us or to any limited partner for breach of any fiduciary duty or other duty by reason of the fact that such person or entity pursues or acquires such opportunity for itself, directs such opportunity to another person or entity or does not communicate such opportunity or information to us. This may create actual and potential conflicts of interest between us and affiliates of our general partner and result in less than favorable treatment of us and our unitholders.
The fees and reimbursements due to our general partner and its affiliates, including BP Pipelines, for services provided to us or on our behalf will reduce our cash available for distribution. In certain cases, the amount and timing of such reimbursements will be determined by our general partner and its affiliates, including BP Pipelines.
Pursuant to our partnership agreement, we will reimburse our general partner and its affiliates, including BP Pipelines, for costs and expenses they incur and payments they make on our behalf. Pursuant to the omnibus agreement and subsequent adjustments, we paid BP Pipelines a fee of $15.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2021, for general and administrative services, and, in addition, to reimburse personnel and other costs related to the direct operation, management and maintenance of the assets. Our general partner, in good faith, may adjust the administrative fee to reflect, among others, any change in the level or complexity of our operations, a change in the scope or cost of services provided to us, inflation or a change in law or other regulatory requirements, the contribution, acquisition or disposition of our assets or any material change in our operation activities. In addition, pursuant to the omnibus agreement, we will reimburse our general partner for payments to BP Pipelines and its affiliates for other expenses incurred by BP Pipelines and its affiliates on our behalf to the extent the fees relating to such services are not included in the general and administrative services fee. Each of these payments will be made prior to making any distributions on our common units. The reimbursement of expenses and payment of fees to our general partner and its affiliates will reduce our cash available for distribution. There is no limit on the fee and expense reimbursements that we may be required to pay to our general partner and its affiliates. Refer to Part III, Item 13 — “Omnibus Agreement” for additional information.
The holder or holders of our incentive distribution rights may elect to cause us to issue common units to it in connection with a resetting of the target distribution levels related to the incentive distribution rights, without the approval of the conflicts committee of our general partner’s board of directors or the holders of our common units. This could result in lower distributions to holders of our common units.
The holder or holders of a majority of our incentive distribution rights (currently our general partner) have the right to reset the initial target distribution levels at higher levels based on our cash distribution levels at the time of the exercise of the reset election. Following a reset election by our general partner, the minimum quarterly distribution will be calculated equal to an amount equal to the prior cash distribution per common unit for the fiscal quarter immediately preceding the reset election (which amount we refer 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. If our general partner elects to reset the target distribution levels, it will be entitled to receive a number of common units equal to the number of common units that would have entitled the holder to an aggregate quarterly cash distribution for the quarter prior to the reset election equal to the distribution on the incentive distribution rights for the quarter prior to the reset election.
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 unit without such conversion. However, our general partner may transfer the incentive distribution rights at any time. It is possible that our general partner or a transferee could exercise this reset election at a time when we are experiencing declines in our aggregate cash distributions or at a time when the holders of the incentive distribution rights expect that we will experience declines in our aggregate cash distributions in the foreseeable future. In such situations, the holders of the incentive distribution rights may be experiencing, or may expect to experience, declines in the cash distributions it receives related to the incentive distribution rights and may therefore desire to be issued 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 may cause our common unitholders to experience reduction in the amount of cash distributions that they would have otherwise received had we not issued new common units to the holders of the incentive distribution rights in connection with resetting the target distribution levels.
Unitholders have limited voting rights and are not entitled to elect our general partner or its directors, which could reduce the price at which our common units will trade.
Compared to the holders of common stock in a corporation, unitholders have limited voting rights and, therefore, limited ability to influence management’s decisions regarding our business. Unitholders will have no right on an annual or ongoing basis to elect our general partner or its board of directors. The board of directors of our general partner, including the independent directors, is chosen entirely by BP Holdco, as a result of it owning our general partner, and not by our unitholders. Please read “Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance” and “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions, and Director Independence.” Unlike publicly traded corporations, we will not conduct annual meetings of our unitholders to elect directors or conduct other matters routinely conducted at annual meetings of stockholders of corporations. 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.
If you are a non-eligible holder, your common units may be subject to redemption.
