HEP 12-31-2012 10K
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
_________________________________________________________________
FORM 10-K
_________________________________________________________________
(Mark One)
|
| |
ý | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012
OR
|
| |
¨ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from __________ to ____________
Commission File Number 1-32225
_________________________________________________________________
HOLLY ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
_________________________________________________________________
|
| | |
Delaware | | 20-0833098 |
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) | | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
| | |
2828 N. Harwood, Suite 1300 Dallas, Texas | | 75201-1507 |
(Address of principal executive offices) | | (Zip Code) |
(214) 871-3555
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code
_________________________________________________________________
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Common Limited Partner Units
Securities registered pursuant to 12(g) of the Act:
None.
_________________________________________________________________
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes ý No ¨
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15 (d) of the Act.
Yes ¨ No ý
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ý No ¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
|
| | | | | | | |
Large accelerated filer | ý | Accelerated filer | ¨ | Non-accelerated filer | ¨ | Smaller reporting company | ¨ |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No ý
The aggregate market value of common limited partner units held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $900 million on June 29, 2012, the last day of the registrant's most recently completed second fiscal quarter, based on the last sales price as quoted on the New York Stock Exchange on such date.
The number of the registrant’s outstanding common limited partners units at February 15, 2013 was 56,782,048.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: None
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
| | |
| | |
Item | | Page |
| PART I | |
| | |
| |
| | |
1. | | |
1A. | | |
1B. | | |
2. | | |
3. | | |
4. | | |
| | |
| PART II | |
| | |
5. | | |
6. | | |
7. | | |
7A. | | |
8. | | |
9. | | |
9A. | | |
9B. | | |
| | |
| PART III | |
| | |
10. | | |
11. | | |
12. | | |
13. | | |
14. | | |
| | |
| PART IV | |
| | |
15. | | |
| | |
| |
| | |
| |
PART I
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities laws. All statements, other than statements of historical fact included in this Form 10-K, including, but not limited to, those under “Business”, “Risk Factors” and “Properties” in Items 1, 1A and 2 and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in Item 7, are forward-looking statements. Forward looking statements use words such as “anticipate,” “project,” “expect,” “plan,” “goal,” “forecast,” “intend,” "should," "would," “could,” “believe,” “may,” and similar expressions and statements regarding our plans and objectives for future operations. These statements are based on our beliefs and assumptions and those of our general partner using currently available information and expectations as of the date hereof, are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties. Although we and our general partner believe that such expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable, neither we nor our general partner can give assurance that our expectations will prove to be correct. All statements concerning our expectations for future results of operations are based on forecasts for our existing operations and do not include the potential impact of any future acquisitions. Our forward-looking statements are subject to a variety of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. If one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or if underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results may vary materially from those anticipated, estimated, projected or expected. Certain factors could cause actual results to differ materially from results anticipated in the forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to:
| |
• | risks and uncertainties with respect to the actual quantities of petroleum products and crude oil shipped on our pipelines and/or terminalled, stored or throughput in our terminals; |
| |
• | the economic viability of HollyFrontier Corporation, Alon USA, Inc. and our other customers; |
| |
• | the demand for refined petroleum products in markets we serve; |
| |
• | our ability to successfully purchase and integrate additional operations in the future; |
| |
• | our ability to complete previously announced or contemplated acquisitions; |
| |
• | the availability and cost of additional debt and equity financing; |
| |
• | the possibility of reductions in production or shutdowns at refineries utilizing our pipeline and terminal facilities; |
| |
• | the effects of current and future government regulations and policies; |
| |
• | our operational efficiency in carrying out routine operations and capital construction projects; |
| |
• | the possibility of terrorist attacks and the consequences of any such attacks; |
| |
• | general economic conditions; and |
| |
• | other financial, operational and legal risks and uncertainties detailed from time to time in our Securities and Exchange Commission filings. |
Cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations are set forth in this Form 10-K, including without limitation, the forward-looking statements that are referred to above. When considering forward-looking statements, you should keep in mind the known material risk factors and other cautionary statements set forth in this Form 10-K under “Risk Factors” in Item 1A. All forward-looking statements included in this Form 10-K and all subsequent written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to us or persons acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements. The forward-looking statements speak only as of the date made and, other than as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
INDEX TO DEFINED TERMS AND NAMES
The following terms and names that appear in this form 10-K are defined on the following pages:
|
| | | |
| | | |
| Alon.................................................................................................................................................. | 5 | |
| Beeson Pipeline.............................................................................................................................. | 27 | |
| bpd.................................................................................................................................................... | 8 | |
| CD&A............................................................................................................................................... | 98 | |
| CFR................................................................................................................................................. . | 9 | |
| Credit Agreement............................................................................................................................ | 8 | |
| Distributable cash flow................................................................................................................... | 35 | |
| DOT.................................................................................................................................................... | 9 | |
| EBITDA............................................................................................................................................... | 35 | |
| Expansion capital expenditures...................................................................................................... | 7 | |
| FERC............................................................................................................................................... | 7 | |
| GAAP............................................................................................................................................... | 36 | |
| Guarantor subsidiaries.................................................................................................................... | 79 | |
| HEP................................................................................................................................................... | 5 | |
| HEP Logistics................................................................................................................................. | 34 | |
| HLS................................................................................................................................................. | 5 | |
| HFC................................................................................................................................................. | 5 | |
| LACT............................................................................................................................................... | 6 | |
| LIBOR................................................................................................................................................. | 48 | |
| Long-term Incentive Plan............................................................................................................... | 70 | |
| LPG................................................................................................................................................. | 6 | |
| Maintenance capital expenditures................................................................................................... | 7 | |
| mbbls............................................................................................................................................... | 26 | |
| mbpd............................................................................................................................................... | 42 | |
| MMSCFD............................................................................................................................................... | 27 | |
| Mid-America.................................................................................................................................. | 27 | |
| Non-Guarantor............................................................................................................................... | 79 | |
| NuStar............................................................................................................................................... | 31 | |
| Omnibus Agreement.............................................................................................................................. | 7 | |
| OSHA............................................................................................................................................... | 16 | |
| Parent............................................................................................................................................... | 79 | |
| Plains............................................................................................................................................... | 5 | |
| PPI................................................................................................................................................... | 7 | |
| Rio Grande...................................................................................................................................... | 26 | |
| Roadrunner Pipeline....................................................................................................................... | 27 | |
| SEC.................................................................................................................................................. | 5 | |
| Senior Notes................................................................................................................................... | 12 | |
| SLC Pipeline................................................................................................................................... | 5 | |
| UNEV Pipeline............................................................................................................................... | 5 | |
OVERVIEW
Holly Energy Partners, L.P. (“HEP”) is a Delaware limited partnership engaged principally in the business of operating a system of petroleum product and crude pipelines, storage tanks, distribution terminals and loading rack facilities in west Texas, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Oklahoma, Wyoming, Kansas, Arizona, Idaho and Washington. We were formed in Delaware in 2004 and maintain our principal corporate offices at 2828 N. Harwood, Suite 1300, Dallas, Texas 75201-1507. Our telephone number is 214-871-3555 and our internet website address is www.hollyenergy.com. The information contained on our website does not constitute part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. A copy of this Annual Report on Form 10-K will be provided without charge upon written request to the Vice President, Investor Relations at the above address. A direct link to our filings at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) website is available on our website on the Investors page. Also available on our website are copies of our Governance Guidelines, Audit Committee Charter, Compensation Committee Charter, and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, all of which will be provided without charge upon written request to the Vice President, Investor Relations at the above address. In this document, the words “we,” “our,” “ours” and “us” refer to HEP and its consolidated subsidiaries or to HEP or an individual subsidiary and not to any other person. “HFC” refers to HollyFrontier Corporation and its subsidiaries, other than HEP and its subsidiaries and other than Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. (“HLS”), a subsidiary of HollyFrontier Corporation that is the general partner of the general partner of HEP and manages HEP.
We own and operate petroleum product and crude pipelines and terminal, tankage and loading rack facilities that support HFC’s refining and marketing operations in the Mid-Continent, Southwest and Rocky Mountain regions of the United States and Alon USA, Inc.’s (“Alon”) refinery in Big Spring, Texas. HFC currently owns a 44% interest in us, including the 2% general partner interest. Additionally, we own a 75% interest in UNEV Pipeline, LLC (“UNEV”), which owns a 400-mile, 12-inch refined products pipeline running from Woods Cross, Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada (the “UNEV Pipeline”), product terminals near Cedar City, Utah and Las Vegas, Nevada and related assets, and a 25% joint venture interest in a 95-mile intrastate crude oil pipeline system (the “SLC Pipeline”) that serves refineries in the Salt Lake City, Utah area.
We generate revenues by charging tariffs for transporting petroleum products and crude oil through our pipelines, by charging fees for terminalling and storing refined products and other hydrocarbons, and providing other services at our storage tanks and terminals. We do not take ownership of products that we transport, terminal or store, and therefore, we are not directly exposed to changes in commodity prices.
Our assets include:
Pipelines:
| |
• | approximately 810 miles of refined product pipelines, including 340 miles of leased pipelines, that transport gasoline, diesel and jet fuel principally from HFC’s Navajo refinery in New Mexico to its customers in the metropolitan and rural areas of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah and northern Mexico; |
| |
• | approximately 510 miles of refined product pipelines that transport refined products from Alon’s Big Spring refinery in Texas to its customers in Texas and Oklahoma; |
| |
• | three 65-mile intermediate pipelines that transport intermediate feedstocks and crude oil from HFC’s Navajo refinery crude oil distillation and vacuum facilities in Lovington, New Mexico to its petroleum refinery facilities in Artesia, New Mexico; |
| |
• | approximately 960 miles of crude oil trunk, gathering and connection pipelines located in west Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma that deliver crude oil to HFC’s Navajo refinery; |
| |
• | approximately 10 miles of refined product pipelines that support HFC’s Woods Cross refinery located near Salt Lake City, Utah; |
| |
• | gasoline and diesel connecting pipelines located at HFC’s Tulsa east refinery facility; |
| |
• | five intermediate product and gas pipelines between HFC’s Tulsa east and west refinery facilities; |
| |
• | crude receiving assets located at HFC’s Cheyenne refinery; |
| |
• | a 75% interest in the UNEV Pipeline, a 400-mile refined products pipeline running from Woods Cross, Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada; and |
| |
• | a 25% joint venture interest in the SLC pipeline, a 95-mile intrastate crude oil pipeline system that transports crude oil into the Salt Lake City, Utah area from the Utah terminus of the Frontier Pipeline, as well as crude oil flowing from Wyoming and Utah via Plains All American Pipeline, L. P.’s (“Plains”) Rocky Mountain Pipeline. |
Refined Product Terminals and Refinery Tankage:
| |
• | four refined product terminals located in El Paso, Texas; Moriarty and Bloomfield, New Mexico; and Tucson, Arizona, with an aggregate capacity of approximately 1,300,000 barrels, that are integrated with our refined product pipeline system that serves HFC’s Navajo refinery; |
| |
• | three refined product terminals (two of which are 50% owned), located in Burley and Boise, Idaho and Spokane, Washington, with an aggregate capacity of approximately 500,000 barrels, that serve third-party common carrier pipelines; |
| |
• | one refined product terminal near Mountain Home, Idaho with a capacity of 120,000 barrels, that serves a nearby United States Air Force Base; |
| |
• | two refined product terminals, located in Wichita Falls and Abilene, Texas, and one tank farm in Orla, Texas with aggregate capacity of approximately 500,000 barrels, that are integrated with our refined product pipelines that serve Alon’s Big Spring refinery; |
| |
• | a refined product loading rack facility at each of HFC’s refineries, heavy product / asphalt loading rack facilities at HFC’s Navajo refinery Lovington facility, Tulsa refinery east facility and the Cheyenne refinery, liquefied petroleum gas (“LPG”) loading rack facilities at HFC’s Tulsa refinery west facility, Cheyenne refinery and El Dorado refinery, lube oil loading racks at HFC’s Tulsa refinery west facility and crude oil Leased Automatic Custody Transfer (“LACT”) units located at HFC’s Cheyenne refinery; |
| |
• | a leased jet fuel terminal in Roswell, New Mexico; |
| |
• | on-site crude oil tankage at HFC’s Navajo, Woods Cross, Tulsa and Cheyenne refineries having an aggregate storage capacity of approximately 1,100,000 barrels; |
| |
• | on-site refined and intermediate product tankage at HFC’s Tulsa, Cheyenne and El Dorado refineries having an aggregate storage capacity of approximately 8,200,000 barrels; and |
| |
• | a 75% interest in UNEV Pipeline's product terminals near Cedar City, Utah and Las Vegas, Nevada with an aggregate capacity of approximately 460,000 barrels. |
We have a long-term strategic relationship with HFC. Our growth plan is to continue to pursue purchases of logistic assets at HFC's existing refining locations in New Mexico, Utah, Oklahoma, Kansas and Wyoming. We also will work with HFC on logistic asset acquisitions in conjunction with HFC’s refinery acquisition strategies. Furthermore, we will continue to pursue third-party logistic asset acquisitions that are accretive to our unitholders and increase the diversity of our revenues.
On November 29, 2012, we announced a two-for-one unit split, payable in the form of a common unit distribution for each issued and outstanding common unit. The unit distribution was paid January 16, 2013 to all unitholders of record on January 7, 2013. All references to unit and per unit amounts in this document and related disclosures have been adjusted to reflect the effect of the unit split for all periods presented.
2012 Acquisition
UNEV Pipeline Interest Acquisition
On July 12, 2012, we acquired from HFC a 75% interest in UNEV which owns a 400-mile, 12-inch refined products pipeline running from Woods Cross, Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada, product terminals near Cedar City, Utah and Las Vegas, Nevada and related assets. We paid consideration consisting of $260.9 million in cash and 2,059,800 of our common units (adjusted to reflect the unit split). As a result of the common units issued to HFC, HFC's ownership interest in us increased from 42% to 44% (including the 2% general partner interest). Also under the terms of the transaction, we issued to HFC a Class B unit comprising an equity interest in a wholly-owned subsidiary that entitles HFC to an interest in our share of annual UNEV earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation, and amortization above $30 million beginning July 1, 2016 and ending in June 2032, subject to certain limitations. Contemporaneously with this transaction, HFC (our general partner) agreed to forego its right to incentive distributions of up to $1.25 million per quarter over the next twelve consecutive quarterly periods and up to an additional four quarters in certain circumstances. In connection with the transaction, we entered into 15-year throughput agreements with shippers containing minimum annual revenue commitments to us of $25 million.
2011 Acquisition
Legacy Frontier Tankage and Terminal Transaction
On November 9, 2011, we acquired from HFC certain tankage, loading rack and crude receiving assets located at HFC’s El Dorado and Cheyenne refineries. We paid non-cash consideration consisting of promissory notes with an aggregate principal amount of $150 million and 7,615,230 of our common units. In connection with the transaction, we entered into 15-year throughput agreements with HFC containing minimum annual revenue commitments to us of $48.3 million.
2010 Acquisitions
Tulsa East / Lovington Storage Asset Transaction
On March 31, 2010, we acquired from HFC certain storage assets for $88.6 million consisting of hydrocarbon storage tanks having approximately 2 million barrels of storage capacity, a rail loading rack and a truck unloading rack located at HFC’s Tulsa refinery east facility. Also, as part of this same transaction, we acquired HFC’s asphalt loading rack facility located at its Navajo refinery facility in Lovington, New Mexico for $4.4 million.
Agreements with HFC and Alon
We serve HFC’s refineries under long-term pipeline and terminal, tankage and throughput agreements expiring in 2019 through 2026. Under these agreements, HFC agreed to transport, store and throughput volumes of refined product and crude oil on our pipelines and terminal, tankage and loading rack facilities that result in minimum annual payments to us. These minimum annual payments or revenues are subject to annual tariff rate adjustments on July 1, based on the Producer Price Index (“PPI”) or the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) index. Additionally, such agreements require HFC to reimburse us for certain costs. As of December 31, 2012, these agreements with HFC will result in minimum annualized payments to us of $217.2 million.
If HFC fails to meet its minimum volume commitments under the agreements in any quarter, it will be required to pay us in cash the amount of any shortfall by the last day of the month following the end of the quarter. Under certain of the agreements, a shortfall payment may be applied as a credit in the following four quarters after minimum obligations are met.
We also have a pipelines and terminals agreement with Alon expiring in 2020 under which Alon has agreed to transport on our pipelines and throughput through our terminals volumes of refined products that result in a minimum level of annual revenue that also is subject to annual tariff rate adjustments. In addition, we have a capacity lease agreement with Alon under which we lease Alon space on our Orla to El Paso pipeline for the shipment of up to 15,000 barrels of refined product per day. The terms under this agreement expire beginning in 2018 through 2022. As of December 31, 2012, these agreements with Alon will result in minimum annualized payments to us of $31.4 million.
A significant reduction in revenues under these agreements would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
Furthermore, if new laws or regulations that affect terminals or pipelines are enacted that require us to make substantial and unanticipated capital expenditures at the pipelines or terminals, we will have the right after we have made efforts to mitigate their effects to negotiate a monthly surcharge on HFC for the use of the terminals or to file for an increased tariff rate for use of the pipelines to cover HFC’s pro rata portion of the cost of complying with these laws or regulations including a reasonable rate of return. In such instances, we will negotiate in good faith with HFC to agree on the level of the monthly surcharge or increased tariff rate.
