e424b1
Filed pursuant to
Rule 424(b)(1)
Registration
No. 333-169277
PROSPECTUS
16,375,000 Shares
Targa Resources Corp.
Common Stock
This is the initial public offering of the common stock of Targa
Resources Corp. The selling stockholders identified in this
prospectus, including a member of our senior management, are
offering 16,375,000 shares of our common stock. We will not
receive any proceeds from the sale of shares by the selling
stockholders. No public market currently exists for our common
stock.
An affiliate of Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated, an underwriter in this offering, is a selling
stockholder. See Underwriting (Conflicts of
Interest)Conflicts of Interest.
We have been approved to list our common stock on the New York
Stock Exchange under the symbol TRGP.
Investing in our common stock involves risks. See Risk
Factors beginning on page 23 of this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
Total
|
|
Price to the public
|
|
$
|
22.00
|
|
|
$
|
360,250,000
|
|
Underwriting discounts and
commissions(1)
|
|
$
|
1.21
|
|
|
$
|
19,813,750
|
|
Proceeds to the selling stockholders
|
|
$
|
20.79
|
|
|
$
|
340,436,250
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes a structuring fee equal to 0.25% of the gross proceeds
of this offering, or approximately $900,625, payable by Targa
Resources Corp. to Barclays Capital Inc. |
Certain of the selling stockholders have granted the
underwriters a
30-day
option to purchase up to an additional 2,456,250 shares of
common stock on the same terms and conditions as set forth above
if the underwriters sell more than 16,375,000 shares of
common stock in this offering.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state
securities commission has approved or disapproved of these
securities or passed on the adequacy or accuracy of this
prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
Barclays Capital, on behalf of the underwriters, expects to
deliver the shares on or about December 10, 2010.
|
|
|
Barclays
Capital |
Morgan Stanley |
BofA Merrill Lynch |
|
|
Citi |
Deutsche Bank Securities |
|
|
|
Credit
Suisse |
J.P. Morgan |
Wells Fargo Securities |
|
|
|
Raymond
James |
RBC Capital Markets |
UBS Investment Bank |
Prospectus dated December 6, 2010
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
|
106
|
|
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
|
|
169
|
|
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
|
182
|
|
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
|
193
|
|
|
|
|
205
|
|
|
|
|
207
|
|
|
|
|
210
|
|
|
|
|
219
|
|
|
|
|
219
|
|
|
|
|
219
|
|
|
|
|
219
|
|
|
|
|
F-1
|
|
|
|
|
A-1
|
|
You should rely only on the information contained in this
prospectus. We have not, and the underwriters have not,
authorized anyone to provide you with different information. If
anyone provides you with different or inconsistent information,
you should not rely on it. We are not, and the underwriters are
not, making an offer to sell these securities in any
jurisdiction where an offer or sale is not permitted. You should
assume that the information appearing in this prospectus is
accurate as of the date on the front cover of this prospectus.
Our business, financial condition, results of operations and
prospects may have changed since that date.
Until December 31, 2010, all dealers that buy, sell or
trade our common stock, whether or not participating in this
offering, may be required to deliver a prospectus. This
requirement is in addition to the dealers obligation to
deliver a prospectus when acting as underwriters and with
respect to their unsold allotments or subscriptions.
i
SUMMARY
This summary provides a brief overview of information
contained elsewhere in this prospectus. Because it is
abbreviated, this summary may not contain all of the information
that you should consider before investing in our common stock.
You should read the entire prospectus carefully, including the
historical financial statements and the notes to those financial
statements. Unless indicated otherwise, the information
presented in this prospectus assumes that the underwriters do
not exercise their option to purchase additional shares of our
common stock. You should read Risk Factors beginning
on page 23 for more information about important risks that
you should consider carefully before investing in our common
stock. We include a glossary of some of the terms used in this
prospectus as Appendix A.
As used in this prospectus, unless we indicate otherwise:
(1) our, we, us,
TRC, the Company and similar terms refer
either to Targa Resources Corp., formerly Targa Resources
Investments Inc., in its individual capacity or to Targa
Resources Corp. and its subsidiaries collectively, as the
context requires, (2) the General Partner
refers to Targa Resources GP LLC, the general partner of the
Partnership, and (3) the Partnership refers to
Targa Resources Partners LP in its individual capacity, to Targa
Resources Partners LP and its subsidiaries collectively, or to
Targa Resources Partners LP together with combined entities for
predecessor periods under common control, as the context
requires.
Targa Resources
Corp.
We own general and limited partner interests, including
incentive distribution rights (IDRs), in Targa
Resources Partners LP (NYSE: NGLS), a publicly traded Delaware
limited partnership that is a leading provider of midstream
natural gas and natural gas liquid services in the United
States. The Partnership is engaged in the business of gathering,
compressing, treating, processing and selling natural gas and
storing, fractionating, treating, transporting and selling
natural gas liquids, or NGLs, and NGL products. Our interests in
the Partnership consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
a 2% general partner interest, which we hold through our 100%
ownership interest in the general partner of the Partnership;
|
|
|
|
|
|
all of the outstanding IDRs of the Partnership; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,645,659 of the 75,545,409 outstanding common units of the
Partnership, representing a 15.1% limited partnership interest
in the Partnership.
|
Our primary business objective is to increase our cash available
for distribution to our stockholders by assisting the
Partnership in executing its business strategy. We may
facilitate the Partnerships growth through various forms
of financial support, including, but not limited to, modifying
the Partnerships IDRs, exercising the Partnerships
IDR reset provision contained in its partnership agreement,
making loans, making capital contributions in exchange for
yielding or non-yielding equity interests or providing other
financial support to the Partnership, if needed, to support its
ability to make distributions. In addition, we may acquire
assets that could be candidates for acquisition by the
Partnership, potentially after operational or commercial
improvement or further development.
Our cash flows are generated from the cash distributions we
receive from the Partnership. The Partnership is required to
distribute all available cash at the end of each quarter after
establishing reserves to provide for the proper conduct of its
business or to provide for future distributions. Our ownership
of the Partnerships IDRs and general partner interests
entitle us to receive:
|
|
|
|
|
2% of all cash distributed in a quarter until $0.3881 has been
distributed in respect of each common unit of the Partnership
for that quarter;
|
|
|
|
15% of all cash distributed in a quarter after $0.3881 has been
distributed in respect of each common unit of the Partnership
for that quarter;
|
|
|
|
25% of all cash distributed in a quarter after $0.4219 has been
distributed in respect of each common unit of the Partnership
for that quarter; and
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
50% of all cash distributed in a quarter after $0.50625 has been
distributed in respect of each common unit of the Partnership
for that quarter.
|
On November 4, 2010, the Partnership announced that
management plans to recommend to the General Partners
board of directors a $0.04 increase in the annualized cash
distribution rate to $2.19 per common unit for the fourth
quarter of 2010 distribution. Based on a $2.19 annualized rate,
a quarterly distribution by the Partnership of $0.5475 per
common unit will result in a quarterly distribution to us of
$6.4 million, or $25.5 million on an annualized basis,
in respect of our common units in the Partnership. Such
distribution would also result in a quarterly distribution to us
of $6.3 million, or $25.2 million on an annualized
basis, in respect of our 2% general partner interest and IDRs
for total quarterly distributions of $12.7 million, or
$50.7 million on an annualized basis.
We intend to pay to our stockholders, on a quarterly basis,
dividends equal to the cash the Partnership distributes to us
based on our ownership of Partnership securities, less the
expenses of being a public company, other general and
administrative expenses, federal income taxes, capital
contributions to the Partnership and reserves established by our
board of directors. Based on the current distribution policy of
the Partnership, we plan to pay an initial quarterly dividend of
$0.2575 per share of our common stock, or $1.03 per
share on an annualized basis, for a total quarterly dividend of
approximately $10.9 million, or $43.6 million on an
annualized basis, per our dividend policy, which we will adopt
prior to the conclusion of this offering. See Our Dividend
Policy.
2
The following graph shows the historical cash distributions
declared by the Partnership for the periods shown to its limited
partners (including us), to us based on our 2% general partner
interest in the Partnership and to us based on the IDRs. The
increases in historical cash distributions to both the limited
partners and the general partner since the second quarter ended
June 30, 2007, as reflected in the graph set forth below,
generally resulted from increases in the Partnerships per
unit quarterly distribution over time and the issuance of
approximately 44.7 million additional common units by the
Partnership over time to finance acquisitions and capital
improvements. Over the same period, the quarterly distributions
declared and to be recommended by the Partnership in respect of
our 2% general partner interest and IDRs increased approximately
3,050% from $0.2 million to $6.3 million.
Quarterly Cash
Distributions by the
Partnership(1)
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents historical quarterly
cash distributions by the Partnership.
|
The graph set forth below shows hypothetical cash distributions
payable to us in respect of our interests in the Partnership
across an illustrative range of annualized distributions per
common unit. This information is based upon the following:
|
|
|
|
|
the Partnership has a total of 75,545,409 common units
outstanding; and
|
|
|
|
we own (i) a 2% general partner interest in the
Partnership, (ii) the IDRs and (iii) 11,645,659 common
units of the Partnership.
|
3
The graph below also illustrates the impact on us of the
Partnership raising or lowering its per common unit distribution
from the fourth quarter quarterly distribution of $0.5475 per
common unit, or $2.19 per common unit on an annualized basis,
that management plans to recommend to the General Partners
board of directors. This information is presented for
illustrative purposes only; it is not intended to be a
prediction of future performance and does not attempt to
illustrate the impact that changes in our or the
Partnerships business, including changes that may result
from changes in interest rates, energy prices or general
economic conditions, or the impact that any future acquisitions
or expansion projects, divestitures or the issuance of
additional debt or equity securities, will have on our or the
Partnerships results of operations.
Hypothetical
Annualized Pre-Tax Partnership Distributions to
Us(1)
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For the fourth quarter of 2010,
management plans to recommend a quarterly cash distribution of
$0.5475 per common unit, or $2.19 per common unit on an
annualized basis.
|
The impact on us of changes in the Partnerships
distribution levels will vary depending on several factors,
including the Partnerships total outstanding partnership
interests on the record date for the distribution, the aggregate
cash distributions made by the Partnership and the interests in
the Partnership owned by us. If the Partnership increases
distributions to its unitholders, including us, we would expect
to increase dividends to our stockholders, although the timing
and amount of such increased dividends, if any, will not
necessarily be comparable to the timing and amount of the
increase in distributions made by the Partnership. In addition,
the level of distributions we receive and of dividends we pay to
our stockholders may be affected by the various risks associated
with an investment in us and the underlying business of the
Partnership. Please read Risk Factors for more
information about the risks that may impact your investment
in us.
Targa Resources
Partners LP
The Partnership is a leading provider of midstream natural gas
and NGL services in the United States and is engaged in the
business of gathering, compressing, treating, processing and
selling natural gas and storing, fractionating, treating,
transporting and selling NGLs and NGL products. The Partnership
operates in two primary divisions: (i) Natural Gas
Gathering and Processing, consisting of two
segments(a) Field Gathering and Processing and
(b) Coastal Gathering and Processing; and (ii) NGL
Logistics and Marketing, consisting of two
segments(a) Logistics Assets and (b) Marketing
and Distribution.
4
The Partnership currently owns interests in or operates
approximately 11,372 miles of natural gas pipelines and
approximately 800 miles of NGL pipelines, with natural gas
gathering systems covering approximately 13,500 square
miles and 22 natural gas processing plants with access to
natural gas supplies in the Permian Basin, the Fort Worth
Basin, the onshore region of the Louisiana Gulf Coast and the
Gulf of Mexico.
Additionally, the Partnerships integrated NGL logistics
and marketing division, or Downstream Business, has
net NGL fractionation capacity of approximately 314 MBbl/d,
48 owned and operated storage wells with a net storage capacity
of approximately 67 MMBbl, and 15 storage, marine and
transport terminals with above ground NGL storage capacity of
approximately 825 MBbl.
Since the beginning of 2007, the Partnership has completed six
acquisitions from us with an aggregate purchase price of
approximately $3.1 billion. In addition, and over the same
period, the Partnership has invested approximately
$196 million in growth capital expenditures. We believe
that the Partnership is well positioned to continue the
successful execution of its business strategies, including
accretive acquisitions and expansion projects, and that the
Partnerships inventory of growth projects should help to
sustain continued growth in cash distributions paid by the
Partnership.
Based on the Partnerships closing common unit price on
December 3, 2010, the Partnership has an equity market
capitalization of $2.3 billion. As of September 30,
2010, the Partnership had total assets of $3.1 billion.
Recent
Transactions
On August 25, 2010, the Partnership acquired from us a 63%
ownership interest in Versado Gas Processors, L.L.C.
(Versado), a joint venture in which Chevron U.S.A.
Inc. owns the remaining 37% interest, for a purchase price of
$247.2 million. Versado owns a natural gas gathering and
processing business consisting of the Eunice, Monument and
Saunders gathering and processing systems, including treating
operations, processing plants and related assets (collectively,
the Versado System). The Versado System includes
three refrigerated cryogenic processing plants and approximately
3,200 miles of combined gathering pipelines in Southeast
New Mexico and West Texas and is primarily conducted under
percent of proceeds arrangements. During 2009, the Versado
System processed an average of approximately
198.8 MMcf/d
of natural gas and produced an average of approximately
22.2 MBbl/d of NGLs. In the first nine months of 2010, the
Versado System processed an average of approximately
180.5 MMcf/d
of natural gas and produced an average of approximately
20.4 MBbl/d of NGLs.
On September 28, 2010, the Partnership acquired from us a
77% ownership interest in Venice Energy Services Company, L.L.C.
(VESCO), a joint venture in which Enterprise Gas
Processing, LLC and Oneok Vesco Holdings, L.L.C. own the
remaining ownership interests, for a purchase price of
$175.6 million. VESCO owns and operates a natural gas
gathering and processing business in Louisiana consisting of a
coastal straddle plant and the business and operations of Venice
Gathering System, L.L.C., a wholly owned subsidiary of VESCO
that owns and operates an offshore gathering system and related
assets (collectively, the VESCO System). The VESCO
System captures volumes from the Gulf of Mexico shelf and
deepwater. For the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010, VESCO processed
363 MMcf/d
and
423 MMcf/d
of natural gas, respectively.
On October 8, 2010, the Partnership declared a quarterly
cash distribution of $0.5375 per common unit, or $2.15 per
common unit on an annualized basis for the third quarter of
2010, payable on November 12, 2010 to holders of record on
October 18, 2010.
On November 4, 2010, the Partnership announced that
management plans to recommend to the General Partners
board of directors a $0.04 increase in the annualized cash
distribution rate to $2.19 per common unit for the fourth
quarter of 2010 distribution.
5
Partnership
Growth Drivers
We believe the Partnerships near-term growth will be
driven both by significant recently completed or pending
projects as well as strong supply and demand fundamentals for
its existing businesses. Over the longer-term, we expect the
Partnerships growth will be driven by natural gas shale
opportunities, which could lead to growth in both the
Partnerships Gathering and Processing division and
Downstream Business, organic growth projects and potential
strategic and other acquisitions related to its existing
businesses.
Organic growth projects. We expect the
Partnerships near-term growth to be driven by a number of
significant projects scheduled for completion in 2011 and 2012
that are supported by long-term, fee-based contracts. These
projects include:
|
|
|
|
|
Cedar Bayou Fractionator expansion
project: The Partnership is currently
constructing approximately 78 MBbl/d of additional
fractionation capacity at the Partnerships 88% owned Cedar
Bayou Fractionator (CBF) in Mont Belvieu for an
estimated gross cost of $78 million.
|
|
|
|
Benzene treating project: A new treater is
under construction which will operate in conjunction with the
Partnerships existing low sulfur natural gasoline
(LSNG) facility at Mont Belvieu and is designed to
reduce benzene content of natural gasoline to meet new, more
stringent environmental standards. The treater has an estimated
gross cost of approximately $33 million.
|
|
|
|
Gulf Coast Fractionators expansion
project: The Partnership has announced plans by
Gulf Coast Fractionators (GCF), a partnership with
ConocoPhillips and Devon Energy Corporation in which the
Partnership owns a 38.8% interest, to expand the capacity of its
NGL fractionation facility in Mont Belvieu by 43 MBbl/d for
an estimated gross cost of $75 million.
|
|
|
|
SAOU Expansion Program: The Partnership has
announced a $30 million capital expenditure program
including new compression facilities and pipelines as well as
expenditures to restart the
25 MMcf/d
Conger processing plant in response to strong volume growth and
new well connects.
|
The Partnership has successfully completed both large and small
organic growth projects that are associated with its existing
assets and expects to continue to do so in the future. These
projects have involved growth capital expenditures of
approximately $245 million since 2005 and include an LSNG
project, operations improvements and efficiency enhancements,
opportunistic commercial development activities, and other
enhancements.
Strong supply and demand fundamentals for the
Partnerships existing businesses. We
believe that the current strength of oil, condensate and NGL
prices and of forecast prices for these energy commodities has
caused producers in and around the Partnerships natural
gas gathering and processing areas of operation to focus their
drilling programs on regions rich in these forms of
hydrocarbons. Liquids rich gas is prevalent from the Wolfberry
Trend and Canyon Sands plays, which are accessible by the SAOU
processing business in the Permian Basin (known as
SAOU), the Wolfberry and Bone Springs plays, which
are accessible by the Sand Hills system, and from
oilier portions of the Barnett Shale natural gas
play, especially portions of Montague, Cooke, Clay and Wise
counties, which are accessible by the North Texas System.
Producer activity in areas rich in oil, condensate and NGLs is
currently generating high demand for the Partnerships
fractionation services at the Mont Belvieu market hub. As a
result, fractionation volumes have recently increased to near
existing capacity. Until additional fractionation capacity comes
on-line in 2011, there will be limited incremental supply of
fractionation services in the area. These strong supply and
demand fundamentals have resulted in long-term,
take-or-pay
contracts for existing capacity and support the construction of
new fractionation capacity, such as the Partnerships CBF
and GCF expansion projects. The Partnership is continuing to see
rates for fractionation services increase. The
6
higher volumes of fractionated NGLs should also result in
increased demand for other related fee-based services provided
by the Partnerships Downstream Business.
Natural gas shale opportunities. The
Partnership is actively pursuing natural gas gathering and
processing and NGL fractionation opportunities associated with
many of the active, liquids rich natural gas shale plays, such
as certain regions of the Marcellus Shale and Eagle Ford Shale.
We believe that the Partnerships leadership position in
the NGL Logistics and Marketing business, which includes the
Partnerships fractionation services, provides the
Partnership with a competitive advantage relative to other
gathering and processing companies without these capabilities.
Potential third party acquisitions related to the
Partnerships existing businesses. While the
Partnerships recent growth has been partially driven by
the implementation of a focused drop drown strategy, our
management team also has a record of successful third party
acquisitions. Since our formation, our strategy has included
approximately $3 billion in acquisitions and growth capital
expenditures.
Our management team will continue to manage the
Partnerships business after this offering, and we expect
that third-party acquisitions will continue to be a significant
focus of the Partnerships growth strategy.
The
Partnerships Competitive Strengths and
Strategies
We believe the Partnership is well positioned to execute its
business strategy due to the following competitive strengths:
|
|
|
|
|
The Partnership is one of the largest fractionators of NGLs in
the Gulf Coast region.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships gathering and processing businesses are
predominantly located in active and growth oriented oil and gas
producing basins.
|
|
|
|
The Partnership provides a comprehensive package of services to
natural gas producers.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships gathering and processing systems and
logistics assets consist of high-quality, well maintained
assets, resulting in low cost, efficient operations.
|
|
|
|
The Partnership maintains gathering and processing positions in
strategic oil and gas producing areas across multiple basins and
provides services under attractive contract terms to a diverse
mix of customers.
|
|
|
|
Maintaining appropriate leverage and distribution coverage
levels and mitigating commodity price volatility allow the
Partnership to be flexible in its growth strategy and enable it
to pursue strategic acquisitions and large growth projects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The executive management team which formed TRI Resources Inc.,
formerly Targa Resources, Inc., in 2004 and continues to manage
Targa today possesses over 200 years of combined experience
working in the midstream natural gas and energy business.
|
The
Partnerships Challenges
The Partnership faces a number of challenges in implementing its
business strategy. For example:
|
|
|
|
|
The Partnership has a substantial amount of indebtedness which
may adversely affect its financial position.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships cash flow is affected by supply and
demand for oil, natural gas and NGL products and by natural gas
and NGL prices, and decreases in these prices could adversely
affect its results of operations and financial condition.
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships long-term success depends on its ability
to obtain new sources of supplies of natural gas and NGLs, which
depends on certain factors beyond its control. Any decrease in
supplies of natural gas or NGLs could adversely affect the
Partnerships business and operating results.
|
|
|
|
If the Partnership does not make acquisitions or investments in
new assets on economically acceptable terms or efficiently and
effectively integrate new assets, its results of operations and
financial condition could be adversely affected.
|
|
|
|
The Partnership is subject to regulatory, environmental,
political, legal and economic risks, which could adversely
affect its results of operations and financial condition.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships growth strategy requires access to new
capital. Tightened capital markets or increased competition for
investment opportunities could impair its ability to grow.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships hedging activities may not be effective
in reducing the variability of its cash flows and may, in
certain circumstances, increase the variability of its cash
flows.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships industry is highly competitive, and
increased competitive pressure could adversely affect the
Partnerships business and operating results.
|
For a further discussion of these and other challenges we face,
please read Risk Factors.
8
Our Structure and
Ownership After This Offering
We were formed in October 2005 as a Delaware corporation to
become the top-tier holding company for TRI Resources Inc.,
formerly Targa Resources, Inc. We currently have outstanding a
total of (i) 6,409,697 shares of Series B
Convertible Participating Preferred Stock par value
$0.001 per share (Series B Preferred) held
by affiliates of Warburg Pincus LLC (Warburg
Pincus), an affiliate of Bank of America and members of
management and (ii) 10,228,520 shares of common stock
held by members of management and other employees.
All shares of our outstanding Series B Preferred were issued in
connection with our formation in October 2005 either by way of
purchase or exchange. All shares of our outstanding common stock
were issued under our 2005 Stock Incentive Plan as a direct
issuance, as a result of option exercises or in exchange for
Series B Preferred options.
Following effectiveness of the registration statement of which
this prospectus forms a part, (1) we will effect a
1 for 2.03 reverse split of our common stock to reduce
the number of shares of our common stock that are currently
outstanding and (2) all of our shares of Series B
Preferred will automatically convert into shares of common
stock, based on (a) the 10 to 1 conversion ratio applicable
to the Series B Preferred plus (b) the accreted value
per share (which includes accrued and unpaid dividends) of the
Series B Preferred divided by the initial public offering
price for this offering after deducting underwriting discounts
and commissions, in each case after giving effect to the reverse
split. We also expect to issue equity awards that total
approximately 1.9 million shares of common stock in
connection with the offering under a new stock incentive plan.
Please see Management Executive
Compensation Compensation Discussion and
Analysis Changes in Connection with the Completion
of this Offering for a description of the new stock
incentive plan and the proposed initial grant under the plan.
As described above, the number of shares of common stock to be
issued upon conversion of our preferred stock depends on the
initial public offering price as well as the accreted value of
the preferred stock. For purposes of this prospectus, we have
presented all common stock ownership amounts and percentages
based on the initial public offering price of $22.00 per share.
The following chart depicts our organizational and ownership
structure after giving effect to this offering and the
transactions described above. Upon completion of this offering,
there will be a total of 42,292,348 common shares outstanding,
consisting of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates of Warburg Pincus will own 16,145,344 shares of
common stock, representing a 38.2% ownership interest in us.
|
|
|
|
An affiliate of Bank of America will own 1,433,795 shares
of common stock representing a 3.4% ownership interest
in us.
|
|
|
|
Our employees, including our executive officers, will own
approximately 8.3 million shares of common stock,
representing a 19.7% ownership interest in us, including the
approximately 1.9 million shares of common stock we expect
to issue under the new stock incentive plan to be adopted in
conjunction with this offering.
|
|
|
|
Our public stockholders will own 16,375,000 shares of
common stock, representing a 38.7% ownership interest in us.
|
|
|
|
We will indirectly own 100% of the ownership interest in the
General Partner, which will own the 2% general partner interest
in the Partnership and all of the Partnerships IDRs.
|
|
|
|
We will indirectly own 11,645,659 of the Partnerships
75,545,409 outstanding common units, representing a 15.1%
limited partner interest in the Partnership.
|
9
Our Simplified
Organizational Structure
Following this
Offering(1)
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Gives effect to our corporate reorganization as described above
under Our Structure and Ownership After This
Offering, the sale of common stock offered by the selling
stockholders in this offering, and awards of common stock that
will be granted to the directors and executive officers upon the
closing of this offering. |
10
The
Offering
|
|
|
Common stock offered to the public |
|
16,375,000 shares |
|
Common stock to be outstanding after this offering |
|
42,292,348 shares(1) |
|
Over-allotment option |
|
Certain of the selling stockholders have granted the
underwriters a
30-day
option to purchase up to an aggregate of
2,456,250 additional shares of our common stock to cover
over-allotments. |
|
Use of proceeds |
|
We will not receive any proceeds from this offering. |
|
Dividend policy |
|
We intend to pay to our stockholders, on a quarterly basis,
dividends equal to the cash we receive from our Partnership
distributions, less reserves for expenses, future dividends and
other uses of cash, including: |
|
|
|
federal income taxes, which we are required to pay
because we are taxed as a corporation;
|
|
|
|
the expenses of being a public company;
|
|
|
|
other general and administrative expenses;
|
|
|
|
reserves our board of directors believes prudent to
maintain; and
|
|
|
|
capital contributions to the Partnership upon the
issuance by it of additional partnership securities if we choose
to maintain the General Partners 2% interest.
|
|
Dividends |
|
Based on the current distribution policy of the Partnership, our
expected federal income tax liabilities, our expected level of
other expenses and reserves, we expect that our initial
quarterly dividend rate will be $0.2575 per share. We expect to
pay a prorated dividend for the portion of the fourth quarter of
2010 that we are public in February 2011. |
|
|
|
However, we cannot assure you that any dividends will be
declared or paid by us. Based on the distributions paid by the
Partnership to its unitholders for each of the immediately
preceding four quarters, we believe we would have been able to
pay the initial quarterly dividend to our shareholders for each
of the immediately preceding four quarters. We expect that we
will be able to pay the initial quarterly dividend for the three
months ending December 31, 2010 and each of the four
quarters in the year ending December 31, 2011. Please read
Our Dividend Policy. |
|
Tax |
|
For a discussion of the material tax consequences that may be
relevant to prospective stockholders who are
non-U.S.
holders |
11
|
|
|
|
|
(as defined below), please read Material U.S. Federal
Income Tax Consequences to
Non-U.S.
Holders. |
|
Risk factors |
|
You should carefully read and consider the information beginning
on page 23 of this prospectus set forth under the heading
Risk Factors and all other information set forth in
this prospectus before deciding to invest in our common stock. |
|
New York Stock Exchange symbol |
|
TRGP |
|
Conflicts of interest |
|
An affiliate of Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated, an underwriter in this offering, currently owns
equity interests representing a 6.5% ownership interest in us
and is selling 1,324,268 shares of common stock in
connection with this offering and will own 1,433,795 shares
of our common stock, representing a 3.4% ownership interest in
us on a fully diluted basis upon completion of this offering.
Because of this relationship, this offering is being conducted
in accordance with Rule 2720 of the NASD Conduct Rules
(which are part of the FINRA Rules). This rule requires, among
other things, that a qualified independent underwriter has
participated in the preparation of, and has exercised the usual
standards of due diligence with respect to, this prospectus and
the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part.
Barclays Capital Inc. is acting as the qualified independent
underwriter. See Underwriting (Conflicts of
Interest)Conflicts of Interest. |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
This number gives effect to the assumed common stock split, to
conversion of our outstanding preferred stock into shares of our
common stock and to the expected issuance of shares of common
stock under our new stock incentive plan, all of which are
described under Our Structure and Ownership
After This Offering. |
12
Comparison of
Rights of Our Common Stock and the Partnerships Common
Units
Our shares of common stock and the Partnerships common
units are unlikely to trade, either by volume or price, in
correlation or proportion to one another. Instead, while the
trading prices of our shares and the common units may follow
generally similar broad trends, the trading prices may diverge
because, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
common unitholders of the Partnership have a priority over the
IDRs with respect to the Partnership distributions;
|
|
|
|
we participate in the General Partners distributions and
IDRs and the common unitholders do not;
|
|
|
|
we and our stockholders are taxed differently from the
Partnership and its common unitholders; and
|
|
|
|
we may enter into other businesses separate and apart from the
Partnership or any of its affiliates.
|
An investment in common units of a partnership is inherently
different from an investment in common stock of a corporation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnerships Common Units
|
|
Our Shares
|
|
Distributions and Dividends
|
|
The Partnership pays its limited partners and the General Partner quarterly distributions equal to all of the available cash from operating surplus. The General Partner has a 2% general partner interest.
Common unitholders do not participate in the distributions to the General Partner or in the IDRs.
|
|
We intend to pay our stockholders, on a quarterly basis,
dividends equal to the cash the Partnership distributes to us
based on our ownership of Partnership interests, less federal
income taxes, which we are required to pay because we are taxed
as a corporation, the expenses of being a public company, other
general and administrative expenses, capital contributions to
the Partnership upon the issuance by it of additional
Partnership securities if we choose to maintain the General
Partners 2% interest and reserves established by our board
of directors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We receive distributions from the Partnership with respect to
our 11,645,659 common units.
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnerships Common Units
|
|
Our Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition, through our ownership of the Partnerships
general partner, we participate in the distributions to the
General Partner pursuant to the 2% general partner interest and
the IDRs. If the Partnership is successful in implementing its
strategy to increase distributable cash flow, our income from
these rights may increase in the future. However, no
distributions may be made on the IDRs until the minimum
quarterly distribution has been paid on all outstanding common
units. Therefore, distributions with respect to the IDRs are
even more uncertain than distributions on the common units.
|
Taxation of Entity and Equity Owners
|
|
The Partnership is a flow-through entity that is not subject to an entity level federal income tax.
The Partnership expects that holders of units in the Partnership other than us will benefit for a period of time from tax basis adjustments and remedial allocations of deductions so that they will be allocated a relatively small amount of federal taxable income compared to the cash distributed to them.
|
|
Our taxable income is subject to U.S. federal income tax at the
corporate tax rate, which is currently a maximum of 35%. In
addition, we will be allocated more taxable income relative to
our Partnership distributions than the other common unitholders
and the relative amount thereof may increase if the Partnership
issues additional units or distributes a higher percentage of
cash to the holder of the IDRs.
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnerships Common Units
|
|
Our Shares
|
|
|
|
Common unitholders will receive Forms K-1 from the Partnership reflecting the unitholders share of the Partnerships items of income, gain, loss, and deduction.
Tax-exempt organizations, including employee benefit plans, will have unrelated business taxable income as a result of the allocation of the Partnerships items of income, gain, loss, and deduction to them.
Regulated investment companies or mutual funds will be allocated items of income, which will not constitute qualifying income, as a result of the ownership of common units.
|
|
Because we are not a flow-through entity, our stockholders do not report our items of income, gain, loss and deduction on their federal income tax returns. Distributions to our stockholders will constitute dividends for U.S. tax purposes to the extent of our current or accumulated earnings and profits. To the extent those distributions are not treated as dividends, they will be treated as gain from the sale of the common stock to the extent the distribution exceeds a stockholders adjusted basis in the common stock sold.
Our stockholders will generally recognize capital gain or loss on the sale of our common stock equal to the difference between a stockholders adjusted tax basis in the shares of common stock sold and the proceeds received by such holder. This gain or loss will generally be long-term gain or loss if a holder sells shares of common stock held for more than one year. Under current law, long-term capital gains of individuals generally are subject to a reduced rate of U.S. federal income tax.
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-exempt organizations, including employee benefit plans, will not have unrelated business taxable income upon the receipt of dividends from us. Regulated investment companies or mutual funds will have qualifying income as a result of dividends received from us.
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnerships Common Units
|
|
Our Shares
|
|
Voting
|
|
Certain significant decisions require approval by a unit
majority of the common units. These significant decisions
include, among other things:
merger of the Partnership or the sale of
all or substantially all of its assets in certain circumstances;
and
certain amendments to the
Partnerships partnership agreement.
For more information, please read Material Provisions of
the Partnerships Partnership AgreementVoting
Rights.
|
|
Under our amended and restated bylaws, each stockholder will be
entitled to cast one vote, either in person or by proxy, for
each share standing in his or her name on the books of the
corporation as of the record date. Our amended and restated
certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws
will contain supermajority voting requirements for certain
matters. See Description of Our Capital
StockAnti-Takeover Effects of Provisions of Our Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, Our Amended and
Restated Bylaws and Delaware LawCertificate of
Incorporation and Bylaws.
|
Election, Appointment and Removal of General Partner and
Directors
|
|
Common unitholders do not elect the directors of Targa Resources GP LLC. Instead, these directors are elected annually by us, as the sole equity owner of Targa Resources GP LLC.
The Partnerships general partner may not be removed unless that removal is approved by the vote of the holders of not less than 662/3% of the outstanding units, voting together as a single class, including units held by the general partner and its affiliates, and the Partnership receives an opinion of counsel regarding limited liability and tax matters.
|
|
Under our amended and restated bylaws, we will have a staggered board of three classes with each class being elected every three years and only one class elected each year. Also, each director shall hold office until the directors successor shall have been duly elected and shall qualify or until the director shall resign or shall have been removed.
Directors serving on our board may only be removed from office for cause and only by the affirmative vote of a supermajority of our stockholders. See Description of Our Capital StockAnti-Takeover Effects of Provisions of our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, our Amended and Restated Bylaws and Delaware LawCertificate of Incorporation and Bylaws.
|
Preemptive Rights to Acquire Securities
|
|
Common unitholders do not have preemptive rights.
|
|
Our stockholders do not have preemptive rights.
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnerships Common Units
|
|
Our Shares
|
|
|
|
Whenever the Partnership issues equity securities to any person
other than the General Partner and its affiliates, the General
Partner has a preemptive right to purchase additional limited
partnership interests on the same terms in order to maintain its
percentage interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liquidation
|
|
The Partnership will dissolve upon any of the following:
|
|
We will dissolve upon any of the following:
|
|
|
the election of the general partner to
dissolve the Partnership, if approved by the holders of units
representing a unit majority;
there being no limited partners, unless
the Partnership is continued without dissolution in accordance
with applicable Delaware law;
|
|
the entry of a decree of judicial
dissolution of us; or
the approval of at least 67% of our
outstanding common stock.
|
|
|
the entry of a decree of judicial
dissolution of the Partnership pursuant to applicable Delaware
law; or
|
|
|
|
|
the withdrawal or removal of the General
Partner or any other event that results in its ceasing to be the
general partner other than by reason of a transfer of its
general partner interest in accordance with the
Partnerships partnership agreement or withdrawal or
removal following approval and admission of a successor.
|
|
|
17
Principal
Executive Offices and Internet Address
Our principal executive offices are located at 1000 Louisiana,
Suite 4300, Houston, Texas 77002 and our telephone number
is
(713) 584-1000.
Our website is located at www.targaresources.com. We will make
our periodic reports and other information filed with or
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC,
available, free of charge, through our website, as soon as
reasonably practicable after those reports and other information
are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC.
Information on our website or any other website is not
incorporated by reference into this prospectus and does not
constitute a part of this prospectus.
18
Summary
Historical and Pro Forma Financial and Operating Data
Because we control Targa Resources GP LLC, our consolidated
financial information incorporates the consolidated financial
information of Targa Resources Partners LP.
The following table presents selected historical consolidated
financial and operating data of Targa Resources Corp. for the
periods and as of the dates indicated. The summary historical
consolidated statement of operations and cash flow data for the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2008 and 2009 and summary
historical consolidated balance sheet data as of
December 31, 2008 and 2009 have been derived from our
audited financial statements, included elsewhere in this
prospectus. The summary historical consolidated statement of
operations and cash flow data for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2010 and the summary historical
consolidated balance sheet data as of September 30, 2010
have been derived from our unaudited financial statements,
included elsewhere in this prospectus. The summary historical
consolidated balance sheet data as of December 31, 2007 has
been derived from our audited financial statements and the
summary historical consolidated balance sheet as of
September 30, 2009 has been derived from our unaudited
financial statements, neither of which is included in this
prospectus.
Our summary unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated statement
of operations data gives effect to the following transactions
which occurred prior to September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
the September 2010 completion of the sale of our 77% ownership
interest in VESCO to the Partnership, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
consideration to us of $175.6 million,
|
|
|
|
the borrowing by the Partnership of $175.6 million under
its senior secured revolving credit facility, and
|
|
|
|
our prepayment of the remaining $149.4 million balance of
our senior secured term loan;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the August 2010 completion of the sale of our interests in
Versado to the Partnership, including:
|
|
|
|
|
|
consideration to us of $247.2 million, including
89,813 common units and 1,833 general partner units,
|
|
|
|
the borrowing by the Partnership of $244.7 million under
its senior secured revolving credit facility, and
|
|
|
|
our prepayment of $91.3 million of our senior secured term
loan;
|
|
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships August 2010 issuance of $250 million of
77/8%
senior secured notes due October 2018;
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships August 2010 public offering of 7,475,000
common units;
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships entry into an amended and restated
$1.1 billion senior secured credit facility in July 2010;
|
|
|
|
the April 2010 sale of the Permian Assets and Coastal Straddles
and the September 2009 sale of the Downstream Business to the
Partnership along with related financings and debt prepayments;
|
|
|
|
our secondary public offering of 8,500,000 common units of the
Partnership in April 2010; and
|
|
|
|
our January 2010 entry into a new $600 million senior
secured credit facility and related refinancing.
|
19
Our summary unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated statement
of operations data and unaudited pro forma balance sheet data
give effect to this offering and to the following events that
have occurred subsequent to September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
the agreed repurchase on November 5, 2010 from certain
holders of our Holdco Loan of $141.3 million of face value
debt for $137.4 million;
|
|
|
|
the expected award by the Company of approximately
1.9 million shares of common stock under the new stock
incentive plan that we expect to adopt in connection with this
offering; and
|
|
|
|
the $18.0 million cash distribution on the Series B
preferred stock that was paid on November 22, 2010. The
cash distribution represents a portion of the accreted value of
the Series B preferred stock included in our
September 30, 2010 balance sheet.
|
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated financial
information has been prepared by applying pro forma adjustments
to the historical financial statements of Targa Resources Corp.
The pro forma adjustments have been prepared as if the pro forma
transactions had taken place on September 30, 2010, in the
case of the unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated balance
sheet, or as of January 1, 2009, in the case of the
unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated statement of
operations.
We derived the information in the following table from, and that
information should be read together with and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to, the historical combined and unaudited
pro forma condensed consolidated financial statements and the
accompanying notes included elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Historical for
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
For the Years
|
|
|
For the Nine Months
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Ended September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except operating and price data)
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues(1)
|
|
$
|
7,297.2
|
|
|
$
|
7,998.9
|
|
|
$
|
4,536.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,145.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,942.0
|
|
|
$
|
4,536.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,942.0
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product purchases
|
|
|
6,525.5
|
|
|
|
7,218.5
|
|
|
|
3,791.1
|
|
|
|
2,624.9
|
|
|
|
3,387.6
|
|
|
|
3,791.1
|
|
|
|
3,387.6
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
247.1
|
|
|
|
275.2
|
|
|
|
235.0
|
|
|
|
182.7
|
|
|
|
190.4
|
|
|
|
235.0
|
|
|
|
190.4
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
148.1
|
|
|
|
160.9
|
|
|
|
170.3
|
|
|
|
127.9
|
|
|
|
136.9
|
|
|
|
170.3
|
|
|
|
136.9
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
96.3
|
|
|
|
96.4
|
|
|
|
120.4
|
|
|
|
83.6
|
|
|
|
81.0
|
|
|
|
132.1
|
|
|
|
89.8
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
13.4
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
|
7,016.9
|
|
|
|
7,764.4
|
|
|
|
4,318.8
|
|
|
|
3,020.9
|
|
|
|
3,795.5
|
|
|
|
4,330.5
|
|
|
|
3,804.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
280.3
|
|
|
|
234.5
|
|
|
|
217.2
|
|
|
|
124.1
|
|
|
|
146.5
|
|
|
|
205.5
|
|
|
|
137.7
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(162.3
|
)
|
|
|
(141.2
|
)
|
|
|
(132.1
|
)
|
|
|
(102.8
|
)
|
|
|
(83.9
|
)
|
|
|
(128.2
|
)
|
|
|
(78.6
|
)
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
Gain (loss) on debt repurchases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
Gain (loss) on early debt extinguishment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
Gain on insurance claims
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
128.1
|
|
|
|
153.7
|
|
|
|
99.8
|
|
|
|
35.8
|
|
|
|
57.5
|
|
|
|
92.0
|
|
|
|
54.0
|
|
Income tax expense:
|
|
|
(23.9
|
)
|
|
|
(19.3
|
)
|
|
|
(20.7
|
)
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)
|
|
|
(18.5
|
)
|
|
|
(22.5
|
)
|
|
|
(18.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
104.2
|
|
|
|
134.4
|
|
|
|
79.1
|
|
|
|
30.7
|
|
|
|
39.0
|
|
|
|
69.5
|
|
|
|
35.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Historical for
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
For the Years
|
|
|
For the Nine Months
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Ended September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except operating and price data)
|
|
|
Less: Net income attributable to non controlling interest
|
|
|
48.1
|
|
|
|
97.1
|
|
|
|
49.8
|
|
|
|
17.7
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
101.9
|
|
|
|
75.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
56.1
|
|
|
|
37.3
|
|
|
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
13.0
|
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
(32.4
|
)
|
|
|
(40.0
|
)
|
Dividends on Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
(31.6
|
)
|
|
|
(16.8
|
)
|
|
|
(17.8
|
)
|
|
|
(13.2
|
)
|
|
|
(8.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Undistributed earnings attributable to preferred
shareholders(2)
|
|
|
(24.5
|
)
|
|
|
(20.5
|
)
|
|
|
(11.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to common equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(177.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(193.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(32.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(40.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available per common sharebasic and
diluted
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.03
|
)
|
|
$
|
(21.51
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.77
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.95
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Historical for
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
For the Years
|
|
|
For the Nine Months
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Ended September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except operating and price data)
|
|
|
Financial data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin(3)
|
|
$
|
771.7
|
|
|
$
|
780.4
|
|
|
$
|
744.9
|
|
|
$
|
520.1
|
|
|
$
|
554.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
margin(4)
|
|
|
524.6
|
|
|
|
505.2
|
|
|
|
509.9
|
|
|
|
337.4
|
|
|
|
364.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant natural gas inlet,
MMcf/d(5),(6)
|
|
|
1,982.8
|
|
|
|
1,846.4
|
|
|
|
2,139.8
|
|
|
|
2,097.7
|
|
|
|
2,296.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross NGL production, MBbl/d
|
|
|
106.6
|
|
|
|
101.9
|
|
|
|
118.3
|
|
|
|
117.1
|
|
|
|
120.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas sales,
Bbtu/d(6)
|
|
|
526.5
|
|
|
|
532.1
|
|
|
|
598.4
|
|
|
|
590.4
|
|
|
|
678.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NGL sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
320.8
|
|
|
|
286.9
|
|
|
|
279.7
|
|
|
|
285.1
|
|
|
|
246.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensate sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average realized
prices(7):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas, $/MMBtu
|
|
$
|
6.56
|
|
|
$
|
8.20
|
|
|
$
|
3.96
|
|
|
$
|
3.78
|
|
|
$
|
4.61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NGL, $/gal
|
|
|
1.18
|
|
|
|
1.38
|
|
|
|
0.79
|
|
|
|
0.71
|
|
|
|
1.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensate, $/Bbl
|
|
|
70.01
|
|
|
|
91.28
|
|
|
|
56.31
|
|
|
|
54.36
|
|
|
|
73.42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data (at period end):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property plant and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
2,430.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,617.4
|
|
|
$
|
2,548.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,563.9
|
|
|
$
|
2,494.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,494.9
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
3,795.1
|
|
|
|
3,641.8
|
|
|
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
|
3,273.0
|
|
|
|
3,460.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,297.4
|
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities
|
|
|
1,867.8
|
|
|
|
1,976.5
|
|
|
|
1,593.5
|
|
|
|
1,622.6
|
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,522.1
|
|
Convertible cumulative participating Series B preferred
stock
|
|
|
273.8
|
|
|
|
290.6
|
|
|
|
308.4
|
|
|
|
303.8
|
|
|
|
96.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total owners equity
|
|
|
574.1
|
|
|
|
822.0
|
|
|
|
754.9
|
|
|
|
789.9
|
|
|
|
994.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,069.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flow Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
190.6
|
|
|
$
|
390.7
|
|
|
$
|
335.8
|
|
|
$
|
202.9
|
|
|
$
|
104.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(95.9
|
)
|
|
|
(206.7
|
)
|
|
|
(59.3
|
)
|
|
|
(50.7
|
)
|
|
|
(81.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(59.5
|
)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
(386.9
|
)
|
|
|
(327.1
|
)
|
|
|
75.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes business interruption
insurance revenues of $3.0 million and $7.9 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 and
$21.5 million, $32.9 million and $7.3 million for
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007.
|
|
(2) |
|
Based on the terms of the preferred
convertible stock, undistributed earnings of the Company are
allocated to the preferred stock until the carrying value has
been recovered.
|
|
(3) |
|
Gross margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsHow We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
(4) |
|
Operating margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsHow We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
(5) |
|
Plant natural gas inlet represents
the volume of natural gas passing through the meter located at
the inlet of a natural gas processing plant.
|
|
(6) |
|
Plant natural gas inlet volumes
include producer
take-in-kind,
while natural gas sales exclude producer
take-in-kind
volumes.
|
|
(7) |
|
Average realized prices include the
impact of hedging activities.
|
22
RISK
FACTORS
The nature of our business activities subjects us to certain
hazards and risks. You should carefully consider the risks
described below, in addition to the other information contained
in this prospectus, before making an investment decision.
Realization of any of these risks or events could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition,
cash flows and results of operations, which could result in a
decline in the trading price of our common stock, and you may
lose all or part of your investment.
Risks Inherent in
an Investment in Us
Our cash flow
is dependent upon the ability of the Partnership to make cash
distributions to us.
Our cash flow consists of cash distributions from the
Partnership. The amount of cash that the Partnership will be
able to distribute to its partners, including us, each quarter
principally depends upon the amount of cash it generates from
its business. For a description of certain factors that can
cause fluctuations in the amount of cash that the Partnership
generates from its business, please read Risks
Inherent in the Partnerships Business and
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of OperationsFactors That
Significantly Affect Our Results. The Partnership may not
have sufficient available cash each quarter to continue paying
distributions at their current level or at all. If the
Partnership reduces its per unit distribution, because of
reduced operating cash flow, higher expenses, capital
requirements or otherwise, we will have less cash available for
distribution to you and would probably be required to reduce the
dividend per share of common stock paid to you. You should also
be aware that the amount of cash the Partnership has available
for distribution depends primarily upon the Partnerships
cash flow, including cash flow from the release of reserves as
well as borrowings, and is not solely a function of
profitability, which will be affected by non-cash items. As a
result, the Partnership may make cash distributions during
periods when it records losses and may not make cash
distributions during periods when it records profits.
Once we receive cash from the Partnership and the General
Partner, our ability to distribute the cash received to our
stockholders is limited by a number of factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
our obligation to (i) satisfy tax obligations associated
with previous sales of assets to the Partnership,
(ii) reimburse the Partnership for certain capital
expenditures related to Versado and (iii) provide the
Partnership with limited quarterly distribution support through
2011, all as described in more detail in Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsLiquidity and Capital Resources;
|
|
|
|
interest expense and principal payments on any indebtedness we
incur;
|
|
|
|
restrictions on distributions contained in any existing or
future debt agreements;
|
|
|
|
our general and administrative expenses, including expenses we
will incur as a result of being a public company as well as
other operating expenses;
|
|
|
|
expenses of the General Partner;
|
|
|
|
income taxes;
|
|
|
|
reserves we establish in order for us to maintain our 2% general
partner interest in the Partnership upon the issuance of
additional partnership securities by the Partnership; and
|
|
|
|
reserves our board of directors establishes for the proper
conduct of our business, to comply with applicable law or any
agreement binding on us or our subsidiaries or to provide for
future dividends by us.
|
For additional information, please read Our Dividend
Policy. In the future, we may not be able to pay dividends
at or above our estimated initial quarterly dividend of $0.2575
per share, or $1.03 per share on an
23
annualized basis. The actual amount of cash that is available
for dividends to our stockholders will depend on numerous
factors, many of which are beyond our control.
A reduction in
the Partnerships distributions will disproportionately
affect the amount of cash distributions to which we are
entitled.
Our ownership of the IDRs in the Partnership entitles us to
receive specified percentages of the amount of cash
distributions made by the Partnership to its limited partners
only in the event that the Partnership distributes more than
$0.3881 per unit for such quarter. As a result, the holders of
the Partnerships common units have a priority over our
IDRs to the extent of cash distributions by the Partnership up
to and including $0.3881 per unit for any quarter.
Our IDRs entitle us to receive increasing percentages, up to
48%, of all cash distributed by the Partnership. Because the
Partnerships distribution rate is currently above the
maximum target cash distribution level on the IDRs, future
growth in distributions we receive from the Partnership will not
result from an increase in the target cash distribution level
associated with the IDRs. Furthermore, a decrease in the amount
of distributions by the Partnership to less than $0.50625 per
unit per quarter would reduce the General Partners
percentage of the incremental cash distributions above $0.3881
per common unit per quarter from 48% to 23%. As a result, any
such reduction in quarterly cash distributions from the
Partnership would have the effect of disproportionately reducing
the distributions that we receive from the Partnership based on
our IDRs as compared to distributions we receive from the
Partnership with respect to our 2% general partner interest and
our common units.
If the
Partnerships unitholders remove the General Partner, we
would lose our general partner interest and IDRs in the
Partnership and the ability to manage the
Partnership.
We currently manage our investment in the Partnership through
our ownership interest in the General Partner. The
Partnerships partnership agreement, however, gives
unitholders of the Partnership the right to remove the General
Partner upon the affirmative vote of holders of
662/3%
of the Partnerships outstanding units. If the General
Partner were removed as general partner of the Partnership, it
would receive cash or common units in exchange for its 2%
general partner interest and the IDRs and would also lose its
ability to manage the Partnership. While the cash or common
units the General Partner would receive are intended under the
terms of the Partnerships partnership agreement to fully
compensate us in the event such an exchange is required, the
value of the investments we make with the cash or the common
units may not over time be equivalent to the value of the
general partner interest and the IDRs had the General Partner
retained them. Please read Material Provisions of the
Partnerships Partnership AgreementWithdrawal or
Removal of the General Partner.
In addition, if the General Partner is removed as general
partner of the Partnership, we would face an increased risk of
being deemed an investment company. Please read If
in the future we cease to manage and control the Partnership, we
may be deemed to be an investment company under the Investment
Company Act of 1940.
The
Partnership, without our stockholders consent, may issue
additional common units or other equity securities, which may
increase the risk that the Partnership will not have sufficient
available cash to maintain or increase its cash distribution
level per common unit.
Because the Partnership distributes to its partners most of the
cash generated by its operations, it relies primarily upon
external financing sources, including debt and equity issuances,
to fund its acquisitions and expansion capital expenditures.
Accordingly, the Partnership has wide latitude to issue
additional common units on the terms and conditions established
by its general partner. We receive cash distributions from the
Partnership on the general partner interest, IDRs and common
units that we own. Because a significant portion of the cash we
receive from the Partnership is attributable to our ownership of
the IDRs, payment of distributions on additional Partnership
common units may increase the risk that the Partnership will be
unable to maintain or increase its quarterly cash distribution
per unit, which in turn may
24
reduce the amount of distributions we receive attributable to
our common units, general partner interest and IDRs and the
available cash that we have to distribute to our stockholders.
The General
Partner, with our consent but without the consent of our
stockholders, may limit or modify the incentive distributions we
are entitled to receive, which may reduce cash dividends to
you.
We own the General Partner, which owns the IDRs in the
Partnership that entitle us to receive increasing percentages,
up to a maximum of 48% of any cash distributed by the
Partnership as certain target distribution levels are reached in
excess of $0.3881 per common unit in any quarter. A substantial
portion of the cash flow we receive from the Partnership is
provided by these IDRs. Because of the high percentage of the
Partnerships incremental cash flow that is distributed to
the IDRs, certain potential acquisitions might not increase cash
available for distribution per Partnership unit. In order to
facilitate acquisitions by the Partnership or for other reasons,
the board of directors of the General Partner may elect to
reduce the IDRs payable to us with our consent. These reductions
may be permanent reductions in the IDRs or may be reductions
with respect to cash flows from the potential acquisition. If
distributions on the IDRs were reduced for the benefit of the
Partnership units, the total amount of cash distributions we
would receive from the Partnership, and therefore the amount of
cash distributions we could pay to our stockholders, would be
reduced.
In the future,
we may not have sufficient cash to pay estimated
dividends.
Because our only source of operating cash flow consists of cash
distributions from the Partnership, the amount of dividends we
are able to pay to our stockholders may fluctuate based on the
level of distributions the Partnership makes to its partners,
including us. The Partnership may not continue to make quarterly
distributions at the 2010 fourth quarter distribution level of
$0.5475 per common unit that management plans to recommend, or
may not distribute any other amount, or increase its quarterly
distributions in the future. In addition, while we would expect
to increase or decrease distributions to our stockholders if the
Partnership increases or decreases distributions to us, the
timing and amount of such changes in distributions, if any, will
not necessarily be comparable to the timing and amount of any
changes in distributions made by us. Factors such as reserves
established by our board of directors for our estimated general
and administrative expenses of being a public company as well as
other operating expenses, reserves to satisfy our debt service
requirements, if any, and reserves for future distributions by
us may affect the dividends we make to our stockholders. The
actual amount of cash that is available for dividends to our
stockholders will depend on numerous factors, many of which are
beyond our control.
Our cash
dividend policy limits our ability to grow.
Because we plan on distributing a substantial amount of our cash
flow, our growth may not be as fast as the growth of businesses
that reinvest their available cash to expand ongoing operations.
In fact, because our only cash-generating assets are direct and
indirect partnership interests in the Partnership, our growth
will be substantially dependent upon the Partnership. If we
issue additional shares of common stock or we were to incur
debt, the payment of dividends on those additional shares or
interest on that debt could increase the risk that we will be
unable to maintain or increase our cash dividend levels.
Our rate of
growth may be reduced to the extent we purchase additional units
from the Partnership, which will reduce the relative percentage
of the cash we receive from the IDRs.
Our business strategy includes, where appropriate, supporting
the growth of the Partnership by purchasing the
Partnerships units or lending funds or providing other
forms of financial support to the Partnership to provide funding
for the acquisition of a business or asset or for a growth
project. To the extent we purchase common units or securities
not entitled to a current distribution from the Partnership, the
rate of our distribution growth may be reduced, at least in the
short term, as less of our cash distributions will come from our
ownership of IDRs, whose distributions increase at a faster rate
than those of our other securities.
25
We have a
credit facility that contains various restrictions on our
ability to pay dividends to our stockholders, borrow additional
funds or capitalize on business opportunities.
We have a credit facility that contains various operating and
financial restrictions and covenants. Our ability to comply with
these restrictions and covenants may be affected by events
beyond our control, including prevailing economic, financial and
industry conditions. If we are unable to comply with these
restrictions and covenants, any future indebtedness under this
credit facility may become immediately due and payable and our
lenders commitment to make further loans to us may
terminate. We might not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient
funds to make these accelerated payments.
Our credit facility limits our ability to pay dividends to our
stockholders during an event of default or if an event of
default would result from such dividend.
In addition, any future borrowings may:
|
|
|
|
|
adversely affect our ability to obtain additional financing for
future operations or capital needs;
|
|
|
|
limit our ability to pursue acquisitions and other business
opportunities;
|
|
|
|
make our results of operations more susceptible to adverse
economic or operating conditions; or
|
|
|
|
limit our ability to pay dividends.
|
Our payment of any principal and interest will reduce our cash
available for distribution to holders of common stock. In
addition, we are able to incur substantial additional
indebtedness in the future. If we incur additional debt, the
risks associated with our leverage would increase. For more
information regarding our credit facility, please read
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of OperationsLiquidity and Capital
Resources.
If dividends
on our shares of common stock are not paid with respect to any
fiscal quarter, including those at the anticipated initial
dividend rate, our stockholders will not be entitled to receive
that quarters payments in the future.
Dividends to our stockholders will not be cumulative.
Consequently, if dividends on our shares of common stock are not
paid with respect to any fiscal quarter, including those at the
anticipated initial distribution rate, our stockholders will not
be entitled to receive that quarters payments in the
future.
The
Partnerships practice of distributing all of its available
cash may limit its ability to grow, which could impact
distributions to us and the available cash that we have to
dividend to our stockholders.
Because our only cash-generating assets are common units and
general partner interests in the Partnership, including the
IDRs, our growth will be dependent upon the Partnerships
ability to increase its quarterly cash distributions. The
Partnership has historically distributed to its partners most of
the cash generated by its operations. As a result, it relies
primarily upon external financing sources, including debt and
equity issuances, to fund its acquisitions and expansion capital
expenditures. Accordingly, to the extent the Partnership is
unable to finance growth externally, its ability to grow will be
impaired because it distributes substantially all of its
available cash. Also, if the Partnership incurs additional
indebtedness to finance its growth, the increased interest
expense associated with such indebtedness may reduce the amount
of available cash that we can distribute to you. In addition, to
the extent the Partnership issues additional units in connection
with any acquisitions or growth capital expenditures, the
payment of distributions on those additional units may increase
the risk that the Partnership will be unable to maintain or
increase its per unit distribution level, which in turn may
impact the available cash that we have to distribute to our
stockholders.
26
Restrictions
in the Partnerships senior secured credit facility and
indentures could limit its ability to make distributions
to us.
The Partnerships senior secured credit facility and
indentures contain covenants limiting its ability to incur
indebtedness, grant liens, engage in transactions with
affiliates and make distributions. The Partnerships senior
secured credit facility also contains covenants requiring the
Partnership to maintain certain financial ratios. The
Partnership is prohibited from making any distribution to
unitholders if such distribution would cause an event of default
or otherwise violate a covenant under its senior secured credit
facility or the indentures.
If in the
future we cease to manage and control the Partnership, we may be
deemed to be an investment company under the Investment Company
Act of 1940.
If we cease to manage and control the Partnership and are deemed
to be an investment company under the Investment Company Act of
1940, we would either have to register as an investment company
under the Investment Company Act of 1940, obtain exemptive
relief from the SEC or modify our organizational structure or
our contractual rights to fall outside the definition of an
investment company. Registering as an investment company could,
among other things, materially limit our ability to engage in
transactions with affiliates, including the purchase and sale of
certain securities or other property to or from our affiliates,
restrict our ability to borrow funds or engage in other
transactions involving leverage and require us to add additional
directors who are independent of us and our affiliates, and
adversely affect the price of our common stock.
Our historical
and pro forma financial information may not be representative of
our future performance.
The historical financial information included in this prospectus
is derived from our historical financial statements for periods
prior to our initial public offering. Our audited historical
financial statements were prepared in accordance with GAAP.
Accordingly, the historical financial information included in
this prospectus does not reflect what our results of operations
and financial condition would have been had we been a public
entity during the periods presented, or what our results of
operations and financial condition will be in the future.
In preparing the pro forma financial information included in
this prospectus, we have made adjustments to our historical
financial information based upon currently available information
and upon assumptions that our management believes are reasonable
in order to reflect, on a pro forma basis, the impact of the
items discussed in our unaudited pro forma financial statements
and related notes. The estimates and assumptions used in the
calculation of the pro forma financial information in this
prospectus may be materially different from our actual
experience as a public entity. Accordingly, the pro forma
financial information included in this prospectus does not
purport to represent what our results of operations would
actually have been had we operated as a public entity during the
periods presented or what our results of operations and
financial condition will be in the future, nor does the pro
forma financial information give effect to any events other than
those discussed in our unaudited pro forma financial statements
and related notes.
The
assumptions underlying our TRC minimum estimated cash available
for distribution for the three month period ending
December 31, 2010 and the twelve month period ending
December 31, 2011, included in Our Dividend
Policy involve inherent and significant business,
economic, financial, regulatory and competitive risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ
materially from those estimated.
Our estimate of cash available for distribution for the three
month period ending December 31, 2010 and the twelve month
period ending December 31, 2011 set forth in Our
Dividend Policy has been prepared by management, and we
have not received an opinion or report on it from our or any
other independent registered public accounting firm. The
assumptions underlying the forecasts are inherently
27
uncertain and are subject to significant business, economic,
financial, regulatory and competitive risks and uncertainties
that could cause actual results to differ materially from those
forecasted. If we do not achieve the forecasted results, we may
not be able to pay a quarterly dividend on our common stock, in
which event the market price of our common stock may decline
materially. For further discussion on our ability to pay a
quarterly dividend, please read Our Dividend Policy.
If we lose any
of our named executive officers, our business may be adversely
affected.
Our success is dependent upon the efforts of the named executive
officers. Our named executive officers are responsible for
executing the Partnerships business strategy and, when
appropriate to our primary business objective, facilitating the
Partnerships growth through various forms of financial
support provided by us, including, but not limited to, modifying
the Partnerships IDRs, exercising the Partnerships
IDR reset provision contained in its partnership agreement,
making loans, making capital contributions in exchange for
yielding or non-yielding equity interests or providing other
financial support to the Partnership. There is substantial
competition for qualified personnel in the midstream natural gas
industry. We may not be able to retain our existing named
executive officers or fill new positions or vacancies created by
expansion or turnover. We have not entered into employment
agreements with any of our named executive officers. In
addition, we do not maintain key man life insurance
on the lives of any of our named executive officers. A loss of
one or more of our named executive officers could harm our and
the Partnerships business and prevent us from implementing
our and the Partnerships business strategy.
If we fail to
develop or maintain an effective system of internal controls, we
may not be able to accurately report our financial results or
prevent fraud. In addition, potential changes in accounting
standards might cause us to revise our financial results and
disclosure in the future.
Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide
timely and reliable financial reports and effectively prevent
fraud. If we cannot provide timely and reliable financial
reports or prevent fraud, our reputation and operating results
would be harmed. We continue to enhance our internal controls
and financial reporting capabilities. These enhancements require
a significant commitment of resources, personnel and the
development and maintenance of formalized internal reporting
procedures to ensure the reliability of our financial reporting.
Our efforts to update and maintain our internal controls may not
be successful, and we may be unable to maintain adequate
controls over our financial processes and reporting in the
future, including future compliance with the obligations under
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Any failure
to develop or maintain effective controls, or difficulties
encountered in their implementation or other effective
improvement of our internal controls could prevent us from
timely and reliably reporting our financial results and may harm
our operating results. Ineffective internal controls could also
cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial
information. In addition, the Financial Accounting Standards
Board or the SEC could enact new accounting standards that might
impact how we or the Partnership are required to record
revenues, expenses, assets and liabilities. Any significant
change in accounting standards or disclosure requirements could
have a material effect on our business, results of operations,
financial condition and ability to service our and our
subsidiaries debt obligations.
Our shares of
common stock and the Partnerships common units may not
trade in relation or proportion to one another.
The shares of our common stock and the Partnerships common
units may not trade, either by volume or price, in correlation
or proportion to one another. Instead, while the trading prices
of our common stock and the Partnerships common units may
follow generally similar broad trends, the trading prices may
diverge because, among other things:
|
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships cash distributions to its common
unitholders have a priority over distributions on its IDRs;
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
we participate in the distributions on the General
Partners general partner interest and IDRs in the
Partnership while the Partnerships common unitholders do
not;
|
|
|
|
we and our stockholders are taxed differently from the
Partnership and its common unitholders; and
|
|
|
|
we may enter into other businesses separate and apart from the
Partnership or any of its affiliates.
|
An increase in
interest rates may cause the market price of our common stock to
decline.
Like all equity investments, an investment in our common stock
is subject to certain risks. In exchange for accepting these
risks, investors may expect to receive a higher rate of return
than would otherwise be obtainable from lower-risk investments.
Accordingly, as interest rates rise, the ability of investors to
obtain higher risk-adjusted rates of return by purchasing
government-backed debt securities may cause a corresponding
decline in demand for riskier investments generally, including
yield-based equity investments. Reduced demand for our common
stock resulting from investors seeking other more favorable
investment opportunities may cause the trading price of our
common stock to decline.
The initial
public offering price of our common stock may not be indicative
of the market price of our common stock after this offering. In
addition, an active liquid trading market for our common stock
may not develop and our stock price may be
volatile.
Prior to this offering, our common stock was not traded on any
market. An active and liquid trading market for our common stock
may not develop or be maintained after this offering. Liquid and
active trading markets usually result in less price volatility
and more efficiency in carrying out investors purchase and
sale orders. The market price of our common stock could vary
significantly as a result of a number of factors, some of which
are beyond our control. In the event of a drop in the market
price of our common stock, you could lose a substantial part or
all of your investment in our common stock. The initial public
offering price will be negotiated between the selling
stockholders and representatives of the underwriters, based on
numerous factors which are discussed in the
Underwriting section of this prospectus, and may not
be indicative of the market price of our common stock after this
offering. Consequently, you may not be able to sell shares of
our common stock at prices equal to or greater than the price
paid by you in the offering.
The following factors could affect our stock price:
|
|
|
|
|
our and the Partnerships operating and financial
performance;
|
|
|
|
quarterly variations in the rate of growth of our and the
Partnerships financial indicators, such as net income per
share, net income and revenues;
|
|
|
|
changes in revenue or earnings estimates or publication of
reports by equity research analysts relating to us or the
Partnership;
|
|
|
|
speculation in the press or investment community;
|
|
|
|
sales of our common stock by us, the selling stockholders or
other stockholders, or the perception that such sales may occur;
|
|
|
|
general market conditions, including fluctuations in commodity
prices; and
|
|
|
|
domestic and international economic, legal and regulatory
factors unrelated to our performance.
|
The stock markets in general have experienced volatility that
has often been unrelated to the operating performance of
particular companies. These broad market fluctuations may
adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.
29
The
requirements of being a public company, including compliance
with the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act and the
requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, may strain our
resources, increase our costs and distract management; and we
may be unable to comply with these requirements in a timely or
cost-effective manner.
As a public company with listed equity securities, we will need
to comply with new laws, regulations and requirements, certain
corporate governance provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, related regulations of the SEC and the requirements of the
New York Stock Exchange, or NYSE, with which we were not
required to comply as a private company. Complying with these
statutes, regulations and requirements will occupy a significant
amount of time of our board of directors and management and will
significantly increase our costs and expenses. We will need to:
|
|
|
|
|
institute a more comprehensive compliance function;
|
|
|
|
design, establish, evaluate and maintain an additional system of
internal controls over financial reporting in compliance with
the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and the related rules and regulations of the SEC and the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board;
|
|
|
|
comply with rules promulgated by the NYSE;
|
|
|
|
prepare and distribute periodic public reports in compliance
with our obligations under the federal securities laws;
|
|
|
|
establish new internal policies, such as those relating to
disclosure controls and procedures and insider trading;
|
|
|
|
involve and retain to a greater degree outside counsel and
accountants in the above activities; and
|
|
|
|
augment our investor relations function.
|
In addition, we also expect that being a public company will
require us to accept less director and officer liability
insurance coverage than we desire or to incur additional costs
to maintain coverage. These factors could also make it more
difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our
board of directors, particularly to serve on our Audit
Committee, and qualified executive officers.
Future sales
of our common stock in the public market could lower our stock
price, and any additional capital raised by us through the sale
of equity or convertible securities may dilute your ownership in
us.
We or our stockholders may sell shares of common stock in
subsequent public offerings. We may also issue additional shares
of common stock or convertible securities. After the completion
of this offering, we will have 42,292,348 outstanding shares of
common stock. This number consists of 16,375,000 shares
that the selling stockholders are selling in this offering
(assuming no exercise of the underwriters over-allotment
option), which may be resold immediately in the public market.
Following the completion of this offering, the existing
stockholders will own approximately 26 million shares, or
approximately 61.3% of our total outstanding shares, all of
which are restricted from immediate resale under the federal
securities laws. A substantial portion of such shares are
subject to the
lock-up
agreements between such parties and the underwriters described
in Underwriting, but may be sold into the market in
the future. Certain of our existing stockholders are party to a
registration rights agreement with us which requires us to
effect the registration of their shares in certain circumstances
no earlier than the expiration of the
lock-up
period contained in the underwriting agreement entered into in
connection with this offering.
As soon as practicable after this offering, we intend to file a
registration statement with the SEC on
Form S-8
providing for the registration of 5 million shares of our
common stock issued or reserved for issuance under our stock
incentive plan. Subject to the satisfaction of vesting
conditions and the expiration
30
of lock-up
agreements, shares registered under this registration statement
on
Form S-8
will be available for resale immediately in the public market
without restriction.
We cannot predict the size of future issuances of our common
stock or the effect, if any, that future issuances and sales of
shares of our common stock will have on the market price of our
common stock. Sales of substantial amounts of our common stock
(including shares issued in connection with an acquisition), or
the perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect
prevailing market prices of our common stock.
Our amended
and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and
restated bylaws, as well as Delaware law, will contain
provisions that could discourage acquisition bids or merger
proposals, which may adversely affect the market price of our
common stock.
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation will
authorize our board of directors to issue preferred stock
without stockholder approval. If our board of directors elects
to issue preferred stock, it could be more difficult for a third
party to acquire us. In addition, some provisions of our amended
and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and
restated bylaws could make it more difficult for a third party
to acquire control of us, even if the change of control would be
beneficial to our stockholders, including:
|
|
|
|
|
a classified board of directors, so that only approximately
one-third of our directors are elected each year;
|
|
|
|
limitations on the removal of directors; and
|
|
|
|
limitations on the ability of our stockholders to call special
meetings and establish advance notice provisions for stockholder
proposals and nominations for elections to the board of
directors to be acted upon at meetings of stockholders.
|
Delaware law prohibits us from engaging in any business
combination with any interested stockholder, meaning
generally that a stockholder who beneficially owns more than 15%
of our stock cannot acquire us for a period of three years from
the date this person became an interested stockholder, unless
various conditions are met, such as approval of the transaction
by our board of directors. We anticipate opting out of this
provision of Delaware law until such time as Warburg Pincus and
certain transferees, do not beneficially own at least 15% of our
common stock. Please read Description of Our Capital
StockAnti-Takeover Effects of Provisions of Our Amended
and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, Our Amended and
Restated Bylaws and Delaware Law.
Merrill Lynch,
Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated may have a
conflict of interest with respect to this
offering.
Merrill Lynch Ventures L.P. 2001 (ML Ventures), an
affiliate of Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated (BofA Merrill Lynch), an underwriter in
this offering, currently owns equity interests representing a
6.5% ownership interest in us and is selling
1,324,268 shares of common stock in connection with this
offering and will own 1,433,795 shares of our common stock,
representing a 3.4% ownership interest in us on a fully diluted
basis upon completion of this offering. Accordingly, BofA
Merrill Lynchs interest may go beyond receiving customary
underwriting discounts and commissions. In particular, there may
be a conflict of interest between BofA Merrill Lynchs own
interests as underwriter (including in negotiating the initial
public offering price) and the interests of its affiliate ML
Ventures as a selling stockholder. Because of this relationship,
this offering is being conducted in accordance with
Rule 2720 of the NASD Conduct Rules (which are part of the
FINRA Rules). This rule requires, among other things, that a
qualified independent underwriter has participated in the
preparation of, and has exercised the usual standards of due
diligence with respect to, this prospectus and the registration
statement of which this prospectus is a part. Accordingly,
Barclays Capital Inc. (Barclays Capital) is assuming the
responsibilities of acting as the qualified independent
underwriter in this offering. Although the qualified independent
underwriter has participated in the preparation of the
registration statement and prospectus and conducted due
diligence, we cannot assure you that this will adequately
address any potential conflicts of interest related to BofA
Merrill Lynch and ML Ventures. We have agreed to indemnify
Barclays Capital for
31
acting as qualified independent underwriter against certain
liabilities, including liabilities under the Securities Act and
to contribute to payments that Barclays Capital may be required
to make for these liabilities.
We have a
significant stockholder, which will limit your ability to
influence corporate matters and may give rise to conflicts of
interest.
Upon completion of this offering, affiliates of Warburg Pincus
will beneficially own approximately 38.2% of our outstanding
common stock based on the assumed rate of conversion of our
preferred stock into common stock upon completion of this
offering as described under SummaryOur Structure and
Ownership After This Offering. See Security
Ownership of Management and Selling Stockholders.
Accordingly, Warburg Pincus will exert significant influence
over us and any action requiring the approval of the holders of
our stock, including the election of directors and approval of
significant corporate transactions. Warburgs concentrated
ownership makes it less likely that any other holder or group of
holders of common stock will be able to affect the way we are
managed or the direction of our business. These factors also may
delay or prevent a change in our management or voting control.
Furthermore, conflicts of interest could arise in the future
between us, on the one hand, and Warburg Pincus and its
affiliates, on the other hand, concerning among other things,
potential competitive business activities, business
opportunities, the issuance of additional securities, the
payment of dividends by us and other matters. Warburg Pincus is
a private equity firm that has invested, among other things, in
companies in the energy industry. As a result, Warburg
Pincus existing and future portfolio companies which it
controls may compete with us for investment or business
opportunities. These conflicts of interest may not be resolved
in our favor.
In our amended
and restated certificate of incorporation, we have renounced
business opportunities that may be pursued by the Partnership or
by affiliated stockholders that currently hold a significant
amount of our common stock.
In our restated charter and in accordance with Delaware law, we
have renounced any interest or expectancy we may have in, or
being offered an opportunity to participate in, any business
opportunities, including any opportunities within those classes
of opportunity currently pursued by the Partnership, presented
to Warburg Pincus or any private fund that it manages or
advises, their affiliates (other than us and our subsidiaries),
their officers, directors, partners, employees or other agents
who serve as one of our directors, Merrill Lynch Ventures L.P.
2001, its affiliates (other than us and our subsidiaries), and
any portfolio company in which such entities or persons has an
equity investment (other than us and our subsidiaries)
participates or desires or seeks to participate in and that
involves any aspect of the energy business or industry. Please
read Description of Our Capital StockCorporate
Opportunity.
The duties of
our officers and directors may conflict with those owed to the
Partnership and these officers and directors may face conflicts
of interest in the allocation of administrative time among our
business and the Partnerships business.
We anticipate that substantially all of our officers and certain
members of our board of directors will be officers or directors
of the General Partner and, as a result, will have separate
duties that govern their management of the Partnerships
business. These officers and directors may encounter situations
in which their obligations to us, on the one hand, and the
Partnership, on the other hand, are in conflict. For a
description of how these conflicts will be resolved, please read
Certain Relationships and Related
TransactionsConflicts of Interest. The resolution of
these conflicts may not always be in our best interest or that
of our stockholders.
In addition, our officers who also serve as officers of the
General Partner may face conflicts in allocating their time
spent on our behalf and on behalf of the Partnership. These time
allocations may adversely affect our or the Partnerships
results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition. For
a list
32
of our officers and directors that will serve in the same
capacity for the General Partner and a discussion of the amount
of time we expect them to devote to our business, please read
Management.
The U.S.
federal income tax rate on dividend income is scheduled to
increase in 2011.
Our distributions to our stockholders will constitute dividends
for U.S. federal income tax purposes to the extent such
distributions are paid from our current or accumulated earnings
and profits, as determined under U.S. federal income tax
principles. Dividends received by certain non-corporate
U.S. stockholders, including individuals, are subject to a
reduced maximum federal tax rate of 15% for taxable years
beginning on or before December 31, 2010. However, for
taxable years beginning after December 31, 2010, dividends
received by such non-corporate U.S. stockholders will be
taxed at the rate applicable to ordinary income of individuals,
which is scheduled to increase to a maximum of 39.6%.
Risks Inherent in
the Partnerships Business
Because we are directly dependent on the distributions we
receive from the Partnership, risks to the Partnerships
operations are also risks to us. We have set forth below risks
to the Partnerships business and operations, the
occurrence of which could negatively impact the
Partnerships financial performance and decrease the amount
of cash it is able to distribute to us.
The
Partnership has a substantial amount of indebtedness which may
adversely affect its financial position.
The Partnership has a substantial amount of indebtedness. On
July 19, 2010, the Partnership entered into a new five-year
$1.1 billion senior secured revolving credit facility,
which allows it to request increases in commitments up to an
additional $300 million. The amended and restated senior
secured credit facility replaces the Partnerships former
$977.5 million senior secured revolving credit facility due
February 2012. As of September 30, 2010, the Partnership
had approximately $753 million of borrowings outstanding
under its senior secured credit facility, approximately
$102 million of letters of credit outstanding and
approximately $245 million of additional borrowing capacity
under its senior secured credit facility. For the year ended
December 31, 2009 and the quarter ended September 30,
2010, the Partnerships consolidated interest expense was
$118.6 million and $23.3 million.
This substantial level of indebtedness increases the possibility
that the Partnership may be unable to generate cash sufficient
to pay, when due, the principal of, interest on or other amounts
due in respect of indebtedness. This substantial indebtedness,
combined with the Partnerships lease and other financial
obligations and contractual commitments, could have other
important consequences to us, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships ability to obtain additional financing,
if necessary, for working capital, capital expenditures,
acquisitions or other purposes may be impaired or such financing
may not be available on favorable terms;
|
|
|
|
satisfying the Partnerships obligations with respect to
indebtedness may be more difficult and any failure to comply
with the obligations of any debt instruments could result in an
event of default under the agreements governing such
indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
the Partnership will need a portion of cash flow to make
interest payments on debt, reducing the funds that would
otherwise be available for operations and future business
opportunities;
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships debt level will make it more vulnerable
to competitive pressures or a downturn in its business or the
economy generally; and
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships debt level may limit flexibility in
planning for, or responding to, changing business and economic
conditions.
|
The Partnerships ability to service its debt will depend
upon, among other things, its future financial and operating
performance, which will be affected by prevailing economic
conditions and
33
financial, business, regulatory and other factors, some of which
are beyond its control. If the Partnerships operating
results are not sufficient to service its current or future
indebtedness, it will be forced to take actions such as reducing
or delaying business activities, acquisitions, investments or
capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring or
refinancing debt, or seeking additional equity capital and may
adversely affect the Partnerships ability to make cash
distributions. The Partnership may not be able to effect any of
these actions on satisfactory terms, or at all.
Increases in
interest rates could adversely affect the Partnerships
business.
The Partnership has significant exposure to increases in
interest rates. As of September 30, 2010, its total
indebtedness was $1,433.2 million, of which
$679.9 million was at fixed interest rates and
$753.3 million was at variable interest rates. After giving
effect to interest rate swaps with a notional amount of
$300 million, a one percentage point increase in the
interest rate on the Partnerships variable interest rate
debt would have increased its consolidated annual interest
expense by approximately $4.5 million. As a result of this
significant amount of variable interest rate debt, the
Partnerships financial condition could be adversely
affected by significant increases in interest rates.
Despite
current indebtedness levels, the Partnership may still be able
to incur substantially more debt. This could increase the risks
associated with its substantial leverage.
The Partnership may be able to incur substantial additional
indebtedness in the future. As of September 30, 2010, the
Partnership had approximately $753 million of borrowings
outstanding under its senior secured credit facility,
approximately, $102 million of letters of credit
outstanding and approximately $245 million of additional
borrowing capacity. The Partnership may be able to incur an
additional $300 million of debt under its senior secured
credit facility if it requests and is able to obtain commitments
for the additional $300 million available under its senior
secured credit facility. Although the Partnerships senior
secured credit facility contains restrictions on the incurrence
of additional indebtedness, these restrictions are subject to a
number of significant qualifications and exceptions, and any
indebtedness incurred in compliance with these restrictions
could be substantial. If the Partnership incurs additional debt,
the risks associated with its substantial leverage would
increase.
The terms of
the Partnerships senior secured credit facility and
indentures may restrict its current and future operations,
particularly its ability to respond to changes in business or to
take certain actions.
The credit agreement governing the Partnerships senior
secured credit facility and the indentures governing the
Partnerships senior notes contain, and any future
indebtedness the Partnership incurs will likely contain, a
number of restrictive covenants that impose significant
operating and financial restrictions, including restrictions on
its ability to engage in acts that may be in its best long-term
interests. These agreements include covenants that, among other
things, restrict the Partnerships ability to:
|
|
|
|
|
incur or guarantee additional indebtedness or issue preferred
stock;
|
|
|
|
pay dividends on its equity securities or redeem, repurchase or
retire its equity securities or subordinated indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
make investments;
|
|
|
|
create restrictions on the payment of dividends or other
distributions to its equity holders;
|
|
|
|
engage in transactions with its affiliates;
|
|
|
|
sell assets, including equity securities of its subsidiaries;
|
|
|
|
consolidate or merge;
|
|
|
|
incur liens;
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
prepay, redeem and repurchase certain debt, other than loans
under the senior secured credit facility;
|
|
|
|
make certain acquisitions;
|
|
|
|
transfer assets;
|
|
|
|
enter into sale and lease back transactions;
|
|
|
|
make capital expenditures;
|
|
|
|
amend debt and other material agreements; and
|
|
|
|
change business activities conducted by it.
|
In addition, the Partnerships senior secured credit
facility requires it to satisfy and maintain specified financial
ratios and other financial condition tests. The
Partnerships ability to meet those financial ratios and
tests can be affected by events beyond its control, and we
cannot assure you that the Partnership will meet those ratios
and tests.
A breach of any of these covenants could result in an event of
default under the Partnerships senior secured credit
facility and indentures. Upon the occurrence of such an event of
default, all amounts outstanding under the applicable debt
agreements could be declared to be immediately due and payable
and all applicable commitments to extend further credit could be
terminated. If the Partnership is unable to repay the
accelerated debt under its senior secured credit facility, the
lenders under senior secured credit facility could proceed
against the collateral granted to them to secure that
indebtedness. The Partnership has pledged substantially all of
its assets as collateral under its senior secured credit
facility. If the Partnership indebtedness under its senior
secured credit facility or indentures is accelerated, we cannot
assure you that the Partnership will have sufficient assets to
repay the indebtedness. The operating and financial restrictions
and covenants in these debt agreements and any future financing
agreements may adversely affect the Partnerships ability
to finance future operations or capital needs or to engage in
other business activities.
The
Partnerships cash flow is affected by supply and demand
for natural gas and NGL products and by natural gas and NGL
prices, and decreases in these prices could adversely affect its
results of operations and financial condition.
The Partnerships operations can be affected by the level
of natural gas and NGL prices and the relationship between these
prices. The prices of oil, natural gas and NGLs have been
volatile and we expect this volatility to continue. The
Partnerships future cash flow may be materially adversely
affected if it experiences significant, prolonged pricing
deterioration. The markets and prices for natural gas and NGLs
depend upon factors beyond the Partnerships control. These
factors include demand for these commodities, which fluctuate
with changes in market and economic conditions and other
factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the impact of seasonality and weather;
|
|
|
|
general economic conditions and economic conditions impacting
the Partnerships primary markets;
|
|
|
|
the economic conditions of the Partnerships customers;
|
|
|
|
the level of domestic crude oil and natural gas production and
consumption;
|
|
|
|
the availability of imported natural gas, liquefied natural gas,
NGLs and crude oil;
|
|
|
|
actions taken by foreign oil and gas producing nations;
|
|
|
|
the availability of local, intrastate and interstate
transportation systems and storage for residue natural gas and
NGLs;
|
35
|
|
|
|
|
the availability and marketing of competitive fuels
and/or
feedstocks;
|
|
|
|
the impact of energy conservation efforts; and
|
|
|
|
the extent of governmental regulation and taxation.
|
The Partnerships primary natural gas gathering and
processing arrangements that expose it to commodity price risk
are its
percent-of-proceeds
arrangements. For the nine months ended September 30, 2010
and the year ended December 31, 2009, its
percent-of-proceeds
arrangements accounted for approximately 37% and 48% of its
gathered natural gas volume. Under
percent-of-proceeds
arrangements, the Partnership generally processes natural gas
from producers and remits to the producers an agreed percentage
of the proceeds from the sale of residue gas and NGL products at
market prices or a percentage of residue gas and NGL products at
the tailgate of its processing facilities. In some
percent-of-proceeds
arrangements, the Partnership remits to the producer a
percentage of an index-based price for residue gas and NGL
products, less agreed adjustments, rather than remitting a
portion of the actual sales proceeds. Under these types of
arrangements, the Partnerships revenues and its cash flows
increase or decrease, whichever is applicable, as the price of
natural gas, NGLs and crude oil fluctuates. Please see
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of OperationsQuantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.
Because of the
natural decline in production in the Partnerships
operating regions and in other regions from which it sources NGL
supplies, the Partnerships long-term success depends on
its ability to obtain new sources of supplies of natural gas and
NGLs, which depends on certain factors beyond its control. Any
decrease in supplies of natural gas or NGLs could adversely
affect the Partnerships business and operating
results.
The Partnerships gathering systems are connected to oil
and natural gas wells from which production will naturally
decline over time, which means that its cash flows associated
with these sources of natural gas will likely also decline over
time. The Partnerships logistics assets are similarly
impacted by declines in NGL supplies in the regions in which the
Partnership operates as well as other regions from which it
sources NGLs. To maintain or increase throughput levels on its
gathering systems and the utilization rate at its processing
plants and its treating and fractionation facilities, the
Partnership must continually obtain new natural gas and NGL
supplies. A material decrease in natural gas production from
producing areas on which the Partnership relies, as a result of
depressed commodity prices or otherwise, could result in a
decline in the volume of natural gas that it processes and NGL
products delivered to its fractionation facilities. The
Partnerships ability to obtain additional sources of
natural gas and NGLs depends, in part, on the level of
successful drilling and production activity near its gathering
systems and, in part, on the level of successful drilling and
production in other areas from which it sources NGL supplies.
The Partnership has no control over the level of such activity
in the areas of its operations, the amount of reserves
associated with the wells or the rate at which production from a
well will decline. In addition, the Partnership has no control
over producers or their drilling or production decisions, which
are affected by, among other things, prevailing and projected
energy prices, demand for hydrocarbons, the level of reserves,
geological considerations, governmental regulations,
availability of drilling rigs, other production and development
costs and the availability and cost of capital.
Fluctuations in energy prices can greatly affect production
rates and investments by third parties in the development of new
oil and natural gas reserves. Drilling and production activity
generally decreases as oil and natural gas prices decrease.
Prices of oil and natural gas have been volatile, and the
Partnership expects this volatility to continue. Consequently,
even if new natural gas reserves are discovered in areas served
by the Partnerships assets, producers may choose not to
develop those reserves. Reductions in exploration and production
activity, competitor actions or shut-ins by producers in the
areas in which the Partnership operates may prevent it from
obtaining supplies of natural gas to replace the natural decline
in volumes from existing wells, which could result in reduced
volumes through its facilities, and reduced utilization of its
gathering, treating, processing and fractionation assets.
36
If the
Partnership does not make acquisitions on economically
acceptable terms or efficiently and effectively integrate the
acquired assets with its asset base, its future growth will be
limited.
The Partnerships ability to grow depends, in part, on its
ability to make acquisitions that result in an increase in cash
generated from operations per unit. The Partnership is unable to
acquire businesses from us in order to grow because our only
assets are the interests in the Partnership that we own. As a
result, it will need to focus on third-party acquisitions and
organic growth. If the Partnership is unable to make these
accretive acquisitions either because the Partnership is
(1) unable to identify attractive acquisition candidates or
negotiate acceptable purchase contracts with them,
(2) unable to obtain financing for these acquisitions on
economically acceptable terms or (3) outbid by competitors,
then its future growth and ability to increase distributions
will be limited.
Any acquisition involves potential risks, including, among other
things:
|
|
|
|
|
operating a significantly larger combined organization and
adding operations;
|
|
|
|
difficulties in the assimilation of the assets and operations of
the acquired businesses, especially if the assets acquired are
in a new business segment or geographic area;
|
|
|
|
the risk that natural gas reserves expected to support the
acquired assets may not be of the anticipated magnitude or may
not be developed as anticipated;
|
|
|
|
the failure to realize expected volumes, revenues, profitability
or growth;
|
|
|
|
the failure to realize any expected synergies and cost savings;
|
|
|
|
coordinating geographically disparate organizations, systems and
facilities.
|
|
|
|
the assumption of unknown liabilities;
|
|
|
|
limitations on rights to indemnity from the seller;
|
|
|
|
inaccurate assumptions about the overall costs of equity or debt;
|
|
|
|
the diversion of managements and employees attention
from other business concerns; and
|
|
|
|
customer or key employee losses at the acquired businesses.
|
If these risks materialize, the acquired assets may inhibit the
Partnerships growth, fail to deliver expected benefits and
add further unexpected costs. Challenges may arise whenever
businesses with different operations or management are combined
and the Partnership may experience unanticipated delays in
realizing the benefits of an acquisition. If the Partnership
consummates any future acquisition, its capitalization and
results of operations may change significantly and you may not
have the opportunity to evaluate the economic, financial and
other relevant information that the Partnership will consider in
evaluating future acquisitions.
The Partnerships acquisition strategy is based, in part,
on its expectation of ongoing divestitures of energy assets by
industry participants. A material decrease in such divestitures
would limit its opportunities for future acquisitions and could
adversely affect its operations and cash flows available for
distribution to its unitholders.
Acquisitions may significantly increase the Partnerships
size and diversify the geographic areas in which it operates.
The Partnership may not achieve the desired affect from any
future acquisitions.
The
Partnerships construction of new assets may not result in
revenue increases and is subject to regulatory, environmental,
political, legal and economic risks, which could adversely
affect its results of operations and financial
condition.
One of the ways the Partnership intends to grow its business is
through the construction of new midstream assets. The
construction of additions or modifications to the
Partnerships existing systems and
37
the construction of new midstream assets involves numerous
regulatory, environmental, political and legal uncertainties
beyond the Partnerships control and may require the
expenditure of significant amounts of capital. If the
Partnership undertakes these projects, they may not be completed
on schedule or at the budgeted cost or at all. Moreover, the
Partnerships revenues may not increase immediately upon
the expenditure of funds on a particular project. For instance,
if the Partnership builds a new pipeline, the construction may
occur over an extended period of time and it will not receive
any material increases in revenues until the project is
completed. Moreover, it may construct facilities to capture
anticipated future growth in production in a region in which
such growth does not materialize. Since the Partnership is not
engaged in the exploration for and development of natural gas
and oil reserves, it does not possess reserve expertise and it
often does not have access to third party estimates of potential
reserves in an area prior to constructing facilities in such
area. To the extent the Partnership relies on estimates of
future production in its decision to construct additions to its
systems, such estimates may prove to be inaccurate because there
are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of
future production. As a result, new facilities may not be able
to attract enough throughput to achieve the Partnerships
expected investment return, which could adversely affect its
results of operations and financial condition. In addition, the
construction of additions to the Partnerships existing
gathering and transportation assets may require it to obtain new
rights-of-way
prior to constructing new pipelines. The Partnership may be
unable to obtain such
rights-of-way
to connect new natural gas supplies to its existing gathering
lines or capitalize on other attractive expansion opportunities.
Additionally, it may become more expensive for the Partnership
to obtain new
rights-of-way
or to renew existing
rights-of-way.
If the cost of renewing or obtaining new
rights-of-way
increases, the Partnerships cash flows could be adversely
affected.
The
Partnerships acquisition strategy requires access to new
capital. Tightened capital markets or increased competition for
investment opportunities could impair its ability to grow
through acquisitions.
The Partnership continuously considers and enters into
discussions regarding potential acquisitions. Any limitations on
its access to capital will impair its ability to execute this
strategy. If the cost of such capital becomes too expensive, its
ability to develop or acquire strategic and accretive assets
will be limited. The Partnership may not be able to raise the
necessary funds on satisfactory terms, if at all. The primary
factors that influence the Partnerships initial cost of
equity include market conditions, fees it pays to underwriters
and other offering costs, which include amounts it pays for
legal and accounting services. The primary factors influencing
the Partnerships cost of borrowing include interest rates,
credit spreads, covenants, underwriting or loan origination fees
and similar charges it pays to lenders.
Current weak economic conditions and the volatility and
disruption in the weak financial markets have increased the cost
of raising money in the debt and equity capital markets
substantially while diminishing the availability of funds from
those markets. Also, as a result of concerns about the stability
of financial markets generally and the solvency of
counterparties specifically, the cost of obtaining money from
the credit markets generally has increased as many lenders and
institutional investors have increased interest rates, enacted
tighter lending standards, refused to refinance existing debt at
maturity at all or on terms similar to our current debt and
reduced and, in some cases, ceased to provide funding to
borrowers. These factors may impair the Partnerships
ability to execute its acquisition strategy.
Global financial markets and economic conditions have been, and
continue to be, disrupted and volatile. The debt and equity
capital markets have been exceedingly distressed. These issues,
along with significant write-offs in the financial services
sector, the re-pricing of credit risk and the current weak
economic conditions have made, and will likely continue to make,
it difficult to obtain funding.
In particular, the cost of raising money in the debt and equity
capital markets has increased substantially while the
availability of funds from those markets generally has
diminished significantly. Also, as a result of concerns about
the stability of financial markets generally and the solvency of
counterparties specifically, the cost of obtaining funds from
the credit markets generally has increased as many lenders and
institutional investors have increased interest rates, enacted
tighter lending standards, refused to refinance
38
existing debt at maturity at all or on terms similar to the
Partnerships current debt and reduced and, in some cases,
ceased to provide funding to borrowers.
In addition, the Partnership is experiencing increased
competition for the types of assets it contemplates purchasing.
The weak economic conditions and competition for asset purchases
could limit the Partnerships ability to fully execute its
growth strategy. The Partnerships inability to execute its
growth strategy could materially adversely affect its ability to
maintain or pay higher distributions in the future.
Demand for
propane is seasonal and requires increases in inventory to meet
seasonal demand.
Weather conditions have a significant impact on the demand for
propane because end-users depend on propane principally for
heating purposes.
Warmer-than-normal
temperatures in one or more regions in which the Partnership
operates can significantly decrease the total volume of propane
it sells. Lack of consumer demand for propane may also adversely
affect the retailers the Partnership transacts with in its
wholesale propane marketing operations, exposing it to their
inability to satisfy their contractual obligations to the
Partnership.
If the
Partnership fails to balance its purchases of natural gas and
its sales of residue gas and NGLs, its exposure to commodity
price risk will increase.
The Partnership may not be successful in balancing its purchases
of natural gas and its sales of residue gas and NGLs. In
addition, a producer could fail to deliver promised volumes to
the Partnership or deliver in excess of contracted volumes, or a
purchaser could purchase less than contracted volumes. Any of
these actions could cause an imbalance between the
Partnerships purchases and sales. If the
Partnerships purchases and sales are not balanced, it will
face increased exposure to commodity price risks and could have
increased volatility in its operating income.
The
Partnerships hedging activities may not be effective in
reducing the variability of its cash flows and may, in certain
circumstances, increase the variability of its cash flows.
Moreover, the Partnerships hedges may not fully protect it
against volatility in basis differentials. Finally, the
percentage of the Partnerships expected equity commodity
volumes that are hedged decreases substantially over
time.
The Partnership has entered into derivative transactions related
to only a portion of its equity volumes. As a result, it will
continue to have direct commodity price risk to the unhedged
portion. The Partnerships actual future volumes may be
significantly higher or lower than it estimated at the time it
entered into the derivative transactions for that period. If the
actual amount is higher than it estimated, it will have greater
commodity price risk than it intended. If the actual amount is
lower than the amount that is subject to its derivative
financial instruments, it might be forced to satisfy all or a
portion of its derivative transactions without the benefit of
the cash flow from its sale of the underlying physical
commodity. The percentages of the Partnerships expected
equity volumes that are covered by its hedges decrease over
time. To the extent the Partnership hedges its commodity price
risk, it may forego the benefits it would otherwise experience
if commodity prices were to change in its favor. The derivative
instruments the Partnership utilizes for these hedges are based
on posted market prices, which may be higher or lower than the
actual natural gas, NGLs and condensate prices that it realizes
in its operations. These pricing differentials may be
substantial and could materially impact the prices the
Partnership ultimately realizes. In addition, current market and
economic conditions may adversely affect the Partnerships
hedge counterparties ability to meet their obligations.
Given the current volatility in the financial and commodity
markets, the Partnership may experience defaults by its hedge
counterparties in the future. As a result of these and other
factors, the Partnerships hedging activities may not be as
effective as it intends in reducing the variability of its cash
flows, and in certain circumstances may actually increase the
variability of its cash flows. Please see
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of OperationsQuantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.
39
If third party
pipelines and other facilities interconnected to the
Partnerships natural gas pipelines and processing
facilities become partially or fully unavailable to transport
natural gas and NGLs, the Partnerships revenues could be
adversely affected.
The Partnership depends upon third party pipelines, storage and
other facilities that provide delivery options to and from its
pipelines and processing facilities. Since it does not own or
operate these pipelines or other facilities, their continuing
operation in their current manner is not within the
Partnerships control. If any of these third party
facilities become partially or fully unavailable, or if the
quality specifications for their facilities change so as to
restrict the Partnerships ability to utilize them, its
revenues could be adversely affected.
The
Partnerships industry is highly competitive, and increased
competitive pressure could adversely affect the
Partnerships business and operating results.
The Partnership competes with similar enterprises in its
respective areas of operation. Some of its competitors are large
oil, natural gas and natural gas liquid companies that have
greater financial resources and access to supplies of natural
gas and NGLs than it does. Some of these competitors may expand
or construct gathering, processing and transportation systems
that would create additional competition for the services the
Partnership provides to its customers. In addition, its
customers who are significant producers of natural gas may
develop their own gathering, processing and transportation
systems in lieu of using the Partnerships. The
Partnerships ability to renew or replace existing
contracts with its customers at rates sufficient to maintain
current revenues and cash flows could be adversely affected by
the activities of its competitors and its customers. All of
these competitive pressures could have a material adverse effect
on the Partnerships business, results of operations, and
financial condition.
The
Partnership typically does not obtain independent evaluations of
natural gas reserves dedicated to its gathering pipeline
systems; therefore, volumes of natural gas on the
Partnerships systems in the future could be less than it
anticipates.
The Partnership typically does not obtain independent
evaluations of natural gas reserves connected to its gathering
systems due to the unwillingness of producers to provide reserve
information as well as the cost of such evaluations.
Accordingly, the Partnership does not have independent estimates
of total reserves dedicated to its gathering systems or the
anticipated life of such reserves. If the total reserves or
estimated life of the reserves connected to its gathering
systems is less than it anticipates and the Partnership is
unable to secure additional sources of natural gas, then the
volumes of natural gas transported on its gathering systems in
the future could be less than it anticipates. A decline in the
volumes of natural gas on the Partnerships systems could
have a material adverse effect on its business, results of
operations, and financial condition.