We have adopted certain requirements regarding those investors who may own our common units. Eligible holders are limited partners whose, or whose owners’, federal income tax status does not have or is not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the rates that can be charged by us on assets that are subject to regulation by FERC or a similar regulatory body, as determined by our general partner with the advice of counsel. Ineligible holders are limited partners (a) who are not an eligible holder or (b) whose nationality, citizenship or other related status would create a substantial risk of cancellation or forfeiture of any property in which we have an interest, as determined by our general partner with the advice of counsel. If you are an ineligible holder, in certain circumstances as set forth in our partnership agreement, your units may be redeemed by us at the then-current market price. The redemption price will be paid in cash or by delivery of a promissory note, as determined by our general partner.
Even if holders of our common units are dissatisfied, they cannot initially remove our general partner without its consent.
If our unitholders are dissatisfied with the performance of our general partner, they have limited ability to remove our general partner. Unitholders are currently unable to remove our general partner without its consent because our general partner and its affiliates own sufficient units to be able to prevent its removal. Our general partner may not be removed except for cause by a vote of the holders of at least 66 2/3% of the outstanding units, including any units owned by our general partner and its affiliates, voting together as a single class. BP Holdco owns an aggregate of 54.4% of our common units as of March 9, 2022.
Our general partner interest or the 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 without the consent of our unitholders. Furthermore, our partnership agreement does not restrict the ability of the owner of our general partner to transfer its membership interests in our general partner to a third party. The new owner of our general partner would then be in a position to replace the board of directors and executive officers of our general partner with its own designees and thereby exert significant control over the decisions taken by the board of directors and executive officers of our general partner. This effectively permits a “change of control” without the vote or consent of the unitholders.
The incentive distribution rights may be transferred to a third party without unitholder consent.
Our general partner may transfer the incentive distribution rights to a third party at any time without the consent of our unitholders. If our general partner transfers the incentive distribution rights to a third party, our general partner would not have the same incentive to grow our partnership and increase quarterly distributions to unitholders over time. For example, a transfer of incentive distribution rights by our general partner could reduce the likelihood of BP Pipelines accepting offers made by us relating to assets owned by BP Pipelines, as it would have less of an economic incentive to grow our business, which in turn would impact our ability to grow our asset base.
Our general partner has a limited call right that may require unitholders to sell their common units at an undesirable time or price.
If at any time our general partner and its affiliates own more than 80% of the outstanding common units, our general partner, its affiliates or we will have the right, but not the obligation, to acquire all, but not less than all, of the common units held by unaffiliated persons at a price equal to the greater of (1) the average of the daily closing price of the common units over the 20 trading days preceding the date three days before notice of exercise of the call right is first mailed and (2) the highest per-unit price paid by our general partner or any of its affiliates for common units during the 90-day period preceding the date such notice is first mailed. As a result, unitholders may be required to sell their common units at an undesirable time or price and may not receive any return or a negative return on their investment. Unitholders may also incur a tax liability upon a sale of their units. Our general partner is not obligated to obtain a fairness opinion regarding the value of the common units to be repurchased by it upon exercise of the limited call right. There is no restriction in our partnership agreement that prevents our general partner from causing us to issue additional common units and then exercising its call right. If our general partner exercised its limited call right, the effect would be to take us private and, if the units were subsequently deregistered, we would no longer be subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. As of March 9, 2022, BP Holdco owned 54.4% of our common units.
We may issue an unlimited number of additional partnership interests, including units ranking senior to the common units, without unitholder approval, which would dilute existing unitholder ownership interests.
Our partnership agreement authorizes us to issue an unlimited number of additional limited partner interests at any time without the approval of our unitholders. The issuance of additional common units or other equity interests of equal or senior rank will have the following effects:
•our existing 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.
There are no limitations in our partnership agreement on our ability to issue units ranking senior to the common units.
In accordance with Delaware law and the provisions of our partnership agreement, we may issue additional partnership interests that are senior to the common units in right of distribution, liquidation and voting. The issuance by us of units of senior rank may (i) reduce or eliminate the amount of cash available for distribution to our common unitholders; (ii) diminish the relative voting strength of the total common units outstanding as a class; or (iii) subordinate the claims of the common unitholders to our assets in the event of our liquidation.
The market price of our common units could be adversely affected by sales of substantial amounts of our common units in the public or private markets, including sales by BP Holdco or other large holders.