For additional information regarding our significant customers, see Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of Part II of this Form 10-K.
Omnibus Agreement
Under certain provisions of an omnibus agreement with HFC (the “Omnibus Agreement”), we pay HFC an annual administrative fee for the provision by HFC or its affiliates of various general and administrative services to us, currently $2.3 million. This fee includes expenses incurred by HFC and its affiliates to perform centralized corporate functions, such as executive management, legal, accounting, treasury, information technology and other corporate services, including the administration of employee benefit plans. This fee does not include the salaries of personnel employed by HLS who perform services for us or the cost of their employee benefits, such as 401(k), pension and health insurance benefits, which are separately charged to us by HFC. We also reimburse HFC and its affiliates for direct expenses they incur on our behalf. In addition, we also pay for our own direct general and administrative costs, including costs relating to operating as a separate publicly held entity, such as costs for preparation of partners’ K-1 tax information, SEC filings, investor relations, directors’ compensation, directors’ and officers’ insurance and registrar and transfer agent fees.
CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS
Our pipeline and terminalling operations are capital intensive, requiring investments to maintain, expand, upgrade or enhance existing operations and to meet environmental and operational regulations. Our capital requirements consist of maintenance capital expenditures and expansion capital expenditures. “Maintenance capital expenditures” represent capital expenditures to replace partially or fully depreciated assets to maintain the operating capacity of existing assets. Maintenance capital expenditures include expenditures required to maintain equipment reliability, tankage and pipeline integrity, safety and to address environmental regulations. “Expansion capital expenditures” represent capital expenditures to expand the operating capacity of existing or new assets, whether through construction or acquisition. Expansion capital expenditures include expenditures to acquire assets, to grow our business and to expand existing facilities, such as projects that increase throughput capacity on our pipelines and in our
terminals. Repair and maintenance expenses associated with existing assets that do not extend their useful life are charged to operating expenses as incurred.
Each year the HLS board of directors approves our annual capital budget, which specifies capital projects that our management is authorized to undertake. Additionally, at times when conditions warrant or as new opportunities arise, additional projects may be approved. The funds allocated for a particular capital project may be expended over a period in excess of a year, depending on the time required to complete the project. Therefore, our planned capital expenditures for a given year consist of expenditures approved for capital projects included in the current year's capital budget as well as, in certain cases, expenditures approved for capital projects in capital budgets for prior years. The 2013 regular capital budget is comprised of $10.1 million for maintenance capital expenditures and $2.0 million for expansion capital expenditures exclusive of the projects discussed below. In addition to our capital budget, we may spend funds periodically to do capital upgrades of our assets where a customer reimburses us for such costs. These reimbursements would be required under contractual agreements and would generally benefit the customer over the remaining life of such agreements.
We recently have made certain modifications to our crude oil gathering and trunk line system that effectively have increased our ability to gather and transport an additional 10,000 barrels per day (“bpd”) of Delaware Basin crude oil in response to increased drilling activity in southeast New Mexico. We have a second project recently approved which consists of the reactivation and conversion to crude oil service of a 70-mile, 8-inch petroleum products pipeline owned by us. This project also includes the expansion and extension of several of our crude gathering systems and crude mainlines. Once in service, this system will be capable of transporting crude oil from southeast New Mexico to third-party common carrier pipelines in west Texas for further transport to major crude oil markets. This project is estimated to cost approximately $38.5 million and could be fully operational in late 2013.
We are also performing preliminary engineering, routing and cost estimates for two proposed new pipelines. The first proposed pipeline would be a new intrastate crude oil pipeline between Cushing, Oklahoma and HFC's Tulsa, Oklahoma refinery. The 50-mile line would provide safe and reliable transport of Cushing sourced domestic and Canadian crude oil to HFC's 125,000 BPD Tulsa facility. The pipeline would allow for a significant portion of crude oil transported to be heavy Canadian and sour crude oil. Crude oil processed at HFC's Tulsa facility is currently transported on pipelines owned by Sunoco Logistics and Magellan Pipeline Company. The second proposed pipeline would be a new 100-mile interstate petroleum products pipeline between the HFC's Cheyenne, Wyoming refinery and Denver, Colorado. The 52,000 BPD refinery, with its ability to process up to 35,000 BPD of heavy Canadian crude and its close proximity to growing domestic crude production, is a significant supplier of petroleum products to the Denver market. The project also will evaluate the construction of a new petroleum products terminal in North Denver or, alternatively, the routing of the new pipeline to existing third-party product terminals in the Denver area. This infrastructure addition would ensure safe and reliable transport of petroleum products from HFC's location-advantaged refinery to its largest market. Petroleum products produced at HFC's Cheyenne, Wyoming refinery are currently transported to Denver on the Rocky Mountain Pipeline’s products line owned by Plains All-American. We anticipate that we will be in a position to decide whether to proceed with these projects in the second quarter of 2013 when preliminary engineering and detailed project cost estimates are completed and if necessary shipper commitments can be secured.
We expect that our currently planned sustaining and maintenance capital expenditures, as well as expenditures for acquisitions and capital development projects will be funded with existing cash generated by operations, the sale of additional limited partner common units, the issuance of debt securities and advances under our $550 million senior secured revolving credit facility expiring in June 2017 (the “Credit Agreement”), or a combination thereof. With volatility and uncertainty at times in the credit and equity markets, there may be limits on our ability to issue new debt or equity financing. Additionally, due to pricing movements in the debt and equity markets, we may not be able to issue new debt and equity securities at acceptable pricing. Without additional capital beyond amounts available under the Credit Agreement, our ability to obtain funds for some of these capital projects may be limited.
SAFETY AND MAINTENANCE
We perform preventive and normal maintenance on all of our pipeline systems and make repairs and replacements when necessary or appropriate. We also conduct routine and required inspections of our pipelines and other assets as required by code or regulation. We inject corrosion inhibitors into our mainlines to help control internal corrosion. External coatings and impressed current cathodic protection systems are used to protect against external corrosion. We conduct all cathodic protection work in accordance with National Association of Corrosion Engineers standards. We regularly monitor, test and record the effectiveness of these corrosion-inhibiting systems.
We monitor the structural integrity of selected segments of our pipeline systems through a program of periodic internal inspections using both “dent pigs” and electronic “smart pigs”, as well as hydrostatic testing that conforms to federal standards. We follow
these inspections with a review of the data and we make repairs as necessary to ensure the integrity of the pipeline. We have initiated a risk-based approach to prioritizing the pipeline segments for future smart pig runs or other approved integrity testing methods. We believe this approach will ensure that the pipelines that have the greatest risk potential receive the highest priority in being scheduled for inspections or pressure tests for integrity. Our inspection process complies with all Department of Transportation (“DOT”) and Code of Federal Regulations (“CFR”) 49 CFR Part 195 requirements.
Maintenance facilities containing equipment for pipe repairs, spare parts, and trained response personnel are located along the pipelines. Employees participate in simulated spill deployment exercises on a regular basis. Also they participate in actual spill response boom deployment exercises in planned spill scenarios in accordance with Oil Pollution Act of 1990 requirements. We believe that all of our pipelines have been constructed and are maintained in all material respects in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws; the regulations and standards prescribed by the American Petroleum Institute, the DOT; and accepted industry practice.
At our terminals, tanks designed for gasoline storage are equipped with internal or external floating roofs that minimize emissions and prevent potentially flammable vapor accumulation between fluid levels and the roof of the tank. Our terminal facilities have facility response plans, spill prevention and control plans, and other plans and programs to respond to emergencies.
Many of our terminal loading racks are protected with water deluge systems activated by either heat sensors or an emergency switch. Several of our terminals also are protected by foam systems that are activated in case of fire. All of our terminals are subject to participation in a comprehensive environmental management program to assure compliance with applicable air, solid waste, and wastewater regulations.
COMPETITION
As a result of our physical integration with HFC’s refineries, our contractual relationship with HFC under the Omnibus Agreement and the HFC pipelines and terminals, tankage and throughput agreements, we believe that we will not face significant competition for barrels of refined products transported from HFC’s refineries, particularly during the terms of our long-term transportation agreements with HFC expiring in 2019 through 2026. Additionally, under our throughput agreement with Alon expiring in 2020, we believe that we will not face significant competition for those barrels of refined products we transport from Alon’s Big Spring refinery.
However, we do face competition from other pipelines that may be able to supply the end-user markets of HFC or Alon with refined products on a more competitive basis. Additionally, if HFC’s wholesale customers reduced their purchases of refined products due to the increased availability of cheaper product from other suppliers or for other reasons, the volumes transported through our pipelines could be reduced, which, subject to the minimum revenue commitments, could cause a decrease in cash and revenues generated from our operations.
The petroleum refining business is highly competitive. Among HFC’s competitors are some of the world’s largest integrated petroleum companies, which have their own crude oil supplies and distribution and marketing systems. HFC competes with independent refiners as well. Competition in particular geographic areas is affected primarily by the amounts of refined products produced by refineries located in such areas and by the availability of refined products and the cost of transportation to such areas from refineries located outside those areas.
In addition, we face competition from trucks that deliver product in a number of areas we serve. Although their costs may not be competitive for longer hauls or large volume shipments, trucks compete effectively for incremental and marginal volumes in many areas we serve. The availability of truck transportation places some competitive constraints on us.
Historically, the significant majority of the throughput at our terminal facilities has come from HFC, with the exception of third-party receipts at the Spokane terminal, Alon volumes at El Paso, and the Abilene and Wichita Falls terminals that serve Alon’s Big Springs refinery.
Our twelve refined product terminals compete with other independent terminal operators as well as integrated oil companies based on terminal location, price, versatility and services provided. Our competition primarily comes from integrated petroleum companies, refining and marketing companies, independent terminal companies and distribution companies with marketing and trading arms.
RATE REGULATION
Some of our existing pipelines are subject to rate regulation by the FERC under the Interstate Commerce Act. The Interstate Commerce Act requires that tariff rates for oil pipelines, a category that includes crude oil and petroleum product pipelines, be just and reasonable and non-discriminatory. The Interstate Commerce Act permits challenges to rates that are already on file and
in effect by complaint. A successful challenge under a complaint may result in the complainant obtaining damages or reparations for up to two years prior to the date the complaint was filed. The Interstate Commerce Act also permits challenges to a proposed new or changed rate by a protest. A successful challenge under a protest may result in the protestant obtaining refunds or reparations from the date the proposed new or changed rate becomes effective. In either challenge process, the third party must be able to show it has a substantial economic interest in those rates to proceed. The FERC generally has not investigated interstate rates on its own initiative but will likely become a party to any proceedings when the rates receive either a complaint or a protest. However, the FERC is not prohibited from bringing an interstate rate under investigation without a third-party intervention.
While the FERC regulates the rates for interstate shipments on our refined product pipelines, the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission regulates the rates for intrastate shipments in New Mexico, the Texas Railroad Commission regulates the rates for intrastate shipments in Texas, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission regulates the rates for intrastate shipments in Oklahoma and the Idaho Public Utilities Commission regulates the rates for intrastate shipments in Idaho. State commissions have generally not been aggressive in regulating common carrier pipelines and generally have not investigated the rates or practices of petroleum pipelines in the absence of shipper complaints, and we do not believe the intrastate tariffs now in effect are likely to be challenged. However, a state regulatory commission could investigate our rates if such a challenge were filed.
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION AND REMEDIATION
Our operation of pipelines, terminals, and associated facilities in connection with the storage and transportation of refined products is subject to stringent and complex federal, state, and local laws and regulations governing the discharge of materials into the environment, or otherwise relating to the protection of the environment. As with the industry generally, compliance with existing and anticipated laws and regulations increases our overall cost of business, including our capital costs to construct, maintain, and upgrade equipment and facilities. Although these laws and regulations affect our maintenance capital expenditures and net income, we believe that they do not affect our competitive position in that the operations of our competitors are similarly affected. We believe that our operations are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations. However, these laws and regulations, and the interpretation or enforcement thereof, are subject to frequent change by regulatory authorities, and we are unable to predict the ongoing cost to us of complying with these laws and regulations or the future impact of these laws and regulations on our operations. Violation of environmental laws, regulations, and permits can result in the imposition of significant administrative, civil and criminal penalties, injunctions, and construction bans or delays. A discharge of hydrocarbons or hazardous substances into the environment could, to the extent the event is not insured, subject us to substantial expense, including both the cost to comply with applicable laws and regulations and claims made by employees, neighboring landowners and other third parties for personal injury and property damage.
Under the Omnibus Agreement and certain transportation agreements and purchase agreements with HFC, HFC has agreed to indemnify us, subject to certain monetary and time limitations, for environmental noncompliance and remediation liabilities associated with certain assets transferred to us from HFC and occurring or existing prior to the date of such transfers.
We have an environmental agreement with Alon with respect to pre-closing environmental costs and liabilities relating to the pipelines and terminals acquired from Alon in 2005, under which Alon will indemnify us subject to certain monetary and time limitations.
Contamination resulting from spills of refined products and crude oil is not unusual within the petroleum pipeline industry. Historic spills along our existing pipelines and terminals as a result of past operations have resulted in contamination of the environment, including soils and groundwater. Site conditions, including soils and groundwater, are being evaluated at a few of our properties where operations may have resulted in releases of hydrocarbons and other wastes, none of which we believe will have a significant effect on our operations since the remediation of such releases would be covered under environmental indemnification agreements.
There are environmental remediation projects currently in progress that relate to certain assets acquired from HFC. Certain of these projects were underway prior to our purchase and represent liabilities of HFC for future remediation activities retained by HFC. Additionally, as of December 31, 2012, we have an accrual of $3.0 million that relates to environmental clean-up projects for which we have assumed liability or for which the indemnity provided for by HFC has expired or will expire. The remaining projects, including assessment and monitoring activities, are covered under the HFC environmental indemnification discussed above and represent liabilities of HFC.
We may experience future releases into the environment from our pipelines and terminals or discover historical releases that were previously unidentified or not assessed. Although we maintain an extensive inspection and audit program designed, as applicable, to prevent, detect and address these releases promptly, damages and liabilities incurred due to any future environmental releases from our assets, nevertheless, have the potential to substantially affect our business.
EMPLOYEES
Neither we nor our general partner has employees. Direct support for our operations is provided by HLS, which employs 232 people. We reimburse HFC for direct expenses that HFC or its affiliates incurs on our behalf for the employees of HLS. HLS considers its employee relations to be good.
Investing in us involves a degree of risk, including the risks described below. You should consider the following risk factors carefully together with all of the other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including the financial statements and related notes, when deciding to invest in us. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial may also materially and adversely affect our business operations. If any of the following risks were to actually occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations or treatment of unitholders could be materially and adversely affected.
The headings provided in this Item 1A. are for convenience and reference purposes only and shall not affect or limit the extent or interpretation of the risk factors.
RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS
If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow, our ability to pay quarterly distributions to our common unitholders at current levels or to increase our quarterly distributions in the future could be impaired materially.
Our ability to pay quarterly distributions depends primarily on cash flow, including cash flow from operations, financial reserves and credit facilities, and not solely on profitability, which is affected by non-cash items. As a result, we may pay cash distributions during periods of losses and may be unable to pay cash distributions during periods of income. Our ability to generate sufficient cash from operations is largely dependent on our ability to manage our business successfully which may be affected also by economic, financial, competitive, and regulatory factors that are beyond our control. Because the cash we generate from operations will fluctuate from quarter to quarter, we may not be able to pay quarterly distributions at the current level for each quarter or to increase our quarterly distributions in the future.
We depend on HFC and particularly its Navajo refinery for a majority of our revenues; if those revenues were significantly reduced or if HFC's financial condition materially deteriorated, there would be a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
For the year ended December 31, 2012, HFC accounted for 79% of the revenues of our petroleum product and crude pipelines and 92% of the revenues of our terminals, tankage, and truck loading racks. We expect to continue to derive a majority of our revenues from HFC for the foreseeable future. If HFC satisfies only its minimum obligations under the long-term pipeline and terminal, tankage and throughput agreements that it has with us or is unable to meet its minimum annual payment commitment for any reason, including due to prolonged downtime or a shutdown at HFC's refineries, our revenues and cash flow would decline.
Any significant curtailing of production at the Navajo refinery could, by reducing throughput in our pipelines and terminals, result in our realizing materially lower levels of revenues and cash flow for the duration of the shutdown. For the year ended December 31, 2012, production from the Navajo refinery accounted for 82% of the throughput volumes transported by our refined product and crude pipelines. The Navajo refinery also received 100% of the petroleum products shipped on our New Mexico intermediate pipelines. Operations at any of HFC's refineries could be partially or completely shut down, temporarily or permanently, as the result of:
| |
• | competition from other refineries and pipelines that may be able to supply the refinery's end-user markets on a more cost-effective basis; |
| |
• | operational problems such as catastrophic events at the refinery, labor difficulties or environmental proceedings or other litigation that compel the cessation of all or a portion of the operations at the refinery; |
| |
• | planned maintenance or capital projects; |
| |
• | increasingly stringent environmental laws and regulations, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's gasoline and diesel sulfur control requirements that limit the concentration of sulfur in motor gasoline and diesel fuel for both on-road and non-road usage as well as various state and federal emission requirements that may affect the refinery itself and potential future climate change regulations; |
| |
• | an inability to obtain crude oil for the refinery at competitive prices; or |
| |
• | a general reduction in demand for refined products in the area due to: |
| |
◦ | a local or national recession or other adverse economic condition that results in lower spending by businesses and consumers on gasoline and diesel fuel; |
| |
◦ | higher gasoline prices due to higher crude oil costs, higher taxes or stricter environmental laws or regulations; or |
| |
◦ | a shift by consumers to more fuel-efficient or alternative fuel vehicles or an increase in fuel economy, whether as a result of technological advances by manufacturers, legislation either mandating or encouraging higher fuel economy or the use of alternative fuel or otherwise. |
The magnitude of the effect on us of any shutdown would depend on the length of the shutdown and the extent of the refinery operations affected by the shutdown. We have no control over the factors that may lead to a shutdown or the measures HFC may take in response to a shutdown. HFC makes all decisions at each of its refineries concerning levels of production, regulatory compliance, refinery turnarounds (planned shutdowns of individual process units within the refinery to perform major maintenance activities), labor relations, environmental remediation, emission control and capital expenditures; is responsible for all related costs; and is under no contractual obligation to us to maintain operations at its refineries.