A reduction in
demand for NGL products by the petrochemical, refining or other
industries or by the fuel markets, or a significant increase in
NGL product supply relative to this demand, could materially
adversely affect the Partnerships business, results of
operations and financial condition.
The NGL products the Partnership produces have a variety of
applications, including as heating fuels, petrochemical
feedstocks and refining blend stocks. A reduction in demand for
NGL products, whether because of general or industry specific
economic conditions, new government regulations, global
competition, reduced demand by consumers for products made with
NGL products (for example; reduced petrochemical demand observed
due to lower activity in the automobile and construction
industries), increased competition from petroleum-based
feedstocks due to pricing differences, mild winter weather for
some NGL applications or other reasons, could result in a
decline in the volume of NGL products the Partnership handles or
reduce the fees it charges for its services. Also, increased
supply of NGL products
40
could reduce the value of NGLs handled by the Partnership and
reduce the margins realized. The Partnerships NGL products
and their demand are affected as follows:
Ethane. Ethane is typically supplied as purity
ethane and as part of ethane-propane mix. Ethane is primarily
used in the petrochemical industry as feedstock for ethylene,
one of the basic building blocks for a wide range of plastics
and other chemical products. Although ethane is typically
extracted as part of the mixed NGL stream at gas processing
plants, if natural gas prices increase significantly in relation
to NGL product prices or if the demand for ethylene falls, it
may be more profitable for natural gas processors to leave the
ethane in the natural gas stream thereby reducing the volume of
NGLs delivered for fractionation and marketing.
Propane. Propane is used as a petrochemical
feedstock in the production of ethylene and propylene, as a
heating, engine and industrial fuel, and in agricultural
applications such as crop drying. Changes in demand for ethylene
and propylene could adversely affect demand for propane. The
demand for propane as a heating fuel is significantly affected
by weather conditions. The volume of propane sold is at its
highest during the six-month peak heating season of October
through March. Demand for the Partnerships propane may be
reduced during periods of
warmer-than-normal
weather.
Normal Butane. Normal butane is used in the
production of isobutane, as a refined product blending
component, as a fuel gas, and in the production of ethylene and
propylene. Changes in the composition of refined products
resulting from governmental regulation, changes in feedstocks,
products and economics, demand for heating fuel and for ethylene
and propylene could adversely affect demand for normal butane.
Isobutane. Isobutane is predominantly used in
refineries to produce alkylates to enhance octane levels.
Accordingly, any action that reduces demand for motor gasoline
or demand for isobutane to produce alkylates for octane
enhancement might reduce demand for isobutane.
Natural Gasoline. Natural gasoline is used as
a blending component for certain refined products and as a
feedstock used in the production of ethylene and propylene.
Changes in the mandated composition resulting from governmental
regulation of motor gasoline and in demand for ethylene and
propylene could adversely affect demand for natural gasoline.
NGLs and products produced from NGLs also compete with global
markets. Any reduced demand or increased supply for ethane,
propane, normal butane, isobutane or natural gasoline in the
markets the Partnerships accesses for any of the reasons
stated above could adversely affect demand for the services it
provides as well as NGL prices, which would negatively impact
the Partnerships results of operations and financial
condition.
The
Partnership has significant relationships with ChevronPhillips
Chemical Company LP as a customer for its marketing and refinery
services. In some cases, these agreements are subject to
renegotiation and termination rights.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and the year
ended December 31, 2009, approximately 12% and 16% of the
Partnerships consolidated revenues were derived from
transactions with CPC. Under many of the Partnerships CPC
contracts where it purchases or markets NGLs on CPCs
behalf, CPC may elect to terminate the contracts or renegotiate
the price terms. To the extent CPC reduces the volumes of NGLs
that it purchases from the Partnership or reduces the volumes of
NGLs that the Partnership markets on its behalf, or to the
extent the economic terms of such contracts are changed, the
Partnerships revenues and cash available for debt service
could decline.
The tax
treatment of the Partnership depends on its status as a
partnership for federal income tax purposes as well as its not
being subject to a material amount of entity-level taxation by
individual states. If the Internal Revenue Service
(IRS) were to treat the
41
Partnership as a corporation for federal income tax
purposes or the Partnership becomes subject to a material amount
of entity-level taxation for state tax purposes, then its cash
available for distribution to its unitholders, including us,
would be substantially reduced.
We currently own an approximate 15% limited partner interest, a
2% general partner interest and the IDRs in the Partnership. The
anticipated after-tax economic benefit of our investment in the
Partnership depends largely on its being treated as a
partnership for federal income tax purposes. In order to
maintain its status as a partnership for United States federal
income tax purposes, 90 percent or more of the gross income
of the Partnership for every taxable year must be
qualifying income under section 7704 of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. The Partnership
has not requested and does not plan to request a ruling from the
IRS with respect to its treatment as a partnership for federal
income tax purposes.
Despite the fact that the Partnership is a limited partnership
under Delaware law, it is possible, under certain circumstances
for an entity such as the Partnership to be treated as a
corporation for federal income tax purposes. Although the
Partnership does not believe based upon its current operations
that it is so treated, a change in the Partnerships
business could cause it to be treated as a corporation for
federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject it to federal
income taxation as an entity.
If the Partnership were treated as a corporation for federal
income tax purposes, it would pay federal income tax on its
taxable income at the corporate tax rate, which is currently a
maximum of 35%, and would likely pay state income tax at varying
rates. Distributions to the Partnerships unitholders,
including us, would generally be taxed again as corporate
distributions and no income, gains, losses or deductions would
flow through to the Partnerships unitholders, including
us. If such tax was imposed upon the Partnership as a
corporation, its cash available for distribution would be
substantially reduced. Therefore, treatment of the Partnership
as a corporation would result in a material reduction in the
anticipated cash flow and after-tax return to the
Partnerships unitholders, including us, and would likely
cause a substantial reduction in the value of our investment in
the Partnership.
In addition, current law may change so as to cause the
Partnership to be treated as a corporation for federal income
tax purposes or otherwise subject the Partnership to
entity-level taxation for state or local income tax purposes. At
the federal level, members of Congress have recently considered
legislative changes that would affect the tax treatment of
certain publicly traded partnerships. Although the considered
legislation would not appear to have affected the
Partnerships treatment as a partnership, we are unable to
predict whether any of these changes, or other proposals will be
reintroduced or will ultimately be enacted. Moreover, any
modification to the federal income tax laws and interpretations
thereof may or may not be applied retroactively. Any such
changes could negatively impact the value of an investment in
the Partnerships common units. At the state level, because
of widespread state budget deficits and other reasons, several
states are evaluating ways to subject partnerships to
entity-level taxation through the imposition of state income,
franchise and other forms of taxation. For example, the
Partnership is required to pay Texas franchise tax at a maximum
effective rate of 0.7% of its gross income apportioned to Texas
in the prior year. Imposition of any similar tax on the
Partnership by additional states would reduce the cash available
for distribution to Partnership unitholders, including us.
The Partnerships partnership agreement provides that if a
law is enacted or existing law is modified or interpreted in a
manner that subjects it to taxation as a corporation or
otherwise subjects it to entity-level taxation for federal,
state or local income tax purposes, the minimum quarterly
distribution and the target distribution amounts may be adjusted
to reflect the impact of that law on the Partnership.
The
Partnership does not own most of the land on which its pipelines
and compression facilities are located, which could disrupt its
operations.
The Partnership does not own most of the land on which its
pipelines and compression facilities are located, and the
Partnership is therefore subject to the possibility of more
onerous terms
and/or
increased costs to retain necessary land use if it does not have
valid
rights-of-way
or leases or if such
rights-of-way
or leases lapse or terminate. The Partnership sometimes obtains
the rights to land owned by third parties and governmental
agencies for a specific period of time. The Partnerships
loss of these rights, through its
42
inability to renew
right-of-way
contracts, leases or otherwise, could cause it to cease
operations on the affected land, increase costs related to
continuing operations elsewhere, and reduce its revenue.
The
Partnership may be unable to cause its majority-owned joint
ventures to take or not to take certain actions unless some or
all of its joint venture participants agree.
The Partnership participates in several majority-owned joint
ventures whose corporate governance structures require at least
a majority in interest vote to authorize many basic activities
and require a greater voting interest (sometimes up to 100%) to
authorize more significant activities. Examples of these more
significant activities are large expenditures or contractual
commitments, the construction or acquisition of assets,
borrowing money or otherwise raising capital, making
distributions, transactions with affiliates of a joint venture
participant, litigation and transactions not in the ordinary
course of business, among others. Without the concurrence of
joint venture participants with enough voting interests, the
Partnership may be unable to cause any of its joint ventures to
take or not take certain actions, even though taking or
preventing those actions may be in the best interest of the
Partnership or the particular joint venture.
In addition, subject to certain conditions, any joint venture
owner may sell, transfer or otherwise modify its ownership
interest in a joint venture, whether in a transaction involving
third parties or the other joint owners. Any such transaction
could result in the Partnership partnering with different or
additional parties.
Weather may
limit the Partnerships ability to operate its business and
could adversely affect its operating results.
The weather in the areas in which the Partnership operates can
cause disruptions and in some cases suspension of its
operations. For example, unseasonably wet weather, extended
periods of below-freezing weather and hurricanes may cause
disruptions or suspensions of the Partnerships operations,
which could adversely affect its operating results.
The Partnerships business involves many hazards and
operational risks, some of which may not be insured or fully
covered by insurance. If a significant accident or event occurs
that is not fully insured, if the Partnership fails to recover
all anticipated insurance proceeds for significant accidents or
events for which it is insured, or if it fails to rebuild
facilities damaged by such accidents or events, its operations
and financial results could be adversely affected.
The Partnerships operations are subject to many hazards
inherent in the gathering, compressing, treating, processing and
transporting of natural gas and the fractionation, storage and
transportation of NGLs, including:
|
|
|
|
|
damage to pipelines and plants, related equipment and
surrounding properties caused by hurricanes, tornadoes, floods,
fires and other natural disasters, explosions and acts of
terrorism;
|
|
|
|
inadvertent damage from third parties, including from
construction, farm and utility equipment;
|
|
|
|
leaks of natural gas, NGLs and other hydrocarbons or losses of
natural gas or NGLs as a result of the malfunction of equipment
or facilities; and
|
|
|
|
other hazards that could also result in personal injury and loss
of life, pollution and suspension of operations.
|
These risks could result in substantial losses due to personal
injury, loss of life, severe damage to and destruction of
property and equipment and pollution or other environmental
damage and may result in curtailment or suspension of the
Partnerships related operations. A natural disaster or
other hazard affecting the areas in which the Partnership
operates could have a material adverse effect on its operations.
For example, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita damaged gathering
systems, processing facilities, NGL fractionators and pipelines
along the Gulf Coast, including certain of the
Partnerships facilities. These hurricanes disrupted the
operations of the Partnerships customers in August and
September 2005, which curtailed or suspended the operations of
various energy companies with assets in the region. The
Louisiana
43
and Texas Gulf Coast was similarly impacted in September 2008 as
a result of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike. The Partnership is not
fully insured against all risks inherent to its business. The
Partnership is not insured against all environmental accidents
that might occur which may include toxic tort claims, other than
incidents considered to be sudden and accidental. If a
significant accident or event occurs that is not fully insured,
if the Partnership fails to recover all anticipated insurance
proceeds for significant accidents or events for which it is
insured, or if it fails to rebuild facilities damaged by such
accidents or events, its operations and financial condition
could be adversely affected. In addition, the Partnership may
not be able to maintain or obtain insurance of the type and
amount it desires at reasonable rates. As a result of market
conditions, premiums and deductibles for certain of the
Partnerships insurance policies have increased
substantially, and could escalate further. For example,
following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, insurance premiums,
deductibles and co-insurance requirements increased
substantially, and terms were generally less favorable than
terms that could be obtained prior to such hurricanes. Insurance
market conditions worsened as a result of the losses sustained
from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike in September 2008. As a result,
the Partnership experienced further increases in deductibles and
premiums, and further reductions in coverage and limits, with
some coverages unavailable at any cost.
The
Partnership may incur significant costs and liabilities
resulting from pipeline integrity programs and related
repairs.
Pursuant to the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002, as
reauthorized and amended by the Pipeline Inspection, Protection,
Enforcement and Safety Act of 2006, the DOT, through the PHMSA,
has adopted regulations requiring pipeline operators to develop
integrity management programs for transmission pipelines located
where a leak or rupture could do the most harm in high
consequence areas, including high population areas, areas
that are sources of drinking water, ecological resource areas
that are unusually sensitive to environmental damage from a
pipeline release and commercially navigable waterways, unless
the operator effectively demonstrates by risk assessment that
the pipeline could not affect the area. The regulations require
operators of covered pipelines to:
|
|
|
|
|
perform ongoing assessments of pipeline integrity;
|
|
|
|
identify and characterize applicable threats to pipeline
segments that could impact a high consequence area;
|
|
|
|
improve data collection, integration and analysis;
|
|
|
|
repair and remediate the pipeline as necessary; and
|
|
|
|
implement preventive and mitigating actions.
|
In addition, states have adopted regulations similar to existing
DOT regulations for intrastate gathering and transmission lines.
The Partnership currently estimates that it will incur an
aggregate cost of approximately $5.1 million between 2010
and 2012 to implement pipeline integrity management program
testing along certain segments of its natural gas and NGL
pipelines. This estimate does not include the costs, if any, of
any repair, remediation, preventative or mitigating actions that
may be determined to be necessary as a result of the testing
program, which costs could be substantial. At this time, the
Partnership cannot predict the ultimate cost of compliance with
this regulation, as the cost will vary significantly depending
on the number and extent of any repairs found to be necessary as
a result of the pipeline integrity testing. Following the
initial round of testing and repairs, the Partnership will
continue its pipeline integrity testing programs to assess and
maintain the integrity of its pipelines. The results of these
tests could cause the Partnership to incur significant and
unanticipated capital and operating expenditures for repairs or
upgrades deemed necessary to ensure the continued safe and
reliable operations of its pipelines.
44
Unexpected
volume changes due to production variability or to gathering,
plant or pipeline system disruptions may increase the
Partnerships exposure to commodity price
movements.
The Partnership sells processed natural gas to third parties at
plant tailgates or at pipeline pooling points. Sales made to
natural gas marketers and end-users may be interrupted by
disruptions to volumes anywhere along the system. The
Partnership attempts to balance sales with volumes supplied from
processing operations, but unexpected volume variations due to
production variability or to gathering, plant or pipeline system
disruptions may expose the Partnership to volume imbalances
which, in conjunction with movements in commodity prices, could
materially impact the Partnerships income from operations
and cash flow.
The
Partnership requires a significant amount of cash to service its
indebtedness. The Partnerships ability to generate cash
depends on many factors beyond its control.
The Partnerships ability to make payments on and to
refinance its indebtedness and to fund planned capital
expenditures depends on its ability to generate cash in the
future. This, to a certain extent, is subject to general
economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and
other factors that are beyond its control. We cannot assure you
that the Partnership will generate sufficient cash flow from
operations or that future borrowings will be available to it
under its credit agreement or otherwise in an amount sufficient
to enable it to pay its indebtedness or to fund its other
liquidity needs. The Partnership may need to refinance all or a
portion of its indebtedness at or before maturity. The
Partnership cannot assure you that it will be able to refinance
any of its indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms or at
all.
Failure to
comply with existing or new environmental laws or regulations or
an accidental release of hazardous substances, hydrocarbons or
wastes into the environment may cause the Partnership to incur
significant costs and liabilities.
The Partnerships operations are subject to stringent and
complex federal, state and local environmental laws and
regulations governing the discharge of materials into the
environment or otherwise relating to environmental protection.
These laws include, for example, (1) the federal Clean Air
Act and comparable state laws that impose obligations related to
air emissions, (2) the Federal Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act, as amended, (RCRA) and comparable
state laws that impose obligations for the handling, storage,
treatment or disposal of solid and hazardous waste from the
Partnerships facilities, (3) the Federal
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability
Act of 1980, as amended, (CERCLA or the
Superfund law) and comparable state laws that
regulate the cleanup of hazardous substances that may have been
released at properties currently or previously owned or operated
by us or at locations to which the Partnerships hazardous
substances have been transported for recycling or disposal and
(4) the Clean Water Act and comparable state laws that
regulate discharges of wastewater from the Partnerships
facilities to state and federal waters. Failure to comply with
these laws and regulations or newly adopted laws or regulations
may trigger a variety of administrative, civil and criminal
enforcement measures, including the assessment of monetary
penalties or other sanctions, the imposition of remedial
obligations and the issuance of orders enjoining future
operations or imposing additional compliance requirements on
such operations. Certain environmental laws, including CERCLA
and analogous state laws, impose strict, joint and several
liability for costs required to clean up and restore sites where
hazardous substances, hydrocarbons or wastes have been disposed
or otherwise released. Moreover, it is not uncommon for
neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims
for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by
noise, odor or the release of hazardous substances, hydrocarbons
or wastes into the environment.
There is inherent risk of incurring environmental costs and
liabilities in connection with the Partnerships operations
due to its handling of natural gas, NGLs and other petroleum
products, because of air emissions and water discharges related
to its operations, and as a result of historical industry
operations and waste disposal practices. For example, an
accidental release from one of the Partnerships facilities
could subject it to substantial liabilities arising from
environmental cleanup and
45
restoration costs, claims made by neighboring landowners and
other third parties for personal injury, natural resource and
property damages and fines or penalties for related violations
of environmental laws or regulations.
Moreover, stricter laws, regulations or enforcement policies
could significantly increase the Partnerships operational
or compliance costs and the cost of any remediation that may
become necessary. For instance, since August 2009, the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality has conducted a series of
analyses of air emissions in the Barnett Shale area in response
to reported concerns about high concentrations of benzene in the
air near drilling sites and natural gas processing facilities,
and the analysis could result in the adoption of new air
emission regulatory or permitting limitations that could require
the Partnership to incur increased capital or operating costs.
The Partnership is also conducting its own evaluation of air
emissions at certain of its facilities in the Barnett Shale area
and, as necessary, plans to conduct corrective actions at such
facilities. Additionally, environmental groups have advocated
increased regulation and a moratorium on the issuance of
drilling permits for new natural gas wells in the Barnett Shale
area. The adoption of any laws, regulations or other legally
enforceable mandates that result in more stringent air emission
limitations or that restrict or prohibit the drilling of new
natural gas wells for any extended period of time could increase
the Partnerships operating and compliance costs as well as
reduce the rate of production of natural gas operators with whom
the Partnership has a business relationship, which could have a
material adverse effect on the Partnerships results of
operations and cash flows. The Partnership may not be able to
recover some or any of these costs from insurance.
Increased
regulation of hydraulic fracturing could result in reductions or
delays in drilling and completing new oil and natural gas wells,
which could adversely impact the Partnerships revenues by
decreasing the volumes of natural gas that the Partnership
gathers, processes and fractionates.
Hydraulic fracturing is a process used by oil and gas
exploration and production operators in the completion of
certain oil and gas wells whereby water, sand and chemicals are
injected under pressure into subsurface formations to stimulate
gas and, to a lesser extent, oil production. Due to concerns
that hydraulic fracturing may adversely affect drinking water
supplies, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) recently announced its plan to conduct a
comprehensive research study to investigate the potential
adverse impact that hydraulic fracturing may have on water
quality and public health. The initial study results are
expected to be available in late 2012. Additionally, legislation
has been introduced in the U.S. Congress to amend the
federal Safe Drinking Water Act to subject hydraulic fracturing
operations to regulation under that Act and to require the
disclosure of chemicals used by the oil and gas industry in the
hydraulic fracturing process. If enacted, such a provision could
require hydraulic fracturing activities to meet permitting and
financial assurance requirements, adhere to certain construction
specifications, fulfill monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping
requirements and meet plugging and abandonment requirements. In
unrelated oil spill legislation being considered by the
U.S. Senate in the aftermath of the April 2010 Macondo well
release in the Gulf of Mexico, an amending provision has been
prepared that would require natural gas drillers to disclose the
chemicals they pump into the ground as part of the hydraulic
fracturing process. Disclosure of chemicals used in the
fracturing process could make it easier for third parties
opposing hydraulic fracturing to initiate legal proceedings
based on allegations that specific chemicals used in the
fracturing process could adversely affect groundwater. Adoption
of legislation or of any implementing regulations placing
restrictions on hydraulic fracturing activities could impose
operational delays, increased operating costs and additional
regulatory burdens on exploration and production operators,
which could reduce their production of natural gas and, in turn,
adversely affect the Partnerships revenues and results of
operations by decreasing the volumes of natural gas that it
gathers, processes and fractionates.
46
A change in
the jurisdictional characterization of some of the
Partnerships assets by federal, state or local regulatory
agencies or a change in policy by those agencies may result in
increased regulation of the Partnerships assets, which may
cause its revenues to decline and operating expenses to
increase.
Venice Gathering System, L.L.C. (VGS) is a wholly
owned subsidiary of VESCO engaged in the business of
transporting natural gas in interstate commerce, under
authorization granted by and subject to the jurisdiction of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) under
the Natural Gas Act of 1938 (NGA). VGS owns and
operates a natural gas gathering system extending from South
Timbalier Block 135 to an onshore interconnection to a
natural gas processing plant owned by VESCO. With the exception
of our interest in VGS, our operations are generally exempt from
FERC regulation under the NGA, but FERC regulation still affects
our non-FERC jurisdictional businesses and the markets for
products derived from these businesses. The NGA exempts natural
gas gathering facilities from regulation by FERC as a natural
gas company under the NGA. The Partnership believes that the
natural gas pipelines in its gathering systems meet the
traditional tests FERC has used to establish a pipelines
status as a gatherer not subject to regulation as a natural gas
company. However, the distinction between FERC-regulated
transmission services and federally unregulated gathering
services is the subject of substantial,
on-going
litigation, so the classification and regulation of the
Partnerships gathering facilities are subject to change
based on future determinations by FERC, the courts or Congress.
In addition, the courts have determined that certain pipelines
that would otherwise be subject to the ICA are exempt from
regulation by FERC under the ICA as proprietary lines. The
classification of a line as a proprietary line is a fact-based
determination subject to FERC and court review. Accordingly, the
classification and regulation of some of the Partnerships
gathering facilities and transportation pipelines may be subject
to change based on future determinations by FERC, the courts, or
Congress.
While the Partnerships natural gas gathering operations
are generally exempt from FERC regulation under the NGA, its gas
gathering operations may be subject to certain FERC reporting
and posting requirements in a given year. FERC has issued a
final rule (as amended by orders on rehearing and
clarification), Order 704, requiring certain participants
in the natural gas market, including intrastate pipelines,
natural gas gatherers, natural gas marketers and natural gas
processors, that engage in a minimum level of natural gas sales
or purchases to submit annual reports regarding those
transactions to FERC. In June 2010, FERC issued an Order
granting clarification regarding Order 704.
In addition, FERC has issued a final rule, (as amended by orders
on rehearing and clarification), Order 720, requiring major
non-interstate pipelines, defined as certain non-interstate
pipelines delivering, on an annual basis, more than an average
of 50 million MMBtus of gas over the previous three
calendar years, to post daily certain information regarding the
pipelines capacity and scheduled flows for each receipt
and delivery point that has design capacity equal to or greater
than 15,000 MMBtu/d and requiring interstate pipelines to
post information regarding the provision of no-notice service.
The Partnership takes the position that at this time Targa
Louisiana Intrastate LLC is exempt from this rule.
In addition, FERC recently issued an order extending certain of
the open-access requirements including the prohibition on
buy/sell arrangements and shipper-must-have-title provisions to
include Hinshaw pipelines to the extent such pipelines provide
interstate service. However, FERC issued a Notice of Inquiry on
October 21, 2010, effectively suspending the recent ruling
and requesting comments on whether and how holders of firm
capacity on Section 311 and Hinshaw pipelines should be
permitted to allow others to make use of their firm interstate
capacity, including to what extent buy/sell transactions should
be permitted. We have no way to predict with certainty whether
and to what extent the buy/sell prohibition and
shipper-must-have title provisions will be modified in response
to the Notice of Inquiry.
Other FERC regulations may indirectly impact the
Partnerships businesses and the markets for products
derived from these businesses. FERCs policies and
practices across the range of its natural gas regulatory
activities, including, for example, its policies on open access
transportation, gas quality, ratemaking, capacity release and
market center promotion, may indirectly affect the intrastate
natural gas market. In recent years, FERC has pursued
pro-competitive policies in its regulation of interstate natural
47
gas pipelines. However, we cannot assure you that FERC will
continue this approach as it considers matters such as pipeline
rates and rules and policies that may affect rights of access to
transportation capacity.
Should the
Partnership fail to comply with all applicable FERC administered
statutes, rules, regulations and orders, it could be subject to
substantial penalties and fines.
Under the Domenici-Barton Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EP
Act 2005), which is applicable to VGS, FERC has civil
penalty authority under the NGA to impose penalties for current
violations of up to $1 million per day for each violation
and disgorgement of profits associated with any violation. While
the Partnerships systems have not been regulated by FERC
as a natural gas companies under the NGA, FERC has adopted
regulations that may subject certain of its otherwise non-FERC
jurisdictional facilities to FERC annual reporting and daily
scheduled flow and capacity posting requirements. Additional
rules and legislation pertaining to those and other matters may
be considered or adopted by FERC from time to time. Failure to
comply with those regulations in the future could subject the
Partnership to civil penalty liability.
Climate change
legislation and regulatory initiatives could result in increased
operating costs and reduced demand for the natural gas and NGL
services the Partnership provides.
On December 15, 2009, the EPA published its findings that
emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases
(GHGs) present an endangerment to public health and
the environment because emissions of such gases are, according
to the EPA, contributing to warming of the earths
atmosphere and other climatic changes. These findings allow the
EPA to proceed with the adoption and implementation of
regulations restricting emissions of GHGs under existing
provisions of the federal Clean Air Act. Accordingly, the EPA
has adopted two sets of regulations under the Clean Air Act that
would require a reduction in emissions of GHGs from motor
vehicles and could trigger permit review for GHG emissions from
certain stationary sources. Moreover, on October 30, 2009,
the EPA published a Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse
Gases final rule that establishes a new comprehensive
scheme requiring operators of stationary sources emitting more
than established annual thresholds of carbon dioxide-equivalent
GHGs to inventory and report their GHG emissions annually on a
facility-by-facility
basis. On November 8, 2010, the EPA adopted amendments to
this GHG reporting rule, expanding the monitoring and reporting
obligations to include onshore and offshore oil and natural gas
production facilities and onshore oil and natural gas
processing, transmission, storage and distribution facilities,
beginning in 2012 for emissions occurring in 2011.
In addition, both houses of Congress have actively considered
legislation to reduce emissions of GHGs, and almost half of the
states have already taken legal measures to reduce emissions of
GHGs, primarily through the planned development of GHG emission
inventories
and/or
regional GHG cap and trade programs. Most of these cap and trade
programs work by requiring either major sources of emissions,
such as electric power plants, or major producers of fuels, such
as refineries and NGL fractionation plants, to acquire and
surrender emission allowances with the number of allowances
available for purchase is reduced each year until the overall
GHG emission reduction goal is achieved. The adoption of
legislation or regulations imposing reporting or permitting
obligations on, or limiting emissions of GHGs from, the
Partnerships equipment and operations could require it to
incur additional costs to reduce emissions of GHGs associated
with its operations, could adversely affect its performance of
operations in the absence of any permits that may be required to
regulate emission of greenhouse gases, or could adversely affect
demand for the natural gas it gathers, treats or otherwise
handles in connection with its services.
The recent
adoption of derivatives legislation by the United States
Congress could have an adverse effect on the Partnerships
ability to hedge risks associated with its
business.
The United States Congress recently adopted comprehensive
financial reform legislation that establishes federal oversight
and regulation of the
over-the-counter
derivatives market and entities, such as the Partnership, that
participate in that market. The new legislation was signed into
law by the President on July 21, 2010, and requires the
Commodities Futures Trading Commission (the CFTC)
and the SEC to promulgate rules and regulations implementing the
new legislation within 360 days from the date of
48
enactment. The CFTC has also proposed regulations to set
position limits for certain futures and option contracts in the
major energy markets, although it is not possible at this time
to predict whether or when the CFTC will adopt those rules or
include comparable provisions in its rulemaking under the new
legislation. The financial reform legislation may also require
the Partnership to comply with margin requirements in connection
with its derivative activities, although the application of
those provisions to the Partnership is uncertain at this time.
The financial reform legislation also requires many
counterparties to the Partnerships derivative instruments
to spin off some of their derivatives activities to a separate
entity, which may not be as creditworthy as the current
counterparty. The new legislation and any new regulations could
significantly increase the cost of derivative contracts
(including those requirements to post collateral which could
adversely affect the Partnerships available liquidity),
materially alter the terms of derivative contracts, reduce the
availability of derivatives to protect against risks the
Partnership encounters, reduce the Partnerships ability to
monetize or restructure its existing derivative contracts, and
increase the Partnerships exposure to less creditworthy
counterparties. If the Partnership reduces its use of
derivatives as a result of the legislation and regulations, its
results of operations may become more volatile and its cash
flows may be less predictable, which could adversely affect its
ability to plan for and fund capital expenditures. Finally, the
legislation was intended, in part, to reduce the volatility of
oil and natural gas prices, which some legislators attributed to
speculative trading in derivatives and commodity instruments
related to oil and natural gas. The Partnerships revenues
could therefore be adversely affected if a consequence of the
legislation and regulations is to lower commodity prices. Any of
these consequences could have a material adverse effect on the
Partnership, its financial condition, and its results of
operations.
The
Partnerships interstate common carrier liquids pipeline is
regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission.
Targa NGL Pipeline Company LLC (Targa NGL), one of
the Partnerships subsidiaries, is an interstate NGL common
carrier subject to regulation by the FERC under the ICA. Targa
NGL owns a twelve inch diameter pipeline that runs between Lake
Charles, Louisiana and Mont Belvieu, Texas. This pipeline can
move mixed NGL and purity NGL products. Targa NGL also owns an
eight inch diameter pipeline and a 20 inch diameter
pipeline each of which run between Mont Belvieu, Texas and
Galena Park, Texas. The eight inch and the 20 inch
pipelines are part of an extensive mixed NGL and purity NGL
pipeline receipt and delivery system that provides services to
domestic and foreign import and export customers. The Interstate
Commerce Act (ICA) requires that the Partnership
maintain tariffs on file with FERC for each of these pipelines.
Those tariffs set forth the rates the Partnership charges for
providing transportation services as well as the rules and
regulations governing these services. The ICA requires, among
other things, that rates on interstate common carrier pipelines
be just and reasonable and non-discriminatory. All
shippers on these pipelines are the Partnerships
subsidiaries.
Recent events
in the Gulf of Mexico may adversely affect the operations of the
Partnership.
On April 20, 2010, the Transocean Deepwater Horizon
drilling rig exploded and subsequently sank 130 miles south
of New Orleans, Louisiana, and the resulting release of crude
oil into the Gulf of Mexico was declared a Spill of National
Significance by the United States Department of Homeland
Security. The Partnership cannot predict with any certainty the
impact of this oil spill, the extent of cleanup activities
associated with this spill, or possible changes in laws or
regulations that may be enacted in response to this spill, but
this event and its aftermath could adversely affect the
Partnerships operations. It is possible that the direct
results of the spill and clean-up efforts could interrupt
certain offshore production processed by our facilities.
Furthermore, additional governmental regulation of, or delays in
issuance of permits for, the offshore exploration and production
industry may negatively impact current or future volumes being
gathered or processed by the Partnerships facilities, and
may potentially reduce volumes in its downstream logistics and
marketing business.
49
Terrorist
attacks and the threat of terrorist attacks have resulted in
increased costs to the Partnerships business. Continued
hostilities in the Middle East or other sustained military
campaigns may adversely impact the Partnerships 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 Partnerships industry in
general and on it in particular is not known at this time.
However, resulting regulatory requirements
and/or
related business decisions associated with security are likely
to increase the Partnerships costs.
Increased security measures taken by the Partnership as a
precaution against possible terrorist attacks have resulted in
increased costs to its business. Uncertainty surrounding
continued hostilities in the Middle East or other sustained
military campaigns may affect the Partnerships operations
in unpredictable ways, including disruptions of crude oil
supplies and markets for its products, and the possibility that
infrastructure facilities could be direct targets, or indirect
casualties, of an act of terror.
Changes in the insurance markets attributable to terrorist
attacks may make certain types of insurance more difficult for
the Partnership to obtain. Moreover, the insurance that may be
available to the Partnership may be significantly more expensive
than its existing insurance coverage. Instability in the
financial markets as a result of terrorism or war could also
affect the Partnerships ability to raise capital.
50
USE OF
PROCEEDS
We will not receive any of the net proceeds from any sale of
shares of common stock by any selling stockholder. We expect to
incur approximately $2.5 million of expenses in connection
with this offering, including all expenses of the selling
stockholders which we have agreed to pay and a structuring fee
of approximately $900,625 to be paid to Barclays Capital Inc.
for evaluation, structuring and analysis in connection with the
offering.
51
CAPITALIZATION
The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and
capitalization as of September 30, 2010,
|
|
|
|
|
on an as adjusted basis to give effect to the repayment of
$141.3 million of face value of indebtedness under the
Holdco Loan for $137.4 million and the $18 million
repayment of the accreted value of the Series B Preferred
included in our September 30, 2010 balance sheet; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
on an as further adjusted basis to give effect to the
transactions described under SummaryOur Structure
and Ownership After This Offering.
|
You should read the following table in conjunction with
Selected Historical Financial and Operating Data,
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and our historical
consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto
appearing elsewhere in this prospectus.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
|
9/30/10
|
|
|
As Adjusted
|
|
|
For Offering
|
|
|
|
($ in millions)
|
|
|
Cash & Cash
Equivalents(1)
|
|
$
|
350.0
|
|
|
$
|
194.6
|
|
|
$
|
188.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holdco Loan, due February 2015
|
|
$
|
230.2
|
|
|
$
|
88.9
|
|
|
$
|
88.9
|
|
TRI Senior secured revolving credit facility, due July
2014(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TRI Senior secured term loan facility, due July 2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unamortized discounts, net of premiums
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of the Partnership:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility, due July 2015
|
|
|
753.3
|
|
|
|
753.3
|
|
|
|
753.3
|
|
81/4% Senior
unsecured notes, due July 2016
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
111/4% Senior
unsecured notes, due July 2017
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
77/8% Senior
unsecured notes, due October 2018
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
Unamortized discounts, net of premiums
|
|
|
(10.5
|
)
|
|
|
(10.5
|
)
|
|
|
(10.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Debt
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
|
|
1,522.1
|
|
|
|
1,522.1
|
|
Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
96.8
|
|
|
|
78.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp. stockholders equity
|
|
|
58.8
|
|
|
|
62.8
|
|
|
|
134.3
|
|
Noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries
|
|
|
935.5
|
|
|
|
935.5
|
|
|
|
935.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capitalization
|
|
$
|
2,754.5
|
|
|
$
|
2,599.2
|
|
|
$
|
2,591.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
At closing we expect to have
sufficient cash to satisfy certain tax, capital expenditure, and
other obligations. See Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsLiquidity and Capital Resources.
|
|
(2) |
|
In conjunction with the sale of our
interests in Versado to the Partnership, the revolving credit
facility commitment was reduced to $75 million.
|
52
OUR DIVIDEND
POLICY
General
We intend to pay to our stockholders, on a quarterly basis,
dividends equal to the cash we receive from our Partnership
distributions, less reserves for expenses, future dividends and
other uses of cash, including:
|
|
|
|
|
Federal income taxes, which we are required to pay because we
are taxed as a corporation;
|
|
|
|
the expenses of being a public company;
|
|
|
|
other general and administrative expenses;
|
|
|
|
general and administrative reimbursements to the Partnership;
|
|
|
|
capital contributions to the Partnership upon the issuance by it
of additional partnership securities if we choose to maintain
the General Partners 2.0% interest;
|
|
|
|
reserves our board of directors believes prudent to maintain;
|
|
|
|
our obligation to (i) satisfy tax obligations associated
with previous sales of assets to the Partnership,
(ii) reimburse the Partnership for certain capital
expenditures related to Versado and (iii) provide the
Partnership with limited quarterly distribution support through
2011, all as described in more detail in Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsLiquidity and Capital Resources; and
|
|
|
|
interest expense or principal payments on any indebtedness we
incur.
|
Based on the current distribution policy of the Partnership,
expected cash to be received from the Partnership, our expected
federal income tax liabilities, our expected level of other
expenses and reserves that our board of directors believes
prudent to maintain, we expect that our initial quarterly
dividend rate will be $0.2575 per share. If the Partnership is
successful in implementing its business strategy and increasing
distributions to its partners, we would generally expect to
increase dividends to our stockholders, although the timing and
amount of any such increased dividends will not necessarily be
comparable to the increased Partnership distributions. We expect
to pay a pro rated dividend for the portion of the fourth
quarter of 2010 that we are public in February 2011. However, we
cannot assure you that any dividends will be declared or paid.
The determination of the amount of cash dividends, including the
quarterly dividend referred to above, if any, to be declared and
paid will depend upon our financial condition, results of
operations, cash flow, the level of our capital expenditures,
future business prospects and any other matters that our board
of directors deems relevant. The Partnerships debt
agreements contain restrictions on the payment of distributions
and prohibit the payment of distributions if the Partnership is
in default. If the Partnership cannot make incentive
distributions to the general partner or limited partner
distributions to us, we will be unable to pay dividends on our
common stock.
The
Partnerships Cash Distribution Policy
Under the Partnerships partnership agreement, available
cash is defined to generally mean, for each fiscal quarter, all
cash on hand at the date of determination of available cash for
that quarter less the amount of cash reserves established by the
General Partner to provide for the proper conduct of the
Partnerships business, to comply with applicable law or
any agreement binding on the Partnership and its subsidiaries
and to provide for future distributions to the
Partnerships unitholders for any one or more of the
upcoming four quarters. The determination of available cash
takes into account the possibility of establishing cash reserves
in some quarterly periods that the Partnership may use to pay
cash distributions in other quarterly periods, thereby enabling
it to maintain relatively consistent cash distribution levels
even if the Partnerships business experiences fluctuations
in its cash from operations due to seasonal and cyclical
factors. The General Partners determination of available
cash also allows the Partnership to maintain
53
reserves to provide funding for its growth opportunities. The
Partnership makes its quarterly distributions from cash
generated from its operations, and those distributions have
grown over time as its business has grown, primarily as a result
of numerous acquisitions and organic expansion projects that
have been funded through external financing sources and cash
from operations.
The actual cash distributions paid by the Partnership to its
partners occur within 45 days after the end of each
quarter. Since second quarter 2007, the Partnership has
increased its quarterly cash distribution 7 times. During
that time period, the Partnership has increased its quarterly
distribution by 62% from $0.3375 per common unit, or $1.35 on an
annualized basis, to $0.5475 per common unit, or $2.19 on an
annualized basis, based on the 2010 fourth quarter distribution
management plans to recommend to the General Partners
board of directors.
Overview of
Presentation
In the sections that follow, we present in detail the basis for
our belief that we will be able to fully fund our initial
quarterly dividend of $0.2575 per share of common stock for each
quarter through the quarter ending December 31, 2011. In
these sections, we present three tables, including:
|
|
|
|
|
our Unaudited Pro Forma Available Cash, in which we
present the amount of available cash we would have had available
for dividends to our shareholders on a pro forma basis for the
year ended December 31, 2009 and for the twelve months
ended September 30, 2010; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
our TRC Minimum Estimated Cash Available for Distribution
for the Twelve Month Period Ending December 31, 2011
and TRC Minimum Estimated Cash Available for Distribution
for the Three Month Period Ending December 31, 2010
in which we present our estimate of the Adjusted EBITDA
necessary for the Partnership to pay distributions to its
partners, including us, to enable us to have sufficient cash
available for distribution to fund quarterly dividends on all
outstanding common shares for each quarter through the quarter
ending December 31, 2011.
|
Targa Resources
Corp. Unaudited Pro Forma Available Cash for the Year Ended
December 31, 2009 and the Twelve Months Ended
September 30, 2010
Our pro forma available cash for the year ended
December 31, 2009 and the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010 would have been sufficient to pay the
initial quarterly dividend of $0.2575 per share of common
stock outstanding following the completion of this offering.
Pro forma cash available for distribution includes estimated
incremental general and administrative expenses we will incur as
a result of being a public corporation, such as costs associated
with preparation and distribution of annual and quarterly
reports to shareholders, tax returns, investor relations,
registrar and transfer agent fees, director compensation and
incremental insurance costs, including director and officer
liability insurance. We expect that these items will increase
our annual general and administrative expenses by approximately
$1 million.
The table below reconciles the Partnerships historical
financial results to our minimum cash available for distribution
and illustrates that we would have had cash distributions on our
interests in the Partnership sufficient to pay dividends to our
shareholders at the initial quarterly dividend of $0.2575 per
share. The table reconciles the Partnerships historical
financial results to its Adjusted EBITDA for the year ended
December 31, 2009 and for the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010 and then reconciles Adjusted EBITDA to
pro forma cash available for distribution to all of the
Partnerships unitholders.
The Partnerships pro forma cash available for distribution
is derived from its historical financial statements included in
its Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on October 4, 2010, and its Quarterly
Report on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on November 5, 2010. Under common
control accounting, the Partnerships financial results
include the historical financial results of the assets acquired
from us. The only pro forma adjustments to such historical
financial results are to (i) present prior period interest
expense based on the Partnerships current debt balance as
reflected in the pro forma cash interest expense line in the
table below and (ii) current units outstanding of
75,545,409 units for all
54
periods presented. The pro forma cash available for distribution
should not be considered indicative of our results of operations
had the transactions contemplated in our unaudited pro forma
condensed consolidated financial statements actually been
consummated on January 1, 2009.
Targa Resources
Corp.
Unaudited Pro
Forma Available Cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Twelve Months
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per
|
|
|
|
share amounts)
|
|
|
Targa Resources Partners LP Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
4,503.7
|
|
|
$
|
5,321.4
|
|
Less: Product purchases
|
|
|
(3,792.9
|
)
|
|
|
(4,556.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin(1)
|
|
|
710.8
|
|
|
|
765.2
|
|
Less: Operating expenses
|
|
|
(234.4
|
)
|
|
|
(242.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
margin(2)
|
|
|
476.4
|
|
|
|
522.8
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
(166.7
|
)
|
|
|
(170.1
|
)
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(118.5
|
)
|
|
|
(116.6
|
)
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(107.0
|
)
|
|
|
(107.0
|
)
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investment
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
Loss on debt repurchases
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
Loss on
mark-to-market
derivative instruments
|
|
|
(30.9
|
)
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
(4.2
|
)
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
(19.3
|
)
|
|
|
(25.5
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Targa Resources Partners LP
|
|
|
40.7
|
|
|
|
110.6
|
|
Plus:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
107.0
|
|
|
|
107.0
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
166.7
|
|
|
|
170.1
|
|
Noncash loss related to derivative instruments
|
|
|
92.0
|
|
|
|
15.4
|
|
Noncontrolling interest adjustment
|
|
|
(10.5
|
)
|
|
|
(10.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted
EBITDA(3)
|
|
|
397.1
|
|
|
|
397.0
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Twelve Months
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per
|
|
|
|
share amounts)
|
|
|
Adjusted
EBITDA(3)
|
|
|
397.1
|
|
|
|
397.0
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma cash interest
expense(4)
|
|
|
(101.1
|
)
|
|
|
(101.1
|
)
|
Maintenance capital expenditures, net
|
|
|
(35.3
|
)
|
|
|
(40.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma cash available for distribution to Partnership
unitholders(5)
|
|
|
260.7
|
|
|
|
255.5
|
|
Partnerships debt covenant
ratios(6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest coverage ratio of not less than 2.25 to 1.0
|
|
|
3.7
|
x
|
|
|
3.7
|
x
|
Consolidated leverage ratio of not greater than 5.5 to 1.0
|
|
|
3.5
|
x
|
|
|
3.6
|
x
|
Consolidated senior leverage ratio of not greater than 4.0
to 1.0
|
|
|
1.8
|
x
|
|
|
1.9
|
x
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated minimum cash available for distribution to
Partnership unitholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated minimum cash distributions to us:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2% general partner interest
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
Incentive distribution
rights(7)
|
|
|
21.4
|
|
|
|
21.4
|
|
Common units
|
|
|
25.5
|
|
|
|
25.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma cash distributions to us
|
|
|
50.7
|
|
|
|
50.7
|
|
Pro forma cash distributions to public unitholders
|
|
|
139.9
|
|
|
|
139.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total pro forma cash distributions by the Partnership
|
|
|
190.6
|
|
|
|
190.6
|
|
Excess / (Shortfall)
|
|
|
70.1
|
|
|
|
64.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp.
Data(8)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma cash distributions to be received from the Partnership
|
|
$
|
50.7
|
|
|
$
|
50.7
|
|
Plus / (Less):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative
expenses(9)
|
|
|
(5.4
|
)
|
|
|
(5.4
|
)
|
Cash interest
expense(10)
|
|
|
(3.4
|
)
|
|
|
(3.4
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum estimated cash available for distribution
|
|
|
43.6
|
|
|
|
43.6
|
|
Excess / (Shortfall)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected dividend per share
|
|
|
1.03
|
|
|
|
1.03
|
|
Total dividends paid to stockholders
|
|
$
|
43.6
|
|
|
$
|
43.6
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Gross margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsHow We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
(2) |
|
Operating margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsHow We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
(3) |
|
Adjusted EBITDA is presented
because we believe it provides additional information with
respect to both the performance of our fundamental business
activities as well as our ability to meet future debt service,
capital expenditures and working capital requirements. It is a
non-GAAP financial measure and is not intended to be used in
lieu of the GAAP presentation of net income.
|
|
|
|
(4) |
|
For the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010, the Partnerships pro forma cash
interest expense includes (i) $35.0 million of
interest expense related to borrowings under the revolving
credit facility based on an average balance of
$727.3 million at an average interest rate of 4.8%
(comprised of 1% LIBOR plus a borrowing spread of 2.75% plus
interest rate hedge settlement of 1.1%);
(ii) $62.9 million of interest expense related to the
$690 million of senior unsecured notes with a weighted
average interest rate of approximately 9.1% and
(iii) $3.2 million of commitment fees and letter of
credit fees. After giving effect to LIBOR swaps for
$300 million of the Partnerships revolving credit
facility, a 1.0% change in LIBOR would result in a change in
interest expense for the period of $4.3 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the twelve months ended
December 31, 2009, the Partnerships pro forma cash
interest expense includes (i) $33.6 million of
interest expense related to borrowings under the revolving
credit facility based on an average balance of
$684.5 million at an average interest rate of 4.9%
(comprised of 1% LIBOR plus a spread of 2.75% plus interest rate
hedge settlement of 1.2%); (ii) $62.9 million of
interest expense related to the $690 million of senior
unsecured notes with a weighted average interest rate of
|
56
|
|
|
|
|
approximately 9.1% and
(iii) $4.5 million of commitment fees and letter of
credit fees. After giving effect to LIBOR swaps for
$300 million of the Partnerships revolving credit
facility, a 1.0% change in LIBOR would result in a change in
interest for the period of $3.9 million.
|
|
|
|
Cash interest expense excludes
$5.9 million of non-cash interest expense for both periods.
|
|
(5) |
|
The Partnerships pro forma
cash available for distribution is presented because we believe
it is used by investors to evaluate the ability of the
Partnership to make quarterly cash distributions. It is a
non-GAAP financial measure and is not intended to be used in
lieu of the GAAP presentation of net income.
|
|
(6) |
|
The Partnerships credit
agreement and indentures contain certain financial covenants.
The Partnerships revolving credit facility requires that,
at the end of each fiscal quarter, the Partnership must maintain:
|
|
|
|
|
|
an interest coverage ratio, defined
as the ratio of the Partnerships consolidated adjusted
EBITDA (as defined in the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement)
for the four consecutive fiscal quarters most recently ended to
the consolidated interest expense (as defined in the Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement) for such period, of no less than 2.25
to 1.0;
|
|
|
|
a Consolidated Leverage Ratio,
defined as the ratio of the Partnerships consolidated
funded indebtedness (as defined in the Amended and Restated
Credit Agreement) to consolidated adjusted EBITDA, for the four
fiscal quarters most recently ended, that is not greater than
5.5 to 1.0; and
|
|
|
|
a Consolidated Senior Leverage
ratio, defined as the ratio of the Partnerships
consolidated funded indebtedness, excluding unsecured note
indebtedness, to consolidated adjusted EBITDA, for the four
fiscal quarters most recently ended, that is not greater than
4.0 to 1.0.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition, the indentures
relating to the Partnerships senior notes require that the
Partnership have a fixed charge coverage ratio for the most
recently ended four fiscal quarters of not less than 1.75 to 1.0
in order to make distributions, subject to certain exceptions.
This ratio is approximately equal to the interest coverage ratio
described above. As indicated in the table, the
Partnerships pro forma EBITDA would have been sufficient
to permit cash distributions under the terms of its credit
agreement and indentures.
|
|
(7) |
|
Our incentive distributions are
based on the Partnerships 75,545,409 outstanding common
units as of November 1, 2010 and the Partnerships
fourth quarter 2010 quarterly distribution of $0.5475 per unit,
or $2.19 per unit on an annualized basis, that management plans
to recommend to the General Partners board of directors.
|
|
(8) |
|
We will have no debt outstanding
under TRIs revolving credit facility, and accordingly, we
have not presented credit ratios for this facility in the table.
Pursuant to the terms of this facility at the end of each fiscal
quarter, TRI must maintain:
|
|
|
|
|
|
an interest coverage ratio, defined
as the ratio of our consolidated adjusted EBITDA (as defined in
the revolving credit agreement) for the four consecutive fiscal
quarters most recently ended to the consolidated interest
expense (as defined in the revolving credit agreement) for such
period, of no less than 1.5 to 1.0;
|
|
|
|
a Consolidated Leverage Ratio,
defined as the ratio of our consolidated funded indebtedness (as
defined in the revolving credit agreement) to consolidated
adjusted EBITDA, for the four fiscal quarters most recently
ended, that is not greater than 5.75 to 1.0 and becomes more
restrictive over time.
|
|
|
|
(9) |
|
General and administrative expenses
include $1 million of incremental public company expenses.
|
|
(10) |
|
Following this offering and
excluding debt of the Partnership, our only outstanding debt
will be the Holdco Loan under which we have the election to pay
interest in cash or in kind. We have assumed that we will pay
interest in cash at an assumed interest rate of LIBOR plus a
spread of 3.0%. The Holdco Loan agreement has no restrictive
covenants which would impact our ability to pay dividends.
|
TRC Minimum
Estimated Cash Available for Distribution for the Twelve Month
Period Ending December 31, 2011
Set forth below is a forecast of the TRC Minimum Estimated
Cash Available for Distribution that supports our belief
that we expect to generate sufficient cash flow to pay a
quarterly dividend of $0.2575 per common share on all of
our outstanding common shares for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011, based on assumptions we believe to be
reasonable.
Our minimum estimated cash available for distribution reflects
our judgment as of the date of this prospectus of conditions we
expect to exist and the course of action we expect to take
during the twelve months ending December 31, 2011. The
assumptions disclosed under Assumptions and
Considerations below are those that we believe are
significant to our ability to generate such minimum estimated
cash available for distribution. We believe our actual results
of operations and cash flows for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011 will be sufficient to generate our
minimum
57
estimated cash available for distribution for such period;
however, we can give you no assurance that such minimum
estimated cash available for distribution will be achieved.
There will likely be differences between our minimum estimated
cash available for distribution for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011 and our actual results for such period
and those differences could be material. If we fail to generate
the minimum estimated cash available for distribution for the
twelve months ending December 31, 2011, we may not be able
to pay cash dividends on our common shares at the initial
dividend rate stated in our cash dividend policy for such period.
Our minimum estimated cash available for distribution required
to pay dividends to all our outstanding shares of common stock
at the estimated annual initial dividend rate of $1.03 per share
is approximately $43.6 million. Our minimum estimated cash
available for distribution is comprised of cash distributions
from our limited and general partnership interests in the
Partnership, including the IDRs, less general and administrative
expenses, less cash interest expense, if any, less federal
income taxes, less capital contributions to the Partnership and
less reserves established by our board of directors.
Substantially all of our cash flow will be generated from our
limited and general partnership interests in the Partnership. In
order for our minimum estimated cash available for distribution
to be approximately $43.6 million, we estimate that the
Partnership must have minimum estimated cash available for
distribution for the twelve months ending December 31, 2011
of $190.6 million, which would be sufficient to fund the
Partnerships recommended distribution for the quarter
ended December 31, 2010 of $2.19 per common unit on an
annualized basis.
In order for the Partnership to have minimum estimated cash
available for distribution of $190.6 million, we estimate
that it must generate Adjusted EBITDA of at least
$403.5 million for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011 after giving effect to a
$58.8 million cash reserve. As set forth in the table below
and as further explained under Assumptions and
Considerations, we believe the Partnership will produce
minimum estimated cash available for distribution of
$190.6 million for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011.
We do not as a matter of course make public projections as to
future operations, earnings or other results. However,
management has prepared the minimum estimated cash available for
distribution and assumptions set forth below to substantiate our
belief that we will have sufficient cash available to pay the
estimated annual dividend rate to our stockholders for the
twelve months ending December 31, 2011. The accompanying
prospective financial information was not prepared with a view
toward complying with the published guidelines of the SEC or the
guidelines established by the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants with respect to prospective financial
information, but, in the view of our management, was prepared on
a reasonable basis, reflects the best currently available
estimates and judgments and presents, to the best of
managements knowledge and belief, the assumptions on which
we base our belief that we can generate the minimum estimated
cash available for distribution necessary for us to have
sufficient cash available for distribution to pay the estimated
annual dividend rate to all of our stockholders for the twelve
months ending December 31, 2011. However, this information
is not fact and should not be relied upon as being necessarily
indicative of future results, and readers of this prospectus are
cautioned not to place undue reliance on the prospective
financial information. The prospective financial information
included in this prospectus has been prepared by, and is the
responsibility of, our management. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
has neither examined, compiled nor performed any procedures with
respect to the accompanying prospective financial information
and, accordingly, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP does not express an
opinion or any other form of assurance with respect thereto. The
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP reports included in this prospectus
relate to our historical financial information. Such reports do
not extend to the prospective financial information of the
Partnership or us and should not be read to do so.
58
We are providing the minimum estimated cash available for
distribution and related assumptions for the twelve months
ending December 31, 2011 to supplement our pro forma and
historical financial statements in support of our belief that we
will have sufficient available cash to allow us to pay cash
dividends on all of our outstanding shares of common stock for
each quarter in the twelve month period ending December 31,
2011 at our stated initial quarterly dividend rate. Please read
below under Assumptions and
Considerations for further information as to the
assumptions we have made for the preparation of the minimum
estimated cash available for distribution set forth below.
We do not undertake any obligation to release publicly the
results of any future revisions we may make to the assumptions
used in generating our minimum estimated cash available for
distribution for the twelve months ending December 31, 2011
or to update those assumptions to reflect events or
circumstances after the date of this prospectus. Therefore, you
are cautioned not to place undue reliance on this information.
59
TRC Minimum
Estimated Cash Available for Distribution for the Twelve Month
Period Ending December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ending
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
(In millions except per
|
|
|
|
unit and per share
|
|
|
|
amounts)
|
|
|
Targa Resources Partners LP Data
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
6,098.1
|
|
Less: product purchases
|
|
|
(5,264.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin(1)
|
|
|
833.6
|
|
Less: operating expenses
|
|
|
(289.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
margin(2)
|
|
|
544.3
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
(175.4
|
)
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(110.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
258.6
|
|
Plus (less) other income (expense)
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(110.3
|
)
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investment
|
|
|
11.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
159.8
|
|
Less: income tax expense
|
|
|
(2.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
157.3
|
|
Less: net income attributable to noncontrolling
interest(3)
|
|
|
(31.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Targa Resources Partners LP
|
|
$
|
126.1
|
|
Plus:
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
110.3
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
175.4
|
|
Non-cash loss related to derivative instruments
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Noncontrolling interest adjustment
|
|
|
(11.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Adjusted
EBITDA(4)
|
|
$
|
403.5
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(110.3
|
)
|
Expansion capital expenditures, net
|
|
|
(129.0
|
)
|
Borrowings for expansion capital expenditures
|
|
|
129.0
|
|
Maintenance capital expenditures, net
|
|
|
(49.7
|
)
|
Amortization of debt issue costs
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
Cash
reserve(5)
|
|
|
(58.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated minimum cash available for
distribution(6)
|
|
$
|
190.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnership debt covenant
ratios(7)
|
|
|
|
|
Interest coverage ratio of not less than 2.25 to 1.0
|
|
|
3.7
|
x
|
Consolidated leverage ratio of not greater than 5.5 to 1.0
|
|
|
4.0
|
x
|
Consolidated senior leverage ratio of not greater than 4.0
to 1.0
|
|
|
2.2
|
x
|
Estimated minimum cash available for distribution to
Partnership unitholders
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated minimum cash distributions to us:
|
|
|
|
|
2% general partner interest
|
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
Incentive distribution
rights(8)
|
|
|
21.4
|
|
Common units
|
|
|
25.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total estimated minimum cash distributions to us
|
|
|
50.7
|
|
Estimated minimum cash distributions to public unitholders
|
|
|
139.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total estimated minimum cash distributions by the
Partnership
|
|
$
|
190.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ending
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
(In millions except
|
|
|
|
per share amounts)
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp.
Data(9)(10)
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum estimated cash distributions to be received from the
Partnership
|
|
$
|
50.7
|
|
Corporate general and administrative
expenses(11)
|
|
|
(5.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnership distributions less general and administrative
expenses
|
|
|
45.3
|
|
Plus / (Less):
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense
|
|
|
(3.4
|
)
|
Interest Income
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
Cash taxes paid
|
|
|
(14.3
|
)
|
Cash taxes funded from cash on hand
|
|
|
14.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum estimated cash available for distribution
|
|
$
|
43.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected dividend per share, on an annualized basis
|
|
$
|
1.03
|
|
Total estimated dividends paid to stockholders
|
|
$
|
43.6
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Gross margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsHow We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
(2) |
|
Operating margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsHow We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
(3) |
|
Reflects net income attributable to
Chevrons 37% interest in Versado, Enterprises 12%
interest in VESCO, ONEOKs 11% interest in VESCO and
BPs 12% interest in CBF.
|
|
(4) |
|
Adjusted EBITDA is presented
because we believe it provides additional information with
respect to both the performance of our fundamental business
activities as well as our ability to meet future debt service,
capital expenditures and working capital requirements. It is a
non-GAAP financial measure and is not intended to be used in
lieu of the GAAP presentation of net income.
|
|
(5) |
|
Represents a discretionary cash
reserve. See The Partnerships Cash
Distribution Policy.
|
|
(6) |
|
The Partnerships estimated
minimum cash available for distribution is presented because we
believe it is used by investors to evaluate the ability of the
Partnership to make quarterly cash distributions. It is a
non-GAAP financial measure and is not intended to be used in
lieu of the GAAP presentation of net income.
|
|
(7) |
|
The Partnerships credit
agreement and indentures contain certain financial covenants.
The Partnerships revolving credit facility requires that,
at the end of each fiscal quarter, the Partnership must maintain:
|
|
|
|
|
|
an interest coverage ratio, defined
as the ratio of the Partnerships consolidated adjusted
EBITDA (as defined in the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement)
for the four consecutive fiscal quarters most recently ended to
the consolidated interest expense (as defined in the Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement) for such period, of no less than 2.25
to 1.0;
|
|
|
|
a Consolidated Leverage Ratio,
defined as the ratio of the Partnerships consolidated
funded indebtedness (as defined in the Amended and Restated
Credit Agreement) to consolidated adjusted EBITDA, for the four
fiscal quarters most recently ended, that is not greater than
5.5 to 1.0; and
|
|
|
|
a Consolidated Senior Leverage
ratio, defined as the ratio of the Partnerships
consolidated funded indebtedness, excluding unsecured note
indebtedness, to consolidated adjusted EBITDA, for the four
fiscal quarters most recently ended, that is not greater than
4.0 to 1.0.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition, the indentures
relating to the Partnerships existing senior notes require
that the Partnership have a fixed charge coverage ratio for the
most recently ended four fiscal quarters of not less than 1.75
to 1.0 in order to make distributions, subject to certain
exceptions. This ratio is approximately equal to the interest
coverage ratio described above. As indicated by the table, we
estimate that the Partnerships pro forma EBITDA would be
sufficient to permit cash distributions, under the terms of its
credit agreement and indentures.
|
|
(8) |
|
Based on the Partnerships
75,545,409 outstanding common units as of November 1, 2010
and the Partnerships fourth quarter 2010 quarterly
distribution of $0.5475 per unit, or $2.19 per unit on an
annualized basis, that management plans to recommend to the
General Partners board of directors.
|
61
|
|
|
(9) |
|
We expect that we will have no debt
outstanding under TRIs revolving credit facility, and
accordingly, we have not presented credit ratios for this
facility in the table. Pursuant to the terms of this facility at
the end of each fiscal quarter, TRI must maintain:
|
|
|
|
|
|
an interest coverage ratio, defined
as the ratio of our consolidated adjusted EBITDA (as defined in
the revolving credit agreement) for the four consecutive fiscal
quarters most recently ended to the consolidated interest
expense (as defined in the revolving credit agreement) for such
period, of no less than 1.5 to 1.0;
|
|
|
|
a Consolidated Leverage Ratio,
defined as the ratio of our consolidated funded indebtedness (as
defined in the revolving credit agreement) to consolidated
adjusted EBITDA, for the four fiscal quarters most recently
ended, that is not greater than 5.75 to 1.0 and becomes more
restrictive over time.
|
|
|
|
(10) |
|
The Holdco Loan agreement has no
restrictive covenants which would impact our ability to pay
dividends.
|
|
|
|
(11) |
|
General and administrative expenses
include $3 million of public company expenses, including
$1 million of estimated incremental public company
expenses. TRI Resources Inc. was required to file reports under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 until January 2010, and,
accordingly, recognized costs associated with being a public
company prior to that time.
|
Assumptions and
Considerations
General
We estimate that our ownership interests in the Partnership will
generate sufficient cash flow to enable us to pay our initial
quarterly dividend of $0.2575 per share on all of our shares for
the four quarters ending December 31, 2011. Our ability to
make these dividend payments assumes that the Partnership will
pay its current quarterly distribution of $0.5475 per common
unit for each of the four quarters ending December 31,
2011, which means that the total amount of cash distributions we
will receive from the Partnership for that period would be
$50.7 million.
The primary determinant in the Partnerships ability to pay
a distribution of $0.5475 per common unit for each of the four
quarters ending December 31, 2011, after giving effect to a
$58.8 million cash reserve, is its ability to generate
Adjusted EBITDA of at least $403.5 million during the
period, which in turn is dependent on its ability to generate
operating margin of $544.3 million. Our estimate of the
Partnerships ability to generate at least this amount of
operating margin is based on a number of assumptions including
those set forth below.
While we believe that these assumptions are generally consistent
with the actual performance of the Partnership and are
reasonable in light of our current beliefs concerning future
events, the assumptions are inherently uncertain and are subject
to significant business, economic, regulatory and competitive
risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those we anticipate. If these assumptions
are not realized, the actual available cash that the Partnership
generates, and thus the cash we would receive from our ownership
interests in the Partnership, could be substantially less than
that currently expected and could, therefore, be insufficient to
permit us to make our initial quarterly dividend on our shares
for the forecasted period. In that event, the market price of
our shares may decline materially. Consequently, the statement
that we believe that we will have sufficient cash available to
pay the initial dividend on our shares of common stock for each
quarter through December 31, 2011, should not be regarded
as a representation by us or the underwriters or any other
person that we will make such a distribution. When reading this
section, you should keep in mind the risk factors and other
cautionary statements under the heading Risk Factors
in this prospectus.
Commodity Price Assumptions. As of
October 29, 2010, the NYMEX 2011 calendar strip prices for
natural gas and crude oil were $4.39 per MMBtu and
$84.28 per Bbl. These prices are 13.9% and 0.9%
62
below the forecasted prices of $5.10 per MMBtu and
$85.00 per Bbl used to calculate estimated Adjusted EBITDA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ended
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
$3.99/MMBtu
|
|
$4.48/MMBtu
|
|
$5.10/MMBtu
|
Ethane
|
|
$0.48/gallon
|
|
$0.61/gallon
|
|
$0.47/gallon
|
Propane
|
|
$0.84/gallon
|
|
$1.12/gallon
|
|
$1.05/gallon
|
Isobutane
|
|
$1.19/gallon
|
|
$1.53/gallon
|
|
$1.46/gallon
|
Normal butane
|
|
$1.08/gallon
|
|
$1.44/gallon
|
|
$1.42/gallon
|
Natural gasoline
|
|
$1.31/gallon
|
|
$1.75/gallon
|
|
$1.80/gallon
|
Crude oil
|
|
$59.80/Bbl
|
|
$76.99/Bbl
|
|
$85.00/Bbl
|
In addition, the Partnerships estimated Adjusted EBITDA
reflects the effect of its commodity price hedging program under
which it has hedged a portion of the commodity price risk
related to the sale of its expected natural gas, NGL, and
condensate equity volumes that result from its
percent-of-proceeds
processing arrangements for our Field Gathering and Processing
and the LOU portion of our Coastal Gathering and Processing
operations. Please see Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsFactors That Significantly Affect Our
ResultsContract Terms and Contract Mix and the Impact of
Commodity Prices. The table below summarizes the
Partnerships hedged volumes for 2011 under derivative
arrangements that are in place as of September 30, 2010. We
estimate that these hedged volumes correspond to approximately
65% to 75% of the Partnerships expected natural gas equity
volumes and approximately 50% to 60% of Partnerships
expected NGLs and condensate equity volumes for 2011. The
percentages hedged are derived by dividing the notional volumes
hedged by a range of estimated equity volumes for 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
NGL
|
|
Condensate
|
|
Hedged volume swaps
|
|
30,100 MMBtu/d
|
|
7,000 Bbls/d
|
|
750 Bbls/d
|
Weighted average price swaps
|
|
$6.32 per MMBtu
|
|
$0.85 per gallon
|
|
$77.00 per Bbl
|
Hedged volume floors
|
|
|
|
253 Bbls/d
|
|
|
Weighted average price floors
|
|
|
|
$1.44 per gallon
|
|
|
The table below compares selected financial and volumetric data
for the Partnership for the twelve months ending December 31,
2011 to the twelve months ended September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
(Estimated)
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except for
|
|
|
|
share amounts)
|
|
Targa Resources Partners LP Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
4,503.7
|
|
|
$
|
5,321.4
|
|
|
$
|
6,098.1
|
|
Less: Product purchases
|
|
|
(3,792.9
|
)
|
|
|
(4,556.2
|
)
|
|
|
(5,264.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
710.8
|
|
|
|
765.2
|
|
|
|
833.6
|
|
Less: Operating expenses
|
|
|
(234.4
|
)
|
|
|
(242.4
|
)
|
|
|
(289.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
|
476.4
|
|
|
|
522.8
|
|
|
|
544.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA
|
|
|
397.1
|
|
|
|
397.0
|
|
|
|
403.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance capital expenditures, net
|
|
|
35.3
|
|
|
|
40.4
|
|
|
|
49.7
|
|
Volume Statistics:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inlet Volumes (MMcf/d)
|
|
|
2,139.8
|
|
|
|
2,288.5
|
|
|
|
2,470.2
|
|
Fractionation Volumes (MBbls/d)
|
|
|
217.2
|
|
|
|
221.4
|
|
|
|
291.6
|
|
63
Volume assumptions. For the twelve months
ended September 30, 2010, plant inlet volumes increased 7%
over volumes for the twelve months ended December 31, 2009.
For 2011, we expect a continued increase of 8% over the twelve
months ended September 30, 2010. The volume increase is
driven by additional volumes on the Partnerships VESCO
system (see Coastal Gathering and
Processing Segment Assumptions for more detail), and
expected new drilling and workover activity in our Field
Gathering and Processing segment (see
Field Gathering and Processing Segment Assumptions for
more detail).
Fractionation volumes for 2011 are forecasted to increase 32%
over the twelve months ended September 30, 2010 primarily
due to the 78 MBbl/d CBF expansion, which is expected to be
in service in the second quarter of 2011.
Revenue assumptions. 2011 revenue is
forecasted to increase 15% over the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010 and 35% over 2009. The increase in
revenue is primarily due to higher plant inlet and fractionation
volumes and higher commodity prices as presented in the table
above.
Product purchase assumptions. Product
purchases are forecasted to increase 16% over the twelve months
ended September 30, 2010 and 39% over 2009 primarily due to
increased settlement costs associated with higher inlet volumes
and increased commodity prices.
Operating expense assumptions. Operating
expenses are forecasted to increase 19% over the twelve months
ended September 30, 2010 and 23% over 2009 mostly due to
expanded operations in our Logistics segment resulting from the
CBF expansion and partial year addition of the benzene treater.
Also, expenses are forecasted to be higher for our Field
Gathering and Processing Segment mostly due to increased
connections resulting from new drilling activity.
Operating margin assumptions. For the twelve
months ended September 30, 2010, operating margin increased
10% over operating margin for the twelve months ended
December 31, 2009 largely due to increases in the Field
Gathering and Processing segment and the Coastal Gathering and
Processing Segment. For full year 2011, we expect a continued
increase of 4% over the twelve months ended September 30,
2010 largely due to increases in the Field Gathering and
Processing segment and the Logistics Assets segment (see
Segment Operating Margin
Assumptions for more detail).
Maintenance Capital Expenditures assumptions,
net. The Partnerships maintenance capital
expenditures increased for the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010 relative to 2009 because of a larger
number of well connections associated with higher drilling
activity levels for assets in our Field Gathering and Processing
segment. We expect drilling activity to increase further, which
will result in higher maintenance capital expenditures in 2011.
Segment Operating Margin Assumptions. Based on
the pricing and other assumptions outlined above and the segment
information and other assumptions discussed below, we estimate
forecasted operating margin for the Partnerships segments
for the twelve months ending December 31, 2011 as
64
shown in following table. Selected operating and historical
financial data for the Partnership for the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010 and the twelve months ended December 31,
2009 is also shown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
(Estimated)
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Natural Gas Gathering and Processing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Field Gathering and Processing Segment
|
|
$
|
183.2
|
|
|
$
|
236.6
|
|
|
$
|
245.6
|
|
Coastal Gathering and Processing Segment
|
|
|
89.7
|
|
|
|
111.6
|
|
|
|
102.0
|
|
NGL Logistics and Marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logistics Assets Segment
|
|
|
74.4
|
|
|
|
79.8
|
|
|
|
118.6
|
|
Marketing and Distribution Segment
|
|
|
82.9
|
|
|
|
78.1
|
|
|
|
65.6
|
|
Other
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
16.7
|
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating margin
|
|
$
|
476.4
|
|
|
$
|
522.8
|
|
|
$
|
544.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural Gas Gathering and Processing. The
Partnerships Natural Gas Gathering and Processing business
includes assets used in the gathering of natural gas produced
from oil and gas wells and processing this raw natural gas into
merchantable natural gas by removing impurities and extracting a
stream of combined NGLs or mixed NGLs. The Field Gathering and
Processing segment assets are located in North Texas and in the
Permian Basin of Texas and New Mexico. The Coastal Gathering and
Processing segment assets are located in the onshore and near
offshore regions of the Louisiana Gulf Coast accessing onshore
and offshore gas supplies. The Partnerships results of
operations are impacted by changes in commodity prices as well
as increases and decreases in the volume and thermal content of
natural gas that the Partnership gathers and transports through
its pipeline systems and processing plants.
Field Gathering and Processing Segment
Assumptions. The following table summarizes
selected operating and financial data for the Partnership for
the twelve months ending December 31, 2011 compared to
historical data for the twelve months ended September 30,
2010 and the twelve months ended December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
(Estimated)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant natural gas inlet,
MMcf/d
|
|
|
581.9
|
|
|
|
579.2
|
|
|
|
660.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross NGL Production, MBbl/d
|
|
|
69.8
|
|
|
|
69.9
|
|
|
|
80.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin, $ in millions
|
|
$
|
183.2
|
|
|
$
|
236.6
|
|
|
$
|
245.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
We forecast plant inlet volumes will increase by 14.0% for the
twelve months ending December 31, 2011 as compared to the
twelve months ended September 30, 2010 based on expected
producer drilling and workover activity. New drilling is
expected to come from liquids rich hydrocarbons plays including
the Wolfberry Trend and Canyon Sands plays, which can be
accessed by SAOU, the Wolfberry and Bone Springs plays, which
can be accessed by the Sand Hills system, and the Barnett Shale
and Fort Worth Basin, including Montague, Cooke, Clay and
Wise counties, which can be accessed by the North Texas system.
Operating margin increased 29% from 2009 to the twelve months
ended September 30, 2010 primarily as a result of higher
commodity prices. Operating margin is estimated to increase by
3.8% to $245.6 million for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011 as compared to $236.6 million for
the twelve months ended September 30, 2010 due to increases
in plant inlet volumes partially offset by increased operating
expenses and lower NGL prices.
Coastal Gathering and Processing Segment
Assumptions. The following table summarizes
selected operating and financial data for the Partnership for
the twelve months ending December 31,
65
2011 compared to historical data for the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010 and the twelve months ended
December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
(Estimated)
|
|
|
Plant natural gas inlet,
MMcf/d
|
|
|
1,557.8
|
|
|
|
1,709.3
|
|
|
|
1,810.0
|
|
Gross NGL Production, MBbl/d
|
|
|
48.5
|
|
|
|
51.2
|
|
|
|
58.2
|
|
Operating margin, $ in millions
|
|
$
|
89.7
|
|
|
$
|
111.6
|
|
|
$
|
102.0
|
|
Plant inlet volumes increased by 10% for the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010 as compared to full year 2009 as a
result of the recovery from the impacts of hurricanes in 2008.
Plant inlet volumes are forecasted to increase 6% for the twelve
months ending December 31, 2011 as compared to the twelve
months ended September 30, 2010 based on the addition of
new supply to our VESCO system primarily from anticipated
additional production from existing customers.
Operating margin is estimated to be $102.0 million for the
twelve months ending December 31, 2011 as compared to
$111.6 million for the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010. The decrease in operating margin is
primarily attributable to lower margins resulting from lower
forecasted liquids prices and higher forecasted natural gas
prices and leaner inlet gas partially offset by forecasted
increases in VESCO volumes.
NGL Logistics and Marketing. The
Partnerships NGL Logistics and Marketing segment includes
all the activities necessary to fractionate mixed NGLs into
finished NGL productsethane, propane, normal butane,
isobutane and natural gasolineand provides certain value
added services, such as the storage, terminalling,
transportation, distribution and marketing of NGLs. The assets
in this segment are generally connected indirectly to and
supplied, in part, by the Partnerships gathering and
processing segments and are predominantly located in Mont
Belvieu, Texas and Southwestern Louisiana. The Logistics Assets
segment uses its platform of integrated assets to store,
fractionate, treat and transport NGLs, typically under fee-based
and margin-based arrangements. The Marketing and Distribution
segment covers all activities required to distribute and market
mixed NGLs and NGL products. It includes (1) marketing and
purchasing NGLs in selected United States markets,
(2) marketing and supplying NGLs for refinery customers,
and (3) transporting, storing and selling propane and
providing related propane logistics services to multi-state
retailers, independent retailers and other end users.
Logistics Assets Segment Assumptions. The
following table summarizes selected operating and financial data
for the Partnership for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011 compared to pro forma historical data for
the twelve months ended September 30, 2010 and the twelve
months ended December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
(Estimated)
|
|
|
Fractionation volumes, MBbl/d
|
|
|
217.2
|
|
|
|
221.4
|
|
|
|
291.6
|
|
Treating volumes, MBbl/d
|
|
|
21.9
|
|
|
|
21.4
|
|
|
|
27.5
|
|
Operating margin, $ in millions
|
|
$
|
74.4
|
|
|
$
|
79.8
|
|
|
$
|
118.6
|
|
Fractionation and treating volumes for 2011 are forecasted to
increase approximately 31% relative to the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010 primarily due to the 78 MBbl/d CBF
expansion, which is expected to be in-service in the second
quarter of 2011, and to the Mt. Belvieu Benzene treater, which
is expected to be in-service in the fourth quarter of 2011.
Operating margin is estimated to increase approximately 49% to
$118.6 million for 2011 as compared to $79.8 million
for the twelve months ended September 30, 2010. This
estimated increase is due to the higher fractionation and
treating volumes; renewal of existing contracts at higher rates;
the incremental price impact of the new contracts for the CBF
expansion and the partial year impact of the Benzene treater
described under Business of Targa Resources Partners
LPPartnership Growth Drivers.
66
Marketing and Distribution Segment
Assumptions. The following table summarizes
selected operating and financial data for the Partnership for
the twelve months ending December 31, 2011 compared to
historical data for the twelve months ended September 30,
2010 and the twelve months ended December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve Months Ending
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2011
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
(Estimated)
|
|
|
NGL Sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
276.1
|
|
|
|
246.1
|
|
|
|
254.9
|
|
Operating margin, $ in millions
|
|
$
|
82.9
|
|
|
$
|
78.1
|
|
|
$
|
65.6
|
|
The decline in volumes from the year ended December 31,
2009 to the twelve months ended September 30, 2010 was the
result of a contract renegotiation which resulted in lower
volumes but higher per barrel margins. We expect volumes in 2011
to increase slightly over volumes for the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010 primarily due to some refinery outages
in 2010 that reduced our supply of NGLs.
Operating margin is estimated to be $65.6 million for the
twelve months ending December 31, 2011 which represents a
$12.5 million decline from the twelve months ended
September 30, 2010. The decrease is primarily due to lower
expected margins on the sales of inventories. The Marketing and
Distribution segment benefitted from a generally rising pricing
environment that produced gains from sales of inventory over the
twelve month periods ended September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009.
Other. Other primarily reflects our hedge
settlements which are the cash receipts or payments due to
market prices settling above or below the prices of our hedging
instruments. Contribution to operating margin from other
decreased from $46.2 million for the twelve months ended
December 31, 2009 to $16.7 million for the twelve
months ended September 30, 2010 and is estimated to
decrease further to $12.5 million for the twelve months
ending December 31, 2011. The decrease from 2009 through
the forecast period is primarily due to a trend of lower hedged
volumes and higher commodity prices which result in lower cash
settlements.
Other
Assumptions
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization Expenses. The
Partnerships depreciation and amortization expenses are
estimated to be $175.4 million for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011, as compared to $170.1 million for
the twelve months ended September 30, 2010. Depreciation
and amortization is expected to increase as a result of the
Partnerships organic growth projects and maintenance
capital expenditures.
|
|
|
|
General and Administrative Expenses. The
Partnerships general and administrative expenses include
its public company expenses and are estimated to be
$110.3 million for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011, as compared to $116.6 million for
the twelve months ended September 30, 2010. General and
administrative expenses are expected to decrease as a result of
lower estimated compensation expense and decreased professional
services associated with 2010 transactions.
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense. The Partnerships
interest expense is estimated to be $110.3 million for the
twelve months ending December 31, 2011. This amount
includes (i) $63.0 million of interest expense related
to the $690 million of senior unsecured notes with a
weighted average interest rate of approximately 9.1%,
(ii) $39.0 million of interest expense, after giving
effect to the impact of interest rate hedges, under the
Partnerships revolving credit facility, at an assumed
interest rate of approximately 3.8% (based on a 1% LIBOR plus a
spread of 2.75%) and (iii) $8.3 million of commitment
fees, amortization of debt issuance costs and letter of credit
fees. Pro forma as adjusted for the Versado acquisition, the
VESCO acquisition and the Partnerships debt and equity
offerings in August 2010, the Partnerships revolving
credit facility had a balance of $753.3 million on
September 30, 2010. The balance is estimated to be
$778.3 million at December 31, 2010 with the increase
attributable to expansion capital expenditures. During the
twelve month period ending December 31, 2011, we estimate that
the Partnership will borrow $129.0 million to fund
|
67
|
|
|
|
|
growth capital expenditures. After giving effect to LIBOR swaps
for $300 million of the Partnerships revolving credit
facility, a 1.0% change in LIBOR would result in a change in
interest for the forecast period of $5.4 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in Earnings of Unconsolidated
Investment. The Partnerships equity in
earnings of unconsolidated investment is estimated to be
$11.5 million for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011, compared to $5.6 million for the
twelve months ended September 30, 2010. The
Partnerships equity in earnings of unconsolidated
investment is related to its investment in GCF, and the increase
is attributable to price increases for fractionation services.
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling Interest Adjustment. Net income
attributable to noncontrolling interest is estimated to be
$31.2 million for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011, compared to $25.5 million for the
twelve months ended September 30, 2010. Net income
attributable to noncontrolling interest is associated with
minority ownership stakes in Versado, VESCO and CBF. In the
reconciliation of Partnership net income to Partnership Adjusted
EBITDA, the non-controlling interest adjustment reflects
depreciation expense attributable to the minority ownership
stake.
|
|
|
|
Expansion Capital Expenditures, net and
investments. The Partnerships forecasted
expansion capital expenditures for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011 are estimated to be approximately
$129.0 million net of minority partnership share and
primarily consist of the benzene treating project, the
expansions of CBF and GCF and various gathering and processing
system expansions. See Business of Targa Resources
Partners LPPartnership Growth Drivers. These
forecasted capital expenditures are expected to be funded from
borrowings under its revolving credit facility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance Capital Expenditures, net. The
Partnerships maintenance capital expenditures for the
twelve months ending December 31, 2011 are estimated to be
approximately $49.7 million, net of minority interest
share, compared to $40.4 million on a pro forma basis for
the twelve months ended September 30, 2010. These capital
expenditures are expected to fund the development of additional
gathering and processing capacity in areas in which producers
have increased drilling activity. The estimated amount excludes
approximately $8 million of capital expenditures associated
with the Versado System that will be reimbursed to the
Partnership by us. See Assumptions for Targa
Resources Corp.Capital Expenditure Reimbursement to the
Partnership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compliance with Debt Agreements. We expect
that we and the Partnership will remain in compliance with the
financial covenants in our respective financing arrangements.
|
|
|
|
Regulatory and Other. We have assumed that
there will not be any new federal, state or local regulation of
portions of the energy industry in which we and the Partnership
operate, or a new interpretation of existing regulation, that
will be materially adverse to our or the Partnerships
business and market, regulatory, insurance and overall economic
conditions will not change substantially.
|
Assumptions for
Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
|
|
Financing and Interest Expense. We assume that
our Holdco loan will have an average balance of approximately
$85.0 million during 2011. Pursuant to the terms of such
loan, we pay interest either in cash or in kind (PIK). We have
assumed the cash pay option of LIBOR plus a margin of 3%.
|
|
|
|
Interest Income. We estimate that we will
invest in a combination of cash and equivalents, treasuries and
liquid, investment grade securities until which time the cash is
necessary to satisfy these obligations. For the twelve months
ending December 31, 2011 we estimate such investments will
earn an average return of 2%.
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Taxes. We estimate that we will pay
approximately $14.3 million in taxes for the twelve months
ending December 31, 2011. This amount consists of
$16.9 million from tax liabilities, which resulted from
deferred gains for previous drop down transactions, partially
offset by taxable losses that reduce taxes by $2.6 million.
The $14.3 million of cash taxes due will be funded from our
cash reserve, discussed further below.
|
|
|
|
Capital Expenditure Reimbursement to the
Partnership. In connection with the sale of our
interests in Versado to the Partnership, we have agreed to
reimburse the Partnership for an estimated $19 million of
capital expenditures which are expected to be paid by the end of
2011 from our cash reserve, discussed further below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Reserve. We estimate that at the closing
of this offering we will have approximately $151 million of
cash which will be sufficient to pay current payables as well as
a $19 million capital expenditure reimbursement to be paid
to the Partnership by the end of 2011 and $88 million of
cash taxes which resulted from deferred gains from previous drop
down transactions and which will be paid over the next ten
years. We expect this cash balance, interest income earned on
this balance over time, and any retained cash resulting from
reserves established by our board of directors will be
sufficient to satisfy these obligations.
|
TRC Minimum
Estimated Cash Available for Distribution for the Three Month
Period Ending December 31, 2010
Set forth below is a forecast of the TRC Minimum Estimated
Cash Available for Distribution that supports our belief
that we expect to generate sufficient cash flow to pay a
quarterly dividend of $0.2575 per common share on all of our
outstanding common shares for the three months ending
December 31, 2010. We expect to pay a prorated dividend for
the portion of the fourth quarter of 2010 that we are public. We
believe our actual results of operations and cash flows for the
three months ending December 31, 2010 will be sufficient to
generate our minimum estimated cash available for distribution
for such period; however, we can give you no assurance that such
minimum estimated cash available for distribution will be
achieved. There will likely be differences between our minimum
estimated cash available for distribution for the three months
ending December 31, 2010 and our actual results for such
period and those differences could be material. If we fail to
generate the minimum estimated cash available for distribution
for the three months ending December 31, 2010, we may not
be able to pay a prorated cash dividend on our common shares at
the initial dividend rate stated in our cash dividend policy for
such period.
This forward-looking financial information included in this
prospectus has been prepared by, and is the responsibility of,
our management. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP has neither examined,
compiled nor performed any procedures with respect to the
accompanying forward-looking financial information and,
accordingly, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP does not express an
opinion or any other form of assurance with respect thereto. The
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP reports included in this prospectus
relate to our historical financial information. Such reports do
not extend to this forward-looking financial information of the
Partnership or us and should not be read to do so. Please see
TRC Minimum Estimated Cash Available for Distribution for
the Twelve Month Period Ending December 31, 2011
69
above for cautionary statements and a discussion of risks and
uncertainties relating to the three month forecast set forth
below.
TRC Minimum
Estimated Cash Available for Distribution for the Three Month
Period Ending December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ending
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except for
|
|
|
|
share amounts)
|
|
|
Targa Resources Partners LP Data
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
1,532.6
|
|
Less: Product purchases
|
|
|
(1,320.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin(1)
|
|
|
212.0
|
|
Less: Operating expenses
|
|
|
(70.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
margin(2)
|
|
|
141.5
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
(43.3
|
)
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(32.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
65.6
|
|
Plus (less): other income (expense)
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(25.7
|
)
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investment
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income tax
|
|
|
41.5
|
|
Less: income tax expense
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
40.2
|
|
Less: net income attributable to noncontrolling
interest(3)
|
|
|
(6.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Targa Resources Partners LP
|
|
$
|
33.7
|
|
Plus:
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
25.7
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
43.3
|
|
Noncash loss related to derivative instruments
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
Noncontrolling interest adjustment
|
|
|
(2.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Adjusted
EBITDA(4)
|
|
$
|
108.7
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(25.7
|
)
|
Expansion capital expenditures, net
|
|
|
(41.2
|
)
|
Borrowings for expansion capital expenditures
|
|
|
41.2
|
|
Maintenance capital expenditures, net
|
|
|
(20.0
|
)
|
Amortization of debt issue costs
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
Cash
reserve(5)
|
|
|
(16.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated minimum cash available for
distribution(6)
|
|
$
|
47.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnerships debt covenant
ratios(7)
|
|
|
|
|
Interest coverage ratio of not less than 2.25 to 1.0
|
|
|
3.5
|
x
|
Consolidated leverage ratio of not greater than 5.5 to 1.0
|
|
|
3.8
|
x
|
Consolidated senior leverage ratio of not greater than 4.0 to 1.0
|
|
|
2.1
|
x
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ending
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except for
|
|
|
|
share amounts)
|
|
|
Estimated minimum cash available for distribution to
Partnership unitholders
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated minimum cash distributions to us:
|
|
|
|
|
2% general partner interest
|
|
$
|
1.0
|
|
Incentive distribution
rights(8)
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
Common units
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total estimated minimum cash distributions to us
|
|
|
12.7
|
|
Estimated minimum cash distributions to public unitholders
|
|
|
35.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total estimated minimum cash distributions by the Partnership
|
|
$
|
47.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ending
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except for
|
|
|
|
share amounts)
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp.
Data(9)(10)
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated minimum cash distributions to be received from the
Partnership
|
|
$
|
12.7
|
|
Corporate general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partnership distributions less general and administrative
expenses
|
|
|
11.3
|
|
Plus / (Less):
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
Interest Income
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Cash taxes paid
|
|
|
(3.2
|
)
|
Cash taxes funded from cash on hand
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum cash available for distribution
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected dividend per share
Quarterly(11)
|
|
$
|
0.2575
|
|
Total estimated dividends paid to stockholders (before
proration)(11)
|
|
$
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
|
1.
|
|
Gross margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations How We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
2.
|
|
Operating margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations How We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
3.
|
|
Reflects net income attributable to
Chevrons 37% interest in Versado, Enterprises 12%
interest in VESCO, ONEOKs 11% interest in VESCO and
BPs 12% interest in CBF.
|
|
4.
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA is presented
because we believe it provides additional information with
respect to both the performance of our fundamental business
activities as well as our ability to meet future debt service,
capital expenditures and working capital requirements. It is a
non-GAAP financial measure and is not intended to be used in
lieu of the GAAP presentation of net income.
|
|
5.
|
|
Represents a discretionary cash
reserve. See The Partnerships Cash
Distribution Policy.
|
|
6.
|
|
The Partnerships estimated
minimum cash available for distribution is presented because we
believe it is used by investors to evaluate the ability of the
Partnership to make quarterly cash distributions. It is a
non-GAAP financial measure and is not intended to be used in
lieu of the GAAP presentation of net income.
|
|
7.
|
|
The Partnerships credit
agreement and indentures contain certain financial covenants.
The Partnerships revolving credit facility requires that,
at the end of each fiscal quarter, the Partnership must maintain:
|
|
|
|
|
|
an interest coverage ratio, defined
as the ratio of the Partnerships consolidated adjusted
EBITDA (as defined in the Amended and Restated Credit Agreement)
for the four consecutive fiscal quarters most recently ended to
the consolidated interest expense (as defined in the Amended and
Restated Credit Agreement) for such period, of no less than 2.25
to 1.0;
|
|
|
|
a Consolidated Leverage Ratio,
defined as the ratio of the Partnerships consolidated
funded indebtedness (as defined in the Amended and Restated
Credit Agreement) to consolidated adjusted EBITDA, for the four
fiscal quarters most recently ended, that is not greater than
5.5 to 1.0; and
|
71
|
|
|
|
|
a Consolidated Senior Leverage
ratio, defined as the ratio of the Partnerships
consolidated funded indebtedness, excluding unsecured note
indebtedness, to consolidated adjusted EBITDA, for the four
fiscal quarters most recently ended, that is not greater than
4.0 to 1.0.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition, the indentures
relating to the Partnerships existing senior notes require
that the Partnership have a fixed charge coverage ratio for the
most recently ended four fiscal quarters of not less than 1.75
to 1.0 in order to make distributions, subject to certain
exceptions. This ratio is approximately equal to the interest
coverage ratio described above. As indicated by the table, we
estimate that the Partnerships pro forma EBITDA would be
sufficient to permit cash distributions, under the terms of its
credit agreement and indentures.
|
|
|
|
8.
|
|
Based on the Partnerships
75,545,409 outstanding common units as of November 1, 2010
and the Partnerships fourth quarter 2010 quarterly
distribution of $0.5475 per unit, or $2.19 per unit on an
annualized basis, that management plans to recommend to the
General Partners board of directors.
|
|
|
|
9.
|
|
We expect that we will have no debt
outstanding under TRIs revolving credit facility, and
accordingly, we have not presented credit ratios for this
facility in the table. Pursuant to the terms of this facility at
the end of each fiscal quarter, TRI must maintain:
|
|
|
|
|
|
an interest coverage ratio, defined
as the ratio of our consolidated adjusted EBITDA (as defined in
the revolving credit agreement) for the four consecutive fiscal
quarters most recently ended to the consolidated interest
expense (as defined in the revolving credit agreement) for such
period, of no less than 1.5 to 1.0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
a Consolidated Leverage Ratio,
defined as the ratio of our consolidated funded indebtedness (as
defined in the revolving credit agreement) to consolidated
adjusted EBITDA, for the four fiscal quarters most recently
ended, that is not greater than 5.75 to 1.0 and becomes more
restrictive over time.
|
|
|
|
10.
|
|
The Holdco Loan agreement has no
restrictive covenants which would impact our ability to pay
dividends.
|
|
|
|
11.
|
|
We expect to pay a prorated divided
for the portion of the fourth quarter of 2010 that we are
public. We estimate that we will have sufficient cash available
to pay the full amount of the dividend and, therefore, any
prorated portion thereof.
|
Assumptions and
Considerations
We estimate that our ownership interests in the Partnership will
generate sufficient cash flow to enable us to pay our initial
quarterly dividend of $0.2575 per share, which will be prorated
for the post-offering period, on all of our shares for the
quarter ending December 31, 2010. Our ability to make this
dividend payment assumes that the Partnership will pay its
quarterly distribution of $0.5475 per common unit that
management plans to recommend to the General Partners
board of directors for the fourth quarter ending
December 31, 2010, which means that the total amount of
cash distributions we will receive from the Partnership for that
period would be $12.7 million.
The primary determinant in the Partnerships ability to pay
a distribution of $0.5475 per common unit for the fourth quarter
ending December 31, 2010, after giving effect to a
$16.8 million cash reserve, is its ability to generate
Adjusted EBITDA of at least $108.7 million during the
period, which in turn is dependent on its ability to generate
operating margin of $141.5 million.
The estimates of the Adjusted EBITDA and operating margin to be
generated by the Partnership for the fourth quarter ending
December 31, 2010 assumes the following volume and
commodity price information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
(Estimated)
|
|
|
Field Plant Natural Gas Inlet,
MMcf/d
|
|
|
596.7
|
|
Coastal Plant Natural Gas Inlet,
MMcf/d
|
|
|
1,633.6
|
|
Logistics Fractionation, MBbl/d
|
|
|
250.1
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
(Estimated)
|
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
$
|
3.67/MMBtu
|
|
Ethane
|
|
$
|
0.64/gallon
|
|
Propane
|
|
$
|
1.26/gallon
|
|
Isobutane
|
|
$
|
1.61/gallon
|
|
Normal Butane
|
|
$
|
1.57/gallon
|
|
Natural Gasoline
|
|
$
|
1.96/gallon
|
|
Crude Oil
|
|
$
|
80.34/Bbl
|
|
Other
Assumptions
Volume assumptions. Field Gathering and
Processing volumes reflect the impact of continued growth from
increased drilling activity. Coastal Gathering and Processing
daily volumes decline slightly as compared to the twelve months
ended September 30, 2010 due primarily to temporary
pipeline interruptions. Fractionation volumes reflect the stable
demand for fractionating services. The volumes for each of these
segments is set forth in the table above.
Commodity price assumptions. Commodity prices
are based on actual prices for October 2010 and market prices as
of November 4, 2010 for the remainder of the quarter.
General and Administrative Expenses. The
Partnerships general and administrative expenses include
its public company expenses and are estimated to be
$32.6 million for the three months ending December 31,
2010. The general and administrative expense for the three
months ending December 31, 2010 is higher than the
quarterly average for the twelve months ended September 30,
2010 due to increased compensation costs and drop down
transaction costs.
Interest Expense. The Partnerships
interest expense is estimated to be $25.7 million for the
three months ending December 31, 2010. This amount is based
on the Partnerships outstanding senior unsecured notes and
September 30, 2010 balance on the Partnerships
revolving credit facility and gives effect to expansion capital
expenditures funded during the three months ending
December 31, 2010.
Expansion Capital Expenditures, net. The
Partnerships forecasted expansion capital expenditures for
the three months ending December 31, 2010 are estimated to
be approximately $41.2 million, net of minority partnership
share, and primarily consist of expenditures on previously
announced expansion projects.
Maintenance Capital Expenditures, net. The
Partnerships maintenance capital expenditures for the
three months ending December 31, 2010 are estimated to be
approximately $20.0 million, net of minority interest
share. These capital expenditures are expected to fund the
development of additional gathering and processing capacity in
areas in which producers have increased drilling activity.
TRC
Assumptions
General and Administrative Expense. We have
assumed one quarter of the $5.4 million of the general and
administrative expense estimated for the twelve months ending
December 31, 2011.
Interest Expense. We assume that our Holdco
loan will have an average balance of approximately
$85 million for the three months ending December 31,
2010. Pursuant to the terms of such loan, we can pay interest
either in cash or in kind (PIK). We have assumed the cash pay
option of LIBOR plus a margin of 3%.
Interest Income. We estimate that we will
invest in a combination of cash and cash equivalents, treasuries
and liquid, investment grade securities. For the three months
ending December 31, 2010 we estimate such investments will
earn an average return of 2%.
73
Cash Taxes. We estimate that we will pay
approximately $3.2 million in taxes for the three months
ending December 31, 2010. This amount consists of
$3.7 million of tax liabilities, resulting from deferred
gains for previous drop down transactions, partially offset by
taxable losses that reduce taxes by $0.5 million. The
$3.2 million of cash taxes due will be funded from our cash
reserve.
Cash Reserve. We estimate that at the closing
of this offering we will have approximately $151 million of
cash on hand which will be sufficient to pay $3.2 million
of taxes for the three months ending December 31, 2010.
74
SELECTED
HISTORICAL FINANCIAL AND OPERATING DATA
The following table presents selected historical consolidated
financial and operating data of Targa Resources Corp. for the
periods and as of the dates indicated. The selected historical
consolidated statement of operations and cash flow data for the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2008 and 2009 and selected
historical consolidated balance sheet data as of
December 31, 2009 and 2008 have been derived from our
audited financial statements, included elsewhere in this
prospectus. The selected historical consolidated statement of
operations and cash flow data for the nine months ended
September 30, 2009 and 2010 and the selected historical
consolidated balance sheet data as of September 30, 2010
have been derived from our unaudited financial statements,
included elsewhere in this prospectus.
The selected historical consolidated statement of operations and
cash flow data for the years ended December 31, 2005 and
2006 and the selected historical consolidated balance sheet data
as of December 31, 2005, 2006 and 2007 have been derived
from our audited financial statements, which are not included in
this prospectus. The selected historical consolidated balance
sheet data as of September 30, 2009 has been derived from
our unaudited financial statements, which are not included in
this prospectus.