As of March 9, 2022, we have 104,813,074 common units and no subordinated units outstanding. All of the subordinated units converted into common units on a one-for-one basis at the end of the subordination period. Sales by BP Holdco or other large holders of a substantial number of our common units in the public markets, or the perception that such sales might occur, could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common units or could impair our ability to obtain capital through an offering of equity securities. In addition, we have agreed to provide registration rights to BP Holdco. Under our partnership agreement, our general partner and its affiliates have registration rights relating to the offer and sale of any units that they hold. Alternatively, we may be required to undertake a future public or private offering of common units and use the net proceeds from such offering to redeem an equal number of common units held by BP Holdco.
Our partnership agreement restricts the voting rights of unitholders owning 20% or more of our common units.
Our partnership agreement restricts unitholders’ voting rights by providing that any units held by a person or group that owns 20% or more of any class of units then outstanding, other than our general partner and 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 designates the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware as the exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our unitholders, which would limit our unitholders’ ability to choose the judicial forum for disputes with us or our general partner’s directors, officers or other employees. Our partnership agreement also provides that any unitholder bringing an unsuccessful action will be obligated to reimburse us for any costs we have incurred in connection with such unsuccessful action.
Our partnership agreement provides that, with certain limited exceptions, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for any claims, suits, actions or proceedings (1) arising out of or relating in any way to our partnership agreement (including any claims, suits or actions to interpret, apply or enforce the provisions of our partnership agreement or the duties, obligations or liabilities among limited partners or of limited partners to us, or the rights or powers of, or restrictions on, the limited partners or us), (2) brought in a derivative manner on our behalf, (3) asserting a claim of breach of a duty owed by any director, officer or other employee of us or our general partner, or owed by our general partner, to us or the limited partners, (4) asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware Act or (5) asserting a claim against us governed by the internal affairs doctrine. In addition, if any unitholder brings any of the aforementioned claims, suits, actions or proceedings and such person does not obtain a judgment on the merits that substantially achieves, in substance and amount, the full remedy sought, then such person shall be obligated to reimburse us and our affiliates for all fees, costs and expenses of every kind and description, including but not limited to all reasonable attorneys’ fees and other litigation expenses, that the parties may incur in connection with such claim, suit, action or proceeding. Our partnership agreement also provides that each limited partner waives the right to trial by jury in any such claim, suit, action or proceeding. By purchasing a common unit, a limited partner is irrevocably consenting to these limitations, provisions and potential reimbursement obligations regarding claims, suits, actions or proceedings and submitting to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (or such other court) in connection with any such claims, suits, actions or proceedings. These provisions may have the effect of discouraging lawsuits against us and our general partner’s directors and officers.
The price of our common units may fluctuate significantly, and unitholders could lose all or part of their investment.
The market price of our common units is influenced by many factors, some of which are beyond our control, including:
•our quarterly distributions;
•our quarterly or annual earnings or those of other companies in our industry;
•announcements by us or our competitors of significant contracts or acquisitions;
•changes in accounting standards, policies, guidance, interpretations or principles;
•general economic conditions;
•the failure of securities analysts to cover our common units or changes in financial estimates by analysts;
•future sales of our common units; and
•the other factors described in these “Risk Factors.”
Unitholders’ liability 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. A unitholder could be liable for any and all of our obligations as if a unitholder were a general partner if a court or government agency were to determine that (i) we were conducting business in a state but had not complied with that particular state’s partnership statute; or (ii) a unitholder’s right to act with other unitholders to remove or replace our 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.
Under certain circumstances, unitholders may have to repay amounts wrongfully returned or distributed to them. Under Section 17-607 of the Delaware Act, we may not make a distribution to our unitholders 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. Liabilities to partners on account of their partnership interests and liabilities that are non-recourse to the partnership are not counted for purposes of determining whether a distribution is permitted.
The NYSE does not require a publicly traded partnership like us to comply, and we do not intend to comply, with certain of its governance requirements generally applicable to corporations.
Our common units are listed on the NYSE under the symbol BPMP. As a publicly traded partnership, the NYSE does not require us to have a majority of independent directors on our general partner’s board of directors or to establish a compensation committee or a nominating and corporate governance committee. Accordingly, unitholders will not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of certain corporations that are subject to all of the NYSE’s corporate governance requirements.