Furthermore, HFC's obligations under the long-term pipeline and terminal, tankage and throughput agreements with us would be temporarily suspended during the occurrence of a force majeure event that renders performance impossible with respect to an asset for at least 30 days. If such an event were to continue for a year, we or HFC could terminate the agreements. The occurrence of any of these events could reduce our revenues and cash flows.
We depend on Alon and particularly its Big Spring refinery for a substantial portion of our revenues; if those revenues were significantly reduced, there would be a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
For the year ended December 31, 2012, Alon accounted for 11% of the combined revenues of our petroleum product and crude pipelines and of our terminals and truck loading racks, including revenues we received from Alon under a capacity lease agreement.
A decline in production at Alon's Big Spring refinery would reduce materially the volume of refined products we transport and terminal for Alon and, as a result, our revenues would be materially adversely affected. The Big Spring refinery could partially or completely shut down its operations, temporarily or permanently, due to factors affecting its ability to produce refined products or for planned maintenance or capital projects. Such factors would include the factors discussed above under the discussion of risk factors for the Navajo refinery.
The magnitude of the effect on us of any shutdown depends on the length of the shutdown and the extent of the refinery operations affected. We have no control over the factors that may lead to a shutdown or the measures Alon may take in response to a shutdown. Alon makes all decisions and is responsible for all costs at the Big Spring refinery concerning levels of production, regulatory compliance, refinery turnarounds, labor relations, environmental remediation, emission control and capital expenditures.
In addition, under our throughput agreement with Alon, if we are unable to transport or terminal refined products that Alon is prepared to ship, then Alon has the right to reduce its minimum volume commitment to us during the period of interruption. If a force majeure event occurs, we or Alon could terminate the Alon pipelines and terminals agreement after the expiration of certain time periods. The occurrence of any of these events could reduce our revenues and cash flows.
Due to our lack of asset diversification, adverse developments in our businesses could materially and adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
We rely exclusively on the revenues generated from our business. Due to our lack of asset diversification, especially a large concentration of pipeline assets serving the Navajo refinery, an adverse development in our business could have a significantly greater impact on our financial condition and results of operations than if we maintained more diverse assets.
Our leverage may limit our ability to borrow additional funds, comply with the terms of our indebtedness or capitalize on business opportunities.
As of December 31, 2012, the principal amount of our total outstanding debt was $871 million. Our results of operations, cash flows and financial position could be adversely affected by significant increases in interest rates above current levels. Various limitations in our Credit Agreement and the indentures for our 8.25% senior notes due 2018 and our 6.50% senior notes due 2020 (collectively, the “Senior Notes”) may reduce our ability to incur additional debt, to engage in some transactions and to capitalize on business opportunities. Any subsequent refinancing of our current indebtedness or any new indebtedness could have similar or greater restrictions.
Our leverage could have important consequences. We require substantial cash flow to meet our payment obligations with respect to our indebtedness. Our ability to make scheduled payments, to refinance our obligations with respect to our indebtedness or our ability to obtain additional financing in the future will depend on our financial and operating performance, which, in turn, is subject to prevailing economic conditions and to financial, business and other factors. We believe that we will have sufficient cash flow from operations and available borrowings under our Credit Agreement to service our indebtedness. However, a significant downturn in our business or other development adversely affecting our cash flow could impair materially our ability to service our indebtedness. If our cash flow and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we may be forced to refinance all or a portion of our debt or sell assets. We cannot assure you that we would be able to refinance our existing indebtedness at maturity or otherwise or sell assets on terms that are commercially reasonable.
The instruments governing our debt contain restrictive covenants that may prevent us from engaging in certain beneficial transactions. The agreements governing our debt generally require us to comply with various affirmative and negative covenants including the maintenance of certain financial ratios and restrictions on incurring additional debt, entering into mergers, consolidations and sales of assets, making investments and granting liens. Additionally, our purchase and contribution agreements with HFC with respect to the intermediate pipelines acquired in 2005 and the crude pipelines and tankage assets acquired in 2008, restrict us from selling these pipelines and terminals acquired from HFC. Under these agreements, we are restricted from prepaying borrowings and long-term debt to outstanding balances below $206 million prior to 2015 and $171 million prior to 2018, subject to certain limited exceptions. Our leverage may affect adversely our ability to fund future working capital, capital expenditures and other general partnership requirements, future acquisitions, construction or development activities, or to otherwise realize fully the value of our assets and opportunities because of the need to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to payments on our indebtedness or to comply with any restrictive terms of our indebtedness. Our leverage also may make our results of operations more susceptible to adverse economic and industry conditions by limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate and may place us at a competitive disadvantage as compared to our competitors that have less debt.
We may not be able to obtain funding on acceptable terms or at all because of volatility and uncertainty in the credit and capital markets. This may hinder or prevent us from meeting our future capital needs.
The domestic and global financial markets and economic conditions are disrupted and volatile from time to time due to a variety of factors, including low consumer confidence, high unemployment, geoeconomic and geopolitical issues, weak economic conditions and uncertainty in the financial services sector. In addition, the fixed-income markets have experienced periods of extreme volatility, which negatively impacted market liquidity conditions. As a result, the cost of raising money in the debt and equity capital markets has increased substantially at times while the availability of funds from these markets diminished significantly. In particular, as a result of concerns about the stability of financial markets generally and the solvency of lending counterparties specifically, the cost of obtaining money from the credit markets may increase as many lenders and institutional investors increase interest rates, enact tighter lending standards, refuse to refinance existing debt on similar terms or at all and reduce, or in some cases cease, to provide funding to borrowers. In addition, lending counterparties under existing revolving credit facilities and other debt instruments may be unwilling or unable to meet their funding obligations.
Due to these factors, we cannot be certain that new debt or equity financing will be available on acceptable terms. If funding is not available when needed, or is available only on unfavorable terms, we may be unable to meet our obligations as they come due. Moreover, without adequate funding, we may be unable to execute our growth strategy, complete future acquisitions or construction projects, take advantage of other business opportunities or respond to competitive pressures, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our revenues and results of operations.
We may not be able to fully execute our growth strategy if we encounter illiquid capital markets or increased competition for investment opportunities.
Our strategy contemplates growth through the development and acquisition of crude, intermediate and refined products transportation and storage assets while maintaining a strong balance sheet. This strategy includes constructing and acquiring additional assets and businesses to enhance our ability to compete effectively and diversifying our asset portfolio, thereby providing more stable cash flow. We regularly consider and enter into discussions regarding, and are currently contemplating and/or pursuing, potential joint ventures, stand alone projects or other transactions that we believe will present opportunities to realize synergies, expand our role in our chosen businesses and increase our market position.
We will require substantial new capital to finance the future development and acquisition of assets and businesses. Any limitations on our access to capital will impair our ability to execute this strategy. If the cost of such capital becomes too expensive, our ability to develop or acquire accretive assets will be limited. We may not be able to raise the necessary funds on satisfactory terms, if at all. The primary factors that influence our cost of equity include market conditions, fees we pay to underwriters and other offering
costs, which include amounts we pay for legal and accounting services. The primary factors influencing our cost of borrowing include interest rates, credit spreads, covenants, underwriting or loan origination fees and similar charges we pay to lenders.
In addition, we experience competition for the types of assets and businesses we have historically purchased or acquired. High competition, particularly for a limited pool of assets, may result in higher, less attractive asset prices, and therefore, we may lose to more competitive bidders. Such occurrences limit our ability to execute our growth strategy. Our inability to execute our growth strategy may materially, adversely affect our ability to maintain or pay higher distributions in the future.
We are exposed to the credit risks, and certain other risks, of our key customers, vendors, and other counterparties.
We are subject to risks of loss resulting from nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers, vendors or other counterparties. We derive a significant portion of our revenues from contracts with key customers, including HFC and Alon under their respective pipelines and terminals, tankage and throughput agreements. To the extent that these and other customers may be unable to meet the specifications of their customers, we would be adversely affected unless we were able to make comparably profitable arrangements with other customers.
Mergers among our existing customers could provide strong economic incentives for the combined entities to utilize systems other than ours, and we could experience difficulty in replacing lost volumes and revenues. Because a significant portion of our operating costs are fixed, a reduction in volumes would result not only in a reduction of revenues, but also a decline in net income and cash flow of a similar magnitude, which would reduce our ability to meet our financial obligations and make distributions to unitholders.
If any of our key customers default on their obligations to us, our financial results could be adversely affected. Furthermore, some of our customers may be highly leveraged and subject to their own operating and regulatory risks. In addition, nonperformance by vendors who have committed to provide us with products or services could result in higher costs or interfere with our ability to successfully conduct our business.
Any substantial increase in the nonpayment and/or nonperformance by our customers or vendors could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows.
In addition, in connection with the acquisition of certain of our assets, we have entered into agreements pursuant to which various counterparties have agreed to indemnify us, subject to certain limitations, for (1) certain pre-closing environmental liabilities discovered within specified time periods after the date of the applicable acquisition, (2) certain matters arising from the pre-closing ownership and operation of assets, and (3) ongoing remediation related to the assets. Our results of operation, cash flows and our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders could be adversely affected in the future if third parties fail to satisfy an indemnification obligation owed to us.
Competition from other pipelines that may be able to supply our shippers' customers with refined products at a lower price could cause us to reduce our rates or could reduce our revenues.
We and our shippers could face increased competition if other pipelines are able to supply our shippers' end-user markets competitively with refined products. For example, increased supplies of refined product delivered by Kinder Morgan's El Paso to Phoenix pipeline could result in additional downward pressure on wholesale-refined product prices and refined product margins in El Paso and related markets. Additionally, further increases in products from Gulf Coast refiners entering the El Paso and Arizona markets on this pipeline and a resulting increase in the demand for shipping product on the interconnecting common carrier pipelines could cause a decline in the demand for refined product from HFC and/or Alon. This could reduce our opportunity to earn revenues from HFC and Alon in excess of their minimum volume commitment obligations.
An additional factor that could affect some of HFC's and Alon's markets is excess pipeline capacity from the West Coast into our shippers' Arizona markets on the pipeline from the West Coast to Phoenix. Additional increases in shipments of refined products from the West Coast into our shippers' Arizona markets could result in additional downward pressure on refined product prices that, if sustained over the long term, could influence product shipments by HFC and Alon to these markets.
A material decrease in the supply, or a material increase in the price, of crude oil available to HFC's and Alon's refineries and a corresponding decrease in demand for refined products in the markets served by our pipelines and terminals, could reduce our revenues materially.
The volume of refined products we transport in our refined product pipelines depends on the level of production of refined products from HFC's and Alon's refineries, which, in turn, depends on the availability of attractively-priced crude oil produced in the areas accessible to those refineries. In order to maintain or increase production levels at their refineries, our shippers must continually contract for new crude oil supplies. A material decrease in crude oil production from the fields that supply their refineries, as a
result of depressed commodity prices, decreased demand, lack of drilling activity, natural production declines or otherwise, could result in a decline in the volume of crude oil our shippers refine, absent the availability of transported crude oil to offset such declines. Such an event would result in an overall decline in volumes of refined products transported through our pipelines and therefore a corresponding reduction in our cash flow. In addition, the future growth of our shippers' operations will depend in part upon whether our shippers can contract for additional supplies of crude oil at a greater rate than the rate of natural decline in their currently connected supplies.
Fluctuations in crude oil prices can greatly affect production rates and investments by third parties in the development of new oil reserves. Drilling activity generally decreases as crude oil prices decrease. We and our shippers have no control over the level of drilling activity in the areas of operations, the amount of reserves underlying the wells and the rate at which production from a well will decline, or producers or their production decisions, which are affected by, among other things, prevailing and projected energy prices, demand for hydrocarbons, geological considerations, governmental regulation and the availability and cost of capital. Similarly, a material increase in the price of crude oil supplied to our shippers' refineries without an increase in the market value of the products produced by the refineries, either temporary or permanent, which causes a reduction in the production of refined products at the refineries, would cause a reduction in the volumes of refined products we transport, and our cash flow could be adversely affected.
Finally, our business depends in large part on the demand for the various petroleum products we gather, transport and store in the markets we serve. Reductions in that demand adversely affect our business. Market demand varies based upon the different end uses of the petroleum products we gather, transport and store. We cannot predict the impact of future fuel conservation measures, alternate fuel requirements, government regulation, technological advances in fuel economy and energy-generation devices, exploration and production activities, and actions by foreign nations, any of which could reduce the demand for the petroleum products in the areas we serve.
We may not be able to retain existing customers or acquire new customers.
The renewal or replacement of existing contracts with our customers at rates sufficient to maintain current revenues and cash flows depends on a number of factors outside our control, including competition from other pipelines and the demand for refined products in the markets that we serve. Our long-term pipeline and terminal, tankage and throughput agreements with HFC and Alon expire beginning in 2019 through 2026.
Meeting the requirements of evolving environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those related to climate change, could adversely affect our performance.
Environmental laws and regulations have raised operating costs for the oil and refined products industry and compliance with such laws and regulations may cause us, HFC and Alon to incur potentially material capital expenditures associated with the construction, maintenance, and upgrading of equipment and facilities. We may also be required to address conditions discovered in the future that require environmental response actions or remediation. Future environmental, health and safety requirements or changed interpretations of existing requirements, may impose more stringent requirements on our assets and operations and require us to incur potentially material expenditures to ensure our continued compliance. Future developments in federal laws and regulations governing environmental, health and safety and energy matters are especially difficult to predict.
Currently, various legislative and regulatory measures to address greenhouse gas emissions (including carbon dioxide, methane and other gases) are in various phases of discussion or implementation. These include requirements that require HFC's and Alon's refineries to report emissions of greenhouse gases to the EPA, and proposed federal, state, and regional initiatives that require, or could require, us, HFC and Alon to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from our facilities. Requiring reductions in greenhouse gas emissions could cause us to incur substantial costs to (i) operate and maintain our facilities, (ii) install new emission controls at our facilities and (iii) administer and manage any greenhouse gas emissions programs, including the acquisition or maintenance of emission credits or allowances. These requirements may affect HFC's and Alon's refinery operations and have an indirect adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of our operations.
Requiring a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and the increased use of renewable fuels could also decrease demand for refined products, which could have an indirect, but material, adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. For example, in 2010, the EPA promulgated a rule establishing greenhouse gas emission standards for new-model passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles. Also in 2010, the EPA promulgated a rule establishing greenhouse gas emission thresholds for the permitting of certain stationary sources, which could require greenhouse emission controls for those sources. These requirements could have an indirect adverse effect on our business due to reduced demand for crude oil and refined products, and a direct adverse effect on our business from increased regulation of our facilities.
The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 increases penalties for safety violations, establishes additional safety requirements for newly constructed pipelines, and requires studies of certain safety issues and potentially the adoption of new regulatory requirements for existing pipelines. In addition, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation has published an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking to solicit comments on the need for changes to its safety regulations, including whether to revise the integrity management requirements and add new regulations governing the safety of gathering lines. Such legislative and regulatory changes could have a material effect on our operations through more stringent and comprehensive safety regulations and higher penalties for the violation of those regulations.
Increases in interest rates could adversely affect our business.
We use both fixed and variable rate debt, and we are exposed to market risk due to the floating interest rates on our credit facility. From time to time we use interest rate derivatives to hedge interest obligations on specific debt. In addition, interest rates on future debt offerings could be higher, causing our financing costs to increase accordingly. Our results of operations, cash flows and financial position could be adversely affected by significant increases in interest rates above current levels.
We may be subject to information technology system failures, network disruptions and breaches in data security.
Information technology system failures, network disruptions (whether intentional by a third party or due to natural disaster), breaches of network or data security, or disruption or failure of the network system used to monitor and control pipeline operations could disrupt our operations by impeding our processing of transactions, our ability to protect customer or company information and our financial reporting. Our computer systems, including our back-up systems, could be damaged or interrupted by power outages, computer and telecommunications failures, computer viruses, internal or external security breaches, events such as fires, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes and hurricanes, and/or errors by our employees. Although we have taken steps to address these concerns by implementing sophisticated network security and internal control measures, there can be no assurance that a system failure or data security breach will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Our operations are subject to federal, state, and local laws and regulations relating to product quality specifications, environmental protection and operational safety that could require us to make substantial expenditures.