We derived the information in the following table from, and that
information should be read together with and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to, the historical consolidated financial
statements and the accompanying notes beginning on
page F-1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except operating and price data)
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues(1)
|
|
$
|
1,829.0
|
|
|
$
|
6,132.9
|
|
|
$
|
7,297.2
|
|
|
$
|
7,998.9
|
|
|
$
|
4,536.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,145.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,942.0
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product purchases
|
|
|
1,632.0
|
|
|
|
5,440.8
|
|
|
|
6,525.5
|
|
|
|
7,218.5
|
|
|
|
3,791.1
|
|
|
|
2,624.9
|
|
|
|
3,387.6
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
53.4
|
|
|
|
222.8
|
|
|
|
247.1
|
|
|
|
275.2
|
|
|
|
235.0
|
|
|
|
182.7
|
|
|
|
190.4
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
27.1
|
|
|
|
149.7
|
|
|
|
148.1
|
|
|
|
160.9
|
|
|
|
170.3
|
|
|
|
127.9
|
|
|
|
136.9
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
29.1
|
|
|
|
82.5
|
|
|
|
96.3
|
|
|
|
96.4
|
|
|
|
120.4
|
|
|
|
83.6
|
|
|
|
81.0
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
13.4
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses
|
|
|
1,741.6
|
|
|
|
5,895.8
|
|
|
|
7,016.9
|
|
|
|
7,764.4
|
|
|
|
4,318.8
|
|
|
|
3,020.9
|
|
|
|
3,795.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
87.4
|
|
|
|
237.1
|
|
|
|
280.3
|
|
|
|
234.5
|
|
|
|
217.2
|
|
|
|
124.1
|
|
|
|
146.5
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(39.8
|
)
|
|
|
(180.2
|
)
|
|
|
(162.3
|
)
|
|
|
(141.2
|
)
|
|
|
(132.1
|
)
|
|
|
(102.8
|
)
|
|
|
(83.9
|
)
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments
|
|
|
(3.8
|
)
|
|
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
Gain (loss) on debt repurchases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
Gain (loss) on early debt extinguishment
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
Gain on insurance claims
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on
mark-to-market
derivative instruments
|
|
|
(74.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Other income
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(15.5
|
)
|
|
|
66.9
|
|
|
|
128.1
|
|
|
|
153.7
|
|
|
|
99.8
|
|
|
|
35.8
|
|
|
|
57.5
|
|
Income tax (expense) benefit
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
(16.7
|
)
|
|
|
(23.9
|
)
|
|
|
(19.3
|
)
|
|
|
(20.7
|
)
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)
|
|
|
(18.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
(8.5
|
)
|
|
|
50.2
|
|
|
|
104.2
|
|
|
|
134.4
|
|
|
|
79.1
|
|
|
|
30.7
|
|
|
|
39.0
|
|
Less: Net income attributable to non controlling interest
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
|
|
26.0
|
|
|
|
48.1
|
|
|
|
97.1
|
|
|
|
49.8
|
|
|
|
17.7
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except operating and price data)
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
|
24.2
|
|
|
|
56.1
|
|
|
|
37.3
|
|
|
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
13.0
|
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
Dividends on Series A preferred stock
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conversion of Series A preferred stock to Series B
preferred stock
|
|
|
(158.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends on Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
(6.5
|
)
|
|
|
(39.7
|
)
|
|
|
(31.6
|
)
|
|
|
(16.8
|
)
|
|
|
(17.8
|
)
|
|
|
(13.2
|
)
|
|
|
(8.4
|
)
|
Undistributed earnings attributable to preferred
shareholders(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24.5
|
)
|
|
|
(20.5
|
)
|
|
|
(11.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to common equivalents shareholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(177.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders
|
|
|
(187.9
|
)
|
|
|
(15.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(193.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per sharebasic and diluted
|
|
$
|
(80.64
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.53
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.03
|
)
|
|
$
|
(21.51
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin(3)
|
|
$
|
197.0
|
|
|
$
|
692.1
|
|
|
$
|
771.7
|
|
|
$
|
780.4
|
|
|
$
|
744.9
|
|
|
$
|
520.1
|
|
|
$
|
554.4
|
|
Operating
margin(4)
|
|
|
143.6
|
|
|
|
469.3
|
|
|
|
524.6
|
|
|
|
505.2
|
|
|
|
509.9
|
|
|
|
337.4
|
|
|
|
364.0
|
|
Operating data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant natural gas inlet,
MMcf/d(5),
(6)
|
|
|
400.8
|
|
|
|
1,863.3
|
|
|
|
1,982.8
|
|
|
|
1,846.4
|
|
|
|
2,139.8
|
|
|
|
2,097.7
|
|
|
|
2,296.5
|
|
Gross NGL production, MBbl/d
|
|
|
31.8
|
|
|
|
106.8
|
|
|
|
106.6
|
|
|
|
101.9
|
|
|
|
118.3
|
|
|
|
117.1
|
|
|
|
120.8
|
|
Natural gas sales,
Bbtu/d(6)
|
|
|
313.5
|
|
|
|
501.2
|
|
|
|
526.5
|
|
|
|
532.1
|
|
|
|
598.4
|
|
|
|
590.4
|
|
|
|
678.4
|
|
NGL sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
58.2
|
|
|
|
300.2
|
|
|
|
320.8
|
|
|
|
286.9
|
|
|
|
279.7
|
|
|
|
285.1
|
|
|
|
246.0
|
|
Condensate sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
Average realized
prices(7):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas, $/MMBtu
|
|
|
8.45
|
|
|
|
6.79
|
|
|
|
6.56
|
|
|
|
8.20
|
|
|
|
3.96
|
|
|
|
3.78
|
|
|
|
4.61
|
|
NGL, $/gal
|
|
|
0.84
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
1.18
|
|
|
|
1.38
|
|
|
|
0.79
|
|
|
|
0.71
|
|
|
|
1.03
|
|
Condensate, $/Bbl
|
|
|
55.17
|
|
|
|
63.67
|
|
|
|
70.01
|
|
|
|
91.28
|
|
|
|
56.31
|
|
|
|
54.36
|
|
|
|
73.42
|
|
Balance Sheet Data (at period end):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property plant and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
2,436.6
|
|
|
$
|
2,464.5
|
|
|
$
|
2,430.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,617.4
|
|
|
$
|
2,548.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,563.9
|
|
|
$
|
2,494.9
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
3,396.3
|
|
|
|
3,458.0
|
|
|
|
3,795.1
|
|
|
|
3,641.8
|
|
|
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
|
3,273.0
|
|
|
|
3,460.0
|
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities
|
|
|
2,184.4
|
|
|
|
1,471.9
|
|
|
|
1,867.8
|
|
|
|
1,976.5
|
|
|
|
1,593.5
|
|
|
|
1,622.6
|
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
Convertible cumulative participating Series B preferred
stock
|
|
|
647.5
|
|
|
|
687.2
|
|
|
|
273.8
|
|
|
|
290.6
|
|
|
|
308.4
|
|
|
|
303.8
|
|
|
|
96.8
|
|
Total owners equity
|
|
|
(102.0
|
)
|
|
|
(71.5
|
)
|
|
|
574.1
|
|
|
|
822.0
|
|
|
|
754.9
|
|
|
|
789.9
|
|
|
|
994.3
|
|
Cash Flow Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
108.1
|
|
|
$
|
269.5
|
|
|
$
|
190.6
|
|
|
$
|
390.7
|
|
|
$
|
335.8
|
|
|
$
|
202.9
|
|
|
$
|
104.0
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(2,328.1
|
)
|
|
|
(117.8
|
)
|
|
|
(95.9
|
)
|
|
|
(206.7
|
)
|
|
|
(59.3
|
)
|
|
|
(50.7
|
)
|
|
|
(81.8
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
2,250.6
|
|
|
|
(50.4
|
)
|
|
|
(59.5
|
)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
(386.9
|
)
|
|
|
(327.1
|
)
|
|
|
75.4
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes business interruption
insurance proceeds of $3.0 million and $7.9 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 and
$21.5 million, $32.9 million, $7.3 million and
$10.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2009,
2008, 2007 and 2006.
|
|
(2) |
|
Based on the terms of the preferred
convertible stock, undistributed earnings of the Company are
allocated to the preferred stock until the carrying value has
been recovered.
|
|
(3) |
|
Gross margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsHow We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
(4) |
|
Operating margin is a non-GAAP
financial measure and is discussed under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsHow We Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
(5) |
|
Plant natural gas inlet represents
the volume of natural gas passing through the meter located at
the inlet of a natural gas processing plant.
|
|
(6) |
|
Plant natural gas inlet volumes
include producer
take-in-kind,
while natural gas sales exclude producer
take-in-kind
volumes.
|
|
(7) |
|
Average realized prices include the
impact of hedging activities.
|
76
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
You should read the following discussion of our financial
condition and results of operations in conjunction with the
historical and pro forma consolidated financial statements and
notes thereto included elsewhere in this prospectus. For more
detailed information regarding the basis of presentation for the
following information, you should read the notes to the
historical and pro forma financial statements included elsewhere
in this prospectus. In addition, you should read
Forward-Looking Statements and Risk
Factors for information regarding certain risks inherent
in our and the Partnerships business.
Overview
Financial
Presentation
Because we control the General Partner, we reflect our ownership
interest in the Partnership on a consolidated basis, which means
that our financial results are combined with the
Partnerships financial results in our consolidated
financial statements. The limited partner interests in the
Partnership not owned by controlled affiliates of us are
reflected in our results of operations as net income
attributable to non-controlling interests. We currently have no
separate operating activities apart from those conducted by the
Partnership, and our cash inflows consist of cash distributions
from our interests in the Partnership. Throughout this
discussion, when we refer to our financial results
or our operations, we are referring to the financial results and
operations of all of our consolidated subsidiaries, including
the Partnership. Our consolidated financial statements differ
from the results of operations of the Partnership due to
non-controlling interests in the Partnership, and the effects of
certain assets, liabilities and insurance recoveries that were
retained by us and not included in our asset conveyances with
the Partnership. The historical results of operations do not
reflect incremental general and administrative expenses of
$1.0 million that we expect to incur as a result of being a
public company.
General
We are the sole member of Targa Resources GP LLC, which is the
general partner of the Partnership. Through our control of the
Partnership, we are a leading provider of midstream natural gas
and NGL services in the United States. We are engaged in the
business of gathering, compressing, treating, processing and
selling natural gas and storing, fractionating, treating,
transporting and selling NGLs and NGL products. We operate
through two divisions: the Natural Gas Gathering and Processing
division and the NGL Logistics and Marketing division. Our
interests in the Partnership consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
a 2% general partner interest, which we hold through our 100%
ownership interest in the general partner of the Partnership;
|
|
|
|
all Incentive Distribution Rights (IDRs); and
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,645,659 of the 75,545,409 outstanding common units of the
Partnership, representing a 15.1% limited partnership interest
in the Partnership.
|
Our cash flows are generated from the cash distributions we
receive from the Partnership. The Partnership is required to
distribute all available cash at the end of each quarter after
establishing reserves to provide for the proper conduct of its
business or to provide for future distributions.
Cash
Distributions
The following table sets forth the distributions that the
Partnership has paid in respect of the 2% general partner
interest, the associated IDRs and actual common units held
during the periods indicated. We will not distribute all of the
cash that we receive from the Partnership to our shareholders,
as we will
77
establish reserves for capital contributions, debt service
requirements, general, administrative and other expenses, future
distributions and other miscellaneous uses of cash.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual Cash Distributions
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
Limited
|
|
|
|
Distributions
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
Distribution
|
|
Partner
|
|
Total Partnership
|
|
on Limited
|
|
on General
|
|
|
|
to Targa
|
|
|
Per Limited
|
|
Units
|
|
Cash
|
|
Partner
|
|
Partner
|
|
Distributions
|
|
Resources
|
|
|
Partner Unit
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
Distributions
|
|
Units
|
|
Interest
|
|
on IDRs
|
|
Corp.
|
|
|
(In millions except and Cash Distribution Per Limited Partner
Unit)
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
0.16875
|
|
|
|
30.9
|
|
|
$
|
5.3
|
|
|
$
|
5.2
|
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.1
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
0.33750
|
|
|
|
30.9
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
0.33750
|
|
|
|
44.4
|
|
|
|
15.3
|
|
|
|
15.0
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
0.39750
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
18.9
|
|
|
|
18.4
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
0.41750
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
$
|
19.9
|
|
|
$
|
19.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
5.5
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
0.51250
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
25.9
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
8.2
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
0.51750
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
26.3
|
|
|
|
23.9
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
0.51750
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
26.4
|
|
|
|
24.0
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
0.51750
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
$
|
26.3
|
|
|
$
|
23.9
|
|
|
$
|
0.5
|
|
|
$
|
1.9
|
|
|
$
|
8.4
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
0.51750
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
26.4
|
|
|
|
23.9
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
0.51750
|
|
|
|
61.6
|
|
|
|
35.2
|
|
|
|
31.9
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
13.7
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
0.51750
|
|
|
|
68.0
|
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
35.2
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
0.51750
|
|
|
|
68.0
|
|
|
$
|
38.8
|
|
|
$
|
35.2
|
|
|
$
|
0.8
|
|
|
$
|
2.8
|
|
|
$
|
9.6
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
0.52750
|
|
|
|
68.0
|
|
|
|
40.2
|
|
|
|
35.9
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
0.53750
|
|
|
|
75.5
|
|
|
|
46.1
|
|
|
|
40.6
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
11.8
|
|
Recent
Transactions
On July 19, 2010, the Partnership entered into an amended
and restated five-year $1.1 billion senior secured
revolving credit facility, which allows it to request increases
in commitments up to an additional $300 million. The
amended and restated senior secured credit facility replaces the
Partnerships former $977.5 million senior secured
revolving credit facility due February 2012.
In August 2010, the Partnership completed a public offering of
7,475,000 common units and a separate private offering of
$250,000,000 of
77/8% Senior
Notes due 2018. The Partnership used the net proceeds from these
offerings to reduce borrowings under its senior secured credit
facility.
On August 25, 2010, the Partnership acquired from us a 63%
ownership interest in Versado, a joint venture in which Chevron
U.S.A. Inc. owns the remaining 37% interest, for a purchase
price of $247.2 million. Versado owns a natural gas
gathering and processing business consisting of the Eunice,
Monument and Saunders gathering and processing systems,
including treating operations, processing plants and related
assets. The Versado System includes three refrigerated cryogenic
processing plants and approximately 3,200 miles of combined
gathering pipelines in Southeast New Mexico and West Texas and
is primarily conducted under percent of proceeds arrangements.
During 2009, the Versado System processed an average of
approximately
198.8 MMcf/d
of natural gas and produced an average of approximately
22.2 MBbl/d of NGLs. In the first nine months of 2010, the
Versado System processed an average of approximately
180.5 MMcf/d
of natural gas and produced an average of approximately
20.4 MBbl/d of NGLs.
On September 28, 2010, the Partnership acquired from us an
approximate 77% ownership interest in Venice Energy Services
Company, L.L.C. (VESCO), a joint venture in which
Enterprise Gas Processing, LLC and Oneok Vesco Holdings, L.L.C.
own the remaining ownership interests, for a purchase price of
$175.6 million. VESCO owns and operates a natural gas
gathering and processing business in Louisiana
78
consisting of a coastal straddle plant and the business and
operations of Venice Gathering System, L.L.C., a wholly owned
subsidiary of VESCO that owns and operates an offshore gathering
system and related assets (collectively, the VESCO
System). The VESCO System captures volumes from the Gulf
of Mexico shelf and deepwater. For the year ended
December 31, 2009 and for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010, VESCO processed
363 MMcf/d
and
423 MMcf/d
of natural gas, respectively.
On October 8, 2010, the Partnership declared a quarterly
cash distribution of $0.5375 per common unit, or $2.15 per
common unit on an annualized basis, for the third quarter of
2010, payable on November 12, 2010 to holders of record on
October 18, 2010.
On November 4, 2010, the Partnership announced that
management plans to recommend to the General Partners
board of directors a $0.04 increase in the annualized cash
distribution rate to $2.19 per common unit for the fourth
quarter of 2010 distribution.
Factors That
Significantly Affect Our Results
Upon completion of this offering, our only cash-generating
assets will consist of our interests in the Partnership.
Therefore, our cash flow and resulting ability to pay dividends
will be dependent upon the Partnerships ability to make
distributions in respect of those interests. The actual amount
of cash that the Partnership will have available for
distribution will depend primarily on the amount of cash it
generates from operations.
Our results of operations are substantially impacted by the
volumes that move through both our gathering and processing and
our logistics assets, our contract terms and changes in
commodity prices.
Volumes. In our gathering and processing
operations, plant inlet volumes and capacity utilization rates
generally are driven by wellhead production, our competitive
position on a regional basis and more broadly by the impact of
prices for oil, natural gas and NGLs on exploration and
production activity in the areas of our operation. The factors
that impact the gathering and processing volumes also impact the
total volumes that flow to our Downstream Business. In addition,
fractionation volumes are also affected by the location of the
resulting mixed NGLs, available pipeline capacity to transport
NGLs to our fractionators, and our competitive position relative
to other fractionators.
Contract Terms and Contract Mix and the Impact of Commodity
Prices. Our natural gas gathering and processing
contract arrangements can have a significant impact on our
profitability. Because of the significant volatility of natural
gas and NGL prices, the contract mix of our natural gas
gathering and processing segment can have a significant impact
on our profitability. Negotiated contract terms are based upon a
variety of factors, including natural gas quality, geographic
location, the competitive environment at the time the contract
is executed and customer preferences. Contract mix and,
accordingly, exposure to natural gas and NGL prices may change
over time as a result of changes in these underlying factors.
Set forth below is a table summarizing the contract mix of our
natural gas gathering and processing division for 2009 and the
potential impacts of commodity prices on operating margins:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent of
|
|
|
|
Contract Type
|
|
Throughput
|
|
|
Impact of Commodity Prices
|
|
Percent-of-Proceeds
/
Percent-of-Liquids
|
|
|
48
|
%
|
|
Decreases in natural gas and or NGL prices generate decreases in
operating margins
|
Fee-Based
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
|
No direct impact from commodity price movements
|
Wellhead Purchases / Keep-Whole
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
|
Decreases in NGL prices relative to natural gas prices generate
decreases in operating margins
|
Hybrid
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
|
In periods of favorable processing
economics,(1)
similar to percent-of-liquids or to wellhead
purchases/keep-whole in some circumstances, if economically
advantageous to the processor. In periods of unfavorable
processing economics, similar to fee-based.
|
79
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Favorable processing economics
typically occur when processed NGLs can be sold, after allowing
for processing costs, at a higher value than natural gas on a
Btu equivalent basis.
|
Actual contract terms are based upon a variety of factors,
including natural gas quality, geographic location, the
competitive commodity and pricing environment at the time the
contract is executed, and customer requirements. Our gathering
and processing contract mix and, accordingly, our exposure to
natural gas and NGL prices, may change as a result of producer
preferences, competition, and changes in production as wells
decline at different rates or are added, our expansion into
regions where different types of contracts are more common as
well as other market factors. We prefer to enter into contracts
with less commodity price sensitivity including fee-based and
percent-of-proceeds
arrangements.
The contract terms and contract mix of our downstream business
have a significant impact on our results of operations. During
periods of low relative demand for available fractionation
capacity, rates were low and take or pay contracts were not
readily available. Currently, demand for fractionation services
is relatively high, rates have increased, contract terms or
lengths have increased and reservation fees are required. These
fractionation contracts in the logistics assets segment are
primarily fee-based arrangements while the marketing segment
includes both fee based and percent of proceeds contracts.
We attempt to mitigate the impact of commodity prices on our
results of operations through hedging activities which can
materially impact our results of operations. See
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About
Market Risk Commodity Price Risk. Because the
Downstream Business is primarily fee based, our hedging
activities are primarily focused on the equity volume positions
associated with our percent-of-proceeds or percent-of-liquids
gas processing contracts.
Impact of Our Hedging Activities. In an effort
to reduce the variability of our cash flows, we have hedged the
commodity price associated with a portion of our expected
natural gas, NGL and condensate equity volumes for the remainder
of 2010 through 2013 by entering into derivative financial
instruments including swaps and purchased puts (or floors). With
these arrangements, we have attempted to mitigate our exposure
to commodity price movements with respect to our forecasted
volumes for this period. For additional information regarding
our hedging activities, see Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk Commodity
Price Risk.
General Trends
and Outlook
We expect our business to continue to be affected by the
following key trends. Our expectations are based on assumptions
made by us and information currently available to us. To the
extent our underlying assumptions about or interpretations of
available information prove to be incorrect, our actual results
may vary materially from our expected results.
Demand for Our Services. Fluctuations in
energy prices can affect production rates and investments by
third parties in the development of oil and natural gas
reserves. Generally, drilling and production activity will
increase as energy prices increase. Although recent economic
conditions negatively impacted overall commodity prices, we
believe that the current strength of oil, condensate and NGL
prices compared to natural gas prices has caused producers in
and around our natural gas gathering and processing areas of
operation to focus their drilling programs on regions rich in
these forms of hydrocarbons. This focus is reflected in
increased drilling permits and higher rig counts in these areas,
and we expect these activities to lead to higher inlet volumes
over the next several years. Producer activity in areas rich in
oil, condensate and NGLs is currently generating increased
demand for our fractionation services and for related fee-based
services provided by our downstream business. While we expect
development activity to remain robust with respect to oil and
liquids rich gas development and production, currently depressed
natural gas prices have resulted in reduced activity levels
surrounding comparatively dry natural gas reserves, whether
conventional or unconventional.
80
Significant Relationships. The following table
lists the percentage of our consolidated sales and consolidated
product purchases with our significant customers and suppliers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
% of consolidated revenuesCPC
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
|
|
19
|
%
|
|
|
15
|
%
|
% of consolidated product purchasesLouis Dreyfus Energy
Services L.P.
|
|
|
13
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
No other third party customer accounted for more than 10% of our
consolidated revenues or consolidated product purchases during
these periods.
Commodity Prices. Current forward commodity
prices for the November 2010 through October 2011 period show
natural gas and crude oil prices strengthening while NGL prices
weaken on an absolute price basis and as a percentage of crude
oil. Various industry commodity price forecasts based on
fundamental analysis may differ significantly from forward
market prices. Both are subject to change due to multiple
factors. There has been and we believe there will continue to be
significant volatility in commodity prices and in the
relationships among NGL, crude oil and natural gas prices. In
addition, the volatility and uncertainty of natural gas, crude
oil and NGL prices impact drilling, completion and other
investment decisions by producers and ultimately supply to our
systems.
Our operating income generally improves in an environment of
higher natural gas, NGL and condensate prices, primarily as a
result of our
percent-of-proceeds
contracts. Our processing profitability is largely dependent
upon pricing, the supply of and market demand for natural gas,
NGLs and condensate, which are beyond our control and have been
volatile. Recent weak economic conditions have negatively
affected the pricing and market demand for natural gas, NGLs and
condensate, which caused a reduction in profitability of our
processing operations. In a declining commodity price
environment, without taking into account our hedges, we will
realize a reduction in cash flows under our
percent-of-proceeds
contracts proportionate to average price declines. We have
attempted to mitigate our exposure to commodity price movements
by entering into hedging arrangements. For additional
information regarding our hedging activities, see
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
RiskCommodity Price Risk.
Volatile Capital Markets. We are dependent on
our ability to access the equity and debt capital markets in
order to fund acquisitions and expansion expenditures. Global
financial markets have been, and are expected to continue to be,
volatile and disrupted and weak economic conditions may cause a
significant decline in commodity prices. As a result, we may be
unable to raise equity or debt capital on satisfactory terms, or
at all, which may negatively impact the timing and extent to
which we execute growth plans. Prolonged periods of low
commodity prices or volatile capital markets may impact our
ability or willingness to enter into new hedges, fund organic
growth, connect to new supplies of natural gas, execute
acquisitions or implement expansion capital expenditures.
Increased Regulation. Additional regulation in
various areas has the potential to materially impact our
operations and financial condition. For example, if regulation
of hydraulic fracturing used by producers increased, we may
experience reductions in supplies of natural gas and of NGLs
from producers. Please read Risk FactorsIncreased
regulation of hydraulic fracturing could result in reductions or
delays in drilling and completing new oil and natural gas wells,
which could adversely impact the Partnerships revenues by
decreasing the volumes of natural gas that the Partnership
gathers, processes and fractionates. Similarly, the
forthcoming rules and regulations of the CFTC may limit our
ability or increase the cost to use derivatives, which could
create more volatility and less predictability in our results of
operations. Please read Risk FactorsThe recent
adoption of derivatives legislation by the United States
Congress could have an adverse effect on the Partnerships
ability to hedge risks associated with its business.
How We Evaluate
Our Operations
Our profitability is a function of the difference between the
revenues we receive from our operations, including revenues from
the natural gas, NGLs and condensate we sell, and the costs
81
associated with conducting our operations, including the costs
of wellhead natural gas and mixed NGLs that we purchase as well
as operating and general and administrative costs. Because
commodity price movements tend to impact both revenues and
costs, increases or decreases in our revenues alone are not
necessarily indicative of increases or decreases in our
profitability. Our contract portfolio, the prevailing pricing
environment for natural gas and NGLs, and the volumes of natural
gas and NGL throughput on our systems are important factors in
determining our profitability. Our profitability is also
affected by the NGL content in gathered wellhead natural gas,
supply and demand for our products and services provided to and
changes in our customer mix.
Our management uses a variety of financial and operational
measurements to analyze our performance. These measurements
include: (1) throughput volumes, facility efficiencies and
fuel consumption, (2) operating expenses and (3) the
following non-GAAP measuresgross margin and operating
margin.
Throughput Volumes, Facility Efficiencies and Fuel
Consumption. Our profitability is impacted by our
ability to add new sources of natural gas supply to offset the
natural decline of existing volumes from natural gas wells that
are connected to our gathering and processing systems. This is
achieved by connecting new wells and adding new volumes in
existing areas of production as well as by capturing natural gas
supplies currently gathered by third parties. Similarly, our
profitability is impacted by our ability to add new sources of
mixed NGL supply, typically connected by third party
transportation, to our downstream fractionation facilities. We
fractionate NGLs generated by our gathering and processing
plants as well as by contracting for mixed NGL supply from third
party gathering or fractionation facilities.
In addition, we seek to increase operating margins by limiting
volume losses and reducing fuel consumption by increasing
compression efficiency. With our gathering systems
extensive use of remote monitoring capabilities, we monitor the
volumes of natural gas received at the wellhead or central
delivery points along our gathering systems, the volume of
natural gas received at our processing plant inlets and the
volumes of NGLs and residue natural gas recovered by our
processing plants. We also monitor the volumes of NGLs received,
stored, fractionated, and delivered across our logistics assets.
This information is tracked through our processing plants and
downstream facilities to determine customer settlements for
sales and volume related fees for service and helps us increase
efficiency and reduce fuel consumption.
As part of monitoring the efficiency of our operations, we
measure the difference between the volume of natural gas
received at the wellhead or central delivery points on our
gathering systems and the volume received at the inlet of our
processing plants as an indicator of fuel consumption and line
loss. We also track the difference between the volume of natural
gas received at the inlet of the processing plant and the NGLs
and residue gas produced at the outlet of such plant to monitor
the fuel consumption and recoveries of the facilities. Similar
tracking is performed for our logistics assets. These volume,
recovery and fuel consumption measurements are an important part
of our operational efficiency analysis.
Operating Expenses. Operating expenses are
costs associated with the operation of a specific asset. Direct
labor, ad valorem taxes, repair and maintenance, utilities and
contract services comprise the most significant portion of our
operating expenses. These expenses generally remain relatively
stable independent of the volumes through our systems but
fluctuate depending on the scope of the activities performed
during a specific period.
Gross Margin. With respect to our Natural Gas
Gathering and Processing division, we define gross margin as
total operating revenues, which consist of natural gas and NGL
sales plus service fee revenues, less product purchases, which
consist primarily of producer payments and other natural gas
purchases. With respect to our Logistics Assets segment, we
define gross margin as total revenue, which consists primarily
of service fee revenue. With respect to our Marketing and
Distribution segment, we define gross margin as total revenue,
which consists primarily of service fee revenues and NGL sales,
less cost of sales, which consists primarily of NGL purchases
and changes in inventory valuation.
Operating Margin. We review performance based
on operating margin. We define operating margin as revenues,
which consist of natural gas and NGL sales plus service fee
revenues, less product
82
purchases, which consist primarily of producer payments and
other natural gas purchases, and operating expenses. Natural gas
and NGL sales revenue includes settlement gains and losses on
commodity hedges. Our operating margin is impacted by volumes
and commodity prices as well as by our contract mix and hedging
program, which are described in more detail below. We view our
operating margin as an important performance measure of the core
profitability of our operations. We review our operating margin
monthly for consistency and trend analysis.
The GAAP measure most directly comparable to gross margin and
operating margin is net income. Gross margin and operating
margin should not be considered as an alternative to GAAP net
income. Gross margin and operating margin are not presentations
made in accordance with GAAP and have important limitations as
an analytical tool. You should not consider gross margin and
operating margin in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of
our results as reported under GAAP. Because gross margin and
operating margin exclude some, but not all, items that affect
net income and are defined differently by different companies in
our industry, our definition of gross margin and operating
margin may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of
other companies, thereby diminishing their utility.
We compensate for the limitations of gross margin and operating
margin as an analytical tool by reviewing the comparable GAAP
measure, understanding the differences between the measures and
incorporating these insights into our decision-making processes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Reconciliation of gross margin and operating margin to net
income attributable to Targa Resources Corp.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
$
|
197.0
|
|
|
$
|
692.1
|
|
|
$
|
771.7
|
|
|
$
|
780.4
|
|
|
$
|
744.9
|
|
|
$
|
520.1
|
|
|
$
|
554.4
|
|
Operating (expenses)
|
|
|
(53.4
|
)
|
|
|
(222.8
|
)
|
|
|
(247.1
|
)
|
|
|
(275.2
|
)
|
|
|
(235.0
|
)
|
|
|
(182.7
|
)
|
|
|
(190.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
|
143.6
|
|
|
|
469.3
|
|
|
|
524.6
|
|
|
|
505.2
|
|
|
|
509.9
|
|
|
|
337.4
|
|
|
|
364.0
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
(7.3
|
)
|
|
|
(26.0
|
)
|
|
|
(48.1
|
)
|
|
|
(97.1
|
)
|
|
|
(49.8
|
)
|
|
|
(17.7
|
)
|
|
|
(46.2
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
(27.1
|
)
|
|
|
(149.7
|
)
|
|
|
(148.1
|
)
|
|
|
(160.9
|
)
|
|
|
(170.3
|
)
|
|
|
(127.9
|
)
|
|
|
(136.9
|
)
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(29.1
|
)
|
|
|
(82.5
|
)
|
|
|
(96.3
|
)
|
|
|
(96.4
|
)
|
|
|
(120.4
|
)
|
|
|
(83.6
|
)
|
|
|
(81.0
|
)
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(39.8
|
)
|
|
|
(180.2
|
)
|
|
|
(162.3
|
)
|
|
|
(141.2
|
)
|
|
|
(132.1
|
)
|
|
|
(102.8
|
)
|
|
|
(83.9
|
)
|
Gain (loss) on debt repurchase
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
Gain (loss) on early debt extinguishment
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
Income tax (expense) benefit
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
|
|
(16.7
|
)
|
|
|
(23.9
|
)
|
|
|
(19.3
|
)
|
|
|
(20.7
|
)
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)
|
|
|
(18.5
|
)
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(59.8
|
)
|
|
|
10.0
|
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
|
|
17.8
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
$
|
(15.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
24.2
|
|
|
$
|
56.1
|
|
|
$
|
37.3
|
|
|
$
|
29.3
|
|
|
$
|
13.0
|
|
|
$
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We believe that investors benefit from having access to the same
financial measures that our management uses in evaluating our
operating results. Operating margin provides useful information
to investors because it is used as a supplemental financial
measure by us and by external users of our financial statements,
including such investors, commercial banks and others, to assess:
|
|
|
|
|
the financial performance of our assets without regard to
financing methods, capital structure or historical cost basis;
|
|
|
|
our operating performance and return on capital as compared to
other companies in the midstream energy sector, without regard
to financing or capital structure; and
|
|
|
|
the viability of acquisitions and capital expenditure projects
and the overall rates of return on alternative investment
opportunities.
|
83
Results of
Operations
The following table and discussion is a summary of our
consolidated results of operations for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009 and the three years ended
December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2008 vs. 2007
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues(1)
|
|
$
|
7,297.2
|
|
|
$
|
7,998.9
|
|
|
$
|
4,536.0
|
|
|
$
|
701.7
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
(3,462.9
|
)
|
|
|
(43.3
|
)%
|
|
$
|
3,145.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,942.0
|
|
|
$
|
797.0
|
|
|
|
25.3
|
%
|
Product purchases
|
|
|
6,525.5
|
|
|
|
7,218.5
|
|
|
|
3,791.1
|
|
|
|
693.0
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
%
|
|
|
(3,427.4
|
)
|
|
|
(47.5
|
)%
|
|
|
2,624.9
|
|
|
|
3,387.6
|
|
|
|
762.7
|
|
|
|
29.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin(2)
|
|
|
771.7
|
|
|
|
780.4
|
|
|
|
744.9
|
|
|
|
8.7
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
%
|
|
|
(35.5
|
)
|
|
|
(4.5
|
)%
|
|
|
520.1
|
|
|
|
554.4
|
|
|
|
34.3
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
247.1
|
|
|
|
275.2
|
|
|
|
235.0
|
|
|
|
28.1
|
|
|
|
11.4
|
%
|
|
|
(40.2
|
)
|
|
|
(14.6
|
)%
|
|
|
182.7
|
|
|
|
190.4
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
%
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
148.1
|
|
|
|
160.9
|
|
|
|
170.3
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
|
|
8.6
|
%
|
|
|
9.4
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
%
|
|
|
127.9
|
|
|
|
136.9
|
|
|
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
%
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
96.3
|
|
|
|
96.4
|
|
|
|
120.4
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
%
|
|
|
24.0
|
|
|
|
24.9
|
%
|
|
|
83.6
|
|
|
|
81.0
|
|
|
|
(2.6
|
)
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)%
|
Other
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
13.4
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
13.5
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
(11.4
|
)
|
|
|
(85.1
|
)%
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
(122.2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
280.3
|
|
|
|
234.5
|
|
|
|
217.2
|
|
|
|
(45.8
|
)
|
|
|
(16.3
|
)%
|
|
|
(17.3
|
)
|
|
|
(7.4
|
)%
|
|
|
124.1
|
|
|
|
146.5
|
|
|
|
22.4
|
|
|
|
18.0
|
%
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(162.3
|
)
|
|
|
(141.2
|
)
|
|
|
(132.1
|
)
|
|
|
21.1
|
|
|
|
(13.0
|
)%
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
(6.4
|
)%
|
|
|
(102.8
|
)
|
|
|
(83.9
|
)
|
|
|
18.9
|
|
|
|
(18.4
|
)%
|
Gain on insurance claims
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
(18.5
|
)
|
|
|
(100.0
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
38.6
|
%
|
|
|
(9.0
|
)
|
|
|
(64.3
|
)%
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
18.8
|
%
|
Gain (loss) on debt repurchases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
(27.1
|
)
|
|
|
(105.9
|
)%
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
|
|
(15.9
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
Gain on early debt extinguishment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
169.4
|
%
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
(2.3
|
)
|
|
|
(22.1
|
)%
|
Gain (loss) on
mark-to-market
derivative instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
(123.1
|
)%
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
(150.0
|
)%
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
(50.0
|
)%
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(23.9
|
)
|
|
|
(19.3
|
)
|
|
|
(20.7
|
)
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
(19.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
7.3
|
%
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)
|
|
|
(18.5
|
)
|
|
|
(13.4
|
)
|
|
|
262.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
104.2
|
|
|
|
134.4
|
|
|
|
79.1
|
|
|
|
30.2
|
|
|
|
29.0
|
%
|
|
|
(55.3
|
)
|
|
|
(41.1
|
)%
|
|
|
30.7
|
|
|
|
39.0
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
27.0
|
%
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
48.1
|
|
|
|
97.1
|
|
|
|
49.8
|
|
|
|
49.0
|
|
|
|
101.9
|
%
|
|
|
(47.3
|
)
|
|
|
(48.7
|
)%
|
|
|
17.7
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
28.5
|
|
|
|
161.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
56.1
|
|
|
|
37.3
|
|
|
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
(18.8
|
)
|
|
|
(33.5
|
)%
|
|
|
(8.0
|
)
|
|
|
(21.4
|
)%
|
|
|
13.0
|
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
(20.2
|
)
|
|
|
(155.4
|
)%
|
Dividends on Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
(31.6
|
)
|
|
|
(16.8
|
)
|
|
|
(17.8
|
)
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
|
|
(46.8
|
)%
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
6.0
|
%
|
|
|
(13.2
|
)
|
|
|
(8.4
|
)
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
(36.4
|
)%
|
Undistributed earnings attributable to preferred shareholders
|
|
|
(24.5
|
)
|
|
|
(20.5
|
)
|
|
|
(11.5
|
)
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
(16.3
|
)%
|
|
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
43.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to common equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(177.8
|
)
|
|
|
(177.8
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(193.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(193.2
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
margin(3)
|
|
$
|
524.6
|
|
|
$
|
505.2
|
|
|
$
|
509.9
|
|
|
$
|
(19.4
|
)
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)%
|
|
$
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
%
|
|
$
|
337.4
|
|
|
|
364.0
|
|
|
|
26.6
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
%
|
Operating statistics:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant natural gas inlet,
MMcf/d(4)(5)
|
|
|
1,982.8
|
|
|
|
1,846.4
|
|
|
|
2,139.8
|
|
|
|
(136.4
|
)
|
|
|
(6.9
|
)%
|
|
|
293.4
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
%
|
|
|
2,097.7
|
|
|
|
2,296.5
|
|
|
|
198.8
|
|
|
|
9.5
|
%
|
Gross NGL production, MBbl/d
|
|
|
106.6
|
|
|
|
101.9
|
|
|
|
118.3
|
|
|
|
(4.7
|
)
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)%
|
|
|
16.4
|
|
|
|
16.1
|
%
|
|
|
117.1
|
|
|
|
120.8
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
%
|
Natural gas sales,
BBtu/d(5)
|
|
|
526.5
|
|
|
|
532.1
|
|
|
|
598.4
|
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
%
|
|
|
66.3
|
|
|
|
12.5
|
%
|
|
|
590.4
|
|
|
|
678.4
|
|
|
|
88.0
|
|
|
|
14.9
|
%
|
NGL sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
320.8
|
|
|
|
286.9
|
|
|
|
279.7
|
|
|
|
(33.9
|
)
|
|
|
(10.6
|
)%
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
(2.5
|
)%
|
|
|
285.1
|
|
|
|
246.0
|
|
|
|
(39.1
|
)
|
|
|
(13.7
|
)%
|
Condensate sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(2.6
|
)%
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
%
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
(25.0
|
)%
|
Average realized
prices(6):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas, $/MMBtu
|
|
$
|
6.56
|
|
|
$
|
8.20
|
|
|
$
|
3.96
|
|
|
$
|
1.64
|
|
|
|
25.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
(4.24
|
)
|
|
|
(51.7
|
)%
|
|
$
|
3.78
|
|
|
|
4.61
|
|
|
|
0.83
|
|
|
|
22.0
|
%
|
NGL, $/gal
|
|
|
1.18
|
|
|
|
1.38
|
|
|
|
0.79
|
|
|
|
0.20
|
|
|
|
16.9
|
%
|
|
|
(0.59
|
)
|
|
|
(42.8
|
)%
|
|
|
0.71
|
|
|
|
1.03
|
|
|
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
45.7
|
%
|
Condensate, $/Bbl
|
|
|
70.01
|
|
|
|
91.28
|
|
|
|
56.31
|
|
|
|
21.27
|
|
|
|
30.4
|
%
|
|
|
(34.97
|
)
|
|
|
(38.3
|
)%
|
|
|
54.36
|
|
|
|
73.42
|
|
|
|
19.06
|
|
|
|
35.1
|
%
|
Balance Sheet Data (at end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
2,430.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,617.4
|
|
|
$
|
2,548.1
|
|
|
$
|
187.3
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
%
|
|
$
|
(69.3
|
)
|
|
|
(2.6
|
)%
|
|
$
|
2,563.9
|
|
|
|
2,494.9
|
|
|
|
(69.0
|
)
|
|
|
(2.7
|
)%
|
Total assets
|
|
|
3,795.1
|
|
|
|
3,641.8
|
|
|
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
|
(153.3
|
)
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)%
|
|
|
(274.3
|
)
|
|
|
(7.5
|
)%
|
|
|
3,273.0
|
|
|
|
3,460.0
|
|
|
|
187.0
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
%
|
Long-term debt less current maturities
|
|
|
1,867.8
|
|
|
|
1,976.5
|
|
|
|
1,593.5
|
|
|
|
108.7
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
%
|
|
|
(383.0
|
)
|
|
|
(19.4
|
)%
|
|
|
1,622.6
|
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
|
|
40.8
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
%
|
Convertible cumulative participating Series B preferred
stock
|
|
|
273.8
|
|
|
|
290.6
|
|
|
|
308.4
|
|
|
|
16.8
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
%
|
|
|
17.8
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
%
|
|
|
303.8
|
|
|
|
96.8
|
|
|
|
(207.0
|
)
|
|
|
(68.1
|
)%
|
Total owners equity
|
|
|
574.1
|
|
|
|
822.0
|
|
|
|
754.9
|
|
|
|
247.9
|
|
|
|
43.2
|
%
|
|
|
(67.1
|
)
|
|
|
(8.2
|
)%
|
|
|
789.9
|
|
|
|
994.3
|
|
|
|
204.4
|
|
|
|
25.9
|
%
|
Cash Flow Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
190.6
|
|
|
$
|
390.7
|
|
|
$
|
335.8
|
|
|
$
|
200.1
|
|
|
|
105.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
(54.9
|
)
|
|
|
(14.1
|
)%
|
|
$
|
202.9
|
|
|
|
104.0
|
|
|
|
(98.9
|
)
|
|
|
(48.7
|
)%
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(95.9
|
)
|
|
|
(206.7
|
)
|
|
|
(59.3
|
)
|
|
|
(110.8
|
)
|
|
|
115.5
|
%
|
|
|
147.4
|
|
|
|
(71.3
|
)%
|
|
|
(50.7
|
)
|
|
|
(81.8
|
)
|
|
|
(31.1
|
)
|
|
|
61.3
|
%
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(59.5
|
)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
(386.9
|
)
|
|
|
60.4
|
|
|
|
(101.5
|
)%
|
|
|
(387.8
|
)
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
(327.1
|
)
|
|
|
75.4
|
|
|
|
402.5
|
|
|
|
(123.1
|
)%
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes business interruption
insurance proceeds of $3.0 million and $7.9 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 and
$21.5 million, $32.9 million and $7.3 million for
the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
|
|
|
|
(2) |
|
Gross margin is revenues less
product purchases. See How We Evaluate Our
Operations.
|
84
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Operating margin is revenues less
product purchases and operating expenses. See How We
Evaluate Our Operations.
|
|
(4) |
|
Plant natural gas inlet represents
the volume of natural gas passing through the meter located at
the inlet of a natural gas processing plant.
|
|
(5) |
|
Plant natural gas inlet volumes
include producer
take-in-kind
volumes, while natural gas sales exclude producer
take-in-kind
volumes.
|
|
(6) |
|
Average realized prices include the
impact of hedging activities.
|
|
* |
|
Not meaningful
|
Comparison of
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010 to Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2009
Revenue increased $797.2 million due to higher commodity
prices ($1,057.8 million) offset by lower sales volumes
($246.0 million), lower fee-based and other revenues
($9.7 million) and lower business interruption insurance
proceeds ($4.9 million).
The $34.3 million increase in gross margin reflects higher
revenues of $797.2 million, offset by higher product
purchase costs of $762.7 million.
For additional information regarding the period to period
changes in our gross margins, see Results of
Operations By Segment.
The $7.7 million increase in operating expenses was
primarily attributable to increased compensation and benefits
expense, increased maintenance costs and environmental spending,
partially offset by lower contract services and professional
fees. See Results of Operations By
Segment for additional discussion regarding changes in
operating expenses.
The increase in depreciation and amortization expenses is
attributable to a $5.9 million impairment on an idled
terminal facility and is attributable to assets acquired in 2009
that have a full period of depreciation in 2010 and capital
expenditures in 2010 of $84.2 million.
General and administrative expenses were flat.
The decrease in interest expense is due to reductions in our
total outstanding indebtedness primarily funded by equity
issuances by the Partnership. See Liquidity
and Capital Resources for information regarding our
outstanding debt obligations.
Year Ended
December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2008
Revenue decreased $3,462.9 million due to lower commodity
prices ($3,516.5 million), lower NGL sales volumes
($169.4 million) and lower business interruption insurance
proceeds ($11.4 million) offset by higher natural gas and
condensate sales volumes ($222.1 million) and higher
fee-based and other revenues of $12.3 million.
The $35.5 million decrease in gross margin reflects lower
revenue of $3,462.9 million offset by a reduction in
product purchase costs of $3,427.4 million. For additional
information regarding the period to period changes in our gross
margins, see Results of Operations
By Segment.
The decrease in operating expenses was primarily due to lower
fuel, utilities and catalyst expenses of $20.6 million,
lower maintenance and supplies expenses of $20.6 million,
and lower contract labor costs of $7.8 million, partially
offset by a lower level of cost recovery billings to others of
$6.5 million. Year over year comparisons of operating
expenses are affected by the consolidation of VESCO starting
August 1, 2008, following our acquisition of majority
ownership in this operation. Had VESCO been consolidated for all
of 2008 operating expenses would have been $17.1 million
higher for 2008. See Results of
Operations By Segment for additional
discussion regarding changes in operating expenses.
The increase in depreciation and amortization expenses is
primarily attributable to assets acquired in 2008 that had a
full period of depreciation and capital expenditures in 2009 of
$170.3 million.
85
The increase in general and administrative expenses was
primarily due to higher compensation related expenses of
$17.0 million and increased insurance expenses of
$6.0 million, reflecting higher property casualty premiums
following significant 2008 Gulf Coast hurricane activity.
The decrease in interest expense is due to reduction of debt
levels due to our sale of certain of our assets to the
Partnership coupled with sales of Partnership equity and
increased debt at the Partnership. See
Liquidity and Capital Resources for
information regarding our outstanding debt obligations.
The decrease in equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments
is due to our acquisition of majority ownership in and
consolidation of VESCO beginning August 1, 2008.
The net decrease in gains from debt transactions includes a
$27.1 million decrease in gain on debt repurchases
partially offset by a $6.1 million increase in gain on debt
extinguishment. See Liquidity and Capital
Resources for information regarding our outstanding debt
obligations.
The increase in gain on
mark-to-market
derivative instruments was due to favorable changes in commodity
prices and our adjusting $1.6 million in fair value of
certain contracts with Lehman Brothers Commodity Services Inc.
to zero as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy filing.
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2007
Revenue increased $701.7 million due to higher commodity
prices ($1,230.1 million), an increase in natural gas sales
volumes ($16.8 million), an increase in fee-based and other
revenues of $30.0 million and higher business interruption
insurance proceeds of $25.6 million offset by lower NGL and
condensate sales volumes ($600.8 million).
The $8.7 million increase in gross margin reflects higher
revenues of $701.7 million offset by an increase in product
purchase costs of $693.0 million. For additional
information regarding the period to period changes in our gross
margins, see Results of Operations
By Segment.
The increase in operating expenses was primarily due to higher
fuel, utilities and catalyst expenses of $8.4 million,
higher maintenance and supplies expenses of $15.2 million
and net lower cost recovery billings to others of
$6.4 million due to hurricane related reimbursements in
2007. See Results of Operations By
Segment for additional discussion regarding changes in
operating expenses.
The increase in depreciation and amortization expenses is
primarily attributable to assets acquired in 2007 that had a
full period of depreciation and capital expenditures in 2008 of
$160.9 million.
General and administrative expenses were flat.
The decrease in interest expense is due to lower weighted
average interest rates partially offset by higher debt. See
Liquidity and Capital Resources for
information regarding our outstanding debt obligations.
The gain from debt transactions includes a $25.6 million
gain on debt repurchases and a $3.6 million gain on debt
extinguishment. See Liquidity and Capital
Resources for information regarding our outstanding debt
obligations.
The gain on insurance claims resulted from cumulative insurance
receipts related to property damage caused by Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita in 2005 exceeding the insurance claim receivable that
we had established.
The net loss on
mark-to-market
derivative instruments was primarily due to adjusting the fair
value of certain contracts with Lehman Brothers Commodity
Services Inc. to zero as a result of the Lehman Brothers
bankruptcy filing.
86
Results of
OperationsBy Segment
Natural Gas
Gathering and Processing
Field Gathering
and Processing
The following table provides summary financial data regarding
results of operations in our Field Gathering and Processing
segment for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2008 vs. 2007
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
($ in millions except average realized prices)
|
|
|
Gross
margin(1)
|
|
$
|
415.9
|
|
|
$
|
489.9
|
|
|
$
|
268.9
|
|
|
$
|
74.0
|
|
|
|
17.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
(221.0
|
)
|
|
|
(45.1
|
)%
|
|
$
|
187.2
|
|
|
$
|
250.4
|
|
|
$
|
63.2
|
|
|
|
33.8
|
%
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
94.7
|
|
|
|
104.5
|
|
|
|
84.7
|
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
%
|
|
|
(19.8
|
)
|
|
|
(18.9
|
)%
|
|
|
63.4
|
|
|
|
73.5
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
margin(2)
|
|
$
|
321.2
|
|
|
$
|
385.4
|
|
|
$
|
184.2
|
|
|
|
64.2
|
|
|
|
20.0
|
%
|
|
|
(201.2
|
)
|
|
|
(52.2
|
)%
|
|
$
|
123.8
|
|
|
$
|
176.9
|
|
|
|
53.1
|
|
|
|
42.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
statistics(3):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant natural gas inlet,
MMcf/d
|
|
|
605.8
|
|
|
|
584.1
|
|
|
|
581.9
|
|
|
|
(21.7
|
)
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)%
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)%
|
|
|
585.6
|
|
|
|
582.0
|
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
|
(.6
|
%)%
|
Gross NGL production, MBbl/d
|
|
|
69.0
|
|
|
|
68.0
|
|
|
|
69.8
|
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)%
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
%
|
|
|
70.1
|
|
|
|
70.2
|
|
|
|
.1
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
Natural gas sales, BBtu/d
|
|
|
289.1
|
|
|
|
296.2
|
|
|
|
219.6
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
%
|
|
|
(76.6
|
)
|
|
|
(25.9
|
)%
|
|
|
244.0
|
|
|
|
257.2
|
|
|
|
13.2
|
|
|
|
5.4
|
%
|
NGL sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
55.3
|
|
|
|
54.1
|
|
|
|
56.2
|
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)%
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
%
|
|
|
55.4
|
|
|
|
55.6
|
|
|
|
.2
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
Condensate sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
(7.9
|
)%
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
(8.6
|
)%
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(14.3
|
)%
|
Average realized prices:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas, $/MMBtu
|
|
$
|
6.12
|
|
|
$
|
7.55
|
|
|
$
|
3.69
|
|
|
$
|
1.43
|
|
|
|
23.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
(3.86
|
)
|
|
|
(51.1
|
)%
|
|
$
|
3.12
|
|
|
$
|
4.30
|
|
|
$
|
1.18
|
|
|
|
37.8
|
%
|
NGL, $/gal
|
|
|
1.05
|
|
|
|
1.21
|
|
|
|
0.69
|
|
|
|
0.16
|
|
|
|
15.2
|
%
|
|
|
(0.52
|
)
|
|
|
(43.0
|
)%
|
|
|
0.63
|
|
|
|
0.91
|
|
|
|
0.28
|
|
|
|
44.4
|
%
|
Condensate, $/Bbl
|
|
|
63.11
|
|
|
|
86.01
|
|
|
|
55.84
|
|
|
|
22.90
|
|
|
|
36.3
|
%
|
|
|
(30.17
|
)
|
|
|
(35.1
|
)%
|
|
|
51.41
|
|
|
|
73.82
|
|
|
|
22.41
|
|
|
|
43.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Gross margin is revenues less
product purchases.
|
|
(2) |
|
Operating margin is gross margin
less operating expenses.
|
|
(3) |
|
Segment operating statistics
include the effect of intersegment sales, which have been
eliminated from the consolidated presentation. For all volume
statistics presented, the numerator is the total volume sold
during the year and the denominator is the number of calendar
days during the year.
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30, 2010 Compared to Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2009
The $63.2 million increase in gross margin for 2010 is
primarily due to an increase in commodity sales prices
($280.0 million), an increase in natural gas and NGL sales
volumes ($12.4 million) and an increase in fee-based and
other revenues ($2.4 million), offset by lower condensate
sales volumes ($6.2 million) and an increase in commodity
purchase costs ($225.4 million). The increased volumes were
largely due to new well connects throughout our systems,
partially offset at our Versado System by production declines in
the high volume Morrow formation, combined with planned and
unplanned operational outages at our Eunice Plant.
The increase in operating expenses for 2010 was primarily due to
increases in system maintenance expenses of $5.2 million
and compensation and benefits costs of $2.5 million.
Year Ended
December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2008
The $221.0 million decrease in gross margin for 2009 was
due to lower commodity prices ($790.2 million) and lower
natural gas and condensate sales volumes ($220.8 million)
offset by higher NGL sales volumes ($36.1 million), higher
fee based and other revenue of $0.8 million and lower
product purchases of $753.1 million. The increased NGL
sales volumes were due primarily to higher NGL production.
The decrease in operating expenses was primarily due to lower
maintenance and supplies expenses of $8.4 million, lower
contract services and professional fees of $4.4 million and
lower fuel, utilities and catalysts expenses of
$3.2 million.
87
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2007
The $74.0 million increase in gross margin for 2008 was due
to higher commodity prices ($317.3 million), higher natural
gas sales volumes ($17.8 million) and fee based and other
revenue of $2.9 million, offset by lower NGL and condensate
sales volumes ($22.2 million) and higher product purchase
costs of $241.8 million. The decreased NGL sales volumes
were due primarily to lower throughput and NGL production
volumes, while higher natural gas sales volumes were due to
higher purchases for resale.
The increase in operating expenses was primarily due to
increased maintenance and supplies expenses of
$4.0 million, higher contract and professional services of
$2.5 million and higher fuel, utilities and catalyst
expenses of $2.6 million.
Coastal Gathering
and Processing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2008 vs. 2007
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
($ in millions except average realized prices)
|
|
|
Gross
margin(1)
|
|
$
|
115.7
|
|
|
$
|
134.9
|
|
|
$
|
132.4
|
|
|
$
|
19.2
|
|
|
|
16.6
|
%
|
|
$
|
(2.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)%
|
|
$
|
87.3
|
|
|
$
|
107.4
|
|
|
$
|
20.1
|
|
|
|
23.0
|
%
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
28.7
|
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
|
|
43.3
|
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
8.7
|
%
|
|
|
12.1
|
|
|
|
38.8
|
%
|
|
|
35.2
|
|
|
|
31.6
|
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
|
(10.2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
margin(2)
|
|
$
|
87.0
|
|
|
$
|
103.7
|
|
|
$
|
89.1
|
|
|
|
16.7
|
|
|
|
19.2
|
%
|
|
|
(14.6
|
)
|
|
|
(14.1
|
)%
|
|
$
|
52.1
|
|
|
$
|
75.8
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
|
|
|
45.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
statistics(3):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant natural gas inlet,
MMcf/d(4)
|
|
|
1,377.0
|
|
|
|
1,262.4
|
|
|
|
1,557.8
|
|
|
|
(114.6
|
)
|
|
|
(8.3
|
)%
|
|
|
295.4
|
|
|
|
23.4
|
%
|
|
|
1,512.1
|
|
|
|
1,714.5
|
|
|
|
202.4
|
|
|
|
13.4
|
%
|
Gross NGL production, MBbl/d
|
|
|
37.6
|
|
|
|
33.9
|
|
|
|
48.5
|
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
(9.8
|
)%
|
|
|
14.6
|
|
|
|
43.1
|
%
|
|
|
47.0
|
|
|
|
50.5
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
%
|
Natural gas sales, BBtu/d
|
|
|
244.1
|
|
|
|
239.4
|
|
|
|
258.4
|
|
|
|
(4.7
|
)
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)%
|
|
|
19.0
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
%
|
|
|
249.2
|
|
|
|
305.3
|
|
|
|
56.1
|
|
|
|
22.5
|
%
|
NGL sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
36.3
|
|
|
|
31.7
|
|
|
|
40.6
|
|
|
|
(4.6
|
)
|
|
|
(12.7
|
)%
|
|
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
28.1
|
%
|
|
|
39.5
|
|
|
|
44.0
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
11.4
|
%
|
Condensate sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
%
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average realized prices:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas, $/MMBtu
|
|
$
|
6.83
|
|
|
$
|
8.99
|
|
|
$
|
4.00
|
|
|
$
|
2.14
|
|
|
|
31.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
(4.99
|
)
|
|
|
(55.5
|
)%
|
|
$
|
3.88
|
|
|
$
|
4.64
|
|
|
$
|
0.76
|
|
|
|
19.6
|
%
|
NGL, $/gal
|
|
|
1.09
|
|
|
|
1.34
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
|
|
|
22.9
|
%
|
|
|
(0.57
|
)
|
|
|
(42.5
|
)%
|
|
|
0.69
|
|
|
|
1.00
|
|
|
|
0.31
|
|
|
|
44.9
|
%
|
Condensate, $/Bbl
|
|
|
73.02
|
|
|
|
90.10
|
|
|
|
53.31
|
|
|
|
17.08
|
|
|
|
23.4
|
%
|
|
|
(36.79
|
)
|
|
|
(40.8
|
)%
|
|
|
55.59
|
|
|
|
78.45
|
|
|
|
22.86
|
|
|
|
41.1
|
%
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Gross margin is revenues less
product purchases.
|
|
(2) |
|
Operating margin is gross margin
less operating expenses.
|
|
(3) |
|
Segment operating statistics
include the effect of intersegment sales, which have been
eliminated from the consolidated presentation. For all volume
statistics presented, the numerator is the total volume sold
during the year and the denominator is the number of calendar
days during the year.
|
|
(4) |
|
The majority of Coastal
Straddles volumes are gathered on third party offshore
pipeline systems and delivered to the plant inlets.
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30, 2010 Compared to Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2009
The $20.1 million increase in gross margin for 2010 is
primarily due to an increase in commodity sales prices
($224.0 million) and commodity sales volumes
($80.6 million), offset by increased commodity purchase
costs ($281.3 million) and lower business interruption
recoveries ($2.3 million). Natural gas sales volumes
increased due to increased demand from our industrial customers
and increase sales to affiliates for resale. NGL sales volumes
increased primarily due to the straddle plants recovering
operations in 1Q and 2Q 2009 following Hurricanes Gustav and Ike.
The decrease in operating expenses for 2010 was primarily due to
lower system maintenance expenses and contract and professional
services reflecting hurricane related spending in 2009.
88
Year Ended
December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2008
The $2.5 million decrease in gross margin for 2009 was due
to lower commodity prices ($847.7 million) and lower
business interruption proceeds of $3.3 million offset by
higher commodity sales volumes ($246.0 million) as a result
of the recovery of operations from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike,
reduced product purchase costs of $601.6 million and higher
fee-based and other income of $0.9 million. Had VESCO been
consolidated for the entire period, gross margin for 2008 would
have been $43.6 million higher.
The increase in operating expenses was primarily due to a full
year of operating expenses from VESCO in 2009, as compared with
five months of operating expenses from VESCO in 2008, due to our
acquisition of majority ownership in and consolidation of VESCO
on August 1, 2008. Had VESCO been consolidated for entire
period, operating expenses for 2008 would have been
$17.1 million higher and our Coastal Gathering and
Processing segment would have reported reductions in aggregate
operating expense levels during 2009 as was the case with our
other segments.
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2007
The $19.2 million increase in gross margin for 2008 is
attributable to an increase in commodity sales prices
($319.0 million), increased fee based and other income of
$0.1 million and increased business interruption proceeds
of $11.6 million offset by a decrease in commodity sales
volumes ($82.8 million), which were primarily the result of
disruptions to straddle plant operations during the third and
fourth quarters of 2008 due to Hurricanes Gustav and Ike and
higher product purchase costs of $228.7 million.
The increase in operating expenses was primarily due to our
acquisition of majority ownership and consolidation of VESCO in
August 2008, which added $5.5 million of operating
expenses. Partially offsetting this increase was lower
compensation expenses of $1.9 million.
NGL Logistics
and Marketing
Logistics
Assets
The following table provides summary financial data regarding
results of operations of our Logistics Assets segment for the
periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 vs. 2007
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
($ in millions except average realized prices)
|
|
|
Gross
margin(1)
|
|
$
|
134.5
|
|
|
$
|
172.5
|
|
|
$
|
159.4
|
|
|
$
|
38.0
|
|
|
|
28.3
|
%
|
|
$
|
(13.1
|
)
|
|
|
(7.6
|
)%
|
|
$
|
110.4
|
|
|
$
|
123.4
|
|
|
$
|
13.0
|
|
|
|
11.8
|
%
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
101.8
|
|
|
|
132.5
|
|
|
|
81.9
|
|
|
|
30.7
|
|
|
|
30.2
|
%
|
|
|
(50.6
|
)
|
|
|
(38.2
|
)%
|
|
|
62.4
|
|
|
|
68.6
|
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
9.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
margin(2)
|
|
$
|
32.7
|
|
|
$
|
40.0
|
|
|
$
|
77.5
|
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
|
|
22.3
|
%
|
|
|
37.5
|
|
|
|
93.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
48.0
|
|
|
$
|
54.8
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
14.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating statistics:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fractionation volumes, MBbl/d
|
|
|
209.2
|
|
|
|
212.2
|
|
|
|
217.2
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
%
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
%
|
|
|
215.4
|
|
|
|
220.9
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
%
|
Treating volumes,
MBbl/d(3)
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
20.7
|
|
|
|
21.9
|
|
|
|
11.6
|
|
|
|
127.5
|
%
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
%
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
|
17.8
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
(3.8
|
)%
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Gross margin consists of fee
revenue and business interruption proceeds.
|
|
(2) |
|
Operating margin is gross margin
less operating expenses.
|
|
(3) |
|
Consists of the volumes treated in
our LSNG unit.
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30, 2010 Compared to Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2009
The $13.0 million increase in gross margin was primarily
due to higher fractionation fees of $15.1 million offset by
lower terminalling and storage revenues of $1.0 million.
During 2009, we received $2.4 million in business
interruption proceeds.
89
Operating expenses increased due to higher fuel and electricity
expense of $5.8 million primarily driven by higher gas
prices and higher compensation costs of $3.2 million, which
were partially offset by favorable system product gains of
$3.3 million.
Year Ended
December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2008
The $13.1 million decrease in gross margin for 2009 was due
to lower fractionation and treating revenue of
$20.9 million due to lower fees offset by higher other
fee-based and other revenue of $4.6 million and increased
business interruption insurance proceeds of $3.2 million.
The decrease in operating expenses was primarily due to lower
fuel and utilities expenses of $43.2 million, lower
maintenance and supplies expenses of $4.7 million and lower
outside services of $9.4 million, partially offset by
higher compensation expense of $1.1 million and system
product losses of $2.5 million.
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2007
The $38.0 million increase in gross margin for 2008 was due
to higher fractionation and treating revenue of
$32.3 million due to higher fees and increased treating
volumes, increased other fee-based revenue of $3.9 million
and increased business interruption insurance proceeds of
$1.8 million.
The increase in operating expenses was primarily due to higher
fuel and utilities expense of $17.0 million, higher
maintenance and supplies expense of $4.8 million and
increased outside service costs of $8.7 million. Factors
contributing to the overall increase were the first full year of
operations for the LSNG unit and expenses related to the
facilities damaged by Hurricanes Ike and Gustav.
Marketing and
Distribution
The following table provides summary financial data regarding
results of operations of our Marketing and Distribution segment
for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
2008 vs. 2007
|
|
|
2009 vs. 2008
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
($ in millions except average realized prices)
|
|
|
Gross
margin(1)
|
|
$
|
140.2
|
|
|
$
|
99.1
|
|
|
$
|
136.0
|
|
|
$
|
(41.1
|
)
|
|
|
(29.3
|
)%
|
|
$
|
36.9
|
|
|
|
37.2
|
%
|
|
$
|
91.0
|
|
|
$
|
82.4
|
|
|
$
|
(8.6
|
)
|
|
|
(9.5
|
)%
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
55.2
|
|
|
|
57.9
|
|
|
|
46.6
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
%
|
|
|
(11.3
|
)
|
|
|
(19.5
|
)%
|
|
|
36.5
|
|
|
|
33.5
|
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
(8.2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
margin(2)
|
|
$
|
85.0
|
|
|
$
|
41.2
|
|
|
$
|
89.4
|
|
|
|
(43.8
|
)
|
|
|
(51.5
|
)%
|
|
|
48.2
|
|
|
|
117.0
|
%
|
|
$
|
54.5
|
|
|
$
|
48.9
|
|
|
|
(5.6
|
)
|
|
|
(10.3
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating statistics:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas sales, BBtu/d)
|
|
|
389.8
|
|
|
|
417.4
|
|
|
|
510.3
|
|
|
|
27.6
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
%
|
|
|
92.9
|
|
|
|
22.3
|
%
|
|
|
497.7
|
|
|
|
630.1
|
|
|
|
132.4
|
|
|
|
26.6
|
%
|
NGL sales, MBbl/d
|
|
|
316.3
|
|
|
|
284.0
|
|
|
|
276.1
|
|
|
|
(32.3
|
)
|
|
|
(10.2
|
)%
|
|
|
(7.9
|
)
|
|
|
(2.8
|
)%
|
|
|
281.4
|
|
|
|
241.3
|
|
|
|
(40.1
|
)
|
|
|
(14.3
|
)%
|
Average realized prices:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Natural gas, $/MMBtu
|
|
$
|
6.38
|
|
|
$
|
7.81
|
|
|
$
|
3.65
|
|
|
$
|
1.43
|
|
|
|
22.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
(4.16
|
)
|
|
|
(53.3
|
)%
|
|
$
|
3.46
|
|
|
$
|
4.50
|
|
|
$
|
1.04
|
|
|
|
30.1
|
%
|
NGL, $/gal
|
|
|
1.19
|
|
|
|
1.40
|
|
|
|
0.80
|
|
|
|
0.21
|
|
|
|
17.6
|
%
|
|
|
(0.60
|
)
|
|
|
(42.9
|
)%
|
|
|
0.72
|
|
|
|
1.06
|
|
|
|
0.34
|
|
|
|
47.2
|
%
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Gross margin is revenues less
product purchases.
|
|
(2) |
|
Operating margin is gross margin
less operating expenses.
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30, 2010 Compared to Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2009
The $8.6 million decrease in gross margin was due to
increased commodity prices ($1,113.4 million) and higher
natural gas volumes ($124.9 million) offset by lower NGL
volumes ($330.8 million), lower fee-based and other
revenues ($20.5 million), lower business interruption
proceeds ($2.0 million) and increased product purchases
($893.4 million). Lower 2010 margins at inventory locations
were primarily due to the 2009 impact of higher margins on
forward sales agreements that were fixed at relatively high 2008
prices, along with spot fractionation volumes and
90
associated fees. These items were partially offset by higher
marketing fees on contract purchase volumes due to overall
higher 2010 market prices. Margin on transportation activity
decreased due to expiration of a barge contract partially offset
by increased truck activity.
Natural gas sales volumes are higher due to increased purchases
for resale. NGL sales volumes are lower due to a change in
contract terms with a petrochemical supplier that has a minimal
impact to gross margin.
The decrease in operating expenses was primarily due to lower
outside services of $5.5 million, partially offset by
higher maintenance and supplies expenses of $2.6 million
and higher compensation costs of $0.5 million. Factors
contributing to the decrease included the expiration of a barge
contract, partially offset by increased truck utilization.
Year Ended
December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2008
The $36.9 million increase in gross margin for 2009 was due
to higher natural gas volumes ($261.8 million), lower
product purchase costs of $3,281.6 million and a
$33.0 million decrease in lower of cost or market
adjustment, offset by lower commodity prices
($3,334.9 million), lower NGL sales volumes
($188.3 million), lower fee-based and other revenues of
$5.1 million and lower business interruption insurance
proceeds of $11.2 million.
Natural gas sales volumes are higher due to increased purchases
for resale. NGL sales volumes are lower beginning in the third
quarter of 2009 due to a change in contract terms with a
petrochemical supplier that had a minimal impact to gross margin.
The decrease in operating expenses was primarily due to a
decrease in fuel and utilities expense of $5.8 million, a
decrease in maintenance and supplies expenses of
$4.2 million and a decrease in outside services of
$1.0 million. Factors contributing to the decrease included
the expiration of a barge contract, partially offset by
increased truck utilization.
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2007
The $41.1 million decrease in gross margin for 2008 was due
to lower NGL sales volumes ($572.0 million), higher product
purchase costs of $689.8 million and a $36.0 million
increase in lower of cost or market adjustment, offset by higher
commodity prices ($1,166.6 million), higher natural gas
sales volumes ($66.9 million), increased fee-based and
other revenues of $11.0 million and increased business
interruption insurance proceeds of $12.2 million. Natural
gas sales volumes are higher due to increased purchases for
resale, and lower NGL sales volumes are primarily the result of
disruptions from Hurricanes Gustav and Ike, as well as reduced
petrochemical sales.
The increase in operating expenses was primarily due to
increases in fuel and utilities expense of $3.1 million and
maintenance and supplies expenses of $2.2 million,
partially offset by decreases in rail expense of
$1.5 million and compensation expense of $1.2 million.
Other
The primary purpose of our commodity risk management activities
is to hedge our exposure to commodity price risk and reduce
fluctuations in our operating cash flow despite fluctuations in
commodity prices. We have hedged the commodity price associated
with a significant portion of our expected natural gas, NGL and
condensate equity volumes by entering into derivative financial
instruments. Please see Note 19 to our historical combined
audited consolidated financial statements and Note 16 to
our unaudited consolidated financial statements included
elsewhere in this prospectus for additional information about
our segments.
91
Nine Months
Ended September 30, 2010 Compare to Nine Months Ended
September 30, 2009
Our cash flow hedging program decreased gross margin by
$51.4 million during the first nine months of 2010 versus
2009, as higher commodity prices resulted in lower revenues from
settlements on derivative contracts.
Year Ended
December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2008
Our cash flow hedges increased gross margin by $134.8 million
during 2009 versus 2008, as plummeting commodity prices yielded
higher settlement revenues on derivative contracts.
Year Ended
December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2007
Rising commodity prices resulted in higher hedge settlement
payments during 2008, reducing gross margin by $63.8 million for
2008 versus 2007.
Hurricane
Update
Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita affected certain of our Gulf Coast
facilities in 2005. The final purchase price allocation for our
acquisition from Dynegy in October 2005 included an
$81.1 million receivable for insurance claims related to
property damage caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. During
2008, our cumulative receipts exceeded such amount, and we
recognized a gain of $18.5 million. During 2009,
expenditures related to these hurricanes included
$0.3 million capitalized as improvements. The insurance
claim process is now complete with respect to Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita for property damage and business interruption insurance.
Hurricanes
Gustav and Ike
Certain of our Louisiana and Texas facilities sustained damage
and had interruptions to their operations during the 2008
hurricane season from two Gulf Coast hurricanesGustav and
Ike. As of December 31, 2008, we recorded a
$19.3 million loss provision (net of estimated insurance
reimbursements) related to the hurricanes. During 2009, the
estimate was reduced by $3.7 million. During 2009,
expenditures related to the hurricanes included
$33.7 million for previously accrued repair costs and
$7.5 million capitalized as improvements.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009,
expenditures related to the hurricanes included
$3.7 million and $32.8 million for repairs and
$0.2 million and $7.5 million for improvements. Proofs
of loss for $5.3 million, comprising $2.3 million for
property damage insurance claims and $3.0 million for
business interruption insurance claims were executed during the
nine month period ended September 30, 2010. For the nine
month period ended September 30, 2009, proofs of loss for
$42.2 million, comprising $34.8 million for property
damage insurance claims and $7.4 million for business
interruption insurance claims were executed.
Liquidity and
Capital Resources
Our ability to finance our operations, including funding capital
expenditures and acquisitions, to meet our indebtedness
obligations, to refinance our indebtedness or to meet our
collateral requirements will depend on our ability to generate
cash in the future. Our ability to generate cash is subject to a
number of factors, some of which are beyond our control,
including weather, commodity prices, particularly for natural
gas and NGLs, and our ongoing efforts to manage operating costs
and maintenance capital expenditures, as well as general
economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and
other factors. See Risk Factors.
92
Our main sources of liquidity and capital resources are
internally generated cash flow from operations, borrowings under
our credit facility, the issuance of additional units by the
Partnership and access to debt markets. The capital markets
continue to experience volatility. Many financial institutions
have had liquidity concerns, prompting government intervention
to mitigate pressure on the credit markets. Our exposure to
current credit conditions includes our credit facility, cash
investments and counterparty performance risks. Continued
volatility in the debt markets may increase costs associated
with issuing debt instruments due to increased spreads over
relevant interest rate benchmarks and affect its ability to
access those markets.
Current market conditions also elevate the concern over
counterparty risks related to our commodity derivative contracts
and trade credit. We have all of our commodity derivatives with
major financial institutions or major oil companies. Should any
of these financial counterparties not perform, we may not
realize the benefit of some of our hedges under lower commodity
prices, which could have a material adverse effect on our
results of operation. We sell our natural gas, NGLs and
condensate to a variety of purchasers. Non-performance by a
trade creditor could result in losses.
Crude oil and natural gas prices are also volatile. In a
continuing effort to reduce the volatility of our cash flows, we
have periodically entered into commodity derivative contracts
for a portion of our estimated equity volumes through 2013. See
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
RiskCommodity Price Risk. The current market
conditions may also impact our ability to enter into future
commodity derivative contracts. In the event of a continued
global recession, commodity prices may decrease significantly,
which could reduce our operating margins and cash flow from
operations.
As of September 30, 2010, we had $350.0 million of
cash on hand, including $54.5 million at the Partnership.
We have the ability to use $295.5 million of the cash on
hand and available to us to satisfy our aggregate tax liability
of approximately $88 million over the next ten years
associated with our sales of assets to the Partnership and
related financings as well as to fund the reimbursement of
certain capital expenditures to the Partnership associated with
its acquisition of Versado. In addition, we have a contingent
obligation to contribute to the Partnership limited distribution
support in any quarter through 2011 if and to the extent the
Partnership has insufficient available cash to fund a
distribution of $0.5175 per unit. We do not currently expect to
make any payments pursuant to this distribution support
obligation.
Our cash generated from operations has been sufficient to
finance our operating expenditures and non-acquisition related
capital expenditures. Based on our anticipated levels of
operations and absent any disruptive events, we believe that
internally generated cash flow and borrowings available under
our senior secured credit facilities should provide sufficient
resources to finance our operations, non-acquisition related
capital expenditures, long-term indebtedness obligations and
collateral requirements.
Our cash flows consist of distributions from our interest in the
Partnership, which is obligated to make minimum quarterly cash
distributions to its unitholders from available cash, as defined
in its partnership agreement. On October 8, 2010, the
Partnership increased its quarterly distribution to $0.5375 per
common unit per quarter (or $2.15 per common unit on an
annualized basis) for the quarter ended September 30, 2010.
Based on the Partnerships current capital structure, a
distribution of $0.5375 per common unit will result in a
quarterly distribution of $11.8 million in respect of our
partnership interests in the Partnership.
A portion of our capital resources are utilized in the form of
cash and letters of credit to satisfy counterparty collateral
demands. These counterparty collateral demands reflect our
non-investment grade status, as assigned to us and the
Partnership by Moodys Investors Service, Inc. and Standard
& Poors Ratings Service, and counterparties
views of our financial condition and ability to satisfy our
performance obligations, as well as commodity prices and other
factors. At September 30, 2010, our total outstanding
letter of credit postings were $104.5 million, of which the
Partnerships were $101.5 million.
Working Capital. Working capital is the amount
by which current assets exceed current liabilities. Our working
capital requirements are primarily driven by changes in accounts
receivable and accounts payable. These changes are impacted by
changes in the prices of commodities that we buy and sell. In
93
general, our working capital requirements increase in periods of
rising commodity prices and decrease in periods of declining
commodity prices. However, our working capital needs do not
necessarily change at the same rate as commodity prices because
both accounts receivable and accounts payable are impacted by
the same commodity prices. In addition, the timing of payments
received by our customers or paid to our suppliers can also
cause fluctuations in working capital because we settle with
most of our larger suppliers and customers on a monthly basis
and often near the end of the month. We expect that our future
working capital requirements will be impacted by these same
factors. Our cash flows provided by operating activities will be
sufficient to meet our operating requirements for the next
twelve months.
We had a positive working capital balance of
$278.7 million, $191.2 million, $390.5 million
and $321.5 million as of September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively.
Cash
Flow
The following table summarizes cash flow provided by or used in
operating activities, investing activities and financing
activities for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
190.6
|
|
|
$
|
390.7
|
|
|
$
|
335.8
|
|
|
$
|
202.9
|
|
|
$
|
104.0
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(95.9
|
)
|
|
|
(206.7
|
)
|
|
|
(59.3
|
)
|
|
|
(50.7
|
)
|
|
|
(81.8
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(59.5
|
)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
(386.9
|
)
|
|
|
(327.1
|
)
|
|
|
75.4
|
|
Operating
Activities
The changes in net cash provided by operating activities are
attributable to our net income adjusted for non-cash charges as
presented in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows included
in our historical consolidated financial statements and related
notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this prospectus and changes
in working capital as discussed above under
Liquidity and Capital Resources Working
Capital.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010 compared to
2009, net cash provided by operating activities decreased by
$98.9 million primarily due to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
an increase in net income of $8.3 million.
|
|
|
|
a decrease in non-cash risk management activities of
$51.6 million due to higher average future prices on
commodity valuations.
|
|
|
|
a decrease in the change in operating assets and liabilities of
$65.4 million, primarily driven by lower payable and
receivable balances in 2010.
|
The $54.9 million decrease in net cash provided by
operating activities in 2009 compared to 2008 was primarily due
to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flow from consolidated operations (excluding cash
payments for interest, cash payments for income taxes and
distributions received from unconsolidated affiliates) decreased
$48.3 million
period-to-period.
The decrease in operating cash flow is generally due to a
decrease in net income of $55.3 million. Please see
Results of OperationsYear Ended
December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2008 for a discussion of material items that impacted our
operating cash flow.
|
|
|
|
Cash payments for interest expense decreased $11.8 million
period-to-period
primarily due to a reduction in and change in the mix of debt
due to debt retirements and refinancing activities and lower
effective interest rates.
|
94
|
|
|
|
|
Cash payments for income taxes increased $4.9 million
period-to-period
primarily due to higher estimated Federal income tax payments
partially offset by state income tax refunds.
|
|
|
|
Distributions received from unconsolidated affiliates increased
$0.3 million
period-to-period.
|
The $200.1 million increase in net cash provided by
operating activities for 2008 compared to 2007 was primarily due
to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flow from consolidated operations (excluding cash
payments for interest, cash payments for income taxes,
distributions received from unconsolidated affiliates and cash
payments for hedge terminations) increased by
$153.3 million
period-to-period.
The increase in operating cash flow is generally due to an
increase in net income of $30.2 million. Please see
Results of OperationsYear Ended
December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31,
2007 for a discussion of material items that impacted our
operating cash flow.
|
|
|
|
Cash payments for interest expense decreased $39.4 million
period-to-period
primarily due lower overall interest rates and the mix of debt
due to debt retirements and refinancing activities offset by a
higher debt load.
|
|
|
|
Cash payments for income taxes decreased $2.0 million
period-to-period
primarily due to lower state income tax payments.
|
|
|
|
Distributions received from unconsolidated affiliates increased
$0.8 million
period-to-period.
|
|
|
|
Cash payments for hedge terminations decreased
$87.4 million.
|
Investing
Activities
Net cash used in investing activities increased by
$31.1 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2010 compared to the nine months ended 2009, primarily due to a
change in proceeds from property insurance claims of
$23.8 million in 2010 and additional capital spending.
Net cash used in investing activities decreased by
$147.4 million to $59.3 million for 2009 compared to
$206.7 million for 2008. The decrease is attributable to
lower capital expenditures in 2009 and the VESCO acquisition in
2008.
Net cash used in investing activities increased by
$110.8 million in 2008 compared to 2007, primarily due to
the VESCO acquisition in 2008.
The following table lists gross additions to property, plant and
equipment, cash flows used in property, plant and equipment
additions and the difference, which is primarily settled
accruals and non-cash additions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Gross additions to property, plant and equipment
|
|
$
|
118.6
|
|
|
$
|
147.1
|
|
|
$
|
101.9
|
|
|
$
|
72.3
|
|
|
$
|
83.8
|
|
Inventory line-fill transferred to property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(5.8
|
)
|
|
|
(9.8
|
)
|
|
|
(9.8
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Change in accruals
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9.0
|
)
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Purchase price adjustment related to consolidation of VESCO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash expenditures
|
|
$
|
118.4
|
|
|
$
|
132.3
|
|
|
$
|
99.4
|
|
|
$
|
74.9
|
|
|
$
|
84.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95
Financing
Activities
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities for the nine
months ended September 30, 2010 compared to 2009 changed by
$402.5 million. The change was primarily due to net debt
transactions providing cash of $53 million in 2010 compared
to using cash of $357 million in 2009, net proceeds from
equity sales of TRC and the Partnership in 2010 of
$543 million and $419.9 million in distributions to
our Series B preferred and common stockholders.
Net cash used in financing activities in 2009 was primarily due
to net repayments and distributions, partially offset by equity
issuances.
Net cash provided by financing activities during 2008 was
primarily due to net borrowings, net of repayments and
repurchases, partially offset by increased distributions paid to
unitholders in 2008.
Net cash provided by financing activities was primarily due to
net borrowings, partially offset by decreased distribution to
unitholders.
Capital
Requirements
The midstream energy business can be capital intensive,
requiring significant investment to maintain and upgrade
existing operations. However, we expect to make expenditures
during the next year in amounts similar to prior years for the
construction of additional natural gas gathering and processing
infrastructure and fractionation and treating capacity and to
enhance the value of our natural gas logistics and marketing
assets.
We categorize our capital expenditures as either:
(i) maintenance expenditures or (ii) expansion
expenditures. Maintenance expenditures are those expenditures
that are necessary to maintain the service capability of our
existing assets including the replacement of system components
and equipment which is worn, obsolete or completing its useful
life, the addition of new sources of natural gas supply to our
systems to replace natural gas production declines and
expenditures to remain in compliance with environmental laws and
regulations. Expansion expenditures improve the service
capability of the existing assets, extend asset useful lives,
increase capacities from existing levels, add capabilities,
reduce costs or enhance revenues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expansion
|
|
$
|
52.5
|
|
|
$
|
74.5
|
|
|
$
|
55.4
|
|
|
$
|
38.9
|
|
|
$
|
52.4
|
|
Maintenance
|
|
|
66.1
|
|
|
|
72.6
|
|
|
|
46.5
|
|
|
|
33.4
|
|
|
|
31.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
118.6
|
|
|
$
|
147.1
|
|
|
$
|
101.9
|
|
|
$
|
72.3
|
|
|
$
|
83.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96
Credit Facilities
and Long-Term Debt
The following table summarizes our and the Partnerships
debt as of September 30, 2010 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
Our Obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
Holdco Loan, due February 2015
|
|
$
|
230.2
|
|
TRI Senior secured revolving credit facility due July 2014
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of the Partnership:
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility, due July 2015
|
|
|
753.3
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
81/4%
fixed rate, due July 2016
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
111/4%
fixed rate, due July 2017
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
77/8%
fixed rate, due October 2018
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
Unamortized discounts, net of premiums
|
|
|
(10.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt
|
|
$
|
1,663.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We consolidate the debt of the Partnership with that of our own;
however we do not have the contractual obligation to make
interest or principal payments with respect to the debt of the
Partnership. We have retired all amounts outstanding under our
senior secured term loan facility due July 2016 as of September
2010. Our debt obligations including TRIs debt obligations
do not restrict the ability of the Partnership to make
distributions to us. TRIs senior secured credit facility
has restrictions and covenants that may limit our ability to pay
dividends to our stockholders. Please read TRI
Senior Secured Credit Facility for a discussion of the
restrictions and covenants in TRIs senior secured credit
facility.
On July 19, 2010, the Partnership entered into an amended
and restated five-year $1.1 billion amended and restated
senior secured revolving credit facility, which allows it to
request increases in commitments up to an additional
$300 million. The amended and restated senior secured
credit facility replaces the Partnerships former
$977.5 million senior secured revolving credit facility due
February 2012.
On August 13, 2010, the Partnership closed a
$250 million senior notes offering. These notes issued at
77/8%
will mature in October 2018. The net proceeds of this offering
were $244 million, after deducting initial purchasers
discounts and the estimated expenses of the offering. The
Partnership used the net proceeds from this offering to reduce
borrowings under its senior secured credit facility.
Holdco
Loan
On August 9, 2007, we borrowed $450 million under this
facility. Interest on borrowings under the facility are payable,
at our option, either (i) entirely in cash,
(ii) entirely by increasing the principal amount of the
outstanding borrowings or (iii) 50% in cash and 50% by
increasing the principal amount of the outstanding borrowings.
At September 30, 2010, the applicable margin for borrowings
under the facility was 5.0% with respect to LIBOR borrowings.
TRC is the borrower under this facility and has pledged the TRI
stock as collateral under this loan agreement.
On November 3, 2010, we amended our Holdco Loan to name our
wholly-owned subsidiary, TRI, as guarantor to our obligations
under the credit agreement. The operations and assets of the
Partnership continue to be excluded as guarantors of the Holdco
Loan. In conjunction with the guaranty agreement, the applicable
margin for borrowings under the facility was reduced from 5.0%
to 3.75%. At our option, should we choose to pay the interest on
this loan in cash versus increasing the principal amount of the
outstanding borrowings, the applicable margin for borrowings
would be further reduced to 3.0%.
97
On November 5, 2010, we agreed to purchase from certain
holders of the Holdco Loan $141.3 million of face value for
$137.4 million, which includes estimated transaction costs
of $0.4 million. Additionally, we will write off
$0.9 million of associated debt issue costs.
TRI Senior
Secured Credit Facility
On January 5, 2010, we entered into a senior secured credit
facility providing senior secured financing of
$600 million, consisting of:
|
|
|
|
|
$500 million senior secured term loan facility (fully
repaid as of September 2010); and
|
|
|
|
$100 million senior secured revolving credit facility
(reduced to $75 million and undrawn as of September 2010).
|
The entire amount of our credit facility is available for
letters of credit and includes a limited borrowing capacity for
borrowings on
same-day
notice referred to as swing line loans. Our available capacity
under this facility is currently $75 million. TRI is the
borrower under this facility.
Borrowings under the credit agreement bear interest at a rate
equal to an applicable margin, plus at our option, either
(a) a base rate determined by reference to the higher of
(1) the prime rate of Deutsche Bank, (2) the federal
funds rate plus 0.5%, and (3) solely in the case of term
loans, 3%, or (b) LIBOR as determined by reference to the
higher of (1) the British Bankers Association LIBOR Rate
and (2) solely in the case of term loans, 2%.
Principal amounts outstanding under our senior secured revolving
credit facility are due and payable in full on July 5, 2014
and principal amounts outstanding under our senior secured term
loan facility are due on July 5, 2016. During the nine
months ended September 30, 2010, our sale of the Permian
Assets and Coastal Straddles and our secondary public offering
of 8,500,000 common units of the Partnership resulted in
mandatory prepayments of $261.3 million under the
provisions of our facility. During August and September 2010, we
repaid all amounts outstanding under our senior secured term
loan facility using the net proceeds from our sales of Versado
and VESCO.
The credit agreement is secured by a pledge of our ownership in
our restricted subsidiaries and contains a number of covenants
that, among other things, restrict, subject to certain
exceptions, our ability to incur additional indebtedness
(including guarantees and hedging obligations); create liens on
assets; enter into sale and leaseback transactions; engage in
mergers or consolidations; sell assets; pay dividends and make
distributions or repurchase capital stock and other equity
interests; make investments, loans or advances; make capital
expenditures; repay, redeem or repurchase certain indebtedness;
make certain acquisitions; engage in certain transactions with
affiliates; amend certain debt and other material agreements;
and change our lines of business.
The credit agreement requires us to maintain a consolidated
leverage ratio of less than 5.75 to 1.0 prior to 2012, less than
5.50 to 1.0 during 2012, and less than 5.25 to 1.0 thereafter.
We are also required to maintain an interest coverage ratio of
greater than 1.50 to 1.0. As of September 30, 2010, we were
in compliance with these ratios. In addition, we are required to
comply with certain limitations, including minimum cash
consideration requirements for non-ordinary course asset sales.
If we were to breach our leverage or interest ratios or
otherwise fail to comply with the requirements of our credit
agreement, we would not be able to make any further borrowings
or dividends to stockholders. If such default was not cured
within the time periods allowed under the credit agreement, and
not otherwise waived by the lenders, the lenders would have the
right to pursue their remedies against us, including declaring
all amounts outstanding under the credit agreement to be
immediately due and payable.
Senior Secured
Revolving Credit Facility of the Partnership due 2015
On July 19, 2010, the Partnership entered into an amended
and restated five-year $1.1 billion senior secured credit
facility, which allows it to request increases in commitments up
to additional $300 million.
98
The amended and restated senior secured credit facility replaces
the Partnerships former $977.5 million senior secured
revolving credit facility due February 2012.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010, the
Partnership had gross borrowings under its senior secured
revolving credit facility of $1,178.1 million. The
Partnerships acquisition of the Permian and Straddle
Systems was funded by $420.0 million of the borrowings
under its credit facility. For the same nine month period, the
Partnership had repayments totaling $904.0 million, for a
net increase under its credit facility for the nine month period
ended September 30, 2010 of $274.1 million.
The amended and restated credit facility bears interest at LIBOR
plus an applicable margin ranging from 2.25% to 3.5% (or base
rate at the borrowers option) dependent on the
Partnerships consolidated funded indebtedness to
consolidated adjusted EBITDA ratio. The Partnerships
amended and restated credit facility is secured by substantially
all of the Partnerships assets.
The Partnerships senior secured credit facility restricts
its ability to make distributions of available cash to
unitholders if a default or an event of default (as defined in
our senior secured credit agreement) has occurred and is
continuing. The senior secured credit facility requires the
Partnership to maintain a consolidated funded indebtedness to
consolidated adjusted EBITDA of less than or equal to 5.50 to
1.00. The senior secured credit facility also requires the
Partnership to maintain an interest coverage ratio (the ratio of
our consolidated EBITDA to our consolidated interest expense, as
defined in the senior secured credit agreement) of greater than
or equal to 2.25 to 1.00 determined as of the last day of each
quarter for the four-fiscal quarter period ending on the date of
determination, as well as upon the occurrence of certain events,
including the incurrence of additional permitted indebtedness.
The
Partnerships Outstanding Notes
On June 18, 2008, the Partnership privately placed
$250 million in aggregate principal amount at par value of
81/4% senior
notes due 2016 (the
81/4% Notes).
On July 6, 2009, the Partnership privately placed
$250 million in aggregate principal amount of
111/4% senior
notes due 2017 (the
111/4% Notes).
The
111/4% Notes
were issued at 94.973% of the face amount, resulting in gross
proceeds of $237.4 million. On August 13, 2010, the
Partnership placed $250 million in aggregate principal
amount of its
77/8
senior notes due 2018. These notes are unsecured senior
obligations that rank pari passu in right of payment with
existing and future senior indebtedness of the Partnership,
including indebtedness under its credit facility. They are
senior in right of payment to any of the Partnerships
future subordinated indebtedness.
The Partnerships senior unsecured notes and associated
indenture agreements restrict the Partnerships ability to
make distributions to unitholders in the event of default (as
defined in the Indenture Agreements). The indenture agreements
also restrict the Partnerships ability and the ability of
certain of its subsidiaries to: (i) incur additional debt
or enter into sale and leaseback transactions; (ii) pay
certain distributions on or repurchase, equity interests (only
if such distributions do not meet specified conditions);
(iii) make certain investments; (iv) incur liens;
(v) enter into transactions with affiliates;
(vi) merge or consolidate with another company; and
(vii) transfer and sell assets. These covenants are subject
to a number of important exceptions and qualifications. If at
any time when the Notes are rated investment grade by both
Moodys Investors Service, Inc. and Standard &
Poors Ratings Services and no Default (as defined in the
Indenture Agreements) has occurred and is continuing, many of
such covenants will terminate and the Partnership and its
subsidiaries will cease to be subject to such covenants.
Off-Balance Sheet
Arrangements
We currently have no off-balance sheet arrangements as defined
by the SEC. See Contractual Obligations below and
Commitments and Contingencies included under
Note 15 to our Audited Consolidated Financial
Statements beginning on
page F-1
of this Prospectus for a discussion of our commitments and
contingencies, some of which are not recognized in the
consolidated balance sheets under GAAP.
99
Contractual
Obligations
Following is a summary of our contractual cash obligations over
the next several fiscal years, as of December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contractual Obligations
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
1-3 Years
|
|
|
4-5 Years
|
|
|
More Than 5 Years
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Debt obligations
|
|
$
|
1,606.0
|
|
|
$
|
12.5
|
|
|
$
|
528.9
|
|
|
$
|
250.0
|
|
|
$
|
814.6
|
|
Interest on debt obligations
|
|
|
415.7
|
|
|
|
77.0
|
|
|
|
143.6
|
|
|
|
104.3
|
|
|
|
90.8
|
|
Operating lease
obligations(1)
|
|
|
55.2
|
|
|
|
11.1
|
|
|
|
16.9
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
16.8
|
|
Capacity
payments(2)
|
|
|
12.4
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land site lease and
right-of-way(3)
|
|
|
19.9
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
13.1
|
|
Capital
Projects(4)
|
|
|
33.4
|
|
|
|
17.2
|
|
|
|
15.2
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,142.6
|
|
|
$
|
124.7
|
|
|
$
|
713.8
|
|
|
$
|
368.8
|
|
|
$
|
935.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes minimum lease payment
obligations associated with gas processing plant site leases,
railcar leases, and office space leases.
|
|
(2) |
|
Consist of capacity payments for
firm transportation contracts.
|
|
(3) |
|
Lease site and right-of-way
expenses provide for surface and underground access for
gathering, processing and distribution assets that are located
on property not owned by us; these agreements expire at various
dates through 2099.
|
|
(4) |
|
Primarily relate to Versado
remediation projects.
|
Critical
Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP
requires our management to make estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the period. Actual results could differ from
these estimates. The policies and estimates discussed below are
considered by management to be critical to an understanding of
our financial statements because their application requires the
most significant judgments from management in estimating matters
for financial reporting that are inherently uncertain. See the
description of our accounting policies in the notes to the
financial statements for additional information about our
critical accounting policies and estimates.
Property, Plant and Equipment. In general,
depreciation is the systematic and rational allocation of an
assets cost, less its residual value (if any), to the
period it benefits. Our property, plant and equipment is
depreciated using the straight-line method over the estimated
useful lives of the assets. Our estimate of depreciation
incorporates assumptions regarding the useful economic lives and
residual values of our assets. At the time we place our assets
in-service, we believe such assumptions are reasonable; however,
circumstances may develop that would cause us to change these
assumptions, which would change our depreciation amounts
prospectively. Examples of such circumstances include:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in energy prices;
|
|
|
|
changes in competition;
|
|
|
|
changes in laws and regulations that limit estimated economic
life of an asset
|
|
|
|
changes in technology which render an asset obsolete;
|
|
|
|
changes in expected salvage values; and
|
|
|
|
changes in the forecast life of applicable resources basins.
|
As of September 30, 2010, the net book value of our
property, plant and equipment was $2.5 billion and we
recorded $136.9 million in depreciation expense for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010. The weighted average
life of our long-lived assets is approximately 20 years. If
the useful lives of these
100
assets were found to be shorter than originally estimated,
depreciation expense may increase, liabilities for future asset
retirement obligations may be insufficient and impairments in
carrying values of tangible and intangible assets may result.
For example, if the depreciable lives of our assets were reduced
by 10%, we estimate that depreciation expense would increase by
$15.1 million per year, which would result in a
corresponding reduction in our operating income. In addition, if
an assessment of impairment resulted in a reduction of 1% of our
long-lived assets, our operating income would decrease by
$24.9 million per year. There have been no material changes
impacting estimated useful lives of the assets.
Revenue Recognition. As of September 30,
2010, our balance sheet reflects total accounts receivable from
third parties of $350.5 million. We have recorded an
allowance for doubtful accounts as of September 30, 2010 of
$7.8 million.
Our exposure to uncollectible accounts receivable relates to the
financial health of its counterparties. We have an active credit
management process which is focused on controlling loss exposure
to bankruptcies or other liquidity issues of counterparties. If
an assessment of uncollectibility resulted in a 1% reduction of
our third party accounts receivable, our annual operating income
would decrease by $3.5 million.
Price Risk Management (Hedging). Our net
income and cash flows are subject to volatility stemming from
changes in commodity prices and interest rates. To reduce the
volatility of our cash flows, we have entered into
(i) derivative financial instruments related to a portion
of its equity volumes to manage the purchase and sales prices of
commodities and (ii) interest rate financial instruments to
fix the interest rate on its variable debt. We are exposed to
the credit risk of its counterparties in these derivative
financial instruments. We also monitor NGL inventory levels with
a view to mitigating losses related to downward price exposure.
Our cash flow is affected by the derivative financial
instruments we enter into to the extent these instruments are
settled by (i) making or receiving a payment to/from the
counterparty or (ii) making or receiving a payment for
entering into a contract that exactly offsets the original
derivative financial instrument. Typically a derivative
financial instrument is settled when the physical transaction
that underlies the derivative financial instrument occurs.
One of the primary factors that can affect our operating results
each period is the price assumptions we use to value our
derivative financial instruments, which are reflected at their
fair values in the balance sheet. The relationship between the
derivative financial instruments and the hedged item must be
highly effective in achieving the offset of changes in cash
flows attributable to the hedged risk both at the inception of
the derivative financial instrument and on an ongoing basis.
Hedge accounting is discontinued prospectively when a derivative
financial instrument becomes ineffective. Gains and losses
deferred in other comprehensive income related to cash flow
hedges for which hedge accounting has been discontinued remain
deferred until the forecasted transaction occurs. If it is
probable that a hedged forecasted transaction will not occur,
deferred gains or losses on the derivative financial instrument
are reclassified to earnings immediately.
The estimated fair value of our derivative financial instruments
was an asset of $15.9 million as of September 30,
2010, net of an adjustment for credit risk. The credit risk
adjustment is based on the default probabilities by year for
each counterpartys traded credit default swap
transactions. These default probabilities have been applied to
the unadjusted fair values of the derivative financial
instruments to arrive at the credit risk adjustment, which
aggregates to less than $1.0 million as of
September 30, 2010. We have an active credit management
process which is focused on controlling loss exposure to
bankruptcies or other liquidity issues of counterparties. If a
financial instrument counterparty were to declare bankruptcy, we
would be exposed to the loss of fair value of the financial
instrument transaction with that counterparty.