Tax Risks to Common Unitholders
Our tax treatment depends on our status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes and not being subject to a material amount of entity-level taxation. If the IRS were to treat us as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, or if we become subject to entity-level taxation for state tax purposes, our cash available for distribution to our unitholders would be substantially reduced.
The anticipated after-tax economic benefit of an investment in our common units depends largely on our being treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes.
Despite the fact that we are organized as a limited partnership under Delaware law, we would be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes unless we satisfy a “qualifying income” requirement. Based upon our current operations and current Treasury Regulations, we believe we satisfy the qualifying income requirement. However, no ruling has been or will be requested regarding our treatment as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Failing to meet the qualifying income requirement or a change in current law could cause us to be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject us to taxation as an entity.
If we were treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, we would pay U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income at the corporate tax rate. Distributions to unitholders would generally be taxed again as corporate distributions, and no income, gains, losses or deductions would flow through to unitholders. Because a tax would be imposed upon us as a corporation, our cash available for distribution to unitholders would be substantially reduced. Therefore, treatment of us 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.
At the state level, several states have been evaluating ways to subject partnerships to entity-level taxation through the imposition of state income, franchise or other forms of taxation. We currently own assets and conduct business in several states that impose a margin or franchise tax, and the State of Illinois, where Diamondback terminates, currently imposes an income-based replacement tax. In the future, we may expand our operations. Imposition of a similar tax on us in other jurisdictions that we may expand to could substantially reduce our cash available for distribution to our unitholders. Our 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 U.S. federal, state, local or foreign income tax purposes, the minimum quarterly distribution amount and the target distribution amounts may be adjusted to reflect the impact of that law or interpretation on us.
The tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships or an investment in our common units could be subject to potential legislative, judicial or administrative changes or differing interpretations, possibly applied on a retroactive basis.
The present U.S. federal income tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships, including us, or an investment in our common units, may be modified by administrative, legislative or judicial changes or differing interpretations at any time. Members of Congress have frequently proposed and considered substantive changes to the existing U.S. federal income tax laws that would affect publicly traded partnerships, including proposals that would eliminate our ability to qualify for partnership tax treatment. Recent proposals have provided for the expansion of the qualifying income exception for publicly traded partnerships in certain circumstances and other proposals have provided for the total elimination of the qualifying income exception upon which we rely for our partnership tax treatment.
In addition, the Treasury Department has issued, and in the future may issue, regulations interpreting those laws that affect publicly traded partnerships. There can be no assurance that there will not be further changes to U.S. federal income tax laws or the Treasury Department’s interpretation of the qualifying income rules in a manner that could impact our ability to qualify as a partnership in the future.
Any modification to the U.S. federal income tax laws and interpretations thereof may or may not be retroactively applied and could make it more difficult or impossible for us to meet the exception for certain publicly traded partnerships to be treated as partnerships for U.S. federal income tax purposes. We are unable to predict whether any changes or other proposals will ultimately be enacted. Any future legislative changes could negatively impact the value of an investment in our common units. You are urged to consult with your own tax advisor with respect to the status of regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on your investment in our common units.
Our general partner may elect to convert or restructure the partnership to an entity taxable as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes without unitholder consent.
Under our partnership agreement, our general partner may, without unitholder approval, cause the partnership to be treated as an entity taxable as a corporation or subject to entity-level taxation for U.S. federal or applicable state and local income tax purposes, whether by election of the partnership or conversion of the partnership or by any other means or methods. The general partner may take this action if it believes it is adverse to our interests (i) for us to continue to be characterized as a partnership for U.S. federal or applicable state and local income tax purposes or (ii) for common units held by unitholders other than our general partner and its affiliates not to be converted into or exchanged for an interest in an entity taxed as a corporation or at the entity level for U.S. federal or applicable state or local tax purposes whose sole asset is an interest in us. Any such event may be taxable or nontaxable to our unitholders, depending on the form of the transaction. The tax liability, if any, of a unitholder as a result of such an event may vary depending on the unitholder’s particular situation and may vary from the tax liability of our general partner and BP Pipelines. In addition and as part of such determination, our general partner and its affiliates may choose to retain their partnership interests in us and cause our interests held by other persons to be exchanged for interests in a new entity, taxable as a corporation or subject to entity-level taxation for U.S. federal or applicable state or local tax purposes whose sole assets are interests in us. Our general partner has no duty or obligation to make any such determination or take any such actions, and may decline to do so in its sole discretion and free from any duty to our limited partners.