Our pipelines and terminals, tankage and loading rack operations are subject to increasingly strict environmental and safety laws and regulations. Also, the transportation and storage of refined products produces a risk that refined products and other hydrocarbons may be suddenly or gradually released into the environment, potentially causing substantial expenditures for a response action, significant government penalties, liability to government agencies for natural resources damages, personal injury or property damages to private parties and significant business interruption. We own or lease a number of properties that have been used to store or distribute refined products for many years. Many of these properties also have been operated by third parties whose handling, disposal, or release of hydrocarbons and other wastes were not under our control. If we were to incur a significant liability pursuant to environmental laws or regulations, it could have a material adverse effect on us. Also we are subject to the requirements of the Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”), and comparable state statutes. Any violation of OSHA could impose substantial costs on us.
Petroleum products that we store and transport are sold by our customers for consumption into the public market. Various federal, state and local agencies have the authority to prescribe specific product quality specifications of refined products. Changes in product quality specifications or blending requirements could reduce our throughput volume, require us to incur additional handling costs or require capital expenditures. For example, different product specifications for different markets impact the fungibility of the products in our system and could require the construction of additional storage. If we are unable to recover these costs through increased revenues, our cash flows and ability to pay cash distributions could be adversely affected. In addition, changes in the product quality of the products we receive on our petroleum products pipeline system could reduce or eliminate our ability to blend products.
Our operations are subject to operational hazards and unforeseen interruptions for which we may not be adequately insured.
Our operations are subject to operational hazards and unforeseen interruptions such as natural disasters, adverse weather, accidents, fires, explosions, hazardous materials releases, mechanical failures and other events beyond our control. These events might result in a loss of equipment or life or destruction of property, injury, or extensive property damage, as well as a curtailment or interruption in our operations. In addition, third-party damage, mechanical malfunctions, undetected leaks in pipelines, faulty measurement or other errors may result in significant costs or lost revenues.
We may not be able to maintain or obtain insurance of the type and amount we desire at reasonable rates and exclusions from coverage may limit our ability to recover the amount of the full loss in all situations. As a result of market conditions, premiums and deductibles for certain of our insurance policies could increase. In some instances, certain insurance could become unavailable or available only for reduced amounts of coverage. If we were to incur a significant liability for which we were not fully insured, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial position. With our distribution policy, we do not have the same flexibility as other legal entities to accumulate cash to protect against underinsured or uninsured losses.
There can be no assurance that insurance will cover all damages and losses resulting from these types of hazards. We are not fully insured against all risks incident to our business. We are not insured against all environmental accidents that might occur, other than those considered to be sudden and accidental. Our business interruption insurance covers only certain lost revenues arising from physical damage to our facilities and HFC and Alon facilities. If a significant accident or event occurs that is not fully insured, our operations could be temporarily or permanently impaired, and our liabilities and expenses could be significant.
Any reduction in the capacity of, or the allocations to, our shippers on interconnecting, third-party pipelines could cause a reduction of volumes transported in our pipelines and through our terminals.
HFC, Alon and the other users of our pipelines and terminals are dependent upon connections to third-party pipelines to receive and deliver crude oil and refined products. Any reduction of capacities of these interconnecting pipelines due to testing, line repair, reduced operating pressures, or other causes could result in reduced volumes transported in our pipelines or through our terminals. Similarly, if additional shippers begin transporting volumes of refined products over interconnecting pipelines, the allocations to existing shippers in these pipelines would be reduced, which could also reduce volumes transported in our pipelines or through our terminals.
We could be subject to damages based on claims brought against us by our customers or lose customers as a result of the failure of products we distribute to meet certain quality specifications.
A significant portion of our operating responsibility on refined product pipelines is to insure the quality and purity of the products loaded at our loading racks. If our quality control measures were to fail, off specification product could be sent out to public gasoline stations. This type of incident could result in liability claims regarding damages caused by the off specification fuel or could impact our ability to retain existing customers or to acquire new customers, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations and cash flows.
If our assumptions concerning population growth are inaccurate or if HFC's growth strategy is not successful, our ability to grow may be adversely affected.
Our growth strategy is dependent upon:
| |
• | the accuracy of our assumption that many of the markets that we currently serve or have plans to serve in the Southwestern, Rocky Mountain and Mid-Continent regions of the United States will experience population growth that is higher than the national average; and |
| |
• | the willingness and ability of HFC to capture a share of this additional demand in its existing markets and to identify and penetrate new markets in the Southwestern, Rocky Mountain and Mid-Continent regions of the United States. |
If our assumptions about growth in market demand prove incorrect, HFC may not have any incentive to increase refinery capacity and production or shift additional throughput to our pipelines, which would adversely affect our growth strategy. Furthermore, HFC is under no obligation to pursue a growth strategy. If HFC chooses not to gain, or is unable to gain additional customers in new or existing markets, our growth strategy would be adversely affected. Moreover, HFC may not make acquisitions that would provide acquisition opportunities to us; or, if those opportunities arise, they may not be on terms attractive to us or on terms that allow us to obtain appropriate financing.
Growing our business by constructing new pipelines and terminals, or expanding existing ones, subjects us to construction risks.
One of the ways we may grow our business is through the construction of new pipelines and terminals or the expansion of existing ones. The construction of a new pipeline or the expansion of an existing pipeline, by adding horsepower or pump stations or by adding a second pipeline along an existing pipeline, involves numerous regulatory, environmental, political, and legal uncertainties, most of which are beyond our control. These projects may not be completed on schedule or at all or at the budgeted cost. In addition, our revenues may not increase immediately upon the expenditure of funds on a particular project. For instance, if we
build a new pipeline, the construction will occur over an extended period of time and we will not receive any material increases in revenues until after completion of the project. Moreover, we may construct facilities to capture anticipated future growth in demand for refined products in a region in which such growth does not materialize. As a result, new facilities may not be able to attract enough throughput to achieve our expected investment return, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Rate regulation, changes to rate-making rules, or a successful challenge to the rates we charge may reduce our revenues and the amount of cash we generate.
The FERC regulates the tariff rates for interstate movements and state regulatory authorities regulate the tariff rates for intrastate movements on our pipeline systems. The regulatory agencies that regulate our systems periodically implement new rules, regulations and terms and conditions of services subject to their jurisdiction. New initiatives or orders may adversely affect the rates charged for our services.
The primary rate-making methodology of the FERC is price indexing. We use this methodology in all of our interstate markets. If the FERC's petroleum pipeline rate-making methodology changes, the new methodology could result in tariffs that generate lower revenues and cash flow. The indexing method allows a pipeline to increase its rates based on a percentage change in the producer price index for finished goods. 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 allowable rate. In addition, changes in the index might not be large enough to fully reflect actual increases in our costs. 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 would adversely affect our revenues and cash flow.
If a party with an economic interest were to file either a protest of our proposal for increased rates or a complaint against our existing tariff rates, or the FERC were to initiate an investigation of our existing rates, then our rates could be subject to detailed review. If our proposed rate increases were found to be in excess of levels justified by our cost of service, the FERC could order us to reduce our rates, and to refund the amount by which the rate increases were determined to be excessive, plus interest. If our existing rates were found to be in excess of our cost of services, we could be ordered to refund the excess we collected for as far back as two years prior to the date of the filing of the complaint challenging the rates, and we could be ordered to reduce our rates prospectively. In addition, a state commission also could investigate our intrastate rates or our terms and conditions of service on its own initiative or at the urging of a shipper or other interested party. If a state commission found that our rates exceeded levels justified by our cost of service, the state commission could order us to reduce our rates. Any such reductions may result in lower revenues and cash flows if additional volumes and / or capacity are unavailable to offset such rate reductions.
HFC and Alon have agreed not to challenge, or to cause others to challenge or assist others in challenging, our tariff rates in effect during the terms of their respective pipelines and terminals agreements. These agreements do not prevent other current or future shippers from challenging our tariff rates.
Terrorist attacks, and the threat of terrorist attacks or domestic vandalism, have resulted in increased costs to our business. Continued global hostilities or other sustained military campaigns may adversely impact our results of operations.
The long-term impact of terrorist attacks, such as the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, and the threat of future terrorist attacks, on the energy transportation industry in general, and on us in particular, is not known at this time. Increased security measures taken by us as a precaution against possible terrorist attacks or vandalism have resulted in increased costs to our business. Uncertainty surrounding continued global hostilities or other sustained military campaigns may affect our operations in unpredictable ways, including disruptions of crude oil supplies and markets for refined products, and the possibility that infrastructure facilities could be direct targets of, or indirect casualties of, an act of terror.
Changes in the insurance markets attributable to terrorist attacks could make certain types of insurance more difficult for us to obtain. Moreover, the insurance that may be available to us may be significantly more expensive than our existing insurance coverage. Instability in the financial markets as a result of terrorism or war could also affect our ability to raise capital including our ability to repay or refinance debt.
Adverse changes in our credit ratings and risk profile, and that of our general partner, may negatively affect us.
Our ability to access capital markets is important to our ability to operate our business. Regional and national economic conditions, increased scrutiny of the energy industry and regulatory changes, as well as changes in our economic performance, could result in credit agencies reexamining our credit rating. While credit ratings reflect the opinions of the credit agencies issuing such ratings and may not necessarily reflect actual performance, a downgrade in our credit rating could restrict or discontinue our ability to
access capital markets at attractive rates, and could result in an increase in our borrowing costs, a reduced level of capital expenditures and an impact on future earnings and cash flows.
We are in compliance with all covenants or other requirements set forth in our Credit Agreement. Further, we do not have any rating downgrade triggers that would automatically accelerate the maturity dates of any debt. However, a downgrade in our credit rating could affect adversely our ability to borrow on, renew existing, or obtain access to new financing arrangements and would increase the cost of such financing arrangements.
The credit and business risk profiles of our general partner, and of HFC as the indirect owner of our general partner, may be factors in credit evaluations of us as a master limited partnership due to the significant influence of our general partner and its indirect owner over our business activities, including our cash distribution acquisition strategy and business risk profile. Another factor that may be considered is the financial condition of our general partner and its owners, including the degree of their financial leverage and their dependence on cash flow from the partnership to service their indebtedness.
We may be unsuccessful in integrating the operations of the assets we have acquired or of any future acquisitions with our operations, and in realizing all or any part of the anticipated benefits of any such acquisitions.
From time to time, we evaluate and acquire assets and businesses that we believe complement our existing assets and businesses. For example, in 2012 we completed the UNEV pipeline asset acquisition. Acquisitions may require substantial capital or the incurrence of substantial indebtedness. Our capitalization and results of operations may change significantly as a result of the acquisitions we recently completed or as a result of future acquisitions. Acquisitions and business expansions involve numerous risks, including difficulties in the assimilation of the assets and operations of the acquired businesses, inefficiencies and difficulties that arise because of unfamiliarity with new assets and the businesses associated with them and new geographic areas and the diversion of management's attention from other business concerns. Further, unexpected costs and challenges may arise whenever businesses with different operations or management are combined, and we may experience unanticipated delays in realizing the benefits of an acquisition, including the assets we acquired in 2012. Also, following an acquisition, we may discover previously unknown liabilities associated with the acquired business or assets for which we have no recourse under applicable indemnification provisions.
If we are unable to complete capital projects at their expected costs or in a timely manner, or if the market conditions assumed in our project economics deteriorate, our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows could be affected materially and adversely.
Delays or cost increases related to capital spending programs involving construction of new facilities (or improvements and repairs to our existing facilities) could affect adversely our ability to achieve forecasted operating results. Although we evaluate and monitor each capital spending project and try to anticipate difficulties that may arise, such delays or cost increases may arise as a result of numerous factors, such as:
| |
• | denial or delay in issuing requisite regulatory approvals and/or permits; |
| |
• | unplanned increases in the cost of construction materials or labor; |
| |
• | disruptions in transportation of modular components and/or construction materials; |
| |
• | severe adverse weather conditions, natural disasters, or other events (such as equipment malfunctions explosions, fires or spills) affecting our facilities, or those of vendors and suppliers; |
| |
• | shortages of sufficiently skilled labor, or labor disagreements resulting in unplanned work stoppages; |
| |
• | market-related increases in a project's debt or equity financing costs; and/or |
| |
• | nonperformance by, or disputes with, vendors, suppliers, contractors, or sub-contractors involved with a project. |
If we are unable to complete capital projects at their expected costs or in a timely manner our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.
We do not own all of the land on which our pipeline systems and facilities are located. Our operations could be disrupted if we were to lose or were unable to renew existing rights-of-way.
We do not own all of the land on which our pipeline systems and facilities are located, and we are, therefore, subject to the risk of increased costs to maintain necessary land use. We obtain the right to construct and operate pipelines on land owned by third parties and government agencies for specified periods. If we were to lose these rights through an inability to renew right-of-way contracts or otherwise, we may be required to relocate our pipelines and our business could be adversely affected. Additionally, it may become more expensive for us to obtain new rights-of-way or to renew existing rights-of-way. If the cost of obtaining new
rights-of-way or renewing existing rights-of-way increases, it may adversely affect our operations and cash flows available for distribution to unitholders.
Our business may suffer due to a change in the composition of our Board of Directors, or if any of our key senior executives or other key employees discontinue employment with HLS, who provide services to us. Furthermore, a shortage of skilled labor or disruptions in HLS's labor force may make it difficult for us to maintain labor productivity.
Our future success depends to a large extent on the services of HLS's Board of Directors, key senior executives and key senior employees who provide services to us. Our business depends on the continuing ability to recruit, train and retain highly qualified employees in all areas of our operations, including accounting, business operations, finance and other key back-office and mid-office personnel. The competition for these employees is intense, and the loss of these executives or employees could harm our business. If any of these executives or other key personnel resign or become unable to continue in their present roles and are not adequately replaced, our business operations could be materially adversely affected. We do not maintain any “key man” life insurance for any executives. Furthermore, our operations require skilled and experienced laborers with proficiency in multiple tasks.
As of December 31, 2012, approximately 17% of HLS's employees were represented by labor unions under collective bargaining agreements with various expiration dates. We may not be able to renegotiate the collective bargaining agreements when they expire on satisfactory terms or at all. A failure to do so may increase our costs. In addition, existing labor agreements may not prevent a strike or work stoppage in the future, and any work stoppage could negatively affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Many of our officers also allocate time to our general partner and its affiliates.
Our general partner shares officers and administrative personnel with HFC to operate both our business and HFC's business. Our general partners' officers, several of whom also are officers of HFC, will allocate the time they and the other employees of HFC spend on our behalf and on behalf of HFC. These officers face conflicts regarding the allocation of their and other employees' time, which may affect adversely our results of operations, cash flows and financial condition.
RISKS TO COMMON UNITHOLDERS
HFC and its affiliates may have conflicts of interest and limited fiduciary duties, which may permit them to favor their own interests.
Currently, HFC indirectly owns the 2% general partner interest and a 42% limited partner interest in us and owns and controls the general partner of our general partner, HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P (“HEP Logistics”). Conflicts of interest may arise between HFC and its affiliates, including our general partner, on the one hand, and us, on the other hand. As a result of these conflicts, the general partner may favor its own interests and the interests of its other affiliates over our interests. These conflicts include, among others, the following situations:
| |
• | HFC, as a shipper on our pipelines, has an economic incentive not to cause us to seek higher tariff rates or terminalling fees, even if such higher rates or terminalling fees would reflect rates that could be obtained in arm's-length, third-party transactions; |
| |
• | neither our partnership agreement nor any other agreement requires HFC to pursue a business strategy that favors us or utilizes our assets, including whether to increase or decrease refinery production, whether to shut down or reconfigure a refinery, or what markets to pursue or grow. HFC's directors and officers have a fiduciary duty to make these decisions in the best interests of the stockholders of HFC; |
| |
• | our general partner is allowed to take into account the interests of parties other than us, such as HFC, in resolving conflicts of interest; |
| |
• | our general partner determines which costs incurred by HFC and its affiliates are reimbursable by us; |
| |
• | our partnership agreement does not restrict our general partner from causing us to pay it or its affiliates for any services rendered to us or entering into additional contractual arrangements with any of these entities on our behalf; |
| |
• | our general partner determines the amount and timing of our asset purchases and sales, capital expenditures and borrowings, each of which can affect the amount of cash available to us; and |
| |
• | our general partner controls the enforcement of obligations owed to us by our general partner and its affiliates, including the pipelines and terminals agreement with HFC. |
Cost reimbursements, which will be determined by our general partner, and fees due to our general partner and its affiliates for services provided, are substantial.
Under our Omnibus Agreement, we are currently obligated to pay HFC an administrative fee of $2.3 million per year for the provision by HFC or its affiliates of various general and administrative services for our benefit. We can provide no assurance that HFC will continue to provide us the officers and employees that are necessary for the conduct of our business nor that such provision will be on terms that are acceptable to us. If HFC fails to provide us with adequate personnel, our operations could be adversely impacted.
The administrative fee is subject to annual review and may increase if we make an acquisition that requires an increase in the level of general and administrative services that we receive from HFC or its affiliates. Our general partner will determine the amount of general and administrative expenses that properly will be allocated to us in accordance with the terms of our partnership agreement. In addition, our general partner and its affiliates are entitled to reimbursement for all other expenses they incur on our behalf, including the salaries of and the cost of employee benefits for employees of Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. who provide services to us. Prior to making any distribution on the common units, we will reimburse our general partner and its affiliates, including officers and directors of the general partner, for all expenses incurred on our behalf, plus the administrative fee. The reimbursement of expenses and the payment of fees could adversely affect our ability to make distributions. The general partner has sole discretion to determine the amount of these expenses. Our general partner and its affiliates also may provide us other services for which we are charged fees as determined by our general partner.