Ignoring our adjustment for credit risk, if a bankruptcy by
financial instrument counterparty impacted 10% of the fair value
of commodity-based financial instruments, we estimate that our
operating income would decrease by $1.6 million per year.
101
Recent Accounting
Pronouncements
For a discussion of recent accounting pronouncements that will
affect us, see Significant Accounting Policies
included under Note 2 to our Unaudited Consolidated
Financial Statements beginning on page F-1 of this
Prospectus.
Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Our principal market risks are our exposure to changes in
commodity prices, particularly to the prices of natural gas and
NGLs, changes in interest rates, as well as nonperformance by
our customers. We do not use risk sensitive instruments for
trading purposes.
Commodity Price Risk. A majority of our
revenues are derived from
percent-of-proceeds
contracts under which we receive a portion of the natural gas
and/or NGLs
or equity volumes, as payment for services. The prices of
natural gas and NGLs are subject to fluctuations in response to
changes in supply, demand, market uncertainty and a variety of
additional factors beyond our control. We monitor these risks
and enter into hedging transactions designed to mitigate the
impact of commodity price fluctuations on our business. Cash
flows from a derivative instrument designated as a hedge are
classified in the same category as the cash flows from the item
being hedged.
The primary purpose of our commodity risk management activities
is to hedge our exposure to commodity price risk and reduce
fluctuations in our operating cash flow despite fluctuations in
commodity prices. In an effort to reduce the variability of our
cash flows, as of September 30, 2010, we have hedged the
commodity price associated with a significant portion of our
expected natural gas, NGL and condensate equity volumes for the
remainder of 2010 through 2013 by entering into derivative
financial instruments including swaps and purchased puts (or
floors). The percentages of our expected equity volumes that are
hedged decrease over time. With swaps, we typically receive an
agreed fixed price for a specified notional quantity of natural
gas or NGL and we pay the hedge counterparty a floating price
for that same quantity based upon published index prices. Since
we receive from our customers substantially the same floating
index price from the sale of the underlying physical commodity,
these transactions are designed to effectively lock-in the
agreed fixed price in advance for the volumes hedged. In order
to avoid having a greater volume hedged than our actual equity
volumes, we typically limit our use of swaps to hedge the prices
of less than our expected natural gas and NGL equity volumes. We
utilize purchased puts (or floors) to hedge additional expected
equity commodity volumes without creating volumetric risk. We
intend to continue to manage our exposure to commodity prices in
the future by entering into similar hedge transactions using
swaps, collars, purchased puts (or floors) or other hedge
instruments as market conditions permit.
We have tailored our hedges to generally match the NGL product
composition and the NGL and natural gas delivery points to those
of its physical equity volumes. Our NGL hedges cover specific
NGL products or baskets of ethane, propane, normal butane,
isobutane and natural gasoline based upon our expected equity
NGL composition. We believe this strategy avoids uncorrelated
risks resulting from employing hedges on crude oil or other
petroleum products as proxy hedges of NGL prices.
Our NGL hedges fair values are based on published index prices
for delivery at Mont Belvieu through 2013, except for the price
of isobutane in 2012, which is based on the ending 2011 pricing.
Our natural gas hedges fair values are based on published index
prices for delivery at Waha, Permian Basin and Mid-Continent,
which closely approximate its actual NGL and natural gas
delivery points. We hedge a portion of our condensate sales
using crude oil hedges that are based on the NYMEX futures
contracts for West Texas Intermediate light, sweet crude.
These commodity price hedging transactions are typically
documented pursuant to a standard International Swap Dealers
Association form with customized credit and legal terms. Our
principal counterparties (or, if applicable, their guarantors)
have investment grade credit ratings. Our payment obligations in
connection with substantially all of these hedging transactions
and any additional credit exposure due to a rise in natural gas
and NGL prices relative to the fixed prices set forth in the
hedges, are secured by a first priority lien in the collateral
securing our senior secured indebtedness that ranks equal in
102
right of payment with liens granted in favor of our senior
secured lenders. As long as this first priority lien is in
effect, we expect to have no obligation to post cash, letters of
credit or other additional collateral to secure these hedges at
any time, even if our counterpartys exposure to our credit
increases over the term of the hedge as a result of higher
commodity prices or because there has been a change in our
creditworthiness. A purchased put (or floor) transaction does
not create credit exposure to us for our counterparties.
For all periods presented we entered into hedging arrangements
for a portion of our forecasted equity volumes. Floor volumes
and floor pricing are based solely on purchased puts (or
floors). During 2009, 2008 and 2007, our operating revenues were
increased (decreased) by net hedge adjustments of
$69.7 million, $(65.1) million and $4.1 million.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, our
operating revenues were increased by net hedge adjustments of
$8.1 million and $59.1 million.
As of September 30, 2010, our commodity derivative
arrangements were as follows:
Natural
Gas
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Instrument
|
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
MMBtu per Day
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Index
|
|
$/MMBtu
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-NGPL MC
|
|
|
8.94
|
|
|
|
5,637
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.7
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-NGPL MC
|
|
|
6.87
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,350
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-NGPL MC
|
|
|
6.82
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,637
|
|
|
|
4,350
|
|
|
|
4,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-Waha
|
|
|
6.61
|
|
|
|
28,509
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-Waha
|
|
|
6.29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17.9
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-Waha
|
|
|
6.61
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,850
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-Waha
|
|
|
5.59
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,509
|
|
|
|
23,750
|
|
|
|
14,850
|
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-PB
|
|
|
5.42
|
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-PB
|
|
|
5.42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-PB
|
|
|
5.54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
Swap
|
|
IF-PB
|
|
|
5.54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,146
|
|
|
|
30,100
|
|
|
|
23,100
|
|
|
|
8,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual Gross Basis Swaps
|
Basis Swaps
|
|
Various Indexes, Maturities October 2010 May 2011
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Swaps
|
|
Various Indexes, Maturities October 2010 May 2011
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
49.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103
NGLs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Instrument
|
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Barrels per Day
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Index
|
|
$/gal
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Swap
|
|
OPIS-MB
|
|
|
1.06
|
|
|
|
9,064
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
Swap
|
|
OPIS-MB
|
|
|
0.85
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5.0
|
)
|
Swap
|
|
OPIS-MB
|
|
|
0.89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Swaps
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,064
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
4,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Floor
|
|
OPIS-MB
|
|
|
1.44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
253
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
Floor
|
|
OPIS-MB
|
|
|
1.43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Floors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
253
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,064
|
|
|
|
7,253
|
|
|
|
4,944
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Instrument
|
|
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Barrels per Day
|
|
|
|
|
Type
|
|
Index
|
|
|
$/Bbl
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Swap
|
|
|
NY-WTI
|
|
|
|
71.76
|
|
|
|
851
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.7
|
)
|
Swap
|
|
|
NY-WTI
|
|
|
|
77.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.1
|
)
|
Swap
|
|
|
NY-WTI
|
|
|
|
72.60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.1
|
)
|
Swap
|
|
|
NY-WTI
|
|
|
|
73.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Swaps
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
851
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(6.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These contracts may expose us to the risk of financial loss in
certain circumstances. Our hedging arrangements provide us
protection on the hedged volumes if prices decline below the
prices at which these hedges are set. If prices rise above the
prices at which we have hedged, we will receive less revenue on
the hedged volumes than we would receive in the absence of
hedges.
We account for the fair value of our financial assets and
liabilities using a three-tier fair value hierarchy, which
prioritizes the significant inputs used in measuring fair value.
These tiers include: Level 1, defined as observable inputs
such as quoted prices in active markets; Level 2, defined
as inputs other than quoted prices in active markets that are
either directly or indirectly observable; and Level 3,
defined as unobservable inputs in which little or no market data
exists, therefore required an entity to develop its own
assumptions. We determine the value of our NGL derivative
contracts utilizing a discounted cash flow model for swaps and a
standard option pricing model for options, based on inputs that
are either readily available in public markets or are quoted by
counterparties to these contracts. Prior to 2009, all of our NGL
contracts were classified as Level 3 within the hierarchy.
In 2009, we were able to obtain inputs from quoted prices
related to certain of these commodity derivatives for similar
assets and liabilities in active markets. These inputs are
observable for the asset or liability, either directly or
indirectly, for the full term of the commodity swaps and
options. For the NGL contracts that have inputs from quoted
prices, we have changed our classification of these instruments
from Level 3 to Level 2 within the fair value
hierarchy. For those NGL contracts where we were unable to
obtain quoted prices for the full term of the commodity swap and
options the NGL valuations are still classified as Level 3
within the fair value hierarchy.
Interest Rate Risk. We are exposed to changes
in interest rates, primarily as a result of variable rate
borrowings under our senior secured revolving credit facility.
To the extent that interest rates increase,
104
interest expense for our revolving debt will also increase. As
of September 30, 2010, we and the Partnership have variable
rate borrowings of $983.5 million outstanding. In an effort
to reduce the variability of our cash flows, we have entered
into several interest rate swap and interest rate basis swap
agreements. Under these agreements, which are accounted for as
cash flow hedges, the base interest rate on the specified
notional amount of our variable rate debt is effectively fixed
for the term of each agreement and ineffectiveness is required
to be measured each reporting period. The fair values of the
interest rate swap agreements, which are adjusted regularly,
have been aggregated by counterparty for classification in our
consolidated balance sheets. Accordingly, unrealized gains and
losses relating to the interest rate swaps are recorded in
accumulated other comprehensive income (OCI) until
the interest expense on the related debt is recognized in
earnings.
As of September 30, 2010 we had the following open interest
rate swaps:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
Fixed Rate
|
|
|
Notional Amount
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
3.67
|
%
|
|
$
|
300 million
|
|
|
$
|
(2.6
|
)
|
2011
|
|
|
3.52
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)
|
2012
|
|
|
3.38
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(7.9
|
)
|
2013
|
|
|
3.39
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(5.8
|
)
|
01/014/24/2014
|
|
|
3.39
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(26.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have designated all interest rate swaps as cash flow hedges.
Accordingly, unrealized gains and losses relating to the
interest rate swaps are recorded in OCI until the interest
expense on the related debt is recognized in earnings. A
hypothetical increase of 100 basis points in the underlying
interest rate, after taking into account our interest rate
swaps, would increase our annual interest expense by
$6.8 million.
Credit Risk. We are subject to risk of losses
resulting from nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers.
Our credit exposure related to commodity derivative instruments
is represented by the fair value of contracts with a net
positive fair value to us at the reporting date. At such times,
these outstanding instruments expose us to credit loss in the
event of nonperformance by the counterparties to the agreements.
Should the creditworthiness of one or more of our counterparties
decline, our ability to mitigate nonperformance risk is limited
to a counterparty agreeing to either a voluntary termination and
subsequent cash settlement or a novation of the derivative
contract to a third party. In the event of a counterparty
default, we may sustain a loss and our cash receipts could be
negatively impacted.
As of September 30, 2010, we had counterparty credit
exposure related to commodity derivatives with affiliates of
Barclays, Goldman Sachs, and BP which accounted for 47%, 20% and
18% of our counterparty credit exposure related to commodity
derivative instruments. Goldman Sachs, Barclays and BP are major
financial institutions or corporations, each possessing
investment grade credit ratings, based upon minimum credit
ratings assigned by Standard & Poors Rating
Services.
105
OUR
INDUSTRY
Introduction
Natural gas gathering and processing and NGL logistics and
marketing are a critical part of the natural gas value chain.
Natural gas gathering and processing systems create value by
collecting raw natural gas from the wellhead and separating dry
gas (primarily methane) from mixed NGLs which include ethane,
propane, normal butane, isobutane and natural gasoline. Most
natural gas produced at the wellhead contains NGLs. Natural gas
produced in association with crude oil typically contains higher
concentrations of NGLs than natural gas produced from gas wells.
This unprocessed natural gas is generally not acceptable for
transportation in the nations interstate pipeline
transmission system or for commercial use. Processing plants
extract the NGLs, leaving residual dry gas that meets interstate
pipeline transmission and commercial quality specifications.
Furthermore, processing plants produce NGLs which, on an energy
equivalent basis, usually have a greater economic value as a raw
material for petrochemicals, motor gasolines or commercial use
than as a residual component of the natural gas stream. In order
for the mixed NGLs to become marketable to end users, they are
first fractionated into NGL products, perhaps put into storage
and ultimately distributed to end users. The table below
illustrates the position and function of natural gas gathering
and processing and NGL logistics and marketing within the
natural gas market chain.
We believe that current industry dynamics are resulting in
increases in domestic drilling within the basins in which we
operate and creating the need for additional natural gas and
natural gas liquids infrastructure and services. Factors
contributing to this include (i) a strong crude oil and NGL
price environment; (ii) the continuation of oil and gas
exploration and production innovation including geophysical
interpretation, horizontal drilling and well completion
techniques; (iii) a trend toward increased drilling in oil,
condensate and NGL rich, or liquids rich reservoirs,
especially resource plays; and (iv) increasing levels of
supply of mixed NGLs to our fractionation facilities coupled
with strong demand from petrochemical complexes and exports
which are leading to higher capacity utilization.
The following overview provides additional information relating
to the operations of our assets as well an overview of the
potential demand for our services and other related information.
We believe our
106
integrated midstream platform is well positioned to benefit from
these industry trends and to compete for opportunities to
provide new infrastructure and services.
Overview of
Natural Gas Gathering and Processing
Gathering. At the initial stages of the
midstream value chain, a network of typically small diameter
pipelines known as gathering systems directly connect to
wellheads, batteries or central delivery points
(CDPs) in the production area. These gathering
systems transport raw natural gas to a common location for
processing and treating. A large gathering system may involve
thousands of miles of gathering lines connected to thousands of
wells or indirectly to wells via CDPs. Gathering systems are
often designed to be flexible to allow gathering of natural gas
at different pressures, perhaps flow natural gas to multiple
plants, provide the ability to connect new producers quickly,
and most importantly are generally scalable to allow for
additional production without significant incremental capital
expenditures.
Field Compression. Since individual wells
produce at progressively lower field pressures as they deplete,
it becomes increasingly difficult to produce the remaining
production in the ground against the pressure that exists in the
connecting gathering system. Natural gas compression is a
mechanical process in which a volume of natural gas at a given
pressure is compressed to a desired higher pressure, which
allows the natural gas to flow into a higher pressure system.
Field compression is typically used to allow a gathering system
to operate at a lower pressure or provide sufficient discharge
pressure to deliver natural gas into a higher pressure system.
If field compression is not installed, then less of the
remaining natural gas in the ground will be produced because it
cannot overcome the gathering system pressure. In contrast, if
field compression is installed, then a well can continue
delivering natural gas that otherwise would not be produced.
Treating and Dehydration. After gathering, the
second process in the midstream value chain is treating and
dehydration. Natural gas contains various contaminants, such as
water vapor, carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide, that can cause
significant damage to intrastate and interstate pipelines and
therefore render the gas unacceptable for transmission on such
pipelines. In addition, end-users will not purchase natural gas
with a high level of these contaminants. To meet downstream
pipeline and end-user natural gas quality standards, the natural
gas is dehydrated to remove the saturated water and is
chemically treated to remove the carbon dioxide and hydrogen
sulfide from the gas stream.
Processing. Once the contaminants are removed,
the next step involves the separation of pipeline quality
residue gas from mixed NGLs, a method known as processing. Most
decontaminated natural gas is not suitable for long-haul
pipeline transportation or commercial use and must be processed
to remove the heavier hydrocarbon components. The removal and
separation of hydrocarbons during processing is possible because
of the differences in physical properties between the components
of the raw gas stream. There are four basic types of natural gas
processing methods: cryogenic expansion, lean oil absorption,
straight refrigeration and dry bed absorption. Cryogenic
expansion represents the latest generation and most prevalent
form of processing in the U.S, incorporating extremely low
temperatures and high pressures to provide the best processing
and most economical extraction.
Natural gas is processed not only to remove NGLs that may
interfere with pipeline transportation or the end use of the
natural gas, but also to separate from the natural gas those
hydrocarbon liquids that could have a higher value as NGLs than
as natural gas. The principal components of residue gas are
methane and to a much lower extent ethane, but processors
typically have the option to recover most of the ethane from the
residue gas stream for processing into NGLs or reject some of
the ethane and leave it in the residue gas stream, depending on
pipeline restrictions and whether the ethane is more valuable
being processed or left in the natural gas stream. The residue
gas is sold to industrial, commercial and residential customers
and electric utilities. The premium or discount in value between
natural gas and processed NGLs is known as the frac
spread. Because NGLs often serve as substitutes for
products derived from crude oil, NGL prices tend to move in
relation to crude prices.
Natural gas processing occurs under a contractual arrangement
between the producer or owner of the raw natural gas stream and
the processor. There are many forms of processing contracts
which vary in
107
the amount of commodity price risk they carry. The specific
commodity exposure to natural gas or NGL prices is highly
dependent on the types of contracts. Processing contracts can
vary in length from one month to the life of the
field. Four typical processing contract types are
described below:
|
|
|
|
|
Percent-of-Proceeds,
Percent-of-Value
or
Percent-of-Liquids. In
a
percent-of-proceeds
arrangement, the processor remits to the producers a percentage
of the proceeds from the sales of residue gas and NGL products
or a percentage of residue gas and NGL products at the tailgate
of the processing facilities. In some
percent-of-proceeds
arrangements, the producer is paid a percentage of an index
price for residue gas and NGL products, less agreed adjustments,
rather than remitting a portion of the actual sales proceeds.
The
percent-of-value
and
percent-of-liquids
are variations on this arrangement. These types of arrangements
expose the processor to some commodity price risk as the
revenues from the contracts are directly correlated with the
price of natural gas and NGLs.
|
|
|
|
Keep-Whole. A keep-whole arrangement allows
the processor to keep 100% of the NGLs produced and requires the
return of natural gas, or value of the gas, to the producer or
owner. A wellhead purchase contract is a variation of this
arrangement. Since some of the gas is used during processing,
the processor must compensate the producer or owner for the gas
shrink entailed in processing by supplying additional gas or by
paying an agreed value for the gas utilized. These arrangements
have the highest commodity price exposure for the processor
because the costs are dependent on the price of natural gas and
the revenues are based on the price of NGLs. As a result, a
processor with these types of contracts benefits when the value
of the NGLs is high relative to the cost of the natural gas and
is disadvantaged when the cost of the natural gas is high
relative to the value of the NGLs.
|
|
|
|
Fee-Based. Under a fee-based contract, the
processor receives a fee per gallon of NGLs produced or per Mcf
of natural gas processed. Under a pure fee-based arrangement, a
processor would have no direct commodity price risk exposure.
|
|
|
|
Hybrid. Hybrid contracts are a mix of the
typical processing contracts discussed above. In periods of
favorable processing economics, hybrid contracts are similar to
percent-of-liquids contracts or to wellhead purchases/keep-whole
contracts in some circumstances, if economically advantageous to
the processor. In periods of unfavorable processing economics,
hybrid contracts are similar to fee-based contracts. Favorable
processing economics typically occur when processed NGLs can be
sold, after allowing for processing costs, at a higher value
than natural gas on a Btu equivalent basis,
|
Overview of NGL
Logistics and Marketing
Fractionation. Fractionation is the
distillation of the heterogeneous mixture of extracted NGLs into
individual components for end-use sale. Fractionation is
accomplished by controlling the temperature and pressure of the
stream of mixed liquids in order to take advantage of the
difference in boiling points of separate products. As the
temperature of the stream is increased, the lightest component
boils off the top of the distillation tower as a gas where it
then condenses into a finished NGL product that is routed to
markets or to storage. The heavier components in the mixture are
routed to the next tower where the process is repeated until all
components have been separated. Described below are the five
basic NGL components (NGL products) and their
typical uses. A typical barrel of NGLs consists of ethane,
propane, normal butane, isobutane and natural gasoline.
|
|
|
|
|
Ethane. Ethane is used primarily as feedstock
in the production of ethylene, one of the basic building blocks
for a wide range of plastics and other chemical products.
|
|
|
|
Propane. Propane is used as heating fuel,
engine fuel and industrial fuel, for agricultural burning and
drying and as petrochemical feedstock for production of ethylene
and propylene.
|
108
|
|
|
|
|
Normal Butane. Normal butane is principally
used for motor gasoline blending and as fuel gas, either alone
or in a mixture with propane, and feedstock for the manufacture
of ethylene and butadiene, a key ingredient of synthetic rubber.
Normal butane is also used to derive isobutane.
|
|
|
|
Isobutane. Isobutane is principally used by
refiners to enhance the octane content of motor gasoline and in
the production of MTBE, an additive in cleaner burning motor
gasoline.
|
|
|
|
Natural Gasoline. Natural gasoline is
principally used as a motor gasoline blend stock or
petrochemical feedstock.
|
As of December 31, 2009 the United States and Ontario,
Canada had approximately
2.6 MMBbl/d
of existing fractionation capacity with several expansions
announced and underway. Mont Belvieu, TX accounted for 28%
of total U.S. fractionation capacity, making it the largest
NGL complex in the US. Another 18% of the fractionation capacity
is located in Louisiana. Both of these regions are located close
to the large petrochemical complex which is along the Gulf Coast
in Texas and Louisiana and which constitutes a major consumer of
NGL products.
Total U.S. and
Ontario Fractionation Capacity by Location
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity
|
|
|
|
|
Region
|
|
(MBbl/d)
|
|
% of Total
|
|
|
|
Mont Belvieu, TX
|
|
|
737
|
|
|
|
28.4
|
%
|
|
Other Texas & New Mexico
|
|
|
606
|
|
|
|
23.4
|
%
|
|
Kansas/Oklahoma
|
|
|
513
|
|
|
|
19.8
|
%
|
|
Louisiana(1)
|
|
|
476
|
|
|
|
18.4
|
%
|
|
Ontario and Other US
|
|
|
260
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2,592
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships fractionation assets are primarily
located at Mont Belvieu, TX and Lake Charles, LA with
approximately 79% of gross capacity located at Mont Belvieu.
Based on operatorship, the Partnership is the second largest
operator of fractionation in Mont Belvieu and Louisiana
combined. Additionally, the Partnership is currently
constructing approximately 78 MBbl/d of additional
fractionation capacity.
Mont Belvieu and
Louisiana. Combined Fractionation Capacity by Operator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity
|
|
|
|
|
Company
|
|
(MBbl/d)
|
|
% of Total
|
|
|
|
Enterprise (including Promix LLC)
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
46.5
|
%
|
|
Targa
Resources(1)
|
|
|
283
|
|
|
|
23.3
|
%
|
|
ONEOK
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
|
13.2
|
%
|
|
Others
|
|
|
206
|
|
|
|
17.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,213
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Total Louisiana capacity and Targa
Resources capacity reduced by
36 MBbl/d
to reflect the Partnerships idle facility in Venice,
Louisiana.
|
Source: Purvin and Gertz, Inc, The North
American NGL Industry: Risks and Rewards in the Midstream
Sector: 2010 Edition and company filings.
109
Transportation and Storage. Once the mixed
NGLs are fractionated into individual NGL products, the NGL
products are stored, transported and marketed to end-use
markets. The NGL industry has thousands of miles of intrastate
and interstate transmission pipelines and a network of barges,
rails, trucks, terminals and underground storage facilities to
deliver NGLs to market. The bulk of the NGL storage capacity is
located near the refining and petrochemical complexes of the
Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coasts, with a second major
concentration in central Kansas. Each NGL product system
typically has storage capacity located both throughout the
pipeline network and at major market centers to help temper
seasonal demand and daily supply-demand shifts.
Barriers to Entry. Although competition within
the NGL logistics and marketing industry is robust, we believe
there are significant barriers to entry for these business
lines. These barriers include (i) significant costs and
execution risk to construct new facilities; (ii) a finite
number of sites such as ours that are connected to market hubs,
pipeline infrastructure, underground storage,
import / export facilities and end users and
(iii) specialized expertise required to operate logistics
and marketing facilities.
Industry
Trends
Natural gas is a critical component of energy consumption in the
U.S., accounting for approximately 24% of all energy used in
2008, representing approximately 23.8 Tcf of natural gas,
according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration
(EIA). Over the next 27 years, the EIA
estimates that total domestic energy consumption will increase
by over 15%, with natural gas consumption directly benefiting
from population growth, growth in cleaner-burning natural
gas-fired electric generation and natural gas vehicles, and
indirectly through additions of electric vehicles. Additionally,
we believe that there are numerous other trends in the industry
relating to natural gas and NGLs that will continue to benefit
us. These trends include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity Price Environment. Current crude,
condensate and NGL pricing are relatively attractive compared to
historical levels while current natural gas pricing is
relatively less attractive. Furthermore, the existing
differential between NGL prices (often linked to crude oil
prices) and natural gas prices creates a premium value for the
mixed NGLs relative to the value of natural gas from which they
are removed. This environment incents producers to develop
hydrocarbon reserves that contain oil, condensate and NGLs and
incents producers or processors to remove the maximum amount of
NGLs from the raw natural gas through processing.
|
|
|
|
Advances in Exploration and Production
Techniques. Improvements in exploration and
production capabilities including geophysical interpretation,
horizontal drilling, and well completions have played a
significant role in the increase of domestic shale natural gas
production. The natural gas shale formations represent prolific
sources of domestic hydrocarbons. With the advances in
exploration and production capabilities driving finding and
development costs down, natural gas produced from the shale
formations is expected to represent an increasing portion of
total domestic supply. As drilling activity continues to
increase in these areas, gathering and pipeline systems will be
required to transport the natural gas, processing plants will be
needed to process such natural gas, fractionation will be
required to turn mixed NGLs into commercial NGL products, and
other logistics, marketing and distribution infrastructure will
be utilized to distribute NGL products to the ultimate end
users. We believe that improvements in geosciences, drilling
technology, and completion techniques are also being used to
develop and exploit other resource plays in conventional basins,
including the Wolfberry and other geographic strata in the
Permian Basin.
|
|
|
|
Shift to Oil and Liquids Rich Natural Gas
Production. Due to the current commodity price
environment, producer economics shift drilling activity toward
oil production and gas production with higher levels of
condensate and NGLs. As a result, the level of well permitting
in liquids rich plays has been significantly increasing.
Processing is generally required to strip out the mixed NGLs
prior to transportation of the natural gas to end users,
especially in oil and liquids rich
|
110
|
|
|
|
|
natural gas production areas. The increased production of
natural gas rich in NGLs has resulted in increased need for
processing facilities and has created a significant supply of
mixed NGLs that ultimately must be fractionated.
|
Increasing Levels of Mixed NGL Supplies and Demand for NGL
Products. Due to the producers economic
focus on oil, condensate and NGL rich production streams, the
supply of mixed NGLs to the Gulf Coast is quickly increasing.
This increase in supply has resulted in high utilization rates
for fractionation services. The increased demand for
fractionation has allowed many suppliers of fractionation
services to increase fees and enter into longer dated contracts.
Additionally, we believe that strong processing economics as a
result of recent historical and forecast commodity prices are
driving incremental improvements in processing recoveries which
along with lighter processable NGL barrels in certain shale
plays are resulting in the recovery of more ethane. In response
to recent ethane and propane pricing as a petrochemical
feedstock relative to competing crude-based feedstocks, Gulf
Coast flexi-crackers have been shifting to lighter feedstock and
are converting heavy crackers to be switchable to lighter
feedstock. This increases demand for NGL products.
111
OUR
BUSINESS
Overview
We own general and limited partner interests, including IDRs, in
Targa Resources Partners LP (NYSE: NGLS), a publicly traded
Delaware limited partnership that is a leading provider of
midstream natural gas and natural gas liquid services in the
United States. The Partnership is engaged in the business of
gathering, compressing, treating, processing and selling natural
gas and storing, fractionating, treating, transporting and
selling natural gas liquids, or NGLs, and NGL products. Our
interests in the Partnership consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
a 2% general partner interest, which we hold through our 100%
ownership interest in the general partner of the Partnership;
|
|
|
|
|
|
all of the outstanding IDRs of the Partnership; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,645,659 of the 75,545,409 outstanding common units of the
Partnership, representing a 15.1% limited partnership interest
in the Partnership.
|
Our primary business objective is to increase our cash available
for distribution to our stockholders by assisting the
Partnership in executing its business strategy. We may
facilitate the Partnerships growth through various forms
of financial support, including, but not limited to, modifying
the Partnerships IDRs, exercising the Partnerships
IDR reset provision contained in its partnership agreement,
making loans, making capital contributions in exchange for
yielding or non-yielding equity interests or providing other
financial support to the Partnership, if needed, to support its
ability to make distributions. In addition, we may acquire
assets that could be candidates for acquisition by the
Partnership, potentially after operational or commercial
improvement or further development.
Our cash flows are generated from the cash distributions we
receive from the Partnership. The Partnership is required to
distribute all available cash at the end of each quarter after
establishing reserves to provide for the proper conduct of its
business or to provide for future distributions. Our ownership
of the Partnerships IDRs and general partner interests
entitle us to receive:
|
|
|
|
|
2% of all cash distributed in a quarter until $0.3881 has been
distributed in respect of each common unit of the Partnership
for that quarter;
|
|
|
|
15% of all cash distributed in a quarter after $0.3881 has been
distributed in respect of each common unit of the Partnership
for that quarter;
|
|
|
|
25% of all cash distributed in a quarter after $0.4219 has been
distributed in respect of each common unit of the Partnership
for that quarter; and
|
|
|
|
50% of all cash distributed in a quarter after $0.50625 has been
distributed in respect of each common unit of the Partnership
for that quarter.
|
On November 4, 2010, the Partnership announced that
management plans to recommend to the General Partners
board of directors a $0.04 increase in the annualized cash
distribution rate to $2.19 per common unit for the fourth
quarter of 2010 distribution. Based on a $2.19 annualized rate,
a quarterly distribution by the Partnership of $0.5475 per
common unit will result in a quarterly distribution to us of
$6.4 million, or $25.5 million on an annualized basis,
in respect of our common units in the Partnership. Such
distribution would also result in a quarterly distribution to us
of $6.3 million or $25.2 million on an annualized
basis, in respect of our 2% general partner interest and IDRs
for total quarterly distributions of $12.7 million, or
$50.7 million on an annualized basis.
We intend to pay to our stockholders, on a quarterly basis,
dividends equal to the cash the Partnership distributes to us
based on our ownership of Partnership securities, less the
expenses of being a public company, other general and
administrative expenses, federal income taxes, capital
contributions to the Partnership and reserves established by our
board of directors. Based on the current distribution policy of
the Partnership, we plan to pay an initial quarterly dividend of
$0.2575 per share of our common stock, or
112
$1.03 per share on an annualized basis, for a total
quarterly dividend of approximately $10.9 million, or
$43.6 million on an annualized basis, per our dividend
policy, which we will adopt prior to the conclusion of this
offering. See Our Dividend Policy.
The following graph shows the historical cash distributions
declared by the Partnership for the periods shown to its limited
partners (including us), to us based on our 2% general partner
interest in the Partnership and to us based on the IDRs. From
the quarter ended June 30, 2007 through the quarter ended
December 31, 2010, the quarterly distributions to the
limited partners declared and expected by the Partnership
increased approximately 298%, from $10.4 million to
$41.4 million. Over the same period, the quarterly
distributions to the limited partners declared and expected by
the Partnership in respect to our 2% general partner interest
and IDRs increased approximately 3,050% from $0.2 million,
or 2% of the Partnerships quarterly distributions, to
$6.3 million, or approximately 13% of the
Partnerships quarterly distributions. Those increases in
historical cash distributions to both the limited partners and
the general partner since the second quarter ended June 30,
2007, as reflected in the graph set forth below, generally
resulted from the following increases in the Partnerships
per unit quarterly distribution over time from $0.3375 declared
and paid for the second quarter of 2007 to $0.5475 for the
fourth quarter of 2010 that management plans to recommend; and
the issuance of approximately 44.7 million additional
common units by the Partnership over time to finance
acquisitions and capital improvements.
Quarterly Cash
Distributions by the
Partnership(1)
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents historical quarterly
cash distributions by the Partnership.
|
The graph set forth below shows hypothetical cash distributions
payable to us in respect of our interests in the Partnership
across an illustrative range of annualized distributions per
common unit. This information is based upon the following:
|
|
|
|
|
the Partnership has a total of 75,545,409 common units
outstanding; and
|
|
|
|
we own (i) a 2% general partner interest in the
Partnership, (ii) the IDRs and (iii) 11,645,659 common
units of the Partnership.
|
113
The graph below also illustrates the impact on us of the
Partnership raising or lowering its per common unit distribution
from the fourth quarter quarterly distribution of $0.5475 per
common unit, or $2.19 per common unit on an annualized basis,
that management plans to recommend to the General Partners
board of directors. This information is presented for
illustrative purposes only; it is not intended to be a
prediction of future performance and does not attempt to
illustrate the impact that changes in our or the
Partnerships business, including changes that may result
from changes in interest rates, energy prices or general
economic conditions, or the impact that any future acquisitions
or expansion projects, divestitures or the issuance of
additional debt or equity securities, will have on our or the
Partnerships results of operations.
Hypothetical
Annualized Pre-Tax Partnership Distributions to
Us(1)
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For the fourth quarter of 2010,
management plans to recommend a quarterly cash distribution of
$0.5475 per common unit, or $2.19 per common unit on an
annualized basis.
|
The impact on us of changes in the Partnerships
distribution levels will vary depending on several factors,
including the Partnerships total outstanding partnership
interests on the record date for the distribution, the aggregate
cash distributions made by the Partnership and the interests in
the Partnership owned by us. If the Partnership increases
distributions to its unitholders, including us, we would expect
to increase dividends to our stockholders, although the timing
and amount of such increased dividends, if any, will not
necessarily be comparable to the timing and amount of the
increase in distributions made by the Partnership. In addition,
the level of distributions we receive and of dividends we pay to
our stockholders may be affected by the various risks associated
with an investment in us and the underlying business of the
Partnership. Please read Risk Factors for more
information about the risks that may impact your investment
in us.
Legal
Proceedings
We are involved in various legal proceedings arising in the
ordinary course of our business. See Business of
Targa Resources Partners LPLegal Proceedings.
114
BUSINESS OF TARGA
RESOURCES PARTNERS LP
Overview
The Partnership is a leading provider of midstream natural gas
and NGL services in the United States that we formed on
October 26, 2006 to own, operate, acquire and develop a
diversified portfolio of complementary midstream energy assets.
The Partnership is engaged in the business of gathering,
compressing, treating, processing and selling natural gas and
storing, fractionating, treating, transporting and selling NGLs
and NGL products. The Partnership operates in two primary
divisions: (i) Natural Gas Gathering and Processing,
consisting of two segments(a) Field Gathering and
Processing and (b) Coastal Gathering and Processing; and
(ii) NGL Logistics and Marketing consisting of two
segments(a) Logistics Assets and (b) Marketing
and Distribution.
The Natural Gas Gathering and Processing division includes
assets used in the gathering of natural gas produced from oil
and gas wells and processing this gathered raw natural gas into
merchantable natural gas by removing impurities and extracting a
stream of combined NGLs or mixed NGLs (sometimes called Y-grade
or raw mix). The Field Gathering and Processing segment assets
are located in North Texas and in the Permian Basin of Texas and
New Mexico. The Coastal Gathering and Processing segment assets
are located in the onshore and near offshore regions of the
Louisiana Gulf Coast accessing onshore and offshore gas supplies.
The NGL Logistics and Marketing division is also referred to as
the Downstream Business. It includes the activities necessary to
fractionate mixed NGLs into finished NGL productsethane,
propane, normal butane, isobutane and natural gasolineand
provides certain value added services, such as the storage,
terminalling, transportation, distribution and marketing of
NGLs. The assets in this segment are generally connected
indirectly to and supplied, in part, by the Partnerships
gathering and processing segments and are predominantly located
in Mont Belvieu, Texas and Southwestern Louisiana. The Marketing
and Distribution segment covers all activities required to
distribute and market mixed NGLs and NGL products. It includes
(1) marketing and purchasing NGLs in selected United States
markets; (2) marketing and supplying NGLs for refinery
customers; and (3) transporting, storing and selling
propane and providing related propane logistics services to
multi-state retailers, independent retailers and other end users.
Since the beginning of 2007, the Partnership has completed six
acquisitions from us with an aggregate purchase price of
approximately $3.1 billion. In addition, and over the same
period, the Partnership has invested approximately
$196 million in growth capital expenditures. The
acquisitions from us are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
In February 2007, in connection with its initial public
offering, the Partnership acquired approximately
3,950 miles of integrated gathering pipelines that gather
and compress natural gas received from receipt points in the
Fort Worth Basin/Bend Arch in North Texas, two natural gas
processing plants and a fractionator. These assets, together
with the business conducted thereby, are collectively referred
to as the North Texas System.
|
|
|
|
In October 2007, the Partnership acquired natural gas gathering,
processing and treating assets in the Permian Basin of West
Texas and in Southwest Louisiana. The West Texas assets,
together with the business conducted thereby, are collectively
referred to as SAOU and the Southwest Louisiana
assets, together with the business conducted thereby, are
collectively referred to as LOU.
|
|
|
|
In September 2009, the Partnership acquired our NGLs business
consisting of fractionation facilities, storage and terminalling
facilities, low sulfur natural gasoline treating facilities,
pipeline transportation and distribution assets, propane
storage, truck terminals and NGL transport assets. These assets,
together with the businesses conducted thereby, are collectively
referred to as the NGL Logistics and Marketing division or the
Downstream Business.
|
115
|
|
|
|
|
In April 2010, the Partnership acquired a natural gas straddle
business consisting of the business and operations involving the
Barracuda, Lowry and Stingray plants, including the Pelican,
Seahawk and Cameron gas gathering pipeline systems, and the
business and operations represented by participation and
ownership interests in the Bluewater, Sea Robin, Calumet, N.
Terrebonne, Toca and Yscloskey plants. These assets, together
with the business conducted thereby, are collectively referred
to as the Coastal Straddles. The Partnership also
acquired certain natural gas gathering and processing systems,
processing plants and related assets including the Sand Hills
processing plant and gathering system, Monahans gathering
system, Puckett gathering system, a 40% ownership interest in
the West Seminole gathering system and a compressor overhaul
facility. These assets, together with the business conducted
thereby, are collectively referred to as the Permian
Business.
|
|
|
|
In August 2010, the Partnership acquired a 63% ownership
interest in Versado, which conducts a natural gas gathering and
processing business in New Mexico consisting of the business and
operations involving the Eunice, Monument and Saunders gathering
and processing systems, processing plants and related assets.
These assets, together with the business conducted thereby, are
collectively referred to as the Versado System.
|
|
|
|
On September 28, 2010, the Partnership acquired from us a
77% ownership interest in VESCO, a joint venture in which
Enterprise Gas Processing, LLC and ONEOK VESCO Holdings, L.L.C.
own the remaining ownership interests, for a purchase price of
$175.6 million. VESCO owns and operates a natural gas
gathering and processing business in Louisiana consisting of a
coastal straddle plant and the business and operations of Venice
Gathering System, L.L.C., a wholly owned subsidiary of VESCO
that owns and operates an offshore gathering system and related
assets (collectively, the VESCO System). The VESCO
System captures volumes from the Gulf of Mexico shelf and
deepwater. For the year ended December 31, 2009 and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010, VESCO processed
363 MMcf/d
and
423 MMcf/d
of natural gas, respectively.
|
Partnership
Growth Drivers
We believe the Partnerships near-term growth will be
driven both by significant recently completed or pending
projects as well as strong supply and demand fundamentals for
its existing businesses. Over the longer-term, we expect the
Partnerships growth will be driven by natural gas shale
opportunities, which could lead to growth in both the
Partnerships Gathering and Processing division and
Downstream Business, organic growth projects and potential
strategic and other acquisitions related to its existing
businesses.
Organic growth projects. We expect the
Partnerships near-term growth to be driven by a number of
significant projects scheduled for completion in 2011 that are
supported by long-term, fee-based contracts. We believe that
organic growth projects, such as the ones listed below, often
generate higher returns on investment than those available from
third party acquisitions. Organic projects in process include:
|
|
|
|
|
Cedar Bayou Fractionator expansion
project: The Partnership is currently
constructing approximately 78 MBbl/d of additional
fractionation capacity at the Partnerships 88% owned CBF
in Mont Belvieu for an estimated gross cost of $78 million.
The fractionation expansion is expected to be in-service in the
second quarter of 2011. This expansion is supported with
10 year fee-based contracts with Oneok Hydrocarbons, L.P.,
Questar Gas Management Company and Majestic Energy Services, LLC
that have certain guaranteed volume commitments or provisions
for deficiency payments.
|
|
|
|
Benzene treating project: A new treater is
under construction which will operate in conjunction with the
Partnerships existing LSNG facility at Mont Belvieu and is
designed to reduce benzene content of natural gasoline to meet
new, more stringent environmental standards. The treater has an
estimated gross cost of approximately $33 million, and
construction is currently
|
116
|
|
|
|
|
underway. The treater is currently anticipated to be in-service
in the fourth quarter of 2011 and is supported by a fee-based
contract with Marathon Petroleum Company LLC that has certain
guaranteed volume commitments or provisions for deficiency
payments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gulf Coast Fractionators expansion
project: The Partnership has announced plans by
Gulf Coast Fractionators, a partnership with ConocoPhillips and
Devon Energy Corporation in which the Partnership owns a 38.8%
interest, to expand the capacity of its NGL fractionation
facility in Mont Belvieu by 43 MBbl/d for an estimated
gross cost of $75 million. ConocoPhillips, as the operator,
will manage the expansion project. The expansion is expected to
be operational during the second quarter of 2012, subject to
regulatory approvals. The total capital expenditures are
expected to be significantly lower than a greenfield
fractionation facility since the new capacity will be integrated
with existing fractionation capacity, utilities, infrastructure
and footprint already at Mont Belvieu.
|
|
|
|
SAOU Expansion Program: The Partnership has
announced a $30 million capital expenditure program to
expand gathering and processing capability over the next
18 months in response to strong volume growth and new well
connects associated with producer activity in the Wolfberry
Trend and Canyon Sands plays as discussed below under
Strong supply and demand fundamentals for the
Partnerships existing businesses. This growth
investment program includes new compression facilities and
pipelines as well as expenditures to restart the
25 MMcf/d
Conger processing plant by late 2010 or early 2011.
|
The Partnership has successfully completed both large and small
organic growth projects that are associated with its existing
assets and expects to continue to do so in the future. These
projects have involved growth capital expenditures of
approximately $245 million since 2005 and include:
|
|
|
|
|
Low sulfur natural gasoline project: In July
2007, the Partnership completed construction of a natural
gasoline hydrotreater at Mont Belvieu that removes sulfur from
natural gasoline, allowing customers to meet new, more stringent
environmental standards. The facility has a capacity of
30 MBbls/d and is supported by fee-based contracts with
Marathon Petroleum Company LLC and Koch Supply and Trading LP
that have certain guaranteed volume commitments or provisions
for deficiency payments. The Partnership made capital
expenditures of $39.5 million to convert idle equipment at
Mont Belvieu into the LSNG facility.
|
|
|
|
Operations Improvement and Efficiency
Enhancement: The Partnership has historically
focused on ways to improve margins and reduce operating expenses
by improving its operations. Examples include energy saving
initiatives such as building cogeneration capacity to
self-generate electricity for the Partnerships facilities
at Mont Belvieu, installing electric compression in North Texas
and Versado to reduce fuel costs, emissions and operating costs,
and bringing compression overhaul in-house to improve quality,
turnaround time and costs.
|
|
|
|
Opportunistic Commercial Development
Activities: The Partnership has used the
extensive footprint of its asset base to identify and pursue
projects that generate strong returns on invested capital.
Examples include installing a new interconnect pipeline to the
Kinder Morgan Rancho line at SAOU, developing the Winona
wholesale propane terminal in Arizona, restarting the Easton
Storage Facility at LOU, and installing additional equipment to
increase ethane recoveries at the Partnerships Lowry
straddle plant.
|
|
|
|
Other Enhancements: The Partnership also has
completed a number of smaller acquisitions and projects that
have enhanced its existing asset base and that can provide
attractive investment returns. Examples include the purchase of
existing pipelines that expand beyond its existing asset base,
installation of pipeline interconnects to our gathering systems
and consolidation of interests in joint ventures.
|
The Partnership believes these projects have been successful in
terms of return on investment. Because the Partnerships
assets are not easily duplicated and are located in active
producing areas and
117
near key NGL markets and logistics centers, we expect that the
Partnership will continue to focus on attractive investment
opportunities associated with its existing asset base.
Strong supply and demand fundamentals for the
Partnerships existing businesses. We
believe that the current strength of oil, condensate and NGL
prices and of forecast prices for these energy commodities has
caused producers in and around the Partnerships natural
gas gathering and processing areas of operation to focus their
drilling programs on regions rich in these forms of
hydrocarbons. Liquids rich gas is prevalent from the Wolfberry
Trend and Canyon Sands plays, which are accessible by SAOU, the
Wolfberry and Bone Springs plays, which are accessible by the
Sand Hills system, and from oilier portions of the
Barnett Shale natural gas play, especially portions of Montague,
Cooke, Clay and Wise counties, which are accessible by the North
Texas System. The Wolfberry, Canyon Sands, and Bone Springs
plays are oil plays with associated gas containing high liquids
content ranging from approximately 7.0 to 9.5 gal/Mcf. By
comparison, the liquids content of the gas from the liquids rich
portion of the Eagle Ford Shale natural gas play is expected to
average about 4 gal/Mcf. The Partnership is experiencing
increased drilling permits and higher rig counts in these areas
and expects these activities to result in higher inlet volumes
over the next several years.
Producer activity in areas rich in oil, condensate and NGLs is
currently generating high demand for the Partnerships
fractionation services at the Mont Belvieu market hub. As a
result, fractionation volumes have recently increased to near
existing capacity. Until additional fractionation capacity comes
on-line in 2011, there will be limited incremental supply of
fractionation services in the area. These strong supply and
demand fundamentals have resulted in long-term,
take-or-pay
contracts for existing capacity and support the construction of
new fractionation capacity, such as the Partnerships CBF
and GCF expansion projects. The Partnership is continuing to see
rates for fractionation services increase. Existing
fractionation customers are renewing contracts at market rates
that are, in most cases, substantially higher than expiring
rates for extended terms of up to ten years and with reservation
fees that are paid even if customer volumes are not fractionated
to ensure access to fractionation services. A portion of the
recent and future expected increases in cash flow for the
Partnerships fractionation business is related to high
utilization and rollover of existing contracts to higher rates.
The higher volumes of fractionated NGLs should also result in
increased demand for other related fee-based services provided
by the Partnerships Downstream Business.
Natural gas shale opportunities. The
Partnership is actively pursuing natural gas gathering and
processing and NGL fractionation opportunities associated with
many of the active, liquids rich natural gas shale plays, such
as certain regions of the Marcellus Shale and Eagle Ford Shale.
We believe that the Partnerships leadership position in
the NGL Logistics and Marketing business, which includes the
Partnerships fractionation services, provides the
Partnership with a competitive advantage relative to other
gathering and processing companies without these capabilities.
While we believe that the expected growth in the supply of
liquids rich gas from these plays will likely require the
construction of (i) additional fractionation capacity,
(ii) additional pipelines to transport the NGLs to and from
major fractionation centers, and (iii) additional natural
gas gathering and processing facilities, the Partnerships
active involvement in multiple potential projects does not
guarantee that it will be involved with any such capacity
expansions.
Potential third party acquisitions related to the
Partnerships existing businesses. While the
Partnerships recent growth has been partially driven by
the implementation of a focused drop drown strategy, our
management team also has a record of successful third party
acquisitions. Since our formation, our strategy has included
approximately $3 billion in acquisitions and growth capital
expenditures. This track record includes:
|
|
|
|
|
The 2004 acquisition of SAOU and LOU from ConocoPhillips Company
for $248 million;
|
|
|
|
The 2004 acquisition of a 40% interest in Bridgeline Holdings,
LP for $101 million from the Enron Corporation bankruptcy
estate. Chevron Corporation, the other owner, exercised its
rights under the partnership agreement to purchase the 40% stake
from Targa for $117 million in 2005;
|
118
|
|
|
|
|
The 2005 acquisition of Dynegy Midstream Services, Limited
Partnership from Dynegy, Inc. for $2.4 billion; and
|
|
|
|
The 2008 acquisition of Chevron Corporations 53.9%
interest in VESCO.
|
Our management team will continue to manage the
Partnerships business after this offering, and we expect
that third-party acquisitions will continue to be a significant
focus of the Partnerships growth strategy.
Competitive
Strengths and Strategies
We believe the Partnership is well positioned to execute its
business strategy due to the following competitive strengths:
|
|
|
|
|
Leading Fractionation Position. The
Partnership is one of the largest fractionators of NGLs in the
Gulf Coast. Its primary fractionation assets are located in Mont
Belvieu and Lake Charles, which are key market centers for NGLs
and are located at the intersection of NGL infrastructure
including mixed NGL supply pipelines, storage, takeaway
pipelines and other transportation infrastructure. The
Partnerships assets are also located near and connected to
key consumers of NGL products including the petrochemical and
industrial markets. The location and interconnectivity of the
assets are not easily replicated, and we have sufficient
additional capability to expand their capacity. Our management
has extensive experience in operating these assets and in
permitting and building new midstream assets.
|
|
|
|
Strategically located gathering and processing asset
base. The Partnerships gathering and
processing businesses are predominantly located in active and
growth oriented oil and gas producing basins. Activity in the
Wolfberry, the Barnett Shale, Canyon Sands and Bone Springs
plays is driven by the economics of current favorable oil,
condensate and NGL prices and the high condensate and NGL
content of the natural gas or associated natural gas streams.
Increased drilling and production activities in these areas
would likely increase the volumes of natural gas available to
the Partnerships gathering and processing systems.
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive package of midstream
services. The Partnership provides a
comprehensive package of services to natural gas producers,
including natural gas gathering, compression, treating,
processing and selling and storing, fractionating, treating,
transporting and selling NGLs and NGL products. These services
are essential to gather, process and treat wellhead gas to meet
pipeline standards and to extract NGLs for sale into
petrochemical, industrial and commercial markets. We believe the
Partnerships ability to provide these integrated services
provides an advantage in competing for new supplies of natural
gas because the Partnership can provide substantially all of the
services producers, marketers and others require for moving
natural gas and NGLs from wellhead to market on a cost-effective
basis. Additionally, due to the high cost of replicating assets
in key strategic positions, the difficulty of permitting and
constructing new midstream assets and the difficulty of
developing the expertise necessary to operate them, the barriers
to enter the midstream natural gas sector on a scale similar to
the Partnerships are reasonably high.
|
|
|
|
High quality and efficient assets. The
Partnerships gathering and processing systems and
logistics assets consist of high-quality, well maintained
facilities, resulting in low cost, efficient operations.
Advanced technologies have been implemented for processing
plants (primarily cryogenic units utilizing centralized control
systems), measurement (essentially all electronic and
electronically linked to a central data base) and operations and
maintenance to manage work orders and implement preventative
maintenance schedules (computerized maintenance management
systems). These applications have allowed proactive management
of the Partnerships operations resulting in lower costs
and minimal downtime. The Partnership has established a
reputation in the midstream industry as a reliable and
cost-effective supplier of services to its customers and has a
track record of safe and efficient operation of its facilities.
The
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
Partnership intends to continue to pursue new contracts, cost
efficiencies and operating improvements of its assets. Such
improvements in the past have included new production and
acreage commitments, reducing fuel gas and flare volumes and
improving NGL capacity and recoveries. The Partnership will also
continue to optimize existing plant assets to improve and
maximize capacity and throughput.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large, diverse business mix with favorable
contracts. The Partnership maintains gathering
and processing positions in strategic oil and gas producing
areas across multiple oil and gas basins and provides services
under attractive contract terms to a diverse mix of customers
across its areas of operations. Consequently, the Partnership is
not dependent on any one oil and gas basin or customer. The
gathering and processing contract portfolio has attractive rate
and term characteristics. The Partnerships NGL Logistics
and Marketing assets are typically located near key market hubs
and near important NGL customers. They also serve must-run
portions of the natural gas value chain, are primarily
fee-based, and have a diverse mix of customers. The logistics
contract portfolio, largely fee-based, has attractive rate and
term characteristics. Given the higher rates for logistics
assets contracts that are being renewed (largely based on
replacement cost economics), the new projects underway, the
long-term nature of many of the renewed and new contracts, and
continuing strong supply and demand fundamentals for this
business, we expect an increasing percentage of the
Partnerships cash flows to be fee-based.
|
|
|
|
Financial Flexibility. The Partnership has
historically maintained strong financial metrics relative to its
peer group, with leverage and distribution coverage ratios
consistently above the peer group median. The Partnership also
reduces the impact of commodity price volatility by hedging the
commodity price risk associated with a portion of its expected
natural gas, NGL and condensate equity volumes. Maintaining
appropriate leverage and distribution coverage levels and
mitigating commodity price volatility allow the Partnership to
be flexible in its growth strategy and enable it to pursue
strategic acquisitions and large growth projects.
|
|
|
|
Experienced and long-term focused management
team. The executive management team which formed
Targa in 2004 and continues to manage Targa today possesses over
200 years of combined experience working in the midstream
natural gas and energy business. The management team will
continue to hold a meaningful ownership stake in us immediately
following this offering.
|
The
Partnerships Challenges
The Partnership faces a number of challenges in implementing its
business strategy. For example:
|
|
|
|
|
The Partnership has a substantial amount of indebtedness which
may adversely affect its financial position.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships cash flow is affected by supply and
demand for oil, natural gas and NGL products and by natural gas
and NGL prices, and decreases in these prices could adversely
affect its results of operations and financial condition.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships long-term success depends on its ability
to obtain new sources of supplies of natural gas and NGLs, which
depends on certain factors beyond its control. Any decrease in
supplies of natural gas or NGLs could adversely affect the
Partnerships business and operating results.
|
|
|
|
If the Partnership does not make acquisitions or investments in
new assets on economically acceptable terms or efficiently and
effectively integrate new assets, its results of operations and
financial condition could be adversely affected.
|
|
|
|
The Partnership is subject to regulatory, environmental,
political, legal and economic risks, which could adversely
affect its results of operations and financial condition.
|
120
|
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships growth strategy requires access to new
capital. Tightened capital markets or increased competition for
investment opportunities could impair its ability to grow.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships hedging activities may not be effective
in reducing the variability of its cash flows and may, in
certain circumstances, increase the variability of its cash
flows.
|
|
|
|
The Partnerships industry is highly competitive, and
increased competitive pressure could adversely affect the
Partnerships business and operating results.
|
For a further discussion of these and other challenges we face,
please read Risk Factors.
Business
Operations
The operations of the Partnership are reported in two divisions:
(i) Natural Gas Gathering and Processing, consisting of two
segments(a) Field Gathering and Processing and
(b) Coastal Gathering and Processing; and (ii) NGL
Logistics and Marketing, consisting of two
segments(a) Logistics Assets and (b) Marketing
and Distribution.
Natural Gas
Gathering and Processing Division
Natural gas gathering and processing consists of gathering,
compressing, dehydrating, treating, conditioning, processing,
transporting and marketing natural gas. The gathering of natural
gas consists of aggregating natural gas produced from various
wells through small diameter gathering lines to processing
plants. Natural gas has a widely varying composition, depending
on the field, the formation and the reservoir from which it is
produced. The processing of natural gas consists of the
extraction of imbedded NGLs and the removal of water vapor and
other contaminants to form (i) a stream of marketable
natural gas, commonly referred to as residue gas, and
(ii) a stream of mixed NGLs, commonly referred to as
Mixed NGLs or Y-grade. Once processed,
the residue gas is transported to markets through pipelines that
are either owned by the gatherers/processors or third parties.
End-users of residue gas include large commercial and industrial
customers, as well as natural gas and electric utilities serving
individual consumers. The Partnership sells its residue gas
either directly to such end-users or to marketers into
intrastate or interstate pipelines, which are typically located
in close proximity or ready access to its facilities.
The Partnership continually seeks new supplies of natural gas,
both to offset the natural declines in production from connected
wells and to increase throughput volumes. The Partnership
obtains additional natural gas supply in its operating areas by
contracting for production from new wells or by capturing
existing production currently gathered by others. Competition
for new natural gas supplies is based primarily on location of
assets, commercial terms, service levels and access to markets.
The commercial terms of natural gas gathering and processing
arrangements are driven, in part, by capital costs, which are
impacted by the proximity of systems to the supply source and by
operating costs, which are impacted by operational efficiencies,
facility design and economies of scale.
We believe the extensive asset base and scope of operations in
the regions in which the Partnership operates provide the
Partnership with significant opportunities to add both new and
existing natural gas production to its systems. We believe the
Partnerships size and scope gives the Partnership a strong
competitive position by placing it in proximity to a large
number of existing and new natural gas producing wells in its
areas of operations, allowing the Partnership to generate
economies of scale and to provide its customers with access to
its existing facilities and to multiple end-use markets and
market hubs. Additionally, we believe the Partnerships
ability to serve its customers needs across the natural
gas and NGL value chain further augments the Partnerships
ability to attract new customers.
Field Gathering
and Processing Segment
The Field Gathering and Processing segment gathers and processes
natural gas from the Permian Basin in West Texas and Southeast
New Mexico, and the Fort Worth Basin, including the Barnett
Shale, in North Texas. The natural gas processed by this segment
is supplied through its gathering systems which, in
121
aggregate, consist of approximately 10,100 miles of natural
gas pipelines. The segments processing plants include nine
owned and operated facilities. For the first nine months of
2010, the Partnership processed an average of approximately
582.0 MMcf/d
of natural gas and produced an average of approximately
70.2 MBbl/d of NGLs.
We believe the Partnership is well positioned as a gatherer and
processor in the Permian and Fort Worth Basins. The
Partnership has broad geographic scope, covering portions of
40 counties and approximately 18,100 square miles
across the basins. We believe proximity to production and
development provides the Partnership with a competitive
advantage in capturing new supplies of natural gas because of
the Partnerships resulting competitive costs to connect
new wells and to process additional natural gas in its existing
processing plants. Additionally, because the Partnership
operates all of its plants in these regions, the Partnership is
often able to redirect natural gas among two or more of its
processing plants, allowing it to optimize processing efficiency
and further improve the profitability of its operations.
The Field Gathering and Processing segments operations
consist of the Permian Business, the Versado System, SAOU and
the North Texas System.
Permian Business. The Permian Business
consists of the Sand Hills gathering and processing system and
the West Seminole and Puckett gathering systems. These systems
consist of approximately 1,300 miles of natural gas
gathering pipelines. These gathering systems are low-pressure
gathering systems with significant compression assets. The Sand
Hills refrigerated cryogenic processing plant has a gross
processing capacity of
150 MMcf/d
and residue gas connections to pipelines owned by affiliates of
Enterprise Products Partners L.P. (Enterprise),
ONEOK, Inc. (ONEOK) and El Paso Corporation
(El Paso).
Versado System. The Versado System consists of
the Saunders, Eunice and Monument gas processing plants and
related gathering systems in Southeastern New Mexico. The
gathering systems consist of approximately 3,200 miles of
natural gas gathering pipelines. The Saunders, Eunice and
Monument refrigerated cryogenic processing plants have aggregate
processing capacity of 280 MMcf per day (176 MMcf per
day, net to the Partnerships ownership interest). These
plants have residue gas connections to pipelines owned by
affiliates of El Paso, MidAmerican Energy Company and
Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. (Kinder Morgan).
The Partnerships ownership in the Versado System is held
through Versado Gas Processors, L.L.C., a joint venture that is
63% owned by the Partnership and 37% owned by Chevron U.S.A. Inc.
SAOU. Covering portions of 10 counties and
approximately 4,000 square miles in West Texas, SAOU
includes approximately 1,500 miles of pipelines in the
Permian Basin that gather natural gas to the Mertzon and
Sterling processing plants. SAOU is connected to numerous
producing wells
and/or
central delivery points. The system has approximately
1,000 miles of low-pressure gathering systems and
approximately 500 miles of high-pressure gathering
pipelines to deliver the natural gas to the Partnerships
processing plants. The gathering system has numerous compressor
stations to inject low-pressure gas into the high-pressure
pipelines.
SAOUs processing facilities include two currently
operating refrigerated cryogenic processing plantsthe
Mertzon plant and the Sterling plantwhich have an
aggregate processing capacity of approximately
110 MMcf/d.
The system also includes the Conger cryogenic plant with a
capacity of approximately
25 MMcf/d.
The Partnership is in the process of restarting the Conger plant
by the end of 2010 or early 2011 to provide for rapidly
increasing volumes in SAOU.
North Texas System. The North Texas System
includes two interconnected gathering systems with approximately
4,100 miles of pipelines, covering portions of 12 counties
and approximately 5,700 square miles, gathering wellhead
natural gas for the Chico and Shackelford natural gas processing
facilities.
The Chico Gathering System consists of approximately
2,000 miles of primarily low-pressure gathering pipelines.
Wellhead natural gas is either gathered for the Chico plant
located in Wise County, Texas, and then compressed for
processing, or it is compressed in the field at numerous
compressor
122
stations and then moved via one of several high-pressure
gathering pipelines to the Chico plant. The Shackelford
Gathering System consists of approximately 2,100 miles of
intermediate-pressure gathering pipelines which gather wellhead
natural gas largely for the Shackelford plant in Albany, Texas.
Natural gas gathered from the northern and eastern portions of
the Shackelford Gathering System is typically compressed in the
field at numerous compressor stations and then transported to
the Chico plant for processing.
The Chico processing plant includes two cryogenic processing
trains with a combined capacity of approximately
265 MMcf/d
and an NGL fractionator with the capacity to fractionate up to
approximately 15 MBbl/d of mixed NGLs. The Shackelford
plant is a cryogenic plant with a nameplate capacity of
approximately
15 MMcf/d,
but effective capacity is limited to approximately
13 MMcf/d
due to capacity constraints on the residue gas pipeline that
serves the facility.
The following table lists the Field Gathering and Processing
segments natural gas processing plants:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
Approximate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Inlet
|
|
Gross NGL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Throughput
|
|
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
Volume for the
|
|
for the Nine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
September 30,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
Operated/
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
Capacity
|
|
2010
|
|
2010
|
|
Process
|
|
Non-
|
Facility
|
|
Owned
|
|
Location
|
|
(MMcf/d)
|
|
(MMcf/d)
|
|
(MBbl/d)
|
|
Type(4)
|
|
Operated
|
|
Permian Business
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sand Hills
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Crane, TX
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
115.0
|
|
|
|
14.2
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Versado System
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Saunders(1)
|
|
|
63.0
|
|
|
Lea, NM
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Eunice(1)
|
|
|
63.0
|
|
|
Lea, NM
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Monument(1)
|
|
|
63.0
|
|
|
Lea, NM
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Area Total
|
|
|
280
|
|
|
|
180.5
|
|
|
|
20.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SAOU
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mertzon
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Irion, TX
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Sterling
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Sterling, TX
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Conger(2)
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Sterling, TX
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Area Total
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
|
97.3
|
|
|
|
15.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North Texas System
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chico(3)
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Wise, TX
|
|
|
265
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Shackelford
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Shackelford, TX
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Area Total
|
|
|
278
|
|
|
|
177.2
|
|
|
|
20.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment System Total
|
|
|
843
|
|
|
|
570.0
|
|
|
|
69.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
These plants are part of the
Partnerships Versado joint venture, and 2010 volumes
represent 100% ownership interest of which the Partnership owns
63.0%.
|
|
(2) |
|
The Partnership is in the process
of restarting the Conger plant by the end of 2010 or early 2011
to provide for rapidly increasing volumes in SAOU.
|
|
(3) |
|
The Chico plant has fractionation
capacity of approximately 15 MBbl/d.
|
|
(4) |
|
CryoCryogenic Processing.
|
Coastal Gathering
and Processing Segment
The Partnerships Coastal Gathering and Processing segment
assets are located in the onshore region of the Louisiana Gulf
Coast and the Gulf of Mexico. With the strategic location of its
assets in Louisiana, the Partnership has access to the Henry
Hub, the largest natural gas hub in the U.S., and a substantial
NGL distribution system with access to markets throughout
Louisiana and the southeast
123
U.S. The Coastal Gathering and Processing segments
assets consist of the Coastal Straddles and LOU. For the first
nine months of 2010, the Partnership processed an average of
approximately
1,714.5 MMcf/d
of plant natural gas inlet and produced an average of
approximately 50.5 MBbl/d of NGLs.
Coastal Straddles. Coastal Straddles consists
of three wholly owned and seven partially owned straddle plants,
some of which are operated by the Partnership, and two offshore
gathering systems. The plants are generally situated on mainline
natural gas pipelines and process volumes of natural gas
collected from multiple offshore producing areas through a
series of offshore gathering systems and pipelines. The offshore
gathering systems, the Pelican and Seahawk pipeline systems
which have a combined length of approximately 175 miles,
are operated by the Partnership. These pipeline systems have a
combined capacity of approximately 230 MMcf per day and
supply a portion of the natural gas delivered to the Barracuda
and Lowry processing facilities. The gathering systems are
unregulated pipelines that gather natural gas from the shallow
water central Gulf of Mexico shelf. The Seahawk gathering system
also gathers some natural gas from the onshore regions of the
Louisiana Gulf Coast. Additionally, we have an interest in
Venice Gathering System, L.L.C., an offshore gathering system
regulated as an interstate pipeline by the FERC, which supplies
a portion of the natural gas to VESCO.
Coastal Straddles processes natural gas produced from shallow
water central and western Gulf of Mexico natural gas wells and
from deep shelf and deepwater Gulf of Mexico production via
connections to third party pipelines or through pipelines owned
by the Partnership. Coastal Straddles has access to markets
across the U.S. through the interstate natural gas
pipelines to which it is interconnected.
LOU. LOU consists of approximately
850 miles of gathering system pipelines, covering
approximately 3,800 square miles in Southwest Louisiana.
The gathering system is connected to numerous producing wells
and/or
central delivery points in the area between Lafayette and Lake
Charles, Louisiana. The gathering system is a high-pressure
gathering system that delivers natural gas for processing to
either the Acadia or Gillis plants via three main trunk lines.
The processing facilities include the Gillis and Acadia
processing plants, both of which are cryogenic plants. These
processing plants have an aggregate processing capacity of
approximately
260 MMcf/d.
In addition, the Gillis plant has integrated fractionation with
operating capacity of approximately 13 MBbl/d of capacity.
124
The following table lists the Coastal Gathering and Processing
segments natural gas processing plants:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
Approximate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Inlet
|
|
Gross NGL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
Throughput
|
|
Production
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
Volume for the
|
|
for the Nine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
Operated/
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
Capacity
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
Process
|
|
Non-
|
Facility
|
|
Owned
|
|
Location
|
|
(MMcf/d)
|
|
(MMcf/d)
|
|
(MBbl/d)
|
|
Type(5)
|
|
operated
|
|
Coastal
Straddles(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barracuda
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Cameron, LA
|
|
|
190
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Lowry
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Cameron, LA
|
|
|
265
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Stingray
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Cameron, LA
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RA
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Calumet(2)
|
|
|
32.4
|
|
|
St. Mary, LA
|
|
|
1,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RA
|
|
|
Non-operated
|
|
Yscloskey(2)
|
|
|
25.3
|
|
|
St. Bernard, LA
|
|
|
1,850
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RA
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
VESCO
|
|
|
76.8
|
|
|
Plaquemines, LA
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Bluewater(2)
|
|
|
21.8
|
|
|
Acadia, LA
|
|
|
425
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Non-operated
|
|
Terrebonne(2)
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
Terrebonne, LA
|
|
|
950
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RA
|
|
|
Non-operated
|
|
Toca(2)
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
|
St. Bernard, LA
|
|
|
1,150
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo/RA
|
|
|
Non-operated
|
|
Iowa(3)
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Jeff. Davis, LA
|
|
|
500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Sea Robin
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
Vermillion, LA
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Non-operated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Area Total
|
|
|
8,730
|
|
|
|
1,523.9
|
|
|
|
43.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOU
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gillis(4)
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Calcasieu, LA
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
Acadia
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Acadia, LA
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cryo
|
|
|
Operated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Area Total
|
|
|
260
|
|
|
|
190.6
|
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated System Total
|
|
|
8,990
|
|
|
|
1,714.5
|
|
|
|
50.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Coastal Straddles also includes two
offshore gathering systems which have a combined length of
approximately 175 miles.
|
|
(2) |
|
Our ownership is adjustable and
subject to annual redetermination.
|
|
(3) |
|
The Iowa plant, which is owned by
TRI, is currently idled. The Partnership has an option to
purchase the plant from TRI.
|
|
(4) |
|
The Gillis plant has fractionation
capacity of approximately 13 MBbl/d.
|
|
(5) |
|
CryoCryogenic Processing;
RARefrigerated Absorption Processing.
|
NGL Logistics
and Marketing Division
The NGL Logistics and Marketing division is also referred to as
the Downstream Business. It includes the activities necessary to
convert mixed NGLs into NGL products, market the NGL products
and provide certain value added services such as the
fractionation, storage, terminalling, transportation,
distribution and marketing of NGLs. Through fractionation, mixed
NGLs are separated into its component parts (ethane, propane,
butanes and natural gasoline). These component parts are
delivered to end-users through pipelines, barges, trucks and
rail cars. End-users of component NGLs include petrochemical and
refining companies and propane markets for heating, cooking or
crop drying applications. Retail distributors often sell to
end-use propane customers.
Logistics Assets
Segment
This segment uses its platform of integrated assets to
fractionate, store, treat and transport typically under
fee-based and margin-based arrangements. For NGLs to be used by
refineries, petrochemical manufacturers, propane distributors
and other industrial end-users, they must be fractionated into
their component products and delivered to various points
throughout the U.S. The Partnerships logistics assets
are generally connected to and supplied, in part, by its Natural
Gas Gathering
125
and Processing assets and are primarily located at Mont Belvieu
and Galena Park near Houston, Texas and in Lake Charles,
Louisiana.
Fractionation. After being extracted in the
field, mixed NGLs, sometimes referred to as y-grade
or raw NGL mix, are typically transported to a
centralized facility for fractionation where the mixed NGLs are
separated into discrete NGL products: ethane, propane, butanes
and natural gasoline. Mixed NGLs delivered from the
Partnerships Field and Coastal Gathering and Processing
segments represent the largest source of volumes processed by
the Partnerships NGL fractionators.
The majority of the Partnerships NGL fractionation
business is under fee-based arrangements. These fees are subject
to adjustment for changes in certain fractionation expenses,
including energy costs. The operating results of the
Partnerships NGL fractionation business are dependent upon
the volume of mixed NGLs fractionated and the level of
fractionation fees charged.
We believe that sufficient volumes of mixed NGLs will be
available for fractionation in commercially viable quantities
for the foreseeable future due to increases in NGL production
expected from shale plays in areas of the U.S. that include
North Texas, South Texas, Oklahoma and the Rockies and certain
other basins accessed by pipelines to Mont Belvieu, as well as
from continued production of NGLs in areas such as the Permian
Basin, Mid-Continent, East Texas, South Louisiana and shelf and
deepwater Gulf of Mexico. Dew point specifications implemented
by individual pipelines and the policy statement enacted by FERC
should result in volumes of mixed NGLs being available for
fractionation because natural gas requires processing or
conditioning to meet pipeline quality specifications. These
requirements establish a base volume of mixed NGLs during
periods when it might be otherwise uneconomical to process
certain sources of natural gas. Furthermore, significant volumes
of mixed NGLs are contractually committed to the
Partnerships NGL fractionation facilities.
Although competition for NGL fractionation services is primarily
based on the fractionation fee, the ability of an NGL
fractionator to obtain mixed NGLs and distribute NGL products is
also an important competitive factor. This ability is a function
of the existence of storage infrastructure and supply and market
connectivity necessary to conduct such operations. We believe
that the location, scope and capability of the
Partnerships logistics assets, including its
transportation and distribution systems, give the Partnership
access to both substantial sources of mixed NGLs and a large
number of end-use markets.
The following table details the Logistics Assets segments
fractionation facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Throughput for
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum Gross
|
|
the Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
Facility
|
|
% Owned
|
|
(MBbls/d)
|
|
(MBbls/d)
|
|
Operated Fractionation Facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lake Charles Fractionator (Lake Charles, LA)
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
37.1
|
|
Cedar Bayou Fractionator (Mont Belvieu,
TX)(1)
|
|
|
88.0
|
|
|
|
215
|
|
|
|
183.8
|
|
Equity Fractionation Facilities (non-operated):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gulf Coast Fractionator (Mont Belvieu, TX)
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
109
|
|
|
|
98.0
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes ownership through 88%
interest in Downstream Energy Ventures Co, LLC.
|
The Partnerships fractionation assets include ownership
interests in three stand-alone fractionation facilities that are
located on the Gulf Coast. The Partnership operates two of the
facilities, one at Mont Belvieu, Texas, and the other at Lake
Charles, Louisiana. The Partnership also has an equity
investment in a third fractionator, Gulf Coast Fractionators
(GCF), also located at Mont Belvieu. The Partnership
is subject to a consent decree with the Federal Trade
Commission, issued December 12, 1996, that, among other
things, prevents the Partnership from participating in
commercial decisions regarding rates paid by third parties for
fractionation services at GCF. This restriction on the
Partnerships activity at GCF will terminate on
December 12, 2016, twenty years after the date the consent
order was issued. In addition to the three stand-alone
facilities in the Logistics Assets segment, see the description
of
126
fractionation assets in the North Texas System and LOU in the
Partnerships Natural Gas Gathering and Processing division.
Storage and Terminalling. In general, the
Partnerships storage assets provide warehousing of mixed
NGLs, NGL products and petrochemical products in underground
wells, which allows for the injection and withdrawal of such
products at various times in order to meet demand cycles.
Similarly, the Partnerships terminalling operations
provide the inbound/outbound logistics and warehousing of mixed
NGLs, NGL products and petrochemical products in above-ground
storage tanks. The Partnerships underground storage and
terminalling facilities serve single markets, such as propane,
as well as multiple products and markets. For example, the Mont
Belvieu and Galena Park facilities have extensive pipeline
connections for mixed NGL supply and delivery of component NGLs.
In addition, some of these facilities are connected to marine,
rail and truck loading and unloading facilities that provide
services and products to the Partnerships customers. The
Partnership provides long and short-term storage and
terminalling services and throughput capability to affiliates
and third party customers for a fee.
The Partnership owns and/or operates a total of 43 storage
wells at its facilities with a net storage capacity of
approximately 64.5 MMBbl, the usage of which may be limited
by brine handling capacity, which is utilized to displace NGLs
from storage.
The Partnership operates its storage and terminalling facilities
based on the needs and requirements of its customers in the NGL,
petrochemical, refining, propane distribution and other related
industries. The Partnership usually experiences an increase in
demand for storage and terminalling of mixed NGLs during the
summer months when gas plants typically reach peak NGL
production, refineries have excess NGL products and LPG imports
are often highest. Demand for storage and terminalling at the
Partnerships propane facilities typically peaks during
fall, winter and early spring.
The Partnerships fractionation, storage and terminalling
business is supported by approximately 800 miles of
company-owned pipelines to transport mixed NGLs and
specification products.
The following table details the Logistics Assets segments
NGL storage facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NGL Storage Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
County/Parish,
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Gross Storage
|
|
Facility
|
|
% Owned
|
|
|
State
|
|
Permitted Wells
|
|
|
Capacity (MMBbl)
|
|
|
Hackberry Storage (Lake Charles)
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Cameron, LA
|
|
|
12
|
(1)
|
|
|
20.0
|
|
Mont Belvieu Storage
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Chambers, TX
|
|
|
20
|
(2)
|
|
|
42.5
|
|
Easton Storage
|
|
|
100.0
|
|
|
Evangeline, LA
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Hattiesburg Storage
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
|
Forrest, MS
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Four of twelve owned wells leased
to Citgo under long-term lease; one of twelve currently
permitting for service.
|
|
(2) |
|
The Partnership owns 20 wells
and operates 6 wells owned by ChevronPhillips Chemical.
|
The following table details the Logistics Assets segments
Terminal Facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terminal Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Throughput for Nine
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
County/Parish,
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
Facility
|
|
% Owned
|
|
State
|
|
Description
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Million gallons)
|
|
|
Galena Park
Terminal(1)
|
|
100
|
|
Harris, TX
|
|
NGL import / export terminal
|
|
|
593.1
|
|
Mont Belvieu
Terminal(2)
|
|
100
|
|
Chambers, TX
|
|
Transport and storage terminal
|
|
|
1,951.9
|
|
Hackberry Terminal
|
|
100
|
|
Cameron, LA
|
|
Storage terminal
|
|
|
56.9
|
|
Throughput volume is based on 100% ownership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
127
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Volumes reflect total import and
export across the dock/terminal.
|
|
(2) |
|
Volumes reflect total transport and
terminal throughput volumes.
|
Marketing and
Distribution Segment
The Marketing and Distribution segment transports, distributes
and markets NGLs via terminals and transportation assets across
the U.S. The Partnership owns or commercially manages
terminal facilities in a number of states, including Texas,
Louisiana, Arizona, Nevada, California, Florida, Alabama,
Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky and New Jersey. The geographic
diversity of the Partnerships assets provides it direct
access to many NGL customers as well as markets via trucks,
barges, rail cars and open-access regulated NGL pipelines owned
by third parties. The Marketing and Distribution division
consists of (i) NGL Distribution and Marketing,
(ii) Wholesale Marketing, (iii) Refinery Services and
(iv) Commercial Transportation.
NGL Distribution and Marketing. The
Partnership markets its own NGL production and also purchases
component NGL products from other NGL producers and marketers
for resale. For the first nine months of 2010, the
Partnerships distribution and marketing services business
sold an average of approximately 341.0 MBbl/d of NGLs.
The Partnership generally purchases mixed NGLs from producers at
a monthly pricing index less applicable fractionation,
transportation and marketing fees and resells these products to
petrochemical manufacturers, refineries and other marketing and
retail companies. This is primarily a physical settlement
business in which the Partnership earns margins from purchasing
and selling NGL products from producers under contract. The
Partnership also earns margins by purchasing and reselling NGL
products in the spot and forward physical markets. To
effectively serve its customers in the NGL Distribution and
Marketing segment, the Partnership contracts for and uses many
of the assets included in its Logistics Assets segment.
Wholesale Marketing. The Partnerships
wholesale propane marketing operations include primarily the
sale of propane and related logistics services to major
multi-state retailers, independent retailers and other
end-users. The Partnerships propane supply primarily
originates from both its refinery/gas supply contracts and its
other owned or managed logistics and marketing assets. The
Partnership generally sells propane at a fixed or posted price
at the time of delivery and, in some circumstances, the
Partnership earns margin on a net-back basis.
The wholesale propane marketing business is significantly
impacted by weather-driven demand, particularly in the winter,
the price of propane in the markets the Partnership serves and
its ability to deliver propane to customers to satisfy peak
winter demand.
Refinery Services. In its refinery services
business, the Partnership typically provides NGL balancing
services via contractual arrangements with refiners to purchase
and/or
market propane and to supply butanes. The Partnership uses its
commercial transportation assets (discussed below) and contracts
for and uses the storage, transportation and distribution assets
included in its Logistics Assets segment to assist refinery
customers in managing their NGL product demand and production
schedules. This includes both feedstocks consumed in refinery
processes and the excess NGLs produced by those same refining
processes. Under typical net-back sales contracts, the
Partnership generally retains a portion of the resale price of
NGL sales or receives a fixed minimum fee per gallon on products
sold. Under net-back purchase contracts, fees are earned for
locating and supplying NGL feedstocks to the refineries based on
a percentage of the cost to obtain such supply or a minimum fee
per gallon.
Key factors impacting the results of the Partnerships
refinery services business include production volumes, prices of
propane and butanes, as well as its ability to perform receipt,
delivery and transportation services in order to meet refinery
demand.
Commercial Transportation. The
Partnerships NGL transportation and distribution
infrastructure includes a wide range of assets supporting both
third party customers and the delivery requirements of its
128
marketing and asset management business. The Partnership
provides fee-based transportation services to refineries and
petrochemical companies throughout the Gulf Coast area. The
Partnerships assets are also deployed to serve its
wholesale distribution terminals, fractionation facilities,
underground storage facilities and pipeline injection terminals.
These distribution assets provide a variety of ways to transport
and deliver products to its customers.
The Partnerships transportation assets, as of
September 30, 2010, include:
|
|
|
|
|
approximately 770 railcars that the Partnership leases and
manages;
|
|
|
|
approximately 70 owned and leased transport tractors and
approximately 100 company-owned tank trailers; and
|
|
|
|
21 company-owned pressurized NGL barges.
|
The following table details the Marketing and Distribution
segments Terminal Facilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terminal Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Throughput for Nine
|
|
|
|
|
|
County/Parish,
|
|
|
|
Months Ended
|
Facility
|
|
% Owned
|
|
|
State
|
|
Description
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Million gallons)
|
|
Calvert City Terminal
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Marshall, KY
|
|
Propane terminal
|
|
32.6
|
Greenville Terminal
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Washington, MS
|
|
Marine propane terminal
|
|
16.9
|
Pt. Everglades Terminal
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Broward, FL
|
|
Marine propane terminal
|
|
16.6
|
Tyler Terminal
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Smith, TX
|
|
Propane terminal
|
|
7.2
|
Abilene
Transport(1)
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Taylor, TX
|
|
Mixed NGLs transport terminal
|
|
9.2
|
Bridgeport
Transport(1)
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Jack, TX
|
|
Mixed NGLs transport terminal
|
|
39.0
|
Gladewater
Transport(1)
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Gregg, TX
|
|
Mixed NGLs transport terminal
|
|
14.1
|
Hammond Transport
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Tangipahoa, LA
|
|
Transport terminal
|
|
22.8
|
Chattanooga Terminal
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Hamilton, TN
|
|
Propane terminal
|
|
12.6
|
Sparta Terminal
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Sparta, NJ
|
|
Propane terminal
|
|
5.5
|
Hattiesburg
Terminal(2)
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Forrest, MS
|
|
Propane terminal
|
|
214.3
|
Winona Terminal
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
Flagstaff, AZ
|
|
Propane terminal
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Volumes reflect total transport and
injection volumes.
|
(2) |
|
Throughput volume is based on 100%
ownership.
|
Operational Risks
and Insurance
The Partnership is subject to all risks inherent in the
midstream natural gas business. These risks include, but are not
limited to, explosions, fires, mechanical failure, terrorist
attacks, product spillage, weather, nature and inadequate
maintenance of
rights-of-way
and could result in damage to or destruction of operating assets
and other property, or could result in personal injury, loss of
life or polluting the environment, as well as curtailment or
suspension of operations at the affected facility. We maintain,
on behalf of ourselves and our subsidiaries, including the
Partnership, general public liability, property, boiler and
machinery and business interruption insurance in amounts that we
consider to be appropriate for such risks. Such insurance is
subject to deductibles that we consider reasonable and not
excessive given the current insurance market environment. The
costs associated with these insurance coverages increased
significantly following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005.
Insurance premiums, deductibles and co-insurance requirements
increased substantially, and terms were generally less favorable
than terms that were obtained prior to those hurricanes.
Insurance market conditions worsened again as a result of
industry losses including those sustained from Hurricanes Gustav
and Ike in September 2008, and as a result of volatile
conditions in the financial markets. As a result, in 2009, the
Partnership experienced further increases in deductibles and
premiums, and further reductions in coverage and limits.
The occurrence of a significant event not fully insured or
indemnified against, or the failure of a party to meet its
indemnification obligations, could materially and adversely
affect the Partnerships
129
operations and financial condition. While we currently maintain
levels and types of insurance that we believe to be prudent
under current insurance industry market conditions, our
inability to secure these levels and types of insurance in the
future could negatively impact the Partnerships business
operations and financial stability, particularly if an uninsured
loss were to occur. No assurance can be given that we will be
able to maintain these levels of insurance in the future at
rates considered commercially reasonable, particularly named
windstorm coverage and possibly contingent business interruption
coverage for the Partnerships onshore operations.
Significant
Customers
The following table lists the percentage of the
Partnerships consolidated sales and consolidated product
purchases with the Partnerships significant customers and
suppliers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2008
|
|
2009
|
|
% of consolidated revenues CPC
|
|
|
21
|
%
|
|
|
20
|
%
|
|
|
16
|
%
|
% of consolidated product purchases Louis Dreyfus Energy
Services L.P.
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
No other customer or supplier accounted for more than 10% of the
Partnerships consolidated revenues or consolidated product
purchases during these periods.
Gas Gathering and
Processing Contracts with Chevron
Under gas gathering and processing agreements with the
Partnership or the Versado entity in which the Partnership has a
63.0% ownership interest, Chevron has dedicated, on a
life-of-field
basis, substantially all of the natural gas it produces from
committed areas in New Mexico, Texas and the Gulf of Mexico.
Under these contracts, the Partnership receives a percentage of
the volumes of NGLs and residue gas attributable to the
processed natural gas in Texas and New Mexico and a percentage
of the volumes of NGLs or a fee depending on processing
economics for the Gulf of Mexico. These contracts provide that
either party has the right to periodically renegotiate the
processing terms. If the parties are unable to agree, then the
matter is settled by binding arbitration.
Refinery Services
and Related Contracts with Chevron
The Partnerships master refinery services agreement for
Chevron refineries was renegotiated and replaced on
April 1, 2009 with liquid product purchase agreements which
allows the Partnership to purchase propane from Chevrons
Pascagoula and Richmond refineries. The Partnership also
negotiated a new contract to provide transportation for
Chevrons propylene mix at the Pascagoula refinery. The
fractionation agreements under which the Partnership
fractionates Chevrons raw product at CBF were renegotiated
in 2009, resulting in increased volumes and extended terms.
In addition to its agreements with Chevron, the Partnership has
agreements with CPC, a separate joint venture affiliate of
Chevron, pursuant to which the Partnership supplies a
significant portion of CPCs NGL feedstock needs for
petrochemical plants in the Texas Gulf Coast area and a related
services agreement, pursuant to which the Partnership provides
storage and logistical services to CPC for feedstocks and
products produced from the petrochemical plants. The services
contract was renegotiated in 2008 with key components having a
10 year term. In September 2009, CPC executed contracts to
replace the previously terminated agreement with a new feedstock
and storage agreement effective for a term of 5 years,
which will renew annually following the end of the five year
term unless terminated by either party. We believe that the
Partnership is well positioned to retain CPC as a customer based
on the Partnerships long-standing history of customer
service, criticality of the service provided, the integrated
nature of facilities and the difficulty and high cost associated
with replicating the Partnerships assets. In addition to
these two agreements, The Partnership has fractionation
agreements in place with CPC for Y-grade streams and butanes.
130
Competition
The Partnership faces strong competition in acquiring new
natural gas supplies. Competition for natural gas supplies is
primarily based on the location of gathering and processing
facilities, pricing arrangements, reputation, efficiency,
flexibility, reliability and access to end-use markets or liquid
marketing hubs. Competitors to the Partnerships gathering
and processing operations include other natural gas gatherers
and processors, such as major interstate and intrastate pipeline
companies, master limited partnerships and oil and gas
producers. The Partnerships major competitors for natural
gas supplies in its current operating regions include Atlas Gas
Pipeline Company, Copano Energy, L.L.C. (Copano),
WTG Gas Processing L.P. (WTG), DCP Midstream
Partners LP (DCP), Devon Energy Corp
(Devon), Enbridge Inc., GulfSouth Pipeline Company,
LP, Hanlan Gas Processing, Ltd., J W Operating Company,
Louisiana Intrastate Gas and several other interstate pipeline
companies. Many of its competitors have greater financial
resources than the Partnership possesses.
The Partnership also competes for NGL products to market through
its NGL Logistics and Marketing division. The Partnerships
competitors include major oil and gas producers who market NGL
products for their own account and for others. Additionally, the
Partnership competes with several other NGL marketing companies,
including Enterprise Products Partners L.P., DCP, ONEOK and BP
p.l.c.
Additionally, the Partnership faces competition for mixed NGLs
supplies at its fractionation facilities. Its competitors
include large oil, natural gas and petrochemical companies. The
fractionators in which the Partnership owns an interest in the
Mont Belvieu region compete for volumes of mixed NGLs with other
fractionators also located at Mont Belvieu. Among the primary
competitors are Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and ONEOK,
Inc. In addition, certain producers fractionate mixed NGLs for
their own account in captive facilities. The Mont Belvieu
fractionators also compete on a more limited basis with
fractionators in Conway, Kansas and a number of decentralized,
smaller fractionation facilities in Texas, Louisiana and New
Mexico. The Partnerships other fractionation facilities
compete for mixed NGLs with the fractionators at Mont Belvieu as
well as other fractionation facilities located in Louisiana. The
Partnerships customers who are significant producers of
mixed NGLs and NGL products or consumers of NGL products may
develop their own fractionation facilities in lieu of using the
Partnerships services.
Regulation of
Operations
Regulation of pipeline gathering and transportation services,
natural gas sales and transportation of NGLs may affect certain
aspects of the Partnerships business and the market for
its products and services.
Regulation of
Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines
VGS is regulated by FERC under the NGA, and the NGPA. VGS
operates under a FERC-approved, open-access tariff that
establishes rates and terms and conditions under which the
system provides services to its customers. Pursuant to
FERCs jurisdiction, existing pipeline rates
and/or terms
and conditions of service may be challenged by customer
complaint or by FERC and proposed rate changes or changes in the
terms and conditions of service may be challenged by protest.
Generally, FERCs authority extends to: transportation of
natural gas; rates and charges for natural gas transportation;
certification and construction of new facilities; extension or
abandonment of services and facilities; maintenance of accounts
and records; commercial relationships and communications between
pipelines and certain affiliates; terms and conditions of
service and service contracts with customers; depreciation and
amortization policies; and acquisition and disposition of
facilities.
VGS holds a certificate of public convenience and necessity
issued by FERC permitting the construction, ownership, and
operation of its interstate natural gas pipeline facilities and
the provision of transportation services. This certificate
authorization requires VGS to provide on a non-discriminatory
basis open-access services to all customers who qualify under
its FERC gas tariff. FERC has the power to prescribe the
accounting treatment of items for regulatory purposes. Thus, the
books and records of VGS may be periodically audited by FERC.
131
The maximum recourse rates that may be charged by VGS for its
services are established through FERCs ratemaking process.
Generally, the maximum filed recourse rates for interstate
pipelines are based on the cost of service including recovery of
and a return on the pipelines investment. Key determinants
in the ratemaking process are costs of providing service,
allowed rate of return and volume throughput and contractual
capacity commitment assumptions. VGS is permitted to discount
its firm and interruptible rates without further FERC
authorization down to the variable cost of performing service,
provided they do not unduly discriminate. The
applicable recourse rates and terms and conditions for service
are set forth in each pipelines FERC approved tariff. Rate
design and the allocation of costs also can impact a
pipelines profitability.
Gathering
Pipeline Regulation
The Partnerships natural gas gathering operations are
typically subject to ratable take and common purchaser statutes
in the states in which it operates. The common purchaser
statutes generally require gathering pipelines to purchase or
take without undue discrimination as to source of supply or
producer. These statutes are designed to prohibit discrimination
in favor of one producer over another producer or one source of
supply over another. The regulations under these statutes can
have the effect of imposing some restrictions on the
Partnerships ability as an owner of gathering facilities
to decide with whom it contracts to gather natural gas. The
states in which the Partnership operates have adopted
complaint-based regulation of natural gas gathering activities,
which allows natural gas producers and shippers to file
complaints with state regulators in an effort to resolve
grievances relating to gathering access and rate discrimination.
The rates the Partnership charges for gathering are deemed just
and reasonable unless challenged in a complaint. We cannot
predict whether such a complaint will be filed against the
Partnership in the future. Failure to comply with state
regulations can result in the imposition of administrative,
civil and criminal penalties.
Section 1(b) of the NGA, exempts natural gas gathering
facilities from regulation as a natural gas company by FERC
under the NGA. We believe that the natural gas pipelines in the
Partnerships gathering systems meet the traditional tests
FERC has used to establish a pipelines status as a
gatherer not subject to regulation as a natural gas company.
However, the distinction between FERC-regulated transmission
services and federally unregulated gathering services is the
subject of substantial, on-going litigation, so the
classification and regulation of the Partnerships
gathering facilities are subject to change based on future
determinations by FERC, the courts or Congress. Natural gas
gathering may receive greater regulatory scrutiny at both the
state and federal levels. The Partnerships natural gas
gathering operations could be adversely affected should they be
subject to more stringent application of state or federal
regulation of rates and services. Additional rules and
legislation pertaining to these matters are considered or
adopted from time to time. We cannot predict what effect, if
any, such changes might have on the Partnerships
operations, but the industry could be required to incur
additional capital expenditures and increased costs depending on
future legislative and regulatory changes.
In 2007, Texas enacted new laws regarding rates, competition and
confidentiality for natural gas gathering and transmission
pipelines (Competition Statute) and new informal
complaint procedures for challenging determinations of lost and
unaccounted for gas by gas gatherers, processors and
transporters (LUG Statute). The Competition Statute
gives the Railroad Commission of Texas (RRC) the
ability to use either a
cost-of-service
method or a market-based method for setting rates for natural
gas gathering and transportation pipelines in formal rate
proceedings. This statute also gives the RRC specific authority
to enforce its statutory duty to prevent discrimination in
natural gas gathering and transportation, to enforce the
requirement that parties participate in an informal complaint
process and to punish purchasers, transporters, and gatherers
for taking discriminatory actions against shippers and sellers.
The Competition Bill also provides producers with the unilateral
option to determine whether or not confidentiality provisions
are included in a contract to which a producer is a party for
the sale, transportation, or gathering of natural gas. The LUG
Statute modifies the informal complaint process at the RRC with
procedures unique to lost and unaccounted for gas issues. Such
statute also extends the types of information that can be
requested
132
and provides the RRC with the authority to make determinations
and issue orders in specific situations. We cannot predict what
effect, if any, these statutes might have on the
Partnerships future operations in Texas.
Intrastate
Pipeline Regulation
Though the Partnerships natural gas intrastate pipelines
are not subject to regulation by FERC as natural gas companies
under the NGA, the Partnerships intrastate pipelines may
be subject to certain FERC-imposed daily scheduled flow and
capacity posting requirements depending on the volume of flows
in a given period and the design capacity of the pipelines
receipt and delivery meters. See Other Federal Laws
and Regulation Affecting Our IndustryFERC Market
Transparency Rules.
The Partnerships Texas intrastate pipeline, Targa
Intrastate Pipeline LLC (Targa Intrastate), owns the
intrastate pipeline that transports natural gas from the
Partnerships Shackelford processing plant to an
interconnect with Atmos Pipeline-Texas that in turn delivers gas
to the West Texas Utilities Companys Paint Creek Power
Station. Targa Intrastate also owns a 1.65 mile,
10 inch diameter intrastate pipeline that transports
natural gas from a third party gathering system into the Chico
System in Denton County, Texas. Targa Intrastate is a gas
utility subject to regulation by the RRC and has a tariff on
file with such agency.
The Partnerships Louisiana intrastate pipeline, Targa
Louisiana Intrastate LLC (TLI) owns an approximately
60-mile
intrastate pipeline system that receives all of the natural gas
it transports within or at the boundary of the State of
Louisiana. Because all such gas ultimately is consumed within
Louisiana, and since the pipelines rates and terms of
service are subject to regulation by the Office of Conservation
of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources
(DNR), the pipeline qualifies as a Hinshaw pipeline
under Section 1(c) of the NGA and thus is exempt from full
FERC regulation.
Texas and Louisiana have adopted complaint-based regulation of
intrastate natural gas transportation activities, which allows
natural gas producers and shippers to file complaints with state
regulators in an effort to resolve grievances relating to
pipeline access and rate discrimination. The rates the
Partnership charges for intrastate transportation are deemed
just and reasonable unless challenged in a complaint. We cannot
predict whether such a complaint will be filed against the
Partnership in the future. Failure to comply with state
regulations can result in the imposition of administrative,
civil and criminal penalties.
Regulation of NGL
intrastate pipelines
The Partnerships intrastate NGL pipelines in Louisiana
gather mixed NGLs streams that the Partnership owns from
processing plants in Louisiana and deliver such streams to the
Gillis fractionator in Lake Charles, Louisiana, where the mixed
NGLs streams are fractionated into various products. The
Partnership delivers such refined products (ethane, propane,
butanes and natural gasoline) out of its fractionator to and
from Targa-owned storage, to other third party facilities and to
various third party pipelines in Louisiana. These pipelines are
not subject to FERC regulation or rate regulation by the DNR,
but are regulated by United States Department of Transportation
(DOT) safety regulations.
Natural Gas
Processing
The Partnerships natural gas gathering and processing
operations are not presently subject to FERC regulation.
However, starting in May 2009 the Partnership was required to
report to FERC information regarding natural gas sale and
purchase transactions for some of its operations depending on
the volume of natural gas transacted during the prior calendar
year. See Other Federal Laws and
Regulation Affecting Our IndustryFERC Market
Transparency Rules. There can be no assurance that the
Partnerships processing operations will continue to be
exempt from other FERC regulation in the future.
Availability,
Terms and Cost of Pipeline Transportation
The Partnerships processing facilities and marketing of
natural gas and NGLs are affected by the availability, terms and
cost of pipeline transportation. The price and terms of access
to pipeline
133
transportation can be subject to extensive federal and, if a
complaint is filed, state regulation. FERC is continually
proposing and implementing new rules and regulations affecting
the interstate transportation of natural gas, and to a lesser
extent, the interstate transportation of NGLs. These initiatives
also may indirectly affect the intrastate transportation of
natural gas and NGLs under certain circumstances. We cannot
predict the ultimate impact of these regulatory changes to the
Partnerships processing operations and its natural gas and
NGL marketing operations. We do not believe that the Partnership
would be affected by any such FERC action materially differently
than other natural gas processors and natural gas and NGL
marketers with whom it competes.
The ability of the Partnerships processing facilities and
pipelines to deliver natural gas into third party natural gas
pipeline facilities is directly impacted by the gas quality
specifications required by those pipelines. In 2006, FERC issued
a policy statement on provisions governing gas quality and
interchangeability in the tariffs of interstate gas pipeline
companies and a separate order declining to set generic
prescriptive national standards. FERC strongly encouraged all
natural gas pipelines subject to its jurisdiction to adopt, as
needed, gas quality and interchangeability standards in their
FERC gas tariffs modeled on the interim guidelines issued by a
group of industry representatives, headed by the Natural Gas
Council (NGC+ Work Group), or to explain how and why
their tariff provisions differ. We do not believe that the
adoption of the NGC+ Work Groups gas quality interim
guidelines by a pipeline that either directly or indirectly
interconnects with the Partnerships facilities would
materially affect the Partnerships operations. We have no
way to predict, however, whether FERC will approve of gas
quality specifications that materially differ from the NGC+ Work
Groups interim guidelines for such an interconnecting
pipeline.