If the IRS were to contest the federal income tax positions we take, it may adversely impact the market for our common units, and the costs of any such contest would 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 U.S. federal income tax purposes or any other matter affecting us. The IRS may adopt positions that differ from the positions we take. It may be necessary to resort to administrative or court proceedings to sustain some or all of the positions we take. A court may not agree with some or all of the positions we take. Any contest with the IRS may materially and adversely impact the market for our common units and the price at which they trade. Moreover, the costs of any contest between us and the IRS will result in a reduction in cash available for distribution to our unitholders and thus will be borne indirectly by our unitholders.
If the IRS makes audit adjustments to our income tax returns for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, it (and some states) may assess and collect any taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) resulting from such audit adjustments directly from us, in which case our cash available for distribution to our unitholders might be substantially reduced and our current and former unitholders may be required to indemnify us for any taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) resulting from such audit adjustments that were paid on such unitholders' behalf.
Pursuant to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, if the IRS makes audit adjustments to our income tax returns, it (and some states) may assess and collect any taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) resulting from such audit adjustments directly from us. To the extent possible under the new rules, our general partner may elect to either pay the taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) directly to the IRS or, if we are eligible, issue a revised information packet to each unitholder and former unitholder with respect to an audited and adjusted return. Although our general partner may elect to have our unitholders and former unitholders take such audit adjustment into account and pay any resulting taxes (including applicable penalties or interest) in accordance with their interests in us during the tax year under audit, there can be no assurance that such election will be practical, permissible or effective in all circumstances. As a result, our current unitholders may bear some or all of the tax liability resulting from such audit adjustment, even if such unitholders did not own units in us during the tax year under audit. If, as a result of any such audit adjustment, we are required to make payments of taxes, penalties and interest, our cash available for distribution to our unitholders might be substantially reduced and our current and former unitholders may be required to indemnify us for any taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) resulting from such audit adjustments that were paid on such unitholders' behalf. These rules are not applicable for tax years beginning on or prior to December 31, 2017.
Even if unitholders do not receive any cash distributions from us, they will be required to pay taxes on their share of our taxable income.
Unitholders are required to pay U.S. federal income taxes and, in some cases, state and local income taxes, on their share of our taxable income, whether or not they receive cash distributions from us. Unitholders may not receive cash distributions from us equal to their share of our taxable income or even equal to the actual tax due from them with respect to that income.
Tax gain or loss on the disposition of our common units could be more or less than expected.
If a unitholder sells common units, the unitholder will recognize a gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and that unitholder’s tax basis in those common units. Because distributions in excess of a unitholder’s allocable share of our net taxable income decrease its tax basis in such unitholder’s common units, the amount, if any, of such prior excess distributions with respect to the units a unitholder sells will, in effect, become taxable income to a unitholder if it sells such units at a price greater than its tax basis in those units, even if the price such unitholder receives is less than its original cost. In addition, because the amount realized includes a unitholder’s share of our nonrecourse liabilities, if a unitholder sells its units, a unitholder may incur a tax liability in excess of the amount of cash received from the sale.
A substantial portion of the amount realized from a unitholder’s sale of our units, whether or not representing gain, may be taxed as ordinary income to such unitholder due to potential recapture items, including depreciation recapture. Thus, a unitholder may recognize both ordinary income and capital loss from the sale of units if the amount realized on a sale of such units is less than such unitholder’s adjusted basis in the units. Net capital loss may only offset capital gains and, in the case of individuals, up to $3,000 of ordinary income per year. In the taxable period in which a unitholder sells its units, such unitholder may recognize ordinary income from our allocations of income and gain to such unitholder prior to the sale and from recapture items that generally cannot be offset by any capital loss recognized upon the sale of units.
Unitholders may be subject to limitation on their ability to deduct interest expense incurred by us.
In general, we are entitled to a deduction for interest paid or accrued on indebtedness properly allocable to our trade or business during our taxable year. However, under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, our deduction for “business interest” is limited to the sum of our business interest income and 30% of our “adjusted taxable income.” For the purposes of this limitation, our adjusted taxable income is computed without regard to any business interest expense or business interest income, and in the case of taxable years beginning before January 1, 2022, any deduction allowable for depreciation, amortization, or depletion to the extent such depreciation, amortization, or depletion is not capitalized into cost of goods sold with respect to inventory.