Increases in interest rates could adversely impact our unit price and our ability to issue additional equity to make acquisitions, for expansion capital expenditures or for other purposes.
As with other yield-oriented securities, our unit price is impacted by the level of our cash distributions and implied distribution yield. The distribution yield is often used by investors to compare and rank related yield-oriented securities for investment decision-making purposes. Therefore, changes in interest rates, either positive or negative, may affect the yield requirements of investors who invest in our units and a rising interest rate environment could have an adverse impact on our unit price and our ability to issue additional equity to make acquisitions, for expansion capital expenditures or for other purposes. If we then issue additional equity at a significantly lower price, material dilution to our existing unitholders could result.
Even if unitholders are dissatisfied, they cannot remove our general partner without its consent.
Unlike the holders of common stock in a corporation, unitholders have only limited voting rights on matters affecting our business and, therefore, limited ability to influence management's decisions regarding our business. Unitholders did not elect our general partner or the board of directors of our general partner's general partner and have no right to elect our general partner or the board of directors of our general partner's general partner on an annual or other continuing basis. The board of directors of our general partner's general partner is chosen by the members of our general partner's general partner. Furthermore, if unitholders are dissatisfied with the performance of our general partner, they will have little ability to remove our general partner. As a result of these limitations, the price at which the common units trade could be diminished because of the absence or reduction of a takeover premium in the trading price.
The vote of the holders of at least 66 2/3% of all outstanding units voting together as a single class is required to remove the general partner. Unitholders will be unable to remove the general partner without its consent because the general partner and its affiliates own sufficient units to prevent its removal. Unitholders' voting rights are further restricted by the partnership agreement provision providing that any units held by a person that owns 20% or more of any class of units then outstanding, other than the general partner, its affiliates, their transferees, and persons who acquired such units with the prior approval of the board of directors of the general partner's general partner, cannot vote on any matter; however, no such person currently exists. Our partnership agreement also contains provisions limiting the ability of unitholders to call meetings or to acquire information about our operations, as well as other provisions limiting the unitholders' ability to influence the manner or direction of management.
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 in a merger or in a sale of all or substantially all of its assets without the consent of the unitholders. Furthermore, our partnership agreement does not restrict the ability of the partners of our general partner from transferring their respective partnership interests in our general partner to a third party. The new partners of our general partner would then be in a position to replace the board of directors and officers of the general partner of our general partner with their own choices and to control the decisions taken by the board of directors and officers.
We may issue additional common units without unitholder approval, which would dilute an existing unitholder's ownership interests.
Under our partnership agreement, provided there is no significant decrease in our operating performance, we may issue an unlimited number of limited partner interests of any type without the approval of our unitholders, and HEP currently has a shelf registration on file with the SEC pursuant to which it may issue up to $2.0 billion in additional common units.
The issuance by us of additional common units or other equity securities of equal or senior rank will have the following effects:
| |
• | our unitholders' proportionate ownership interest in us will decrease; |
| |
• | the amount of cash available for distribution on each unit may decrease; |
| |
• | because a lower percentage of total outstanding units will be subordinated units, the risk that a shortfall in the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution will be borne by our common unitholders will increase; |
| |
• | the relative voting strength of each previously outstanding unit may be diminished; and |
| |
• | the market price of the common units may decline. |
Our partnership agreement does not give our unitholders the right to approve our issuance of equity securities ranking junior to the common units at any time.
In establishing cash reserves, our general partner may reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to unitholders.
Our partnership agreement requires our general partner to deduct from operating surplus cash reserves that it establishes are necessary to fund our future operating expenditures. In addition, our partnership agreement permits our general partner to reduce available cash by establishing cash reserves for the proper conduct of our business, to comply with applicable law or agreements to which we are a party, or to provide funds for future distributions to partners. These cash reserves will affect the amount of cash available to make the required payments to our debt holders or to pay the minimum quarterly distribution on our common units every quarter.
HFC and its affiliates may engage in limited competition with us.
HFC and its affiliates may engage in limited competition with us. Pursuant to the Omnibus Agreement among us, HFC and our general partner, HFC and its affiliates agreed not to engage in the business of operating intermediate or refined product pipelines or terminals, crude oil pipelines or terminals, truck racks or crude oil gathering systems in the continental United States. The Omnibus Agreement, however, does not apply to:
| |
• | any business operated by HFC or any of its subsidiaries at the closing of our initial public offering; |
| |
• | any business or asset that HFC or any of its subsidiaries acquires or constructs that has a fair market value or construction cost of less than $5 million; and |
| |
• | any business or asset that HFC or any of its subsidiaries acquires or constructs that has a fair market value or construction cost of $5 million or more if we have been offered the opportunity to purchase the business or asset at fair market value, and we decline to do so. |
In the event that HFC or its affiliates no longer control our partnership or there is a change of control of HFC, the non-competition provisions of the Omnibus Agreement will terminate.
Our general partner may cause us to borrow funds in order to make cash distributions, even where the purpose or effect of the borrowing benefits our general partner or its affiliates.
In some instances, our general partner may cause us to borrow funds from affiliates of HFC or from third parties in order to permit the payment of cash distributions. These borrowings are permitted even if the purpose and effect of the borrowing is to enable us to make incentive distributions.
Our general partner has a limited call right that may require a unitholder to sell its common units at an undesirable time or price.
If at any time our general partner and its affiliates own more than 80% of the common units (which it does not presently), our general partner will have the right, but not the obligation, which it may assign to any of its affiliates or to us, to acquire all, but not less than all, of the common units held by unaffiliated persons at a price not less than their then-current market price. As a result, a holder of common units may be required to sell its units at a time or price that is undesirable to it and may not receive any return on its investment. A common unitholder may also incur a tax liability upon a sale of its units.
A unitholder may not have limited liability if a court finds that unitholder actions constitute control of our business or that we have not complied with state partnership law.
Under Delaware law, a unitholder could be held liable for our obligations to the same extent as a general partner if a court determined that the right of unitholders to remove our general partner or to take other action under our partnership agreement constituted participation in the “control” of our business. Our general partner generally has unlimited liability for our obligations, such as our debts and environmental liabilities, except for those contractual obligations that are expressly made without recourse to our general partner.
In addition, Section 17-607 and 17-804 of the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act provides that under some circumstances, a unitholder may be liable to us for the amount of a distribution for a period of three years from the date of the distribution.
Further, we conduct business in a number of states. In some of those states the limitations on the liability of limited partners for the obligations of a limited partnership have not been clearly established. The unitholders might be held liable for the partnership's obligations as if they were a general partner if a court or government agency determined that we were conducting business in the state but had not complied with the state's partnership statute.
HFC may sell units in the public or private markets, and such sales could have an adverse impact on the trading price of the common units.
HFC currently holds 24,255,030 of our common units, which is approximately 42% of our outstanding common units. Additionally, we agreed to provide HFC registration rights with respect to our common units that it holds. The sale of these units in the public or private markets could have an adverse impact on the trading price of our common units.
TAX RISKS TO COMMON UNITHOLDERS
Our tax treatment depends on our status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes as well as our not being subject to a material amount of entity-level taxation by individual states. If the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) were to treat us as a corporation for federal income tax purposes or, as a result of legislative changes, we were to become subject to additional amounts of entity-level taxation for federal or state tax purposes, then our cash available for distribution to unitholders would be substantially reduced.
The anticipated after-tax economic benefit of an investment in our common units depends largely on us being treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes.
Despite the fact that we are organized as a limited partnership under Delaware law, it is possible in certain circumstances for a partnership such as ours to be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes. Although we do not believe, based upon our current operations, that we will be so treated, a change in our business (or a change in current law) could cause us to be treated as a corporation for 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 federal income tax on our taxable income at the corporate tax rate, which is currently a maximum of 35%. Under current law, 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 unitholders, likely causing a substantial reduction in the value of our common units.
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 federal, state or local income tax purposes, the minimum quarterly distribution amount and the target distribution amounts may be adjusted to reflect the impact of that law on us.
The tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships or an investment in our units could be subject to potential legislative, judicial or administrative changes and differing interpretations, possibly 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. For example, from time to time, members of Congress propose and consider substantive changes to the existing federal income tax laws that affect publicly
traded partnerships. Currently, one such legislative proposal would eliminate the qualifying income exception upon which we rely for our treatment as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. We are unable to predict whether any of these changes or other proposals will be reintroduced or will ultimately be enacted. Any such changes could negatively impact the value of an investment in our common units. Any modification to the U.S. federal income tax laws may be applied retroactively and could make it more difficult or impossible to meet the expectation for certain publicly traded partnerships to be treated as partnerships for U.S. federal income tax purposes.
If the IRS contests the federal income tax positions we take, the market for our common units may be adversely impacted and the cost of any IRS contest will reduce our cash available for distribution to our unitholders.
The IRS may adopt positions that differ from the positions we have taken or may take on tax matters. 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. In addition, our costs of any contest with the IRS will be borne indirectly by our unitholders and our general partner because the costs will reduce our cash available for distribution.
Unitholders will be required to pay taxes on their share of our income even if they do not receive any cash distributions from us.
Because our unitholders will generally be treated as partners to whom we allocate taxable income, which could be different in amount than the cash we distribute, they will be required to pay any federal income taxes and, in some cases, state and local income taxes on their share of our taxable income even if they receive no 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 liability resulting from that income.
Tax gain or loss on the disposition of our common units could be more or less than expected.
If a unitholder disposes of common units, it will recognize gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and its tax basis in those common units. Because distributions in excess of a unitholder's allocable share of our net taxable income result in a decrease of the unitholder's tax basis in its common units, the amount, if any, of such prior excess distributions with respect to the units sold will, in effect, become taxable income to the unitholder if it sells such units at a price greater than its tax basis in those units, even if the price the unitholder receives is less than its original cost. Moreover, a substantial portion of the amount realized, whether or not representing gain, may be taxed as ordinary income due to potential recapture of depreciation and deductions and certain other items. In addition, because the amount realized includes a unitholder's share of our nonrecourse liabilities, if unitholders sell their units, they may incur a tax liability in excess of the amount of cash they receive from the sale.
Tax-exempt entities and non-U.S. persons face unique tax issues from owning our common units that may result in adverse tax consequences to them.
An investment in common units by tax-exempt entities, such as employee benefit plans and individual retirement accounts (known as IRAs), Keogh Plans and other retirement plans, regulated investment companies and non-U.S. persons raises issues unique to them. For example, virtually all of our income allocated to organizations that are exempt from federal income tax, including IRAs and other retirement plans, will be “unrelated business taxable income” and will be taxable to them. Distributions to non-U.S. persons will be reduced by withholding taxes at the highest applicable effective tax rate, and non-U.S. persons will be required to file U.S. federal tax returns and pay tax on their share of our taxable income. Tax-exempt entities and non-U.S. persons should consult their tax adviser before investing in our common units.
We treat each purchaser of common units as having the same tax benefits without regard to the actual common units purchased. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of the common units.
Because we cannot match transferors and transferees of common units we will adopt depreciation and amortization positions that may not conform to all aspects of existing Treasury Regulations. A successful IRS challenge to those positions could adversely affect the amount of tax benefits available to our unitholders. It also could affect the timing of these tax benefits or the amount of gain from unitholders' sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of our common units or result in audit adjustments to their tax returns.
We prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our units each month based upon the ownership of our units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular 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 units each month based upon the ownership of our units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred. The use of this proration method may not be permitted under existing treasury regulations, and although the Department of the Treasury issued proposed treasury regulations that provide a safe harbor pursuant to which a publicly traded partnership may use a similar monthly simplifying convention to allocate tax items, the proposed regulations are not final and do not specifically authorize the use of the proration method we have adopted. If the IRS were to challenge our proration method or new treasury regulations were issued, we may be required to change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders.
A unitholder whose units are the subject of a securities loan (e.g., a loan to a “short seller” to cover a short sale of units) may be considered as having disposed of those units. If so, it would no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those units during the period of the loan and may recognize gain or loss from the disposition.
Because there is no tax concept of loaning a partnership interest, a unitholder whose units are the subject of a securities loan may be considered as having disposed of the loaned units, such unitholder may no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those 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 units may not be reportable by the unitholder and any cash distributions received by the unitholder as to those 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 loan to a short seller are urged to modify any applicable brokerage account agreements to prohibit their brokers from borrowing their units.
We have adopted certain valuation methodologies that may result in a shift of income, gain, loss and deduction between the general partner and the unitholders. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of the common units.
When we issue units or engage in certain other transactions, we determine the fair market value of our assets and allocate any unrealized gain or loss attributable to our assets to the capital accounts of our unitholders and our general partner. Our methodology may be viewed as understating the value of our assets. In that case, there may be a shift of income, gain, loss and deduction between certain unitholders and the general partner, which may be unfavorable to such unitholders. Moreover, under our valuation methods, subsequent purchasers of common units may have a greater portion of their Internal Revenue Code Section 743(b) adjustment allocated to our tangible assets and a lesser portion allocated to our intangible assets. The IRS may challenge our valuation methods, or our allocation of the Section 743(b) adjustment attributable to our tangible and intangible assets, and allocations of income, gain, loss and deduction between the general partner and certain of our unitholders.
A successful IRS challenge to these methods or allocations could adversely affect the amount of taxable income or loss being allocated to our unitholders. It also could affect the amount of gain 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.
The sale or exchange of 50% or more of our capital and profits interests during any twelve-month period will result in the termination of our partnership for federal income tax purposes.
We will be considered to have terminated our partnership for federal income tax purposes if there are sales or exchanges which, in the aggregate, constitute 50% or more of the total interests in our capital and profits within a twelve-month period. For purposes of determining whether the 50% threshold has been met, multiple sales of the same interest will be counted only once. Our termination would, among other things, result in the closing of our taxable year for all unitholders, which would result in us filing two tax returns (and our unitholders may receive two Schedules K-1) for one fiscal year and may result in a significant deferral of depreciation deductions allowable in computing our taxable income. In the case of a unitholder reporting on a taxable year other than a fiscal year ending December 31, the closing of our taxable year may also result in more than twelve months of our taxable income or loss being includable in its taxable income for the year of termination. Our termination currently would not affect our classification as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, but instead, we would be treated as a new partnership for tax purposes. If treated as a new partnership for federal tax purposes, we must make new tax elections and could be subject to penalties if we are unable to determine that a termination occurred. The IRS has announced a relief procedure whereby if a publicly traded partnership that has technically terminated requests and the IRS grants special relief, among other things, the partnership may be permitted to provide only a single Schedule K-1 to unitholders for the tax years in which the termination occurs.
Unitholders likely will be subject to state and local taxes and return filing requirements as a result of investing in our common units.
In addition to federal income taxes, unitholders likely will be subject to other taxes, such as state and local income taxes, unincorporated business taxes and estate, inheritance, or intangible taxes that are imposed by the various jurisdictions in which we do business or own property now or in the future. Unitholders likely will be required to file state and local income tax returns and pay state and local income taxes in some or all of these various jurisdictions, even if they do not live in these jurisdictions. Further, unitholders may be subject to penalties for failure to comply with those requirements. We currently own property and conduct business in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Oklahoma, Washington, Kansas, Wyoming and Nevada. We may own property or conduct business in other states or foreign countries in the future. It is the unitholder's responsibility to file all federal, state, local and foreign tax returns.
| |
Item 1B. | Unresolved Staff Comments |
We do not have any unresolved SEC staff comments.
PIPELINES
Our refined product pipelines transport light refined products from HFC’s Navajo refinery in New Mexico and Alon’s Big Spring refinery in Texas to their customers in the metropolitan and rural areas of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Oklahoma and northern Mexico and from HFC's Woods Cross refinery in Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada and Cedar City, Utah. The refined products transported in these pipelines include conventional gasolines, federal, state and local specification reformulated gasoline, low-octane gasoline for oxygenate blending, distillates that include high- and low-sulfur diesel and jet fuel and LPGs (such as propane, butane and isobutane).
Our intermediate product pipelines consist principally of three parallel pipelines that originate at the Navajo refinery Lovington facilities and terminate at its Artesia facilities. These pipelines transport intermediate feedstocks and crude oil for HFC’s refining operations in New Mexico.
Our crude pipelines consist of crude oil trunk, gathering and connection pipelines located in west Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma that deliver crude oil to the Navajo refinery and crude oil and refined product pipelines that support HFC’s Woods Cross refinery.
Our pipelines are regularly inspected, are well maintained and we believe, are in good repair. Generally, other than as may be provided in certain pipelines and terminal agreements, substantially all of our pipelines are unrestricted as to the direction in which product flows and the types of refined products that we can transport on them. The FERC regulates the transportation tariffs for interstate shipments on our refined product pipelines and state regulatory agencies regulate the transportation tariffs for intrastate shipments on our pipelines.