Sales of
Natural Gas and NGLs
The price at which the Partnership buys and sells natural gas
and NGLs is currently not subject to federal rate regulation
and, for the most part, is not subject to state regulation.
However, with regard to the Partnerships physical
purchases and sales of these energy commodities and any related
hedging activities that it undertakes, the Partnership is
required to observe anti-market manipulation laws and related
regulations enforced by FERC
and/or the
CFTC. See Other Federal Laws and
Regulation Affecting Our IndustryEnergy Policy Act of
2005. Starting May 1, 2009, the Partnership was
required to report to FERC information regarding natural gas
sale and purchase transactions for some of its operations
depending on the volume of natural gas transacted during the
prior calendar year. See Other Federal Laws and
Regulation Affecting Our IndustryFERC Market
Transparency Rules. Should the Partnership violate the
anti-market manipulation laws and regulations, it could also be
subject to related third party damage claims by, among others,
market participants, sellers, royalty owners and taxing
authorities.
Other State
and Local Regulation of Operations
The Partnerships business activities are subject to
various state and local laws and regulations, as well as orders
of regulatory bodies pursuant thereto, governing a wide variety
of matters, including marketing, production, pricing, community
right-to-know,
protection of the environment, safety and other matters. For
additional information regarding the potential impact of
federal, state or local regulatory measures on the
Partnerships business, see Risk FactorsRisks
Related to Our Business.
Interstate common
carrier liquids pipeline regulation
As part of the Downstream Business acquired from Targa on
September 24, 2009, the Partnership acquired Targa NGL.
Targa NGL is an interstate NGL common carrier subject to
regulation by FERC under the ICA. Targa NGL owns a twelve inch
diameter pipeline that runs between Lake Charles, Louisiana and
Mont Belvieu, Texas. This pipeline can move mixed NGLs and
purity NGL products. Targa NGL also owns an eight inch diameter
pipeline and a 20 inch diameter pipeline, each of which run
between Mont Belvieu, Texas and Galena Park, Texas. The eight
inch and the 20 inch pipelines are part of an extensive
mixed NGL and purity NGL pipeline receipt and delivery system
that provides services to domestic and foreign import and export
customers. The ICA requires that the Partnership maintain
tariffs on file with FERC for each of these pipelines. Those
tariffs set forth the rates the Partnership charges for
providing transportation
134
services as well as the rules and regulations governing these
services. The ICA requires, among other things, that rates on
interstate common carrier pipelines be just and
reasonable and non-discriminatory. All shippers on this
pipeline are Partnership subsidiaries.
Other Federal
Laws and Regulation Affecting Our Industry
Energy Policy Act
of 2005
The EPAct 2005 is a comprehensive compilation of tax incentives,
authorized appropriations for grants and guaranteed loans, and
significant changes to the statutory policy that affects all
segments of the energy industry. Among other matters, EP Act
2005 amends the NGA to add an anti- market manipulation
provision which makes it unlawful for any entity to engage in
prohibited behavior to be prescribed by FERC, and furthermore
provides FERC with additional civil penalty authority. The EP
Act 2005 provides FERC with the power to assess civil penalties
of up to $1 million per day for violations of the NGA and
$1 million per violation per day for violations of the
NGPA. The civil penalty provisions are applicable to entities
that engage in the sale of natural gas for resale in interstate
commerce, including VGS. In 2006, FERC issued Order 670 to
implement the anti-market manipulation provision of EP Act 2005.
Order 670 makes it unlawful to: (1) in connection with
the purchase or sale of natural gas subject to the jurisdiction
of FERC, or the purchase or sale of transportation services
subject to the jurisdiction of FERC, for any entity, directly or
indirectly, to use or employ any device, scheme or artifice to
defraud; (2) to make any untrue statement of material fact
or omit any statement necessary to make the statements made not
misleading; or (3) to engage in any act or practice that
operates as a fraud or deceit upon any person. Order 670
does not apply to activities that relate only to intrastate or
other non-jurisdictional sales or gathering, but does apply to
activities of gas pipelines and storage companies that provide
interstate services, as well as otherwise non-jurisdictional
entities to the extent the activities are conducted in
connection with gas sales, purchases or transportation
subject to FERC jurisdiction, which now includes the annual
reporting requirements under a final rule on the annual natural
gas transaction reporting requirements, as amended by subsequent
orders on rehearing (Order 704), the daily schedule flow
and capacity posting requirements under Order 720, and the
quarterly reporting requirement under Order 735. The
anti-market manipulation rule and enhanced civil penalty
authority reflect an expansion of FERCs NGA enforcement
authority.
FERC Standards of
Conduct for Transmission Providers
On October 16, 2008, FERC issued new standards of conduct
for transmission providers (Order 717) to regulate the
manner in which interstate natural gas pipelines may interact
with their marketing affiliates based on an employee separation
approach. A Transmission Provider includes an
interstate natural gas pipeline that provides open access
transportation pursuant to FERCs regulations. Under these
rules, a Transmission Providers transmission function
employees (including the transmission function employees of any
of its affiliates) must function independently from the
Transmission Providers marketing function employees
(including the marketing function employees of any of its
affiliates). FERC clarified on October 15, 2009 in a
rehearing order, Order
717-A,
however, that if a Hinshaw pipeline affiliated with a
Transmission Provider engages in off-system sales of gas that
has been transported on the Transmission Providers
affiliated pipeline, then the Transmission Provider and the
Hinshaw pipeline (which is engaging in marketing functions) will
be required to observe the Standards of Conduct by, among other
things, having the marketing function employees function
independently from the transmission function employees. The
Partnerships only Hinshaw pipeline, TLI, does not engage
in any off-system sales of gas that have been transported on an
affiliated Transmission Provider, and we do not believe that the
Partnerships operations will be affected by the new
standards of conduct. FERC further clarified Order
717-A in a
rehearing order, Order 717-B, on November 16, 2009 and in
Order 717-C, on April 16, 2010. However, Orders 717-B and
717-C did not substantively alter the rules promulgated under
Orders 717 and
717-A.
Requests for rehearing of Order 717-C have been filed and are
currently pending before FERC. Our only Transmission Provider,
VGS, does not engage in any transactions with marketing
affiliates, and we do not believe that our operations will be
affected by the new standards of conduct. We have no way to
predict with certainty whether and to what extent FERC will
revise the new standards of conduct in response to those
requests for rehearing.
135
FERC Market
Transparency Rules
In 2007, FERC issued Order 704, whereby wholesale buyers and
sellers of more than 2.2 BBtu of physical natural gas in the
previous calendar year, including interstate and intrastate
natural gas pipelines, natural gas gatherers, natural gas
processors and natural gas marketers, are now required to
report, on May 1 of each year, beginning in 2009, aggregate
volumes of natural gas purchased or sold at wholesale in the
prior calendar year to the extent such transactions utilize,
contribute to, or may contribute to the formation of price
indices. It is the responsibility of the reporting entity to
determine which transactions should be reported based on the
guidance of Order 704 as clarified on orders in clarification in
rehearing.
On November 20, 2008, FERC issued a final rule on daily
scheduled flows and capacity posting requirements (Order 720).
Under Order 720, as clarified on orders in clarification in
rehearing certain non-interstate pipelines delivering, on an
annual basis, more than an average of 50 million MMBtu of
gas over the previous three calendar years, are required to post
daily certain information regarding the pipelines capacity
and scheduled flows for each receipt and delivery point that has
a design capacity equal to or greater than 15,000 MMBtu/d
and interstate pipelines are required to post information
regarding the provision of no-notice service. The Partnership
takes the position that, at this time, Targa Louisiana
Intrastate LLC is exempt from this rule as currently written.
On May 20, 2010, the FERC issued Order No. 735, which
requires intrastate pipelines providing transportation services
under Section 311 of the NGPA and Hinshaw
pipelines operating under Section 1(c) of the NGA to report
on a quarterly basis more detailed transportation and storage
transaction information, including: rates charged by the
pipeline under each contract; receipt and delivery points and
zones or segments covered by each contract; the quantity of
natural gas the shipper is entitled to transport, store, or
deliver; the duration of the contract; and whether there is an
affiliate relationship between the pipeline and the shipper.
Order No. 735 further requires that such information must
be supplied through a new electronic reporting system and will
be posted on FERCs website, and that such quarterly
reports may not contain information redacted as privileged. The
FERC promulgated this Rule after determining that such
transactional information would help shippers make more informed
purchasing decisions and would improve the ability of both
shippers and the FERC to monitor actual transactions for
evidence of market power or undue discrimination. Order
No. 735 also extends the Commissions periodic review
of the rates charged by the subject pipelines from three years
to five years. Order No. 735 becomes effective on
April 1, 2011. Numerous parties are seeking rehearing of
Order No. 735 (pursuant to filings made June 21,
2010). As currently written, this rule does not apply to the
Partnerships Hinshaw pipelines, however the Partnership
has no way to predict if and to what extent an order on
rehearing by the FERC may affect the current requirements under
Order No. 735. We will continue to monitor developments
with respect to this rulemaking.
Additional proposals and proceedings that might affect the
natural gas industry are pending before Congress, FERC and the
courts. We cannot predict the ultimate impact of these or the
above regulatory changes to the Partnerships natural gas
operations. We do not believe that the Partnership would be
affected by any such FERC action materially differently than
other midstream natural gas companies with whom it competes.
Environmental,
Health and Safety Matters
General
The Partnerships operations are subject to stringent and
complex federal, state and local laws and regulations pertaining
to health, safety and the environment. As with the industry
generally, compliance with current and anticipated environmental
laws and regulations increases the Partnerships overall
cost of business, including its capital costs to construct,
maintain and upgrade equipment and facilities. These laws and
regulations may, among other things, require the acquisition of
various permits to conduct regulated activities, require the
installation of pollution control equipment or otherwise
restrict the way the Partnership can handle or dispose of its
wastes; limit or prohibit construction activities in sensitive
areas such as wetlands, wilderness areas or areas inhabited by
endangered or threatened species;
136
impose specific health and safety criteria addressing worker
protection, require investigatory and remedial action to
mitigate pollution conditions caused by the Partnerships
operations or attributable to former operations; and enjoin some
or all of the operations of facilities deemed in non-compliance
with permits issued pursuant to such environmental laws and
regulations. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations
may result in assessment of administrative, civil and criminal
penalties, the imposition of removal or remedial obligations and
the issuance of injunctions limiting or prohibiting the
Partnerships activities.
The Partnership has implemented programs and policies designed
to keep its pipelines, plants and other facilities in compliance
with existing environmental laws and regulations. The clear
trend in environmental regulation, however, is to place more
restrictions and limitations on activities that may affect the
environment and thus, any changes in environmental laws and
regulations or re-interpretation of enforcement policies that
result in more stringent and costly waste handling, storage,
transport, disposal or remediation requirements could have a
material adverse effect on the Partnerships operations and
financial position. The Partnership may be unable to pass on
such increased compliance costs to its customers. Moreover,
accidental releases or spills may occur in the course of the
Partnerships operations and we cannot assure you that the
Partnership will not incur significant costs and liabilities as
a result of such releases or spills, including any third party
claims for damage to property, natural resources or persons.
While we believe that the Partnership is in substantial
compliance with existing environmental laws and regulations and
that continued compliance with current requirements would not
have a material adverse effect on the Partnership, there is no
assurance that the current conditions will continue in the
future.
The following is a summary of the more significant existing
environmental, health and safety laws and regulations to which
the Partnerships business operations are subject and for
which compliance may have a material adverse impact on its
capital expenditures, results of operations or financial
position.
Hazardous
Substances and Waste
CERCLA and comparable state laws impose liability without regard
to fault or the legality of the original conduct, on certain
classes of persons who are considered to be responsible for the
release of a hazardous substance into the
environment. These persons include current and prior owners or
operators of the site where the release occurred and entities
that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous
substances found at the site. Under CERCLA, these
responsible persons may be subject to joint and
several, strict liability for the costs of cleaning up the
hazardous substances that have been released into the
environment, for damages to natural resources and for the costs
of certain health studies. CERCLA also authorizes the EPA and,
in some instances, third parties to act in response to threats
to the public health or the environment and to seek to recover
from the responsible classes of persons the costs they incur. It
is not uncommon for neighboring landowners and other third
parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage
allegedly caused by the release of hazardous substances or other
pollutants into the environment. The Partnership generates
materials in the course of its operations that are regulated as
hazardous substances under CERCLA or similar state
statutes and, as a result, may be jointly and severally liable
under CERCLA or such statutes for all or part of the costs
required to clean up sites at which these hazardous substances
have been released into the environment.
The Partnership also generates solid wastes, including hazardous
wastes that are subject to the requirements of RCRA and
comparable state statutes. While RCRA regulates both solid and
hazardous wastes, it imposes strict requirements on the
generation, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of
hazardous wastes. In the course of its operations, the
Partnership generates petroleum product wastes and ordinary
industrial wastes such as paint wastes, waste solvents and waste
compressor oils that are regulated as hazardous wastes. Certain
materials generated in the exploration, development or
production of crude oil and natural gas are excluded from
RCRAs hazardous waste regulations. However, it is possible
that future changes in law or regulation could result in these
wastes, including wastes currently generated during the
Partnerships operations, being designated as
hazardous wastes and therefore subject to more
rigorous and costly disposal requirements. Any such changes in
the laws and regulations could have a
137
material adverse effect on the Partnerships capital
expenditures and operating expenses as well as those of the oil
and gas industry in general.
The Partnership currently owns or leases and has in the past
owned or leased, properties that for many years have been used
for midstream natural gas and NGL activities. Although the
Partnership has utilized operating and disposal practices that
were standard in the industry at the time, hydrocarbons or
wastes may have been disposed of or released on or under the
properties owned or leased by us or on or under the other
locations where these hydrocarbons and wastes have been taken
for treatment or disposal. In addition, certain of these
properties have been operated by third parties whose treatment
and disposal or release of hydrocarbons or wastes was not under
the Partnerships control. These properties and wastes
disposed thereon may be subject to CERCLA, RCRA and analogous
state laws. Under these laws, the Partnership could be required
to remove or remediate previously disposed wastes (including
wastes disposed of or released by prior owners or operators), to
clean up contaminated property (including contaminated
groundwater) and to perform remedial operations to prevent
future contamination. We are not currently aware of any facts,
events or conditions relating to such requirements that could
materially impact the Partnerships operations or financial
condition.
Air
Emissions
The Clean Air Act, as amended, and comparable state laws and
regulations restrict the emission of air pollutants from many
sources, including processing plants and compressor stations and
also impose various monitoring and reporting requirements. These
laws and regulations may require the Partnership to obtain
pre-approval for the construction or modification of certain
projects or facilities expected to produce or significantly
increase air emissions, obtain and strictly comply with
stringent air permit requirements or utilize specific equipment
or technologies to control emissions. The Partnership is
currently reviewing the air emissions monitoring systems at
certain of its facilities. The Partnership may be required to
incur capital expenditures in the next few years to implement
various air emissions leak detection and monitoring programs as
well as to install air pollution control equipment or
non-ambient
storage tanks as a result of its review or in connection with
maintaining, amending or obtaining operating permits and
approvals for air emissions. We currently believe, however, that
such requirements will not have a material adverse affect on the
Partnerships operations.
Climate
Change
There is increasing attention in the United States and worldwide
concerning the issue of climate change and the effect of GHGs.
On December 15, 2009, the EPA published its findings that
emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs present an
endangerment to public health and the environment because
emissions of such gases are, according to the EPA, contributing
to warming of the earths atmosphere and other climatic
changes. These findings allow the EPA to proceed with the
adoption and implementation of regulations restricting emissions
of GHGs under existing provisions of the federal Clean Air Act.
The EPA already has adopted two sets of regulations regarding
possible future regulation of GHG emissions under the Clean Air
Act, one of which purports to regulate emissions of GHGs from
motor vehicles and the other of which would regulate emissions
of GHGs from large stationary sources of emissions, such as
power plants or industrial facilities. EPA has asserted that the
final motor vehicle GHG emission standards will trigger
construction and operating permit requirements for stationary
sources, commencing when those motor vehicle standards take
effect, on January 2, 2011. Thus, on June 3, 2010, EPA
published its final rule to address permitting of GHG emissions
from stationary sources under the Clean Air Acts
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and
Title V permitting programs. The final rule tailors the PSD
and Title V permitting programs to apply to certain
stationary sources of GHG emissions in a multi-step process,
with the largest sources first subject to permitting. Most
recently on August 12, 2010, the EPA proposed two actions
to govern the implementation of PSD permitting requirements for
GHGs in states whose existing State Implementation Plan
(SIPs) do not accommodate the regulation of GHGs.
First, the EPA has proposed to issue a Finding of
Substantial Inadequacy for thirteen states, including
Louisiana, whose SIPs do not accommodate such GHG regulation and
require those states to comply with a proposed
138
SIP call, which would require those states to
revise their SIPs to ensure that their PSD programs cover GHG
emissions. Second, the EPA has proposed to establish a Federal
Implementation Plan in any state that establishes a new
comprehensive scheme requiring operators of stationary sources
emitting more than established annual thresholds of carbon
dioxide-equivalent GHGs to inventory and report their GHG
emissions annually on a
facility-by-facility
basis that does not revise its SIP to accommodate GHG
permitting. Moreover, on October 30, 2009, the EPA
published a final rule in the U.S. beginning in 2011 for
emissions occurring in 2010. On November 8, 2010, the EPA
adopted amendments to this GHG reporting rule, expanding the
monitoring and reporting obligations to include onshore and
offshore oil and natural gas production facilities and onshore
oil and natural gas processing, transmission, storage and
distribution facilities, beginning in 2012 for emissions
occurring in 2011.
In addition, both houses of Congress have already considered
legislation to reduce emissions of GHGs, and almost half of the
states have already taken legal measures to reduce emissions of
GHGs, primarily through the planned development of GHG emission
inventories
and/or
regional GHG cap and trade programs. Most of these cap and trade
programs work by requiring either major sources of emissions,
such as electric power plants, or major producers of fuels, such
as refineries and NGL fractionation plants, to acquire and
surrender emission allowances. The number of allowances
available for purchase is reduced each year until the overall
GHG emission reduction goal is achieved. The adoption and
implementation of any regulations imposing GHG reporting or
permitting obligations on, or limiting emissions of GHGs from,
the Partnerships equipment and operations could require
the Partnership to incur costs to reduce emissions of GHGs
associated with its operations , could adversely affect its
performance of operations in the absence of any permits that may
be required to regulation emission of greenhouse gases, or could
adversely affect demand for its natural gas and NGL processing
services.
Finally, it should be noted that some scientists have concluded
that increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the
Earths atmosphere may produce climate changes that have
significant physical effects, such as increased frequency and
severity of storms, droughts, and floods and other climatic
events; if any such effects were to occur, they could have in
adverse effect on the Partnerships assets and operations.
Water
Discharges
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (Clean
Water Act or CWA), and analogous state laws
impose restrictions and strict controls regarding the discharge
of pollutants into navigable waters. Pursuant to the CWA and
analogous state laws, permits must be obtained to discharge
pollutants into state waters or waters of the U.S. Any such
discharge of pollutants into regulated waters must be performed
in accordance with the terms of the permit issued by the EPA or
the analogous state agency. Spill prevention, control and
countermeasure requirements under federal law require
appropriate containment berms and similar structures to help
prevent the contamination of navigable waters in the event of a
petroleum hydrocarbon tank spill, rupture or leak. In addition,
the CWA and analogous state laws require individual permits or
coverage under general permits for discharges of storm water
runoff from certain types of facilities. These permits may
require the Partnership to monitor and sample the storm water
runoff. The CWA and analogous state laws can impose substantial
civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance including spills
and other non-authorized discharges.
It is customary to recover natural gas from deep shale
formations through the use of hydraulic fracturing, combined
with sophisticated horizontal drilling. Hydraulic fracturing
involves the injection of water, sand and chemical additives
under pressure into rock formations to stimulate gas production.
Due to public concerns raised regarding potential impacts of
hydraulic fracturing on groundwater quality, legislative and
regulatory efforts at the federal level and in some states have
been initiated to require or make more stringent the permitting
and compliance requirements for hydraulic fracturing operations.
In particular, The U.S. Senate and House of Representatives
are currently considering bills entitled the Fracturing
Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act (FRAC
Act), to amend the federal Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA), to repeal an exemption from regulation for
hydraulic fracturing. If enacted, the FRAC Act would amend the
definition of underground injection in the SDWA to
encompass hydraulic
139
fracturing activities and this would require hydraulic
fracturing operations to meet permitting and financial assurance
requirements, adhere to certain construction specifications,
fulfill monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping obligations, and
meet plugging and abandonment requirements. The FRAC Act also
proposes to require the reporting and public disclosure of
chemicals used in the fracturing process, which could make it
easier for third parties opposing the hydraulic fracturing
process to initiate legal proceedings based on allegations that
specific chemicals used in the fracturing process could
adversely affect groundwater. Although the legislation is still
being developed, we do not expect the FRAC Act to have a
material adverse effect on our business. Moreover, the EPA
announced in March 2010 that it is conducting a comprehensive
research study in
2010-2011 on
the potential adverse impacts that hydraulic fracturing may have
on water quality and public health. The results of such a study
which are expected to be available by late 2012, once completed,
could further spur action towards federal legislation and
regulation of hydraulic fracturing activities.
The Oil Pollution Act of 1990, as amended (OPA),
which amends the CWA, establishes strict liability for owners
and operators of facilities that are the site of a release of
oil into waters of the United States. OPA and its associated
regulations impose a variety of requirements on responsible
parties related to the prevention of oil spills and liability
for damages resulting from such spills. A responsible
party under OPA includes owners and operators of onshore
facilities, such as the Partnerships plants, and the
Partnerships pipelines. Under OPA, owners and operators of
facilities that handle, store, or transport oil are required to
develop and implement oil spill response plans, and establish
and maintain evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to
cover liabilities related to an oil spill for which such parties
could be statutorily responsible. We believe that the
Partnership is in substantial compliance with the CWA, SDWA, OPA
and analogous state laws.
Endangered
Species Act
The federal Endangered Species Act, as amended
(ESA), restricts activities that may affect
endangered or threatened species or their habitats. While some
of the Partnerships facilities may be located in areas
that are designated as habitat for endangered or threatened
species, we believe that the Partnership is in substantial
compliance with the ESA. However, the designation of previously
unidentified endangered or threatened species could cause the
Partnership to incur additional costs or become subject to
operating restrictions or bans in the affected areas.
Pipeline
Safety
The pipelines used by the Partnership to gather and transport
natural gas and transport NGLs are subject to regulation by the
DOT under the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968, as
amended (NGPSA), with respect to natural gas and the
Hazardous Liquids Pipeline Safety Act of 1979, as amended
(HLPSA), with respect to crude oil, NGLs and
condensates. The NGPSA and HLPSA govern the design,
installation, testing, construction, operation, replacement and
management of natural gas and NGL pipeline facilities. Pursuant
to these acts, the DOT has promulgated regulations governing
pipeline wall thickness, design pressures, maximum operating
pressures, pipeline patrols and leak surveys, minimum depth
requirements, and emergency procedures, as well as other matters
intended to ensure adequate protection for the public and to
prevent accidents and failures. Where applicable, the NGPSA and
HLPSA require any entity that owns or operates pipeline
facilities to comply with the regulations under these acts, to
permit access to and allow copying of records and to make
certain reports and provide information as required by the
Secretary of Transportation. We believe that the
Partnerships pipeline operations are in substantial
compliance with applicable NGPSA and HLPSA requirements;
however, due to the possibility of new or amended laws and
regulations or reinterpretation of existing laws and
regulations, future compliance with the NGPSA and HLPSA could
result in increased costs.
The Partnerships pipelines are also subject to regulation
by the DOT under the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002,
which was amended by the Pipeline Inspection, Protection,
Enforcement, and Safety Act of 2006 (PIPES Act). The
DOT, through the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) has established a series of
rules, which require pipeline operators to develop
140
and implement integrity management programs for gas transmission
pipelines that, in the event of a failure, could affect
high consequence areas. High consequence
areas are currently defined as areas with specified
population densities, buildings containing populations of
limited mobility and areas where people gather that are located
along the route of a pipeline. Similar rules are also in place
for operators of hazardous liquid pipelines including lines
transporting NGLs and condensates.
In addition, states have adopted regulations, similar to
existing DOT regulations, for intrastate gathering and
transmission lines. Texas and Louisiana have developed
regulatory programs that parallel the federal regulatory scheme
and are applicable to intrastate pipelines transporting natural
gas and NGLs. We currently estimate an annual average cost of
$1.7 million for years 2010 through 2012 to perform
necessary integrity management program testing on the
Partnerships pipelines required by existing DOT and state
regulations. This estimate does not include the costs, if any,
of any repair, remediation, preventative or mitigating actions
that may be determined to be necessary as a result of the
testing program, which costs could be substantial. However, we
do not expect that any such costs would be material to the
Partnerships financial condition or results of operations.
More recently, on December 3, 2009, the PHMSA issued a
final rule mandated by the PIPES Act focusing on how human
interactions of control room personnel, such as avoidance of
error or the performance of mitigating actions, may impact
pipeline system integrity. Among other things, the final rule
requires operators of hazardous liquid and gas pipelines to
amend their existing written operations and maintenance
procedures, operator qualification programs and emergency plans
to take into account such items as specificity of the
responsibilities and roles of control room personnel; listing of
planned pipeline-related occurrences during a particular shift
that may be easily shared with other controllers during a shift
turnover; establishment of appropriate shift rotations to
protect against controller fatigue; and development of
appropriate communications between controllers, management and
field personnel when planning and implementing changes to
pipeline equipment or operations. We do not anticipate that the
rule, as issued in final form, will result in substantial costs
with respect to the Partnerships operations.
Employee
Health and Safety
The Partnership is subject to a number of federal and state laws
and regulations, including the federal Occupational Safety and
Health Act, as amended (OSHA), and comparable state
statutes, whose purpose is to protect the health and safety of
workers, both generally and within the pipeline industry. In
addition, the OSHA hazard communication standard, the EPA
community
right-to-know
regulations under Title III of the Federal Superfund
Amendment and Reauthorization Act and comparable state statutes
require that information be maintained concerning hazardous
materials used or produced in the Partnerships operations
and that this information be provided to employees, state and
local government authorities and citizens. The Partnership and
the entities in which it owns an interest are also subject to
OSHA Process Safety Management regulations, which are designed
to prevent or minimize the consequences of catastrophic releases
of toxic, reactive, flammable or explosive chemicals. These
regulations apply to any process which involves a chemical at or
above the specified thresholds or any process which involves
flammable liquid or gas, pressurized tanks, caverns and wells in
excess of 10,000 pounds at various locations. Flammable liquids
stored in atmospheric tanks below their normal boiling point
without the benefit of chilling or refrigeration are exempt. The
Partnership has an internal program of inspection designed to
monitor and enforce compliance with worker safety requirements.
We believe that the Partnership is in substantial compliance
with all applicable laws and regulations relating to worker
health and safety.
Title to
Properties and
Rights-of-Way
The Partnerships real property falls into two categories:
(1) parcels that it owns in fee and (2) parcels in
which its interest derives from leases, easements,
rights-of-way,
permits or licenses from landowners or governmental authorities
permitting the use of such land for its operations. Portions of
the land on which the Partnerships plants and other major
facilities are located are owned by the Partnership in
141
fee title, and we believe that the Partnership has satisfactory
title to these lands. The remainder of the land on which the
Partnerships plant sites and major facilities are located
are held by the Partnership pursuant to ground leases between
the Partnership, as lessee, and the fee owner of the lands, as
lessors. The Partnership, or its predecessors, has leased these
lands for many years without any material challenge known to us
relating to the title to the land upon which the assets are
located, and we believe that the Partnership has satisfactory
leasehold estates to such lands. We have no knowledge of any
challenge to the underlying fee title of any material lease,
easement,
right-of-way,
permit or license held by the Partnership or to its title to any
material lease, easement,
right-of-way,
permit or lease, and we believe that the Partnership has
satisfactory title to all of its material leases, easements,
rights-of-way,
permits and licenses.
Employees
The Partnership does not have employees. Through our
subsidiaries, we employ approximately 1,000 people which
perform services for the Partnership. None of these employees
are covered by collective bargaining agreements. We consider
employee relations to be good.
Legal
Proceedings
On December 8, 2005, WTG filed suit in the
333rd District Court of Harris County, Texas against
several defendants, including Targa and two other Targa entities
and private equity funds affiliated with Warburg Pincus LLC,
seeking damages from the defendants. The suit alleges that Targa
and private equity funds affiliated with Warburg Pincus, along
with ConocoPhillips Company (ConocoPhillips) and
Morgan Stanley, tortiously interfered with (i) a contract
WTG claims to have had to purchase SAOU from ConocoPhillips and
(ii) prospective business relations of WTG. WTG claims the
alleged interference resulted from Targas competition to
purchase the ConocoPhillips assets and its successful
acquisition of those assets in 2004. In October 2007, the
District Court granted defendants motions for summary
judgment on all of WTGs claims. In February 2010, the
14th Court of Appeals affirmed the District Courts
final judgment in favor of defendants in its entirety.
WTGs appeal is pending before the Texas Supreme Court, and
we intend to contest the appeal, but can give no assurances
regarding the outcome of the proceeding. We have agreed to
indemnify the Partnership for any claim or liability arising out
of the WTG suit.
Except as provided above, neither we nor the Partnership is a
party to any other legal proceedings other than legal
proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business. The
Partnership is a party to various administrative and regulatory
proceedings that have arisen in the ordinary course of our
business. See Regulation of Operations
and Environmental, Health and Safety
Matters.
142
MANAGEMENT
Targa Resources
Corp.
Our executive officers listed below serve in the same capacity
for the General Partner and devote their time as needed to
conduct the business and affairs of both the Company and the
Partnership. Because our only cash-generating assets are direct
and indirect partnership interests in the Partnership, we expect
that our executive officers will devote a substantial majority
of their time to the Partnerships business. We expect the
amount of time that our executive officers devote to our
business as opposed to the Partnerships business in future
periods will not be substantial unless significant changes are
made to the nature of our business.
The following table sets forth certain information with respect
to our directors, executive officers and other officers as of
December 6, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and Director
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
President
|
James W. Whalen
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
Executive Chairman and Director
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
President-Finance and Administration
|
Roy E. Johnson
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
Executive Vice President
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
Matthew J. Meloy
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
Paul W. Chung
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
|
John R. Sparger
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer
|
Charles R. Crisp
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
Director
|
In Seon Hwang
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
Director
|
Chansoo Joung
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Director
|
Peter R. Kagan
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
Director
|
Chris Tong
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
Director
|
Our directors hold office until the earlier of their death,
resignation, removal or disqualification or until their
successors have been elected and qualified. Officers serve at
the discretion of the board of directors. There are no family
relationships among any of our directors or executive officers.
Please read Certain Relationships and Related
TransactionsStockholders Agreement for a
discussion of arrangements among our stockholders pursuant to
which our directors were selected.
Rene R. Joyce has served as a director and Chief
Executive Officer of Targa Resources Corp. (the
Company) since its formation on October 27,
2005, of the General Partner since October 2006 and of TRI
Resources Inc. (Targa) since its formation in
February 2004 and was a consultant for the Targa predecessor
company during 2003. He is also a member of the supervisory
directors of Core Laboratories N.V. Mr. Joyce served as a
consultant in the energy industry from 2000 through 2003
providing advice to various energy companies and investors
regarding their operations, acquisitions and dispositions.
Mr. Joyce served as President of onshore pipeline
operations of Coral Energy, LLC, a subsidiary of Shell Oil
Company (Shell) from 1998 through 1999 and President
of energy services of Coral Energy Holding, L.P.
(Coral), a subsidiary of Shell which was the gas and
power marketing joint venture between Shell and Tejas Gas
Corporation (Tejas), during 1999. Mr. Joyce
served as President of various operating subsidiaries of Tejas,
a natural gas pipeline company, from 1990 until 1998 when Tejas
was acquired by Shell. As the founding Chief Executive Officer
of Targa, Mr. Joyce brings deep experience in the midstream
business, expansive knowledge of the oil and gas industry, as
well as relationships with chief
143
executives and other senior management at peer companies,
customers and other oil and natural gas companies throughout the
world. His experience and industry knowledge, complemented by an
engineering and legal educational background, enable
Mr. Joyce to provide the board with executive counsel on
the full range of business, technical, and professional matters.
Joe Bob Perkins has served as President of the Company
since its formation on October 27, 2005, of the General
Partner since October 2006 and of Targa since February 2004 and
was a consultant for the Targa predecessor company during 2003.
Mr. Perkins also served as a consultant in the energy
industry from 2002 through 2003 and was an active partner in RTM
Media (an outdoor advertising firm) during such time period.
Mr. Perkins served as President and Chief Operating Officer
for the Wholesale Businesses, Wholesale Group and Power
Generation Group of Reliant Resources, Inc. and its
parent/predecessor companies, from 1998 to 2002 and Vice
President, Corporate Planning and Development, of Houston
Industries from 1996 to 1998. He served as Vice President,
Business Development, of Coral from 1995 to 1996 and as
Director, Business Development, of Tejas from 1994 to 1995.
Prior to 1994, Mr. Perkins held various positions with the
consulting firm of McKinsey & Company and with an
exploration and production company.
James W. Whalen has served as Executive Chairman of the
Companys board of directors since October 25, 2010,
and as a director of the Company since its formation on
October 27, 2005, of the General Partner since February
2007 and of Targa since 2004. Mr. Whalen served as
President-Finance and Administration of the Company and of Targa
between January 2006 and October 25, 2010. He has served as
President-Finance and Administration of the General Partner
since October 2006 and for various Targa subsidiaries since
November 2005. Between October 2002 and October 2005,
Mr. Whalen served as the Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of Parker Drilling Company. Between January
2002 and October 2002, he was the Chief Financial Officer of
Diversified Diagnostic Products, Inc. He served as Chief
Commercial Officer of Coral from February 1998 through January
2000. Previously, he served as Chief Financial Officer for Tejas
from 1992 to 1998. Mr. Whalen brings a breadth and depth of
experience as an executive, board member, and audit committee
member across several different companies and in energy and
other industry areas. His valuable management and financial
expertise includes an understanding of the accounting and
financial matters that the Partnership and industry address on a
regular basis.
Roy E. Johnson has served as Executive Vice President of
the Company since its formation on October 27, 2005, of the
General Partner since October 2006 and of Targa since April 2004
and was a consultant for the Targa predecessor company during
2003. Mr. Johnson also served as a consultant in the energy
industry from 2000 through 2003 providing advice to various
energy companies and investors regarding their operations,
acquisitions and dispositions. He served as Vice President,
Business Development and President of the International Group of
Tejas from 1995 to 2000. In these positions, he was responsible
for acquisitions, pipeline expansion and development projects in
North and South America. Mr. Johnson served as President of
Louisiana Resources Company, a company engaged in intrastate
natural gas transmission, from 1992 to 1995. Prior to 1992,
Mr. Johnson held various positions with a number of
different companies in the upstream and downstream energy
industry.
Michael A. Heim has served as Executive Vice President
and Chief Operating Officer of the Company since its formation
on October 27, 2005, of the General Partner since October
2006 and of Targa since April 2004 and was a consultant for the
Targa predecessor company during 2003. Mr. Heim also served
as a consultant in the energy industry from 2001 through 2003
providing advice to various energy companies and investors
regarding their operations, acquisitions and dispositions.
Mr. Heim served as Chief Operating Officer and Executive
Vice President of Coastal Field Services, a subsidiary of The
Coastal Corp. (Coastal) a diversified energy
company, from 1997 to 2001 and President of Coastal States Gas
Transmission Company from 1997 to 2001. In these positions, he
was responsible for Coastals midstream gathering,
processing, and marketing businesses. Prior to 1997, he served
as an officer of several other Coastal exploration and
production, marketing and midstream subsidiaries.
144
Jeffrey J. McParland has served as President
Finance and Administration since October 25, 2010.
Mr. McParland served as Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of the Company between October 27, 2005
and October 25, 2010 and of Targa between April 2004 and
October 25, 2010 and was a consultant for the Targa
predecessor company during 2003. He has served as Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer of the General Partner
since October 2006 and served as a director of the General
Partner from October 2006 to February 2007. Mr. McParland
served as Treasurer of the Company from October 27, 2005
until May 2007, of the General Partner from October 2006 until
May 2007 and of Targa from April 2004 until May 2007.
Mr. McParland served as Secretary of Targa since February
2004 until May 2004, at which time he was elected as Assistant
Secretary. Mr. McParland served as Senior Vice President,
Finance of Dynegy Inc., a company engaged in power generation,
the midstream natural gas business and energy marketing, from
2000 to 2002. In this position, he was responsible for corporate
finance and treasury operations activities. He served as Senior
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of
PG&E Gas Transmission, a midstream natural gas and
regulated natural gas pipeline company, from 1999 to 2000. Prior
to 1999, he worked in various engineering and finance positions
with companies in the power generation and engineering and
construction industries.
Matthew J. Meloy has served as Senior Vice President,
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company and Targa
since October 25, 2010. Mr. Meloy served as Vice
President Finance and Treasurer of the Company and
Targa between March 2008 and October 2010, and as Director,
Corporate Development of the Company and the General Partner
between March 2006 and March 2008. He has served as Vice
President Finance and Treasurer of the General
Partner since March 2008. Mr. Meloy was with The Royal Bank
of Scotland in the structured finance group, focusing on the
energy sector from October 2003 to March 2006, most recently
serving as Assistant Vice President.
Paul W. Chung has served as Executive Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary of the Company since its formation
on October 27, 2005, of the General Partner since October
2006 and of Targa since May 2004. Mr. Chung served as
Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Coral from 1999
to April 2004; Shell Trading North America Company, a subsidiary
of Shell, from 2001 to April 2004; and Coral Energy, LLC from
1999 to 2001. In these positions, he was responsible for all
legal and regulatory affairs. He served as Vice President and
Assistant General Counsel of Tejas from 1996 to 1999. Prior to
1996, Mr. Chung held a number of legal positions with
different companies, including the law firm of
Vinson & Elkins L.L.P.
John R. Sparger has served as Senior Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer of the Company and Targa since January
2006. Mr. Sparger served as Vice President, Internal Audit
of the Company between October 2005 and January 2006 and of
Targa between November 2004 and January 2006. Mr. Sparger
served as a consultant in the energy industry from 2002 through
September 2004, including Targa between February 2004 and
September 2004, providing advice to various energy companies and
entities regarding processes, systems, accounting and internal
controls. Prior to 2002, he worked in various accounting and
administrative positions with companies in the energy industry,
audit and consulting positions in public accounting and
consulting positions with a large international consulting firm.
Charles R. Crisp has served as a director of the Company
since its formation on October 27, 2005 and of Targa since
February 2004. Mr. Crisp was President and Chief Executive
Officer of Coral Energy, LLC, a subsidiary of Shell Oil Company
from 1999 until his retirement in November 2000, and was
President and Chief Operating Officer of Coral from January 1998
through February 1999. Prior to this, Mr. Crisp served as
President of the power generation group of Houston Industries
and, between 1988 and 1996, as President and Chief Operating
Officer of Tejas. Mr. Crisp is also a director of AGL
Resources Inc., EOG Resources Inc. and IntercontinentalExchange,
Inc. Mr. Crisp brings extensive energy experience, a vast
understanding of many aspects of our industry and experience
serving on the boards of other public companies in the energy
industry. His leadership and business experience and deep
knowledge of various sectors of the energy industry bring a
crucial insight to the board of directors. We expect that
Mr. Crisp will be an independent director for purposes of
NYSE listing requirements.
In Seon Hwang has served as a director of the Company and
Targa since May 2006. Mr. Hwang is a Member and Managing
Director of Warburg Pincus LLC and a general partner of Warburg
Pincus & Co.,
145
where he has been employed since 2004, and became a partner of
Warburg Pincus & Co. in 2009. Prior to joining Warburg
Pincus, Mr. Hwang worked at GSC Partners, a distressed
investment firm, from 2002 until 2004, the M&A group at
Goldman Sachs from 1998 to 2000, and the Boston Consulting Group
from 1997 to 1998. He is also a director of Competitive Power
Ventures and serves on the investment committee of Sheridan
Production Partners LLC. Mr. Hwang serves as a director
because certain investment funds managed by Warburg Pincus LLC,
for whom Mr. Hwang is a managing director and member,
control us through their ownership of securities in Targa
Resources Corp. Mr. Hwang has significant experience with
energy companies and investments and broad familiarity with the
industry and related transactions and capital markets activity,
which enhance his contributions to the board of directors.
Chansoo Joung has served as a director of the Company and
Targa since December 2005, and of the General Partner since
February 2007. Mr. Joung is a Member and Managing Director
of Warburg Pincus LLC and a general partner of Warburg Pincus
& Co., where he has been employed since 2005 and became a
partner of Warburg Pincus & Co. in 2005. Prior to
joining Warburg Pincus, Mr. Joung was head of the Americas
Natural Resources Group in the investment banking division of
Goldman Sachs. He joined Goldman Sachs in 1987 and served in the
Corporate Finance and Mergers and Acquisitions departments and
also founded and led the European Energy Group. He is a director
of Sheridan Production Partners, Broad Oak Energy, Inc.
(Broad Oak), Ceres, Inc. and Suniva, Inc.
Mr. Joung serves as a director because certain investment
funds managed by Warburg Pincus LLC, for whom Mr. Joung is
a managing director and member, control us through their
ownership of securities in Targa Resources Corp. Mr. Joung
has significant experience with energy companies and investments
and broad familiarity with the industry and related transactions
and capital markets activity, which enhance his contributions to
the board of directors.
Peter R. Kagan has served as a director of the Company
since its formation on October 27, 2005, of the General
Partner since February 2007 and of Targa since February 2004.
Mr. Kagan is a member and Managing Director of Warburg
Pincus LLC and a general partner of Warburg Pincus &
Co., where he has been employed since 1997 and became a partner
of Warburg Pincus & Co. in 2002. He is also a member
of Warburg Pincus Executive Management Group. He is also a
director of Antero Resources Corporation, Broad Oak, Canbriam
Energy, Fairfield Energy Limited, Laredo Petroleum and MEG
Energy Corp. Mr. Kagan serves as a director because certain
investment funds managed by Warburg Pincus LLC, for whom
Mr. Kagan is a managing director and member, control us
through their ownership of securities in Targa Resources Corp.
Mr. Kagan has significant experience with energy companies
and investments and broad familiarity with the industry and
related transactions and capital markets activity, which enhance
his contributions to the board of directors.
Chris Tong has served as a director of the Company and
Targa since January 2006. Mr. Tong is a director of Cloud
Peak Energy Inc. He served as Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of Noble Energy, Inc. from January 2005 until
August 2009. He also served as Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer for Magnum Hunter Resources, Inc. from August
1997 until December 2004. Prior thereto, he was Senior Vice
President of Finance of Tejas Acadian Holding Company and its
subsidiaries, including Tejas Gas Corp., Acadian Gas Corporation
and Transok, Inc., all of which were wholly-owned subsidiaries
of Tejas Gas Corporation. Mr. Tong held these positions
from August 1996 until August 1997, and had served in other
treasury positions with Tejas since August 1989. Mr. Tong
brings a breadth and depth of experience as a chief financial
officer in the energy industry, a financial executive, a
director of another public company and member of another audit
committee. He brings significant financial, capital markets and
energy industry experience to the board and in his position as
the chairman of our Audit Committee. We expect that
Mr. Tong will be an independent director for purposes of
NYSE listing requirements.
We expect to add an additional independent director who will
serve on both our audit and conflicts committees within one year
following the completion of this offering.
146
Board of
Directors
Our board of directors consists of seven members. Please read
Certain Relationships and Related
TransactionsStockholders Agreement for a
description of arrangements pursuant to which our directors were
elected prior to the completion of this offering.
Our board will review the independence of our current directors
using the independence standards of the NYSE and, based on this
review, we expect that our board will determine that
Messrs. Crisp, Hwang, Joung, Kagan and Tong are independent
within the meaning of the NYSE listing standards currently in
effect. We do not expect that Messrs. Joyce and Whalen will be
independent based on this review. We expect to add another
independent director to our board of directors within one year
after the completion of this offering. As a result, we expect
that our board of directors will consist of eight members within
one year after the completion of this offering, six of whom will
be independent and that our Nominating and Governance Committee
and Compensation Committee will consist entirely of independent
directors. Our Nominating and Governance Committee and
Compensation Committee will each have a written charter
addressing such committees purpose and responsibilities.
In evaluating director candidates, we expect that our Nominating
and Governance Committee will assess whether a candidate
possesses the integrity, judgment, knowledge, experience, skills
and expertise that are likely to enhance the boards
ability to manage and direct the affairs and business of the
company, including, when applicable, to enhance the ability of
committees of the board to fulfill their duties.
Following the completion of this offering, our directors will be
divided into three classes serving staggered three-year terms.
Class I, Class II and Class III directors will
serve until our annual meetings of stockholders in 2011, 2012
and 2013, respectively. We expect that the Class I
directors will be Messrs. Crisp and Whalen, the Class II
directors will be Messrs. Joung and Hwang and the Class III
directors will be Messrs. Kagan, Tong and Joyce. At each annual
meeting of stockholders held after the initial classification,
directors will be elected to succeed the class of directors
whose terms have expired. This classification of our board of
directors could have the effect of increasing the length of time
necessary to change the composition of a majority of the board
of directors. In general, at least two annual meetings of
stockholders will be necessary for stockholders to effect a
change in a majority of the members of the board of directors.
Committees of the
Board of Directors
Our board of directors has an Audit Committee and Compensation
Committee and will have a Nominating and Governance Committee
and Conflicts Committee, and may have such other committees as
the board of directors shall determine from time to time. Each
of the standing committees of the board of directors will have
the composition and responsibilities described below.
Audit
Committee
At the closing of the offering, the members of our Audit
Committee will be Messrs. Tong, Hwang and Crisp, but we
expect this may change in the future. We expect that any new
member of the audit committee will be financially literate.
Mr. Tong will be the Chairman of this committee and we
expect that our board of directors will determine that
Mr. Tong is the Audit Committee financial expert. We will
rely on the phase-in rules of the SEC and NYSE with respect to
the independence of our Audit Committee. These rules permit us
to have an Audit Committee that has one member that is
independent upon the effectiveness of the registration statement
of which this prospectus forms a part, a majority of members
that are independent within 90 days thereafter and all
members that are independent within one year thereafter. We
expect that Messrs. Tong and Crisp will be
independent under the standards of the New York
Stock Exchange and SEC regulations and that the director we add
to our board of directors within one year following the
completion of this offering will serve on our Audit Committee
and also be independent under the standards of the NYSE and SEC
regulations.
This committee will oversee, review, act on and report on
various auditing and accounting matters to our board of
directors, including: the selection of our independent
accountants, the scope of our annual
147
audits, fees to be paid to the independent accountants, the
performance of our independent accountants and our accounting
practices. In addition, the Audit Committee will oversee our
compliance programs relating to legal and regulatory
requirements. We will adopt an Audit Committee charter defining
the committees primary duties in a manner consistent with
the rules of the SEC and NYSE or market standards.
Compensation
Committee
At the closing of the offering, the members of our Compensation
Committee will be Messrs. Kagan, Crisp and Joung.
Mr. Crisp will be the Chairman of this committee. This
committee will establish salaries, incentives and other forms of
compensation for officers and other employees. Our Compensation
Committee will also administer our incentive compensation and
benefit plans. We will adopt a Compensation Committee charter
defining the committees primary duties in a manner
consistent with the rules of the SEC and NYSE or market
standards.
Nominating and
Governance Committee
At the closing of the offering, the members of our Nominating
and Governance Committee will be Messrs. Joung, Hwang and Tong.
Mr. Joung will be the Chairman of this committee. This committee
will identify, evaluate and recommend qualified nominees to
serve on our board of directors, develop and oversee our
internal corporate governance processes and maintain a
management succession plan. We will adopt a Nominating and
Governance Committee charter defining the committees
primary duties in a manner consistent with the rules of the SEC
and NYSE or market standards.
Conflicts
Committee
At the closing of the offering, the members of our Conflicts
Committee will be Messrs. Crisp and Tong. Mr. Tong will be
the Chairman of this committee. This Committee will review
matters of potential conflicts of interest, as directed by our
board of directors. We will adopt a Conflicts Committee charter
defining the committees primary duties.
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
No member of our Compensation Committee will have been at any
time an employee of ours. None of our executive officers will
serve on the board of directors or compensation committee of a
company that has an executive officer that serves on our board
or Compensation Committee. No member of our board is an
executive officer of a company in which one of our executive
officers serves as a member of the board of directors or
compensation committee of that company.
Messrs. Kagan and Joung, both of whom will be members of
our Compensation Committee, are affiliates of Warburg Pincus.
Messrs. Kagan and Joung are directors of Broad Oak, from
whom we buy natural gas and NGL products, and affiliates of
Warburg Pincus own a controlling interest in Broad Oak.
Messrs. Kagan and Joung are party to a stockholders
agreement, registration rights agreement and indemnification
agreement with us. Please read Certain Relationships and
Related Transactions for a description of these
transactions.
Code of Business
Conduct and Ethics
Our board of directors has adopted a code of business conduct
and ethics applicable to our employees, directors and officers,
in accordance with applicable U.S. federal securities laws
and the corporate governance rules of the NYSE. Any waiver of
this code may be made only by our board of directors and will be
promptly disclosed as required by applicable U.S. federal
securities laws and the corporate governance rules of the NYSE.
148
Corporate
Governance Guidelines
We expect that our board of directors will adopt corporate
governance guidelines in accordance with the corporate
governance rules of the NYSE.
Targa Resources
Partners LP
The following table shows information regarding the directors
and executive officers of the General Partner as of
December 6, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position With Targa Resources GP LLC
|
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and Director
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
President
|
James W. Whalen
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
PresidentFinance and Administration and Director
|
Roy E. Johnson
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
Executive Vice President
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
56
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
Paul W. Chung
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary
|
Peter R. Kagan
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
Director
|
Chansoo Joung
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Director
|
Robert B. Evans
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
Director
|
Barry R. Pearl
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
Director
|
William D. Sullivan
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
Director
|
See Targa Resources Corp. for biographical
information for Rene R. Joyce, Joe Bob Perkins, James W. Whalen,
Roy E. Johnson, Michael A. Heim, Jeffrey J. McParland, Paul W.
Chung, Peter R. Kagan and Chansoo Joung.
Robert B. Evans has served as a director of the General
Partner since February 2007. Mr. Evans is a director of New
Jersey Resources Corporation. Mr. Evans was the President
and Chief Executive Officer of Duke Energy Americas, a business
unit of Duke Energy Corp., from January 2004 to March 2006,
after which he retired. Mr. Evans served as the transition
executive for Energy Services, a business unit of Duke Energy,
during 2003. Mr. Evans also served as President of Duke
Energy Gas Transmission beginning in 1998 and was named
President and Chief Executive Officer in 2002. Prior to his
employment at Duke Energy, Mr. Evans served as Vice
President of marketing and regulatory affairs for Texas Eastern
Transmission and Algonquin Gas Transmission from 1996 to 1998.
Mr. Evans extensive experience in the gas
transmission and energy services sectors enhances the knowledge
of the board in these areas of the oil and gas industry. As a
former President and CEO of various operating companies, his
breadth of executive experiences are applicable to many of the
matters routinely facing the Partnership.
Barry R. Pearl has served as a director of the General
Partner since February 2007. Mr. Pearl is Executive Vice
President of Kealine LLC (and its WesPac Energy LLC affiliate),
a private developer and operator of petroleum infrastructure
facilities and is a director of Kayne Anderson Energy
Development Company, Kayne Anderson/Midstream Energy Fund and
Magellan Midstream Holdings, L.P., the general partner of
Magellan Midstream Partners, L.P. Mr. Pearl served as
President and Chief Executive Officer of TEPPCO Partners from
May 2002 until December 2005 and as President and Chief
Operating Officer from February 2001 through April 2002.
Mr. Pearl served as Vice President of Finance and Chief
Financial Officer of Maverick Tube Corporation from June 1998
until December 2000. From 1984 to 1998, Mr. Pearl was Vice
President of Operations, Senior Vice President of business
development and planning and Senior Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer of Santa Fe Pacific Pipeline Partners,
L.P. Mr. Pearls board and
149
executive experience across energy related companies including
other MLPs enable him to make broad contributions to the issues
and opportunities that the Partnership faces. His industry,
financial and executive experience enable him to make valuable
contributions to the General Partners audit and conflicts
committees.
William D. Sullivan has served as a director of the
General Partner since February 2007. Mr. Sullivan is a
director of St. Mary Land & Exploration Company,
where he serves as a non-executive Chairman of the Board.
Mr. Sullivan is also a director of Legacy Reserves GP, LLC
and Tetra Technologies, Inc. Mr. Sullivan served as
President and Chief Executive Officer of Leor Energy LP from
June 15, 2005 to August 5, 2005. Between 1981 and
August 2003, Mr. Sullivan was employed in various
capacities by Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, including serving
as Executive Vice President, Exploration and Production between
August 2001 and August 2003. Since Mr. Sullivans
departure from Anadarko Petroleum Corporation in August 2003, he
has served on various private energy company boards.
Mr. Sullivans extensive experience in the exploration
and production sector enhances the knowledge of the General
Partners board of directors in this particular area of the
oil and gas industry. As a former exploration and production
operating officer with responsibilities over significant gas
gathering, compression and processing operations, his experience
is valuable to the boards understanding of one of the
Partnerships most important customer types and contributes
to other matters routinely facing the Partnership.
Executive
Compensation
Compensation
Discussion and Analysis
The following discussion and analysis contains statements
regarding our and our executive officers future
performance targets and goals. These targets and goals are
disclosed in the limited context of our compensation programs
and should not be understood to be statements of
managements expectations or estimates of results or other
guidance.
Overview
Prior to the completion of this offering, under the terms of our
Amended and Restated Stockholders Agreement, as amended
(the Stockholders Agreement), compensatory
arrangements with our executive officers identified in the
Summary Compensation Table (named executive
officers) were required to be submitted to a vote of our
stockholders unless such arrangements were approved by the
Compensation Committee (the Compensation Committee)
of our board of directors. As such, the Compensation Committee
was responsible for overseeing the development of an executive
compensation philosophy, strategy, framework and individual
compensation elements for our named executive officers that were
based on our business priorities.
The Stockholders Agreement will terminate upon completion
of this offering. Thereafter, compensatory arrangements with our
named executive officers will remain the responsibility of our
Compensation Committee.
The following Compensation Discussion and Analysis describes the
material elements of compensation for our named executive
officers as determined by the Compensation Committee for the
periods prior to the completion of this offering, including
changes we intend to make in connection with this offering.
Compensation
Philosophy
The Compensation Committee believes that total compensation of
executives should be competitive with the market in which we
compete for executive talentthe energy industry and
midstream natural gas companies. The following compensation
objectives guide the Compensation Committee in its deliberations
about executive compensation matters:
|
|
|
|
|
provide a competitive total compensation program that enables us
to attract and retain key executives;
|
150
|
|
|
|
|
ensure an alignment between our strategic and financial
performance and the total compensation received by our named
executive officers;
|
|
|
|
provide compensation for performance relative to expectations
and our peer group;
|
|
|
|
ensure a balance between short-term and long-term compensation
while emphasizing at-risk or variable, compensation as a
valuable means of supporting our strategic goals and aligning
the interests of our named executive officers with those of our
shareholders; and
|
|
|
|
ensure that our total compensation program supports our business
objectives and priorities.
|
Consistent with this philosophy and compensation objectives, we
do not pay for perquisites for any of our named executive
officers, other than parking subsidies.
The Role of
Peer Groups and Benchmarking
Our Chief Executive Officer (the CEO), President and
President Finance and Administration (collectively,
Senior Management) review compensation practices at
peer companies, as well as broader industry compensation
practices, at a general level and by individual position to
ensure that our total compensation is reasonably comparable and
meets our compensation objectives. In addition, when evaluating
compensation levels for each named executive officer, the
Compensation Committee reviews publicly available compensation
data for executives in our peer group, compensation surveys and
compensation levels for each named executive officer with
respect to their roles and levels of responsibility,
accountability and decision-making authority. Although Senior
Management and the Compensation Committee consider compensation
data from other companies, they do not attempt to set
compensation components to meet specific benchmarks, such as
salaries above the median or total compensation
at the 50th percentile. The peer company data
that is reviewed by Senior Management and the Compensation
Committee is simply one factor out of many that is used in
connection with the establishment of the compensation for our
officers. The other factors considered by Senior Management and
the Compensation Committee include, but are not limited to,
(i) available compensation data about rankings and
comparisons, (ii) ownership stake (both peer
managements stake in peer companies and our
managements stake in us and the Partnership),
(iii) effort and accomplishment on a group basis,
(iv) challenges faced and challenges overcome,
(v) unique skills, (vi) contribution to the management
team and (vii) the perception of both the board of
directors and the Compensation Committee of performance relative
to expectations, actual market/business conditions and relative
peer company performance. All of these factors, including peer
company data, are utilized in a subjective assessment of each
years decisions relating to annual cash incentives,
long-term cash incentives and base compensation changes with a
view towards total compensation and
pay-for-performance.
For 2009, Senior Management identified peer companies in the
midstream energy industry and reviewed compensation information
filed by the peer companies with the SEC. The peer group
reviewed by Senior Management for 2009 consisted of the
following companies: Atlas America, Copano, Crosstex, DCP
Midstream, Enbridge Energy Partners, Energy Transfer Partners,
Magellan Midstream, MarkWest Energy Partners, Martin Midstream,
NuStar Energy, Oneok Partners, Plains All American Pipeline,
Regency Energy Partners, TEPPCO Partners and Williams Energy
Partners.
Senior Management and the Compensation Committee review our
compensation practices and performance against peer companies on
at least an annual basis.
Role of Senior
Management in Establishing Compensation for Named Executive
Officers
Typically, Senior Management consults with a compensation
consultant engaged by the Compensation Committee and reviews
market data to determine relevant compensation levels and
compensation program elements. Based on these consultations and
a review of publicly available information for the peer group,
Senior Management submits a proposal to the chairman of the
Compensation Committee. The proposal includes a recommendation
of base salary, annual bonus and any new long-term compensation
to be paid or awarded to executive officers and employees. The
chairman
151
of the Compensation Committee reviews and discusses this
proposal with Senior Management and may request that Senior
Management provide him with additional information or reconsider
their recommendation. The resulting recommendation is then
submitted to the Compensation Committee for consideration, which
also meets separately with the compensation consultant. The
final compensation decisions are reported to the Board.
Our Senior Management has no other role in determining
compensation for our executive officers, but our executive
officers are delegated the authority and responsibility to
determine the compensation for all other employees.
Elements of
Compensation for Named Executive Officers
Our compensation philosophy for executive officers emphasizes
our executives having a significant long-term equity stake. For
this reason, in connection with TRI Resources Inc.s
formation in 2004 and with our acquisition of Dynegy Midstream
Services, Limited Partnership from Dynegy, Inc. in 2005, the
named executive officers were granted restricted stock and
options to purchase restricted stock to attract, motivate and
retain our executive team. As a result, executive compensation
has been weighted toward long-term equity awards. Our executive
officers have also invested a significant portion of their
personal investable assets in our equity and have made
significant investments in the equity of the Partnership. With
these equity interests as context, elements of compensation for
our named executive officers are the following: (i) annual
base salary; (ii) discretionary annual cash awards;
(iii) performance awards under our long-term incentive
plan, (iv) awards under our new stock incentive plan;
(v) contributions under our 401(k) and profit sharing plan;
and (vi) participation in our health and welfare plans on
the same basis as all of our other employees.
Base Salary. The base salaries for our named
executive officers are set and reviewed annually by the
Compensation Committee. The salaries are based on historical
salaries paid to our named executive officers for services
rendered to us, the extent of their equity ownership in us,
market data and responsibilities of our named executive
officers. Base salaries are intended to provide fixed
compensation comparable to market levels for similarly situated
executive officers.
Annual Cash Incentives. The discretionary
annual cash awards paid to our named executive officers
supplement the annual base salary of our named executive
officers so that, on a combined basis, the annual cash
compensation for our named executive officers yield competitive
cash compensation levels and drive performance in support of our
business strategies. It is our general policy to pay these
awards prior to the end of the first quarter of the next fiscal
year. The payment of individual cash bonuses to executive
management, including our named executive officers, is subject
to the sole discretion of the Compensation Committee.
The discretionary annual cash awards are designed to reward our
employees for contributions towards our achievement of financial
and operational business priorities (including business
priorities of the Partnership) approved by the Compensation
Committee and to aid us in retaining and motivating employees.
These priorities are not objective in naturethey are
subjective. The approach taken by the Compensation Committee in
reviewing performance against the priorities is along the lines
of grading a multi-faceted essay rather than a simple true/false
exam. As such, success does not depend on achieving a particular
target; rather, success is determined based on past norms,
expectations and unanticipated obstacles or opportunities that
arise. For example, hurricanes and deteriorating market
conditions may alter the priorities initially established by the
Compensation Committee such that certain performance that would
otherwise be deemed a negative may, in context, be a positive
result. This subjectivity allows the Compensation Committee to
account for the full industry and economic context of our actual
performance or that of our personnel. The Compensation Committee
considers all strategic priorities and reviews performance
against the priorities but does not assign specific weightings
to the strategic priorities in advance.
Under plans to pay a discretionary annual cash award that have
been adopted and are expected to be adopted in subsequent years
funding of a discretionary cash bonus pool is expected to be
recommended
152
by our CEO and approved by the Compensation Committee annually
based on our achievement of certain strategic, financial and
operational objectives. Such plans are and will be approved by
the Compensation Committee, which considers certain
recommendations by the CEO. Near or following the end of each
year, the CEO recommends to the Compensation Committee the total
amount of cash to be allocated to the bonus pool based upon our
overall performance relative to these objectives. Upon receipt
of the CEOs recommendation, the Compensation Committee, in
its sole discretion, determines the total amount of cash to be
allocated to the bonus pool. Additionally, the Compensation
Committee, in its sole discretion, determines the amount of the
cash bonus award to each of our executive officers, including
the CEO. The executive officers determine the amount of the cash
bonus pool to be allocated to our departments, groups and
employees (other than our executive officers) based on
performance and on the recommendation of their supervisors,
managers and line officers.
Stock Option Grants. Under our 2005 Stock
Incentive Plan, as amended (the 2005 Incentive
Plan), incentive stock options and non-incentive stock
options to purchase, in the aggregate, up to
5,159,786 shares of our restricted stock may be granted to
our employees, directors and consultants. Subject to the terms
of the applicable stock option agreement, options granted under
the 2005 Incentive Plan have a vesting period of four years,
remain exercisable for ten years from the date of grant and have
an exercise price at least equal to the fair market value of a
share of restricted stock on the date of grant. Additional
details relating to previously granted non-incentive stock
options under the 2005 Incentive Plan are included in
Outstanding Equity Awards at 2009 Fiscal
Year-End below. No option awards were granted to the named
executive officers in 2007, 2008 and 2009. Following completion
of this offering, we will no longer make grants under the 2005
Incentive Plan and will adopt a new stock incentive plan. In
connection with this offering, we expect the option awards that
were previously granted to our named executive officers under
the 2005 Incentive Plan and that remain outstanding will be
surrendered and cancelled.
Restricted Stock Grants. Under the 2005
Incentive Plan, up to 7,293,882 shares of our restricted
stock may be granted to our employees, directors and
consultants. Subject to the terms of the restricted stock
agreement, restricted stock granted under the Incentive Plan has
a vesting period of four years from the date of grant.
Additional details relating to shares of restricted stock
previously granted under the 2005 Incentive Plan are included in
Outstanding Equity Awards at 2009 Fiscal
Year-End below. No restricted stock awards were granted to
the named executive officers in 2007, 2008 and 2009.
LTIP Awards. We may grant to the named
executive officers and other key employees cash-settled
performance unit awards linked to the performance of the
Partnerships common units, with the amounts vesting under
such awards dependent on the Partnerships performance
compared to a peer-group consisting of the Partnership and 12
other publicly traded partnerships. These performance unit
awards are made pursuant to a plan we adopted. These awards are
designed to further align the interests of the named executive
officers and other key employees with those of the
Partnerships equity holders.
New Incentive Plan. In connection with this
offering, we are adopting a new stock incentive plan (the
New Incentive Plan) under which we may grant to the
named executive officers, other key employees, consultants and
directors certain awards, including restricted stock and
performance awards. These awards are discussed in more detail
below under the heading Changes in Connection with
the Completion of this Offering.
Retirement Benefits. We offer eligible
employees a Section 401(k) tax-qualified, defined
contribution plan (the 401(k) Plan) to enable
employees to save for retirement through a tax-advantaged
combination of employee and Company contributions and to provide
employees the opportunity to directly manage their retirement
plan assets through a variety of investment options. Our
employees, including our named executive officers, are eligible
to participate in our 401(k) Plan and may elect to defer up to
30% of their annual compensation on a pre-tax basis and have it
contributed to the plan, subject to certain limitations under
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the
Code). In addition, we make the following
contributions to the 401(k) Plan for the benefit of our
employees, including our named executive officers: (i) 3%
of the employees eligible compensation; and (ii) an
amount equal to
153
the employees contributions to the 401(k) Plan up to 5% of
the employees eligible compensation. We may also make
discretionary contributions to the 401(k) Plan for the benefit
of employees depending on our performance.
Health and Welfare Benefits. All full-time
employees, including our named executive officers, may
participate in our health and welfare benefit programs,
including medical, health, life insurance and dental coverage
and disability insurance.
Perquisites. We believe that the elements of
executive compensation should be tied directly or indirectly to
the actual performance of the Company. It is the Compensation
Committees policy not to pay for perquisites for any of
our named executive officers, other than parking subsidies.
Relation of
Compensation Elements to Compensation Philosophy
Our named executive officers, other senior managers and
directors, through a combination of personal investment and
equity grants, will own approximately 19.3% of our fully diluted
equity upon completion of this offering, including equity awards
expected to be made under the New Incentive Plan in connection
with this offering. Based on our named executive officers
ownership interests in us and their direct ownership of the
Partnerships common units, they will own, directly and
indirectly, approximately 1.5% of the Partnerships limited
partner interests upon completion of this offering. The
Compensation Committee believes that the elements of its
compensation program fit the established overall compensation
objectives in the context of managements substantial
ownership of our equity, which allows us to provide competitive
compensation opportunities to align and drive the performance of
the named executive officers in support of our and the
Partnerships business strategies and to attract, motivate
and retain high quality talent with the skills and competencies
required by us and the Partnership.
Application of
Compensation Elements
Equity Ownership. The Compensation Committee
did not award additional equity to the named executive officers
in 2009.
Base Salary. In 2009, base salaries for our
named executive officers were established based on historical
levels for these officers, taking into consideration officer
salaries in our peer group and the long-term equity component of
our compensation program.
Annual Cash Incentives. The Compensation
Committee approved our 2009 Annual Incentive Plan (the
Bonus Plan) in January 2009 with the following eight
key business priorities to be considered when making awards
under the Bonus Plan: (i) manage controllable costs to
levels at or below plan levelswith a continuous effort to
improve costs for 2009 and beyond; (ii) examine, prioritize
and approve each capital project closely for economics (or
necessity) in the current environment; (iii) increase
scrutiny and proactively manage credit and liquidity across
finance, credit and commercial areas; (iv) reduce
(eliminate where appropriate) the Downstream Businesss
inventory exposure (excluding the Partnership);
(v) continue to invest in our businesses primarily within
existing cash flow; (vi) pursue selected opportunities including
new shale play gathering and processing build outs, other
fee-based capital projects and the potential to purchase
distressed strategic assets; (vii) analyze and recommend
approaches to achieve maximum value; and (viii) execute on
the above priorities, including the 2009 financial business
plan. The Compensation Committee also established the following
overall threshold, target and maximum levels for the
Companys bonus pool: 50% of the cash bonus pool for the
threshold level; 100% for the target level and 200% for the
maximum level. The CEO and the Compensation Committee relied on
compensation consultants and market data from peer company and
broader industry compensation practices to establish the
threshold, target and maximum percentage levels, which are
generally consistent with peer company and broader energy
compensation practices. The cash bonus pool target amount is
determined by summing, on an employee by employee basis, the
product of base salaries and market-based target bonus
percentages. The CEO and the Compensation Committee arrive at
the total amount of cash to be allocated to the cash bonus pool
by multiplying percentage of target awarded by the Compensation
Committee by the total target cash bonus pool. The funding of
the cash bonus pool and the payment of individual cash
154
bonuses to executive management, including our named executive
officers, are subject to the sole discretion of the Compensation
Committee.
In December 2009, the Compensation Committee approved a cash
bonus pool equal to 200% of the target level for the employee
group, including our named executive officers, under the Bonus
Plan for performance during 2009 in recognition of outstanding
efforts and organizational performance. The Compensation
Committee determined to pay these above target level bonuses
because it considered overall performance, including
organizational performance, to have substantially exceeded
expectations in 2009 based on the eight key business priorities
it established for 2009. The Compensation Committee considered
or subjectively evaluated (rather than measured) organizational
performance by reviewing the apparent overall performance of our
personnel with respect to the initial and subsequent business
priorities relative to both the overall and management-specific
performance expectations of the Compensation Committee, each on
an absolute level and relative to the Compensation
Committees sense of peer performance. This subjective
assessment that performance substantially exceeded expectations
was based on a qualitative evaluation rather than a mechanical,
quantitative determination of results across each of the key
business priorities. Aspects of performance important to this
qualitative determination included (i) strategic and
impactful changes to our and our subsidiaries capital
structures, (ii) demonstrated success in dispute
resolution, (iii) promising project development efforts and
(iv) successful response to the impact of two hurricanes
while meeting customers needs and business objectives.
This subjective evaluation that performance had substantially
exceed expectations occurred with the background and ongoing
context of detailed board and committee refinements of the 2009
business priorities prior to the beginning of the year,
continued board and committee discussion and active dialogue
with management about priorities in subsequent board and
committee meetings, and further board and committee discussion
of performance relative to expectations at the end of 2009. The
extensive business and board experience of the Compensation
Committee and of the board provide the perspective to make this
subjective assessment in a qualitative manner to evaluate
management performance overall and the performance of the
executive officers. The executive officers received the
following bonus awards, which are equivalent to the same average
percentage of target as the Company bonus pool with a 1.5x
performance multiplier (similar to the average multiplier used
for top quartile performers), based on exceeding our overall
goals in 2009, including the successful implementation of
strategic initiatives (i.e. specific projects or
accomplishments toward the eight business priorities during the
year) that were driven by the executive officers:
|
|
|
|
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
$
|
510,000
|
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
400,500
|
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
459,000
|
|
James W. Whalen
|
|
|
445,500
|
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
424,500
|
|
In January 2009, the Compensation Committee approved a cash
bonus pool of 150% of the target level for the employee group
under the cash bonus plan for performance during 2008 in
recognition of significant efforts and organizational
performance. The Compensation Committee determined to pay these
above target level bonuses because it considered overall
performance, including organizational performance, to be strong
in 2008 based on the six key business priorities it established
for 2008 as well as a number of unanticipated priorities and
performance factors, which included operating through two
hurricanes that impacted our personnel and assets while meeting
customer needs and business objectives. The Compensation
Committee considered or subjectively evaluated (rather than
measured) organizational performance by reviewing the
performance of our personnel with respect to the initial and
subsequent business priorities relative to expectations and peer
performance, which included demonstrated successes in hurricane
preparedness, accounting systems, commercial business
initiatives and area manager involvement.
Long-term Cash Incentives. In January 2008 and
2009, we granted our executive officers cash-settled performance
unit awards linked to the performance of the Partnerships
common units that will vest in June of 2011 and 2012, with the
amounts vesting under such awards dependent on the
Partnerships
155
performance compared to a peer-group consisting of the
Partnership and 12 other publicly traded partnerships. The peer
group companies for 2008 and 2009 were Energy Transfer Partners,
Oneok Partners, Copano, DCP Midstream, Regency Energy Partners,
Plains All American Pipeline, MarkWest Energy Partners, Williams
Energy Partners, Magellan Midstream, Martin Midstream, Enbridge
Energy Partners, Crosstex and Targa Resources Partners LP. These
performance unit awards were made pursuant to a plan we adopted
that is administered by the Compensation Committee. The
Compensation Committee has the ability to modify the peer-group
in the event a peer company is no longer determined to be one of
the Partnerships peers. The cash settlement value of these
performance unit awards will be the sum of the value of an
equivalent Partnership common unit at the time of vesting plus
associated distributions over the three year period multiplied
by a performance vesting percentage which may be zero or range
from 50% to 100%. This cash settlement value may be higher or
lower than the Partnership common unit price at the time of the
grant. If the Partnerships performance equals or exceeds
the performance for the median of the group, 100% of the award
will vest. If the Partnership ranks tenth in the group, 50% of
the award will vest, between tenth and seventh, 50% to 100% will
vest based on an interpolated basis, and for a performance
ranking lower than tenth, no amounts will vest. In January 2008,
our named executive officers, who are also executive officers of
the General Partner, received an award of performance units as
follows: 4,000 performance units to Mr. Joyce, 2,700
performance units to Mr. McParland, 3,500 performance units
to Mr. Perkins, 3,500 performance units to Mr. Whalen
and 3,500 performance units to Mr. Heim. In January 2009,
the named executive officers received an award of performance
units as follows: 34,000 performance units to Mr. Joyce,
15,500 performance units to Mr. McParland, 20,800
performance units to Mr. Perkins and 20,800 performance
units to Mr. Heim.
Set forth below is the performance for the median of
the peer group for each of the 2008 and 2009 grants and a
comparison of the Partnerships performance to the peer
group as of December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performance(1)
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
Peer Group Median
|
|
Partnership
|
|
Partnership Position
|
|
2008
|
|
|
7.9
|
%
|
|
|
15.2
|
%
|
|
|
5th of 13
|
|
2009
|
|
|
53.1
|
%
|
|
|
79.6
|
%
|
|
|
3rd of 13
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Total return measured by (i) subtracting the average
closing price per share/unit for the first ten trading days of
the performance period (the Beginning Price) from
the sum of (a) the average closing price per share/unit for
the last ten trading days ending on the date that is
15 days prior to the end of the performance period plus
(b) the aggregate amount of dividends/distributions paid
with respect to a share/unit during such period (the result
being referred to as the Value Increase) and
(ii) dividing the Value Increase by the Beginning Price.
The performance period for the 2008 and 2009 awards begins on
June 30, 2008 and June 30, 2009, and ends on the third
anniversary of such dates. |
In addition to the January 2009 grants, in December 2009, our
executive officers were awarded performance units under our
long-term incentive plan for the 2010 compensation cycle that
will vest in June 2013 as follows: 18,025 performance units to
Mr. Joyce, 13,464 performance units to Mr. Whalen,
9,350 performance units to Mr. McParland, 13,860
performance units to Mr. Perkins and 9,894 performance
units to Mr. Heim. The cash settlement value of these
performance unit awards will be the sum of the value of an
equivalent Partnership common unit at the time of vesting plus
associated distributions over the three year period multiplied
by a performance vesting percentage which may be zero or range
from 25% to 150%. This cash settlement value may be higher or
lower than the Partnership common unit price at the time of the
grant. If the Partnerships performance equals or exceeds
the performance for the 25th percentile of the group but is
less than or equal to the 50th percentile of the group,
then 25% to 100% of the award will vest. If the
Partnerships performance equals or exceeds the performance
for the 50th percentile of the group but is less than or
equal to the 75th percentile of the group, then 100% to 150% of
the award will vest. The vesting between the 25th percentile and
the 50th percentile will be done on an interpolated basis
between 25% and 100% and the vesting between the 50th percentile
and 75th percentile will be done on an interpolated basis
between 100% and 150%. If the Partnerships performance is
above the performance of the 75th percentile of the group, the
performance percentage will be 150% and all amounts will vest.
If the
156
Partnerships performance is below the performance of the
25th percentile of the group, the performance percentage
will be zero and no amounts will vest. The performance period
for these performance unit awards began on June 30, 2010
and ends on the third anniversary of such date.
Health and Welfare Benefits. For 2009, our
named executive officers participated in our health and welfare
benefit programs, including medical, health, life insurance,
dental coverage and disability insurance.
Perquisites. Consistent with our compensation
philosophy, we did not pay for perquisites for any of our named
executive officers during 2009, other than parking subsidies.
Changes for
2010
Annual Cash Incentives. In light of recent
economic and financial events, Senior Management developed and
proposed a set of strategic priorities to the Compensation
Committee. In February 2010, the Compensation Committee approved
our 2010 Annual Incentive Compensation Plan (the 2010
Bonus Plan), the cash bonus plan for performance during
2010, and established the following nine key business
priorities: (i) continue to control all operating, capital
and general and administrative costs, (ii) invest in our
businesses primarily within existing cashflow,
(iii) continue priority emphasis and strong performance
relative to a safe workplace, (iv) reinforce business
philosophy and mindset that promotes environmental and
regulatory compliance, (v) continue to tightly manage the
Downstream Business inventory exposure, (vi) execute
on major capital and development projects, such as finalizing
negotiations, completing projects on time and on budget, and
optimizing economics and capital funding, (vii) pursue
selected opportunities, including new shale play gathering and
processing build-outs, other fee-based capex projects and
potential purchases of strategic assets, (viii) pursue
commercial and financial approaches to achieve maximum value and
manage risks, and (ix) execute on all business dimensions,
including the financial business plan. The Compensation
Committee also established the following overall threshold,
target and maximum levels for the Companys bonus pool: 50%
of the cash bonus pool for the threshold level; 100% for the
target level and 200% for the maximum level. As with the Bonus
Plan, funding of the cash bonus pool and the payment of
individual cash bonuses to executive management, including our
named executive officers, are subject to the sole discretion of
the Compensation Committee.
Long-term Cash Incentives. The cash settlement
value of any future grants of performance unit awards under our
long-term incentive plan will be determined using the formula
adopted for the performance unit awards granted in December 2009.
Compensation and Peer Group Review. The
Compensation Committee engaged a consultant to review executive
and key employee compensation during the second quarter of 2010
to help the committee assure that compensation goals are met and
that the most recent trends in compensation are appropriately
considered. In this process, the peer companies were reassessed
to determine whether the peer groups for long-term cash
incentive awards (performance units) and for compensation
comparison and analysis remain appropriate and adequately
reflect the market for executive talent. As a result of this
review, the peer group used for long-term cash incentive awards
and for compensation comparison was expanded and weighted. Our
peer group now consists of master limited partnerships
(MLPs) (given a 70% weighting), exploration and
production companies (E&Ps) (given a 15%
weighting) and utility companies (given a 15% weighting). The
peer group companies in each of the three categories are:
|
|
|
|
|
MLP peer companies: Atlas Pipeline Partners,
L.P., Copano Energy, L.L.C., Crosstex Energy, LP, DCP Midstream
Partners, LP, Enbridge Energy Partners LP, Energy Transfer
Partners, LP, Enterprise Products Partners LP, Magellan
Midstream Partners, LP, MarkWest Energy Partners, LP, NuStar
Energy LP, ONEOK Partners, LP, Regency Energy Partners LP and
Williams Partners LP
|
|
|
|
E&P peer companies: Cabot Oil &
Gas Corp., Cimarex Energy Co., Denbury Resources Inc., EOG
Resources Inc., Murphy Oil Corp., Newfield Exploration Co.,
Noble Energy Inc., Penn Virginia Corp., Petrohawk Energy Corp.,
Pioneer Natural Resources Co., Southwestern Energy Co. and Ultra
Petroleum Corp.
|
157
|
|
|
|
|
Utility peer companies: Centerpoint Energy
Inc., El Paso Corp., Enbridge Inc., EQT Corp., National
Fuel Gas Co., NiSource Inc., ONEOK Inc., Questar Corp., Sempra
Energy, Spectra Energy Co., Southern Union Co. and Williams
Companies Inc.
|
The review also indicated that the compensation for our named
executive officers is below compensation paid at our new MLP
peer companies and significantly below our expanded peer group.
In order to begin closing this gap in compensation, the
Compensation Committee authorized, and executive management
implemented, the following increased base salaries for our named
executive officers effective July 1, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
$
|
475,000
|
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
340,000
|
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
412,000
|
|
James W. Whalen
|
|
|
412,000
|
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
369,000
|
|
The increase in base pay for the key employees only closed
approximately one-half of the gap in executive compensation
highlighted by the review. Any remaining gap is expected to be
closed over the next two years. In addition, the market-based
base salary bonus percentages for the named executive officers
used in determining the annual cash incentives were increased
Changes in
Connection with the Completion of this Offering
In connection with this offering, we have adopted the New
Incentive Plan in order to attract and retain the best available
personnel for positions of substantial responsibility, to
provide additional incentives to our employees, directors,
affiliates and consultants, and to promote the success of our
business. The New Incentive Plan will be supplemental to our
2005 Stock Incentive Plan.
The New Incentive Plan will provide for discretionary grants of
the following types of awards: (a) incentive stock options
qualified as such under U.S. federal income tax laws,
(b) stock options that do not qualify as incentive stock
options, (c) phantom stock awards, (d) restricted
stock awards, (e) performance awards, (f) bonus stock
awards, or (g) any combination of such awards.
The New Incentive Plan is not subject to the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (ERISA). The
New Incentive Plan, for a limited period of time following this
offering, will qualify for an exception to the deductibility
limitations imposed by Section 162(m) of the Code. As a
result, during that limited period of time, certain awards will
be exempt from the limitations on the deductibility of
compensation that exceeds $1,000,000.
Shares Available. The maximum aggregate
number of shares of our common stock that will be reserved and
available for delivery in connection with awards under the New
Incentive Plan will be approximately 3.1 million after
giving effect to the shares expected to be granted in connection
with this offering. If common stock subject to any award is not
issued or transferred, or ceases to be issuable or transferable
for any reason, including stock subject to an award that is
cancelled, forfeited or settled in cash and shares withheld to
pay the exercise price of or to satisfy the withholding
obligations with respect to an award, those shares of common
stock will again be available for delivery under the New
Incentive Plan to the extent allowable by law.
Eligibility. Any individual who provides
services to us, including non-employee directors and
consultants, is eligible to participate in the New Incentive
Plan (each, an Eligible Person). Each Eligible
Person who is designated by the Compensation Committee to
receive an award under the New Incentive Plan will be a
Participant. An Eligible Person will be eligible to
receive an award pursuant to the terms of the New Incentive Plan
and subject to any limitations imposed by appropriate action of
the Compensation Committee.
Administration. Our board of directors has
appointed the Compensation Committee to administer the New
Incentive Plan pursuant to its terms, except in the event our
board of directors
158
chooses to take action under the New Incentive Plan. Our
Compensation Committee will, unless otherwise determined by the
board of directors, be comprised of two or more individuals each
of whom constitutes an outside director as defined
in Section 162(m) of the Code and nonemployee
director as defined in
Rule 16b-3
under the Exchange Act. Unless otherwise limited, the
Compensation Committee has broad discretion to administer the
New Incentive Plan, including the power to determine to whom and
when awards will be granted, to determine the amount of such
awards (measured in cash, shares of common stock or as otherwise
designated), to prescribe and interpret the terms and provisions
of each award agreement, to delegate duties under the New
Incentive Plan and to execute all other responsibilities
permitted or required under the New Incentive Plan. Our board of
directors in its discretion may terminate the New Incentive Plan
at any time with respect to any shares of common stock for which
awards have not been granted. Our board of directors may alter
or amend the New Incentive Plan from time to time, except that
no change may be made that would materially impair the rights of
a participant with respect to an outstanding award without the
consent of the participant.
Options. The Compensation Committee may grant
options to Eligible Persons including (a) incentive stock
options (only to our employees) that comply with
Section 422 of the Code and (b) nonstatutory options.
The exercise price for an option must not be less than the
greater of (i) the par value per share of common stock and
(ii) the fair market value per share as of the date of
grant. Options may be exercised as the Compensation Committee
determines, but not later than 10 years from the date of
grant. Any incentive stock option granted to an employee who
possesses more than 10% of the total combined voting power of
all classes of our shares within the meaning of
Section 422(b)(6) of the Code must have an exercise price
of at least 110% of the fair market value of the underlying
shares at the time the option is granted and may not be
exercised later than five years from the date of grant.
Phantom Stock Awards. Phantom stock awards are
rights to receive shares of common stock (or the fair market
value thereof), or rights to receive amounts equal to any
appreciation or increase in the fair market value of common
stock over a specific period of time. Such awards vest over a
period of time established by the Compensation Committee,
without satisfaction of any performance criteria or objectives.
A phantom stock award may include a stock appreciation right
that is granted independently of a stock option and/or dividend
equivalent rights (DERs), which entitle the participant to
receive an amount of cash equal to the dividends, if any,
declared on a share of our common stock during the period the
phantom stock award remains outstanding. A phantom
stock award will terminate if the recipients employment or
service as a consultant or director of the Company and its
affiliates terminates during the applicable vesting period,
except as otherwise determined by the Compensation Committee.
Phantom Stock Awards may be paid in cash, common stock or a
combination of cash and stock.
Restricted Stock Awards. A restricted stock
award is a grant of shares of common stock subject to a risk of
forfeiture, restrictions on transferability, and any other
restrictions imposed by the Compensation Committee in its
discretion. Except as otherwise provided under the terms of the
New Incentive Plan or an award agreement, the holder of a
restricted stock award may have rights as a stockholder,
including the right to vote or to receive dividends (subject to
any mandatory reinvestment or other requirements imposed by the
Compensation Committee). A restricted stock award that is
subject to forfeiture restrictions may be forfeited and
reacquired by us upon termination of employment or services.
Common stock distributed in connection with a stock split or
stock dividend, and other property distributed as a dividend,
may be subject to the same restrictions and risk of forfeiture
as the restricted stock with respect to which the distribution
was made.
Performance Awards. The Compensation Committee
may designate that certain awards granted under the New
Incentive Plan constitute performance awards. A
performance award is any award the grant, exercise or settlement
of which is subject to one or more performance standards. These
standards may include business criteria for us on a consolidated
basis, such as total stockholders return and earnings per
share, or for specific subsidiaries or business or geographical
units, such as the Partnership.
Bonus Stock Awards. Bonus stock awards under
the New Incentive Plan are awards of common stock. These awards
are granted on such terms and conditions and at such purchase
price (if any)
159
determined by the Compensation Committee and need not be subject
to performance criteria, objectives, or forfeiture.
While historically, we have used both stock options and
restricted stock to compensate our employees, including our
named executive officers, based on recommendations by our
compensation consultant after completing the review discussed
above, we currently expect the Compensation Committees
awards under the New Incentive Plan to consist primarily of
restricted stock and performance awards rather than stock
options. In connection with this offering, the Compensation
Committee expects to approve initial awards of an aggregate of
approximately 1.9 million shares of restricted stock and
bonus stock under the New Incentive Plan to employees, including
the named executive officers, effective upon the closing of this
offering and after giving effect to our corporate reorganization
as described under Summary Our Structure and
Ownership After This Offering. Of these initial awards,
our named executive officers will be granted shares of
restricted stock and bonus stock as follows: (i) with
respect to restricted stock:
Mr. Joyce121,125 shares;
Mr. Perkins67,980 shares;
Mr. Whalen67,980 shares;
Mr. Heim60,885 shares; and
Mr. McParland56,100 shares; and (ii) with
respect to bonus stock: Mr. Joyce122,439 shares;
Mr. Perkins106,200 shares;
Mr. Whalen106,200 shares;
Mr. Heim61,825 shares; and
Mr. McParland87,642 shares. The restricted stock
awards will have vesting restrictions. The restricted stock
awards ((i) above) to executive officers and other key employees
are made based upon the recommendation of a compensation
consultant using market-based precedent and market-based amounts
to provide a one-time retention and incentive award in
connection with our transition from a private to a public
company. The expected awards to the executive officers were
established using a market-based multiple of 3X annual target
long-term incentive compensation for each individual. The
consultant concluded that at the proposed 3X annual target
long-term incentive level, the awards for executive management
are of lesser value than grants awarded to senior executives in
connection with other recent industry transactions over the last
three years and that the overall program fell in a range between
the 50th and 75th percentile due to grants to a larger
than typical non-executive leadership group. The comparable
transactions included the merger of Markwest Hydrocarbons with
Markwest Energy Partners, L.P., the acquisition of the
controlling interest of Buckeye GP Holding by BGHGP Holdings,
LLC, the Merger of Inergy L.P. and Inergy LP Holdings, the
acquisition of Genesis Energys general partner from
Denbury Resources by Quintana Energy Investor Group and
transactions involving Precision Drilling, Apache, RRI Energy,
Approach Resources, Concho Resources, Encore Energy Partners,
and Vanguard Natural Resources. The bonus stock awards
((ii) above) will be fully vested on the date of grant.
These awards are intended to align the interests of key
employees (including our named executive officers) with those of
our stockholders rather than to only provide an opportunity to
participate in the equity appreciation of our common stock.
Therefore, participants (including our named executive officers)
will not pay any consideration for the common stock they receive
with respect to these awards, and we will not receive any cash
remuneration for the common stock delivered with respect to
these awards. Partially as a result of the overall award
structure, we expect that our named executive officers, as well
as all other holders, of outstanding out-of-the-money options
that were granted under the 2005 Stock Incentive Plan will
cancel those options. Any such option cancellations would be
contingent upon the completion of the offering.
As described above, the Compensation Committee also expects to
make cash bonus awards to our executive officers, including our
named executive officers, upon consummation of this offering in
the aggregate amount of $3 million. After the internal
reallocation described below, the expected cash awards to our
named executive officers are as follows:
Mr. Heim$732,000 .
The bonus stock awards and the cash bonus awards are being
granted to the seven-person executive management team to provide
(i) a higher carry of their equity interests
and (ii) additional discretionary compensation, in each
case in recognition of our executive management teams
efforts in bringing us to this point in our successful history.
The initial allocation among the seven persons of the
1.9 million shares of discretionary bonus and restricted
stock awards and $3 million cash bonus to be awarded to the
executive team will be initially based on the relative current
base compensation of each individual. Our board of directors and
the Compensation Committee have also indicated that they will
allow
160
a voluntary reallocation of equity for cash among the members
of the executive management group to accommodate individual
preferences. The named executive officers, other than
Mr. Heim, will elect to exchange their portion of the cash
bonus for additional equity and Mr. Heim and our two other
executive officers will elect to exchange some of their equity
for larger shares of the cash bonus. The final allocation for
the named executive officers is shown above. The amounts of
restricted stock, bonus stock and cash bonus awards are
determined pursuant to our compensation philosophy and the
compensation review discussed above.
Executive
Compensation
The following Summary Compensation Table sets forth the
compensation of our named executive officers for 2009, 2008 and
2007. Additional details regarding the applicable elements of
compensation in the Summary Compensation Table are provided in
the footnotes following the table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary Compensation Table for 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
Incentive Plan
|
|
All Other
|
|
Total
|
Name
|
|
Year
|
|
Salary
|
|
Awards
($)(1)
|
|
Compensation(2)
|
|
Compensation(3)
|
|
Compensation
|
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
$
|
337,500
|
|
|
$
|
742,965
|
|
|
$
|
510,000
|
|
|
$
|
20,187
|
|
|
$
|
1,610,652
|
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
322,500
|
|
|
|
148,218
|
|
|
|
247,500
|
|
|
|
19,205
|
|
|
|
737,423
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
293,750
|
|
|
|
459,769
|
|
|
|
300,000
|
|
|
|
817,963
|
|
|
|
1,871,482
|
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
265,000
|
|
|
|
435,695
|
|
|
|
400,500
|
|
|
|
20,061
|
|
|
|
1,121,256
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
253,000
|
|
|
|
114,247
|
|
|
|
194,250
|
|
|
|
19,031
|
|
|
|
580,528
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
230,000
|
|
|
|
316,770
|
|
|
|
235,000
|
|
|
|
674,292
|
|
|
|
1,456,062
|
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
303,750
|
|
|
|
574,514
|
|
|
|
459,000
|
|
|
|
20,129
|
|
|
|
1,357,393
|
|
President
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
290,250
|
|
|
|
126,228
|
|
|
|
222,750
|
|
|
|
19,124
|
|
|
|
658,352
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
265,000
|
|
|
|
366,318
|
|
|
|
270,000
|
|
|
|
817,888
|
|
|
|
1,719,206
|
|
James W. Whalen
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
297,000
|
|
|
|
306,914
|
|
|
|
445,500
|
|
|
|
19,936
|
|
|
|
1,069,350
|
|
PresidentFinance
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
290,250
|
|
|
|
66,488
|
|
|
|
222,750
|
|
|
|
18,871
|
|
|
|
598,359
|
|
and Administration
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
265,000
|
|
|
|
224,796
|
|
|
|
270,000
|
|
|
|
817,888
|
|
|
|
1,577,684
|
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
281,000
|
|
|
|
553,310
|
|
|
|
424,500
|
|
|
|
20,089
|
|
|
|
1,278,899
|
|
Executive Vice President
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
268,750
|
|
|
|
127,172
|
|
|
|
206,250
|
|
|
|
19,071
|
|
|
|
621,243
|
|
and Chief Operating Officer
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
243,750
|
|
|
|
366,318
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
817,838
|
|
|
|
1,677,906
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts represent the aggregate grant date fair value of awards
computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. Assumptions used
in the calculation of these amounts are included in Note 12
to our Consolidated Financial Statements beginning
on page F-1. Detailed information about the amount recognized
for specific awards is reported in the table under
Grants of Plan-Based Awards below. The fair
value of a performance unit is the sum of: (i) the closing
price of a common unit of the Partnership on the reporting date;
(ii) the fair value of an
at-the-money
call option on a performance unit with a grant date equal to the
reporting date and an expiration date equal to the last day of
the performance period; and (iii) estimated DERs. The grant
date value of a performance unit award granted on
January 22, 2009 (for the 2009 compensation cycle) and
December 3, 2009 (for the 2010 compensation cycle),
assuming the highest performance condition will be achieved, is
$36.74 and $36.04. Accordingly, the highest aggregate value of
the performance unit awards granted in 2009 for the named
executive officers is as follows:
Mr. Joyce$1,898,745;
Mr. McParland$906,431;
Mr. Perkins$1,263,693; Mr. Whalen$485,284;
and Mr. Heim$1,120,746. |
|
(2) |
|
Amounts represent awards granted pursuant to our Bonus Plan. See
the narrative to the section titled Grants of
Plan-Based Awards below for further information regarding
these awards. |
161
|
|
|
(3) |
|
For 2009 All Other Compensation includes the
(i) aggregate value of matching and non-matching
contributions to our 401(k) plan and (ii) the dollar value
of life insurance coverage. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
401(k) and Profit
|
|
Dollar Value of
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Sharing Plan
|
|
Life Insurance
|
|
Total
|
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
$
|
19,600
|
|
|
$
|
587
|
|
|
$
|
20,187
|
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
19,600
|
|
|
|
461
|
|
|
|
20,061
|
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
19,600
|
|
|
|
529
|
|
|
|
20,129
|
|
James W. Whalen
|
|
|
19,600
|
|
|
|
336
|
|
|
|
19,936
|
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
19,600
|
|
|
|
489
|
|
|
|
20,089
|
|
Grants of
Plan-Based Awards
The following table and the footnotes thereto provide
information regarding grants of plan-based equity and non-equity
awards made to the named executive officers during 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grants of Plan Based Awards for 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Future Payouts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Possible Payouts Under
|
|
|
Under
|
|
|
Grant Date Fair
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Equity Incentive Plan
Awards(1)
|
|
|
Equity Incentive Plan
Awards(2)
|
|
|
Value of
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock and
|
|
Name
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Threshold
|
|
|
Target
|
|
|
2X Target
|
|
|
Threshold
|
|
|
(Units)
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
Option
Awards(3)
|
|
|
Mr. Joyce
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
85,000
|
|
|
$
|
170,000
|
|
|
$
|
340,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01/22/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,249,068
|
|
|
|
|
12/03/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,025
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
649,677
|
|
Mr. McParland
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
66,750
|
|
|
|
133,500
|
|
|
|
267,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01/22/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
569,428
|
|
|
|
|
12/03/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,350
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
337,003
|
|
Mr. Perkins
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
76,500
|
|
|
|
153,000
|
|
|
|
306,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01/22/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
764,136
|
|
|
|
|
12/03/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,860
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
499,557
|
|
Mr. Whalen
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
74,250
|
|
|
|
148,500
|
|
|
|
297,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/03/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,464
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
485,284
|
|
Mr. Heim
|
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
|
70,750
|
|
|
|
141,500
|
|
|
|
283,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
01/22/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
764,136
|
|
|
|
|
12/03/09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
356,610
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
These awards were granted under the Bonus Plan. At the time the
Bonus Plan was adopted, the estimated future payouts in the
above table under the heading Estimated Possible Payouts
Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards represented the
portion of the cash bonus pool available for awards to the named
executive officers under the Bonus Plan based on the three
performance levels. In December 2009, the Compensation Committee
approved a bonus award for the named executive officers equal to
the maximum payout with a 1.5x performance multiplier. See
Executive CompensationCompensation Discussion
and AnalysisApplication of Compensation
ElementsAnnual Cash Incentives. |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
The performance unit awards under the column Target
were granted under our long-term incentive plan. While there are
no threshold or maximum amounts (or equivalent items) relating
to the issuance of these performance unit awards, payouts under
the awards will vary based on a performance factor. Please see
Executive CompensationCompensation Discussion
and AnalysisApplication of Compensation
ElementsLong-term Cash Incentives for a detailed
discussion of the performance unit awards and the performance
factor. |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
The dollar amounts shown for the performance units granted on
January 22, 2009 are determined by multiplying the number
of units reported in the table by $36.74 (the grant date fair
value of awards computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic
718) and assume a 100% performance vesting percentage. The
dollar amounts shown for the performance units granted on
December 3, 2009 are |
162
|
|
|
|
|
determined by multiplying the number of units reported in the
table by $36.04 (the grant date fair value of awards computed in
accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718) and assume a 100%
performance vesting percentage. Please see Executive
CompensationCompensation Discussion and
AnalysisApplication of Compensation
ElementsLong-term Cash Incentives for a detailed
discussion of the performance unit awards and the performance
factor. |
Narrative
Disclosure to Summary Compensation Table and Grants of Plan
Based Awards Table
A discussion of 2009 salaries, bonuses and incentive plans is
included in Executive CompensationCompensation
Discussion and Analysis.
2005 Stock
Incentive Plan
Stock Option Grants. Under our 2005 Stock
Incentive Plan, incentive stock options and non-incentive stock
options to purchase, in the aggregate, up to
5,159,786 shares of our restricted stock may be granted to
our employees, directors and consultants. Subject to the terms
of the applicable stock option agreement, options granted under
the 2005 Incentive Plan have a vesting period of four years,
remain exercisable for ten years from the date of grant and have
an exercise price at least equal to the fair market value of a
share of restricted stock on the date of grant. Additional
details relating to previously granted non-incentive stock
options under the 2005 Incentive Plan are included in
Outstanding Equity Awards at 2009 Fiscal
Year-End below. No option awards were granted to the named
executive officers in 2007, 2008 and 2009. Following completion
of this offering, we will not make additional grants under the
2005 Incentive Plan. In connection with this offering, it is
anticipated that option awards that were previously granted to
our named executive officers under the 2005 Incentive Plan and
that remain outstanding prior to the completion of this offering
will be surrendered and cancelled.