If our “business interest” is subject to limitation under these rules, our unitholders will be limited in their ability to deduct their share of any interest expense that has been allocated to them. As a result, unitholders may be subject to limitation on their ability to deduct interest expense incurred by us.
Tax-exempt entities face unique tax issues from owning our common units that may result in adverse tax consequences to them.
Investment in our common units by tax-exempt entities, such as employee benefit plans and individual retirement accounts (known as IRAs), raises issues unique to them. For example, virtually all of our income allocated to organizations that are exempt from U.S. federal income tax, including IRAs and other retirement plans, will be unrelated business taxable income and will be taxable to them. Tax-exempt entities should consult a tax advisor before investing in our common units.
Non-U.S. Unitholders will be subject to U.S. taxes and withholding with respect to their income and gain from
owning our units.
Non-U.S. unitholders are generally taxed and subject to income tax filing requirements by the United States on income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business. Income allocated to our unitholders and any gain from the sale of our units will generally be considered to be "effectively connected" with a U.S. trade or business. As a result, distributions to a non-U.S. unitholder will be subject to withholding at the highest applicable effective tax rate and a non-U.S. unitholder who sells or otherwise disposes of a unit will also be subject to U.S. federal income tax on the gain realized from the sale or disposition of that unit.
Moreover, the transferee of an interest in a partnership that is engaged in a U.S. trade or business is generally required to withhold 10% of the “amount realized” by the transferor unless the transferor certifies that it is not a foreign person. While the determination of a partner’s “amount realized” generally includes any decrease of a partner’s share of the partnership’s liabilities, recently issued Treasury regulations provide that the “amount realized” on a transfer of an interest in a publicly traded partnership, such as our common units, will generally be the amount of gross proceeds paid to the broker effecting the applicable transfer on behalf of the transferor, and thus will be determined without regard to any decrease in that partner’s share of a publicly traded partnership’s liabilities. The Treasury regulations and other guidance from the IRS further provide that withholding on a transfer of an interest in a publicly traded partnership will not be imposed on a transfer that occurs prior to January 1, 2023, and after that date, if effected through a broker, the obligation to withhold on a transfer of interests in a publicly traded partnership is imposed on the transferor’s broker. Non-U.S. unitholders should consult their tax advisors regarding the impact of these rules on an investment in our common units.
We treat each purchaser of our common units as having the same tax benefits without regard to the common units actually purchased. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of our common units.
Because we cannot match transferors and transferees of common units, we have adopted certain methods for allocating depreciation and amortization deductions that may not conform to all aspects of existing Treasury Regulations. A successful IRS challenge to the use of these methods could adversely affect the amount of tax benefits available to our unitholders. It also could affect the timing of these tax benefits or the amount of gain from any sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of our common units or result in audit adjustments to a unitholder’s tax returns.
We generally prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our common units each month based upon the ownership of our common units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular common unit is transferred. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders.
We generally prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our common units each month based upon the ownership of our common units on the first day of each month (the “Allocation Date”), instead of on the basis of the date a particular common unit is transferred. Similarly, we generally allocate (i) certain deductions for depreciation of capital additions, (ii) gain or loss realized on a sale or other disposition of our assets and, (iii) in the discretion of the general partner, any other extraordinary item of income, gain, loss or deduction based upon ownership on the Allocation Date. Treasury Regulations allow a similar monthly simplifying convention, but such regulations do not specifically authorize all aspects of our proration method. If the IRS were to challenge our proration method, we may be required to change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders.
A unitholder whose common units are the subject of a securities loan (e.g., a loan to a “short seller” to cover a short sale of common units) may be considered to have disposed of those common units. If so, such unitholder would no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those common units during the period of the loan and could recognize gain or loss from the disposition.
Because there are no specific rules governing the U.S. federal income tax consequence of loaning a partnership interest, a unitholder whose common units are the subject of a securities loan may be considered to have disposed of the loaned common
units. In that case, the unitholder may no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those common units during the period of the loan to the short seller and the unitholder may recognize gain or loss from such disposition. Moreover, during the period of the loan, any of our income, gain, loss or deduction with respect to those common units may not be reportable by the unitholder and any cash distributions received by the unitholder as to those common units could be fully taxable as ordinary income. Unitholders desiring to assure their status as partners and avoid the risk of gain recognition from a securities loan are urged to consult a tax advisor to determine whether it is advisable to modify any applicable brokerage account agreements to prohibit their brokers from borrowing their common units.