The following table details the average aggregate daily number of barrels of petroleum products transported on our pipelines in each of the periods set forth below for HFC and for third parties.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Years Ended December 31, |
| | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 | | 2008 |
Volumes transported for (bpd): | | | | | | | | | | |
HFC | | 405,718 |
| | 345,990 |
| | 324,382 |
| | 295,039 |
| | 253,484 |
|
Third parties(1) | | 63,152 |
| | 52,361 |
| | 38,910 |
| | 43,709 |
| | 22,756 |
|
Total | | 468,870 |
| | 398,351 |
| | 363,292 |
| | 338,748 |
| | 276,240 |
|
Total barrels in thousands (“mbbls”)(1) | | 171,606 |
| | 145,398 |
| | 132,602 |
| | 123,643 |
| | 101,104 |
|
| |
(1) | We sold our 70% interest in Rio Grande on December 1, 2009, therefore the Rio Grande volumes have been excluded. |
The following table sets forth certain operating data for each of our refined product, intermediate and crude pipelines. Throughput is the total average number of barrels per day transported on a pipeline but does not aggregate barrels moved between different points on the same pipeline. Revenues reflect tariff revenues generated by barrels shipped from an origin to a delivery point on a pipeline. Revenues also include payments made by Alon under capacity lease arrangements on our Orla to El Paso pipeline. Under these arrangements, we provide space on our pipeline for the shipment of up to 15,000 barrels of refined product per day. Alon pays us whether or not it actually ships the full volumes of refined products it is entitled to ship. To the extent Alon does not use its capacity; we are entitled to use it. We calculate the capacity of our pipelines based on the throughput capacity for barrels of gasoline equivalent that may be transported in the existing configuration; in some cases, this includes the use of drag reducing agents.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Origin and Destination | | Diameter (inches) | | Length (miles) | | Capacity (bpd) | |
Refined Product Pipelines: | | | | | | | |
Artesia, NM to El Paso, TX | | 6 |
| | 156 |
| | 19,000 |
| |
Artesia, NM to Orla, TX to El Paso, TX | | 8/12/8 |
| | 214 |
| | 70,000 |
| (1) |
Artesia, NM to Moriarty, NM(2) | | 12/8 |
| | 215 |
| | 27,000 |
| (3) |
Moriarty, NM to Bloomfield, NM(2) | | 8 |
| | 191 |
| | 14,400 |
| (3) |
Big Spring, TX to Abilene, TX | | 6/8 |
| | 105 |
| | 20,000 |
| |
Big Spring, TX to Wichita Falls, TX | | 6/8 |
| | 227 |
| | 23,000 |
| |
Wichita Falls, TX to Duncan, OK | | 6 |
| | 47 |
| | 21,000 |
| |
Midland, TX to Orla, TX | | 8/10 |
| | 135 |
| | 25,000 |
| |
Artesia, NM to Roswell, NM | | 4 |
| | 36 |
| | 5,300 |
| |
Woods Cross, UT | | 10/8 |
| | 8 |
| | 70,000 |
| |
Woods Cross, UT to Las Vegas, NV | | 12 |
| | 400 |
| | 62,000 |
| |
Tulsa, OK(4) | | | | | | | |
Intermediate Product Pipelines: | | | | | | | |
Lovington, NM to Artesia, NM | | 8 |
| | 65 |
| | 48,000 |
| |
Lovington, NM to Artesia, NM | | 10 |
| | 65 |
| | 72,000 |
| |
Lovington, NM to Artesia, NM | | 16 |
| | 65 |
| | 96,000 |
| |
Tulsa, OK(5) | | 8/10/12 |
| | 10 |
| | |
| (5) |
Crude Pipelines: | | | | | | | |
Lovington / Artesia, New Mexico | | Various |
| | 861 |
| | 31,000 |
| |
Roadrunner Pipeline | | 16 |
| | 65 |
| | 62,400 |
| |
Beeson Pipeline | | 8 |
| | 37 |
| | 35,000 |
| |
Woods Cross, Utah | | 12 |
| | 4 |
| | 40,000 |
| |
| |
(1) | Includes 15,000 bpd of capacity on the Orla to El Paso segment of this pipeline that is leased to Alon under capacity lease agreements. |
| |
(2) | The White Lakes Junction to Moriarty segment of our Artesia to Moriarty pipeline and the Moriarty to Bloomfield pipeline is leased from Mid-America Pipeline Company, LLC (“Mid-America”) under a long-term lease agreement. |
| |
(3) | Capacity for this pipeline is reflected in the information for the Artesia to Moriarty pipeline. |
| |
(4) | Tulsa gasoline and diesel fuel connections to Magellan’s pipeline of less than one mile. |
| |
(5) | The pipe capacities with 3 gas pipes with capacities of 10 million standard cubic feet per day (“MMSCFD”), 22MMSCFD, and 10MMSCFD and 2 liquid pipes with capacities of 45,000 BPD and 60,000 BPD. |
HFC shipped an aggregate of 63% of the petroleum products transported on our refined product pipelines and 100% of the petroleum products transported on our intermediate pipelines and crude oil pipelines in 2012. These pipelines transported 90% of the light refined products produced by HFC’s Navajo refinery in 2012.
Artesia, New Mexico to El Paso, Texas
The Artesia to El Paso refined product pipeline is regulated by the FERC. It was constructed in 1959 and consists of 156 miles of 6-inch pipeline. This pipeline is used primarily for the shipment of refined products produced at the Navajo refinery to our El Paso terminal, where we deliver to common carrier pipelines for transportation to Arizona, northern New Mexico, northern Mexico and to the terminal’s tank farm for truck rack loading for local delivery by tanker truck. Refined products produced at the Navajo refinery destined for El Paso are transported on either this pipeline or our Artesia to Orla to El Paso pipeline.
Artesia, New Mexico to Orla, Texas to El Paso, Texas
The Artesia to Orla to El Paso refined product pipeline is a common-carrier pipeline regulated by the FERC and consists of three segments:
| |
• | an 8-inch and a 12-inch, 82-mile segment from the Navajo refinery to Orla, Texas; |
| |
• | a 12-inch, 124-mile segment from Orla to outside El Paso, Texas; and |
| |
• | an 8-inch, 8-mile segment from outside El Paso to our El Paso terminal. |
There are two shippers on this pipeline, HFC and Alon. As mentioned above, refined products destined to our El Paso terminal are delivered to common carrier pipelines for transportation to Arizona, northern New Mexico and northern Mexico and to the terminal’s truck rack for local delivery by tanker truck.
Artesia, New Mexico to Moriarty, New Mexico
The Artesia to Moriarty refined product pipeline consists of a 60-mile, 12-inch pipeline that was constructed in 1999 and extends from the Navajo refinery Artesia facility to White Lakes Junction, New Mexico, and 155 miles of 8-inch pipeline that was constructed in 1973 and extends from White Lakes Junction to our Moriarty terminal, where it also connects to our Moriarty to Bloomfield pipeline. We own the 12-inch pipeline from Artesia to White Lakes Junction. We lease the White Lakes Junction to Moriarty segment of this pipeline and the Moriarty to Bloomfield pipeline described below, from Mid-America Pipeline Company, LLC under a long-term lease agreement entered into in 1996, which expires in 2017 and has two ten-year extensions at our option. At our Moriarty terminal, volumes shipped on this pipeline can be transported to other markets in the area, including Albuquerque, Santa Fe and west Texas, via tanker truck. The 155-mile White Lakes Junction to Moriarty segment of this pipeline is operated by Mid-America (or its designee). HFC is the only shipper on this pipeline. Currently, we pay a monthly fee (which is subject to adjustments based on changes in the PPI) of $556,000 to Mid-America to lease the White Lakes Junction to Moriarty and Moriarty to Bloomfield pipelines.
Moriarty, New Mexico to Bloomfield, New Mexico
The Moriarty to Bloomfield refined product pipeline was constructed in 1973 and consists of 191 miles of 8-inch pipeline leased from Mid-America. This pipeline serves our terminal in Bloomfield. At our Bloomfield terminal, volumes shipped on this pipeline are transported to other markets in the Four Corners area via tanker truck. This pipeline is operated by Mid-America (or its designee). HFC is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Big Spring, Texas to Abilene, Texas
The Big Spring to Abilene refined product pipeline was constructed in 1957 and consists of 100 miles of 6-inch pipeline and 5 miles of 8-inch pipeline. This pipeline is used for the shipment of refined products produced at the Big Spring refinery to the Abilene terminal. Alon is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Big Spring, Texas to Wichita Falls, Texas
Segments of the Big Spring to Wichita Falls refined product pipeline were constructed in 1969 and 1989, and consist of 95 miles of 6-inch pipeline and 132 miles of 8-inch pipeline. This pipeline is used for the shipment of refined products produced at the Big Spring refinery to the Wichita Falls terminal. Alon is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Wichita Falls, Texas to Duncan, Oklahoma
The Wichita Falls to Duncan refined product pipeline is a common carrier and is regulated by the FERC. It was constructed in 1958 and consists of 47 miles of 6-inch pipeline. This pipeline is used for the shipment of refined products from the Wichita Falls terminal to Alon’s Duncan terminal, which we do not own. Alon is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Midland, Texas to Orla, Texas
Segments of the Midland to Orla refined product pipeline were constructed in 1928 and 1998, and consist of 50 miles of 10-inch pipeline and 85 miles of 8-inch pipeline. This pipeline is used for the shipment of refined products produced at the Big Spring refinery from Midland to our tank farm at Orla. Alon is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Artesia, New Mexico to Roswell, New Mexico
The 36-mile, 4-inch diameter Artesia to Roswell refined product pipeline delivers jet fuel only to tanks located at our jet fuel terminal in Roswell. HFC is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Woods Cross, Utah refined product pipelines
The Woods Cross refined product pipelines consist of three pipeline segments. The Woods Cross to Pioneer terminal segment consists of 2 miles of 8-inch pipeline, which is used for product shipments to and through the Pioneer terminal. The Woods Cross to Pioneer segment represents 2 miles of 10-inch pipeline that is also used for product shipments to and through the Pioneer terminal. The Woods Cross to Chevron Pipeline’s Salt Lake Products Pipeline segment consists of 4 miles of 8-inch pipeline and is used for product shipments from HFC’s Woods Cross refinery to Chevron’s North Salt Lake pumping station. HFC is the only shipper on these pipelines.
UNEV refined product pipeline
The 400-mile, 12-inch refined products pipeline was completed in early 2012. This pipeline is used for the shipment of refined products from Woods Cross, Utah to terminals in Las Vegas, Nevada and Cedar City, Utah. HFC and Sinclair Transportation Company (“Sinclair”) are the primary shippers on this pipeline.
8” Pipeline from Lovington, New Mexico to Artesia, New Mexico
The 65-mile, 8-inch diameter pipeline was constructed in 1981. This pipeline is used for the shipment of intermediate feedstocks, crude oil and LPGs from the Navajo refinery Lovington facility to its Artesia facility. HFC is the primary shipper on this pipeline.
10” Pipeline from Lovington, New Mexico to Artesia, New Mexico
The 65-mile, 10-inch diameter pipeline was constructed in 1999. This pipeline is used for the shipment of intermediate feedstocks and crude oil from the Navajo refinery Lovington facility to its Artesia facility. HFC is the only shipper on this pipeline.
16” Pipeline from Lovington, New Mexico to Artesia, New Mexico
The 65-mile, 16-inch diameter pipeline was constructed in 2009. This pipeline is used for the shipment of intermediate feedstocks and crude oil from the Navajo refinery Lovington facility to its Artesia facility. HFC is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Lovington / Artesia, New Mexico crude oil pipelines
The crude oil gathering and trunk pipelines deliver crude oil to HFC’s Navajo refinery and consist of 850 miles of 4-inch, 6-inch and 8-inch diameter pipeline. The crude oil trunk pipelines consist of five pipeline segments that deliver crude oil to the Navajo refinery Lovington facility and seven pipeline segments that deliver crude oil to the Navajo refinery Artesia facility.
The Lovington system crude oil mainlines include five pipeline segments consisting of a 23-mile, 12-inch pipeline from Russell to Lovington, a 20-mile, 8-inch pipeline from Russell to Hobbs, an 11-mile, 6-inch and 8-inch pipeline from Crouch to Lovington, a 20-mile, 8-inch pipeline from Hobbs to Lovington and a 6-mile, 6-inch pipeline from Gaines to Hobbs.
The Artesia system crude oil mainlines include seven pipeline segments consisting of an 11-mile, 6-inch pipeline from Beeson to North Artesia, a 7-mile, 4-inch and 6-inch pipeline from Barnsdall to North Artesia, a 2-mile, 8-inch pipeline from the Barnsdall jumper line to Lovington, a 4-mile, 4-inch pipeline from the Artesia Station to North Artesia, a 6-mile, 8-inch pipeline from North Artesia to Evans Junction and a 1-mile, 6-inch pipeline from Abo to Evans Junction.
We operate a 12-mile, 8-inch pipeline from Evans Junction to Artesia, New Mexico that supplies natural gas to the Navajo refinery Artesia facility.
Roadrunner Pipeline
The Roadrunner crude oil pipeline connects the Navajo refinery Lovington facility to a west Texas terminal of the Centurion Pipeline that extends to Cushing, Oklahoma. It was constructed in 2009 and consists of 65 miles of 16-inch pipeline. This pipeline is used for the shipment of crude oil from Cushing to the Navajo refinery Lovington facility.
Beeson Pipeline
The Beeson crude oil pipeline delivers crude oil to the Navajo refinery Lovington facility. It was constructed in 2009 and consists of 37 miles of 8-inch pipeline. This pipeline ships crude oil from our crude oil gathering system to the Navajo refinery Lovington facility for processing.
Woods Cross, Utah crude oil pipeline
This 4-mile, 12-inch pipeline is used for the shipment of crude oil from Chevron Pipeline’s North Salt Lake City station to the Woods Cross refinery.
REFINED PRODUCT TERMINALS, LOADING RACKS AND REFINERY TANKAGE
Refined Product Terminals and Loading Racks
Our refined product terminals receive products from pipelines connected to HFC’s refineries and Alon’s Big Spring refinery. We then distribute them to HFC and third parties, who in turn deliver them to end-users and retail outlets. Our terminals are generally complementary to our pipeline assets and serve HFC’s and Alon’s marketing activities and other customers. Terminals play a key role in moving product to the end-user market by providing the following services:
| |
• | blending to achieve specified grades of gasoline; |
| |
• | other ancillary services that include the injection of additives and filtering of jet fuel; and |
| |
• | storage and inventory management. |
Typically, our refined product terminal facilities consist of multiple storage tanks and are equipped with automated truck loading equipment that operates 24 hours a day. This automated system provides for control of security, allocations, and credit and carrier certification by remote input of data by our customers. In addition, nearly all of our terminals are equipped with truck loading racks capable of providing automated blending to individual customer specifications.
Our refined product terminals derive most of their revenues from terminalling fees paid by customers. We charge a fee for transferring refined products from the terminal to trucks or to pipelines connected to the terminal. In addition to terminalling fees, we generate revenues by charging our customers fees for blending, injecting additives, and filtering jet fuel. HFC currently accounts for the substantial majority of our refined product terminal revenues.
The table below sets forth the total average throughput for our refined product terminals in each of the periods presented:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Years Ended December 31, |
| | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 | | 2008 |
Refined products terminalled for (bpd): | | | | | | | | | | |
HFC | | 271,549 |
| | 193,645 |
| | 178,903 |
| | 114,431 |
| | 109,539 |
|
Third parties | | 53,456 |
| | 44,454 |
| | 39,568 |
| | 42,206 |
| | 32,737 |
|
Total | | 325,005 |
| | 238,099 |
| | 218,471 |
| | 156,637 |
| | 142,276 |
|
Total (mbbls) | | 118,952 |
| | 86,906 |
| | 79,742 |
| | 57,173 |
| | 52,073 |
|
The following table outlines the locations of our terminals and their storage capacities, number of tanks, supply source, and mode of delivery:
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Terminal Location | | Storage Capacity (barrels) | | Number of Tanks | | Supply Source | | Mode of Delivery |
El Paso, TX | | 747,000 |
| | 20 | | Pipeline/rail | | Truck/Pipeline |
Moriarty, NM | | 189,000 |
| | 9 | | Pipeline | | Truck |
Bloomfield, NM | | 193,000 |
| | 7 | | Pipeline | | Truck |
Tucson, AZ(1) | | 176,000 |
| | 9 | | Pipeline | | Truck |
Mountain Home, ID(2) | | 120,000 |
| | 3 | | Pipeline | | Pipeline |
Boise, ID(3) | | 111,000 |
| | 9 | | Pipeline | | Pipeline |
Burley, ID(3) | | 70,000 |
| | 7 | | Pipeline | | Truck |
Spokane, WA | | 333,000 |
| | 32 | | Pipeline/Rail | | Truck |
Abilene, TX | | 156,100 |
| | 6 | | Pipeline | | Truck/Pipeline |
Wichita Falls, TX | | 220,000 |
| | 11 | | Pipeline | | Truck/Pipeline |
Las Vegas, NV | | 267,000 |
| | 9 | | Pipeline/Truck | | Truck |
Cedar City, UT | | 194,000 |
| | 7 | | Pipeline/Rail/Truck | | Truck |
Roswell, NM (2) | | 25,000 |
| | 1 | | Pipeline | | Truck |
Orla tank farm | | 135,000 |
| | 5 | | Pipeline | | Pipeline |
Artesia facility truck rack | | N/A |
| | N/A | | Refinery | | Truck |
Lovington facility asphalt truck rack | | N/A |
| | N/A | | Refinery | | Truck |
Woods Cross facility truck rack | | N/A |
| | N/A | | Refinery | | Truck/Pipeline |
Tulsa west facility truck and rail rack | | N/A |
| | N/A | | Refinery | | Truck/Rail/Pipeline |
Tulsa east facility truck and rail racks | | 25,000 |
| | N/A | | Refinery | | Truck/Rail/Pipeline |
Cheyenne facility truck and rail racks | | N/A |
| | N/A | | Refinery | | Truck/Rail |
El Dorado facility truck racks | | N/A |
| | N/A | | Refinery | | Truck |
Total | | 2,961,100 |
| | | | | | |
| |
(1) | The underlying ground at the Tucson terminal is leased. |
| |
(2) | Handles only jet fuel. |
| |
(3) | We have a 50% ownership interest in these terminals. The capacity and throughput information represents the proportionate share of capacity and throughput attributable to our ownership interest. |
El Paso Terminal
We receive light refined products at this terminal from the Navajo refinery Artesia facility through our Artesia to El Paso and Artesia to Orla to El Paso pipelines and by rail that account for 90% of the volumes at this terminal. We also receive product from the Big Spring refinery that accounted for 10% of the volumes at this terminal in 2012. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally via the truck rack or transported to our Tucson terminal and other terminals in Phoenix on Kinder Morgan’s East System pipeline. Competition in this market includes a refinery and terminal owned by Western Refining, Inc., a joint venture pipeline and terminal owned by ConocoPhillips and NuStar Energy, L.P. (“NuStar”).