Restricted Stock Grants. Under the 2005
Incentive Plan, up to 7,293,882 shares of our restricted
stock may be granted to our employees, directors and
consultants. Subject to the terms of the restricted stock
agreement, restricted stock granted under the Incentive Plan has
a vesting period of four years from the date of grant.
Additional details relating to previously granted shares of
common stock are included in Outstanding Equity
Awards at 2009 Fiscal Year-End below. No stock awards were
granted to the named executive officers in 2007, 2008 and 2009.
163
Outstanding
Equity Awards at 2009 Fiscal Year-End
The following table and the footnotes related thereto provide
information regarding each stock option and other equity-based
awards outstanding as of December 31, 2009 for each of our
named executive officers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Equity Awards at 2009 Fiscal Year-End
|
|
|
|
Option
Awards(1)
|
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
|
Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Awards: Number of
|
|
|
Awards: Market or
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unearned
|
|
|
Payout Value of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Performance Units
|
|
|
Unearned Performance
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Option
|
|
|
Expiration
|
|
|
That have not
|
|
|
Units That have not
|
|
Name
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
Vested(2)
|
|
|
Vested(3)
|
|
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
|
21,772
|
|
|
$
|
0.75
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
71,025
|
|
|
$
|
1,848,849
|
|
|
|
|
291,376
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
246,549
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,006
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,559
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
218,532
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
35,750
|
|
|
|
934,717
|
|
|
|
|
184,912
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,254
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,919
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
236,014
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
48,960
|
|
|
|
1,276,843
|
|
|
|
|
199,705
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,435
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,073
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James W. Whalen
|
|
|
90,908
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
11/01/15
|
|
|
|
27,764
|
|
|
|
740,040
|
|
|
|
|
192,308
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
11/01/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
937
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,996
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
21,772
|
|
|
|
0.75
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
44,194
|
|
|
|
1,157,174
|
|
|
|
|
236,014
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
199,705
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
10/31/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,435
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,073
|
|
|
|
15.00
|
|
|
|
12/20/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All outstanding option grants are vested and fully exercisable. |
|
(2) |
|
Represents the number of performance units awarded on
February 8, 2007, January 17, 2008, January 22,
2009 and December 3, 2009 under our long-term incentive
plan. These awards vest in August 2010, June 2011, June 2012,
and June 2013, based on the Partnerships performance over
the applicable period measured against a peer group of
companies. These awards are discussed in more detail under the
heading Executive CompensationCompensation
Discussion and AnalysisApplication of Compensation
ElementsLong-Term Cash Incentives. |
|
(3) |
|
The dollar amounts shown are determined by multiplying the
number of performance units reported in the table by the sum of
the closing price of a common unit of the Partnership on
December 31, 2009 ($24.31) and the related distribution
equivalent rights for each award and assume full payout under
the awards at the time of vesting. |
164
Option Exercises
and Stock Vested in 2009
The following table provides the amount realized during 2009 by
each named executive officer upon the exercise of options and
upon the vesting of our restricted common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option Exercises and Stock Vested for 2009
|
|
|
Option Awards
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquired on
|
|
Value Realized on
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
Value Realized on
|
Name
|
|
Exercise(1)
|
|
Exercise
|
|
Acquired on Vesting
|
|
Vesting(2)
|
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
148,263(3
|
)
|
|
$
|
296,526
|
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
21,772
|
|
|
|
43,544
|
|
|
|
112,091(4
|
)
|
|
|
224,182
|
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
21,772
|
|
|
|
43,544
|
|
|
|
123,489(5
|
)
|
|
|
246,978
|
|
James W. Whalen
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102,249(6
|
)
|
|
|
204,498
|
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
123,489(5
|
)
|
|
|
246,978
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
At the time of exercise of the stock options, the common stock
acquired upon exercise had a value of $2.00 per share. This
value was determined by an independent consultant pursuant to a
valuation of our common stock dated November 4, 2009. |
|
(2) |
|
The value realized on vesting used a per share price based on
the estimated market price of our common stock on such date.
These values were determined by an independent consultant
pursuant to valuations of our common stock prepared at various
times during 2009 and 2008, which management believes are
reasonable approximations of the value of such stock as of the
applicable dates. |
|
(3) |
|
The shares vested as follows: 146,840 shares on
October 31, 2009 and 1,432 shares on December 20,
2009. |
|
(4) |
|
The shares vested as follows: 111,024 shares on
October 31, 2009 and 1,067 shares on December 20,
2009. |
|
(5) |
|
The shares vested as follows: 122,336 shares on
October 31, 2009 and 1,153 shares on December 20,
2009. |
|
(6) |
|
The shares vested as follows: 544 shares on
October 31, 2009, 100,595 shares on November 1,
2009 and 1,110 shares on December 20, 2009. |
Change in Control
and Termination Benefits
2005 Incentive
Plan.
No payments would have been made to each of the named executive
officers under the 2005 Incentive Plan and related agreements in
the event there was a Change of Control or their employment was
terminated, each as of December 31, 2009.
Long-Term Incentive Plan. If a Change of
Control (as defined below) occurs during the performance period
established for the performance units and related distribution
equivalent rights granted to a named executive officer under our
form of Performance Unit Grant Agreement (a Performance
Unit Agreement), the performance units and related
distribution equivalent rights then credited to a named
executive officer will be cancelled and the named executive
officer will be paid an amount of cash equal to the sum of
(i) the product of (a) the Fair Market Value (as
defined below) of a common unit of the Partnership multiplied by
(b) the number of performance units granted to the named
executive officer, plus (ii) the amount of distribution
equivalent rights then credited to the named executive officer,
if any.
Performance units and the related distribution equivalent rights
granted to a named executive officer under a Performance Unit
Agreement will be automatically forfeited without payment upon
the termination of his employment with us and our affiliates,
except that: if his employment is terminated by reason of his
death, a disability that entitles him to disability benefits
under our long-term disability plan or by us other than for
Cause (as defined below), he will be vested in his performance
units that he is otherwise
165
qualified to receive payment for based on achievement of the
performance goal at the end of the Performance Period.
The following terms have the specified meanings for purposes of
our long-term incentive plan:
|
|
|
|
|
Change of Control means (i) any person
or group within the meaning of those terms as used
in Sections 13(d) and 14(d)(2) of the Exchange Act, other
than an affiliate of us, becoming the beneficial owner, by way
of merger, consolidation, recapitalization, reorganization or
otherwise, of 50% or more of the combined voting power of the
equity interests in the Partnership or its general partner,
(ii) the limited partners of the Partnership approving, in
one or a series of transactions, a plan of complete liquidation
of the Partnership, (iii) the sale or other disposition by
either the Partnership or the General Partner of all or
substantially all of its assets in one or more transactions to
any person other than the General Partner or one of the General
Partners affiliates or (iv) a transaction resulting
in a person other than the Partnerships general partner or
one of such general partners affiliates being the general
partner of the Partnership. With respect to an award subject to
Section 409A of the Code, Change of Control will mean a
change of control event as defined in the
regulations and guidance issued under Section 409A of the Code.
|
|
|
|
Fair Market Value means the closing sales price of a
common unit of the Partnership on the principal national
securities exchange or other market in which trading in such
common units occurs on the applicable date (or if there is not
trading in the common units on such date, on the next preceding
date on which there was trading) as reported in The Wall Street
Journal (or other reporting service approved by the Compensation
Committee). In the event the common units are not traded on a
national securities exchange or other market at the time a
determination of fair market value is required to be made, the
determination of fair market value shall be made in good faith
by the Compensation Committee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cause means (i) failure to perform assigned duties
and responsibilities, (ii) engaging in conduct which is
injurious (monetarily of otherwise) to us or our affiliates,
(iii) breach of any corporate policy or code of conduct
established by us or our affiliates or breach of any agreement
between the named executive officer and us or our affiliates or
(iv) conviction of a misdemeanor involving moral turpitude
or a felony. If the named executive officer is a party to an
agreement with us or our affiliates in which this term is
defined, then that definition will apply for purposes of our
long-term incentive plan and the Performance Unit Agreement.
|
The following table reflects payments that would have been made
to each of the named executive officers under our long-term
incentive plan and related agreements in the event there was a
Change of Control or their employment was terminated, each as of
December 31, 2009. Substantially all of the stock option
and restricted stock awards available for grant under the 2005
Incentive Plan have been granted and have subsequently vested.
No payments would be made under the 2005 Incentive Plan to any
named executive officer in the event there was a Change of
Control or their employment was terminated, each as of
December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination for
|
Name
|
|
Change of Control
|
|
Death or Disability
|
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
$
|
1,848,849
|
(1)
|
|
$
|
1,848,849
|
(1)
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
934,717
|
(2)
|
|
|
934,717
|
(2)
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
1,276,843
|
(3)
|
|
|
1,276,843
|
(3)
|
James W. Whalen
|
|
|
740,040
|
(4)
|
|
|
740,040
|
(4)
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
1,157,174
|
(5)
|
|
|
1,157,174
|
(5)
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Of this amount, $364,650 and $71,381 relate to the performance
units and related distribution equivalent rights granted on
February 7, 2007; $97,240 and $15,660 relate to the
performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on January 17, 2008; $826,540 and $35,190 relate to
the performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on January 22, 2009; and |
166
|
|
|
|
|
$438,188 and $0 relate to the performance units and related
distribution equivalent rights granted on December 3, 2009. |
|
(2) |
|
Of this amount, $199,342 and $39,022 relate to the performance
units and related distribution equivalent rights granted on
February 7, 2007; $65,637 and $10,571 relate to the
performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on January 17, 2008; $376,805 and $16,043 relate to
the performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on January 22, 2009; and $227,299 and $0 relate to
the performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on December 3, 2009. |
|
(3) |
|
Of this amount, $262,548 and $51,395 relate to the performance
units and related distribution equivalent rights granted on
February 7, 2007; $85,085 and $13,703 relate to the
performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on January 17, 2008; $505,648 and $21,528 relate to
the performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on January 22, 2009; and $336,937 and $0 relate to
the performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on December 3, 2009. |
|
(4) |
|
Of this amount, $262,548 and $51,395 relate to the performance
units and related distribution equivalent rights granted on
February 7, 2007; $85,085 and $13,703 relate to the
performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on January 17, 2008; and $327,310 and $0 relate to
the performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on December 3, 2009. |
|
(5) |
|
Of this amount, $243,100 and $47,588 relate to the performance
units and related distribution equivalent rights granted on
February 7, 2007; $85,085 and $13,703 relate to the
performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on January 17, 2008; $505,648 and $21,548 relate to
the performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on January 22, 2009; and $240,523 and $0 relate to
the performance units and related distribution equivalent rights
granted on December 3, 2009. |
Director
Compensation
The following table sets forth the compensation earned by our
non-employee directors for 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fees Earned Or
|
|
|
Stock Awards
|
|
|
All Other
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Paid in Cash
|
|
|
($)(5)
|
|
|
Compensation(6)
|
|
|
Total Compensation
|
|
|
Joe B.
Foster(1)(2)(3)
|
|
$
|
40,167
|
|
|
$
|
26,317
|
|
|
$
|
16,560
|
|
|
$
|
83,044
|
|
Chris
Tong(2)(3)
|
|
|
65,500
|
|
|
|
45,161
|
|
|
|
16,560
|
|
|
|
127,221
|
|
Charles R.
Crisp(2)(3)
|
|
|
44,500
|
|
|
|
45,176
|
|
|
|
16,560
|
|
|
|
106,236
|
|
In Seon Hwang
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chansoo
Joung(2)(3)(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter R.
Kagan(2)(3)(4)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
On December 1, 2009, Joe B. Foster resigned from the Board
of Directors of each of Targa Resources Corp. and TRI Resources
Inc. |
|
|
|
(2) |
|
On January 22, 2009, Messrs. Crisp, Foster and Tong
each received 4,000 common units of the Partnership in
connection with their service on our board of directors and
Messrs. Joung and Kagan each received 4,000 common units of
the Partnership in connection with their service on the board of
directors of the General Partner. The grant date fair value of
the 4,000 common units granted to each of these named
individuals was $8.20, based on the closing price of the common
units on the day prior to the grant date. During 2009, each of
the named individuals received $16,560 in distributions on the
common units of the Partnership that were awarded to them. The
Partnership also recognized $16,560 of expense for each of the
stock awards held by the named individuals. |
|
(3) |
|
As of December 31, 2009, Mr. Tong held 20,900 common
units, Mr. Crisp held 9,100 common units and Mr. Joung
and Mr. Kagan each held 8,000 common units of the
Partnership. As of his resignation, Mr. Foster owned 12,700
common units of the Partnership. |
167
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Messrs. Joung and Kagan earned $104,616 and $103,116 in
fees for service on the board of directors of the General
Partner in 2009. Mr. Joungs compensation included
$47,500 in fees, $40,556 in stock awards and $16,560 in all
other compensation. Mr. Kagans compensation included
$46,000 in fees, $40,556 in stock awards and $16,560 in all
other compensation. |
|
(5) |
|
Amounts represent the aggregate grant date fair value of awards
computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. For a discussion
of the assumptions and methodologies used to value the awards
reported in these columns, see the discussion of stock awards
contained in Accounting for Unit-Based Compensation included
under Note 2 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements beginning on
page F-1. |
|
(6) |
|
For 2009 All Other Compensation consists of the
distributions paid on common units of the Partnership from unit
awards |
Narrative to
Director Compensation Table
For 2009, each independent director received an annual cash
retainer of $34,000 and the chairman of the Audit Committee
received an additional annual retainer of $20,000. All of our
independent directors receive $1,500 for each Board, Audit
Committee and Compensation Committee meeting attended. Payment
of independent director fees is generally made twice annually,
at the second regularly scheduled meeting of the Board and the
final meeting of the Board for the fiscal year. All independent
directors are reimbursed for
out-of-pocket
expenses incurred in attending Board and committee meetings.
A director who is also an employee receives no additional
compensation for services as a director. Accordingly, the
Summary Compensation Table reflects total compensation received
by Messrs. Joyce and Whalen for services performed for us
and our affiliates.
Director Long-term Equity Incentives. The
Partnership made equity-based awards in January 2009 to our
non-management and independent directors under the
Partnerships long-term incentive plan. These awards were
determined by us and approved by the General Partners
board of directors. Each of these directors received an award of
4,000 restricted units, which will settle with the delivery of
Partnership common units. All of these awards are subject to
three-year vesting, without a performance condition and vest
ratably on each anniversary of the grant. The awards are
intended to align the long-term interests of our executive
officers and directors with those of the Partnerships
unitholders. Our independent and non-management directors
currently participate in the Partnerships plan.
Changes for
2010
Director Compensation. In December 2009, the
board of directors approved changes to director compensation for
the 2010 fiscal year. For 2010, each independent director will
receive an annual cash retainer of $40,000.
Director Long-term Equity Incentives. In
January 2010, each of our non-management and independent
directors received an award of 2,250 restricted units under the
Partnerships long-term incentive plan, which will settle
with the delivery of Partnership common units.
168
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF MANAGEMENT AND SELLING STOCKHOLDERS
Targa Resources
Corp.
The following table sets forth information regarding the
beneficial ownership of our common stock as of December 6,
2010, after giving effect to our corporate reorganization as
described under Summary Our Structure and
Ownership After This Offering, and as adjusted to reflect
the sale of common stock offered by the selling stockholders in
this offering, for:
|
|
|
|
|
each person who beneficially owns more than 5% of our
outstanding shares of common stock;
|
|
|
|
each of our named executive officers;
|
|
|
|
each of our directors;
|
|
|
|
each selling stockholder; and
|
|
|
|
all of our executive officers and directors as a group.
|
Beneficial ownership is determined under the rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission. In general, these rules
attribute beneficial ownership of securities to persons who
possess sole or shared voting power
and/or
investment power with respect to those securities and include,
among other things, securities that an individual has the right
to acquire within 60 days. Unless otherwise indicated, the
stockholders identified in the table below have sole voting and
investment power with respect to all shares shown as
beneficially owned by them. Percentage ownership calculations
for any stockholder listed in the table below are based on
42,292,348 shares of our common stock outstanding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
Shares of
|
|
Shares Beneficially
|
|
|
Owned Prior to the
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
Owned
|
|
|
Offering(14)
|
|
Being
|
|
After the Offering
|
Name of Beneficial
Owner(1)
|
|
Number
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Offered
|
|
Number
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Selling Stockholders and 5% Stockholders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Warburg Pincus Private Equity VIII,
L.P.(2)
|
|
|
19,270,013
|
|
|
|
45.6
|
%
|
|
|
9,252,384
|
|
|
|
10,017,629
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
%
|
Warburg Pincus Netherlands Private
Equity VIII C.V. I(2)
|
|
|
558,551
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
%
|
|
|
268,185
|
|
|
|
290,366
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
WP-WPVIII Investors,
LP(2)
|
|
|
55,872
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
26,827
|
|
|
|
29,045
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Warburg Pincus Private Equity IX,
L.P.(2)
|
|
|
11,172,913
|
|
|
|
26.4
|
%
|
|
|
5,364,609
|
|
|
|
5,808,304
|
|
|
|
13.7
|
%
|
Merrill Lynch Ventures L.P.
2001(3)
|
|
|
2,758,063
|
|
|
|
6.5
|
%
|
|
|
1,324,268
|
|
|
|
1,433,795
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
%
|
Margaret D.
Helma(4)
|
|
|
27,533
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
7,744
|
|
|
|
14,381
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Roy E.
Johnson(5)
|
|
|
730,522
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
%
|
|
|
128,820
|
|
|
|
608,169
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
%
|
Rene
Ruiz(6)
|
|
|
14,449
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
2,163
|
|
|
|
12,286
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Directors and Executive Officers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rene R.
Joyce(7)
|
|
|
993,824
|
|
|
|
2.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,114,906
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
%
|
Joe Bob
Perkins(8)
|
|
|
834,838
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
909,808
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
%
|
Michael A.
Heim(9)
|
|
|
788,282
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
811,782
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
%
|
Jeffrey J.
McParland(10)
|
|
|
701,895
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
753,776
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
%
|
James W.
Whalen(11)
|
|
|
554,785
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
633,429
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
%
|
Peter R.
Kagan(2)(12)
|
|
|
31,057,349
|
|
|
|
73.4
|
%
|
|
|
14,912,005
|
|
|
|
16,145,344
|
|
|
|
38.2
|
%
|
Chansoo
Joung(2)(12)
|
|
|
31,057,349
|
|
|
|
73.4
|
%
|
|
|
14,912,005
|
|
|
|
16,145,344
|
|
|
|
38.2
|
%
|
In Seon
Hwang(2)(12)
|
|
|
31,057,349
|
|
|
|
73.4
|
%
|
|
|
14,912,005
|
|
|
|
16,145,344
|
|
|
|
38.2
|
%
|
Charles R. Crisp
|
|
|
155,606
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140,080
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
Chris Tong
|
|
|
61,084
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,439
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
All directors and executive officers as a group
(12 persons)(12)(13)
|
|
|
36,475,796
|
|
|
|
86.2
|
%
|
|
|
15,040,825
|
|
|
|
21,770,811
|
|
|
|
51.5
|
%
|
169
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Unless otherwise indicated, the address for all beneficial
owners in this table is 1000 Louisiana, Suite 4300,
Houston, Texas 77002. |
|
(2) |
|
Warburg Pincus Private Equity VIII, L.P., a Delaware limited
partnership and two affiliated partnerships (WP
VIII), and Warburg Pincus Private Equity IX, L.P., a
Delaware limited partnership (WP IX), in the
aggregate will own, on a fully diluted basis, approximately
38.2% of our equity interests upon completion of this offering.
The general partner of WP VIII is Warburg Pincus Partners, LLC,
a New York limited liability company (WP Partners
LLC), and the general partner of WP IX is Warburg Pincus
IX, LLC, a New York limited liability company, of which WP
Partners LLC is the sole member. Warburg Pincus & Co.,
a New York general partnership (WP), is the managing
member of WP Partners LLC. WP VIII and WP IX are managed by
Warburg Pincus LLC, a New York limited liability company
(WP LLC). The address of the Warburg Pincus entities
is 450 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10017.
Messrs. Hwang, Joung and Kagan are Partners of WP and
Managing Directors and Members of WP LLC. Charles R. Kaye and
Joseph P. Landy are Managing General Partners of WP and Managing
Members and Co-Presidents of WP LLC and may be deemed to control
the Warburg Pincus entities. Messrs. Hwang, Joung, Kagan,
Kaye and Landy disclaim beneficial ownership of all shares held
by the Warburg Pincus entities. |
|
(3) |
|
Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., a Delaware corporation
(ML&Co.), is a wholly owned subsidiary of Bank
of America, a Delaware corporation (BAC). Merrill
Lynch Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (ML
Group), is a wholly owned subsidiary of ML&Co.
Merrill Lynch Ventures L.P. 2001, a Delaware limited
partnership, is a private investment fund whose general partner
is Merrill Lynch Ventures, LLC (MLV LLC), a Delaware
limited liability company and a wholly owned subsidiary of ML
Group. Merrill Lynch Ventures L.P. 2001s decisions
regarding the voting or disposition of shares of its portfolio
investments (including its investment in us) are made by the
management and investment committee of the board of directors of
MLV LLC. BAC is the ultimate parent company of each of the
foregoing. Each of BAC, ML&Co., ML Group and MLV LLC
disclaims beneficial ownership of these securities except to the
extent of its pecuniary interest therein. The address of the BAC
entities, including Merrill Lynch Ventures L.P. 2001, is 4 World
Financial Center, 250 Vesey Street, New York, NY 10080. |
|
(4) |
|
The number of shares reported as being beneficially owned by
Ms. Helma were acquired by her under our 2005 Stock
Incentive Plan either as a direct issuance or as a result of
option exercises and do not include a yet to be determined
individual long term incentive award of restricted shares from
an approved pool of restricted shares to be awarded to employees. |
|
(5) |
|
Shares of common stock beneficially owned by Mr. Johnson
include: (i) a management incentive award of
36,104 shares and a long term incentive award of 56,100
restricted shares in connection with this offering;
(ii) 134,162 shares issued to the Karen Johnson 2008
Family Trust, of which Mr. Johnsons wife is the
trustee and has sole voting and investment power;
(iii) 134,162 shares issued to the Roy Johnson 2010
Family Trust, of which Mr. Johnson is the trustee with sole
voting and investment power; and (iv) 50,659 shares
issued to Karen M. Johnson, of which she has sole voting and
investment power. Mr. Johnson purchased the shares of
common stock that he is offering from us in connection with our
formation in October 2005. |
|
(6) |
|
The number of shares reported as being beneficially owned by
Mr. Ruiz were acquired by him under our 2005 Stock
Incentive Plan as a result of option exercises and do not
include a yet to be determined individual long term incentive
award of restricted shares from an approved pool of restricted
shares to be awarded to employees.. |
|
(7) |
|
Shares of common stock beneficially owned by Mr. Joyce
include: (i) a management incentive award of
122,439 shares and a long term incentive award of 121,125
restricted shares in connection with this offering;
(ii) 234,959 shares issued to The Rene Joyce 2010
Grantor Retained Annuity Trust, of which Mr. Joyce and his
wife are co-trustees and have shared voting and investment
power; and (iii) 561,292 shares issued to The Kay
Joyce 2010 Family Trust, of which Mr. Joyces wife is
trustee and has sole voting and investment power. |
|
(8) |
|
Shares of common stock beneficially owned by Mr. Perkins
include: (i) a management incentive award of
106,200 shares and a long term incentive award of 67,980
restricted shares in connection with this offering;
(ii) 151,805 shares issued to the JBP Liquidity Trust,
of which Ms. Claudia Capp Vaglica is trustee and has sole
voting and investment power; (iii) 147,645 shares
issued to the JBP Family Trust, of which Ms. Vaglica is the
trustee and has sole voting and investment power; and
(iv) 4,159 shares issued to Mr. Perkins
wife over which she has sole voting and investment power. |
170
|
|
|
(9) |
|
Shares of common stock beneficially owned by Mr. Heim
include: (i) a management incentive award of
61,825 shares and a long term incentive award of 60,885
restricted shares in connection with this offering;
(ii) 312,378 shares issued to The Michael Heim 2009
Family Trust, of which Mr. Heim and Nicholas Heim are
co-trustees and have shared voting and investment power; and
(iii) 196,672 shares issued to The Patricia Heim 2009
Grantor Retained Annuity Trust, of which Mr. Heim and his
wife are co-trustees and have shared voting and investment power. |
|
(10) |
|
Shares of common stock beneficially owned by Mr. McParland
include a management incentive award of 87,642 shares and a
long term incentive award of 56,100 restricted shares in
connection with this offering. |
|
(11) |
|
Shares of common stock beneficially owned by Mr. Whalen
include a management incentive award of 106,200 shares and
a long term incentive award of 67,980 restricted shares in
connection with this offering and 633,429 shares issued to
the Whalen Family Investments Limited Partnership. |
|
(12) |
|
All shares indicated as owned by Messrs. Hwang, Joung and
Kagan are included because of their affiliation with the Warburg
Pincus entities. |
|
(13) |
|
The number of shares reported as being beneficially owned by our
directors and executive officers as a group includes the
following shares beneficially owned by the following members of
our executive management team: Mr. Johnson
608,169 and Mr. Chung 604,078. |
|
(14) |
|
The reported number of shares beneficially owned excludes awards
of common stock that will be granted to the directors and
executive officers upon the closing of this offering. Please see
ManagementExecutive CompensationCompensation
Discussion and AnalysisChanges in Connection with the
Completion of this Offering for a detailed description of
these awards. |
Overview of
Distributions
During the past three fiscal years, our stockholders, including
the selling stockholders listed in the table above, have
received dividends from us on a pro rata basis. Holders of the
Series B Preferred received their pro rata share of
(i) an $18 million distribution paid on
November 22, 2010 that reduced the accreted value of the
Series B Preferred included in our September 30, 2010
balance sheet; (ii) a $220 million extraordinary
distribution paid in April 2010; (iii) a $200 million
extraordinary distribution paid on the common stock (treating
the Series B Preferred on a common stock equivalent basis)
in April 2010; and (iv) a $445 million dividend paid
in 2007. Holders of our common stock received their pro rata
share of the $200 million extraordinary distribution paid
in April 2010 (treating the Series B Preferred on a common
stock equivalent basis). We do not expect our outstanding equity
awards to vest in connection with this offering.
Targa Resources
Partners LP
The following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of the
Partnerships units as of December 6, 2010
held by:
|
|
|
|
|
each person who then beneficially owns 5% or more of the then
outstanding units;
|
|
|
|
all of the directors of the General Partner;
|
|
|
|
each named executive officer of the General Partner, and;
|
|
|
|
all directors and executive officers of the General Partner as a
group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Units
|
|
Percentage of Common
|
Name of Beneficial
Owner(1)
|
|
Beneficially
Owned(2)
|
|
Units Beneficially Owned
|
|
Targa Resources
Corp.(3)
|
|
|
11,645,659
|
|
|
|
15.4
|
%
|
Rene R. Joyce
|
|
|
81,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Joe Bob Perkins
|
|
|
32,100
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Michael A. Heim
|
|
|
8,000
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Jeffrey J. McParland
|
|
|
16,500
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
James W.
Whalen(4)
|
|
|
111,152
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Chansoo
Joung(3)(5)
|
|
|
10,250
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Peter R.
Kagan(3)(6)
|
|
|
10,250
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Robert B.
Evans(7)
|
|
|
26,150
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
171
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Units
|
|
Percentage of Common
|
Name of Beneficial
Owner(1)
|
|
Beneficially
Owned(2)
|
|
Units Beneficially Owned
|
|
Barry R.
Pearl(8)
|
|
|
12,550
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
William D.
Sullivan(9)
|
|
|
14,950
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
All directors and executive officers as a group
(12 persons)(10)
|
|
|
350,402
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Less than 1%. |
|
(1) |
|
Unless otherwise indicated, the address for all beneficial
owners in this table is 1000 Louisiana, Suite 4300,
Houston, Texas 77002. The nature of the beneficial ownership for
all the equity securities is sole voting and investment power. |
|
(2) |
|
The common units of the Partnership presented as being
beneficially owned by the Partnerships directors and
executive officers do not include the common units held
indirectly by us that may be attributable to such directors and
officers based on their ownership of equity interests in us. |
|
(3) |
|
The units attributed to us are held by three indirect
wholly-owned subsidiaries, Targa GP Inc., Targa LP Inc. and
Targa Versado Holdings LP. WP VIII and WP IX in the
aggregate will own, on a fully diluted basis, approximately
38.2% of our equity interests upon completion of this offering.
The general partner of WP VIII is WP Partners LLC, and the
general partner of WP IX is Warburg Pincus IX, LLC, a New York
limited liability company, of which WP Partners LLC is the sole
member. WP is the managing member of WP Partners LLC. WP VIII
and WP IX are managed by WP LLC. The address of the Warburg
Pincus entities is 450 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York
10017. Messrs. Kagan and Joung, are Partners of WP and
Managing Directors and Members of WP LLC. Charles R. Kaye and
Joseph P. Landy are Managing General Partners of WP and Managing
Members and Co-Presidents of WP LLC and may be deemed to control
the Warburg Pincus entities. Messrs. Joung, Kagan, Kaye and
Landy disclaim beneficial ownership of all shares held by the
Warburg Pincus entities. |
|
(4) |
|
Common units beneficially owned by Mr. Whalen include
12,500 common units owned by the Whalen Family Investments
Limited Partnership. |
|
(5) |
|
Common units beneficially owned by Mr. Joung include 10,250
restricted common units. |
|
(6) |
|
Common units beneficially owned by Mr. Kagan include 10,250
restricted common units. |
|
(7) |
|
Common units beneficially owned by Mr. Evans include 17,150
restricted common units and 9,000 common units owned by the
Staser Dynasty Trust, of which Mr. Evans wife is the
executor and has sole voting and investment power. |
|
(8) |
|
Common units beneficially owned by Mr. Pearl include 10,250
restricted common units. |
|
(9) |
|
Common units beneficially owned by Mr. Sullivan include
10,250 restricted common units. |
|
(10) |
|
The number of common units reported as being beneficially owned
by the directors and executive officers of the
Partnerships general partner as a group includes the
following common units beneficially owned by the following
members of our executive management team:
Mr. Johnson 10,000 common units; and
Mr. Chung 17,500 common units. |
172
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
Our Relationship
with Targa Resources Partners LP and its General
Partner
General
Our only cash generating assets consist of our partnership
interests in the Partnership, which, upon completion of this
offering, will initially consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
a 2.0% general partner interest in the Partnership, which we
hold through our 100% ownership interests in the General Partner;
|
|
|
|
|
|
all of the outstanding IDRs of the Partnership; and
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,645,659 of the 75,545,409 outstanding common units of
the Partnership, representing a 15.1% limited partnership
interest.
|
Stockholders
Agreement
Our stockholders, including our named executive officers,
certain of our directors, Warburg Pincus and BofA, are party to
the Stockholders Agreement. The Stockholders
Agreement (i) provides certain holders of our preferred
stock with preemptive rights relating to certain issuances of
securities by us or our subsidiaries, (ii) imposes
restrictions on the disposition and transfer of our securities,
(iii) establishes vesting and forfeiture provisions for
securities held by our management, (iv) provides us with
the option to repurchase our securities held by our management
and directors upon the termination of their employment or
service to us in certain circumstances, and (v) imposes on
us the obligation to furnish financial information to Warburg
Pincus and BofA as long as they maintain a certain ownership
level in our securities.
The Stockholders Agreement also requires the stockholders
party thereto to vote to elect to our Board of Directors two of
our executive officers (one of whom shall be our chief executive
officer unless otherwise agreed by the majority holders), five
individuals that will be designated by Warburg Pincus and one
individual (two individuals if there are only four Warburg
nominees or three individuals if there are only three Warburg
nominees) who shall be independent that will be selected by
Warburg Pincus, after consultation with our chief executive
officer and approved by the majority holders.
The Stockholders Agreement will terminate upon completion
of this offering.
Registration
Rights Agreement
Agreement with
Series B Preferred Stock Investors
On October 31, 2005, we entered into an amended and
restated registration rights agreement with the holders of our
Series B preferred stock that received or purchased
6,453,406 shares of preferred stock pursuant to a stock
purchase agreement dated October 31, 2005. Pursuant to the
registration rights agreement, we have agreed to register the
sale of shares of our common stock that holders of our
Series B preferred stock will receive upon conversion of
the Series B shares, under certain circumstances. These
holders include (directly or indirectly through subsidiaries or
affiliates), among others, Warburg Pincus and BofA.
Demand Registration Rights. At any time after
our initial public offering, the qualified holders shall have
the right to require us by written notice to register a
specified number of shares of common stock in accordance with
the Securities Act and the registration rights agreement. The
qualified holders have the right to request up to an aggregate
of five registrations; provided that such qualified holders are
not limited in the number of demand registrations that
constitute shelf registrations pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act. In no event shall more
than one demand registration occur during any six-month period
or within 120 days after the effective date of a
registration statement we file, provided that no demand
registration may be prohibited for that
120-day
period more than once in any
12-month
period.
173
Piggy-back Registration Rights. If, at any
time after our initial public offering, we propose to file a
registration statement under the Securities Act with respect to
an offering of common stock (subject to certain exceptions), for
our own account, then we must give at least 15 days
notice prior to the anticipated filing date to all holders of
registrable securities to allow them to include a specified
number of their shares in that registration statement. We will
be required to maintain the effectiveness of that registration
statement until the earlier of 180 days after the effective
date and the consummation of the distribution by the
participating holders.
Conditions and Limitations; Expenses. These
registration rights are subject to certain conditions and
limitations, including the right of the underwriters to limit
the number of shares to be included in a registration and our
right to delay or withdraw a registration statement under
certain circumstances. We will generally pay all registration
expenses in connection with our obligations under the
registration rights agreement, regardless of whether a
registration statement is filed or becomes effective.
Related Party
Transactions Involving the Partnership
Initial Public
Offering of Partnership
On February 14, 2007, the Partnership completed its initial
public offering (the IPO) and borrowed
$294.5 million under its newly established credit facility.
In return for our contribution of the North Texas System to the
Partnership, we received a 2% general partner interest and a
36.6% limited partner interest in the Partnership and cash
proceeds of $665.7 million. We used the proceeds received
from contributing the North Texas System to the Partnership and
cash on hand to retire in full the outstanding balance
(including accrued interest) of our $700 million senior
secured asset sale bridge loan facility then outstanding.
Purchase and
Sale Agreements
On September 18, 2007, we entered into a purchase and sale
agreement (the SAOU/LOU Purchase Agreement) with the
Partnership pursuant to which we contributed to the Partnership
(i) 100% of the limited liability company interests in
Targa Resources Texas GP LLC (Targa Texas GP),
(ii) a 99% limited partner interest in Targa Texas Field
Services LP (Targa Texas LP) and (iii) 100% of
the limited liability company interests in Targa Louisiana Field
Services LLC (Targa Louisiana), for aggregate
consideration of $705 million, subject to certain
adjustments, consisting of $698.0 million in cash and the
issuance to the General Partner of 275,511 general partner
units, enabling the General Partner to maintain its 2% general
partner interest in the Partnership. Targa Texas GP, Targa Texas
LP and Targa Louisiana, collectively, owned the initial assets
constituting SAOU and LOU. Pursuant to the SAOU/LOU Purchase
Agreement, we have indemnified the Partnership, its affiliates
and their respective officers, directors, employees, counsel,
accountants, financial advisers and consultants from and against
(i) all losses that they incur arising from any breach of
our representations, warranties or covenants in the SAOU/LOU
Purchase Agreement, (ii) certain environmental matters and
(iii) certain litigation matters. The Partnership
indemnified us, our affiliates and our respective officers,
directors, employees, counsel, accountants, financial advisers
and consultants from and against all losses that we incur
arising from or out of (i) the business or operations of
Targa Texas GP, Targa Texas LP and Targa Louisiana and Targa
Louisiana Intrastate LLC (whether relating to periods prior to
or after the closing of the acquisition of SAOU/LOU businesses)
to the extent such losses are not matters for which we have
indemnified the Partnership or (ii) any breach of the
Partnerships representations, warranties or covenants in
the SAOU/LOU Purchase Agreement. Certain of our indemnification
obligations are subject to an aggregate deductible of
$10 million and a cap equal to $80 million. In
addition, the parties reciprocal indemnification
obligations for certain tax liability and losses are not subject
to the deductible and cap. Our environmental indemnification was
limited to matters for which we receive notice and a claim for
indemnification prior to the second anniversary of the closing.
Indemnification claims for breaches of representations and
warranties (other than for certain fundamental representations
and warranties) must be delivered to us prior to the first
anniversary of the closing. We have received no claims for
indemnification under the SAOU/LOU Purchase Agreement. The
acquisition closed on October 24, 2007.
174
On July 27, 2009, we entered into a purchase and sale
agreement (the Downstream Purchase Agreement) with
the Partnership pursuant to which we contributed to the
Partnership (i) 100% of the limited liability company
interests in Targa Downstream GP LLC (Targa Downstream
GP), (ii) 100% of the limited liability company
interests in Targa LSNG GP LLC (Targa LSNG GP),
(iii) 100% of the limited partner interests in Targa
Downstream LP (Targa Downstream LP), and
(iv) 100% of the limited partner interests in Targa LSNG LP
(Targa LSNG LP), for aggregate consideration of
$530 million, subject to certain adjustments, consisting of
$397.5 million in cash, the issuance to us of 8,527,615
common units and the issuance to the General Partner of 174,033
general partner units, enabling the General Partner to maintain
its 2% general partner interest in the Partnership. Targa
Downstream LP and Targa LSNG LP, collectively, own the
Downstream Business. Pursuant to the Downstream Purchase
Agreement, we indemnified the Partnership, its affiliates and
their respective officers, directors, employees, counsel,
accountants, financial advisers and consultants from and against
(i) all losses that they incur arising from any breach of
our representations, warranties or covenants in the Downstream
Purchase Agreement, (ii) certain environmental matters and
(iii) certain litigation matters. The Partnership has
indemnified us, our affiliates and our respective officers,
directors, employees, counsel, accountants, financial advisers
and consultants from and against all losses that we incur
arising from or out of (i) the business and operations of
Targa Downstream GP, Targa LSNG GP, Targa Downstream LP, Targa
LSNG LP (whether relating to periods prior to or after the
closing of the acquisition of the Downstream Business) to the
extent such losses are not matters for which we have indemnified
the Partnership or (ii) any breach of the
Partnerships representations, warranties or covenants in
the Downstream Purchase Agreement. Certain of our
indemnification obligations are subject to an aggregate
deductible of $7.95 million and a cap equal to
$58.3 million. In addition, the parties reciprocal
indemnification obligations for certain tax liability and losses
are not subject to the deductible and cap. Our environmental
indemnification was limited to matters for which we receive
notice and a claim for indemnification prior to the second
anniversary of the closing. Indemnification claims for breaches
of representations and warranties (other than for certain
fundamental representations and warranties) must be delivered to
us prior to the first anniversary of the closing. We have
received no claims for indemnification under the Downstream
Purchase Agreement. The acquisition closed on September 24,
2009.
On March 31, 2010, we entered into a purchase and sale
agreement (the Permian/Straddle Purchase Agreement)
with the Partnership pursuant to which we contributed to the
Partnership (i) all of the limited partner interests in
Targa Midstream Services Limited Partnership (TMS),
(ii) all of the limited liability company interests in
Targa Gas Marketing LLC (TGM), (iii) all of the
limited and general partner interests in Targa Permian LP
(Permian), (iv) all of the limited partner
interests in Targa Straddle LP (Targa Straddle), and
(v) all of the limited liability company interests in Targa
Straddle GP LLC (Targa Straddle GP), (such limited
partner interests in TMS, Permian and Targa Straddle, general
partner interests in Permian and limited liability company
interests in TGM and Targa Straddle GP being collectively
referred to as the Permian/Straddle Business), for
aggregate consideration of $420 million, subject to certain
adjustments. Pursuant to the Permian/Straddle Purchase
Agreement, we have indemnified the Partnership, its affiliates
and their respective officers, directors, employees, counsel,
accountants, financial advisers and consultants from and against
(i) all losses that they incur arising from any breach of
our representations, warranties or covenants in the
Permian/Straddle Purchase Agreement and (ii) certain
environmental, operational and litigation matters. The
Partnership has indemnified us, our affiliates and our
respective officers, directors, employees, counsel, accountants,
financial advisers and consultants from and against all losses
that we incur arising from or out of (i) the business or
operations of the Permian/Straddle Business (whether relating to
periods prior to or after the closing of the acquisition of the
Permian/Straddle Business) to the extent such losses are not
matters for which we have indemnified the Partnership or
(ii) any breach of the Partnerships representations,
warranties or covenants in the Permian/Straddle Purchase
Agreement. Certain of our indemnification obligations are
subject to an aggregate deductible of $6.3 million and a
cap equal to $46.2 million. In addition, these
parties reciprocal indemnification obligations for certain
tax liability and losses are not subject to the deductible and
cap. Our environmental indemnification was limited to matters
for which we receive notice and a claim for indemnification
prior to the second anniversary of the closing. Indemnification
claims for breaches of representations and warranties (other
than for certain fundamental representations and warranties)
must
175
be delivered to us prior to the first anniversary of the
closing. We have received no claims for indemnification under
the Permian/Straddle Purchase Agreement. The acquisition closed
on April 27, 2010.
On August 6, 2010, we entered into a purchase and sale
agreement (the Versado Purchase Agreement) with the
Partnership pursuant to which the Partnership acquired
(i) all of the member interests in Targa Versado GP LLC
(Targa Versado GP) and (ii) all of the limited
partner interests in Targa Versado LP (Targa Versado
LP), for aggregate consideration of $247 million,
subject to certain adjustments, including the issuance to us of
89,813 common units and the issuance to the General Partner of
1,833 general partner units, enabling the General Partner to
maintain its 2% general partner interest in the Partnership.
Targa Versado GP and Targa Versado LP, collectively, own the
interests in Versado. Pursuant to the Versado Purchase
Agreement, we indemnified the Partnership, its affiliates and
their respective officers, directors, employees, counsel,
accountants, financial advisers and consultants from and against
(i) all losses that they incur arising from any breach of
our representations, warranties or covenants in the Versado
Purchase Agreement and (ii) certain environmental matters.
The Partnership has indemnified us, our affiliates and our
respective officers, directors, employees, counsel, accountants,
financial advisers and consultants from and against all losses
that we incur arising from or out of (i) the business or
operations of Targa Versado GP and Targa Versado LP (whether
relating to periods prior to or after the closing of the
acquisition of the interests in Versado) to the extent such
losses are not matters for which we have indemnified the
Partnership or (ii) any breach of the Partnerships
representations, warranties or covenants in the Versado Purchase
Agreement. Certain of our indemnification obligations are
subject to an aggregate deductible of $3.45 million and a
cap equal to $25.3 million. In addition, the parties
reciprocal indemnification obligations for certain tax liability
and losses are not subject to the deductible and cap. Pursuant
to the Versado Purchase Agreement, we also agreed to reimburse
the Partnership for maintenance capital expenditure amounts
incurred by the Partnership or its subsidiaries in respect of
certain New Mexico Environmental Department capital projects.
The acquisition closed on August 25, 2010.
On September 13, 2010, we entered into a purchase and sale
agreement (the VESCO Purchase Agreement) with the
Partnership pursuant to which the Partnership acquired all of
the member interests in Targa Capital LLC (Targa
Capital), for aggregate consideration of
$175.6 million, subject to certain adjustments. Targa
Capital owns a 76.7536% ownership interest in VESCO. Pursuant to
the VESCO Purchase Agreement, we indemnified the Partnership,
its affiliates and their respective officers, directors,
employees, counsel, accountants, financial advisers and
consultants from and against (i) all losses that they incur
arising from any breach of our representations, warranties or
covenants in the VESCO Purchase Agreement and (ii) certain
environmental and litigation matters. The Partnership has
indemnified us, our affiliates and our respective officers,
directors, employees, counsel, accountants, financial advisers
and consultants from and against all losses that we incur
arising from or out of (i) the business or operations of
Targa Capital (whether relating to periods prior to or after the
closing of the acquisition of Targa Capital) to the extent such
losses are not matters for which we have indemnified the
Partnership or (ii) any breach of the Partnerships
representations, warranties or covenants in the VESCO Purchase
Agreement. Certain of our indemnification obligations are
subject to an aggregate deductible of $2.5 million and a
cap equal to $18.425 million. In addition, the
parties reciprocal indemnification obligations for certain
tax liability and losses are not subject to the deductible and
cap. The acquisition closed on September 28, 2010.
Omnibus
Agreement
Our Omnibus Agreement with the Partnership addresses the
reimbursement of us for costs incurred on the Partnerships
behalf, competition and indemnification matters. Any or all of
the provisions of the Omnibus Agreement, other than the
indemnification provisions described below, are terminable by us
at our option if the General Partner is removed as the
Partnerships general partner without cause and units held
by us and our affiliates are not voted in favor of that removal.
The Omnibus Agreement will also terminate in the event of a
Change of Control of the Partnership or its general partner.
176
Reimbursement
of Operating and General and Administrative
Expense
Under the terms of the Omnibus Agreement, the Partnership
reimburses us for the payment of certain operating and direct
expenses, including compensation and benefits of operating
personnel, and for the provision of various general and
administrative services for the Partnerships benefit.
Pursuant to these arrangements, we perform centralized corporate
functions for the Partnership, such as legal, accounting,
treasury, insurance, risk management, health, safety and
environmental, information technology, human resources, credit,
payroll, internal audit, taxes, engineering and marketing. The
Partnership reimburses us for the direct expenses to provide
these services as well as other direct expenses we incur on the
Partnerships behalf, such as compensation of operational
personnel performing services for the Partnerships benefit
and the cost of their employee benefits, including 401(k),
pension and health insurance benefits. The general partner
determines the amount of general and administrative expenses to
be allocated to the Partnership in accordance with the
partnership agreement.
With respect to the North Texas System, prior to
February 15, 2010, the Partnership reimbursed us for
general and administrative expenses, which were capped at
$5.0 million annually, subject to certain increases; and
operating and certain direct expenses, which were not capped.
Between October 24, 2007 and February 15, 2010, with
respect to SAOU and LOU, and between September 24, 2009 and
February 15, 2010, with respect to the Downstream Business,
the Partnership reimbursed us for general and administrative
expenses, which were not capped, allocated to SAOU and LOU and
the Downstream Business according to our allocation practice;
and operating and certain direct expenses, which were not capped.
During the nine-quarter period beginning with the fourth quarter
of 2009 and continuing through the fourth quarter of 2011, we
will provide distribution support to the Partnership in the form
of a reduction in the reimbursement for general and
administrative expense allocated to the Partnership if necessary
(or make a payment to the Partnership, if needed) for a 1.0
times distribution coverage ratio, at the distribution level of
$0.5175 per limited partner unit, subject to maximum support of
$8.0 million in any quarter. No distribution support was
necessary for the fourth quarter of 2009 or the first and second
quarters of 2010.
Competition
We are not restricted, under either the Partnerships
partnership agreement or the Omnibus Agreement, from competing
with the Partnership. We may acquire, construct or dispose of
additional midstream energy or other assets in the future
without any obligation to offer the Partnership the opportunity
to purchase or construct those assets.
Indemnification
Under the Omnibus Agreement, we indemnified the Partnership for
pre-closing claims relating to the North Texas System for a
period of three years. Additionally, we indemnified the
Partnership for losses relating to income tax liabilities
attributable to pre-IPO operations that are not reserved on the
books of the Predecessor Business of the North Texas System as
of February 14, 2007. We do not have any obligation under
this indemnification until the Partnerships aggregate
losses exceed $250,000. Our obligation under this
indemnification will terminate upon the expiration of any
applicable statute of limitations. The Partnership will
indemnify us for all losses attributable to the post-IPO
operations of the North Texas System.
Contracts with
Affiliates
Services Agreement. We expect to enter into
service arrangements with a subsidiary of ours that will be spun
off immediately prior to the closing of this offering to persons
who are our equityholders, including our executive officers,
certain of our directors, Warburg Pincus and BofA. This company
will own certain real property and developmental intellectual
property rights. Pursuant to the services arrangements, we
expect to provide general and administrative services and other
services in support of this companys business operations
and will be reimbursed by this company for such services at our
actual cost.
177
Indemnification Agreements. In February 2007,
the Partnership and the General Partner, entered into
indemnification agreements with each independent director of the
General Partner. Each indemnification agreement provides that
each of the Partnership and the General Partner will indemnify
and hold harmless each indemnitee against Expenses (as defined
in the indemnification agreement) to the fullest extent
permitted or authorized by law, including the Delaware Revised
Uniform Limited Partnership Act and the Delaware Limited
Liability Company Act in effect on the date of the agreement or
as such laws may be amended to provide more advantageous rights
to the indemnitee. If such indemnification is unavailable as a
result of a court decision and if the Partnership or the General
Partner is jointly liable in the proceeding with the indemnitee,
the Partnership and the General Partner will contribute funds to
the indemnitee for his Expenses in proportion to relative
benefit and fault of the Partnership or the General Partner on
the one hand and indemnitee on the other in the transaction
giving rise to the proceeding.
Each indemnification agreement also provides that the
Partnership and the General Partner will indemnify and hold
harmless the indemnitee against Expenses incurred for actions
taken as a director or officer of the Partnership or the General
Partner or for serving at the request of the Partnership or the
General Partner as a director or officer or another position at
another corporation or enterprise, as the case may be, but only
if no final and non-appealable judgment has been entered by a
court determining that, in respect of the matter for which the
indemnitee is seeking indemnification, the indemnitee acted in
bad faith or engaged in fraud or willful misconduct or, in the
case of a criminal proceeding, the indemnitee acted with
knowledge that the indemnitees conduct was unlawful. The
indemnification agreement also provides that the Partnership and
the General Partner must advance payment of certain Expenses to
the indemnitee, including fees of counsel, subject to receipt of
an undertaking from the indemnitee to return such advance if it
is it is ultimately determined that the Indemnitee is not
entitled to indemnification.
In February 2007, we entered into parent indemnification
agreements with each of our directors and officers, including
Messrs. Joyce, Whalen, Kagan and Joung who serve as
directors
and/or
officers of the General Partner. Each parent indemnification
agreement provides that we will indemnify and hold harmless each
indemnitee for Expenses (as defined in the parent
indemnification agreement) to the fullest extent permitted or
authorized by law, including the Delaware General Corporation
Law, in effect on the date of the agreement or as it may be
amended to provide more advantageous rights to the indemnitee.
If such indemnification is unavailable as a result of a court
decision and if we and the Parent Indemnitee are jointly liable
in the proceeding, we will contribute funds to the indemnitee
for his Expenses in proportion to relative benefit and fault of
us and indemnitee in the transaction giving rise to the
proceeding.
Each parent indemnification agreement also provides that we will
indemnify the indemnitee for monetary damages for actions taken
as our director or officer or for serving at our request as a
director or officer or another position at another corporation
or enterprise, as the case may be but only if (i) the
indemnitee acted in good faith and, in the case of conduct in
his official capacity, in a manner he reasonably believed to be
in our best interests and, in all other cases, not opposed to
our best interests and (ii) in the case of a criminal
proceeding, the indemnitee must have had no reasonable cause to
believe that his conduct was unlawful. The parent
indemnification agreement also provides that we must advance
payment of certain Expenses to the indemnitee, including fees of
counsel, subject to receipt of an undertaking from the
indemnitee to return such advance if it is it is ultimately
determined that the indemnitee is not entitled to
indemnification.
Relationships
with Warburg Pincus LLC
Prior to this offering, Warburg Pincus holds a 73.6% equity
interest in us. Warburg Pincus will beneficially own
approximately 38.2% of our outstanding voting stock on a fully
diluted basis upon completion of this offering. Warburg Pincus
is able to elect members of our board of directors, appoint new
management and approve any action requiring the approval of our
stockholders, including amendment of our certificate of
incorporation and mergers or sales of substantially all of our
assets. The directors elected by Warburg Pincus will be able to
influence decisions affecting our capital structure, including
decisions to issue additional capital stock, implement stock
repurchase programs and declare dividends.
178
Chansoo Joung and Peter Kagan, two of our directors and
directors of the General Partner, are Managing Directors of
Warburg Pincus LLC and are also directors of Broad Oak from whom
we buy natural gas and NGL products. Affiliates of Warburg
Pincus LLC own a controlling interest in Broad Oak. During the
nine months ended September 30, 2010, we purchased
$29.4 million of product from Broad Oak. We purchased
$9.7 million and $4.8 million of product from Broad
Oak during 2009 and 2008. These transactions were at market
prices consistent with similar transactions with nonaffiliated
entities.
Relationships
with Bank of America (BofA)
Equity
BofA currently owns approximately 6.5% and upon completion of
this offering will own approximately 3.4% of our outstanding
voting stock on a fully diluted basis.
Financial
Services
An affiliate of BofA is a lender and an agent under our and our
subsidiaries senior credit facilities with commitments of
$86 million. BofA and its affiliates have engaged, and may
in the future engage, in other commercial and investment banking
transactions with subsidiaries of the Company in the ordinary
course of their business. They have received, and expect to
receive, customary compensation and expense reimbursement for
these commercial and investment banking transactions.
Hedging
Arrangements
We have entered into various commodity derivative transactions
with BofA. The following table shows our open commodity
derivatives with BofA as of September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Daily
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Period
|
|
Commodity
|
|
Volumes
|
|
Price
|
|
Index
|
|
Oct 2010Dec 2010
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
3,289 MMBtu
|
|
7.39 per MMBtu
|
|
IF_WAHA
|
Oct 2010Dec 2010
|
|
Condensate
|
|
181 per Bbl
|
|
69.28 per Bbl
|
|
WTI
|
As of September 30, 2010, the aggregate fair value of these
open positions was $0.9 million. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2010, we received $2.1 million from BofA
to settle payments due under hedge transactions. For the nine
months ended September 30, 2009, we received
$44.1 million from BofA to settle payments due under hedge
transactions. During 2009, 2008 and 2007, we received from (paid
to) BofA $33.5 million, $(22.0) million and
$6.9 million in commodity derivative settlements.
Commercial
Relationships
For the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and 2009,
sales to BofA which were included in revenues totaled
$20.9 million and $29.1 million. For the same periods,
purchases from BofA were $3.2 million and $1.0 million.
We have executed NGL sales and purchase transactions on the spot
market with BofA. For the years 2009, 2008 and 2007, sales to
BofA which were included in revenues totaled $36.7 million,
$97.0 million and $81.2 million. For the same periods,
purchases from BofA were $1.0 million, $5.1 million
and $12.1 million.
Conflicts of
Interest
Conflicts of interest exist and may arise in the future as a
result of the relationships between the General Partner and its
affiliates (including us), on the one hand, and the Partnership
and its other limited partners, on the other hand. The directors
and officers of the General Partner have fiduciary duties to
manage the General Partner and us, if applicable, in a manner
beneficial to our owners. At the same time, the General Partner
has a fiduciary duty to manage the Partnership in a manner
beneficial to it and its unitholders. Please see
Review, Approval or Ratification of Transactions
with Related Persons below for additional detail of how
these conflicts of interest will be resolved.
179
Review, Approval
or Ratification of Transactions with Related Persons
Our policies and procedures for approval or ratification of
transactions with related persons are not contained
in a single policy or procedure. Instead, they were historically
contained in the Stockholders Agreement and are reflected in the
general operation of our board of directors. Historically, our
Stockholders Agreement prohibited us from entering into,
modifying, amending or terminating any transaction (other than
certain compensatory arrangements and sales or purchases of
capital stock) with an executive officer, director or affiliate
without the prior written consent of the holders of at least a
majority of our outstanding shares of Series B Preferred
(or our common stock if no Series B Preferred was
outstanding). In addition, we were prohibited from entering into
any material transaction with Warburg Pincus and its affiliates
(other than us, any of its subsidiaries or any our managers,
directors or officers or any of its subsidiaries) without the
prior written consent of BofA. We will distribute and review a
questionnaire to our executive officers and directors requesting
information regarding, among other things, certain transactions
with us in which they or their family members have an interest.
If a conflict or potential conflict of interest arises between
us and our affiliates (excluding the Partnership) on the one
hand and the Partnership and its limited partners (other than us
and our affiliates), on the other hand, the resolution of any
such conflict or potential conflict is addressed as described
under Conflicts of Interest. Pursuant to our
Code of Conduct, our officers and directors are required to
abandon or forfeit any activity or interest that creates a
conflict of interest between them and us or any of our
subsidiaries, unless the conflict is pre-approved by our board
of directors.
Whenever a conflict arises between the General Partner or its
affiliates, on the one hand, and the Partnership or any other
partner, on the other hand, the General Partner will resolve
that conflict. The Partnerships partnership agreement
contains provisions that modify and limit the general
partners fiduciary duties to the Partnerships
unitholders. The partnership agreement also restricts the
remedies available to unitholders for actions taken that,
without those limitations, might constitute breaches of
fiduciary duty.
The General Partner will not be in breach of its obligations
under the partnership agreement or its duties to the Partnership
or its unitholders if the resolution of the conflict is:
|
|
|
|
|
approved by the General Partners conflicts committee,
although the General Partner is not obligated to seek such
approval;
|
|
|
|
approved by the vote of a majority of the Partnerships
outstanding common units, excluding any common units owned by
the General Partner or any of its affiliates;
|
|
|
|
on terms no less favorable to the Partnership than those
generally being provided to or available from unrelated third
parties; or
|
|
|
|
fair and reasonable to the Partnership, taking into account the
totality of the relationships among the parties involved,
including other transactions that may be particularly favorable
or advantageous to the Partnership.
|
The General Partner may, but is not required to, seek the
approval of such resolution from the conflicts committee of its
board of directors. If the General Partner does not seek
approval from the conflicts committee and its board of directors
determines that the resolution or course of action taken with
respect to the conflict of interest satisfies either of the
standards set forth in the third or fourth bullet points above,
then it will be presumed that, in making its decision, the board
of directors acted in good faith and in any proceeding brought
by or on behalf of any limited partner of the Partnership, the
person bringing or
180
prosecuting such proceeding will have the burden of overcoming
such presumption. Unless the resolution of a conflict is
specifically provided for in the partnership agreement, the
general partner or its conflicts committee may consider any
factors they determines in good faith to consider when resolving
a conflict. When the partnership agreement provides that someone
act in good faith, it requires that person to believe he is
acting in the best interests of the Partnership.
Director
Independence
Upon the closing of this offering, we expect to have five
directors that are independent under the NYSEs listing
standards.
181
DESCRIPTION OF
OUR CAPITAL STOCK
Upon completion of this offering, the authorized capital stock
of Targa Resources Corp. will consist of 300,000,000 shares
of common stock, $0.001 par value per share, of which
42,292,348 shares will be issued and outstanding, and
100,000,000 shares of preferred stock, $0.001 par
value per share, of which no shares will be issued and
outstanding. The number of shares outstanding at the closing of
this offering will vary depending on the initial public offering
price. See SummaryOur Structure and Ownership After
this Offering. As of December 3, 2010, there were 54
holders of record of our common stock and 23 holders of record
of our preferred stock.
We will adopt an amended and restated certificate of
incorporation and amended and restated bylaws concurrently with
the completion of this offering. The following summary of our
capital stock and our proposed amended and restated certificate
of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws does not
purport to be complete and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to the provisions of applicable law and to our amended
and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and
restated bylaws, which we expect to adopt and file as exhibits
to the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part.
Common
Stock
Except as provided by law or in a preferred stock designation,
holders of common stock are entitled to one vote for each share
held of record on all matters submitted to a vote of the
stockholders, will have the exclusive right to vote for the
election of directors and do not have cumulative voting rights.
Except as otherwise required by law, holders of common stock, as
such, are not entitled to vote on any amendment to the
certificate of incorporation (including any certificate of
designations relating to any series of preferred stock) that
relates solely to the terms of any outstanding series of
preferred stock if the holders of such affected series are
entitled, either separately or together with the holders of one
or more other such series, to vote thereon pursuant to the
certificate of incorporation (including any certificate of
designations relating to any series of preferred stock) or
pursuant to the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware. Subject to preferences that may be applicable to any
outstanding shares or series of preferred stock, holders of
common stock are entitled to receive ratably such dividends
(payable in cash, stock or otherwise), if any, as may be
declared from time to time by our board of directors out of
funds legally available for dividend payments. All outstanding
shares of common stock are fully paid and non-assessable. The
holders of common stock have no preferences or rights of
conversion, exchange, pre-emption or other subscription rights.
There are no redemption or sinking fund provisions applicable to
the common stock. In the event of any liquidation, dissolution
or
winding-up
of our affairs, holders of common stock will be entitled to
share ratably in our assets that are remaining after payment or
provision for payment of all of our debts and obligations and
after liquidation payments to holders of outstanding shares of
preferred stock, if any.
Preferred
Stock
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation will
authorize our board of directors, subject to any limitations
prescribed by law, without further stockholder approval, to
establish and to issue from time to time one or more classes or
series of preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share, covering
up to an aggregate of 100,000,000 shares of preferred
stock. Each class or series of preferred stock will cover the
number of shares and will have the powers, preferences, rights,
qualifications, limitations and restrictions determined by our
board of directors, which may include, among others, dividend
rights, liquidation preferences, voting rights, conversion
rights, preemptive rights and redemption rights. Except as
provided by law or in a preferred stock designation, the holders
of preferred stock will not be entitled to vote at or receive
notice of any meeting of stockholders.
Anti-Takeover
Effects of Provisions of Our Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation, Our Amended and Restated Bylaws and Delaware
Law
Some provisions of Delaware law, and our amended and restated
certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws
described below, will contain provisions that could make the
following transactions more difficult: acquisitions of us by
means of a tender offer, a proxy contest or otherwise; or
182
removal of our incumbent officers and directors. These
provisions may also have the effect of preventing changes in our
management. It is possible that these provisions could make it
more difficult to accomplish or could deter transactions that
stockholders may otherwise consider to be in their best interest
or in our best interests, including transactions that might
result in a premium over the market price for our shares.
These provisions, summarized below, are expected to discourage
coercive takeover practices and inadequate takeover bids. These
provisions are also designed to encourage persons seeking to
acquire control of us to first negotiate with us. We believe
that the benefits of increased protection and our potential
ability to negotiate with the proponent of an unfriendly or
unsolicited proposal to acquire or restructure us outweigh the
disadvantages of discouraging these proposals because, among
other things, negotiation of these proposals could result in an
improvement of their terms.
Delaware
Law
We anticipate opting out of the provisions of Section 203
of the Delaware General Corporation Law, or DGCL, which
regulates corporate takeovers until such time as Warburg Pincus
and, subject to certain exceptions, its direct and indirect
transferees and their respective affiliates and successors, as
well as any group (within the meaning of Rule
13d-5 of the
Exchange Act) that includes any of the foregoing persons or
entities, do not beneficially own at least 15% of our common
stock. In general, those provisions prohibit a Delaware
corporation, including those whose securities are listed for
trading on the NYSE, from engaging in any business combination
with any interested stockholder for a period of three years
following the date that the stockholder became an interested
stockholder, unless:
|
|
|
|
|
the transaction is approved by the board of directors before the
date the interested stockholder attained that status;
|
|
|
|
upon consummation of the transaction that resulted in the
stockholder becoming an interested stockholder, the interested
stockholder owned at least 85% of the voting stock of the
corporation outstanding at the time the transaction commenced; or
|
|
|
|
on or after such time the business combination is approved by
the board of directors and authorized at a meeting of
stockholders by at least two-thirds of the outstanding voting
stock that is not owned by the interested stockholder.
|
Section 203 defines business combination to
include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
any merger or consolidation involving the corporation and the
interested stockholder;
|
|
|
|
any sale, transfer, pledge or other disposition of 10% or more
of the assets of the corporation involving the interested
stockholder;
|
|
|
|
subject to certain exceptions, any transaction that results in
the issuance or transfer by the corporation of any stock of the
corporation to the interested stockholder;
|
|
|
|
any transaction involving the corporation that has the effect of
increasing the proportionate share of the stock of any class or
series of the corporation beneficially owned by the interested
stockholder; or
|
|
|
|
the receipt by the interested stockholder of the benefit of any
loans, advances, guarantees, pledges or other financial benefits
provided by or through the corporation.
|
In general, Section 203 defines an interested stockholder
as any entity or person beneficially owning 15% or more of the
outstanding voting stock of the corporation and any entity or
person affiliated with or controlling or controlled by any of
these entities or persons.
Certificate of
Incorporation and Bylaws
Among other things, upon the completion of this offering, we
expect that our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation and amended and restated bylaws will:
|
|
|
|
|
establish advance notice procedures with regard to stockholder
proposals relating to the nomination of candidates for election
as directors or new business to be brought before meetings of
our stockholders. These procedures provide that notice of
stockholder proposals
|
183
|
|
|
|
|
must be timely given in writing to our corporate secretary prior
to the meeting at which the action is to be taken. Generally, to
be timely, notice must be received at our principal executive
offices not less than 90 days nor more than 120 days
prior to the first anniversary date of the annual meeting for
the preceding year. Our amended and restated bylaws will specify
the requirements as to form and content of all
stockholders notices. These requirements may preclude
stockholders from bringing matters before the stockholders at an
annual or special meeting;
|
|
|
|
|
|
provide our board of directors the ability to authorize
undesignated preferred stock. This ability will make it possible
for our board of directors to issue, without stockholder
approval, preferred stock with voting or other rights or
preferences that could impede the success of any attempt to
change control of us. These and other provisions may have the
effect of deterring hostile takeovers or delaying changes in
control or management of our company;
|
|
|
|
provide that the authorized number of directors may be changed
only by resolution of our board of directors;
|
|
|
|
provide that all vacancies, including newly created
directorships, may, except as otherwise required by law, be
filled by the affirmative vote of a majority of directors then
in office, even if less than a quorum;
|
|
|
|
provide that any action required or permitted to be taken by the
stockholders must be effected at a duly called annual or special
meeting of stockholders and may not be effected by any consent
in writing in lieu of a meeting of such stockholders, subject to
the rights of the holders of any series of preferred stock;
|
|
|
|
provide that directors may be removed only for cause and only by
the affirmative vote of holders of at least
662/3%
of the voting power of our then outstanding common stock;
|
|
|
|
provide that our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation and amended and restated bylaws may be amended by
the affirmative vote of the holders of at least two-thirds of
our then outstanding common stock;
|
|
|
|
provide that special meetings of our stockholders may only be
called by the board of directors, the chief executive officer or
the chairman of the board; and
|
|
|
|
provide that our amended and restated bylaws can be amended or
repealed by our board of directors or our stockholders.
|
Limitation of
Liability and Indemnification Matters
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation will limit
the liability of our directors for monetary damages for breach
of their fiduciary duty as directors, except for the following
liabilities that cannot be eliminated under the DGCL:
|
|
|
|
|
for any breach of their duty of loyalty to us or our
stockholders;
|
|
|
|
for acts or omissions not in good faith or which involve
intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law;
|
|
|
|
for an unlawful payment of dividends or an unlawful stock
purchase or redemption, as provided under Section 174 of
the DGCL; or
|
|
|
|
for any transaction from which the director derived an improper
personal benefit.
|
Any amendment or repeal of these provisions will be prospective
only and would not affect any limitation on liability of a
director for acts or omissions that occurred prior to any such
amendment or repeal.
Our amended and restated bylaws will also provide that we will
indemnify our directors and officers to the fullest extent
permitted by Delaware law. Our amended and restated bylaws will
also permit us to purchase insurance on behalf of any of our
officers, directors, employees or agents or any person who is or
was serving at our request as an officer, director, employee or
agent of another enterprise for any expense,
184
liability or loss asserted against such person and incurred by
any such person in any such capacity, or arising out of that
persons status as such, regardless of whether Delaware law
would permit indemnification.
We have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our
directors and officers. The agreements provide that we will
indemnify and hold harmless each indemnitee for certain expenses
to the fullest extent permitted or authorized by law, including
the DGCL, in effect on the date of the agreement or as it may be
amended to provide more advantageous rights to the indemnitee.
If such indemnification is unavailable as a result of a court
decision and if we and the indemnitee are jointly liable in the
proceeding, we will contribute funds to the indemnitee for his
expenses in proportion to relative benefit and fault of us and
indemnitee in the transaction giving rise to the proceeding. The
indemnification agreements also provide that we will indemnify
the indemnitee for monetary damages for actions taken as our
director or officer or for serving at our request as a director
or officer or another position at another corporation or
enterprise, as the case may be but only if (i) the
indemnitee acted in good faith and, in the case of conduct in
his official capacity, in a manner he reasonably believed to be
in our best interests and, in all other cases, not opposed to
the our best interests and (ii) in the case of a criminal
proceeding, the indemnitee must have had no reasonable cause to
believe that his conduct was unlawful. The indemnification
agreements also provide that we must advance payment of certain
expenses to the indemnitee, including fees of counsel, subject
to receipt of an undertaking from the indemnitee to return such
advance if it is it is ultimately determined that the indemnitee
is not entitled to indemnification.
We believe that the limitation of liability provision in our
amended and restated certificate of incorporation and the
indemnification agreements will facilitate our ability to
continue to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve as
directors and officers.
Corporate
Opportunity
Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation will
provide that, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law,
we renounce any interest or expectancy in any business
opportunity, transaction or other matter in which any of Warburg
Pincus or any private fund that it manages or advises, their
affiliates (other than us and our subsidiaries), their officers,
directors, partners, employees or other agents who serve as one
of our directors, Merrill Lynch Ventures L.P. 2001, its
affiliates (other than us and our subsidiaries), and any
portfolio company in which such entities or persons has an
equity investment (other than us and our subsidiaries)
participates or desires or seeks to participate in and that
involves any aspect of the energy business or industry, unless
any such business opportunity, transaction or matter is
(i) offered to such person in its capacity as one of our
directors and with respect to which no other such person (other
than one of our directors) independently receives notice or
otherwise identifies such business opportunity, transaction or
matter or (ii) identified by such person solely through the
disclosure of information by us or on our behalf.
Transfer Agent
and Registrar
The transfer agent and registrar for our common stock is
Computershare Trust Company, N.A.
Listing
We have been approved to list our common stock for quotation on
the NYSE under the symbol TRGP.
185
THE
PARTNERSHIPS CASH DISTRIBUTION POLICY
Distributions of
Available Cash
General. The Partnerships partnership
agreement requires that, within 45 days after the end of
each quarter, the Partnership distributes all of its available
cash from operating surplus for any quarter to unitholders of
record on the applicable record date in the following manner:
|
|
|
|
|
first, 98% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to the
General Partner, until the Partnership distributes for each
outstanding unit an amount equal to the minimum quarterly
distribution for that quarter; and
|
|
|
|
thereafter, in the manner described in
General Partner Interest and IDRs below.
|
The preceding discussion is based on the assumptions that the
General Partner maintains its 2% general partner interest and
that the Partnership does not issue additional classes of equity
securities.
Definition of Available Cash. The term
available cash, for any quarter, means all cash and
cash equivalents on hand on the date of determination of
available cash for that quarter less the amount of cash reserves
established by the General Partner to:
|
|
|
|
|
provide for the proper conduct of the Partnerships
business;
|
|
|
|
comply with applicable law, any of the Partnerships debt
instruments or other agreements; or
|
|
|
|
provide funds for distributions to the Partnerships
unitholders and to the General Partner for any one or more of
the next four quarters.
|
Minimum Quarterly Distribution. The
Partnership will distribute to the holders of its common units
on a quarterly basis at least the minimum quarterly distribution
to the extent it has sufficient cash from its operations after
establishment of cash reserves and payment of fees and expenses,
including payments to the General Partner. However, there is no
guarantee that the Partnership will pay the minimum quarterly
distribution on the units in any quarter. Even if the
Partnerships cash distribution policy is not modified or
revoked, the amount of distributions paid under its policy and
the decision to make any distribution is determined by the
General Partner, taking into consideration the terms of the
Partnerships partnership agreement. The Partnership will
be prohibited from making any distributions to unitholders if it
would cause an event of default, or an event of default exists,
under its credit agreement.
General Partner Interest and IDRs. The General
Partner is currently entitled to 2% of all quarterly
distributions that the Partnership makes prior to its
liquidation. The General Partner has the right, but not the
obligation, to contribute a proportionate amount of capital to
the Partnership to maintain its current general partner
interest. The General Partners 2% interest in these
distributions may be reduced if the Partnership issues
additional units in the future and the General Partner does not
contribute a proportionate amount of capital to the Partnership
to maintain its 2% general partner interest.
The General Partner also currently holds IDRs that entitle it to
receive increasing percentages, up to a maximum of 50%, of the
cash the Partnership distributes from operating surplus (as
defined below) in excess of $0.3881 per unit per quarter. The
maximum distribution of 50% includes distributions paid to the
General Partner on its general partner interest and assumes that
the General Partner maintains its general partner interest at
2%. Please see General Partner Interest and
IDRs for additional information.
Operating Surplus
and Capital Surplus
General. All cash distributed to unitholders
will be characterized as either operating surplus or
capital surplus. The Partnerships partnership
agreement requires that the Partnership distribute available
cash from operating surplus differently than available cash from
capital surplus.
186
Operating Surplus. Operating surplus consists
of:
|
|
|
|
|
an amount equal to four times the amount needed for any one
quarter for the Partnership to pay a distribution on all of its
units (including the general partner units) and the IDRs at the
same
per-unit
amount as was distributed in the immediately preceding quarter;
plus
|
|
|
|
all of the Partnerships cash receipts, excluding cash from
borrowings, sales of equity and debt securities, sales or other
dispositions of assets outside the ordinary course of business,
capital contributions or corporate reorganizations or
restructurings (provided that cash receipts from the termination
of a commodity hedge or interest rate swap prior to its
specified termination date shall be included in operating
surplus in equal quarterly installments over the scheduled life
of such commodity hedge or interest rate swap); less
|
|
|
|
all of the Partnerships operating expenditures, but
excluding the repayment of borrowings, and including maintenance
capital expenditures; less
|
|
|
|
the amount of cash reserves established by the General Partner
to provide funds for future operating expenditures.
|
Maintenance capital expenditures represent capital expenditures
made to replace partially or fully depreciated assets, to
maintain the existing operating capacity of the
Partnerships assets and to extend their useful lives, or
other capital expenditures that are incurred in maintaining
existing system volumes and related cash flows. Expansion
capital expenditures represent capital expenditures made to
expand or to increase the efficiency of the existing operating
capacity of the Partnerships assets or to expand the
operating capacity or revenues of existing or new assets,
whether through construction or acquisition. Costs for repairs
and minor renewals to maintain facilities in operating condition
and that do not extend the useful life of existing assets will
be treated as operating expenses as the Partnership incurs them.
The Partnerships partnership agreement provides that the
General Partner determines how to allocate a capital expenditure
for the acquisition or expansion of the Partnerships
assets between maintenance capital expenditures and expansion
capital expenditures.
Capital Surplus. Capital surplus generally
consists of:
|
|
|
|
|
borrowings;
|
|
|
|
sales of the Partnerships equity and debt securities;
|
|
|
|
sales or other dispositions of assets for cash, other than
inventory, accounts receivable and other current assets sold in
the ordinary course of business or as part of normal retirement
or replacement of assets;
|
|
|
|
capital contributions received; and
|
|
|
|
corporate restructurings.
|
Characterization of Cash Distributions. The
Partnerships partnership agreement requires that the
Partnership treat all available cash distributed as coming from
operating surplus until the sum of all available cash
distributed since it began operations equals the operating
surplus as of the most recent date of determination of available
cash. The Partnerships partnership agreement requires that
it treat any amount distributed in excess of operating surplus,
regardless of its source, as capital surplus. As reflected
above, operating surplus includes an amount equal to four times
the amount needed for any one quarter for the Partnership to pay
a distribution on all of its units (including the general
partner units) and the IDRs at the same
per-unit
amount as was distributed in the immediately preceding quarter.
This amount does not reflect actual cash on hand that is
available for distribution to the Partnerships
unitholders. Rather, it is a provision that will enable the
Partnership, if it chooses, to distribute as operating surplus
up to this amount of cash it receives in the future from
non-operating sources, such as asset sales, issuances of
securities, and borrowings, that would otherwise be distributed
as capital surplus. The Partnership does not anticipate that it
will make any distributions from capital surplus.
187
General Partner
Interest and IDRs
The Partnerships partnership agreement provides that the
General Partner is entitled to 2% of all distributions that the
Partnership makes prior to its liquidation as long as the
General Partner maintains its current 2% interest in the
Partnership. The General Partner has the right, but not the
obligation, to contribute a proportionate amount of capital to
the Partnership to maintain its 2% general partner interest if
the Partnership issues additional units. The General
Partners 2% interest, and the percentage of the
Partnerships cash distributions to which it is entitled,
will be proportionately reduced if the Partnership issues
additional units in the future and the General Partner does not
contribute a proportionate amount of capital to the Partnership
in order to maintain its 2% general partner interest. The
General Partner will be entitled to make a capital contribution
in order to maintain its 2% general partner interest in the form
of the contribution to the Partnership of common units that it
may hold based on the current market value of the contributed
common units.
IDRs represent the right to receive an increasing percentage
(13%, 23% and 48%) of quarterly distributions of available cash
from operating surplus after the minimum quarterly distribution
and the target distribution levels have been achieved. The
General Partner currently holds the IDRs, but may transfer these
rights separately from its general partner interest, subject to
restrictions in the partnership agreement.
The following discussion assumes that the General Partner
maintains its 2% general partner interest and continues to own
the IDRs.
If for any quarter the Partnership has distributed available
cash from operating surplus to the common unitholders in an
amount equal to the minimum quarterly distribution, then, the
partnership agreement requires that the Partnership distribute
any additional available cash from operating surplus for that
quarter among the unitholders and the General Partner in the
following manner:
|
|
|
|
|
first, 98% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to the
General Partner, until each unitholder receives a total of
$0.3881 per unit for that quarter (the first target
distribution);
|
|
|
|
second, 85% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 15% to the
General Partner, until each unitholder receives a total of
$0.4219 per unit for that quarter (the second target
distribution);
|
|
|
|
third, 75% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 25% to the
General Partner, until each unitholder receives a total of
$0.50625 per unit for that quarter (the third target
distribution); and
|
|
|
|
thereafter, 50% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 50% to
the General Partner.
|
Percentage
Allocations of Available Cash from Operating Surplus
The following table illustrates the percentage allocations of
available cash from operating surplus between the unitholders
and the General Partner based on the specified target
distribution levels. The amounts set forth under Marginal
Percentage Interest in Distributions are the percentage
interests of the General Partner and the unitholders in any
available cash from operating surplus the Partnership
distributes up to and including the corresponding amount in the
column Total Quarterly Distribution Per Unit, until
available cash from operating surplus the Partnership
distributes reaches the next target distribution level, if any.
The percentage interests shown for the unitholders and the
General Partner for the minimum quarterly distribution are also
applicable to quarterly distribution amounts that are less than
the minimum quarterly distribution. The percentage interests set
forth below for the General Partner include its 2% general
partner
188
interest and assume the General Partner has contributed any
additional capital to maintain its 2% general partner interest
and has not transferred its IDRs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Quarterly
|
|
Marginal Percentage Interest in Distributions
|
|
|
|
Distribution per Unit
|
|
|
|
|
General
|
|
|
|
Target Amount
|
|
Unitholders
|
|
|
Partner
|
|
|
Minimum Quarterly Distribution
|
|
$0.3375
|
|
|
98
|
%
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
First Target Distribution
|
|
up to $0.3881
|
|
|
98
|
%
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
Second Target Distribution
|
|
above $0.3881 up to $0.4219
|
|
|
85
|
%
|
|
|
15
|
%
|
Third Target Distribution
|
|
above $0.4219 up to $0.50625
|
|
|
75
|
%
|
|
|
25
|
%
|
Thereafter
|
|
above $0.50625
|
|
|
50
|
%
|
|
|
50
|
%
|
General
Partners Right to Reset Incentive Distribution
Levels
The General Partner, as the holder of the Partnerships
IDRs, has the right under the Partnerships partnership
agreement to elect to relinquish the right to receive incentive
distribution payments based on the initial cash target
distribution levels and to reset, at higher levels, the minimum
quarterly distribution amount and cash target distribution
levels upon which the incentive distribution payments to the
General Partner would be set. The General Partners right
to reset the minimum quarterly distribution amount and the
target distribution levels upon which the incentive
distributions payable to the General Partner are based may be
exercised, without approval of the Partnerships
unitholders or the conflicts committee of the General Partner,
at any time when the Partnership has made cash distributions to
the holders of the IDRs at the highest level of incentive
distribution for each of the prior four consecutive fiscal
quarters. The reset minimum quarterly distribution amount and
target distribution levels will be higher than the minimum
quarterly distribution amount and the target distribution levels
prior to the reset such that the General Partner will not
receive any incentive distributions under the reset target
distribution levels until cash distributions per unit following
this event increase as described below. The Partnership
anticipates that the General Partner would exercise this reset
right in order to facilitate acquisitions or growth projects
that would otherwise not be sufficiently accretive to cash
distributions per common unit, taking into account the existing
levels of incentive distribution payments being made to the
General Partner.
In connection with the resetting of the minimum quarterly
distribution amount and the target distribution levels and the
corresponding relinquishment by the General Partner of incentive
distribution payments based on the target cash distributions
prior to the reset, the General Partner will be entitled to
receive a number of newly issued Class B units based on a
predetermined formula described below that takes into account
the cash parity value of the average cash
distributions related to the IDRs received by the General
Partner for the two quarters prior to the reset event as
compared to the average cash distributions per common unit
during this period.
The number of Class B units that the General Partner would
be entitled to receive from the Partnership in connection with a
resetting of the minimum quarterly distribution amount and the
target distribution levels then in effect would be equal to
(x) the average amount of cash distributions received by
the General Partner in respect of its IDRs during the two
consecutive fiscal quarters ended immediately prior to the date
of such reset election divided by (y) the average of the
amount of cash distributed per common unit during each of these
two quarters. Each Class B unit will be convertible into
one common unit at the election of the holder of the
Class B unit at any time following the first anniversary of
the issuance of these Class B units. The Partnership will
also issue an additional amount of general partner units in
order to maintain the General Partners ownership interest
in the Partnership relative to the issuance of the Class B
units.
Following a reset election by the General Partner, the minimum
quarterly distribution amount will be reset to an amount equal
to the average cash distribution amount per common unit for the
two fiscal quarters immediately preceding the reset election
(such amount is referred to as the reset minimum quarterly
distribution) and the target distribution levels will be
reset to be correspondingly higher such that
189
the Partnership would distribute all of its available cash from
operating surplus for each quarter thereafter as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
first, 98% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to the
General Partner, until each unitholder receives an amount equal
to 115% of the reset minimum quarterly distribution for that
quarter;
|
|
|
|
second, 85% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 15% to the
General Partner, until each unitholder receives an amount per
unit equal to 125% of the reset minimum quarterly distribution
for that quarter;
|
|
|
|
third, 75% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 25% to the
General Partner, until each unitholder receives an amount per
unit equal to 150% of the reset minimum quarterly distribution
for that quarter; and
|
|
|
|
thereafter, 50% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 50% to
the General Partner.
|
Distributions
from Capital Surplus
How Distributions from Capital Surplus Will Be
Made. The Partnerships partnership
agreement requires that the Partnership make distributions of
available cash from capital surplus, if any, in the following
manner:
|
|
|
|
|
first, 98% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to the
General Partner, until the Partnership distributes for each
common unit an amount of available cash from capital surplus
equal to the initial public offering price; and
|
|
|
|
thereafter, the Partnership will make all distributions
of available cash from capital surplus as if they were from
operating surplus.
|
Effect of a Distribution from Capital
Surplus. The Partnerships partnership
agreement treats a distribution of capital surplus as the
repayment of the initial unit price from the initial public
offering, which is a return of capital. The initial public
offering price less any distributions of capital surplus per
unit is referred to as the unrecovered initial unit
price. Each time a distribution of capital surplus is
made, the minimum quarterly distribution and the target
distribution levels will be reduced in the same proportion as
the corresponding reduction in the unrecovered initial unit
price. Because distributions of capital surplus will reduce the
minimum quarterly distribution, after any of these distributions
are made, it may be easier for the General Partner to receive
incentive distributions. However, any distribution of capital
surplus before the unrecovered initial unit price is reduced to
zero cannot be applied to the payment of the minimum quarterly
distribution or any arrearages.
Once the Partnership distributes capital surplus on a unit in an
amount equal to the initial unit price, its partnership
agreement specifies that the minimum quarterly distribution and
the target distribution levels will be reduced to zero. The
Partnerships partnership agreement specifies that the
Partnership then makes all future distributions from operating
surplus, with 50% being paid to the holders of units and 50% to
the General Partner. The percentage interests shown for the
General Partner include its 2% general partner interest and
assume the General Partner has not transferred the IDRs.
Adjustment to the
Minimum Quarterly Distribution and Target Distribution
Levels
In addition to adjusting the minimum quarterly distribution and
target distribution levels to reflect a distribution of capital
surplus, if the Partnership combines its units into fewer units
or subdivides its units into a greater number of units, the
partnership agreement specifies that the following items will be
proportionately adjusted:
|
|
|
|
|
the minimum quarterly distribution;
|
|
|
|
target distribution levels; and
|
|
|
|
the unrecovered initial unit price.
|
190
For example, if a
two-for-one
split of the Partnerships common units should occur, the
minimum quarterly distribution, the target distribution levels
and the unrecovered initial unit price would each be reduced to
50% of its initial level. The Partnerships partnership
agreement provides that the Partnership not make any adjustment
by reason of the issuance of additional units for cash or
property.
In addition, if legislation is enacted or if existing law is
modified or interpreted by a governmental taxing authority, so
that the Partnership becomes taxable as a corporation or
otherwise subject to taxation as an entity for federal, state or
local income tax purposes, the partnership agreement specifies
that the General Partner may reduce the minimum quarterly
distribution and the target distribution levels for each quarter
by multiplying each distribution level by a fraction, the
numerator of which is available cash for that quarter and the
denominator of which is the sum of available cash for that
quarter plus the General Partners estimate of the
Partnerships aggregate liability for the quarter for such
income taxes payable by reason of such legislation or
interpretation. To the extent that the actual tax liability
differs from the estimated tax liability for any quarter, the
difference will be accounted for in subsequent quarters.
Distributions of
Cash Upon Liquidation
General. If the Partnership dissolves in
accordance with the partnership agreement, it will sell or
otherwise dispose of its assets in a process called liquidation.
The Partnership will first apply the proceeds of liquidation to
the payment of its creditors. The Partnership will distribute
any remaining proceeds to the unitholders and the General
Partner, in accordance with their capital account balances, as
adjusted to reflect any gain or loss upon the sale or other
disposition of the Partnerships assets in liquidation.
The allocations of gain and loss upon liquidation are intended,
to the extent required, to permit common unitholders to receive
their unrecovered initial unit price plus the minimum quarterly
distribution for the quarter during which liquidation occurs.
However, there may not be sufficient gain upon the
Partnerships liquidation to enable the holders of common
units to fully recover all of these amounts. Any further net
gain recognized upon liquidation will be allocated in a manner
that takes into account the IDRs of the General Partner.
Manner of Adjustments for Gain. The manner of
the adjustment for gain is set forth in the partnership
agreement. The Partnership will allocate any gain to the
partners in the following manner:
|
|
|
|
|
first, to the General Partner and the holders of units
who have negative balances in their capital accounts to the
extent of and in proportion to those negative balances;
|
|
|
|
second, 98% to the common unitholders, pro rata, and 2%
to the General Partner, until the capital account for each
common unit is equal to the sum of: (1) the unrecovered
initial unit price; and (2) the amount of the minimum
quarterly distribution for the quarter during which the
Partnerships liquidation occurs;
|
|
|
|
third, 98% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to the
General Partner, until the Partnership allocates under this
paragraph an amount per unit equal to: (1) the sum of the
excess of the first target distribution per unit over the
minimum quarterly distribution per unit for each quarter of the
Partnerships existence; less (2) the cumulative
amount per unit of any distributions of available cash from
operating surplus in excess of the minimum quarterly
distribution per unit that the Partnership distributed 98% to
the unitholders, pro rata, and 2% to the General Partner, for
each quarter of the Partnerships existence;
|
|
|
|
fourth, 85% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 15% to the
General Partner, until the Partnership allocates under this
paragraph an amount per unit equal to: (1) the sum of the
excess of the second target distribution per unit over the first
target distribution per unit for each quarter of the
Partnerships existence; less (2) the cumulative
amount per unit of any distributions of available cash from
operating surplus in excess of the first target distribution per
unit that the Partnership distributed 85% to the unitholders,
pro rata, and 15% to the General Partner for each quarter of the
Partnerships existence;
|
191
|
|
|
|
|
fifth, 75% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 25% to the
General Partner, until the Partnership allocates under this
paragraph an amount per unit equal to: (1) the sum of the
excess of the third target distribution per unit over the second
target distribution per unit for each quarter of the
Partnerships existence; less (2) the cumulative
amount per unit of any distributions of available cash from
operating surplus in excess of the second target distribution
per unit that the Partnership distributed 75% to the
unitholders, pro rata, and 25% to the General Partner for each
quarter of the Partnerships existence; and
|
|
|
|
thereafter, 50% to all unitholders, pro rata, and 50% to
the General Partner.
|
The percentage interests set forth above for the General Partner
include its 2% general partner interest and assume the General
Partner has not transferred the IDRs.
Manner of Adjustments for Losses. After making
allocations of loss to the General Partner and the unitholders
in a manner intended to offset in reverse order the allocations
of gains that have previously been allocated, the Partnership
will generally allocate any loss to the General Partner and the
unitholders in the following manner:
|
|
|
|
|
first, 98% to the holders of common units in proportion
to the positive balances in their capital accounts and 2% to the
General Partner, until the capital accounts of the common
unitholders have been reduced to zero; and
|
|
|
|
thereafter, 100% to the General Partner.
|
Adjustments to Capital Accounts. The
Partnerships partnership agreement requires that it make
adjustments to capital accounts upon the issuance of additional
units. In this regard, the partnership agreement specifies that
the Partnership allocates any unrealized and, for tax purposes,
unrecognized gain or loss resulting from the adjustments to the
unitholders and the General Partner in the same manner as the
Partnership allocates gain or loss upon liquidation. In the
event that the Partnership makes positive adjustments to the
capital accounts upon the issuance of additional units, the
partnership agreement requires that the Partnership allocate any
later negative adjustments to the capital accounts resulting
from the issuance of additional units or upon the
Partnerships liquidation in a manner which results, to the
extent possible, in the General Partners capital account
balances equaling the amount which they would have been if no
earlier positive adjustments to the capital accounts had been
made.
192
MATERIAL
PROVISIONS OF THE PARTNERSHIPS PARTNERSHIP
AGREEMENT
The following is a summary of the material provisions of the
Partnerships partnership agreement.
Organization and
Duration
The Partnership was organized on October 23, 2006 and will
have a perpetual existence unless terminated pursuant to the
terms of its partnership agreement.
Purpose
The Partnerships purpose under the partnership agreement
is limited to any business activity that is approved by the
General Partner and that lawfully may be conducted by a limited
partnership organized under Delaware law; provided, that the
General Partner shall not cause the Partnership to engage,
directly or indirectly, in any business activity that the
General Partner determines would cause the Partnership to be
treated as an association taxable as a corporation or otherwise
taxable as an entity for federal income tax purposes.
Power of
Attorney
Each limited partner, and each person who acquires a unit from a
unitholder, by accepting the common unit, automatically grants
to the General Partner and, if appointed, a liquidator, a power
of attorney to, among other things, execute and file documents
required for the Partnerships qualification, continuance
or dissolution. The power of attorney also grants the General
Partner the authority to amend, and to make consents and waivers
under, the Partnerships partnership agreement.
Capital
Contributions
Unitholders are not obligated to make additional capital
contributions, except as described below under
Limited Liability.
The General Partner has the right, but not the obligation, to
contribute a proportionate amount of capital to the Partnership
to maintain its 2% general partner interest if the Partnership
issues additional units. The General Partners 2% interest,
and the percentage of the Partnerships cash distributions
to which it is entitled, will be proportionately reduced if the
Partnership issues additional units in the future and the
General Partner does not contribute a proportionate amount of
capital to the Partnership to maintain its 2% general partner
interest. The General Partner will be entitled to make a capital
contribution in order to maintain its 2% general partner
interest in the form of the contribution to the Partnership of
common units based on the current market value of the
contributed common units.
Voting
Rights
The following is a summary of the unitholder vote required for
the matters specified below. Matters requiring the approval of a
unit majority require the approval of a majority of
the Partnerships common units and Class B units, if
any, voting as a class.
193
In voting their common units and Class B units, the General
Partner and its affiliates will have no fiduciary duty or
obligation whatsoever to the Partnership or the limited
partners, including any duty to act in good faith or in the best
interests of the Partnership or the limited partners.
|
|
|
Issuance of additional units
|
|
No approval right
|
Amendment of the partnership agreement
|
|
Certain amendments may be made by the General Partner without
the approval of the unitholders. Other amendments generally
require the approval of a unit majority. Please see
Amendment of the Partnership Agreement.
|
Merger of the Partnership or the sale of all or substantially
all of the Partnerships assets
|
|
Unit majority in certain circumstances. Please see
Merger, Consolidation, Conversion, Sale or Other
Disposition of Assets.
|
Dissolution of the Partnership
|
|
Unit majority. Please see Termination and
Dissolution.
|
Continuation of the Partnerships business upon dissolution
|
|
Unit majority. Please see Termination and
Dissolution.
|
Withdrawal of the General Partner
|
|
Under most circumstances, the approval of a majority of the
Partnerships common units, excluding common units held by
the General Partner and its affiliates, is required for the
withdrawal of the General Partner prior to December 31, 2016 in
a manner that would cause dissolution of the Partnerships
partnership. Please see Withdrawal or Removal of the
General Partner.
|
Removal of the General Partner
|
|
Not less than
662/3%
of the outstanding units, voting as a single class, including
units held by the General Partner and its affiliates. Please see
Withdrawal or Removal of the General Partner.
|
Transfer of the general partner interest
|
|
The General Partner may transfer all, but not less than all, of
its general partner interest in the Partnerships without a
vote of the Partnerships unitholders to an affiliate or
another person in connection with its merger or consolidation
with or into, or sale of all or substantially all of its assets,
to such person. The approval of a majority of the
Partnerships common units, excluding common units held by
the General Partner and its affiliates, is required in other
circumstances for a transfer of the General Partner interest to
a third party prior to December 31, 2016. See
Transfer of General Partner Units.
|
Transfer of IDRs
|
|
Except for transfers to an affiliate or another person as part
of the General Partners merger or consolidation, sale of
all or substantially all of its assets or the sale of all of the
ownership interests in such holder, the approval of a majority
of the Partnerships common units, excluding common units
held by the General Partner and its affiliates, is required in
most circumstances for a transfer of the IDRs to a third party
prior to December 31, 2016. Please see Transfer of
IDRs.
|
Transfer of ownership interests in the General Partner
|
|
No approval required at any time. Please see
Transfer of Ownership Interests in the General
Partner.
|
194
Limited
Liability
Assuming that a limited partner does not participate in the
control of the Partnerships business within the meaning of
the Delaware Act and that he otherwise acts in conformity with
the provisions of the partnership agreement, his liability under
the Delaware Act will be limited, subject to possible
exceptions, to the amount of capital he is obligated to
contribute to the Partnership for his common units plus his
share of any undistributed profits and assets. If it were
determined, however, that the right, or exercise of the right,
by the limited partners as a group:
|
|
|
|
|
to remove or replace the General Partner;
|
|
|
|
to approve some amendments to the partnership agreement; or
|
|
|
|
to take other action under the partnership agreement,
|
constituted participation in the control of the
Partnerships business for the purposes of the Delaware
Act, then the limited partners could be held personally liable
for the Partnerships obligations under the laws of
Delaware, to the same extent as the General Partner. This
liability would extend to persons who transact business with the
Partnership who reasonably believe that the limited partner is a
general partner. Neither the partnership agreement nor the
Delaware Act specifically provides for legal recourse against
the General Partner if a limited partner were to lose limited
liability through any fault of the General Partner. While this
does not mean that a limited partner could not seek legal
recourse, the Partnership knows of no precedent for this type of
a claim in Delaware case law.
Under the Delaware Act, a limited partnership may not make a
distribution to a partner if, after the distribution, all
liabilities of the limited partnership, other than liabilities
to partners on account of their partnership interests and
liabilities for which the recourse of creditors is limited to
specific property of the partnership, would exceed the fair
value of the assets of the limited partnership. For the purpose
of determining the fair value of the assets of a limited
partnership, the Delaware Act provides that the fair value of
property subject to liability for which recourse of creditors is
limited shall be included in the assets of the limited
partnership only to the extent that the fair value of that
property exceeds the nonrecourse liability. The Delaware Act
provides that a limited partner who receives a distribution and
knew at the time of the distribution that the distribution was
in violation of the Delaware Act shall be liable to the limited
partnership for the amount of the distribution for three years.
Under the Delaware Act, a substituted limited partner of a
limited partnership is liable for the obligations of his
assignor to make contributions to the partnership, except that
such person is not obligated for liabilities unknown to him at
the time he became a limited partner and that could not be
ascertained from the partnership agreement.
The Partnerships subsidiaries conduct business in Texas
and Louisiana, as well as other states. Maintenance of the
Partnerships limited liability as a limited partner of
Targa Resources Operating LP (the Operating
Partnership), may require compliance with legal
requirements in the jurisdictions in which the Operating
Partnership conducts business, including qualifying the
Partnerships subsidiaries to do business there.
Limitations on the liability of limited partners for the
obligations of a limited partner have not been clearly
established in many jurisdictions. If, by virtue of the
Partnerships partnership interest in the Operating
Partnership or otherwise, it were determined that the
Partnership were conducting business in any state without
compliance with the applicable limited partnership or limited
liability company statute, or that the right or exercise of the
right by the limited partners as a group to remove or replace
the General Partner, to approve some amendments to the
partnership agreement, or to take other action under the
partnership agreement constituted participation in the
control of the Partnerships business for purposes of
the statutes of any relevant jurisdiction, then the limited
partners could be held personally liable for the
Partnerships obligations under the law of that
jurisdiction to the same extent as the General Partner under the
circumstances. The Partnership will operate in a manner that the
General Partner considers reasonable and necessary or
appropriate to preserve the limited liability of the limited
partners.