We have adopted certain valuation methodologies in determining a unitholder’s allocations of income, gain, loss and deduction. The IRS may challenge these methodologies or the resulting allocations, which could adversely affect the value of our common units.
In determining the items of income, gain, loss and deduction allocable to our unitholders, we must routinely determine the fair market value of our assets. Although we may, from time to time, consult with professional appraisers regarding valuation matters, we make many fair market value estimates using a methodology based on the market value of our common units as a means to measure the fair market value of our assets. The IRS may challenge these valuation methods and the resulting allocations of income, gain, loss and deduction.
A successful IRS challenge to these methods or allocations could adversely affect the timing or amount of taxable income or loss being allocated to our unitholders. It also could affect the amount of gain recognized from our unitholders’ sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of the common units or result in audit adjustments to our unitholders’ tax returns without the benefit of additional deductions.
Our unitholders will likely be subject to state and local taxes and income tax return filing requirements in jurisdictions where they do not live as a result of investing in our common units.
In addition to U.S. federal income taxes, our unitholders may 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 conduct business or own property now or in the future, even if they do not live in any of those jurisdictions. Our unitholders 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 various jurisdictions. Further, our unitholders may be subject to penalties for failure to comply with those requirements.
We currently own assets and conduct business in multiple states, which currently impose a personal income tax on individuals, corporations and other entities. As we make acquisitions or expand our business, we may own assets or conduct business in additional states that impose a personal income tax. It is our unitholders’ responsibility to file all United States federal, foreign, state and local tax returns and pay any taxes due in these jurisdictions. Unitholders should consult with their own tax advisors regarding the filing of such tax returns, the payment of such taxes, and the deductibility of any taxes paid.
General Risk Factors
We are exposed to the credit risks, and certain other risks, of our customers, and any material nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers could reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
We are subject to the risks of loss resulting from nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers. If any of our most significant customers default on their obligations to us, our financial results could be adversely affected. Our customers may be highly leveraged and subject to their own operating and regulatory risks. For certain of our pipelines, we also may have a limited pool of potential customers and may be unable to replace any customers who default on their obligations to us. Therefore, any material nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers could reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
Any expansion of existing assets or construction of new assets may not result in revenue increases and will be subject to regulatory, environmental, political, legal and economic risks, which could adversely affect our operations and financial condition.
In order to optimize our existing asset base, we intend to evaluate and capitalize on organic opportunities for expansion projects in order to increase revenue on our assets. If we undertake these projects, they may not be completed on schedule or at all or at the budgeted cost.
We also intend to evaluate and may from time to time expand our existing pipelines, such as by adding horsepower, pump stations or new connections. Any such expansion projects will involve numerous regulatory, environmental, political and legal uncertainties, most of which are beyond our control. The process for obtaining environmental permits has the potential to delay any such expansion projects. In addition, the environmental reviews, permits and other approvals that may be required for such expansion projects may be subject to challenge by third parties which can further delay commencing construction.
Moreover, we may not receive sufficient long-term contractual commitments or spot shipments from customers to provide the revenue needed to support projects, and we may be unable to negotiate acceptable interconnection agreements with third-party pipelines to provide destinations for increased throughput. Even if we receive such commitments or spot shipments or make such interconnections, we may not realize an increase in revenue for an extended period of time.
Potential disruption to our business and operations could occur if we do not address an incident effectively.
Our business and operating activities could be disrupted if we do not respond, or are perceived not to respond, in an appropriate manner to any major crisis or if we are not able to restore or replace critical operational capacity.
If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, current and potential unitholders could lose confidence in our financial reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our units.
Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports, prevent fraud and operate successfully as a public company. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our reputation and operating results would be harmed. We cannot be certain that our efforts to maintain our internal controls will be successful, that we will be able to maintain adequate controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future or that we will be able to comply with our obligations under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Any failure to maintain effective internal controls, or difficulties encountered in implementing or improving our internal controls, could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Ineffective internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which would likely have a negative effect on the trading price of our units.