Moriarty Terminal
We receive light refined products at this terminal from the Navajo refinery Artesia facility through our pipelines. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack. HFC is our only customer at this terminal. There are no competing terminals in Moriarty.
Bloomfield Terminal
We receive light refined products at this terminal from the Navajo refinery Artesia facility through our pipelines. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack. HFC is our only customer at this terminal.
Tucson Terminal
We own 100% of the improvements and lease the underlying ground at this terminal. The Tucson terminal receives light refined products from Kinder Morgan’s East System pipeline, which transports refined products from the Navajo refinery Artesia facility that it receives at our El Paso terminal. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack. Competition in this market includes terminals owned by Kinder Morgan.
Mountain Home Terminal
We receive jet fuel from third parties at this terminal that is transported on Chevron’s Salt Lake City to Boise, Idaho pipeline. We then transport the jet fuel from the Mountain Home terminal through our 13-mile, 4-inch pipeline to the United States Air Force base outside of Mountain Home. Our pipeline associated with this terminal is the only pipeline that supplies jet fuel to the air base. We are paid a single fee, from the Defense Energy Support Center, for injecting, storing, testing and transporting jet fuel at this terminal.
Boise Terminal
We and Sinclair each own a 50% interest in the Boise terminal. Sinclair is the operator of the terminal. The Boise terminal receives light refined products from HFC and Sinclair shipped through Chevron’s pipeline originating in Salt Lake City, Utah. The Woods Cross refinery, as well as other refineries in the Salt Lake City area, and Pioneer Pipeline Co.’s terminal in Salt Lake City are connected to the Chevron pipeline. All loading of products out of the Boise terminal is conducted at Chevron’s loading rack, which is connected to the Boise terminal by pipeline. HFC and Sinclair are the only customers at this terminal.
Burley Terminal
We and Sinclair each own a 50% interest in the Burley terminal. Sinclair is the operator of the terminal. The Burley terminal receives product from HFC and Sinclair shipped through Chevron’s pipeline originating in Salt Lake City, Utah. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack. HFC and Sinclair are the only customers at this terminal.
Spokane Terminal
This terminal is connected to the Woods Cross refinery via a Chevron common carrier pipeline. The Spokane terminal also is supplied by Chevron and Yellowstone pipelines and by rail and truck. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack. We have several major customers at this terminal. Other terminals in the Spokane area include terminals owned by ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips.
Abilene Terminal
This terminal receives refined products from Alon's Big Spring refinery, which accounted for all of its volumes in 2012. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally via a truck rack or pumped over a 2-mile pipeline to Dyess Air Force Base. Alon is the only customer at this terminal.
Wichita Falls Terminal
This terminal receives refined products from the Alon's Big Spring refinery, which accounted for all of its volumes in 2012. Refined products received at this terminal are sold via a truck rack or shipped via pipeline connections to Alon’s terminal in Duncan, Oklahoma and also to NuStar’s Southlake Pipeline. Alon is the only customer at this terminal.
Las Vegas Terminal
This terminal is owned by UNEV and receives product from HFC and Sinclair shipped through the UNEV Pipeline originating in Woods Cross, Utah. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally. HFC and Sinclair are the only customers at this terminal.
Cedar City Terminal
This terminal is owned by UNEV and receives product from HFC and Sinclair shipped through the UNEV Pipeline originating in Woods Cross, Utah. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally. HFC and Sinclair are the only customers at this terminal.
Roswell Terminal
This terminal receives jet fuel from the Navajo refinery for further transport to Cannon Air Force Base and to Albuquerque, New Mexico. We lease this terminal under an agreement that expires in September 2016.
Orla Tank Farm
The Orla tank farm was constructed in 1998. It receives refined products from Alon's Big Spring refinery that accounted for all of its volumes in 2012. Refined products received at the tank farm are delivered into our Orla to El Paso pipeline. Alon is the only customer at this tank farm.
Artesia Facility Truck Rack
The truck rack at the Navajo refinery Artesia facility loads light refined products produced at the Navajo refinery, onto tanker trucks for delivery to markets in the surrounding area. HFC is the only customer of this truck rack.
Lovington Facility Asphalt Truck Rack
The asphalt loading rack facility at the Lovington refinery loads asphalt produced at the Lovington facility onto tanker trucks. HFC is the only customer of this truck rack.
Woods Cross Facility Truck Rack
The truck rack at the Woods Cross facility loads light refined products produced at the refinery onto tanker trucks for delivery to markets in the surrounding area. HFC is the only customer of this truck rack. HFC also makes transfers to a common carrier pipeline at this facility.
Tulsa Facilities Truck and Rail Racks
The Tulsa truck and rail loading rack facilities consist of loading racks located at HFC’s Tulsa refinery west and east facilities. Loading racks at the Tulsa refinery west facility consist of rail racks that load refined products and lube oil produced at the refinery onto rail car and a truck rack that loads lube oil onto tanker trucks. Loading racks at the Tulsa refinery east facility consist of truck and rail racks at which we load refined products and off load crude. The truck racks also load asphalt and LPG.
Cheyenne Facility Truck and Rail Racks
The Cheyenne loading rack facilities consist of light refined products, heavy products and LPG truck and rail racks. These racks load refined products and propane onto tanker trucks for delivery to markets in surrounding areas. Additionally, these facilities include four crude oil LACT units that unload crude oil from tanker trucks.
El Dorado Facility Truck Racks
The El Dorado loading rack facilities consist of a light refined products truck rack and a propane truck rack. These racks load refined products and propane onto tanker trucks for delivery to markets in surrounding areas.
Refinery Tankage
Our refinery tankage consists of on-site tankage at HFC’s refineries. Our refinery tankage derives its revenues from fixed fees or throughput charges in providing HFC’s refining facilities with 9,300,000 barrels of storage.
The following table outlines the locations of our refinery tankage, storage capacity, tankage type and number of tanks:
|
| | | | | | | |
Refinery Location | | Storage Capacity (barrels) | | Tankage Type | | Number of Tanks |
Artesia , NM | | 166,000 |
| | Crude oil | | 2 |
Lovington, NM | | 267,000 |
| | Crude oil | | 2 |
Woods Cross, UT | | 180,000 |
| | Crude oil | | 3 |
Tulsa, OK | | 3,171,600 |
| | Crude oil and refined product | | 57 |
Cheyenne, WY | | 1,842,000 |
| | Refined and intermediate product | | 58 |
El Dorado, KS | | 3,702,400 |
| | Refined and intermediate product | | 89 |
Total | | 9,329,000 |
| | | | |
PIPELINE AND TERMINAL CONTROL OPERATIONS
All of our pipelines are operated via geosynchronous satellite, microwave, radio and frame relay communication systems from our central control room located in Artesia, New Mexico. We also monitor activity at our terminals from this control room.The control center operates with state-of-the-art System Control and Data Acquisition, or SCADA, systems. Our control center is equipped with computer systems designed to continuously monitor operational data, including refined product and crude oil throughput, flow rates, and pressures. In addition, the control center monitors alarms and throughput balances. The control center operates remote pumps, motors, engines, and valves associated with the delivery of refined products and crude oil. The computer systems are designed to enhance leak-detection capabilities, sound automatic alarms if operational conditions outside of pre-established parameters occur, and provide for remote-controlled shutdown of pump stations on the pipelines. Pump stations and meter-measurement points on the pipelines are linked by satellite or telephone communication systems for remote monitoring and control, which reduces our requirement for full-time on-site personnel at most of these locations.
We are a party to various legal and regulatory proceedings, which we believe will not have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
| |
Item 4. | Mine Safety Disclosures |
Not applicable.
PART II
| |
Item 5. | Market for the Registrant’s Common Units, Related Unitholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Common Units |
Our common limited partner units are traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “HEP.” The following table sets forth the range of the daily high and low sales prices per common unit, cash distributions per common unit and the trading volume of common units for the periods indicated.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Years Ended December 31, | | High | | Low | | Cash Distributions | | Trading Volume |
2012 | | | | | | | | |
Fourth quarter | | $ | 34.41 |
| | $ | 30.19 |
| | $ | 0.470 |
| | 6,938,000 |
|
Third quarter | | $ | 36.98 |
| | $ | 28.56 |
| | $ | 0.463 |
| | 6,420,200 |
|
Second quarter | | $ | 31.44 |
| | $ | 26.12 |
| | $ | 0.455 |
| | 5,298,000 |
|
First quarter | | $ | 31.88 |
| | $ | 26.64 |
| | $ | 0.448 |
| | 6,704,400 |
|
2011 | | | | | | | | |
Fourth quarter | | $ | 29.98 |
| | $ | 23.65 |
| | $ | 0.443 |
| | 6,609,800 |
|
Third quarter | | $ | 27.51 |
| | $ | 22.70 |
| | $ | 0.438 |
| | 4,050,800 |
|
Second quarter | | $ | 29.46 |
| | $ | 24.28 |
| | $ | 0.433 |
| | 5,781,800 |
|
First quarter | | $ | 30.53 |
| | $ | 25.06 |
| | $ | 0.428 |
| | 4,675,200 |
|
On November 29, 2012, we announced a two-for-one unit split, payable in the form of a common unit distribution for each issued and outstanding common unit. The unit distribution was paid January 16, 2013 to all unitholders of record on January 7, 2013. All references to unit and per unit amounts in this document and related disclosures have been adjusted to reflect the effect of the unit split for all periods presented.
The cash distribution for the fourth quarter of 2012 was declared on January 24, 2013 and is payable on February 14, 2013 to all unitholders of record on February 4, 2013.
As of February 13, 2013, we had approximately 14,400 common unitholders, including beneficial owners of common units held in street name.
We consider regular cash distributions to unitholders on a quarterly basis, although there is no assurance as to the future cash distributions since they are dependent upon future earnings, cash flows, capital requirements, financial condition and other factors. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources” under Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for a discussion of conditions and limitations prohibiting distributions under the Credit Agreement and indentures relating to our senior notes.
Within 45 days after the end of each quarter, we distribute all of our available cash (as defined in our partnership agreement) to unitholders of record on the applicable record date. The amount of available cash generally is all cash on hand at the end of the quarter; less the amount of cash reserves established by our general partner to provide for the proper conduct of our business, comply with applicable laws, any of our debt instruments, or other agreements; or provide funds for distributions to our unitholders and to our general partner for any one or more of the next four quarters; plus all cash on hand on the date of determination of available cash for the quarter resulting from working capital borrowings made after the end of the quarter.
We make distributions in the following manner: 98% to our common unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to the general partner, until we distribute for each outstanding common unit an amount equal to the minimum quarterly distribution for that quarter and any arrearages in payment of the minimum quarterly distributions for any prior quarters, thereafter.
Our general partner, HEP Logistics, is entitled to incentive distributions if the amount we distribute with respect to any quarter exceeds specified target levels presented below:
|
| | | | | | |
| | Total Quarterly Distribution Target Amount | | Marginal Percentage Interest in Distributions |
Unitholders | | General Partner |
Minimum quarterly distribution | | $0.25 | | 98% | | 2% |
First target distribution | | Up to $0.275 | | 98% | | 2% |
Second target distribution | | above $0.275 up to $0.3125 | | 85% | | 15% |
Third target distribution | | above $0.3125 up to $0.375 | | 75% | | 25% |
Thereafter | | Above $0.375 | | 50% | | 50% |
| |
Item 6. | Selected Financial Data |
The following table shows selected financial information for HEP. This table should be read in conjunction with Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the consolidated financial statements of HEP and related notes thereto included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Years Ended December 31, |
| | 2012 | | 2011(1) | | 2010(1) | | 2009(1) | | 2008(1) |
| | (In thousands, except per unit data) |
Statement of Income Data: | | | | | | | | | | |
Revenues | | $ | 292,560 |
| | $ | 214,268 |
| | $ | 182,137 |
| | $ | 146,612 |
| | $ | 109,169 |
|
Operating costs and expenses | | | | | | | | | | |
Operations (exclusive of depreciation and amortization) | | 89,242 |
| | 64,521 |
| | 54,946 |
| | 44,668 |
| | 39,095 |
|
Depreciation and amortization | | 57,461 |
| | 36,958 |
| | 31,363 |
| | 27,982 |
| | 22,615 |
|
General and administrative | | 7,594 |
| | 6,576 |
| | 7,719 |
| | 7,586 |
| | 6,380 |
|
| | 154,297 |
| | 108,055 |
| | 94,028 |
| | 80,236 |
| | 68,090 |
|
Operating income | | 138,263 |
| | 106,213 |
| | 88,109 |
| | 66,376 |
| | 41,079 |
|
Equity in earnings of SLC Pipeline | | 3,364 |
| | 2,552 |
| | 2,393 |
| | 1,919 |
| | — |
|
SLC Pipeline acquisition costs | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (2,500 | ) | | — |
|
Interest income | | — |
| | — |
| | 7 |
| | 11 |
| | 118 |
|
Interest expense | | (47,182 | ) | | (35,959 | ) | | (34,001 | ) | | (21,501 | ) | | (21,763 | ) |
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | | (2,979 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Other income | | 10 |
| | 17 |
| | 17 |
| | 67 |
| | 1,026 |
|
| | (46,787 | ) | | (33,390 | ) | | (31,584 | ) | | (22,004 | ) | | (20,619 | ) |
Income from continuing operations before income taxes | | 91,476 |
| | 72,823 |
| | 56,525 |
| | 44,372 |
| | 20,460 |
|
State income tax | | (371 | ) | | (234 | ) | | (296 | ) | | (20 | ) | | (270 | ) |
Income from continuing operations | | 91,105 |
| | 72,589 |
| | 56,229 |
| | 44,352 |
| | 20,190 |
|
Add net loss attributable to Predecessor | | 4,200 |
| | 6,351 |
| | 70 |
| | 1,411 |
| | 379 |
|
Noncontrolling interest | | (1,153 | ) | | 859 |
| | 24 |
| | 471 |
| | 127 |
|
Income from continuing operations attributable to Holly Energy Partners | | 94,152 |
| | 79,799 |
| | 56,323 |
| | 46,234 |
| | 20,696 |
|
Income from discontinued operations, net of noncontrolling interest(2) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 19,780 |
| | 4,671 |
|
Net income attributable to Holly Energy Partners | | 94,152 |
| | 79,799 |
| | 56,323 |
| | 66,014 |
| | 25,367 |
|
Less general partner interest in net income, including incentive distributions(3) | | 22,450 |
| | 16,806 |
| | 12,084 |
| | 7,947 |
| | 3,913 |
|
Limited partners’ interest in net income | | $ | 71,702 |
| | $ | 62,993 |
| | $ | 44,239 |
| | $ | 58,067 |
| | $ | 21,454 |
|
Limited partners’ per unit interest in net income – basic and diluted(3) | | $ | 1.29 |
| | $ | 1.38 |
| | $ | 1.00 |
| | $ | 1.59 |
| | $ | 0.66 |
|
Distributions per limited partner unit | | $ | 1.84 |
| | $ | 1.74 |
| | $ | 1.66 |
| | $ | 1.58 |
| | $ | 1.50 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Other Financial Data: | | | | | | | | | | |
Cash flows from operating activities | | $ | 161,411 |
| | $ | 99,042 |
| | $ | 104,736 |
| | $ | 68,503 |
| | $ | 64,015 |
|
Cash flows from investing activities | | $ | (42,861 | ) | | $ | (206,309 | ) | | $ | (142,051 | ) | | $ | (198,684 | ) | | $ | (298,557 | ) |
Cash flows from financing activities | | $ | (119,682 | ) | | $ | 105,584 |
| | $ | 35,856 |
| | $ | 131,023 |
| | $ | 218,564 |
|
EBITDA(4) | | $ | 194,242 |
| | $ | 149,766 |
| | $ | 122,089 |
| | $ | 100,707 |
| | $ | 70,195 |
|
Distributable cash flow(5) | | $ | 153,125 |
| | $ | 100,295 |
| | $ | 91,054 |
| | $ | 72,213 |
| | $ | 60,365 |
|
Maintenance capital expenditures(5) | | $ | 5,649 |
| | $ | 5,415 |
| | $ | 4,487 |
| | $ | 3,595 |
| | $ | 3,133 |
|
Expansion capital expenditures | | 37,212 |
| | 200,894 |
| | 137,442 |
| | 201,454 |
| | 295,460 |
|
Total capital expenditures | | $ | 42,861 |
| | $ | 206,309 |
| | $ | 141,929 |
| | $ | 205,049 |
| | $ | 298,593 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Balance Sheet Data (at period end): | | | | | | | | | | |
Net property, plant and equipment | | $ | 960,535 |
| | $ | 960,499 |
| | $ | 683,793 |
| | $ | 553,233 |
| | $ | 363,038 |
|
Total assets | | $ | 1,394,110 |
| | $ | 1,399,196 |
| | $ | 913,263 |
| | $ | 779,035 |
| | $ | 549,762 |
|
Long-term debt(6) | | $ | 864,674 |
| | $ | 605,888 |
| | $ | 491,648 |
| | $ | 390,827 |
| | $ | 355,793 |
|
Total liabilities | | $ | 927,351 |
| | $ | 661,518 |
| | $ | 548,402 |
| | $ | 425,633 |
| | $ | 434,821 |
|
Total equity(7) | | $ | 452,856 |
| | $ | 737,678 |
| | $ | 364,861 |
| | $ | 353,402 |
| | $ | 114,941 |
|
| |
(1) | The amounts presented have been restated from those we previously reported for the respective periods. See Note 2 in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 for a discussion of these revisions. |
| |
(2) | On December 1, 2009, we sold our 70% interest in Rio Grande. Results of operations of Rio Grande and the $14.5 million gain on the sale are presented in discontinued operations. |
| |
(3) | Net income is allocated between limited partners and the general partner interest in accordance with the provisions of the partnership agreement. Net income allocated to the general partner includes incentive distributions declared subsequent to quarter end. Net income attributable to the limited partners is divided by the weighted average limited partner units outstanding in computing the limited partners’ per unit interest in net income. |
| |
(4) | Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (“EBITDA”) is calculated as net income plus (i) interest expense net of interest income, (ii) state income tax and (iii) depreciation and amortization. EBITDA is not a calculation based upon GAAP. However, the amounts included in the EBITDA calculation are derived from amounts included in our consolidated financial statements, with the exception of EBITDA from discontinued operations. EBITDA should not be considered as an alternative to net income or operating income, as an indication of our operating performance or as an alternative to operating cash flow as a measure of liquidity. EBITDA is not necessarily comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. EBITDA is presented here because it is a widely used financial indicator used by investors and analysts to measure performance. EBITDA is also used by our management for internal analysis and as a basis for compliance with financial covenants. |
Set forth below is our calculation of EBITDA.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Years Ended December 31, |
| | 2012 | | 2011(1) | | 2010(1) presented have been restated from those we previously reported for the respective periods. See Note 2 in Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 for a discussion of these revisions.