195
Issuance of
Additional Securities
The Partnerships partnership agreement authorizes the
Partnership to issue an unlimited number of additional
partnership securities for the consideration and on the terms
and conditions determined by the General Partner without the
approval of the unitholders.
It is possible that the Partnership will fund acquisitions
through the issuance of additional common units or other
partnership securities. Holders of any additional common units
the Partnership issues will be entitled to share equally with
the then-existing holders of common units in its distributions
of available cash. In addition, the issuance of additional
common units or other partnership securities may dilute the
value of the interests of the then-existing holders of common
units in the Partnerships net assets.
In accordance with Delaware law and the provisions of the
Partnerships partnership agreement, the Partnership may
also issue additional partnership securities that, as determined
by the General Partner, may have special voting rights to which
the Partnerships common units are not entitled. In
addition, the partnership agreement does not prohibit the
issuance by the Partnerships subsidiaries of equity
securities, which may effectively rank senior to the
Partnerships common units.
Upon the issuance of additional partnership securities, the
General Partner will be entitled, but not required, to make
additional capital contributions to the extent necessary to
maintain its 2% general partner interest in the Partnership. The
General Partners 2% interest in the Partnership will be
reduced if the Partnership issues additional units in the future
(other than the issuance of units issued in connection with a
reset of the incentive distribution target levels relating to
the General Partners IDRs or the issuance of units upon
conversion of outstanding partnership securities) and the
General Partner does not contribute a proportionate amount of
capital to the Partnership to maintain its 2% general partner
interest. Moreover, the General Partner will have the right,
which it may from time to time assign in whole or in part to any
of its affiliates, to purchase common units or other partnership
securities whenever, and on the same terms that, the Partnership
issues those securities to persons other than the General
Partner and its affiliates, to the extent necessary to maintain
the percentage interest of the General Partner and its
affiliates, including such interest represented by common units
that existed immediately prior to each issuance. The holders of
common units will not have preemptive rights to acquire
additional common units or other partnership securities.
Amendment of the
Partnership Agreement
General. Amendments to the Partnerships
partnership agreement may be proposed only by or with the
consent of the General Partner. However, the General Partner
will have no duty or obligation to propose any amendment and may
decline to do so free of any fiduciary duty or obligation
whatsoever to the Partnership or the limited partners, including
any duty to act in good faith or in the best interests of the
Partnership or the limited partners. In order to adopt a
proposed amendment, other than the amendments discussed below,
the General Partner is required to seek written approval of the
holders of the number of units required to approve the amendment
or call a meeting of the limited partners to consider and vote
upon the proposed amendment. Except as described below, an
amendment must be approved by a unit majority.
Prohibited Amendments. No amendment may be
made that would:
|
|
|
|
|
enlarge the obligations of any limited partner without its
consent, unless approved by at least a majority of the type or
class of limited partner interests so affected; or
|
|
|
|
enlarge the obligations of, restrict in any way any action by or
rights of, or reduce in any way the amounts distributable,
reimbursable or otherwise payable by the Partnership to the
General Partner or any of its affiliates without the consent of
the General Partner, which consent may be given or withheld at
its option.
|
The provision of the Partnerships partnership agreement
preventing the amendments having the effects described in any of
the clauses above can be amended upon the approval of the
holders of at least
196
90% of the outstanding units voting together as a single class
(including units owned by the General Partner and its
affiliates).
No Unitholder Approval. The General Partner
may generally make amendments to the Partnerships
partnership agreement without the approval of any limited
partner or assignee to reflect:
|
|
|
|
|
a change in the Partnerships name, the location of its
principal place of its business, its registered agent or its
registered office;
|
|
|
|
the admission, substitution, withdrawal or removal of partners
in accordance with the Partnerships partnership agreement;
|
|
|
|
a change that the General Partner determines to be necessary or
appropriate to qualify or continue the Partnerships
qualification as a limited partnership or a partnership in which
the limited partners have limited liability under the laws of
any state or to ensure that neither the Partnership nor the
Operating Partnership nor any of its subsidiaries will be
treated as an association taxable as a corporation or otherwise
taxed as an entity for federal income tax purposes;
|
|
|
|
a change in the Partnerships fiscal year and related
changes;
|
|
|
|
an amendment that is necessary, in the opinion of the
Partnerships counsel, to prevent the Partnership or the
General Partner or the directors, officers, agents or trustees
of the General Partner from in any manner being subjected to the
provisions of the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Investment
Advisors Act of 1940, or plan asset regulations
adopted under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974, or ERISA, whether or not substantially similar to plan
asset regulations currently applied or proposed;
|
|
|
|
an amendment that the General Partner determines to be necessary
or appropriate for the authorization of additional partnership
securities or rights to acquire partnership securities,
including any amendment that the General Partner determines is
necessary or appropriate in connection with:
|
|
|
|
|
|
the adjustments of the minimum quarterly distribution, first
target distribution, second target distribution and third target
distribution in connection with the reset of the General
Partners IDRs as described under The
Partnerships Cash Distribution PolicyGeneral
Partners Right to Reset Incentive Distribution
Levels;
|
|
|
|
the implementation of the provisions relating to the General
Partners right to reset its IDRs in exchange for
Class B units; or
|
|
|
|
any modification of the IDRs made in connection with the
issuance of additional partnership securities or rights to
acquire partnership securities, provided that, any such
modifications and related issuance of partnership securities
have received approval by a majority of the members of the
conflicts committee of the General Partner;
|
|
|
|
|
|
any amendment expressly permitted in the Partnerships
partnership agreement to be made by the General Partner acting
alone;
|
|
|
|
an amendment effected, necessitated or contemplated by a merger
agreement that has been approved under the terms of the
Partnerships partnership agreement;
|
|
|
|
any amendment that the General Partner determines to be
necessary or appropriate for the formation by the Partnership
of, or the Partnerships investment in, any corporation,
partnership or other entity, as otherwise permitted by the
partnership agreement;
|
|
|
|
conversions into, mergers with or conveyances to another limited
liability entity that is newly formed and has no assets,
liabilities or operations at the time of the conversion, merger
or conveyance other than those it receives by way of the
conversion, merger or conveyance; or
|
197
|
|
|
|
|
any other amendments substantially similar to any of the matters
described in the clauses above.
|
In addition, the General Partner may make amendments to the
Partnerships partnership agreement without the approval of
any limited partner if the General Partner determines that those
amendments:
|
|
|
|
|
do not adversely affect the limited partners (or any particular
class of limited partners) in any material respect;
|
|
|
|
are necessary or appropriate to satisfy any requirements,
conditions or guidelines contained in any opinion, directive,
order, ruling or regulation of any federal or state agency or
judicial authority or contained in any federal or state statute;
|
|
|
|
are necessary or appropriate to facilitate the trading of
limited partner interests or to comply with any rule,
regulation, guideline or requirement of any securities exchange
on which the limited partner interests are or will be listed for
trading;
|
|
|
|
are necessary or appropriate for any action taken by the General
Partner relating to splits or combinations of units under the
provisions of the Partnerships partnership
agreement; or
|
|
|
|
are required to effect the intent expressed in this prospectus
or the intent of the provisions of the Partnerships
partnership agreement or are otherwise contemplated by the
Partnerships partnership agreement.
|
Opinion of Counsel and Unitholder
Approval. For amendments of the type not
requiring unitholder approval, the General Partner will not be
required to obtain an opinion of counsel that an amendment will
not result in a loss of limited liability to the limited
partners or result in the Partnership being treated as an
association taxable as a corporation or otherwise taxable as an
entity for federal income tax purposes in connection with any of
the amendments. No amendments to the Partnerships
partnership agreement other than those described above under
Amendment of the Partnership AgreementNo
Unitholder Approval will become effective without the
approval of holders of at least 90% of the outstanding units
voting as a single class unless the Partnership first obtains an
opinion of counsel to the effect that the amendment will not
affect the limited liability under applicable law of any of the
Partnerships limited partners.
In addition to the above restrictions, any amendment that would
have a material adverse effect on the rights or preferences of
any type or class of outstanding units in relation to other
classes of units will require the approval of at least a
majority of the type or class of units so affected. Any
amendment that reduces the voting percentage required to take
any action is required to be approved by the affirmative vote of
limited partners whose aggregate outstanding units constitute
not less than the voting requirement sought to be reduced.
Merger,
Consolidation, Conversion, Sale or Other Disposition of
Assets
A merger, consolidation or conversion of the Partnership
requires the prior consent of the General Partner. However, the
General Partner will have no duty or obligation to consent to
any merger, consolidation or conversion and may decline to do so
free of any fiduciary duty or obligation whatsoever to the
Partnership or the limited partners, including any duty to act
in good faith or in the best interest of the Partnership or the
limited partners.
In addition, the partnership agreement generally prohibits the
General Partner without the prior approval of the holders of a
unit majority, from causing the Partnership to, among other
things, sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of all or
substantially all of the Partnerships assets in a single
transaction or a series of related transactions, including by
way of merger, consolidation or other combination, or approving
on the Partnerships behalf the sale, exchange or other
disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of the
Partnerships subsidiaries. The General Partner may,
however, mortgage, pledge, hypothecate or grant a security
interest in all or substantially all of the Partnerships
assets without that approval. The General Partner may also sell
all or substantially all of the Partnerships assets under
a
198
foreclosure or other realization upon those encumbrances without
that approval. Finally, the General Partner may consummate any
merger without the prior approval of the Partnerships
unitholders if the Partnership is the surviving entity in the
transaction, the General Partner has received an opinion of
counsel regarding limited liability and tax matters, the
transaction would not result in a material amendment to the
partnership agreement, each of the Partnerships units will
be an identical unit of the partnership following the
transaction, and the partnership securities to be issued do not
exceed 20% of the Partnerships outstanding partnership
securities immediately prior to the transaction.
If the conditions specified in the partnership agreement are
satisfied, the General Partner may convert the Partnership or
any of its subsidiaries into a new limited liability entity or
merge the Partnership or any of its subsidiaries into, or convey
all of the Partnerships assets to, a newly formed entity
if the sole purpose of that conversion, merger or conveyance is
to effect a mere change in the Partnerships legal form
into another limited liability entity, the General Partner has
received an opinion of counsel regarding limited liability and
tax matters, and the governing instruments of the new entity
provide the limited partners and the General Partner with the
same rights and obligations as contained in the partnership
agreement. The unitholders are not entitled to dissenters
rights of appraisal under the partnership agreement or
applicable Delaware law in the event of a conversion, merger or
consolidation, a sale of substantially all of the
Partnerships assets or any other similar transaction or
event.
Termination and
Dissolution
The Partnership will continue as a limited partnership until
terminated under the partnership agreement. The Partnership will
dissolve upon:
|
|
|
|
|
the election of the General Partner to dissolve the Partnership,
if approved by the holders of units representing a unit majority;
|
|
|
|
there being no limited partners, unless the Partnership is
continued without dissolution in accordance with applicable
Delaware law;
|
|
|
|
the entry of a decree of judicial dissolution of the
Partnerships partnership; or
|
|
|
|
the withdrawal or removal of the General Partner or any other
event that results in its ceasing to be the Partnerships
general partner other than by reason of a transfer of its
general partner interest in accordance with the partnership
agreement or withdrawal or removal following approval and
admission of a successor.
|
Upon a dissolution under the last clause above, the holders of a
unit majority may also elect, within specific time limitations,
to continue the Partnerships business on the same terms
and conditions described in the Partnerships partnership
agreement by appointing as a successor general partner an entity
approved by the holders of units representing a unit majority,
subject to the Partnerships receipt of an opinion of
counsel to the effect that:
|
|
|
|
|
the action would not result in the loss of limited liability of
any limited partner; and
|
|
|
|
neither the Partnership, the Operating Partnership nor any of
the Partnerships other subsidiaries would be treated as an
association taxable as a corporation or otherwise be taxable as
an entity for federal income tax purposes upon the exercise of
that right to continue.
|
Liquidation and
Distribution of Proceeds
Upon the Partnerships dissolution, unless it is continued
as a new limited partnership, the liquidator authorized to wind
up the Partnerships affairs will, acting with all of the
powers of the General Partner that are necessary or appropriate,
liquidate the Partnerships assets and apply the proceeds
of the liquidation as described in The Partnerships
Cash Distribution PolicyDistributions of Cash Upon
Liquidation. The liquidator may defer liquidation or
distribution of the Partnerships assets for a reasonable
period of time or distribute assets to partners in kind if it
determines that a sale would be impractical or would cause undue
loss to the Partnerships partners.
199
Withdrawal or
Removal of the General Partner
Except as described below, the General Partner has agreed not to
withdraw voluntarily as the Partnerships general partner
prior to December 31, 2016 without obtaining the approval
of the holders of at least a majority of the outstanding common
units, excluding common units held by the General Partner and
its affiliates, and furnishing an opinion of counsel regarding
limited liability and tax matters. On or after December 31,
2016, the General Partner may withdraw as general partner
without first obtaining approval of any unitholder by giving
90 days written notice, and that withdrawal will not
constitute a violation of the Partnerships partnership
agreement. Notwithstanding the information above, the General
Partner may withdraw without unitholder approval upon
90 days notice to the limited partners if at least
50% of the outstanding common units are held or controlled by
one person and its affiliates other than the General Partner and
its affiliates. In addition, the partnership agreement permits
the General Partner in some instances to sell or otherwise
transfer all of its general partner interest in the Partnership
without the approval of the unitholders. Please see
Transfer of General Partner Units and
Transfer of IDRs.
Upon withdrawal of the General Partner under any circumstances,
other than as a result of a transfer by the General Partner of
all or a part of its general partner interest in the
Partnership, the holders of a unit majority, voting as separate
classes, may select a successor to that withdrawing general
partner. If a successor is not elected, or is elected but an
opinion of counsel regarding limited liability and tax matters
cannot be obtained, the Partnership will be dissolved, wound up
and liquidated, unless within a specified period after that
withdrawal, the holders of a unit majority agree in writing to
continue the Partnerships business and to appoint a
successor general partner. Please see Termination
and Dissolution.
The General Partner may not be removed unless that removal is
approved by the vote of the holders of not less than
662/3%
of the outstanding units, voting together as a single class,
including units held by the General Partner and its affiliates,
and the Partnership receives an opinion of counsel regarding
limited liability and tax matters. Any removal of the General
Partner is also subject to the approval of a successor general
partner by the vote of the holders of a majority of the
outstanding common units and Class B units, if any, voting
as separate classes. The ownership of more than
331/3%
of the outstanding units by the General Partner and its
affiliates would give them the practical ability to prevent the
General Partners removal.
The Partnerships partnership agreement also provides that
if the General Partner is removed as the Partnerships
general partner under circumstances where cause does not exist
and units held by the General Partner and its affiliates are not
voted in favor of that removal the General Partner will have the
right to convert its general partner interest and its IDRs into
common units or to receive cash in exchange for those interests
based on the fair market value of those interests at that time.
In the event of removal of a general partner under circumstances
where cause exists or withdrawal of a general partner where that
withdrawal violates the Partnerships partnership
agreement, a successor general partner will have the option to
purchase the general partner interest and IDRs of the departing
general partner for a cash payment equal to the fair market
value of those interests. Under all other circumstances where a
general partner withdraws or is removed by the limited partners,
the departing general partner will have the option to require
the successor general partner to purchase the general partner
interest of the departing general partner and its IDRs for fair
market value. In each case, this fair market value will be
determined by agreement between the departing general partner
and the successor general partner. If no agreement is reached,
an independent investment banking firm or other independent
expert selected by the departing general partner and the
successor general partner will determine the fair market value.
Or, if the departing general partner and the successor general
partner cannot agree upon an expert, then an expert chosen by
agreement of the experts selected by each of them will determine
the fair market value.
If the option described above is not exercised by either the
departing general partner or the successor general partner, the
departing general partner interest and its IDRs will
automatically convert into common units equal to the fair market
value of those interests as determined by an investment banking
firm or other independent expert selected in the manner
described in the preceding paragraph.
200
In addition, the Partnership is required to reimburse the
departing general partner for all amounts due the departing
general partner, including, without limitation, all
employee-related liabilities, including severance liabilities,
incurred for the termination of any employees employed by the
departing general partner or its affiliates for the
Partnerships benefit.
Transfer of
General Partner Units
Except for transfer by the General Partner of all, but not less
than all, of its general partner units to:
|
|
|
|
|
an affiliate of the General Partner (other than an
individual); or
|
|
|
|
another entity as part of the merger or consolidation of the
General Partner with or into another entity or the transfer by
the General Partner of all or substantially all of its assets to
another entity,
|
the General Partner may not transfer all or any of its general
partner units to another person prior to December 31, 2016
without the approval of the holders of at least a majority of
the outstanding common units, excluding common units held by the
General Partner and its affiliates. As a condition of this
transfer, the transferee must assume, among other things, the
rights and duties of the General Partner, agree to be bound by
the provisions of the Partnerships partnership agreement,
and furnish an opinion of counsel regarding limited liability
and tax matters.
The General Partner and its affiliates may at any time, transfer
units to one or more persons, without unitholder approval.
Transfer of
Ownership Interests in the General Partner
At any time, Targa may sell or transfer all or part of their
membership interests in the General Partner to an affiliate or
third party without the approval of the Partnerships
unitholders.
Transfer of
IDRs
The General Partner or its affiliates or a subsequent holder may
transfer its IDRs to an affiliate of the holder (other than an
individual) or another entity as part of the merger or
consolidation of such holder with or into another entity, the
sale of all of the ownership interest in the holder or the sale
of all or substantially all of its assets to, that entity
without the prior approval of the unitholders. Prior to
December 31, 2016, other transfers of IDRs will require the
affirmative vote of holders of a majority of the outstanding
common units, excluding common units held by the General Partner
and its affiliates. On or after December 31, 2016, the IDRs
will be freely transferable.
Change of
Management Provisions
The Partnerships partnership agreement contains specific
provisions that are intended to discourage a person or group
from attempting to remove the General Partner or otherwise
change the management of the General Partner. If any person or
group other than the General Partner and its affiliates acquires
beneficial ownership of 20% or more of any class of units, that
person or group loses voting rights on all of its units. This
loss of voting rights does not apply to any person or group that
acquires the units from the General Partner or its affiliates
and any transferees of that person or group approved by the
General Partner or to any person or group who acquires the units
with the prior approval of the board of directors of the General
Partner.
The Partnerships partnership agreement also provides that
if the General Partner is removed as the Partnerships
general partner under circumstances where cause does not exist
and units held by the General Partner and its affiliates are not
voted in favor of that removal the General Partner will have the
right to convert its general partner units and its IDRs into
common units or to receive cash in exchange for those interests
based on the fair market value of those interests at that time.
201
Limited Call
Right
If at any time the General Partner and its affiliates own more
than 80% of the then-issued and outstanding limited partner
interests of any class, the General Partner will have the right,
which it may assign in whole or in part to any of its affiliates
or to the Partnership, to acquire all, but not less than all, of
the limited partner interests of the class held by unaffiliated
persons as of a record date to be selected by the General
Partner, on at least 10 but not more than 60 days notice.
The purchase price in the event of this purchase is the greater
of:
|
|
|
|
|
the highest price paid by either of the General Partner or any
of its affiliates for any limited partner interests of the class
purchased within the 90 days preceding the date on which
the General Partner first mails notice of its election to
purchase those limited partner interests; and
|
|
|
|
the current market price as of the date three days before the
date the notice is mailed.
|
As a result of the General Partners right to purchase
outstanding limited partner interests, a holder of limited
partner interests may have his limited partner interests
purchased at a price that may be lower than market prices at
various times prior to such purchase or lower than a unitholder
may anticipate the market price to be in the future. The tax
consequences to a unitholder of the exercise of this call right
are the same as a sale by that unitholder of his common units in
the market.
Meetings;
Voting
Except as described below regarding a person or group owning 20%
or more of any class of units then outstanding, record holders
of units on the record date will be entitled to notice of, and
to vote at, meetings of the Partnerships limited partners
and to act upon matters for which approvals may be solicited.
The General Partner does not anticipate that any meeting of
unitholders will be called in the foreseeable future. Any action
that is required or permitted to be taken by the unitholders may
be taken either at a meeting of the unitholders or without a
meeting if consents in writing describing the action so taken
are signed by holders of the number of units necessary to
authorize or take that action at a meeting. Meetings of the
unitholders may be called by the General Partner or by
unitholders owning at least 20% of the outstanding units of the
class for which a meeting is proposed. Unitholders may vote
either in person or by proxy at meetings. The holders of a
majority of the outstanding units of the class or classes for
which a meeting has been called represented in person or by
proxy will constitute a quorum unless any action by the
unitholders requires approval by holders of a greater percentage
of the units, in which case the quorum will be the greater
percentage.
Each record holder of a unit has a vote according to his
percentage interest in the Partnership; although additional
limited partner interests having special voting rights could be
issued. Please see Issuance of Additional
Securities. However, if at any time any person or group,
other than the General Partner and its affiliates, or a direct
or subsequently approved transferee of the General Partner or
its affiliates, acquires, in the aggregate, beneficial ownership
of 20% or more of any class of units then outstanding, that
person or group will lose voting rights on all of its units and
the units may not be voted on any matter and will not be
considered to be outstanding when sending notices of a meeting
of unitholders, calculating required votes, determining the
presence of a quorum or for other similar purposes. Common units
held in nominee or street name account will be voted by the
broker or other nominee in accordance with the instruction of
the beneficial owner unless the arrangement between the
beneficial owner and his nominee provides otherwise.
Any notice, demand, request, report or proxy material required
or permitted to be given or made to record holders of common
units under the Partnerships partnership agreement will be
delivered to the record holder by the Partnership or by the
transfer agent.
202
Status as Limited
Partner
By transfer of common units in accordance with the
Partnerships partnership agreement, each transferee of
common units shall be admitted as a limited partner with respect
to the common units transferred when such transfer and admission
is reflected in the Partnerships books and records. Except
as described under Limited Liability, the
common units will be fully paid, and unitholders will not be
required to make additional contributions.
Non-Citizen
Assignees; Redemption
If the Partnership is or becomes subject to federal, state or
local laws or regulations that, in the reasonable determination
of the General Partner, create a substantial risk of
cancellation or forfeiture of any property that the Partnership
has an interest in because of the nationality, citizenship or
other related status of any limited partner, the Partnership may
redeem the units held by the limited partner at their current
market price. In order to avoid any cancellation or forfeiture,
the General Partner may require each limited partner to furnish
information about his nationality, citizenship or related
status. If a limited partner fails to furnish information about
his nationality, citizenship or other related status within
30 days after a request for the information or the General
Partner determines after receipt of the information that the
limited partner is not an eligible citizen, the limited partner
may be treated as a non-citizen assignee. A non-citizen assignee
is entitled to an interest equivalent to that of a limited
partner for the right to share in allocations and distributions
from the Partnership, including liquidating distributions. A
non-citizen assignee does not have the right to direct the
voting of his units and may not receive distributions in-kind
upon the Partnerships liquidation.
Indemnification
Under the Partnerships partnership agreement, in most
circumstances, the Partnership will indemnify the following
persons, to the fullest extent permitted by law, from and
against all losses, claims, damages or similar events:
|
|
|
|
|
the General Partner;
|
|
|
|
any departing general partner;
|
|
|
|
any person who is or was an affiliate of a general partner or
any departing general partner;
|
|
|
|
any person who is or was a director, officer, member, partner,
fiduciary or trustee of any entity set forth in the preceding
three bullet points;
|
|
|
|
any person who is or was serving as director, officer, member,
partner, fiduciary or trustee of another person at the request
of the General Partner, any departing general partner, an
affiliate of the General Partner or an affiliate of any
departing general partner; and
|
|
|
|
any person designated by the General Partner.
|
Any indemnification under these provisions will only be out of
the Partnerships assets. Unless it otherwise agrees, the
General Partner will not be personally liable for, or have any
obligation to contribute or lend funds or assets to the
Partnership to enable the Partnership to effectuate,
indemnification. The Partnership may purchase insurance against
liabilities asserted against and expenses incurred by persons
for the Partnerships activities, regardless of whether the
Partnership would have the power to indemnify the person against
liabilities under the partnership agreement.
Reimbursement of
Expenses
The Partnerships partnership agreement requires the
Partnership to reimburse the General Partner for all direct and
indirect expenses it incurs or payments it makes on the
Partnerships behalf and all other expenses allocable to
the Partnership or otherwise incurred by the General Partner in
connection with operating the Partnerships business. These
expenses include salary, bonus, incentive compensation and
203
other amounts paid to persons who perform services for the
Partnership or on the Partnerships behalf and expenses
allocated to the General Partner by its affiliates. The General
Partner is entitled to determine in good faith the expenses that
are allocable to the Partnership.
Books and
Reports
The General Partner is required to keep appropriate books of the
Partnerships business at the Partnerships principal
offices. The books are maintained for both tax and financial
reporting purposes on an accrual basis. For tax and fiscal
reporting purposes, the Partnerships fiscal year is the
calendar year.
The Partnership will furnish or make available to record holders
of common units, within 120 days after the close of each
fiscal year, an annual report containing audited financial
statements and a report on those financial statements by the
Partnerships independent public accountants. Except for
the Partnerships fourth quarter, the Partnership will also
furnish or make available summary financial information within
90 days after the close of each quarter.
The Partnership will furnish each record holder of a unit with
information reasonably required for tax reporting purposes
within 90 days after the close of each calendar year. This
information will be furnished in summary form so that some
complex calculations normally required of partners can be
avoided. The Partnerships ability to furnish this summary
information to unitholders will depend on the cooperation of
unitholders in supplying the Partnership with specific
information. Every unitholder will receive information to assist
him in determining his federal and state tax liability and
filing his federal and state income tax returns, regardless of
whether he supplies the Partnership with information.
Right to Inspect
the Partnerships Books and Records
The Partnerships partnership agreement provides that a
limited partner can, for a purpose reasonably related to his
interest as a limited partner, upon reasonable written demand
stating the purpose of such demand and at his own expense, have
furnished to him:
|
|
|
|
|
a current list of the name and last known address of each
partner;
|
|
|
|
a copy of the Partnerships tax returns;
|
|
|
|
information as to the amount of cash, and a description and
statement of the agreed value of any other property or services,
contributed or to be contributed by each partner and the date on
which each partner became a partner;
|
|
|
|
copies of the Partnerships partnership agreement, the
Partnerships certificate of limited partnership, related
amendments and powers of attorney under which they have been
executed;
|
|
|
|
information regarding the status of the Partnerships
business and financial condition; and
|
|
|
|
any other information regarding the Partnerships affairs
as is just and reasonable.
|
The General Partner may, and intends to, keep confidential from
the limited partners trade secrets or other information the
disclosure of which the General Partner believes in good faith
is not in the Partnerships best interests or that the
Partnership is required by law or by agreements with third
parties to keep confidential.
Registration
Rights
Under the Partnerships partnership agreement, the
Partnership has agreed to register for resale under the
Securities Act and applicable state securities laws any common
units or other partnership securities proposed to be sold by the
General Partner or any of its affiliates or their assignees if
an exemption from the registration requirements is not otherwise
available. These registration rights continue for two years
following any withdrawal or removal of the General Partner. The
Partnership is obligated to pay all expenses incidental to the
registration, excluding underwriting discounts and a structuring
fee.
204
SHARES ELIGIBLE
FOR FUTURE SALE
Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our
common stock. Future sales of our common stock in the public
market, or the availability of such shares for sale in the
public market, could adversely affect market prices prevailing
from time to time. As described below, only a limited number of
shares will be available for sale shortly after this offering
due to contractual and legal restrictions on resale.
Nevertheless, sales of a substantial number of shares of our
common stock in the public market after such restrictions lapse,
or the perception that those sales may occur, could adversely
affect the prevailing market price at such time and our ability
to raise equity-related capital at a time and price we deem
appropriate.
Sales of
Restricted Shares
Upon the closing of this offering, we will have outstanding an
aggregate of 42,292,348 shares of common stock. Of these
shares, all of the 16,375,000 shares of common stock to be
sold in this offering will be freely tradable without
restriction or further registration under the Securities Act,
unless the shares are held by any of our affiliates
as such term is defined in Rule 144 of the Securities Act.
All remaining shares of common stock held by existing
stockholders will be deemed restricted securities as
such term is defined under Rule 144. The restricted
securities were issued and sold by us in private transactions
and are eligible for public sale only if registered under the
Securities Act or if they qualify for an exemption from
registration under Rule 144 or Rule 701 under the
Securities Act, which rules are summarized below.
As a result of the
lock-up
agreements described below and the provisions of Rule 144
and Rule 701 under the Securities Act, all of the shares of
our common stock (excluding the shares to be sold in this
offering) will be available for sale in the public market upon
the expiration of the
lock-up
agreements, beginning 180 days after the date of this
prospectus (subject to extension) and when permitted under
Rule 144 or Rule 701.
Lock-up
Agreements
We, all of our directors and executive officers and the selling
stockholders, other than Ms. Helma and Mr. Ruiz, have
agreed not to offer, sell, contract to sell, pledge or otherwise
dispose of any common stock for a period of 180 days from
the date of the underwriting agreement, subject to certain
exceptions and extensions. See Underwriting for a
description of these
lock-up
provisions.
Rule 144
In general, under Rule 144 as currently in effect, once we
have been a reporting company subject to the reporting
requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act for
90 days, a person (or persons whose shares are aggregated)
who is not deemed to have been an affiliate of ours at any time
during the three months preceding a sale, and who has
beneficially owned restricted securities within the meaning of
Rule 144 for at least six months (including any period of
consecutive ownership of preceding non-affiliated holders) would
be entitled to sell those shares, subject only to the
availability of current public information about us. A
non-affiliated person who has beneficially owned restricted
securities within the meaning of Rule 144 for at least one
year would be entitled to sell those shares without regard to
the provisions of Rule 144.
Once we have been a reporting company subject to the reporting
requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act for
90 days, a person (or persons whose shares are aggregated)
who is deemed to be an affiliate of ours and who has
beneficially owned restricted securities within the meaning of
Rule 144 for at least six months would be entitled to sell
within any three-month period a number of shares that does not
exceed the greater of one percent of the then outstanding shares
of our common stock or the average weekly trading volume of our
common stock reported through the New York Stock Exchange during
the four calendar weeks preceding the filing of notice of the
sale. Such sales are also subject to certain manner of sale
provisions, notice requirements and the availability of current
public information about us.
205
Rule 701
Employees, directors, officers, consultants or advisors who
purchase shares from us in connection with a compensatory stock
or option plan or other written compensatory agreement in
accordance with Rule 701 before the effective date of the
registration statement are entitled to sell such shares
90 days after the effective date of the registration
statement in reliance on Rule 144 without having to comply
with the holding period requirement of Rule 144 and, in the
case of non-affiliates, without having to comply with the public
information, volume limitation or notice filing provisions of
Rule 144. The SEC has indicated that Rule 701 will
apply to typical stock options granted by an issuer before it
becomes subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange
Act, along with the shares acquired upon exercise of such
options, including exercises after the date of this prospectus.
Stock Issued
Under Employee Plans
We intend to file a registration statement on
Form S-8
under the Securities Act to register stock issuable under the
New Incentive Plan. This registration statement is expected to
be filed following the effective date of the registration
statement of which this prospectus is a part and will be
effective upon filing. Accordingly, shares registered under such
registration statement will be available for sale in the open
market following the effective date, unless such shares are
subject to vesting restrictions with us, Rule 144
restrictions applicable to our affiliates or the
lock-up
restrictions described above.
206
MATERIAL U.S.
FEDERAL INCOME TAX
CONSEQUENCES TO
NON-U.S.
HOLDERS
The following is a general discussion of the material
U.S. federal income tax consequences of the acquisition,
ownership and disposition of our common stock to a
non-U.S. holder.
For the purpose of this discussion, a
non-U.S. holder
is any beneficial owner of our common stock that is not for
U.S. federal income tax purposes any of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
an individual citizen or resident of the U.S.;
|
|
|
|
a corporation (or other entity treated as a corporation for
U.S. federal income tax purposes) created or organized in
or under the laws of the U.S., or any state thereof or the
District of Columbia;
|
|
|
|
a partnership (or other entity treated as a partnership or other
pass-through entity for U.S. federal income tax purposes);
|
|
|
|
an estate whose income is subject to U.S. federal income
tax regardless of its source; or
|
|
|
|
a trust (x) whose administration is subject to the primary
supervision of a U.S. court and which has one or more
U.S. persons who have the authority to control all
substantial decisions of the trust or (y) which has made a
valid election to be treated as a U.S. person.
|
If a partnership (or an entity or arrangement treated as a
partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes) holds our
common stock, the tax treatment of a partner in the partnership
will generally depend on the status of the partner and upon the
activities of the partnership. Accordingly, we urge partnerships
that hold our common stock and partners in such partnerships to
consult their tax advisors.
This discussion assumes that a
non-U.S. holder
will hold our common stock issued pursuant to the offering as a
capital asset (generally, property held for investment). This
discussion does not address all aspects of U.S. federal
income taxation or any aspects of state, local, estate or
non-U.S. taxation,
nor does it consider any U.S. federal income tax
considerations that may be relevant to
non-U.S. holders
that may be subject to special treatment under U.S. federal
income tax laws, including, without limitation,
U.S. expatriates, insurance companies, tax-exempt or
governmental organizations, dealers in securities or currency,
banks or other financial institutions, investors whose
functional currency is other than the U.S. dollar, and
investors that hold our common stock as part of a hedge,
straddle, synthetic security, conversion or other integrated
transaction. Furthermore, the following discussion is based on
current provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, and Treasury Regulations and administrative and
judicial interpretations thereof, all as in effect on the date
hereof, and all of which are subject to change, possibly with
retroactive effect.
We urge each prospective investor to consult a tax advisor
regarding the U.S. federal, state, local, estate and
non-U.S. income
and other tax consequences of acquiring, holding and disposing
of shares of our common stock.
Dividends
Distributions with respect to our common stock will constitute
dividends for U.S. tax purposes to the extent paid from our
current or accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under
U.S. federal income tax principles. To the extent those
dividends exceed our current and accumulated earnings and
profits, the dividends will constitute a return of capital and
will first reduce a holders adjusted tax basis in the
common stock, but not below zero, and then will be treated as
gain from the sale of the common stock (see Gain on
Disposition of Common Stock).
Any dividend (out of earnings and profits) paid to a
non-U.S. holder
of our common stock generally will be subject to
U.S. withholding tax either at a rate of 30% of the gross
amount of the dividend or such lower rate as may be specified by
an applicable tax treaty. To receive the benefit of a reduced
treaty rate, a
non-U.S. holder
must provide us with an IRS
Form W-8BEN
or other appropriate version of IRS
Form W-8
207
certifying qualification for the reduced rate. Dividends
received by a
non-U.S. holder
that are effectively connected with a U.S. trade or
business conducted by the
non-U.S. holder
(and, if required by an applicable income tax treaty, are
attributable to a permanent establishment maintained by the
non-U.S. holder
within the U.S.) are exempt from the withholding tax described
above. To obtain this exemption, the
non-U.S. holder
must provide us with an IRS
Form W-8ECI
properly certifying such exemption. Such effectively connected
dividends, although not subject to withholding tax, will be
subject to U.S. federal income tax on a net income basis at
the same graduated rates generally applicable to
U.S. persons, net of certain deductions and credits,
subject to any applicable tax treaty providing otherwise. In
addition to the income tax described above, dividends received
by corporate
non-U.S. holders
that are effectively connected with a U.S. trade or
business of the corporate
non-U.S. holder
may be subject to a branch profits tax at a rate of 30% or such
lower rate as may be specified by an applicable tax treaty.
A
non-U.S. holder
of our common stock may obtain a refund of any excess amounts
withheld if the
non-U.S. holder
is eligible for a reduced rate of United States withholding tax
and an appropriate claim for refund is timely filed with the
Internal Revenue Service or the IRS.
Gain on
Disposition of Common Stock
A
non-U.S. holder
generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax on
any gain realized upon the sale or other disposition of our
common stock unless:
|
|
|
|
|
the gain is effectively connected with a U.S. trade or
business of the
non-U.S. holder
and, if required by an applicable tax treaty, is attributable to
a U.S. permanent establishment maintained by such
non-U.S. holder;
|
|
|
|
the
non-U.S. holder
is an individual who is present in the United States for a
period or periods aggregating 183 days or more during the
calendar year in which the sale or disposition occurs and
certain other conditions are met; or
|
|
|
|
we are or have been a U.S. real property holding
corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes and
the
non-U.S. holder
holds or has held, directly or indirectly, at any time within
the shorter of the five-year period preceding the disposition or
the
non-U.S. holders
holding period, more than 5% of our common stock. Generally, a
corporation is a United States real property holding corporation
if the fair market value of its United States real property
interests equals or exceeds 50% of the sum of the fair market
value of its worldwide real property interests and its other
assets used or held for use in a trade or business. We believe
that we are, and will remain for the foreseeable future, a
U.S. real property holding corporation for
U.S. federal income tax purposes.
|
Unless an applicable tax treaty provides otherwise, gain
described in the first bullet point above will be subject to
U.S. federal income tax on net income basis at the same
graduated rates generally applicable to U.S. persons.
Corporate
non-U.S. holders
also may be subject to a branch profits tax equal to 30% (or
such lower rate as may be specified by an applicable tax treaty)
of its earnings and profits that are effectively connected with
a U.S. trade or business.
Gain described in the second bullet point above (which may be
offset by U.S. source capital losses, provided that the
non-U.S. holder
has timely filed U.S. federal income tax returns with
respect to such losses) will be subject to a flat 30%
U.S. federal income tax (or such lower rate as may be
specified by an applicable tax treaty).
If a
non-U.S. holder
is subject to U.S. federal income tax because of our status
as a U.S. real property holding corporation, then, in the
case of any disposition of our common stock by the
non-U.S. holder,
the purchaser will generally be required to deduct and withhold
a tax equal to 10% of the amount realized on the disposition.
Non-U.S. holders
should consult any applicable income tax treaties that may
provide for different rules.
208
Backup
Withholding and Information Reporting
Generally, we must report annually to the IRS the amount of
dividends paid to each
non-U.S. holder,
the name and address of the recipient, and the amount, if any,
of tax withheld with respect to those dividends. A similar
report is sent to each
non-U.S. holder.
These information reporting requirements apply even if
withholding was not required. Pursuant to tax treaties or other
agreements, the IRS may make its reports available to tax
authorities in the recipients country of residence.
Payments of dividends to a
non-U.S. holder
may be subject to backup withholding (at the applicable rate)
unless the
non-U.S. holder
establishes an exemption, for example, by properly certifying
its
non-U.S. status
on an IRS
Form W-8BEN
or another appropriate version of IRS
Form W-8.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, backup withholding may apply if
either we or our paying agent has actual knowledge, or reason to
know, that the beneficial owner is a U.S. person that is
not an exempt recipient.
Payments of the proceeds from sale or other disposition by a
non-U.S. holder
of our common stock effected outside the U.S. by or through
a foreign office of a broker generally will not be subject to
information reporting or backup withholding. However,
information reporting (but not backup withholding) will apply to
those payments if the broker does not have documentary evidence
that the holder is a
non-U.S. holder,
an exemption is not otherwise established, and the broker has
certain relationships with the United States.
Payments of the proceeds from a sale or other disposition by a
non-U.S. holder
of our common stock effected by or through a U.S. office of
a broker generally will be subject to information reporting and
backup withholding (at the applicable rate) unless the
non-U.S. holder
establishes an exemption, for example, by properly certifying
its
non-U.S. status
on an IRS
Form W-8BEN
or another appropriate version of IRS
Form W-8.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, information reporting and backup
withholding may apply if the broker has actual knowledge, or
reason to know, that the holder is a U.S. person that is
not an exempt recipient.
Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Rather, the
U.S. income tax liability of persons subject to backup
withholding will be reduced by the amount of tax withheld. If
withholding results in an overpayment of taxes, a refund may be
obtained, provided that the required information is timely
furnished to the IRS.
Legislation
Affecting Common Stock Held Through Foreign
Accounts
On March 18, 2010, President Obama signed into law the
Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (the HIRE
Act), which may result in materially different withholding
and information reporting requirements than those described
above, for payments made after December 31, 2012. The HIRE
Act limits the ability of
non-U.S. holders
who hold our common stock through a foreign financial
institution to claim relief from U.S. withholding tax in
respect of dividends paid on our common stock unless the foreign
financial institution agrees, among other things, to annually
report certain information with respect to United States
accounts maintained by such institution. The HIRE Act also
limits the ability of certain non-financial foreign entities to
claim relief from U.S. withholding tax in respect of
dividends paid by us to such entities unless (1) those
entities meet certain certification requirements; (2) the
withholding agent does not know or have reason to know that any
such information provided is incorrect and (3) the
withholding agent reports the information provided to the IRS.
The HIRE Act provisions will have a similar effect with respect
to dispositions of our common stock after December 31,
2012. A
non-U.S. holder
generally would be permitted to claim a refund to the extent any
tax withheld exceeded the holders actual tax liability.
Non-U.S. holders
are encouraged to consult with their tax advisers regarding the
possible implication of the HIRE Act on their investment in
respect of the common stock.
209
UNDERWRITING
Barclays Capital Inc., Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated,
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated,
Citigroup Global Markets Inc., and Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.
are acting as the representatives of the underwriters and
book-running managers of this offering. Under the terms of an
underwriting agreement, which will be filed as an exhibit to the
registration statement, each of the underwriters named below has
severally agreed to purchase from the selling stockholders the
respective number of common stock shown opposite its name below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
Underwriters
|
|
Shares
|
|
Barclays Capital Inc.
|
|
|
3,275,001
|
|
Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated
|
|
|
2,292,500
|
|
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated
|
|
|
1,965,000
|
|
Citigroup Global Markets Inc.
|
|
|
1,965,000
|
|
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.
|
|
|
1,228,125
|
|
Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC
|
|
|
900,625
|
|
J.P. Morgan Securities LLC
|
|
|
900,625
|
|
Wells Fargo Securities, LLC
|
|
|
900,625
|
|
Raymond James & Associates, Inc.
|
|
|
736,875
|
|
RBC Capital Markets, LLC
|
|
|
736,875
|
|
UBS Securities LLC
|
|
|
736,875
|
|
Robert W. Baird & Co. Incorporated
|
|
|
368,437
|
|
ING Financial Markets LLC
|
|
|
368,437
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
16,375,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The underwriting agreement provides that the underwriters
obligation to purchase shares of common stock depends on the
satisfaction of the conditions contained in the underwriting
agreement including:
|
|
|
|
|
the obligation to purchase all of the shares of common stock
offered hereby (other than those shares of common stock covered
by their option to purchase additional shares as described
below), if any of the shares are purchased;
|
|
|
|
the representations and warranties made by us and the selling
stockholders to the underwriters are true;
|
|
|
|
there is no material change in our business or the financial
markets; and
|
|
|
|
we deliver customary closing documents to the underwriters.
|
Commissions and
Expenses
The following table summarizes the underwriting discounts and
commissions the selling stockholders will pay to the
underwriters. These amounts are shown assuming both no exercise
and full exercise of the underwriters option to purchase
additional shares. The underwriting fee is the difference
between the initial price to the public and the amount the
underwriters pay to the selling stockholders for the shares.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No Exercise
|
|
Full Exercise
|
|
Per unit
|
|
$
|
1.21
|
|
|
$
|
1.21
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
19,813,750
|
|
|
$
|
22,785,813
|
|
In addition, we will pay a structuring fee equal to an aggregate
of 0.25% of the gross proceeds from this offering, or
approximately $900,625 ($1,035,719 in the event the underwriters
exercise their option to
210
purchase additional shares of common stock in full), to Barclays
Capital Inc. for evaluation, analysis and structuring of our
company.
The representative of the underwriters has advised us that the
underwriters propose to offer the shares of common stock
directly to the public at the public offering price on the cover
of this prospectus and to selected dealers, which may include
the underwriters, at such offering price less a selling
concession not in excess of $0.726 per share. After the
offering, the representative may change the offering price and
other selling terms. Sales of shares made outside of the United
States may be made by affiliates of the underwriters.
We have agreed to pay expenses incurred by the selling
stockholders in connection with the offering, other than the
underwriting discounts and commission.
Option to
Purchase Additional Shares
Certain of the selling stockholders have granted the
underwriters an option exercisable for 30 days after the
date of the underwriting agreement, to purchase, from time to
time, in whole or in part, up to an aggregate of
2,456,250 shares at the public offering price less
underwriting discounts and commissions. This option may be
exercised if the underwriters sell more than
16,375,000 shares in connection with this offering. To the
extent that this option is exercised, each underwriter will be
obligated, subject to certain conditions, to purchase its pro
rata portion of these additional shares based on the
underwriters underwriting commitment in the offering as
indicated in the table at the beginning of this Underwriting
Section.
Lock-Up
Agreements
We, all of our directors and executive officers and the selling
stockholders, other than Ms. Helma and Mr. Ruiz, will
not, without the prior written consent of Barclays Capital Inc.,
offer, sell, contract to sell, pledge, or otherwise dispose of,
or enter into any transaction which is designed to, or might
reasonably be expected to, result in the disposition (whether by
actual disposition or effective economic disposition due to cash
settlement or otherwise), directly or indirectly, including the
filing (or participation in the filing) of a registration
statement with the Commission in respect of, or establish or
increase a put equivalent position or liquidate or decrease a
call equivalent position within the meaning of Section 16
of the Exchange Act, any other Company shares or any securities
convertible into, or exercisable, or exchangeable for, Company
shares; or publicly announce an intention to effect any such
transaction, for a period 180 days after the date of the
underwriting agreement.
These restrictions do not, among other things, apply to:
|
|
|
|
|
the sale of common stock pursuant to the underwriting agreement;
|
|
|
|
issuances of common stock by us pursuant to any employee benefit
plan in effect as of the date of the underwriting agreement;
|
|
|
|
issuances of common stock by us upon the conversion of
securities or the exercise of warrants outstanding as of the
date of the underwriting agreement;
|
|
|
|
the filing of one or more registration statements on
Form S-8
relating to any employee benefit plan in effect as of the date
of the underwriting agreement.
|
The 180-day
restricted period described above will be extended if:
|
|
|
|
|
during the last 17 days of the
180-day
restricted period we issue an earnings release or announce
material news or a material event relating to us occurs; or
|
|
|
|
prior to the expiration of the
180-day
restricted period, we announce that we will release earnings
results during the
16-day
period beginning on the last day of the
180-day
period, in which case the restrictions described in the
preceding paragraph will continue to apply until the expiration
of the
18-day
period beginning on the issuance of the earnings release or the
announcement of the
|
211
|
|
|
|
|
material news or occurrence of material event unless such
extension is waived in writing by Barclays Capital Inc.
|
Barclays Capital Inc., in its sole discretion, may release the
common stock and other securities subject to the
lock-up
agreements described above in whole or in part at any time with
or without notice. When determining whether or not to release
common stock and other securities from
lock-up
agreements, Barclays Capital Inc. will consider, among other
factors, the holders reasons for requesting the release,
the number of shares of common stock and other securities for
which the release is being requested and market conditions at
the time.
Offering Price
Determination
Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our
common stock. The initial public offering price will be
negotiated between the representative and us and the selling
stockholders. In determining the initial public offering price
of our common stock, the representative will consider:
|
|
|
|
|
the history and prospects for the industry in which we compete;
|
|
|
|
our financial information;
|
|
|
|
the ability of our management and our business potential and
earning prospects;
|
|
|
|
the prevailing securities markets at the time of this
offering; and
|
|
|
|
the recent market prices of, and the demand for, publicly traded
shares of generally comparable companies.
|
Indemnification
We and the selling stockholders have agreed to indemnify the
underwriters against certain liabilities, including liabilities
under the Securities Act and to contribute to payments that the
underwriters may be required to make for these liabilities.
Stabilization,
Short Positions and Penalty Bids
The representative may engage in stabilizing transactions, short
sales and purchases to cover positions created by short sales,
and penalty bids or purchases for the purpose of pegging, fixing
or maintaining the price of the common stock, in accordance with
Regulation M under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
|
|
|
|
|
Stabilizing transactions permit bids to purchase the underlying
security so long as the stabilizing bids do not exceed a
specified maximum.
|
|
|
|
A short position involves a sale by the underwriters of shares
in excess of the number of shares the underwriters are obligated
to purchase in the offering, which creates the syndicate short
position. This short position may be either a covered short
position or a naked short position. In a covered short position,
the number of shares involved in the sales made by the
underwriters in excess of the number of shares they are
obligated to purchase is not greater than the number of shares
that they may purchase by exercising their option to purchase
additional shares. In a naked short position, the number of
shares involved is greater than the number of shares in their
option to purchase additional shares. The underwriters may close
out any short position by either exercising their option to
purchase additional shares
and/or
purchasing shares in the open market. In determining the source
of shares to close out the short position, the underwriters will
consider, among other things, the price of shares available for
purchase in the open market as compared to the price at which
they may purchase shares through their option to purchase
additional shares. A naked short position is more likely to be
created if the underwriters are concerned that there could be
downward pressure on the price of the shares in the open market
after pricing that could adversely affect investors who purchase
in the offering.
|
212
|
|
|
|
|
Syndicate covering transactions involve purchases of the common
stock in the open market after the distribution has been
completed in order to cover syndicate short positions.
|
|
|
|
Penalty bids permits the representative to reclaim a selling
concession from a syndicate member when the common stock
originally sold by the syndicate member is purchased in a
stabilizing or syndicate covering transaction to cover syndicate
short positions.
|
These stabilizing transactions, syndicate covering transactions
and penalty bids may have the effect of raising or maintaining
the market price of our common stock or preventing or retarding
a decline in the market price of the common stock. As a result,
the price of the common stock may be higher than the price that
might otherwise exist in the open market. These transactions may
be effected on The New York Stock Exchange or otherwise and, if
commenced, may be discontinued at any time.
Neither we nor any of the underwriters make any representation
or prediction as to the direction or magnitude of any effect
that the transactions described above may have on the price of
the common stock. In addition, neither we nor any of the
underwriters make representation that the representative will
engage in these stabilizing transactions or that any
transaction, once commenced, will not be discontinued without
notice.
Electronic
Distribution
A prospectus in electronic format may be made available on the
Internet sites or through other online services maintained by
one or more of the underwriters
and/or
selling group members participating in this offering, or by
their affiliates. In those cases, prospective investors may view
offering terms online and, depending upon the particular
underwriter or selling group member, prospective investors may
be allowed to place orders online. The underwriters may agree
with us to allocate a specific number of shares for sale to
online brokerage account holders. Any such allocation for online
distributions will be made by the representative on the same
basis as other allocations.
Other than the prospectus in electronic format, the information
on any underwriters or selling group members web
site and any information contained in any other web site
maintained by an underwriter or selling group member is not part
of the prospectus or the registration statement of which this
prospectus forms a part, has not been approved
and/or
endorsed by us or any underwriter or selling group member in its
capacity as underwriter or selling group member and should not
be relied upon by investors.
New York Stock
Exchange
We have been approved to list our common stock on the New York
Stock Exchange under the symbol TRGP. The
underwriters have undertaken to sell the shares of common stock
in this offering to a minimum of 2,000 beneficial owners in
round lots of 100 or more units to meet the New York Stock
Exchange distribution requirements for trading.
Discretionary
Sales
The underwriters have informed us that they do not intend to
confirm sales to discretionary accounts that exceed 5% of the
total number of shares offered by them. The underwriters have
informed us that they do not intend to confirm sales to
discretionary accounts without the prior specific written
approval of the customer.
Stamp
Taxes
If you purchase shares of common stock offered in this
prospectus, you may be required to pay stamp taxes and other
charges under the laws and practices of the country of purchase,
in addition to the offering price listed on the cover page of
this prospectus.
213
Conflicts of
Interest
ML Ventures, an affiliate of BofA Merrill Lynch, an underwriter
in this offering, currently owns equity interests representing a
6.5% ownership interest in us and is selling
1,324,268 shares of common stock in connection with this
offering and will own 1,433,795 shares of our common stock,
representing a 3.4% ownership interest in us on a fully diluted
basis upon completion of this offering. Accordingly, BofA
Merrill Lynchs interest may go beyond receiving customary
underwriting discounts and commissions. In particular, there may
be a conflict of interest between BofA Merrill Lynchs own
interests as underwriter (including in negotiating the initial
public offering price) and the interests of its affiliate ML
Ventures as a selling stockholder. Because of this relationship,
this offering is being conducted in accordance with
Rule 2720 of the NASD Conduct Rules (which are part of the
FINRA Rules). This rule requires, among other things, that a
qualified independent underwriter has participated in the
preparation of, and has exercised the usual standards of due
diligence with respect to, this prospectus and the registration
statement of which this prospectus is a part. Accordingly,
Barclays Capital is assuming the responsibilities of acting as
the qualified independent underwriter in this offering. Although
the qualified independent underwriter has participated in the
preparation of the registration statement and prospectus and
conducted due diligence, we cannot assure you that this will
adequately address any potential conflicts of interest related
to BofA Merrill Lynch and ML Ventures. We have agreed to
indemnify Barclays Capital for acting as qualified independent
underwriter against certain liabilities, including liabilities
under the Securities Act and to contribute to payments that
Barclays Capital may be required to make for these liabilities.
Pursuant to Rule 2720, no sale of the shares shall be made
to an account over which BofA Merrill Lynch exercises discretion
without the prior specific written consent of the account holder.
Other
Relationships
The underwriters and their affiliates have engaged, and may in
the future engage, in commercial and investment banking
transactions with us in the ordinary course of their business.
They have received, and expect to receive, customary
compensation and expense reimbursement for these commercial and
investment banking transactions.
In addition, Barclays Capital Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce,
Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Wells Fargo Securities,
LLC, Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Citigroup Global Markets
Inc., J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, RBC Capital Markets, LLC,
ING Financial Markets LLC, Morgan Stanley & Co.
Incorporated, UBS Securities LLC, Raymond James &
Associates, Inc. and Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, or
their affiliates, are lenders under the Partnerships
senior secured credit facility, and an affiliate of Merrill
Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated is the
administrative agent and collateral agent, L/C issuer and swing
line lender, an affiliate of Wells Fargo Securities, LLC is the
co-syndication agent, an affiliate of Barclays Capital Inc. is
the co-documentation agent, and an affiliate of Deutsche Bank
Securities Inc. is a co-documentation agent under such facility.
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Credit Suisse Securities (USA)
LLC, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated, ING Financial Markets LLC and Barclays Capital
Inc., or their affiliates, are lenders under our senior secured
credit facility, and an affiliate of Deutsche Bank Securities
Inc. is the administrative agent, collateral agent, swing line
lender and an L/C Issuer, and Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC
is an L/C issuer under such facility. Credit Suisse Securities
(USA) LLC, Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. and Merrill Lynch,
Pierce, Fenner & Smith, or their affiliates, are
lenders under the Holdco Loan, and an affiliate of Credit Suisse
Securities (USA) LLC is administrative agent, Deutsche Bank
Securities Inc. is syndication agent, and an affiliate of
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith is
co-documentation agent under such facility. Barclays Capital
Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., UBS Securities LLC,
Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.,
Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated, Raymond
James & Associates, Inc. and RBC Capital Markets, LLC,
or their affiliates, were underwriters in the Partnerships
April 2010 secondary equity offering. Wells Fargo Securities,
LLC, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated, Barclays Capital Inc., Citigroup Global Markets,
Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated, Deutsche Bank
Securities Inc., J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Raymond
James & Associates, Inc., RBC Capital Markets, LLC and
UBS Securities LLC, or their affiliates, were underwriters in
the Partnerships August 2010 equity offering. Merrill
Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Deutsche
Bank Securities Inc., J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, RBC
Capital Markets, LLC, Wells
214
Fargo Securities, LLC, Barclays Securities Inc., UBS Securities
LLC and ING Financial Markets LLC, or their affiliates, served
as initial purchasers of the Partnerships senior notes
issued in August 2010. In addition, affiliates of Morgan
Stanley & Co. Incorporated, Merrill Lynch, Pierce,
Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Credit Suisse Securities
(USA) LLC and UBS Securities LLC directly or indirectly own
interests in Warburg Pincus Private Equity VIII, L.P.
and/or
Warburg Pincus Private Equity IX, L.P., both of which are
selling stockholders in this offering. None of the affiliates of
such underwriters will receive more than 5% of the proceeds of
this offering as a result of their direct or indirect ownership
in such selling stockholders.
Additionally, in the ordinary course of their various business
activities, the underwriters and their respective affiliates may
make or hold a broad array of investments and actively trade
debt and equity securities (or related derivative securities)
and financial instruments (including bank loans) for their own
account and for the accounts of their customers and may at any
time hold long and short positions in such securities and
instruments. Such investment and securities activities may
involve our securities and instruments.
Selling
Restrictions
European
Economic Area
In relation to each member state of the European Economic Area
that has implemented the Prospectus Directive (each, a relevant
member state), with effect from and including the date on which
the Prospectus Directive is implemented in that relevant member
state (the relevant implementation date), an offer of securities
described in this prospectus may not be made to the public in
that relevant member state other than:
|
|
|
|
|
to any legal entity that is authorized or regulated to operate
in the financial markets or, if not so authorized or regulated,
whose corporate purpose is solely to invest in securities;
|
|
|
|
to any legal entity that has two or more of (1) an average
of at least 250 employees during the last financial year;
(2) a total balance sheet of more than 43,000,000 and
(3) an annual net turnover of more than 50,000,000,
as shown in its last annual or consolidated accounts;
|
|
|
|
to fewer than 100 natural or legal persons (other than qualified
investors as defined in the Prospectus Directive) subject to
obtaining the prior consent of the representative; or
|
|
|
|
in any other circumstances that do not require the publication
of a prospectus pursuant to Article 3 of the Prospectus
Directive, provided that no such offer of securities shall
require us or any underwriter to publish a prospectus pursuant
to Article 3 of the Prospectus Directive.
|
For purposes of this provision, the expression an offer of
securities to the public in any relevant member state
means the communication in any form and by any means of
sufficient information on the terms of the offer and the
securities to be offered so as to enable an investor to decide
to purchase or subscribe the securities, as the expression may
be varied in that member state by any measure implementing the
Prospectus Directive in that member state, and the expression
Prospectus Directive means Directive 2003/71/EC and
includes any relevant implementing measure in each relevant
member state.
We and the selling stockholders have not authorized and do not
authorize the making of any offer of securities through any
financial intermediary on their behalf, other than offers made
by the underwriters with a view to the final placement of the
securities as contemplated in this prospectus. Accordingly, no
purchaser of the securities, other than the underwriters, is
authorized to make any further offer of the securities on behalf
of us, the selling stockholders or the underwriters.
United
Kingdom
This prospectus is only being distributed to, and is only
directed at, persons in the United Kingdom that are qualified
investors within the meaning of Article 2(1)(e) of the
Prospectus Directive (Qualified Investors) that are
also (i) investment professionals falling within
Article 19(5) of the Financial Services and
215
Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotion) Order 2005 (the
Order) or (ii) high net worth entities, and
other persons to whom it may lawfully be communicated, falling
within Article 49(2)(a) to (d) of the Order (all such
persons together being referred to as relevant
persons). This prospectus and its contents are
confidential and should not be distributed, published or
reproduced (in whole or in part) or disclosed by recipients to
any other persons in the United Kingdom. Any person in the
United Kingdom that is not a relevant person should not act or
rely on this document or any of its contents.
Switzerland
The Prospectus does not constitute an issue prospectus pursuant
to Article 652a or Article 1156 of the Swiss Code of
Obligations (CO) and the shares will not be listed
on the SIX Swiss Exchange. Therefore, the Prospectus may not
comply with the disclosure standards of the CO
and/or the
listing rules (including any prospectus schemes) of the SIX
Swiss Exchange. Accordingly, the shares may not be offered to
the public in or from Switzerland, but only to a selected and
limited circle of investors, which do not subscribe to the
shares with a view to distribution.
Dubai
International Financial Centre
This prospectus relates to an Exempt Offer in accordance with
the Offered Securities Rules of the Dubai Financial Services
Authority (DFSA). This prospectus is intended for
distribution only to persons of a type specified in the Offered
Securities Rules of the DFSA. It must not be delivered to, or
relied on by, any other person. The DFSA has no responsibility
for reviewing or verifying any documents in connection with
Exempt Offers. The DFSA has not approved this prospectus nor
taken steps to verify the information set forth herein and has
no responsibility for the prospectus. The securities to which
this prospectus relates may be illiquid
and/or
subject to restrictions on their resale. Prospective purchasers
of the securities offered should conduct their own due diligence
on the securities. If you do not understand the contents of this
prospectus you should consult an authorized financial advisor.
Australia
No prospectus or other disclosure document (as defined in the
Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) of Australia (Corporations
Act)) in relation to the common stock has been or will be
lodged with the Australian Securities & Investments
Commission (ASIC). This document has not been lodged
with ASIC and is only directed to certain categories of exempt
persons. Accordingly, if you receive this document in Australia:
(a) you confirm and warrant that you are either:
(i) a sophisticated investor under
section 708(8)(a) or (b) of the Corporations Act;
(ii) a sophisticated investor under
section 708(8)(c) or (d) of the Corporations Act and
that you have provided an accountants certificate to us
which complies with the requirements of
section 708(8)(c)(i) or (ii) of the Corporations Act
and related regulations before the offer has been made;
(iii) a person associated with the company under
section 708(12) of the Corporations Act; or
(iv) a professional investor within the meaning
of section 708(11)(a) or (b) of the Corporations Act,
and to the extent that you are unable to confirm or warrant that
you are an exempt sophisticated investor, associated person or
professional investor under the Corporations Act any offer made
to you under this document is void and incapable of
acceptance; and
(b) you warrant and agree that you will not offer any of
the common stock for resale in Australia within 12 months
of that common stock being issued unless any such resale offer
is
216
exempt from the requirement to issue a disclosure document under
section 708 of the Corporations Act.
Hong
Kong
The common stock may not be offered or sold in Hong Kong, by
means of any document, other than (a) to professional
investors as defined in the Securities and Futures
Ordinance (Cap. 571, Laws of Hong Kong) and any rules made under
that Ordinance or (b) in other circumstances which do not
result in the document being a prospectus as defined
in the Companies Ordinance (Cap. 32, Laws of Hong Kong) or which
do not constitute an offer to the public within the meaning of
that Ordinance. No advertisement, invitation or document
relating to the common stock may be issued or may be in the
possession of any person for the purpose of the issue, whether
in Hong Kong or elsewhere, which is directed at, or the contents
of which are likely to be read by, the public in Hong Kong
(except if permitted to do so under the laws of Hong Kong) other
than with respect to the common stock which are intended to be
disposed of only to persons outside Hong Kong or only to
professional investors as defined in the Securities
and Futures Ordinance (Cap. 571, Laws of Hong Kong) or any rules
made under that Ordinance.
Japan
No securities registration statement (SRS) has been
filed under Article 4, Paragraph 1 of the Financial
Instruments and Exchange Law of Japan (Law No. 25 of 1948,
as amended) (FIEL) in relation to the common stock.
The shares of common stock are being offered in a private
placement to qualified institutional investors
(tekikaku-kikan-toshika) under Article 10 of the
Cabinet Office Ordinance concerning Definitions provided in
Article 2 of the FIEL (the Ministry of Finance Ordinance
No. 14, as amended) (QIIs), under
Article 2, Paragraph 3, Item 2 i of the FIEL. Any
QII acquiring the shares of common stock in this offer may not
transfer or resell those shares except to other QIIs.
Korea
The shares may not be offered, sold and delivered directly or
indirectly, or offered or sold to any person for reoffering or
resale, directly or indirectly, in Korea or to any resident of
Korea except pursuant to the applicable laws and regulations of
Korea, including the Korea Securities and Exchange Act and the
Foreign Exchange Transaction Law and the decrees and regulations
thereunder. The shares have not been registered with the
Financial Services Commission of Korea for public offering in
Korea. Furthermore, the shares may not be resold to Korean
residents unless the purchaser of the shares complies with all
applicable regulatory requirements (including but not limited to
government approval requirements under the Foreign Exchange
Transaction Law and its subordinate decrees and regulations) in
connection with the purchase of the shares.
Singapore
This prospectus has not been registered as a prospectus with the
Monetary Authority of Singapore. Accordingly, this prospectus
and any other document or material in connection with the offer
or sale, or invitation for subscription or purchase, of the
shares may not be circulated or distributed, nor may the shares
be offered or sold, or be made the subject of an invitation for
subscription or purchase, whether directly or indirectly, to
persons in Singapore other than (i) to an institutional
investor under Section 274 of the Securities and Future
Act, Chapter 289 of Singapore (the SFA),
(ii) to a relevant person as defined in
Section 275(2) of the SFA, or any person pursuant to
Section 275(1A), and in accordance with the conditions,
specified in Section 275 of the SFA or (iii) otherwise
pursuant to, and in accordance with the conditions of, any other
applicable provision of the SFA.
217
Where the shares are subscribed and purchased under
Section 275 of the SFA by a relevant person which is:
(a) a corporation (which is not an accredited investor (as
defined in Section 4A of the SFA)) the sole business of
which is to hold investments and the entire share capital of
which is owned by one or more individuals, each of whom is an
accredited investor; or
(b) a trust (where the trustee is not an accredited
investor (as defined in Section 4A of the SFA)) whose sole
whole purpose is to hold investments and each beneficiary is an
accredited investor,
shares, debentures and units of shares and debentures of that
corporation or the beneficiaries rights and interest
(howsoever described) in that trust shall not be transferable
within six months after that corporation or that trust has
acquired the shares under Section 275 of the SFA except:
(i) to an institutional investor under Section 274 of
the SFA or to a relevant person (as defined in
Section 275(2) of the SFA) and in accordance with the
conditions, specified in Section 275 of the SFA;
(ii) (in the case of a corporation) where the transfer
arises from an offer referred to in Section 275(1A) of the
SFA, or (in the case of a trust) where the transfer arises from
an offer that is made on terms that such rights or interests are
acquired at a consideration of not less than S$200,000 (or its
equivalent in a foreign currency) for each transaction, whether
such amount is to be paid for in cash or by exchange of
securities or other assets;
(iii) where no consideration is or will be given for the
transfer; or
(iv) where the transfer is by operation of law.
By accepting this prospectus, the recipient hereof represents
and warrants that he is entitled to receive it in accordance
with the restrictions set forth above and agrees to be bound by
limitations contained herein. Any failure to comply with these
limitations may constitute a violation of law.
218
LEGAL
MATTERS
The validity of our common stock offered by this prospectus will
be passed upon for Targa Resources Corp. by
Vinson & Elkins L.L.P., Houston, Texas. Certain legal
matters in connection with this offering will be passed upon for
the underwriters by Baker Botts L.L.P., Dallas, Texas.
EXPERTS
The financial statements of Targa Resources Corp. as of
December 31, 2009 and 2008 and for each of the three years
in the period ended December 31, 2009 included in this
Prospectus have been so included in reliance on the report
(which contains an explanatory paragraph relating to the
Companys restatement of its financial statements as
described in Note 23 to the financial statements) of
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public
accounting firm, given on the authority of said firm as experts
in auditing and accounting.
WHERE YOU CAN
FIND MORE INFORMATION
We have filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or
the SEC, a registration statement on
Form S-1
regarding our common units. This prospectus does not contain all
of the information found in the registration statement. For
further information regarding us and our common units offered by
this prospectus, you may desire to review the full registration
statement, including its exhibits and schedules, filed under the
Securities Act. The registration statement of which this
prospectus forms a part, including its exhibits and schedules,
may be inspected and copied at the public reference room
maintained by the SEC at 100 F Street, N.E.,
Room 1580, Washington, D.C. 20549. Copies of the
materials may also be obtained from the SEC at prescribed rates
by writing to the public reference room maintained by the SEC at
100 F Street, N.E., Room 1580,
Washington, D.C. 20549. You may obtain information on the
operation of the public reference room by calling the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
The SEC maintains a web site on the Internet at
http://www.sec.gov.
Our registration statement, of which this prospectus constitutes
a part, can be downloaded from the SECs web site.
We intend to furnish our unitholders annual reports containing
our audited financial statements and furnish or make available
quarterly reports containing our unaudited interim financial
information for the first three fiscal quarters of each of our
fiscal years.
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
This prospectus may contain forward looking
statements. These forward looking statements reflect our current
views with respect to, among other things, our operations and
financial performance. All statements herein or therein that are
not historical facts, including statements about our beliefs or
expectations, are forward-looking statements. We generally
identify these statements by words or phrases, such as
anticipate, estimate, plan,
project, expect, believe,
intend, foresee, forecast,
will, may, outlook or the
negative version of these words or other similar words or
phrases. These statements discuss, among other things, our
strategy, store openings, integration and remodeling, future
financial or operational performance, projected sales or
earnings per share for certain periods, comparable store sales
from one period to another, cost savings, results of store
closings and restructurings, outcome or impact of pending or
threatened litigation, domestic or international developments,
nature and allocation of future capital expenditures, growth
initiatives, inventory levels, cost of goods, future financings
and other goals and targets and statements of the assumptions
underlying or relating to any such statements.
These statements are subject to risks, uncertainties, and other
factors, including, among others, competition in the retail
industry and changes in our product distribution mix and
distribution channels, seasonality of our business, changes in
consumer preferences and consumer spending patterns, product
safety issues including product recalls, general economic
conditions in the United States and other
219
countries in which we conduct our business, our ability to
implement our strategy, our substantial level of indebtedness
and related debt-service obligations, restrictions imposed by
covenants in our debt agreements, availability of adequate
financing, changes in laws that impact our business, changes in
employment legislation, our dependence on key vendors for our
merchandise, costs of goods that we sell, labor costs,
transportation costs, domestic and international events
affecting the delivery of toys and other products to our stores,
political and other developments associated with our
international operations, existence of adverse litigation and
other risks, uncertainties and factors set forth under
Risk Factors herein. In addition, we typically earn
a disproportionate part of our annual operating earnings in the
fourth quarter as a result of seasonal buying patterns and these
buying patterns are difficult to forecast with certainty. These
factors should not be construed as exhaustive, and should be
read in conjunction with the other cautionary statements that
are included in this report. We believe that all forward-looking
statements are based on reasonable assumptions when made;
however, we caution that it is impossible to predict actual
results or outcomes or the effects of risks, uncertainties or
other factors on anticipated results or outcomes and that,
accordingly, one should not place undue reliance on these
statements. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date
they were made, and we undertake no obligation to update these
statements in light of subsequent events or developments unless
required by SEC rules and regulations. Actual results may differ
materially from anticipated results or outcomes discussed in any
forward-looking statement.
220
INDEX TO
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
TARGA RESOURCES CORP. AUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-2
|
|
|
|
|
F-3
|
|
|
|
|
F-4
|
|
|
|
|
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
F-6
|
|
|
|
|
F-7
|
|
|
|
|
F-8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TARGA RESOURCES CORP. UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-48
|
|
|
|
|
F-49
|
|
|
|
|
F-50
|
|
|
|
|
F-51
|
|
|
|
|
F-52
|
|
|
|
|
F-53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TARGA RESOURCES CORP. UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-74
|
|
|
|
|
F-75
|
|
|
|
|
F-76
|
|
|
|
|
F-77
|
|
|
|
|
F-78
|
|
F-1
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Targa Resources
Corp.:
In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and
the related consolidated statements of operations, of
comprehensive income, of changes in owners equity and of
cash flows present fairly, in all material respects, the
financial position of Targa Resources Corp. (formerly Targa
Resources Investments Inc.) and its subsidiaries (the
Company) at December 31, 2009 and 2008, and the
results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the
three years in the period ended December 31, 2009 in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits of these
statements in accordance with the standards of the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles
used and significant estimates made by management, and
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We
believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.
As discussed in Note 3 to the consolidated financial
statements, the Company changed the manner in which it accounts
for noncontrolling interests effective January 1, 2009.
As discussed in Note 23 to the financial statements, the
2009, 2008 and 2007 consolidated financial statements of the
Company have been restated to correct errors.
/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
Houston, Texas
March 5, 2010, except with respect to our opinion on the
consolidated financial statements insofar as it relates to
inclusion of segment information discussed in Note 19,
correction of errors discussed in Note 23 and inclusion of
net income per share data discussed in Note 3, as to which
the date is September 8, 2010, and change in company name
discussed in Note 1, as to which the date is
November 16, 2010.
F-2
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(Restated See Note 23)
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
252.4
|
|
|
$
|
362.8
|
|
Trade receivables, net of allowances of $8.0 million and
$9.4 million
|
|
|
404.3
|
|
|
|
303.9
|
|
Inventory
|
|
|
39.4
|
|
|
|
68.5
|
|
Assets from risk management activities
|
|
|
32.9
|
|
|
|
112.3
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
745.0
|
|
|
|
857.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, at cost
|
|
|
3,193.3
|
|
|
|
3,093.3
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(645.2
|
)
|
|
|
(475.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
2,548.1
|
|
|
|
2,617.4
|
|
Long-term assets from risk management activities
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
|
|
89.8
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
60.6
|
|
|
|
77.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
$
|
3,641.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND OWNERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
206.4
|
|
|
$
|
153.8
|
|
Accrued liabilities
|
|
|
304.3
|
|
|
|
252.4
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
Liabilities from risk management activities
|
|
|
29.2
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
36.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
553.8
|
|
|
|
466.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities
|
|
|
1,593.5
|
|
|
|
1,976.5
|
|
Long-term liabilities from risk management activities
|
|
|
43.8
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
|
|
26.8
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
63.1
|
|
|
|
49.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (see Note 15)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible cumulative participating series B preferred
stock ($0.001 par value; 10.0 million shares
authorized, 6.4 million shares issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2009 and 2008)
|
|
|
308.4
|
|
|
|
290.6
|
|
Owners equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp. stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock ($0.001 par value, 90.0 million shares
authorized, 8.0 million and 7.7 million issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2009 and 2008)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
194.0
|
|
|
|
214.2
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(85.8
|
)
|
|
|
(115.1
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
(20.3
|
)
|
|
|
36.1
|
|
Treasury stock, at cost
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Targa Resources Corp. stockholders equity
|
|
|
87.4
|
|
|
|
134.7
|
|
Noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries
|
|
|
667.5
|
|
|
|
687.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total owners equity
|
|
|
754.9
|
|
|
|
822.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and owners equity
|
|
$
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
$
|
3,641.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-3
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
4,536.0
|
|
|
$
|
7,998.9
|
|
|
$
|
7,297.2
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product purchases
|
|
|
3,791.1
|
|
|
|
7,218.5
|
|
|
|
6,525.5
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
235.0
|
|
|
|
275.2
|
|
|
|
247.1
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
170.3
|
|
|
|
160.9
|
|
|
|
148.1
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
120.4
|
|
|
|
96.4
|
|
|
|
96.3
|
|
Other (see Note 20)
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
13.4
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,318.8
|
|
|
|
7,764.4
|
|
|
|
7,016.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
217.2
|
|
|
|
234.5
|
|
|
|
280.3
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(132.1
|
)
|
|
|
(141.2
|
)
|
|
|
(162.3
|
)
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Gain (Loss) on debt repurchases (See Note 8)
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on early debt extinguishment (See Note 8)
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on insurance claims (see Note 11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on
mark-to-market
derivative instruments
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
99.8
|
|
|
|
153.7
|
|
|
|
128.1
|
|
Income tax expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
Deferred
|
|
|
(19.1
|
)
|
|
|
(18.0
|
)
|
|
|
(23.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20.7
|
)
|
|
|
(19.3
|
)
|
|
|
(23.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
79.1
|
|
|
|
134.4
|
|
|
|
104.2
|
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
49.8
|
|
|
|
97.1
|
|
|
|
48.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
37.3
|
|
|
|
56.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends on Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
(17.8
|
)
|
|
|
(16.8
|
)
|
|
|
(31.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Undistributed earnings attributable to preferred shareholders
|
|
|
(11.5
|
)
|
|
|
(20.5
|
)
|
|
|
(24.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income available to common shareholders
|
|
$
|
0.0
|
|
|
$
|
0.0
|
|
|
$
|
0.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income available per common sharebasic and diluted
|
|
$
|
0.00
|
|
|
$
|
0.00
|
|
|
$
|
0.00
|
|
Weighted average shares outstandingbasic and diluted
|
|
|
7.8
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-4
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(2009 and 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
restated, see
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 23)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
$
|
29.3
|
|
|
$
|
37.3
|
|
|
$
|
56.1
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to Targa
Resources Corp.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity hedging contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value
|
|
|
(49.6
|
)
|
|
|
110.9
|
|
|
|
(146.0
|
)
|
Reclassification adjustment for settled periods
|
|
|
(39.5
|
)
|
|
|
40.4
|
|
|
|
(4.6
|
)
|
Interest rate swaps:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
(5.0
|
)
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Reclassification adjustment for settled periods
|
|
|
8.8
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
(2.1
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
Related income taxes
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
|
|
(52.8
|
)
|
|
|
58.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to
Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
(56.4
|
)
|
|
|
92.4
|
|
|
|
(91.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources
Corp.
|
|
|
(27.1
|
)
|
|
|
129.7
|
|
|
|
(35.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
49.8
|
|
|
|
97.1
|
|
|
|
48.1
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling
interest:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity hedging contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value
|
|
|
(54.7
|
)
|
|
|
95.5
|
|
|
|
(54.8
|
)
|
Reclassification adjustment for settled periods
|
|
|
(30.2
|
)
|
|
|
24.7
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Interest rate swaps:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(14.0
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
Reclassification adjustment for settled periods
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling
interest
|
|
|
(78.1
|
)
|
|
|
108.2
|
|
|
|
(55.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling
interest
|
|
|
(28.3
|
)
|
|
|
205.3
|
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(55.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
335.0
|
|
|
$
|
(42.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
Noncontrolling
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except share amounts in thousands, restated,
See Note 23)
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2006
|
|
|
6,106
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(208.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
35.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
101.5
|
|
|
$
|
(71.5
|
)
|
Issuance of non-vested common stock
|
|
|
1,188
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.1
|
)
|
Option exercises
|
|
|
136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Contributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
771.8
|
|
|
|
771.8
|
|
Impact from equity transactions of the Partnership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
262.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(262.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50.3
|
)
|
|
|
(50.3
|
)
|
Purchase of treasury shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends of Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31.6
|
)
|
Amortization of equity awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
Tax benefit on vesting of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(91.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(55.3
|
)
|
|
|
(147.1
|
)
|
Deferred state taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48.1
|
|
|
|
104.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2007, as restated
|
|
|
7,430
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
230.4
|
|
|
$
|
(152.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(56.3
|
)
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
552.4
|
|
|
$
|
574.1
|
|
Option exercises
|
|
|
368
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Forfeiture of non-vested common stock
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
142
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
Dividends of Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16.8
|
)
|
Impact from equity transactions of the Partnership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
VESCO Acquisition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41.9
|
|
|
|
41.9
|
|
Distribution of property
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14.8
|
)
|
|
|
(14.8
|
)
|
Contributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(98.5
|
)
|
|
|
(98.5
|
)
|
Amortization of equity awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
Tax expense on vesting of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
Other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108.2
|
|
|
|
200.6
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97.1
|
|
|
|
134.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2008, as restated
|
|
|
7,743
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
214.2
|
|
|
$
|
(115.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
36.1
|
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
$
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
687.3
|
|
|
$
|
822.0
|
|
Option exercises
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Forfeitures of non-vested common stock
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact from equity transactions of the Partnership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103.8
|
|
|
|
103.8
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(98.5
|
)
|
|
|
(98.5
|
)
|
Dividends of Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17.8
|
)
|
Amortization of equity awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Tax expense on vesting of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
Other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(56.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(78.1
|
)
|
|
|
(134.5
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49.8
|
|
|
|
79.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2009, as restated
|
|
|
7,951
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
194.0
|
|
|
$
|
(85.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20.3
|
)
|
|
|
198
|
|
|
$
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
667.5
|
|
|
$
|
754.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-6
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
79.1
|
|
|
$
|
134.4
|
|
|
$
|
104.2
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization in interest expense
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
13.2
|
|
Paid-in-kind
interest expense
|
|
|
25.9
|
|
|
|
38.2
|
|
|
|
19.3
|
|
Amortization in general and administrative expense
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
168.8
|
|
|
|
160.9
|
|
|
|
148.1
|
|
Accretion of asset retirement obligations
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
Deferred income tax expense
|
|
|
19.1
|
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments, net of
distributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9.4
|
)
|
|
|
(6.2
|
)
|
Risk management activities
|
|
|
40.3
|
|
|
|
(64.5
|
)
|
|
|
(39.0
|
)
|
Loss (gain) on sale of assets
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
(5.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
Loss (gain) on debt repurchases
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
(25.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on early debt extinguishment
|
|
|
(9.7
|
)
|
|
|
(3.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on property damage insurance settlement (See Note 11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Asset impairment charges
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of interest of Holdco loan facility
|
|
|
(6.0
|
)
|
|
|
(4.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable and other assets
|
|
|
(140.1
|
)
|
|
|
600.7
|
|
|
|
(336.0
|
)
|
Inventory
|
|
|
19.3
|
|
|
|
72.8
|
|
|
|
(26.2
|
)
|
Accounts payable and other liabilities
|
|
|
122.2
|
|
|
|
(520.6
|
)
|
|
|
286.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
335.8
|
|
|
|
390.7
|
|
|
|
190.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outlays for property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(99.4
|
)
|
|
|
(132.3
|
)
|
|
|
(118.4
|
)
|
Acquisitions, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(124.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from property insurance
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
48.3
|
|
|
|
24.9
|
|
Investment in unconsolidated affiliate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.6
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(59.3
|
)
|
|
|
(206.7
|
)
|
|
|
(95.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holdco loan facility:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
450.0
|
|
Repurchases
|
|
|
(33.3
|
)
|
|
|
(62.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments of senior secured debt
|
|
|
(460.0
|
)
|
|
|
(12.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1,399.7
|
)
|
Borrowings (repayments) under senior secured credit facility
|
|
|
(95.9
|
)
|
|
|
95.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured credit facility of the Partnership:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings
|
|
|
569.2
|
|
|
|
185.3
|
|
|
|
721.3
|
|
Repayments
|
|
|
(577.7
|
)
|
|
|
(323.8
|
)
|
|
|
(95.0
|
)
|
Repurchases of senior notes of the Partnership
|
|
|
(18.9
|
)
|
|
|
(26.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of senior notes of the Partnership
|
|
|
237.4
|
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contribution of non-controlling interest
|
|
|
103.8
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
771.8
|
|
Distributions to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
(98.5
|
)
|
|
|
(98.5
|
)
|
|
|
(50.3
|
)
|
Issuance of common stock
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to preferred shareholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(445.1
|
)
|
Costs incurred in connection with financing arrangements
|
|
|
(13.3
|
)
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
(12.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
(386.9
|
)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
(59.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(110.4
|
)
|
|
|
184.9
|
|
|
|
35.2
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
|
|
362.8
|
|
|
|
177.9
|
|
|
|
142.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period
|
|
$
|
252.4
|
|
|
$
|
362.8
|
|
|
$
|
177.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-7
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
Except as noted within the context of each footnote
disclosure, the dollar amounts presented in the tabular data
within these footnote disclosures are stated in millions of
dollars.
|
|
Note 1
|
Organization and
Operations
|
Organization
and Operations
Targa Resources Corp., formerly Targa Resources Investments Inc.
(TRC), is a Delaware corporation formed on
October 27, 2005. Unless the context requires otherwise,
references to we, us, our,
Targa or the Company are intended to
mean our consolidated business and operations. Our only
significant asset is our ownership of 100% of the outstanding
capital stock of Targa Resources Investments Sub Inc., an
intermediate holding company, whose sole asset is its ownership
of 100% of the outstanding capital stock of TRI Resources Inc.,
formerly Targa Resources, Inc. (TRI). Our business
operations consist of natural gas gathering and processing, and
the fractionating, storing, terminalling, transporting,
distributing and marketing of natural gas liquids
(NGLs).
Basis of
Presentation
The accompanying financial statements and related notes present
our consolidated financial position as of December 31, 2009
and 2008, and the results of our operations, comprehensive
income, cash flows and changes in owners equity for the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
We have prepared our consolidated financial statements in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the
United States of America (GAAP). All significant
intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated.
At December 31, 2009, we owned approximately 33.9% of Targa
Resources Partners LP (the Partnership), including
our 2% general partner interest. Targa Resources GP LLC, the
general partner of the Partnership, is wholly owned by us. The
Partnership is consolidated within our financial statements
under the presumption, as well as presence, of general partner
control in accordance with GAAP.
Our consolidated balance sheets and statements of changes in
owners equity have been restated. Additionally, our
consolidated statements of comprehensive income (loss) for 2009
and 2008 have been restated. See Note 23.
In preparing the accompanying consolidated financial statements,
we have reviewed, as determined necessary by us, events that
have occurred after December 31, 2009, up until the
issuance of the financial statements. See Notes 8, 10, 12,
15, 24 and 25.
|
|
Note 2
|
Out of Period
Adjustments
|
During 2009, we recorded adjustments related to prior periods
which decreased our income before income taxes for 2009 by
$5.4 million. The adjustments consisted of
$7.2 million related to debt issue costs that should have
been expensed during 2007 and $1.8 million of revenue which
should have been recorded during 2006.
Had these adjustments been previously recorded in their
appropriate periods, net income attributable to Targa for the
year ended December 31, 2009 would have increased by
$3.4 million.
After evaluating the quantitative and qualitative aspects of
these errors, we concluded that our previously issued financial
statements were not materially misstated and the effect of
recognizing these adjustments in the 2009 financial statements
were not material to the 2009 or 2007 results of operations,
financial position, or cash flows.
F-8
|
|
Note 3
|
Accounting
Policies and Related Matters
|
Consolidation Policy. Our consolidated
financial statements include our accounts and those of our
majority-owned subsidiaries in which we have a controlling
interest. We hold varying undivided interests in various gas
processing facilities in which we are responsible for our
proportionate share of the costs and expenses of the facilities.
Our consolidated financial statements reflect our proportionate
share of the revenues, expenses, assets and liabilities of these
undivided interests.
We follow the equity method of accounting if our ownership
interest is between 20% and 50% and we exercise significant
influence over the operating and financial policies of the
investee.
Cash and Cash Equivalents. Cash and cash
equivalents include all cash on hand, demand deposits, and
investments with original maturities of three months or less. We
consider cash equivalents to include short-term, highly liquid
investments that are readily convertible to known amounts of
cash and which are subject to an insignificant risk of changes
in value.
Comprehensive Income. Comprehensive income
includes net income and other comprehensive income
(OCI), which includes unrealized gains and losses on
derivative instruments that are designated as hedges and
currency translation adjustments.
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts. Estimated
losses on accounts receivable are provided through an allowance
for doubtful accounts. In evaluating the level of established
reserves, we make judgments regarding each partys ability
to make required payments, economic events and other factors. As
the financial condition of any party changes, circumstances
develop or additional information becomes available, adjustments
to an allowance for doubtful accounts may be required.
Inventory. Our product inventories consist
primarily of NGLs. Most product inventories turn over monthly,
but some inventory, primarily propane, is held during the year
to meet anticipated heating season requirements of our
customers. Product inventories are valued at the lower of cost
or market using the average cost method.
Product Exchanges. Exchanges of NGL products
between parties are executed to satisfy timing and logistical
needs of the parties. Volumes received and delivered under
exchange agreements are recorded as inventory. If the locations
of receipt and delivery are in different markets, a price
differential may be billed or owed. The price differential is
recorded as either accounts receivable or accrued liabilities.
Gas Processing Imbalances. Quantities of
natural gas
and/or NGLs
over-delivered or under-delivered related to certain gas plant
operational balancing agreements are recorded monthly as
inventory or as a payable using weighted average prices at the
time the imbalance was created. Monthly, inventory imbalances
receivable are valued at the lower of cost or market; inventory
imbalances payable are valued at replacement cost. These
imbalances are settled either by current cash-out settlements or
by adjusting future receipts or deliveries of natural gas or
NGLs.
Derivative Instruments. We employ derivative
instruments to manage the volatility of cash flows due
fluctuating energy prices and interest rates. All derivative
instruments not qualifying for the normal purchase and normal
sale exception are recorded on the balance sheets at fair value.
The treatment of the periodic changes in fair value will depend
on whether the derivative is designated and effective as a hedge
for accounting purposes. We have designated certain downstream
liquids marketing contracts that meet the definition of a
derivative as normal purchases and normal sales which, under
GAAP, are not accounted for as derivatives.
If a derivative qualifies for hedge accounting and is designated
as a cash flow hedge, the effective portion of the unrealized
gain or loss on the derivative is deferred in Accumulated Other
Comprehensive Income (AOCI), a component of
owners equity, and reclassified to earnings when the
forecasted transaction occurs. Cash flows from a derivative
instrument designated as a hedge are classified in the same
category as the cash flows from the item being hedged. As such,
we include the cash flows from commodity derivative instruments
in revenues and from interest rate derivative instruments in
interest expense.
F-9
If a derivative does not qualify as a hedge or is not designated
as a hedge, the gain or loss on the derivative is recognized
currently in earnings. The ultimate gain or loss on the
derivative transaction upon settlement is also recognized as a
component of other income and expense.
We formally document all relationships between hedging
instruments and hedged items, as well as our risk management
objectives and strategy for undertaking the hedge. This
documentation includes the specific identification of the
hedging instrument and the hedged item, the nature of the risk
being hedged and the manner in which the hedging
instruments effectiveness will be assessed. At the
inception of the hedge, and on an ongoing basis, we assess
whether the derivatives used in hedging transactions are highly
effective in offsetting changes in cash flows of hedged items.
The relationship between the hedging instrument and the hedged
item must be highly effective in achieving the offset of changes
in cash flows attributable to the hedged risk both at the
inception of the contract and on an ongoing basis. We measure
hedge ineffectiveness on a quarterly basis and reclassify any
ineffective portion of the unrealized gain or loss to earnings
in the current period.
We will discontinue hedge accounting on a prospective basis when
a hedge instrument is terminated or ceases to be highly
effective. Gains and losses deferred in AOCI related to cash
flow hedges for which hedge accounting has been discontinued
remain deferred until the forecasted transaction occurs. If it
is no longer probable that a hedged forecasted transaction will
occur, deferred gains or losses on the hedging instrument are
reclassified to earnings immediately.
For balance sheet classification purposes, we analyze the fair
values of the derivative contracts on a deal by deal basis.
Property, Plant and Equipment. Property, plant
and equipment are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation.
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the
estimated useful lives of the assets.
Expenditures for maintenance and repairs are expensed as
incurred. Expenditures to refurbish assets that extend the
useful lives or prevent environmental contamination are
capitalized and depreciated over the remaining useful life of
the asset or major asset component.
Our determination of the useful lives of property, plant and
equipment requires us to make various assumptions, including the
supply of and demand for hydrocarbons in the markets served by
our assets, normal wear and tear of the facilities, and the
extent and frequency of maintenance programs.
We capitalize certain costs directly related to the construction
of assets, including internal labor costs, interest and
engineering costs. Upon disposition or retirement of property,
plant and equipment, any gain or loss is charged to operations.
We evaluate the recoverability of our property, plant and
equipment when events or circumstances such as economic
obsolescence, the business climate, legal and other factors
indicate we may not recover the carrying amount of the assets.
Asset recoverability is measured by comparing the carrying value
of the asset with the assets expected future undiscounted
cash flows. These cash flow estimates require us to make
projections and assumptions for many years into the future for
pricing, demand, competition, operating cost and other factors.
If the carrying amount exceeds the expected future undiscounted
cash flows we recognize an impairment loss to write down the
carrying amount of the asset to its fair value as determined by
quoted market prices in active markets or present value
techniques if quotes are unavailable. The determination of the
fair value using present value techniques requires us to make
projections and assumptions regarding the probability of a range
of outcomes and the rates of interest used in the present value
calculations. Any changes we make to these projections and
assumptions could result in significant revisions to our
evaluation of recoverability of our property, plant and
equipment and the recognition of an impairment loss in our
consolidated statements of operations. See Note 5.
Asset retirement obligations
(AROs). AROs are legal
obligations associated with the retirement of tangible
long-lived assets that result from the assets acquisition,
construction, development
and/or
normal operation. An ARO is initially measured at its estimated
fair value. Upon initial recognition of an ARO,
F-10
we record an increase to the carrying amount of the related
long-lived asset and an offsetting ARO liability. The
consolidated cost of the asset and the capitalized asset
retirement obligation is depreciated using the straight-line
method over the period during which the long-lived asset is
expected to provide benefits. After the initial period of ARO
recognition, the ARO will change as a result of either the
passage of time or revisions to the original estimates of either
the amounts of estimated cash flows or their timing.
Changes due to the passage of time increase the carrying amount
of the liability because there are fewer periods remaining from
the initial measurement date until the settlement date;
therefore, the present values of the discounted future
settlement amount increases. These changes are recorded as a
period cost called accretion expense. Changes resulting from
revisions to the timing or the amount of the original estimate
of undiscounted cash flows shall be recognized as an increase or
a decrease in the carrying amount of the liability for an asset
retirement obligation and the related asset retirement cost
capitalized as part of the carrying amount of the related
long-lived asset. Upon settlement, AROs will be extinguished by
us at either the recorded amount or we will recognize a gain or
loss on the difference between the recorded amount and the
actual settlement cost. See Note 6.
Debt Issue Costs. Costs incurred in connection
with the issuance of long-term debt are deferred and charged to
interest expense over the term of the related debt.
Environmental Liabilities. Liabilities for
loss contingencies, including environmental remediation costs
arising from claims, assessments, litigation, fines, and
penalties and other sources are charged to expense when it is
probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of
the assessment
and/or
remediation can be reasonably estimated. See Note 15.
Income Taxes. We account for income taxes
using the asset and liability method of accounting for deferred
income taxes and provide deferred income taxes for all
significant temporary differences.
As part of the process of preparing our consolidated financial
statements, we are required to estimate our income taxes in each
of the jurisdictions in which we operate. This process involves
estimating our actual current tax payable and related tax
expense together with assessing temporary differences resulting
from differing treatment of certain items, such as depreciation,
for tax and accounting purposes. These differences can result in
deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are included within
our consolidated balance sheets.
We must then assess the likelihood that our deferred tax assets
will be recovered from future taxable income and, to the extent
we believe that it is more likely than not (a likelihood of more
than 50%) that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets
will not be realized, we establish a valuation allowance. Any
change in the valuation allowance would impact our income tax
provision and net income in the period in which such a
determination is made. We consider all available evidence, both
positive and negative, to determine whether, based on the weight
of the evidence, a valuation allowance is needed. Evidence used
includes information about our current financial position and
our results of operations for the current and preceding years,
as well as all currently available information about future
years, including our anticipated future performance, the
reversal of deferred tax liabilities and tax planning strategies.
We believe future sources of taxable income, reversing temporary
differences and other tax planning strategies will be sufficient
to realize assets for which no reserve has been established.
Noncontrolling Interest. Noncontrolling
interest represents third party ownership in the net assets of
our consolidated subsidiaries. For financial reporting purposes,
the assets and liabilities of our majority owned subsidiaries
are consolidated with any third party investors interest
shown as noncontrolling interest within the equity section of
the balance sheet. In the statements of operations,
noncontrolling interest reflects the allocation of earnings to
third party investors. We account for the difference between the
carrying amount of our investment in the Partnership and the
underlying book value arising from issuance of common units by
the Partnership, where we maintain control, as an equity
transaction. If the Partnership issues common units at a price
different than our carrying value per unit, we account for the
premium or deficiency as an adjustment to paid-in capital.
F-11
Revenue Recognition. Our primary types of
sales and service activities reported as operating revenues
include:
|
|
|
|
|
sales of natural gas, NGLs and condensate;
|
|
|
|
natural gas processing, from which we generate revenues through
the compression, gathering, treating, and processing of natural
gas; and
|
|
|
|
NGL fractionation, terminalling and storage, transportation and
treating.
|
We recognize revenues when all of the following criteria are
met: (1) persuasive evidence of an exchange arrangement
exists, if applicable, (2) delivery has occurred or
services have been rendered, (3) the price is fixed or
determinable and (4) collectability is reasonably assured.
For processing services, we receive either fees or a percentage
of commodities as payment for these services, depending on the
type of contract. Under
percent-of-proceeds
contracts, we receive either an agreed upon percentage of the
actual proceeds that we receive from our sales of the residue
natural gas and NGLs or an agreed upon percentage based on index
related prices for the natural gas and NGLs.
Percent-of-value
and
percent-of-liquids
contracts are variations on this arrangement. Under keep-whole
contracts, we keep the NGLs extracted and return the processed
natural gas or value of the natural gas to the producer. A
significant portion of our Straddle plant processing contracts
are hybrid contracts under which settlements are made on a
percent-of-liquids
basis or a fee basis, depending on market conditions. Natural
gas or NGLs that we receive for services or purchase for resale
are in turn sold and recognized in accordance with the criteria
outlined above. Under fee-based contracts, we receive a fee
based on throughput volumes.
We generally report revenues gross in our consolidated
statements of operations. Except for fee-based contracts, we act
as the principal in the transactions where we receive
commodities, take title to the natural gas and NGLs, and incur
the risks and rewards of ownership.
Share-Based Compensation. We award share-based
compensation to employees and directors in the form of
restricted stock, stock options and performance unit awards.
Compensation expense on restricted stock and stock options is
measured by the fair value of the award as determined by
management at the date of grant. Compensation expense on
performance unit awards is initially measured by the fair value
of the award at the date of grant, and remeasured subsequently
at each reporting date through the settlement period.
Compensation expense is recognized in general and administrative
expense over the requisite service period of each award. See
Note 12.
Earnings per Share. We use the two-class
method of allocating earnings between our common and preferred
classes of stock outstanding for purposes of presenting net
income per share. Net income after the impact of preferred
dividends is allocated according to the preferred stock
agreement. The terms of the preferred stock agreement stipulate
that common shareholders are not entitled to any distributions,
unless approved by written consent of a majority of the
outstanding preferred stockholders, until the preferred holders
recapture the carrying value of their preferred securities which
includes accreted dividends. Currently, there is no net income
available to common shareholders as the preferred shareholders
are entitled to all undistributed earnings. As such, there are
no earnings per share to our common shareholders for the periods
reported in these consolidated financial statements. If we have
net income available to common shareholders, basic net income
per share will be calculated by dividing net income attributable
to common shareholders by the weighted-average of common shares
outstanding during each period. Diluted net income attributable
to common shareholders will be calculated by dividing net income
attributable to common shareholders by the weighted-average of
common shares outstanding including other dilutive securities
outstanding. Convertible preferred securities will be excluded
from the determination of earnings per share if their impact
would be antidilutive.
Use of Estimates. The preparation of financial
statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the
reported
F-12
amounts of revenues and expenses during the period. Estimates
and judgments are based on information available at the time
such estimates and judgments are made. Adjustments made with
respect to the use of these estimates and judgments often relate
to information not previously available. Uncertainties with
respect to such estimates and judgments are inherent in the
preparation of financial statements. Estimates and judgments are
used in, among other things, (1) estimating unbilled
revenues and operating and general and administrative costs,
(2) developing fair value assumptions, including estimates
of future cash flows and discount rates, (3) analyzing
long-lived assets for possible impairment, (4) estimating
the useful lives of assets and (5) determining amounts to
accrue for contingencies, guarantees and indemnifications.