| | 2009(1) | | 2008(1) |
| | (In thousands) |
Income from continuing operations attributable to HEP | | $ | 94,152 |
| | $ | 79,799 |
| | $ | 56,323 |
| | $ | 46,234 |
| | $ | 20,696 |
|
Add (subtract): | | | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense | | 40,141 |
| | 34,706 |
| | 30,453 |
| | 20,620 |
| | 18,479 |
|
Amortization of discount and deferred debt issuance costs | | 1,946 |
| | 1,212 |
| | 1,008 |
| | 706 |
| | 1,002 |
|
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | | 2,979 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Increase in interest expense – non-cash charges attributable to interest rate swaps and swap settlement costs | | 5,095 |
| | 41 |
| | 2,540 |
| | 175 |
| | 2,282 |
|
Interest income | | — |
| | — |
| | (7 | ) | | (11 | ) | | (118 | ) |
State income tax | | 371 |
| | 234 |
| | 296 |
| | 20 |
| | 270 |
|
Depreciation and amortization | | 57,461 |
| | 36,958 |
| | 31,363 |
| | 27,982 |
| | 22,615 |
|
Predecessor depreciation and amortization | | (7,903 | ) | | (3,184 | ) | | 113 |
| | (1,268 | ) | | (678 | ) |
EBITDA from discontinued operations (excludes gain on sale of Rio Grande in 2009) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 6,249 |
| | 5,647 |
|
EBITDA | | $ | 194,242 |
| | $ | 149,766 |
| | $ | 122,089 |
| | $ | 100,707 |
| | $ | 70,195 |
|
| |
(5) | Distributable cash flow is not a calculation based upon GAAP. However, the amounts included in the calculation are derived from amounts presented in our consolidated financial statements, with the general exceptions of maintenance capital expenditures and distributable cash flow from discontinued operations. Distributable cash flow should not be considered in isolation or as an alternative to net income or operating income as an indication of our operating performance or as an alternative to operating cash flow as a measure of liquidity. Distributable cash flow is not necessarily comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. Distributable cash flow is presented here because it is a widely accepted financial indicator used by investors to compare partnership performance. It also is used by management for internal analysis and for our performance units. We believe that this measure provides investors an enhanced perspective of the operating performance of our assets and the cash our business is generating. |
Set forth below is our calculation of distributable cash flow.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Years Ended December 31, |
| | 2012 | | 2011(1) | | 2010(1) | | 2009(1) | | 2008(1) |
| | (In thousands) |
Income from continuing operations attributable to HEP | | $ | 94,152 |
| | $ | 79,799 |
| | $ | 56,323 |
| | $ | 46,234 |
| | $ | 20,696 |
|
Add (subtract): | | | | | | | | | | |
Depreciation and amortization | | 57,461 |
| | 36,958 |
| | 31,363 |
| | 27,982 |
| | 22,615 |
|
Predecessor depreciation and amortization | | (7,903 | ) | | (3,184 | ) | | 113 |
| | (1,268 | ) | | (678 | ) |
Amortization of discount and deferred debt issuance costs | | 1,946 |
| | 1,212 |
| | 1,008 |
| | 706 |
| | 1,002 |
|
Increase in interest expense – non-cash charges attributable to interest rate swaps | | 5,095 |
| | 41 |
| | 2,540 |
| | 175 |
| | 2,282 |
|
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | | 2,979 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Increase (decrease) in deferred revenue | | 462 |
| | (6,405 | ) | | 2,035 |
| | (7,256 | ) | | 11,958 |
|
Maintenance capital expenditures* | | (5,649 | ) | | (5,415 | ) | | (4,487 | ) | | (3,595 | ) | | (3,133 | ) |
Crude revenue settlement | | 3,670 |
| | (4,588 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
Distributable cash flow from discontinued operations (excludes gain on sale of Rio Grande in 2009) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 6,183 |
| | 5,623 |
|
SLC Pipeline acquisition costs** | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2,500 |
| | — |
|
Other non-cash adjustments | | 912 |
| | 1,877 |
| | 2,159 |
| | 552 |
| | — |
|
Distributable cash flow | | $ | 153,125 |
| | $ | 100,295 |
| | $ | 91,054 |
| | $ | 72,213 |
| | $ | 60,365 |
|
|
| |
* | Maintenance capital expenditures are capital expenditures made to replace partially or fully depreciated assets in order to maintain the existing operating capacity of our assets and to extend their useful lives. Maintenance capital expenditures include expenditures required to maintain equipment reliability, tankage and pipeline integrity, safety and to address environmental regulations. |
|
| |
** | Under accounting standards, we were required to expense rather than capitalize certain acquisition costs of $2.5 million associated with our joint venture agreement with Plains that closed in March 2009. These costs directly relate to our interest in the new joint venture pipeline and are similar to expansion capital expenditures; accordingly, we have added back these costs to arrive at distributable cash flow. |
| |
(6) | Includes $421 million, $200 million, $159 million, $206 million and $171 million in Credit Agreement advances that were classified as long-term debt at December 31, 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. |
| |
(7) | As a master limited partnership, we distribute our available cash, which historically has exceeded our net income because depreciation and amortization expense represents a non-cash charge against income. The result is a decline in partners’ equity since our regular quarterly distributions have exceeded our quarterly net income. Additionally, if the assets contributed and acquired from HFC while under common control of HFC had been acquired from third parties, our acquisition cost in excess of HFC’s basis in the transferred assets of $305.6 million would have been recorded in our financial statements as increases to our properties and equipment and intangible assets instead of decreases to partners’ equity. |
| |
Item 7. | Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
This Item 7, including but not limited to the sections on “Liquidity and Capital Resources,” contains forward-looking statements. See “Forward-Looking Statements” at the beginning of Part I and Item 1A. "Risk Factors." In this document, the words “we,” “our,” “ours” and “us” refer to HEP and its consolidated subsidiaries or to HEP or an individual subsidiary and not to any other person.
OVERVIEW
HEP is a Delaware limited partnership. We own and operate petroleum product and crude oil pipelines and terminal, tankage and loading rack facilities that support the refining and marketing operations of HFC in the Mid-Continent, Southwest and Rocky Mountain regions of the United States. At December 31, 2012, HFC owned a 44% interest in us including the 2% general partnership interest. We also own and operate refined product pipelines and terminals, located primarily in Texas, that service Alon's refinery in Big Spring, Texas. Additionally, we own a 75% interest in UNEV, the owner of a pipeline running from Utah to Las Vegas, Nevada and related products terminals and a 25% joint venture interest in the SLC Pipeline, a 95-mile intrastate crude oil pipeline system that serves refineries in the Salt Lake City area.
We generate revenues by charging tariffs for transporting petroleum products and crude oil through our pipelines, by charging fees for terminalling and storing refined products and other hydrocarbons and providing other services at our storage tanks and terminals. We do not take ownership of products that we transport, terminal or store, and therefore we are not directly exposed to changes in commodity prices.
On November 29, 2012, we announced a two-for-one unit split, payable in the form of a common unit distribution for each issued and outstanding common unit. The unit distribution was paid January 16, 2013 to all unitholders of record on January 7, 2013. All references to unit and per unit amounts in this document and related disclosures have been adjusted to reflect the effect of the unit split for all periods presented.
UNEV Pipeline Interest Acquisition
On July 12, 2012, we acquired HFC's 75% interest in UNEV. We paid consideration consisting of $260.9 million in cash and 2,059,800 of our common units (adjusted to reflect the unit split). As a result of the common units issued to HFC, HFC's ownership interest in us increased from 42% to 44% (including the 2% general partner interest). Also under the terms of the transaction, we issued to HFC a Class B unit comprising an equity interest in a wholly-owned subsidiary that entitles HFC to an interest in our share of annual UNEV earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation, and amortization above $30 million beginning July 1, 2016 and ending in June 2032, subject to certain limitations. Contemporaneously with this transaction, HFC (our general partner) agreed to forego its right to incentive distributions of up to $1.25 million per quarter over the next twelve consecutive quarterly periods and up to an additional four quarters in certain circumstances.
Legacy Frontier Pipeline and Tankage Asset Transaction
On November 9, 2011, we acquired from HFC certain tankage, loading rack and crude receiving assets located at HFC’s El Dorado and Cheyenne refineries. We paid non-cash consideration consisting of promissory notes with an aggregate principal amount of $150 million and 7,615,230 of our common units. In connection with the transaction, we entered into 15-year throughput agreements with HFC containing minimum annual revenue commitments to us of $48.3 million.
Agreements with HFC and Alon
We serve HFC’s refineries under long-term pipeline and terminal, tankage and throughput agreements expiring from 2019 to 2026. Under these agreements, HFC agreed to transport, store and throughput volumes of refined product and crude oil on our pipelines and terminal, tankage and loading rack facilities that result in minimum annual payments to us. These minimum annual payments or revenues are subject to annual tariff rate adjustments on July 1, based on the PPI or FERC index. As of December 31, 2012, these agreements with HFC will result in minimum annualized payments to us of $217.2 million.
If HFC fails to meet its minimum volume commitments under the agreements in any quarter, it will be required to pay us in cash the amount of any shortfall by the last day of the month following the end of the quarter. Under certain of the agreements, a shortfall payment may be applied as a credit in the following four quarters after minimum obligations are met.
We also have a pipelines and terminals agreement with Alon expiring in 2020 under which Alon has agreed to transport on our pipelines and throughput through our terminals volumes of refined products that result in a minimum level of annual revenue that also is subject to annual tariff rate adjustments. The terms under this agreement expire beginning in 2018 through 2022. We also
have a capacity lease agreement under which we lease Alon space on our Orla to El Paso pipeline for the shipment of refined product. As of December 31, 2012, these agreements with Alon will result in minimum annualized payments to us of $31.4 million.
A significant reduction in revenues under these agreements could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
Under certain provisions of the Omnibus Agreement that we have with HFC, we pay HFC an annual administrative fee, currently $2.3 million, for the provision by HFC or its affiliates of various general and administrative services to us. This fee does not include the salaries of personnel employed by HLS who perform services for us or the cost of their employee benefits, which are separately charged to us by HFC. We also reimburse HFC and its affiliates for direct expenses they incur on our behalf.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Income, Distributable Cash Flow and Volumes
The following tables present income, distributable cash flow and volume information for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, | | Change from |
| | 2012 | | 2011(1) | | 2011 |
| | (In thousands, except per unit data) |
Revenues | | | | | | |
Pipelines: | | | | | | |
Affiliates—refined product pipelines | | $ | 67,682 |
| | $ | 46,649 |
| | $ | 21,033 |
|
Affiliates—intermediate pipelines | | 28,540 |
| | 21,948 |
| | 6,592 |
|
Affiliates—crude pipelines | | 45,888 |
| | 47,542 |
| | (1,654 | ) |
| | 142,110 |
| | 116,139 |
| | 25,971 |
|
Third parties—refined product pipelines | | 37,521 |
| | 38,216 |
| | (695 | ) |
| | 179,631 |
| | 154,355 |
| | 25,276 |
|
Terminals, tanks and loading racks: | | | | | | |
Affiliates | | 103,472 |
| | 52,122 |
| | 51,350 |
|
Third parties | | 9,457 |
| | 7,791 |
| | 1,666 |
|
| | 112,929 |
| | 59,913 |
| | 53,016 |
|
Total revenues | | 292,560 |
| | 214,268 |
| | 78,292 |
|
Operating costs and expenses | | | | | | |
Operations (exclusive of depreciation and amortization) | | 89,242 |
| | 64,521 |
| | 24,721 |
|
Depreciation and amortization | | 57,461 |
| | 36,958 |
| | 20,503 |
|
General and administrative | | 7,594 |
| | 6,576 |
| | 1,018 |
|
| | 154,297 |
| | 108,055 |
| | 46,242 |
|
Operating income | | 138,263 |
| | 106,213 |
| | 32,050 |
|
Equity in earnings of SLC Pipeline | | 3,364 |
| | 2,552 |
| | 812 |
|
Interest expense, including amortization | | (47,182 | ) | | (35,959 | ) | | (11,223 | ) |
Loss on early extinguishment of debt | | (2,979 | ) | | — |
| | (2,979 | ) |
Other | | 10 |
| | 17 |
| | (7 | ) |
| | (46,787 | ) | | (33,390 | ) | | (13,397 | ) |
Income before income taxes | | 91,476 |
| | 72,823 |
| | 18,653 |
|
State income tax | | (371 | ) | | (234 | ) | | (137 | ) |
Net income | | 91,105 |
| | 72,589 |
| | 18,516 |
|
Allocation of net loss attributable to Predecessors | | 4,200 |
| | 6,351 |
| | (2,151 | ) |
Allocation of net loss (income) attributable to noncontrolling interests | | (1,153 | ) | | 859 |
| | (2,012 | ) |
Net income attributable to Holly Energy Partners | | 94,152 |
| | 79,799 |
| | 14,353 |
|
General partner interest in net income, including incentive distributions (2) | | (22,450 | ) | | (16,806 | ) | | (5,644 | ) |
Limited partners’ interest in net income | | $ | 71,702 |
| | $ | 62,993 |
| | $ | 8,709 |
|
Limited partners’ earnings per unit—basic and diluted (2) | | $ | 1.29 |
| | $ | 1.38 |
| | $ | (0.09 | ) |
Weighted average limited partners’ units outstanding | | 55,696 |
| | 45,672 |
| | 10,024 |
|
EBITDA (3) | | $ | 194,242 |
| | $ | 149,766 |
| | $ | 44,476 |
|
Distributable cash flow (4) | | $ | 153,125 |
| | $ | 100,295 |
| | $ | 52,830 |
|
| | | | | | |
Volumes (bpd) | | | | | | |
Pipelines: | | | | | | |
Affiliates—refined product pipelines | | 107,509 |
| | 90,782 |
| | 16,727 |
|
Affiliates—intermediate pipelines | | 127,169 |
| | 93,419 |
| | 33,750 |
|
Affiliates—crude pipelines | | 171,040 |
| | 161,789 |
| | 9,251 |
|
| | 405,718 |
| | 345,990 |
| | 59,728 |
|
Third parties—refined product pipelines | | 63,152 |
| | 52,361 |
| | 10,791 |
|
| | 468,870 |
| | 398,351 |
| | 70,519 |
|
Terminals and loading racks: | | | | | |
|
Affiliates | | 271,549 |
| | 193,645 |
| | 77,904 |
|
Third parties | | 53,456 |
| | 44,454 |
| | 9,002 |
|
| | 325,005 |
| | 238,099 |
| | 86,906 |
|
Total for pipelines and terminal assets (bpd) | | 793,875 |
| | 636,450 |
| | 157,425 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Years Ended December 31, | | Change from |
| | 2011(1) | | 2010(1) | | 2010 |
| |