Actual results could differ materially from estimated amounts.
Accounting
Pronouncements Recently Adopted
Financial
Accounting Standards Board (FASB)
Codification
In June 2009, FASB issued the FASB Accounting Standards
Codification (the Codification or ASC)
as the source of authoritative GAAP recognized by FASB to be
applied by nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive
releases of the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) under authority of federal securities laws are
also sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC registrants. The
Codification is effective for financial statements issued for
interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009.
As of the effective date, the Codification supersedes all
then-existing non-SEC accounting and reporting standards. All
other non-grandfathered non-SEC accounting literature not
included in the Codification has become non-authoritative.
FASB no longer issues new standards in the form of Statements,
FASB Staff Positions, or Emerging Issues Task Force Abstracts.
Instead, it will issue Accounting Standards Updates
(ASUs). FASB will not consider ASUs as authoritative
in their own right. They will serve only to update the
Codification, provide background information about the guidance,
and provide the basis for conclusions on changes in the
Codification.
Fair Value
Measurements
In September 2006, FASB issued guidance regarding fair value
measurement that defines fair value, establishes a framework for
measuring fair value and expands disclosures about fair value
measurements. This guidance applies to previous accounting
guidance that requires or permits fair value measurements, and
accordingly, does not require any new fair value measurements.
The guidance was initially effective as of January 1, 2008,
but in February 2008, FASB delayed until periods beginning after
November 15, 2008 the effective date for applying the
guidance to nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities
that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial
statements on a nonrecurring basis. We adopted the guidance as
of January 1, 2008 with respect to financial assets and
liabilities within its scope and the impact was not material to
our financial statements. As of January 1, 2009,
nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities were also
required to be measured at fair value. The adoption of these
additional provisions did not have a material impact on our
financial statements. See Note 17.
In April 2009, FASB issued guidance for determining fair values
when there is no active market or where the price inputs being
used represent distressed sales. Specifically, it reaffirms the
need to use judgment to ascertain if a formerly active market
has become inactive and in determining fair values when markets
have become inactive. We adopted the guidance as of
June 30, 2009. There have been no material financial
statement implications relating to our adoption.
In April 2009, FASB issued guidance that requires disclosures of
fair value for any financial instruments not currently reflected
at fair value on the balance sheets for all interim periods. We
adopted these provisions as of June 30, 2009. There have
been no material financial statement implications relating to
this adoption. See Note 17.
In January 2010, FASB issued guidance that requires additional
disclosures about fair value measurements including transfers in
and out of Levels 1 and 2 and a higher level of
disaggregation for
F-13
the different types of financial instruments. For the
reconciliation of Level 3 fair value measurements,
information about purchases, sales, issuances and settlements
should be presented separately. This guidance is effective for
annual and interim reporting periods beginning after
December 15, 2009 for most of the new disclosures and for
periods beginning after December 15, 2010 for the new
Level 3 disclosures. Comparative disclosures are not
required in the first year the disclosures are required. Our
adoption did not have a material impact on our consolidated
financial statements.
Business
Combinations
In December 2007, FASB issued guidance that requires the
acquiring entity in a business combination to recognize all
assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the transaction,
establishes the acquisition-date fair value as the measurement
objective for all assets acquired and liabilities assumed and
requires the acquirer to disclose certain information related to
the nature and financial effect of the business combination. It
also establishes principles and requirements for how an acquirer
recognizes any noncontrolling interest in the acquiree and the
goodwill acquired in a business combination. This guidance was
effective on a prospective basis for business combinations for
which the acquisition date is on or after January 1, 2009.
For any business combination that takes place subsequent to
January 1, 2009, this guidance may have a material impact
on our financial statements. The nature and extent of any such
impact will depend upon the terms and conditions of the
transaction.
In April 2009, FASB issued guidance that amends and clarifies
application issues on initial recognition and measurement,
subsequent measurement and accounting, and disclosure of assets
and liabilities arising from contingencies in a business
combination. This update is effective for assets and liabilities
arising from contingencies in business combinations for which
the acquisition date is on or after January 1, 2009. There
have been no material financial statement implications relating
to the adoption of this update.
Other
In December 2007, FASB issued guidance that requires all
entities to report noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries as a
separate component of equity in the consolidated statement of
financial position, to clearly identify consolidated net income
attributable to the parent and to the noncontrolling interest on
the face of the consolidated statement of income, and to provide
sufficient disclosure that clearly identifies and distinguishes
between the interest of the parent and the interests of
noncontrolling owners. It also establishes accounting and
reporting standards for changes in a parents ownership
interest and the valuation of retained noncontrolling equity
investments when a subsidiary is deconsolidated. We adopted
these amended provisions effective January 1, 2009, which
required retrospective reclassification of our consolidated
financial statements for all periods presented in this filing.
As a result of adoption, we have reclassified our noncontrolling
interest (formerly minority interest) on our consolidated
balance sheets, from a component of liabilities to a component
of equity and have also reclassified net income attributable to
noncontrolling interest on our consolidated statements of
operations, to below net income for all periods presented.
Furthermore, we have displayed the portion of other
comprehensive income that is attributable to the noncontrolling
interest within our consolidated statements of comprehensive
income.
In May 2009, FASB issued guidance that establishes general
standards of accounting for and disclosure of events that occur
after the balance sheet date but before financial statements are
issued or are available to be issued. This guidance sets forth
(1) the period after the balance sheet date during which
management of a reporting entity should evaluate events or
transactions that may occur for potential recognition or
disclosure in the financial statements, (2) the
circumstances under which an entity should recognize events or
transactions occurring after the balance sheet date in its
financial statements, and (3) the disclosures that an
entity should make about events or transactions that occurred
after the balance sheet date. It is effective for interim and
annual periods ended after June 15, 2009 and should be
applied prospectively. Our adoption did not have a material
impact on our financial statements.
F-14
In December 2009, the FASB amended consolidation guidance for
variable interest entities (VIEs). VIEs are entities
whose equity investors do not have sufficient equity capital at
risk such that the entity cannot finance its own activities.
When a business has a controlling financial interest in a VIE,
the assets, liabilities and profit or loss of that entity must
be included in consolidation. A business enterprise must
consolidate a VIE when that enterprise has a variable interest
that will cover most of the entitys expected losses
and/or
receive most of the entitys anticipated residual return.
The new guidance, among other things, eliminates the scope
exception for qualifying special-purpose entities, amends
certain guidance for determining whether an entity is a VIE,
expands the list of events that trigger reconsideration of
whether an entity is a VIE, requires a qualitative rather than a
quantitative analysis to determine the primary beneficiary of a
VIE, requires continuous assessments of whether a company is the
primary beneficiary of a VIE and requires enhanced disclosures
about a companys involvement with a VIE. This guidance is
effective for us on January 1, 2010 and early adoption is
prohibited. At December 31, 2009, we had not identified any
interests which qualified as VIEs and our adoption of this new
guidance is not expected to have a material impact on our
financial statements.
Note 4Inventory
Due to fluctuating commodity prices for natural gas liquids, we
occasionally recognize lower of cost or market adjustments when
the carrying values of our inventories exceeds their net
realizable value. These non-cash adjustments are charged to
product purchases in the period they are recognized, with the
related cash impact in the subsequent period of sale. For 2009,
we did not recognize an adjustment to the carrying value of our
NGL inventory. As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, we
recognized $6.0 million and $0.2 million to reduce the
carrying value of NGL inventory to its net realizable value.
|
|
Note 5
|
Property, Plant
and Equipment
|
Property, plant and equipment, at cost, and the related
estimated useful lives of the assets were as follows as of the
dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Estimated Useful Lives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In years)
|
|
Natural gas gathering systems
|
|
$
|
1,578.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,513.6
|
|
|
5 to 20
|
Processing and fractionation facilities
|
|
|
956.0
|
|
|
|
911.4
|
|
|
5 to 25
|
Terminalling and natural gas liquids storage facilities
|
|
|
246.6
|
|
|
|
234.3
|
|
|
5 to 25
|
Transportation assets
|
|
|
271.6
|
|
|
|
264.6
|
|
|
10 to 25
|
Other property and equipment
|
|
|
66.2
|
|
|
|
63.1
|
|
|
3 to 25
|
Land
|
|
|
52.7
|
|
|
|
52.2
|
|
|
|
Construction in progress
|
|
|
22.2
|
|
|
|
54.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, at cost
|
|
$
|
3,193.3
|
|
|
$
|
3,093.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-15
|
|
Note 6
|
Asset Retirement
Obligations
|
Our asset retirement obligations are included in our
consolidated balance sheets as a component of other long-term
liabilities. The changes in our aggregate asset retirement
obligations are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Beginning of period
|
|
$
|
34.0
|
|
|
$
|
12.6
|
|
|
$
|
11.6
|
|
Liabilities
incurred(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities settled
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cash flow
estimate(2)
|
|
|
(2.8
|
)
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accretion expense
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period
|
|
$
|
34.1
|
|
|
$
|
34.0
|
|
|
$
|
12.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The 2008 amount relates to our consolidation of Venice Energy
Services Company, LLC (VESCO). |
|
(2) |
|
The change in cash flow estimate is primarily from a
reassessment of abandonment cost estimates for our offshore
gathering systems. |
|
|
Note 7
|
Investment in
Unconsolidated Affiliates
|
As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, our unconsolidated
investment consisted of a 38.75% ownership interest in Gulf
Coast Fractionators LP (GCF), which owns a
fractionation facility in Mont Belvieu, Texas. As of
December 31, 2009 and 2008, our investment in GCF was
$18.5 million and is included in our consolidated balance
sheets as a component of other assets.
Our equity in the net assets of GCF exceeded our acquisition
date investment account by $5.2 million at
December 31, 2009. This amount is being amortized over the
estimated remaining life of the net assets on a straight-line
basis, and is included as a component of our equity in earnings
of unconsolidated investments.
Prior to July 31, 2008 our unconsolidated investments also
included a 22.9% ownership interest in Venice Energy Services
Company, L.L.C. (VESCO), a venture that operates a
natural gas gathering system and natural gas liquids processing
and extraction facility for producers in the Gulf of Mexico. On
July 31, 2008, we acquired an additional 53.9% interest,
giving us effective control under the terms of the operating
agreement; therefore, we have consolidated the operations of
VESCO in our financial results effective August 1, 2008.
The following table shows our equity earnings and cash
distributions with respect to our unconsolidated investment for
the years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VESCO(1)(2)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
10.1
|
|
|
$
|
6.6
|
|
GCF
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.0
|
|
|
$
|
14.0
|
|
|
$
|
10.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash distributions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GCF
|
|
$
|
5.0
|
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
|
$
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash contributions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VESCO
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes our equity earnings through July 31, 2008. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes business interruption insurance claims of
$4.1 million and $3.1 million for 2008 and 2007,
respectively. |
F-16
Consolidated debt obligations consisted of the following as of
the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Long-term debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of Targa:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holdco loan facility, variable rate, due February
2015(1)
|
|
$
|
385.4
|
|
|
$
|
424.1
|
|
Obligations of TRI:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured term loan facility, variable rate, due October
2012
|
|
|
62.2
|
|
|
|
522.2
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
81/2%
fixed rate, due November 2013
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility, variable rate, due
October 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95.9
|
|
Obligations of the
Partnership:(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility, variable rate, due
February 2012
|
|
|
479.2
|
|
|
|
487.7
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
81/4%
fixed rate, due July 2016
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
111/4%
fixed rate, due July 2017
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unamortized discounts, net of premiums
|
|
|
(11.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
1,606.0
|
|
|
|
1,989.0
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
|
(12.5
|
)
|
|
|
(12.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt
|
|
$
|
1,593.5
|
|
|
$
|
1,976.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Irrevocable standby letters of credit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letters of credit outstanding under senior secured synthetic
letter of credit
facility(3)
|
|
$
|
9.5
|
|
|
$
|
114.0
|
|
Letters of credit outstanding under senior secured revolving
credit facility of the Partnership
|
|
|
108.4
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
117.9
|
|
|
$
|
123.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Quarterly, we make an election to pay interest when due or
refinance the interest as part of long-term debt. |
|
(2) |
|
We consolidate the debt of the Partnership with that of our own;
however, we do not have the obligation to make interest payments
or debt payments with respect to the debt of the Partnership. |
|
(3) |
|
The $50 million senior secured synthetic letter of credit
facility terminates in October 2012. As of December 31,
2009, we had $1.3 million available under this facility. |
Information
Regarding Variable Interest Rates Paid
The following table shows the range of interest rates paid and
weighted average interest rate paid on our variable-rate debt
obligations during 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Range of
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Interest Rates
|
|
Average Interest
|
|
|
Paid
|
|
Rate Paid
|
|
Holdco loan facility of TRC
|
|
5.2% to 9.1%
|
|
|
6.3
|
%
|
Senior secured term loan facility of TRI
|
|
2.2% to 6.0%
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility of TRI
|
|
2.1% to 3.5%
|
|
|
3.1
|
%
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility of the Partnership
|
|
1.2% to 4.5%
|
|
|
1.7
|
%
|
F-17
Consolidated
Debt Maturity Table
The following table presents the scheduled maturities of
principal amounts of our consolidated debt obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2010
|
|
$
|
12.5
|
|
2011
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
2012
|
|
|
516.4
|
|
2013
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
Thereafter(1)
|
|
|
825.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,617.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Due 2015, 2016 and 2017. |
Description of
Debt Obligations
Obligations of
TRC
Holdco Credit
Agreement
On August 9, 2007, we borrowed $450 million under a
credit agreement. In connection with the agreement, we pledged
our indirect 100% ownership of TRIs capital stock as
collateral for amounts due under the agreement. None of
TRIs consolidated subsidiaries guaranty our obligations
under the loan.
Interest on borrowings under the credit agreement are payable,
at our option, either (i) entirely in cash,
(ii) entirely by increasing the principal amount of the
outstanding borrowings or (iii) 50% in cash and 50% by
increasing the principal amount of the outstanding borrowings.
Borrowings outstanding under the credit agreement bear interest
at a rate equal to an applicable rate plus, at our option,
either (a) a base rate determined by reference to the
higher of (1) the prime rate of Credit Suisse or
(2) the federal funds rate plus 0.5% or (b) LIBOR as
determined by reference to the costs of funds for dollar
deposits for the interest period relevant to such borrowing
adjusted for certain statutory reserves. At December 31,
2009, the applicable rate for borrowings under the credit
agreement was 4% with respect to base rate borrowings and 5%
with respect to LIBOR borrowings.
Principal amounts outstanding under the credit agreement are due
and payable in full on February 9, 2015. On and after
February 9, 2008, we may prepay all or part of the
principal amount outstanding, at our option, at 100% of the
principal amount repaid prior to August 9, 2009. On or
after August 9, 2009, we may repay all or part of the
principal outstanding at the redemption prices set forth below
(expressed as percentages of principal amount) if redeemed
during the twelve-month period beginning on August 9 of each
year indicated below:
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Percentage
|
|
2009
|
|
|
102
|
%
|
2010
|
|
|
101
|
%
|
During 2009, we completed transactions that have been recognized
in our consolidated financial statements as a debt
extinguishment, and recognized pre-tax gains of
$24.5 million. The transactions, executed by TRI, were
payments of $39.3 million to acquire $64.5 million of
outstanding borrowings (including accrued interest of
$6.0 million) under our Holdco credit agreement
(Holdco debt) and writeoffs of associated debt issue
costs totaling $0.7 million.
During 2008, we completed a transaction that was recognized in
our consolidated financial statements as a debt extinguishment,
and recognized a pre-tax gain of $3.6 million. The
transactions, executed by TRI, were payments of
$16.4 million to acquire $20 million of outstanding
Holdco debt (including accrued interest of $1.3 million).
The Holdco debt purchased by TRI has not been retired and is
F-18
being accounted for by TRI as a held to maturity investment;
however, upon consolidation the amounts are eliminated and
presented as a debt extinguishment.
During 2008, we paid $50 million to repurchase
$62.5 million of our outstanding borrowings (including
accrued interest of $3.0 million) of Holdco debt, and
recognized a pre-tax gain of $12.5 million. We have retired
the entire $62.5 million face value of the debt.
Compliance with
Debt Covenants
As of December 31, 2009, we were in compliance with the
covenants contained in our various debt agreements.
Obligations of
TRI
Senior Secured
Credit Agreement
TRIs senior secured credit agreement (the credit
agreement) provides senior secured financing of
$2,500 million, consisting of:
|
|
|
|
|
$1,250 million senior secured term loan facility;
|
|
|
|
$700 million senior secured asset sale bridge loan facility;
|
|
|
|
$250 million senior secured revolving credit facility (the
credit facility); and
|
|
|
|
$300 million senior secured synthetic letter of credit
facility.
|
The entire amount of TRIs credit facility is available for
letters of credit and includes a limited borrowing capacity for
borrowings on
same-day
notice referred to as swing line loans.
TRI may increase the commitments under our credit facility in an
aggregate amount up to $400 million, subject to the
satisfaction of certain conditions.
Borrowings under the credit agreement, other than the senior
secured synthetic letter of credit facility, will bear interest
at a rate equal to an applicable margin plus, at our option,
either (a) a base rate determined by reference to the
higher of (1) the prime rate of Credit Suisse and
(2) the federal funds rate plus 0.5% or (b) LIBOR as
determined by reference to the costs of funds for dollar
deposits for the interest period relevant to such borrowing
adjusted for certain statutory reserves.
TRI is required to pay a facility fee, quarterly in arrears, to
the lenders under the senior secured synthetic letter of credit
facility equal to (i) 2.00% of the amount on deposit in the
designated deposit account plus (ii) the administrative
cost incurred by the deposit account agent for such quarterly
period. In addition, TRI is required to pay a commitment fee
equal to 0.375% of the currently unutilized commitments
thereunder.
The senior secured credit agreement requires TRI to prepay loans
outstanding under the senior secured term loan facility, subject
to certain exceptions, with:
|
|
|
|
|
50% of TRIs annual excess cash flow (which percentage will
be reduced to 25% if TRIs total leverage ratio is no more
than 4.00 to 1.00 and to 0% if TRIs total leverage ratio
is no more than 3.00 to 1.00);
|
|
|
|
100% of the net cash proceeds of all non-ordinary course asset
sales, transfers, or other dispositions of property, subject to
certain exceptions;
|
|
|
|
100% of the net cash proceeds of any incurrence of debt, other
than debt permitted under the senior secured credit agreement.
|
TRI is required to repay the term loan facility in quarterly
principal amounts of 0.25% of the original principal amount,
with the remaining amount payable October 31, 2012.
F-19
Principal amounts outstanding under TRIs credit facility
are due and payable in full on October 31, 2011. As of
December 31, 2009, TRI had availability under this facility
of $239.8 million, after giving effect to the Lehman
Commercial Paper Inc. (Lehman Paper) default. In
October 2008, Lehman Paper, a lender under TRIs credit
facility, defaulted on a borrowing request. As a result of the
default, we believe the availability under the facility has been
effectively reduced by $10.2 million at December 31,
2009.
All obligations under the credit agreement and certain secured
hedging arrangements are unconditionally guaranteed, subject to
certain exceptions, by each of TRIs existing and future
domestic restricted subsidiaries, referred to, collectively, as
the guarantors. TRI has pledged the following assets, subject to
certain exceptions, as collateral:
|
|
|
|
|
the capital stock and other equity interests held by TRI or any
guarantor (except that TRI will not pledge more than 65% of the
voting stock and other voting equity interests of any foreign
subsidiary); and
|
|
|
|
a security interest in, and mortgages on, TRI and its
guarantors tangible and intangible assets.
|
The credit agreement contains a number of covenants that, among
other things, restrict, subject to certain exceptions,
TRIs ability to incur additional indebtedness (including
guarantees and hedging obligations) or issue preferred stock;
create liens on assets; enter into sale and leaseback
transactions; engage in mergers or consolidations; sell assets;
pay dividends and make distributions or repurchase capital stock
and other equity interests; make investments, loans or advances;
make capital expenditures; repay, redeem or repurchase certain
indebtedness; make certain acquisitions; engage in certain
transactions with affiliates; amend certain debt and other
material agreements; change its lines of business; and impose
certain restrictions on restricted subsidiaries that are not
guarantors, including restrictions on the ability of such
subsidiaries that are not guarantors to pay dividends.
The credit agreement requires TRI to maintain certain specified
maximum total leverage ratios and certain specified minimum
interest coverage ratios. In each case TRI is required to comply
with certain limitations, including minimum cash consideration
requirements.
During 2009, TRI repaid substantially all of its senior secured
term loan facility and recognized a $14.8 million loss on
early debt extinguishment consisting of the write-off of debt
issue costs related to the facility.
During 2009, TRI elected to reduce the commitments under the
senior secured synthetic letter of credit facility from
$300.0 million to $50.0 million.
81/2% Senior
Notes Due 2013
In December, 2007, TRI filed a registration statement on
Form S-4/A
in which it offered to exchange up to $250.0 million of our
outstanding
81/2% senior
notes due 2013 (the Notes) for new notes. The terms
of the new notes were substantially identical to the outstanding
notes, except that TRI registered the new notes under the
Securities Act of 1933. The exchange of outstanding notes for
new notes was completed in January, 2008.
The Notes:
|
|
|
|
|
are TRIs unsecured senior obligations;
|
|
|
|
rank pari passu in right of payment with all TRIs
existing and future senior indebtedness, including indebtedness
under TRIs credit agreement;
|
|
|
|
are effectively subordinated to all TRIs secured
indebtedness to the extent of the value of the collateral
securing such indebtedness, including indebtedness under the
senior secured credit facilities;
|
|
|
|
are structurally subordinated to all existing and future claims
of creditors (including trade creditors) and holders of
preferred stock of TRIs subsidiaries that do not guarantee
the Notes;
|
F-20
|
|
|
|
|
rank senior in right of payment to any of TRIs future
subordinated indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
are guaranteed on a senior unsecured basis by the subsidiary
guarantors that guarantee the senior secured credit
facilities; and
|
Interest on the Notes accrues at the rate of
81/2%
per annum and is payable in cash semi-annually in arrears on May
1 and November 1.
On or after November 1, 2009, TRI may redeem all or a part
of the Notes at the redemption prices set forth below (expressed
as percentages of principal amount) plus accrued and unpaid
interest and liquidated damages, if any, on the Notes redeemed,
if redeemed during the twelve-month period beginning on November
1 of each year indicated below:
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
Percentage
|
|
2009
|
|
|
104.25
|
%
|
2010
|
|
|
102.13
|
%
|
Compliance with
Debt Covenants
As of December 31, 2009, TRI was in compliance with the
covenants contained in its various debt agreements.
Obligations of
the Partnership
Credit
Agreement
On February 14, 2007, the Partnership entered into a credit
agreement which provided for a five-year $500 million
credit facility with a syndicate of financial institutions. On
October 24, 2007, the Partnership entered into the First
Amendment to Credit Agreement which allowed it to request
commitments under the credit agreement, as supplemented and
amended, up to $1 billion. The Partnership currently has
$977.5 million committed under the senior secured credit
facility. In October 2008, Lehman Bank defaulted on a borrowing
request under the Partnerships senior secured credit
facility. Lehmans commitment under the facility is
$19 million and is currently unfunded which effectively
reduces the Partnerships total commitments under its
credit facility by $19 million.
The credit facility bears interest at the Partnerships
option, at the higher of the lenders prime rate or the
federal funds rate plus 0.5%, plus an applicable margin ranging
from 0% to 1.25% dependent on the Partnerships total
leverage ratio, or LIBOR plus an applicable margin ranging from
1.0% to 2.25% dependent on the Partnerships total leverage
ratio. The Partnerships credit facility is secured by
substantially all of its assets. As of December 31, 2009,
the Partnership had approximately $479.2 million of
borrowings outstanding under its senior secured credit facility
and approximately $69.2 million of outstanding letters of
credit.
The Partnerships senior secured credit facility restricts
its ability to make distributions of available cash to
unitholders if a default or an event of default (as defined in
the Partnerships senior secured credit facility) has
occurred and is continuing. The senior secured credit facility
requires the Partnership to maintain a leverage ratio (the ratio
of consolidated indebtedness to its consolidated EBITDA, as
defined in the senior secured credit facility) of less than or
equal to 5.50 to 1.00 and a senior secured indebtedness ratio
(the ratio of senior secured indebtedness to consolidated
EBITDA, as defined in the senior secured credit facility) of
less than or equal to 4.50 to 1.00, each subject to certain
adjustments. The senior secured credit facility also requires
the Partnership to maintain an interest coverage ratio (the
ratio of its consolidated EBITDA to its consolidated interest
expense, as defined in the senior secured credit facility) of
greater than or equal to 2.25 to 1.00 determined as of the last
day of each quarter for the four-fiscal quarter period ending on
the date of determination, as well as upon the occurrence of
certain events, including the incurrence of additional permitted
indebtedness. In conjunction with a material acquisition, the
Partnership has the option to increase the leverage ratio to
6.00 to 1.00 and to increase the senior secured indebtedness
ratio to 5.00 to 1.00 for a period of up to a year.
F-21
The credit facility matures on February 14, 2012, at which
time all unpaid principal and interest is due.
Senior Unsecured
Notes
The Partnership has two issues of unsecured senior notes under
Rule 144A and Regulation S of the Securities Act of
1933. On June 18, 2008, the Partnership privately placed
$250 million in aggregate principal amount at par value of
81/4% senior
notes due 2016 (the
81/4% Notes).
On July 6, 2009, the Partnership privately placed
$250 million in aggregate principal amount of
111/4% senior
notes due 2017 (the
111/4% Notes).
The
111/4% Notes
were issued at 94.973% of the face amount, resulting in gross
proceeds of $237.4 million .
These notes are unsecured senior obligations that rank pari
passu in right of payment with existing and future senior
indebtedness, including indebtedness under our credit facility.
They are senior in right of payment to any of our future
subordinated indebtedness and are unconditionally guaranteed by
the Partnership. These notes are effectively subordinated to all
secured indebtedness under the credit agreement, which is
secured by substantially all of the Partnerships assets,
to the extent of the value of the collateral securing that
indebtedness.
Interest on the
81/4% Notes
accrues at the rate of
81/4%
per annum and is payable semi-annually in arrears on January 1
and July 1, commencing on January 1, 2009. Interest on
the
111/4% Notes
accrues at the rate of
111/4%
per annum and is payable semi-annually in arrears on January 15
and July 15, commencing on January 15, 2010.
The Partnership may redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal
amount of the
81/4% Notes
at any time prior to July 1, 2011 ( July 15, 2013
for the
111/4% Notes)
, with the net cash proceeds of one or more equity
offerings. The Partnership must pay a redemption price of
108.25% of the principal amount ( 111.25% for the
111/4% Notes)
, plus accrued and unpaid interest and liquidated damages,
if any, to the redemption date provided that:
(1) at least 65% of the aggregate principal amount of each
of the notes (excluding notes held by us) remains outstanding
immediately after the occurrence of such redemption; and
(2) the redemption occurs within 90 days of the date
of the closing of such equity offering.
The Partnership may also redeem all or a part of the
81/4% Notes
at any time prior to July 1, 2012 ( July 15, 2013
for the
111/4% Notes)
at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount
of the notes redeemed plus the applicable premium as defined in
the indenture agreement as of, and accrued and unpaid interest
and liquidated damages, if any, to the date of redemption.
The Partnership may also redeem all or a part of the
81/4% Notes
on or after July 1, 2012 (July 15, 2013 for the
111/4% Notes)
at the redemption prices set forth below (expressed as
percentages of principal amount) plus accrued and unpaid
interest and liquidated damages, if any, on the notes redeemed,
if redeemed during the twelve-month period beginning on July 1
( July 15 for the
111/4% Notes)
of each year indicated below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81/4% Notes
|
|
111/4% Notes
|
Year
|
|
Percentage
|
|
Year
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
|
104.13
|
%
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
|
105.63
|
%
|
|
2013
|
|
|
|
102.06
|
%
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
|
102.81
|
%
|
During 2008, the Partnership repurchased $40.9 million face
value of our outstanding
81/4% Notes
in open market transactions at an aggregate purchase price of
$28.3 million, including $1.5 million of accrued
interest. We recognized a gain on the debt repurchases of
$13.1 million associated with the purchased notes. The
repurchased
81/4% Notes
were retired and are not eligible for re-issue at a later date.
During 2009, the Partnership repurchased $18.7 million face
value ($17.8 million carrying value) of our outstanding
111/4% Notes
in open market transactions at an aggregated purchase price of
$18.9 million
F-22
plus accrued interest of $0.3 million. The Partnership
recognized a loss on the debt repurchases of $1.5 million,
including $0.4 million in debt issue costs associated with
the repurchased notes. The repurchased
111/4% Notes
were retired and are not eligible for re-issue at a later date.
The
111/4% Notes
are subject to a registration rights agreement dated as of
July 6, 2009. If the Partnership fails to do so, additional
interest will accrue on the principal amount of the
111/4% Notes.
The Partnership has determined that the payment of additional
interest is not probable. As a result, the Partnership has not
recorded a liability for any contingent obligation. Any
subsequent accruals of a liability or payments made under this
registration rights agreement will be charged to earnings as
interest expense in the period they are recognized or paid.
Compliance with
Debt Covenants
As of December 31, 2009, the Partnership was in compliance
with the covenants contained in our various debt agreements.
Subsequent
events
On January 5, 2010, TRI entered into a new senior secured
credit facility with a syndicate of financial institutions
consisting of a $100 million revolving credit facility due
2014 and a $500 million term loan due 2016. There was no
initial funding on the revolving credit line. The proceeds of
the term loan were used to:
|
|
|
|
|
complete the cash tender offer and consent solicitation for all
$250.0 million of our outstanding
81/2% senior
notes due 2013;
|
|
|
|
repay the outstanding balance of $62.2 million on our
existing senior secured term loan due 2012;
|
|
|
|
purchase $164.2 million in face value of the Holdco Notes
for $131.4 million; and,
|
|
|
|
fund working capital and pay fees and expenses to the new credit
facility.
|
|
|
Note 9
|
Convertible
Participating Preferred Stock
|
At December 31, 2009 and 2008, we had 6,409,697 shares
of Convertible Cumulative Participating Series B Preferred
Stock (Series B) outstanding, with a
liquidation value of $308.4 million and
$290.6 million. The Series B stock ranks senior to our
common stock.
The holders of the Series B stock accrue dividends at an
annual rate of 6% of the accreted value of the stock (purchase
price plus unpaid dividends, compounded quarterly) until
October 31, 2012, and thereafter at an annual rate of 14%.
Cash dividends on the Series B stock are payable when
declared by our Board of Directors, subject to restrictions
under our debt agreements. In the event that we have paid all
accrued dividends on the Series B stock, we may also pay an
additional dividend, the amount of which shall reduce the
purchase price of the Series B stock.
Upon the occurrence of the liquidation, dissolution, or winding
up of the Company, the holders of the Series B stock are
entitled to receive an amount equal to the Series B
stocks accreted value per share (the Series B
preference amount). If the assets and funds of the Company
available for distribution exceeds the Series B preference
amount, the remaining assets of the corporation are
distributable ratably among the holders of the Series B
stock and common stock, where each Series B holder is
treated for this purpose as holding ten shares of common stock
for each share of Series B stock held.
The holders of the Series B stock are entitled to vote with
the holders of the common stock, wherein each Series B
holder is treated for this purpose as holding ten shares of
common stock for each share of Series B stock held.
In the case of a qualified public offering (as defined in the
Series B stock certificate of designation), each share of
Series B stock automatically converts into (i) a
number of shares of common stock calculated by dividing the
accreted value of such share of Series B stock by the
initial public offering price of the
F-23
common stock, less all underwriters discounts and
commissions, plus (ii) ten shares of common stock for each
share of Series B stock, subject to certain adjustments.
|
|
Note 10
|
Partnership Units
and Related Matters
|
Initial Partnership Unit Offering and Sale of North
Texas. On February 14, 2007, the initial
public offering (IPO) of 19,320,000 common units
representing limited partner interests in the Partnership was
completed. In return for our contribution of our North Texas
assets to the Partnership in connection with the IPO, we
received a 2% general partner interest, incentive distribution
rights and a limited partner interest in the Partnership
represented by 11,528,231 subordinated units. These units were
subordinated to the common units with respect to distribution
rights, until May 19, 2009, at which time under the terms
of the Partnerships amended and restated partnership
agreement, all of our subordinated units converted to common
units on a
one-for-one
basis.
Sale of SAOU and LOU and Secondary Public
Offerings. On October 24, 2007, the
Partnership completed the purchase of our ownership interests in
the natural gas gathering and processing assets associated with
the San Angelo Operating Unit System located in the Permian
Basin (the SAOU System) and the Louisiana Operating
Unit System located in Southwest Louisiana (the LOU
System). The total value of the transaction was
approximately $730.2 million. Concurrent with the
acquisition, the Partnership sold 13,500,000 common units
representing limited partnership interests at a price of $26.87
per common unit ($25.796 per common unit after the underwriting
discount). Total consideration paid by the Partnership to us
consisted of cash of approximately $722.5 million and
312,246 general partner units issued to us.
Sale of Downstream Business. On
September 24, 2009, the Partnership acquired our interests
in Targa Downstream GP LLC, Targa LSNG GP LLC, Targa Downstream
LP and Targa LSNG LP (collectively, the Downstream
Business) for $530 million. Consideration to us
comprised $397.5 million in cash and the issuance to us of
174,033 general partner units and 8,527,615 common units. The
form of the transaction reflected in the Partnerships
consolidated financial statements was:
|
|
|
|
|
We contributed the Downstream Business to the Partnership.
|
|
|
|
Prior to the contribution, the Downstream Business
affiliate indebtedness payable to us totaled
$817.3 million, inclusive of $223.0 million of accrued
interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Immediately prior to, and in contemplation of, the contribution,
$287.3 million of the Downstream Business affiliated
indebtedness was settled through a separate capital contribution
from us.
|
|
|
|
On the contribution date, the Downstream Business
affiliate indebtedness payable to us was $530 million.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Partnership repaid the affiliate indebtedness with:
(i) $397.5 million in cash; (ii) 174,033 in
general partner units with an
agreed-upon
value of $2.7 million; and (iii) 8,527,615 in common
units with an
agreed-upon
value of $129.8 million.
|
As part of the transaction, we agreed to provide distribution
support to the Partnership in the form of a reduction in the
reimbursement for general and administrative expense allocated
to the Partnership if necessary (or make a payment to the
Partnership, if needed) for a 1.0 times distribution coverage
ratio, at the current distribution level of $0.5175 per limited
partner unit, subject to maximum support of $8.0 million in
any quarter. The distribution support is in effect for the
nine-quarter period beginning with the fourth quarter of 2009
and continuing through the fourth quarter of 2011.
Additional Secondary Offering of Common
Units. On August 12, 2009, the Partnership
completed a unit offering under its shelf registration statement
of 6,900,000 common units representing limited partner interests
in the Partnership at a price of $15.70 per common unit. Net
proceeds of the offering were $105.3 million, after
deducting underwriting discounts, commissions and estimated
offering expenses, and including the general partners
proportionate capital contribution of $2.2 million. The
Partnership used
F-24
substantially all of the proceeds to repay $103.5 million
of outstanding borrowings under its senior secured revolving
credit facility.
Cash Distributions. In accordance with the
Partnerships partnership agreement, the Partnership must
distribute all of its available cash, as defined in the
partnership agreement, within 45 days following the end of
each calendar quarter. Distributions will generally be made 98%
to the common unitholders and 2% to the general partner; subject
to the payment of incentive distributions to the extent that
certain target levels of cash distributions are achieved.
Under the quarterly incentive distribution provisions, generally
the Partnerships general partner is entitled to 13% of
amounts distributed in excess of $0.3881 per unit, 23% of the
amounts distributed in excess of $0.4219 per unit and 48% of
amounts distributed in excess of $0.50625 per unit. No incentive
distributions were paid to us as part of our general partner
interest prior to the fourth quarter of 2007. To the extent
there is sufficient available cash, the holders of common units
are entitled to receive the minimum quarterly distribution of
$0.3375 per unit, plus arrearages, prior to any distribution of
available cash to the holders of subordinated units.
The following table shows the amount of the Partnerships
cash distributions declared and paid in the years ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions Paid
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
For the Three
|
|
Limited Partners
|
|
General Partner
|
|
|
|
per Limited
|
Date Paid
|
|
Months Ended
|
|
Common
|
|
Subordinated
|
|
Incentive
|
|
2%
|
|
Total
|
|
Partner Unit
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per unit amounts)
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 14, 2009
|
|
September 30, 2009
|
|
$
|
31.9
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.6
|
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
|
$
|
35.2
|
|
|
$
|
0.5175
|
|
August 14, 2009
|
|
June 30, 2009
|
|
|
23.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
26.4
|
|
|
|
0.5175
|
|
May 15, 2009
|
|
March 31, 2009
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
26.3
|
|
|
|
0.5175
|
|
February 13, 2009
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
26.4
|
|
|
|
0.5175
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 14, 2008
|
|
September 30, 2008
|
|
$
|
17.9
|
|
|
$
|
6.0
|
|
|
$
|
1.9
|
|
|
$
|
0.5
|
|
|
$
|
26.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.5175
|
|
August 14, 2008
|
|
June 30, 2008
|
|
|
17.8
|
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
25.9
|
|
|
|
0.5125
|
|
May 15, 2008
|
|
March 31, 2008
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
19.9
|
|
|
|
0.4175
|
|
February 14, 2008
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
18.9
|
|
|
|
0.3975
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 14, 2007
|
|
September 30, 2007
|
|
$
|
11.1
|
|
|
$
|
3.9
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
15.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.3375
|
|
August 14, 2007
|
|
June 30, 2007
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
0.3375
|
|
May 15, 2007
|
|
March 31, 2007
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
0.1688
|
|
Subsequent
Events
Unit
Offering
On January 19, 2010, the Partnership completed a public
offering of 5,500,000 common units representing limited partner
interests in the Partnership (common units) under
its existing shelf registration statement on
Form S-3
at a price of $23.14 per common unit ($22.17 per common unit,
net of underwriting discounts), providing net proceeds of
$121.9 million. Pursuant to the exercise of the
underwriters overallotment option, the Partnership sold an
additional 825,000 common units at $23.14 per common unit,
providing net proceeds of $18.3 million. The Partnership
used the net proceeds from the offering for general partnership
purposes, which included reducing borrowings under its senior
secured credit facility.
F-25
Cash
Distributions
The Partnership made the following quarterly cash distributions
subsequent to December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions Paid
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
For the Three
|
|
Limited Partners
|
|
General Partner
|
|
|
|
per Limited
|
Date Paid
|
|
Months Ended
|
|
Common
|
|
Subordinated
|
|
Incentive
|
|
2%
|
|
Total
|
|
Partner Unit
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per unit amounts)
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
February 13, 2010
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
35.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
0.5175
|
|
|
|
Note 11
|
Insurance
Claims
|
We recognize income from business interruption insurance in our
consolidated statements of operations in the period that a proof
of loss is executed and submitted to the insurers for payment.
The following table summarizes our income recognition of
business interruption insurance for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Included in
revenues(1)
|
|
$
|
21.5
|
|
|
$
|
32.9
|
|
|
$
|
7.3
|
|
Included in equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes $2.0 million and $1.3 million for 2009 and
2008 in non-hurricane business interruption proceeds. |
Hurricanes Gustav
and Ike
Certain of our Louisiana and Texas facilities sustained damage
and had disruptions to their operations during the 2008
hurricane season from two Gulf Coast hurricanesGustav and
Ike. As of December 31, 2008, we recorded a
$19.3 million loss provision (net of estimated insurance
reimbursements) related to the hurricanes. During 2009, the
estimate was reduced by $3.7 million. During 2009,
expenditures related to the hurricanes included
$33.7 million for previously accrued repair costs and
$7.5 million capitalized as improvements.
Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita
Katrina and Rita affected certain of our Gulf Coast facilities
in 2005. The final purchase price allocation for the DMS
acquisition in October 2005 included an $81.1 million
contingent receivable for insurance claims related to property
damage caused by Katrina and Rita. During 2008, our cumulative
recoveries from insurers exceeded such amount, and we recognized
a gain of $18.5 million. During 2009, expenditures related
to these hurricanes included $0.3 million capitalized as
improvements. The insurance claim process is now complete with
respect to Katrina and Rita for property damage and business
interruption insurance.
|
|
Note 12
|
Stock and Other
Compensation Plans
|
Stock Option
Plans
Under Targas 2005 Incentive Compensation Plan (the
Plan), options to purchase a fixed number of shares of its
stock may be granted to our employees, directors and
consultants. Generally, options granted under the Plan have a
vesting period of four years and remain exercisable for ten
years from the date of grant.
The fair value of each option granted was estimated on the date
of grant using a Black-Scholes option pricing model, which
incorporates various assumptions for 2008, including
(i) expected term of the options of ten years, (ii) a
risk-free interest rate of 3.6%, (iii) expected dividend
yield of 0%, and (iv) expected stock price volatility on
TRCs common stock of 25.5%. Our selection of the risk-free
F-26
interest rate was based on published yields for United States
government securities with comparable terms. Because TRC was a
non-public company during the period of these financial
statements, its expected stock price volatility was estimated
based upon the historical price volatility of the Dow Jones
MidCap Pipelines Index over a period equal to the expected
average term of the options granted. The calculated fair value
of options granted during the year ended December 31, 2008
was $1.48 per share.
The following table shows stock option activity for the periods
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining Contractual
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In years)
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
5,062,080
|
|
|
$
|
7.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
160,893
|
|
|
|
3.59
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(368,113
|
)
|
|
|
2.41
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchased
|
|
|
(45,267
|
)
|
|
|
7.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(84,070
|
)
|
|
|
7.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
4,725,523
|
|
|
|
8.06
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(214,870
|
)
|
|
|
1.41
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(4,800
|
)
|
|
|
8.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
4,505,853
|
|
|
|
8.50
|
|
|
|
5.98
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
4,363,098
|
|
|
|
8.51
|
|
|
|
5.91
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We recognized compensation expense associated with stock options
of $0.1 million, $0.2 million and $0.1 million
during 2009, 2008 and 2007. As of December 31, 2009, we
expect to incur an additional $0.1 million of expense
related to non-vested stock options over a weighted average
period of approximately two years. The total intrinsic value of
options exercised during 2009 was less than $0.1 million.
Non-vested
(Restricted) Common Stock
Restricted stock awards entitle recipients to exchange
restricted common shares for unrestricted common shares (at no
cost to them) once the defined vesting period expires, subject
to certain forfeiture provisions. The restrictions on the
non-vested shares generally lapse four years from the date of
grant.
The following table provides a summary of our non-vested
restricted common stock awards for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Outstanding at beginning of period
|
|
|
1,249,116
|
|
|
|
5,467,154
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,000
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(1,198,085
|
)
|
|
|
(4,163,020
|
)
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(75,018
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at end of period
|
|
|
51,031
|
|
|
|
1,249,116
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average grant date fair value per share
|
|
$
|
1.67
|
|
|
$
|
1.19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The total fair value of non-vested restricted common shares that
vested during 2009 was $1.4 million. We recognized
$0.3 million, $1.0 million and $2.0 million of
compensation expense associated with the vesting of restricted
stock during 2009, 2008 and 2007. As of December 31, 2009,
we expect to incur an additional $0.1 million of expense
related to non-vested shares issued to our employees, over a
weighted average period of approximately two years.
F-27
Non-Employee
Director Grants and Incentive Plan related to the
Partnerships Common Units
In 2007, TRC adopted a long-term incentive plan
(LTIP) for employees, consultants and directors of
the general partner and its affiliates who perform services for
TRC or its affiliates. The LTIP provides for the grant of
cash-settled performance units, which are linked to the
performance of the Partnerships common units and may
include distribution equivalent rights (DERs). The
LTIP is administered by the compensation committee of the board
of directors of TRC. Subject to applicable vesting criteria, a
DER entitles the grantee to a cash payment equal to cash
distributions paid on an outstanding common unit.
Grants outstanding under TRCs LTIP were 275,400 under the
2007 program, 135,800 under the 2008 program, 534,900 units
under the 2009 program and 90,403 units under the 2010
program. During 2009, there were forfeitures under the LTIP of
12,025 units. Grants under the 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010
programs are payable in August 2010, July 2011, June 2012 and
June 2013. Each vested performance unit will entitle the grantee
to a cash payment equal to the then value of a Partnership
common unit, including DERs. Vesting of performance units is
based on the total return per common unit of the Partnership
through the end of the performance period, relative to the total
return of a defined peer group.
Because the performance units require cash settlement, they have
been accounted for as liabilities. The fair value of a
performance unit is the sum of: (i) the closing price of a
Partnership common unit on the reporting date; (ii) the
fair value of an
at-the-money
call option on a performance unit with a grant date equal to the
reporting date and an expiration date equal to the last day of
the performance period; and (iii) estimated DERs. The fair
value of the call options was estimated using a Black-Scholes
option pricing model with a dividend yield of 8.5%, and with
risk-free rates and volatilities of 0.3% and 42% under the 2007
program, 0.8% and 61% under the 2008 program, 1.4% and 61% under
the 2009 program and 1.4% and 52% under the 2010 program.
At December 31, 2009, the aggregate fair value of
performance units expected to vest was $23.5 million.
During 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recognized compensation expense
of $10.5 million, $0.1 million and $2.6 million
as a component of general and administrative expense related to
the performance units. The remaining recognition period for the
unrecognized compensation cost is approximately three and a half
years.
During 2009 and 2008, Targa Resources GP LLC, the general
partner of the Partnership, also made equity-based awards of
32,000 and 16,000 restricted common units of the Partnership
(4,000 and 2,000 restricted common units of the Partnership
to each of the Partnerships and TRCs non-management
directors) under the LTIP. The awards will settle with the
delivery of common units and are subject to three-year vesting,
without a performance condition, and will vest ratably on each
anniversary of the grant date. During 2009, 2008 and 2007, we
recognized compensation expense of $0.3 million,
$0.3 million and $0.2 million related to these awards.
We estimate that the remaining fair value of $0.2 million
will be recognized in expense over approximately two years. As
of December 31, 2009 there were 41,993 unvested restricted
common units outstanding under this plan.
The following table summarizes our unit-based awards for each of
the periods indicated (in units and dollars):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Outstanding at beginning of period
|
|
|
26,664
|
|
|
|
16,000
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
32,000
|
|
|
|
16,000
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
(16,671
|
)
|
|
|
(5,336
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at end of period
|
|
|
41,993
|
|
|
|
26,664
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average grant date fair value per share
|
|
$
|
12.88
|
|
|
$
|
22.12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-28
Subsequent Event. On January 22, 2010,
Targa Resources GP LLC made equity-based awards of 2,250
restricted common units (15,750 total restricted common units)
of the Partnership to each of the Partnerships and
TRCs non-management directors under the Incentive Plan.
The awards will settle with the delivery of common units and are
subject to three year vesting, without a performance condition,
and will vest ratably on each anniversary of the grant date.
Other
Compensation Plans
We have a 401(k) plan whereby we match 100% of up to 5% of an
employees contribution (subject to certain limitations in
the plan). We also contribute an amount equal to 3% of each
employees eligible compensation to the plan as a
retirement contribution and may make additional contributions at
our sole discretion. All Targa contributions are made 100% in
cash. We made contributions to the 401(k) plan totaling
$3.7 million, $8.4 million and $7.6 million
during 2009, 2008 and 2007.
|
|
Note 13
|
Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities
|
Commodity
Hedges
We have tailored our hedges to generally match the NGL product
composition and the NGL and natural gas delivery points to those
of our physical equity volumes. Our NGL hedges cover baskets of
ethane, propane, normal butane, iso-butane and natural gasoline
based upon our expected equity NGL composition, as well as
specific NGL hedges of ethane and propane. We believe this
strategy avoids uncorrelated risks resulting from employing
hedges on crude oil or other petroleum products as
proxy hedges of NGL prices. Additionally, our NGL
hedges are based on published index prices for delivery at Mont
Belvieu and our natural gas hedges are based on published index
prices for delivery at Columbia Gulf, Houston Ship Channel,
Mid-Continent and Waha, which closely approximate our actual NGL
and natural gas delivery points.
We hedge a portion of our condensate sales using crude oil
hedges that are based on the NYMEX futures contracts for West
Texas Intermediate light, sweet crude. This necessarily exposes
us to a market differential risk if the NYMEX futures do not
move in exact parity with our underlying West Texas condensate
equity volumes.
At December 31, 2009, the notional volumes of our commodity
hedges were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
|
|
Instrument
|
|
Unit
|
|
2010
|
|
2011
|
|
2012
|
|
2013
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
MMBtu/d
|
|
|
35,694
|
|
|
|
28,500
|
|
|
|
19,500
|
|
|
|
8,000
|
|
NGL
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
Bbl/d
|
|
|
8,958
|
|
|
|
6,100
|
|
|
|
3,950
|
|
|
|
|
|
NGL
|
|
|
Floors
|
|
|
Bbl/d
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
253
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensate
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
Bbl/d
|
|
|
851
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
Interest Rate
Swaps
As of December 31, 2009, the Partnership had
$479.2 million outstanding under its credit facility, with
interest accruing at a base rate plus an applicable margin. In
order to mitigate the risk of changes in cash flows attributable
to changes in market interest rates the Partnership have entered
into interest rate
F-29
swaps and interest rate basis swaps that effectively fix the
base rate on $300 million in borrowings as shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
|
|
|
Notional
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
Rate
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
07/02/05
|
|
|
3.66
|
%
|
|
$
|
300 million
|
|
|
$
|
(7.8
|
)
|
07/03/05
|
|
|
3.33
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)
|
07/04/05
|
|
|
3.37
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
07/05/05
|
|
|
3.39
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
01/014/24/2014
|
|
|
3.39
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(10.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All interest rate swaps and interest rate basis swaps have been
designated as cash flow hedges of variable rate interest
payments on borrowings under the Partnerships credit
facility.
The following schedules reflect the fair values of derivative
instruments in our financial statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset Derivatives
|
|
|
Liability Derivatives
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
Fair Value as of
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
Fair Value as of
|
|
|
|
Sheet
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Sheet
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
Location
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Location
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity contracts
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
31.6
|
|
|
$
|
108.7
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
$
|
20.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term assets
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
89.8
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
39.1
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Interest rate contracts
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
Long-term assets
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments
|
|
|
|
|
45.4
|
|
|
|
198.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
72.5
|
|
|
|
17.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity contracts
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
Long-term assets
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives
|
|
|
|
$
|
46.7
|
|
|
$
|
202.1
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
73.0
|
|
|
$
|
21.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fair value of derivative instruments, depending on the type
of instrument, was determined by the use of present value
methods or standard option valuation models with assumptions
about commodity prices based on those observed in underlying
markets.
Our earnings are also affected by the use of the
mark-to-market
method of accounting for derivative financial instruments that
do not qualify for hedge accounting or that have not been
F-30
designated as hedges. The changes in fair value of these
instruments are recorded on the balance sheets and through
earnings (i.e., using the
mark-to-market
method) rather than being deferred until the anticipated
transaction affects earnings. The use of
mark-to-market
accounting for financial instruments can cause non-cash earnings
volatility due to changes in the underlying commodity price
indices. During 2009, 2008 and 2007, we recorded the following
mark-to-market
gains:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain (Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognized in
|
|
Derivatives
|
|
Location of Gain (Loss)
|
|
Income on Derivatives
|
|
Not Designated as
|
|
Recognized in Income
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
Hedging Instruments
|
|
on Derivatives
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Commodity contracts
|
|
Other income (expense)
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table reflects the gain (loss) recognized in OCI
on our consolidated balance sheets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized Gain (Loss)
|
|
|
|
Recognized in OCI on
|
|
Derivatives in
|
|
Derivatives (Effective Portion)
|
|
Cash Flow Hedging
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
Relationships
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts
|
|
$
|
(7.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(19.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.5
|
)
|
Commodity contracts
|
|
|
(104.3
|
)
|
|
|
206.4
|
|
|
|
(200.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(111.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
187.4
|
|
|
$
|
(201.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables reflect amounts reclassified from OCI to
revenues and expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain (Loss)
|
|
|
|
Reclassified from OCI into
|
|
Location of Gain (Loss)
|
|
Income (Effective Portion)
|
|
Reclassified from
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
OCI into Income
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
(15.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
2.2
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
69.7
|
|
|
|
(65.1
|
)
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
54.0
|
|
|
$
|
(67.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We recorded hedge ineffectiveness related to commodity hedges of
$0.3 million in 2009. There was no hedge ineffectiveness
related to commodity hedges in 2008 or 2007.
There were no adjustments for hedge ineffectiveness related to
interest rate hedges for 2009, 2008 or 2007.
As of December 31, 2009, deferred net losses of
$18.7 million on commodity hedges and $7.4 million on
interest rate hedges recorded in OCI are expected to be
reclassified to expense during the next twelve months.
In July 2008, we paid $87.4 million to terminate certain
out-of-the-money
natural gas and NGL commodity swaps. Prior to the terminations,
these swaps were designated as hedges. Deferred losses of
$27.9 million will be reclassified from OCI as a non-cash
reduction of revenue during 2010 when the hedged forecasted
sales transactions occur. During 2009 and 2008, deferred losses
of $38.8 million and $20.8 million related to the
terminated swaps were reclassified from OCI as a non-cash
reduction to revenue. We also entered into new natural gas and
NGL commodity swaps at then current market prices that match the
production volumes of the terminated swaps through 2010.
In May 2008 we entered into certain NGL derivative contracts
with Lehman Brothers Commodity Services Inc., a subsidiary of
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (Lehman). Due to
Lehmans bankruptcy filing, it is unlikely that we will
receive full or partial payment of any amounts that may become
owed to us under these contracts. Accordingly, we discontinued
hedge accounting treatment for these contracts in July 2008.
Deferred losses of $0.2 million and $0.3 million will
be reclassified from OCI to revenues during 2011 and
F-31
2012 when the forecasted transactions related to these contracts
are expected to occur. During 2008, we recognized a non-cash
mark-to-market
loss on derivatives of $1.3 million to adjust the fair
value of the Lehman derivative contracts to zero. In October
2008, we terminated the Lehman derivative contracts.
See Note 14, Note 17 and Note 22 for additional
disclosures related to derivative instruments and hedging
activity.
|
|
Note 14
|
Related-Party
Transactions
|
Relationships
with Warburg Pincus LLC
Warburg Pincus LLC beneficially owns approximately 74% of our
outstanding voting stock. Warburg Pincus LLC is able to elect
members of TRIs board of directors, appoint new management
and approve any action requiring our approval, including
amendment of TRIs certificate of incorporation and mergers
or sales of substantially all of TRIs assets. The
directors elected by Warburg Pincus LLC will be able to make
decisions affecting TRIs capital structure, including
decisions to issue additional capital stock, implement stock
repurchase programs and declare dividends.
Chansoo Joung and Peter Kagan, two of our directors, are
Managing Directors of Warburg Pincus LLC and are also directors
of Broad Oak Energy, Inc. (Broad Oak) from whom we
buy natural gas and NGL products. Affiliates of Warburg Pincus
LLC own a controlling interest in Broad Oak. We purchased
$9.7 million and $4.8 million of product from Broad
Oak during 2009 and 2008. These transactions were at market
prices consistent with similar transactions with nonaffiliated
entities.
Relationship
with Maritech Resources, Inc.
William D. Sullivan, one of the directors of the General Partner
of the Partnership, is also a director of Tetra Technologies,
Inc. (Tetra). Maritech Resources, Inc.
(Maritech) is a subsidiary of Tetra. We purchased
$1.8 million and $6.0 million of product from Maritech
during 2009 and 2008 with no purchases in 2007. These
transactions were at market prices consistent with similar
transactions with nonaffiliated entities.
Relationships
with Bank of America
Equity
BofA currently holds a 6.5% equity interest in Targa.
Financial
Services
BofA is a lender and an agent under our existing senior secured
credit facilities. Additionally, BofA is a lender and an
administrative agent under the Partnerships senior secured
credit facility.
Hedging
Arrangements
TRI has previously entered into various commodity derivative
transactions with BofA. As of December 31, 2009, TRI had no
open positions with BofA. For the years ended December 31,
2009, 2008 and 2007, TRI received from (paid to) BofA
$24.2 million, ($30.5) million and
($14.2) million in commodity derivative settlements.
The Partnership had the following open commodity derivatives
with BofA as of December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
Commodity
|
|
Daily Volumes
|
|
Average Price
|
|
Index
|
|
Jan 2010Dec 2010
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
3,289 MMBtu
|
|
|
$7
|
.39 per MMBtu
|
|
IF-WAHA
|
Jan 2010Jun 2010
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
663 MMBtu
|
|
|
8
|
.16 per MMBtu
|
|
NY-HH
|
Jan 2010Dec 2010
|
|
Condensate
|
|
181 Bbl
|
|
|
69
|
.28 per Bbl
|
|
NY-WTI
|
As of December 31, 2009 the fair value of these Partnership
open positions was an asset of $0.9 million. During 2009,
2008 and 2007, the Partnership received from (paid to) BofA
$33.5 million, ($22.0) million and $6.9 million
in commodity derivative settlements.
F-32
Commercial
Relationships
We have executed NGL sales and purchase transactions on the spot
market with BofA. For the years 2009, 2008 and 2007, sales to
BofA which were included in revenues totaled $36.7 million,
$97.0 million and $81.2 million. For the same periods,
purchases from BofA were $1.0 million, $5.1 million
and $12.1 million.
Transactions
with Unconsolidated Affiliates
For the years indicated, our natural gas and NGL sales and
purchases with our unconsolidated affiliates were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Included in revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GCF
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
0.5
|
|
|
$
|
4.5
|
|
VESCO(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
|
$
|
1.2
|
|
|
$
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in costs and expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GCF
|
|
$
|
1.4
|
|
|
$
|
3.5
|
|
|
$
|
3.3
|
|
VESCO(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
178.1
|
|
|
|
145.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.4
|
|
|
$
|
181.6
|
|
|
$
|
149.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For 2008, our commercial transactions with VESCO are reflected
through July 31, 2008. As a result of acquiring an
additional ownership in VESCO, they are no longer considered an
unconsolidated affiliate and we have consolidated the operations
of VESCO in our financial results from August 1, 2008. |
These transactions were at market prices consistent with similar
transactions with nonaffiliated entities.
|
|
Note 15
|
Commitments and
Contingencies
|
Certain property and equipment is leased under non-cancelable
leases that require fixed monthly rental payments and expire at
various dates through 2099. Transportation contracts require us
to make payments for capacity and expire at various dates
through 2013. Surface and underground access for gathering,
processing, and distribution assets that are located on property
not owned by us is obtained through
right-of-way
agreements, which require annual rental payments and expire at
various dates through 2099. Future non-cancelable commitments
related to certain contractual obligations are presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Operating lease
obligations(1)
|
|
$
|
55.2
|
|
|
$
|
11.1
|
|
|
$
|
8.7
|
|
|
$
|
8.2
|
|
|
$
|
5.6
|
|
|
$
|
4.8
|
|
|
$
|
16.8
|
|
Capacity
payments(2)
|
|
|
12.4
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Land site lease and
right-of-way(3)
|
|
|
19.9
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
13.1
|
|
Capital
Projects(4)
|
|
|
33.4
|
|
|
|
17.2
|
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
120.9
|
|
|
$
|
35.2
|
|
|
$
|
28.8
|
|
|
$
|
12.5
|
|
|
$
|
8.3
|
|
|
$
|
6.2
|
|
|
$
|
29.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Include minimum lease payment obligations associated with gas
processing plant site leases, railcar leases, and office space
leases. |
|
(2) |
|
Consist of capacity payments for firm transportation contracts. |
|
(3) |
|
Provide for surface and underground access for gathering,
processing, and distribution assets that are located on property
not owned by us; agreements expire at various dates through 2099. |
F-33
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Primarily relate to Versado Gas Processors, L.L.C.
(Versado) remediation projects. See Environmental
section below. |
Total expenses related to operating leases, capacity payments
and land site lease and
right-of-way
agreements were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
$
|
13.7
|
|
|
$
|
14.7
|
|
|
$
|
16.4
|
|
Capacity payments
|
|
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Land site lease and
right-of-way
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
Environmental
For environmental matters, we record liabilities when remedial
efforts are probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated.
Environmental reserves do not reflect managements
assessment of the insurance coverage that may be applicable to
the matters at issue. Management has assessed each of the
matters based on current information and made a judgment
concerning its potential outcome, considering the nature of the
claim, the amount and nature of damages sought and the
probability of success.
Our environmental liability at December 31, 2009 and 2008
was $3.2 million and $3.8 million. Our
December 31, 2009 liability consisted of $0.2 million
for gathering system leaks, $1.5 million for ground water
assessment and remediation, and $1.5 million for the gas
processing plant environmental violations.
In May 2007, the New Mexico Environment Department
(NMED) alleged air emissions violations at the
Eunice, Monument and Saunders gas processing plants operated by
Targa Midstream Services Limited Partnership and owned by
Versado, which were identified in the course of an inspection of
the Eunice plant conducted by the NMED in August 2005.
Subsequent event. In January 2010, Versado
settled the alleged violations with NMED for a penalty of
approximately $1.5 million. As part of the settlement,
Versado agreed to install two acid gas injection wells,
additional emission control equipment and monitoring equipment,
the cost of which we estimate to be approximately
$33.4 million.
Legal
Proceedings
We are a party to various legal proceedings
and/or
regulatory proceedings and certain claims, suits and complaints
arising in the ordinary course of business have been filed or
are pending against us. We believe all such matters are without
merit or involve amounts which, if resolved unfavorably, would
not have a material effect on our financial position, results of
operations, or cash flows, except for the items more fully
described below.
On December 8, 2005, WTG Gas Processing (WTG)
filed suit in the 333rd District Court of Harris County,
Texas against several defendants, including TRI and two other
Targa entities and private equity funds affiliated with Warburg
Pincus LLC, seeking damages from the defendants. The suit
alleges that TRI and private equity funds affiliated with
Warburg Pincus LLC, along with ConocoPhillips Company
(ConocoPhillips) and Morgan Stanley, tortiously
interfered with (i) a contract WTG claims to have had to
purchase the SAOU System from ConocoPhillips and
(ii) prospective business relations of WTG. WTG claims the
alleged interference resulted from TRIs competition to
purchase the ConocoPhillips assets and its successful
acquisition of those assets in 2004. In October 2007, the
District Court granted defendants motions for summary
judgment on all of WTGs claims. In February 2010, the 14th
Court of Appeals affirmed the District Courts final
judgment in favor of defendants in its entirety. WTGs
appeal is pending before the Texas Supreme Court, and we intend
to contest the appeal, but can give no assurances regarding the
outcome of the proceeding. We have agreed to indemnify the
Partnership for any claim or liability arising out of the WTG
suit.
F-34
|
|
Note 16
|
Fair Value of
Financial Instruments
|
The estimated fair values of our assets and liabilities
classified as financial instruments have been determined using
available market information and valuation methodologies
described below. Considerable judgment is required in
interpreting market data to develop the estimates of fair value.
The use of different market assumptions or valuation
methodologies may have a material effect on the estimated fair
value amounts.
The carrying value of the TRI and the Partnership credit
facilities approximates their fair values, as the interest rates
are based on prevailing market rates. The fair value of the
Holdco loan facility, the senior secured term loan facility and
the senior unsecured notes are based on quoted market prices
based on trades of such debt.
The carrying values of items comprising current assets and
current liabilities approximate fair values due to the
short-term maturities of these instruments. Derivative financial
instruments included in our financial statements are stated at
fair value. The carrying amounts and fair values of our other
financial instruments are as follows as of the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
Carrying
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Value
|
|
Amount
|
|
Value
|
|
Holdco loan facility
|
|
$
|
385.4
|
|
|
$
|
278.9
|
|
|
$
|
424.1
|
|
|
$
|
212.0
|
|
Senior secured term loan facility
|
|
|
62.2
|
|
|
|
55.0
|
|
|
|
522.2
|
|
|
|
331.6
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
81/2%
fixed
rate(1)
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
248.8
|
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
134.4
|
|
Senior unsecured notes of the Partnership,
81/4%
fixed rate
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
|
|
206.5
|
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
|
|
128.3
|
|
Senior unsecured notes of the Partnership,
111/4%
fixed rate
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
|
|
253.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The fair value as of December 31, 2009 represents the value
of the last trade of the year which occurred on December 9,
2009. On January 5, 2010 we paid $264.7 million to
complete a cash tender offer for all outstanding aggregate
principal amount plus accrued interest of $3.8 million. |
|
|
Note 17
|
Fair Value
Measurements
|
We categorize the inputs to the fair value of our financial
assets and liabilities using a three-tier fair value hierarchy
that prioritizes the significant inputs used in measuring fair
value:
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1observable inputs such as quoted prices
in active markets;
|
|
|
|
Level 2inputs other than quoted prices in
active markets that are either directly or indirectly
observable; and
|
|
|
|
Level 3unobservable inputs in which little or
no market data exists, therefore requiring an entity to develop
its own assumptions.
|
Our derivative instruments consist of financially settled
commodity and interest rate swap and option contracts and fixed
price commodity contracts with certain customers. We determine
the value of our derivative contracts utilizing a discounted
cash flow model for swaps and a standard option pricing model
for options, based on inputs that are readily available in
public markets. We have consistently applied these valuation
techniques in all periods presented and believe we have obtained
the most accurate information available for the types of
derivative contracts we hold.
The following tables set forth, by level within the fair value
hierarchy, our financial assets and liabilities measured at fair
value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2009 and
2008. These financial assets and liabilities are classified in
their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is
significant to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the
significance of a particular input to the fair value
F-35
measurement requires judgment, and may affect the valuation of
the fair value assets and liabilities and their placement within
the fair value hierarchy levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
|
Level 2
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
|
Assets from commodity derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
44.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
44.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Assets from interest rate derivatives
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
46.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
46.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities from commodity derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
60.3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
46.6
|
|
|
$
|
13.7
|
|
Liabilities from interest rate derivatives
|
|
|
12.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
$
|
73.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
59.3
|
|
|
$
|
13.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2008
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
|
Level 2
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
|
Assets from commodity derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
202.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
53.9
|
|
|
$
|
148.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
202.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
53.9
|
|
|
$
|
148.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities from commodity derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Liabilities from interest rate derivatives
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
$
|
21.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
21.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table sets forth a reconciliation of the changes
in the fair value of our financial instruments classified as
Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives
|
|
|
|
Contracts
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
(124.2
|
)
|
Unrealized gains (losses) included in OCI
|
|
|
149.6
|
|
Purchases
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
Terminations
|
|
|
77.8
|
|
Settlements
|
|
|
41.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2008
|
|
|
148.2
|
|
Unrealized gains (losses) included in OCI
|
|
|
(57.1
|
)
|
Settlements
|
|
|
(35.0
|
)
|
Transfers out of
Level 3(1)
|
|
|
(69.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
(13.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
During 2009, we reclassified certain of our NGL derivative
contracts from Level 3 (unobservable inputs in which little
or no market data exists) to Level 2 as we were able to
obtain directly observable inputs other than quoted prices in
active markets. |
Our provisions for income taxes for the periods indicated are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Current expense
|
|
$
|
1.6
|
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
Deferred expense
|
|
|
19.1
|
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
20.7
|
|
|
$
|
19.3
|
|
|
$
|
23.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-36
Our deferred income tax assets and liabilities at
December 31, 2009 and 2008 consist of differences related
to the timing of recognition of certain types of costs as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating loss
|
|
$
|
60.1
|
|
|
$
|
68.6
|
|
Commodity hedging contracts and other
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax credits
|
|
|
16.8
|
|
|
|
16.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83.2
|
|
|
|
85.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments(1)
|
|
|
(132.8
|
)
|
|
|
(125.9
|
)
|
Commodity hedging contracts and other
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
(22.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(134.6
|
)
|
|
|
(148.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax liability
|
|
$
|
(51.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(63.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
(60.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(73.7
|
)
|
Foreign
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
State
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(51.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(63.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance sheet classification of deferred tax assets
(liabilities):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current asset
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Long-term asset
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liability
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
(36.2
|
)
|
Long-term liability
|
|
|
(50.0
|
)
|
|
|
(26.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(51.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(63.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Our deferred tax liability attributable to investments reflects
the differences between the book and tax carrying values of the
assets and liabilities of our wholly-owned partnerships and
equity method investments. |
As of December 31, 2009, for federal income tax purposes,
we had carryforwards of approximately $208 million of
regular tax net operating losses (NOL) and
$83 million of alternative minimum tax NOL. The NOL
carryforwards expire in 2029.
Set forth below is reconciliation between our income tax
provision (benefit) computed at the United States statutory rate
on income before income taxes and the income tax provision in
the accompanying consolidated statements of operations for the
periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
U.S. federal income tax provision at statutory rate
|
|
$
|
35.0
|
|
|
$
|
53.8
|
|
|
$
|
44.0
|
|
State income taxes
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
(4.9
|
)
|
Attributable to Noncontrolling Interest
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
|
|
(34.3
|
)
|
|
|
(16.8
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax provision
|
|
$
|
20.7
|
|
|
$
|
19.3
|
|
|
$
|
23.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have not identified any uncertain tax positions. We believe
that our income tax filing positions and deductions will be
sustained on audit and do not anticipate any adjustments that
will result in a material
F-37
adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations
or cash flow. Therefore, no reserves for uncertain income tax
positions have been recorded.
|
|
Note 19
|
Segment
Information
|
Our operations are presented under four reportable segments:
(1) Field Gathering and Processing, (2) Coastal
Gathering and Processing, (3) Logistics Assets and
(4) Marketing and Distribution. The financial results of
our hedging activities are reported in Other.
The Natural Gas Gathering and Processing division includes
assets used in the gathering of natural gas produced from oil
and gas wells and processing this raw natural gas into
merchantable natural gas by extracting natural gas liquids and
removing impurities. The Field Gathering and Processing segment
assets are located in North Texas and the Permian Basin and the
Coastal Gathering and Processing segment assets are located in
the onshore region of the Louisiana Gulf Coast and the Gulf of
Mexico.
The NGL Logistics and Marketing division is also referred to as
our Downstream Business. It includes all the activities
necessary to convert raw natural gas liquids into NGL products,
market the finished products and provide certain value added
services.
The Logistics Assets segment is involved in transporting and
storing mixed NGLs and fractionating, storing, and transporting
finished NGLs. These assets are generally connected to and
supplied, in part, by our gathering and processing segments and
are predominantly located in Mont Belvieu, Texas and
Southwestern Louisiana.
The Marketing and Distribution segment covers all activities
required to distribute and market raw and finished natural gas
liquids and all natural gas marketing activities. It includes
(1) marketing our own natural gas liquids production and
purchasing natural gas liquids products in selected
United States markets; (2) providing liquefied
petroleum gas balancing services to refinery customers;
(3) transporting, storing and selling propane and providing
related propane logistics services to multi-state retailers,
independent retailers and other end users; and
(4) marketing natural gas available to us from our
Gathering and Processing segments and the purchase and resale of
natural gas in selected United States markets.
The Other segment contains the results of our derivatives and
hedging transactions. Eliminations of inter-segment transactions
are reflected in the eliminations column.
Our reportable segment information is shown in the following
tables:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
Field
|
|
|
Coastal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Logistics
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
192.4
|
|
|
$
|
392.0
|
|
|
$
|
79.8
|
|
|
$
|
3,802.1
|
|
|
$
|
69.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,536.0
|
|
Intersegment revenues
|
|
|
780.1
|
|
|
|
520.8
|
|
|
|
79.6
|
|
|
|
337.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,718.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
972.5
|
|
|
|
912.8
|
|
|
|
159.4
|
|
|
|
4,139.6
|
|
|
|
69.7
|
|
|
|
(1,718.0
|
)
|
|
|
4,536.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
$
|
184.2
|
|
|
$
|
89.1
|
|
|
$
|
77.5
|
|
|
$
|
89.4
|
|
|
$
|
69.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
509.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other financial information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
1,770.9
|
|
|
|
497.9
|
|
|
|
414.3
|
|
|
|
450.7
|
|
|
|
65.2
|
|
|
|
168.5
|
|
|
|
3,367.5
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
53.4
|
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
15.8
|
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101.9
|
|
F-38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
Field
|
|
|
Coastal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Logistics
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
415.8
|
|
|
$
|
781.4
|
|
|
$
|
69.1
|
|
|
$
|
6,797.7
|
|
|
$
|
(65.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,998.9
|
|
Intersegment revenues
|
|
|
1,530.8
|
|
|
|
735.5
|
|
|
|
103.4
|
|
|
|
619.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,989.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
1,946.6
|
|
|
|
1,516.9
|
|
|
|
172.5
|
|
|
|
7,417.2
|
|
|
|
(65.1
|
)
|
|
|
(2,989.2
|
)
|
|
|
7,998.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
|
385.4
|
|
|
|
103.7
|
|
|
|
40.0
|
|
|
|
41.2
|
|
|
|
(65.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
505.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other financial information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
1,938.7
|
|
|
|
529.8
|
|
|
|
421.6
|
|
|
|
365.6
|
|
|
|
220.6
|
|
|
|
165.5
|
|
|
|
3,641.8
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
82.7
|
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
|
|
37.2
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
145.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
Field
|
|
|
Coastal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Logistics
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
331.1
|
|
|
$
|
577.3
|
|
|
$
|
53.5
|
|
|
$
|
6,336.6
|
|
|
$
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,297.2
|
|
Intersegment revenues
|
|
|
1,299.7
|
|
|
|
691.7
|
|
|
|
81.0
|
|
|
|
391.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,464.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
1,630.8
|
|
|
|
1,269.0
|
|
|
|
134.5
|
|
|
|
6,728.5
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
(2,464.3
|
)
|
|
|
7,297.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
$
|
321.2
|
|
|
$
|
87.0
|
|
|
$
|
32.7
|
|
|
$
|
85.0
|
|
|
$
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
524.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other financial information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
1,863.5
|
|
|
|
402.2
|
|
|
|
403.3
|
|
|
|
940.3
|
|
|
|
61.8
|
|
|
|
124.0
|
|
|
|
3,795.1
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
64.0
|
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
34.2
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
118.5
|
|
The following table shows our revenues by product and services
for each period presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Natural gas sales
|
|
$
|
809.4
|
|
|
$
|
1,590.3
|
|
|
$
|
1,229.1
|
|
NGL sales
|
|
|
3,365.3
|
|
|
|
6,148.4
|
|
|
|
5,826.3
|
|
Condensate sales
|
|
|
95.5
|
|
|
|
131.5
|
|
|
|
99.5
|
|
Fractionation and treating fees
|
|
|
58.5
|
|
|
|
66.8
|
|
|
|
52.6
|
|
Storage and terminalling fees
|
|
|
41.0
|
|
|
|
33.0
|
|
|
|
30.2
|
|
Transportation fees
|
|
|
43.4
|
|
|
|
39.2
|
|
|
|
33.7
|
|
Gas processing fees
|
|
|
24.0
|
|
|
|
22.0
|
|
|
|
22.6
|
|
Hedge settlements
|
|
|
69.7
|
|
|
|
(65.1
|
)
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Business interruption insurance
|
|
|
21.5
|
|
|
|
32.9
|
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
Other
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
(8.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,536.0
|
|
|
$
|
7,998.9
|
|
|
$
|
7,297.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-39
The following table is a reconciliation of operating margin to
net income for each period presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Reconciliation of operating margin to net income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
$
|
509.9
|
|
|
$
|
505.2
|
|
|
$
|
524.6
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
(170.3
|
)
|
|
|
(160.9
|
)
|
|
|
(148.1
|
)
|
General and administrative expense
|
|
|
(120.4
|
)
|
|
|
(96.4
|
)
|
|
|
(96.3
|
)
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(132.1
|
)
|
|
|
(141.2
|
)
|
|
|
(162.3
|
)
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(20.7
|
)
|
|
|
(19.3
|
)
|
|
|
(23.9
|
)
|
Other, net
|
|
|
12.7
|
|
|
|
47.0
|
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
79.1
|
|
|
$
|
134.4
|
|
|
$
|
104.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 20
|
Other Operating
Income
|
Our other operating (income) expense consists of the following
items for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Abandoned project costs
|
|
$
|
5.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Casualty loss (gain) adjustment (see Note 11)
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
19.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss (gain) on sale of
assets(1)
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
(5.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.0
|
|
|
$
|
13.4
|
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For 2008, $5.8 million of the gain on sale of assets was
due to a like-kind exchange. See Note 21. |
|
|
Note 21
|
Supplemental Cash
Flow Information
|
The following table provides supplemental cash flow information
for each period presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Cash:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid
|
|
$
|
82.4
|
|
|
$
|
94.2
|
|
|
$
|
133.6
|
|
Income taxes paid (received)
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
Business interruption insurance receipts
|
|
|
19.2
|
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
Non-cash:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory line-fill transferred to property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Like-kind exchange of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid-in-kind
interest refinanced to Holdco principal
|
|
|
25.9
|
|
|
|
38.2
|
|
|
|
19.3
|
|
Settlement of Partnership notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution of property to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 22
|
Significant Risks
and Uncertainties
|
Nature of
Operations in Midstream Energy Industry
We operate in the midstream energy industry. Our business
activities include gathering, transporting, processing,
fractionating and storage of natural gas, NGLs and crude oil.
Our results of operations, cash flows and financial condition
may be affected by (i) changes in the commodity prices of
these hydrocarbon products and (ii) changes in the relative
price levels among these hydrocarbon products. In general, the
prices of natural gas, NGLs, condensate and other hydrocarbon
products are subject to
F-40
fluctuations in response to changes in supply, market
uncertainty and a variety of additional factors that are beyond
our control.
Our profitability could be impacted by a decline in the volume
of natural gas, NGLs and condensate transported, gathered or
processed at our facilities. A material decrease in natural gas
or condensate production or condensate refining, as a result of
depressed commodity prices, a decrease in exploration and
development activities or otherwise, could result in a decline
in the volume of natural gas, NGLs and condensate handled by our
facilities.
A reduction in demand for NGL products by the petrochemical,
refining or heating industries, whether because of
(i) general economic conditions, (ii) reduced demand
by consumers for the end products made with NGL products,
(iii) increased competition from petroleum-based products
due to the pricing differences, (iv) adverse weather
conditions, (v) government regulations affecting commodity
prices and production levels of hydrocarbons or the content of
motor gasoline or (vi) other reasons, could also adversely
affect our results of operations, cash flows and financial
position.
Our principal market risks are our exposure to changes in
commodity prices, particularly to the prices of natural gas and
NGLs, as well as changes in interest rates. The fair value of
our commodity and interest rate derivative instruments,
depending on the type of instrument, was determined by the use
of present value methods or standard option valuation models
with assumptions about commodity prices based on those observed
in underlying markets. These contracts may expose us to the risk
of financial loss in certain circumstances. Our hedging
arrangements provide us protection on the hedged volumes if
prices decline below the prices at which these hedges are set.
If prices rise above the prices at which we have hedged, we will
receive less revenue on the hedged volumes than we would receive
in the absence of hedges.
Commodity Price Risk. A majority of the
revenues from our natural gas gathering and processing business
are derived from
percent-of-proceeds
contracts under which we receive a portion of the natural gas
and/or NGLs
or equity volumes, as payment for services. The prices of
natural gas and NGLs are subject to market fluctuations in
response to changes in supply, demand, market uncertainty and a
variety of additional factors beyond our control. We monitor
these risks and enter into commodity derivative transactions
designed to mitigate the impact of commodity price fluctuations
on our business. Cash flows from a derivative instrument
designated as a hedge are classified in the same category as the
cash flows from the item being hedged.
In an effort to reduce the variability of our cash flows we have
hedged the commodity price associated with a significant portion
of our expected natural gas, NGL and condensate equity volumes
for the years 2010 through 2013 by entering into derivative
financial instruments including swaps and purchased puts (or
floors). The percentages of our expected equity volumes that are
hedged decrease over time. With swaps, we typically receive an
agreed upon fixed price for a specified notional quantity of
natural gas or NGL and we pay the hedge counterparty a floating
price for that same quantity based upon published index prices.
Since we receive from our customers substantially the same
floating index price from the sale of the underlying physical
commodity, these transactions are designed to effectively
lock-in the agreed fixed price in advance for the volumes
hedged. In order to avoid having a greater volume hedged than
our actual equity volumes, we typically limit our use of swaps
to hedge the prices of less than our expected natural gas and
NGL equity volumes. We utilize purchased puts (or floors) to
hedge additional expected equity commodity volumes without
creating volumetric risk. Our commodity hedges may expose us to
the risk of financial loss in certain circumstances. Our hedging
arrangements provide us protection on the hedged volumes if
market prices decline below the prices at which these hedges are
set. If market prices rise above the prices at which we have
hedged, we will receive less revenue on the hedged volumes than
we would receive in the absence of hedges.
Interest Rate Risk. We are exposed to changes
in interest rates, primarily as a result of our variable rate
borrowings under our credit facility. In an effort to reduce the
variability of our cash flows, we have entered into several
interest rate swap and interest rate basis swap agreements.
Under these agreements,
F-41
which are accounted for as cash flow hedges, the base interest
rate on the specified notional amount of our variable rate debt
is effectively fixed for the term of each agreement.
Counterparty
RiskCredit and Concentration
Financial instruments which potentially subject us to
concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of commodity
derivative instruments and trade accounts receivable.
Derivative
Counterparty Risk
Where we are exposed to credit risk in our financial instrument
transactions, management analyzes the counterpartys
financial condition prior to entering into an agreement,
establishes credit
and/or
margin limits and monitors the appropriateness of these limits
on an ongoing basis. Generally, management does not require
collateral and does not anticipate nonperformance by our
counterparties.
We have master netting agreements with most of our hedge
counterparties. These netting agreements allow us to net settle
asset and liability positions with the same counterparties. As
of December 31, 2009, we had $7.4 million in
liabilities to offset the default risk of counterparties with
which we also had asset positions of $25.9 million as of
that date.
Our credit exposure related to commodity derivative instruments
is represented by the fair value of contracts with a net
positive fair value to us at the reporting date. At such times,
these outstanding instruments expose us to credit loss in the
event of nonperformance by the counterparties to the agreements.
Should the creditworthiness of one or more of our counterparties
decline, our ability to mitigate nonperformance risk is limited
to a counterparty agreeing to either a voluntary termination and
subsequent cash settlement or a novation of the derivative
contract to a third party. In the event of a counterparty
default, we may sustain a loss and our cash receipts could be
negatively impacted.
As of December 31, 2009, affiliates of Goldman Sachs and
Bank of America (BofA) accounted for 93% and 5% of
our counterparty credit exposure related to commodity derivative
instruments. Goldman Sachs and BofA are major financial
institutions, each possessing investment grade credit ratings
based upon minimum credit ratings assigned by
Standard & Poors Ratings Services.
Customer Credit
Risk
We extend credit to customers and other parties in the normal
course of business. We have established various procedures to
manage our credit exposure, including initial credit approvals,
credit limits and terms, letters of credit, and rights of
offset. We also use prepayments and guarantees to limit credit
risk to ensure that our established credit criteria are met. The
following table summarizes the activity affecting our allowance
for bad debts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
Balance at beginning of period
|
|
$
|
9.4
|
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
|
$
|
0.8
|
|
Additions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Deductions
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Write-offs
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
$
|
8.0
|
|
|
$
|
9.4
|
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Significant
Commercial Relationships
We are exposed to concentration risk when a significant customer
or supplier accounts for a significant portion of our business
activity. The following table lists the percentage of our
consolidated sales
F-42
or purchases with customers and suppliers which accounted for
more than 10% of our consolidated revenues and consolidated
product purchases for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
% of consolidated revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chevron Phillips Chemical Company LLC
|
|
|
15
|
%
|
|
|
19
|
%
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
% of consolidated product
purchases:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louis Dreyfus Energy Services L.P.
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
|
|
9
|
%
|
|
|
13
|
%
|
Casualties and
Other Risks
We maintain coverage in various insurance programs, which
provide us with property damage, business interruption and other
coverages which are customary for the nature and scope of our
operations. The financial impact of storm events such as
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and more recently Hurricanes Gustav
and Ike, as well as the current economic environment, have
affected many insurance carriers, and may affect their ability
to meet their obligation or trigger limitations in certain
insurance coverages. At present, there is no indication of any
of our insurance carriers being unable or unwilling to meet its
coverage obligations.
We believe that we maintain adequate insurance coverage,
although insurance will not cover every type of interruption
that might occur. As a result of insurance market conditions,
premiums and deductibles for certain insurance policies have
increased substantially, and in some instances, certain
insurance may become unavailable, or available for only reduced
amounts of coverage. As a result, we may not be able to renew
existing insurance policies or procure other desirable insurance
on commercially reasonable terms, if at all.
If we were to incur a significant liability for which we were
not fully insured, it could have a material impact on our
consolidated financial position and results of operations. In
addition, the proceeds of any such insurance may not be paid in
a timely manner and may be insufficient if such an event were to
occur. Any event that interrupts the revenues generated by our
consolidated operations, or which causes us to make significant
expenditures not covered by insurance, could reduce our ability
to meet our obligations under various agreements with our
lenders.
|
|
Note 23
|
Restatement of
Consolidated Balance Sheets, Statement of Changes in
Owners Equity and Statements of Comprehensive Income
(Loss)
|
We determined that we had incorrectly accounted for certain
changes in our ownership interest in underlying equity of the
Partnership and restated our controlling and noncontrolling
interest applicable to the Partnership. Under our previous
accounting, noncontrolling interest consisted primarily of the
investment by partners other than TRI Resources Inc., including
those partners share of net income, distributions and
accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) of the
Partnership. The noncontrolling interest and additional paid-in
capital of the Company, however, were not adjusted for changes
in the equity of the Partnership that occurred as a result of
transactions by the Partnership in its sale of additional common
units and acquisitions of assets, liabilities and operations
from the Company.
Under the restated accounting, controlling and noncontrolling
interest will equal their percentage share of the underlying
owners equity of the Partnership at any given balance
sheet date. The restated accounting changes how notional gains
and losses related to the transactions described above are
reported in our owners equity. The restated accounting
includes these gains and losses as adjustments to additional
paid-in capital and are presented in our statement of changes in
owners equity as Impact from equity transactions of
the Partnership. We continue to report the apportionment
of net income (loss) between Targa and the noncontrolling
interest based on relative ownership shares adjusted quarterly
for the impact of any general partner incentive distributions.
F-43
We have reported the restatement in the accompanying financial
statements. We applied the restatement retrospectively to the
inception of the Partnership in February 2007. The impact of the
restatement is to increase additional paid-in capital with a
corresponding reduction in noncontrolling interest of $259.4,
$262.3, and $262.7 million at December 31, 2009, 2008
and 2007. Additionally, as a result of such restatements,
previously accrued dividends on preferred stock have been
recorded as reductions to additional paid-in capital and
accumulated deficit. The accrued preferred dividends have also
been reclassified from long-term liabilities to preferred stock.
There was no impact to our previously reported consolidated
statements of operations, consolidated statements of
comprehensive income, consolidated statements of cash flows,
total assets, total liabilities or total equity.
The following tables summarize the effects of the restatement on
our previously issued financial statements for the year ended
December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related to
|
|
|
Related to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ownership
|
|
|
Preferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Reported
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
As Restated
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
2,345.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(41.0
|
)
|
|
|
2,304.2
|
|
Preferred Stock
|
|
|
267.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41.0
|
|
|
|
308.4
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
259.4
|
|
|
|
(70.0
|
)
|
|
|
194.0
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(155.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70.0
|
|
|
|
(85.8
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(20.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20.3
|
)
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Targa Resources Corp. Stockholders equity
|
|
|
(172.0
|
)
|
|
|
259.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87.4
|
|
Noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries
|
|
|
926.9
|
|
|
|
(259.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
667.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total owners equity
|
|
|
754.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
754.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and owners equity
|
|
$
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related to
|
|
|
Related to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ownership
|
|
|
Preferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
As Restated
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
3,641.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,641.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
2,552.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23.2
|
)
|
|
|
2,529.2
|
|
Preferred Stock
|
|
|
267.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23.2
|
|
|
|
290.6
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
|
|
262.3
|
|
|
|
(52.4
|
)
|
|
|
214.2
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(167.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52.4
|
|
|
|
(115.1
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
36.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36.1
|
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Targa Resources Corp. Stockholders equity
|
|
|
(127.6
|
)
|
|
|
262.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
134.7
|
|
Noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries
|
|
|
949.6
|
|
|
|
(262.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
687.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total owners equity
|
|
|
822.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
822.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and owners equity
|
|
$
|
3,641.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,641.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
Adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related to
|
|
|
Related to
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ownership
|
|
|
Preferred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Dividends
|
|
|
As Restated
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
3,795.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,795.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
2,953.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6.4
|
)
|
|
|
2,947.2
|
|
Preferred Stock
|
|
|
267.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
273.8
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
262.7
|
|
|
|
(35.5
|
)
|
|
|
230.4
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(187.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35.5
|
|
|
|
(152.4
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(56.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(56.3
|
)
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Targa Resources Corp. Stockholders equity
|
|
|
(241.0
|
)
|
|
|
262.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21.7
|
|
Noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries
|
|
|
815.1
|
|
|
|
(262.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
552.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total owners equity
|
|
|
574.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
574.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and owners equity
|
|
$
|
3,795.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,795.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additionally, in our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive
income, we incorrectly applied other comprehensive income (loss)
items attributable to Targa Resources Corp. to net income rather
than net income attributable to Targa Resources Corp. The
following table summarizes the amounts as reported and
F-45
as restated in our Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive
Income (Loss) for the years ended December 31, 2009 and
2008 related to this correction:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Year Ended
|
|
|
For The Year Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
As Reported
|
|
|
As Restated
|
|
|
As Reported
|
|
|
As Restated
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
79.1
|
|
|
|
NR
|
|
|
$
|
134.4
|
|
|
|
NR
|
|
Net income attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
NR
|
|
|
$
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
NR
|
|
|
$
|
37.3
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources
Corp.
|
|
$
|
51.0
|
|
|
$
|
(27.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
21.5
|
|
|
$
|
129.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
$
|
22.7
|
|
|
$
|
(55.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
226.8
|
|
|
$
|
335.0
|
|
|
|
|
NR |
|
This financial statement caption not reported on the As
Reported or As Restated consolidated statement
of comprehensive income as indicated above. |
|
|
Note 24
|
Subsequent Events
(Unaudited)
|
Distribution to
Series B Shareholders
On November 22, 2010, we paid an $18.0 million
distribution to the Series B preferred shareholders. The
cash distribution represents a portion of the accreted value of
the Series B stock included in our December 31, 2009
balance sheet.
Initial Public
Offering
In connection with our initial public offering
(IPO), the following occurred:
|
|
|
|
|
On December 6, 2010, the pricing of our common shares being
sold in our IPO was set at $22.00 per common share, less
underwriting discounts and commissions of $1.21 per common
share, providing net proceeds to the selling stockholders of
$20.79 per common share. We will not receive any proceeds from
this offering.
|
|
|
|
On December 6, 2010, our Board of Directors approved a 1
for 2.03 reverse stock split of our common stock and a
proportional adjustment to the existing conversion ratio for the
Series B Stock upon the pricing of our common shares in
connection with our IPO. The reverse stock split will be
effective prior to the closing of our IPO.
|
|
|
|
On December 6, 2010, the Compensation Committee approved
initial awards of an aggregate 1.35 million shares of
restricted stock under the New Incentive Plan to employees,
including our named executive officers. Additionally, the
Compensation Committee approved a bonus award of 556,514 common
shares and $3 million cash to the executive team in
connection with the IPO. The incentive awards related to our IPO
will result in approximately $14.2 million in additional
compensation expense that will be recorded in the fourth quarter
of 2010.
|
|
|
Note 25
|
Pro Forma
Earnings per Share (Unaudited)
|
Pro Forma
Earnings per Share (Unaudited) for Reverse Stock Split
The following table presents pro forma basic and diluted net
income per share of common stock and the basic and diluted pro
forma weighted average shares outstanding (unaudited) (in
millions) after
F-46
giving effect to the 1 for 2.03 reverse stock split that was
approved by the Board of Directors on December 6, 2010 and
will become effective upon the closing of the initial public
offering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Pro forma net income available per common share
basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Pro forma weighted average shares outstanding basic
and diluted
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
Pro Forma
Earnings per Share (Unaudited) for Reverse Stock Split and
Preferred Conversion
Pro forma basic and diluted net income per share of common stock
(unaudited) has been computed to give effect to (a) the 1
for 2.03 reverse stock split that was approved by the Board of
Directors on December 6, 2010 and will become effective
upon the closing of the initial public offering and (b) the
assumed conversion of the Series B stock into common stock
as if it had occurred on January 1, 2009. The unaudited pro
forma basic and diluted net loss per share does not give effect
to the issuance of shares under the new long term incentive plan
that occurred in connection with the initial public offering.
Also, the numerator in the pro forma basic and diluted net loss
per share calculation has been adjusted to remove the dividends
on Series B stock and the undistributed earnings
attributable to preferred shareholders as these events would not
have occurred if the conversion of the Series B stock to
common shares had occurred at the beginning of the period.
The following table sets forth the computation of our pro forma
basic and diluted net income per share of common stock
(unaudited) (in millions, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Net income available to common shareholders (historical)
|
|
$
|
|
|
Dividends on Series B Preferred Stock
|
|
|
17.8
|
|
Undistributed earnings attributable to preferred shareholders
|
|
|
11.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
$
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in computing net loss per common
share, basic and diluted
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
Pro forma share adjustments to reflect conversion of
Series B stock
|
|
|
35.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in computing pro forma net income
per share, basic
|
|
|
39.2
|
|
Shares related to non-vested restricted stock and options
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in computing pro forma net income
per share, diluted
|
|
|
39.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income per share of common stock, basic
|
|
$
|
0.75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income per share of common stock, diluted
|
|
$
|
0.74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-47
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Historical
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
Historical
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(unaudited) (In millions)
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
350.0
|
|
|
$
|
332.0
|
|
|
$
|
252.4
|
|
Trade receivables, net of allowances of $7.8 million and
$8.0 million
|
|
|
350.5
|
|
|
|
350.5
|
|
|
|
404.3
|
|
Inventory
|
|
|
55.0
|
|
|
|
55.0
|
|
|
|
39.4
|
|
Assets from risk management activities
|
|
|
37.9
|
|
|
|
37.9
|
|
|
|
32.9
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
803.7
|
|
|
|
785.7
|
|
|
|
745.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, at cost
|
|
|
3,276.3
|
|
|
|
3,276.3
|
|
|
|
3,193.3
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(781.4
|
)
|
|
|
(781.4
|
)
|
|
|
(645.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
2,494.9
|
|
|
|
2,494.9
|
|
|
|
2,548.1
|
|
Long-term assets from risk management activities
|
|
|
27.5
|
|
|
|
27.5
|
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
Other long-term assets
|
|
|
133.9
|
|
|
|
133.9
|
|
|
|
60.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
3,460.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,442.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND OWNERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
174.0
|
|
|
$
|
174.0
|
|
|
$
|
206.4
|
|
Accrued liabilities
|
|
|
314.5
|
|
|
|
314.5
|
|
|
|
304.3
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
Liabilities from risk management activities
|
|
|
20.5
|
|
|
|
20.5
|
|
|
|
29.2
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
525.0
|
|
|
|
525.0
|
|
|
|
553.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
|
|
1,593.5
|
|
Long-term liabilities from risk management activities
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
43.8
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
84.6
|
|
|
|
84.6
|
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
66.9
|
|
|
|
66.9
|
|
|
|
63.1
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (see Note 11)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible cumulative participating series B preferred
stock ($0.001 par value; 10.0 million shares
authorized, 6.4 million shares issued and outstanding at
September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 and zero
shares issued and outstanding on a pro forma basis as of
September 30, 2010)
|
|
|
96.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
308.4
|
|
Owners equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp. stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock ($0.001 par value, 90.0 million shares
authorized, 10.4 million and 8.0 million issued and
outstanding at September 30, 2010 and December 31,
2009 and 40.5 million shares outstanding on a pro forma
basis as of September 30, 2010)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
151.4
|
|
|
|
230.2
|
|
|
|
194.0
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(93.0
|
)
|
|
|
(93.0
|
)
|
|
|
(85.8
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
(20.3
|
)
|
Treasury stock, at cost
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Targa Resources Corp. stockholders equity
|
|
|
58.8
|
|
|
|
137.6
|
|
|
|
87.4
|
|
Noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries
|
|
|
935.5
|
|
|
|
935.5
|
|
|
|
667.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total owners equity
|
|
|
994.3
|
|
|
|
1,073.1
|
|
|
|
754.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and owners equity
|
|
$
|
3,460.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,442.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,367.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-48
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(in millions, except per common share data)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
3,942.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,145.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product purchases
|
|
|
3,387.6
|
|
|
|
2,624.9
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
190.4
|
|
|
|
182.7
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
136.9
|
|
|
|
127.9
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
81.0
|
|
|
|
83.6
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,795.5
|
|
|
|
3,020.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
146.5
|
|
|
|
124.1
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(83.9
|
)
|
|
|
(102.8
|
)
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Gain (Loss) on debt repurchases (see Note 5)
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
Gain (Loss) on early debt extinguishment (See Note 5)
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
Gain (Loss) on
mark-to-market
derivative instruments
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
57.5
|
|
|
|
35.8
|
|
Income tax (expense) benefit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
Deferred
|
|
|
(17.6
|
)
|
|
|
(4.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18.5
|
)
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
39.0
|
|
|
|
30.7
|
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
17.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
13.0
|
|
Dividends on Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
(8.4
|
)
|
|
|
(13.2
|
)
|
Distributions to common equivalents
|
|
|
(177.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss available to common shareholders
|
|
|
(193.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss available per common share
|
|
$
|
(21.51
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.03
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding basic and diluted
|
|
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
7.8
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-49
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(in millions)
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
$
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
13.0
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to Targa
Resources Corp.:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity hedging contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value
|
|
|
43.9
|
|
|
|
(16.5
|
)
|
Reclassification adjustment for settled periods
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
(34.9
|
)
|
Interest rate hedges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value
|
|
|
(2.5
|
)
|
|
|
(7.1
|
)
|
Reclassification adjustment for settled periods
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
Related income taxes
|
|
|
(19.6
|
)
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to Targa
Resources Corp.
|
|
|
21.3
|
|
|
|
(33.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources
Corp.
|
|
|
14.1
|
|
|
|
(20.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
17.7
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling
interest:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity hedging contracts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value
|
|
|
44.2
|
|
|
|
(27.2
|
)
|
Reclassification adjustment for settled periods
|
|
|
(6.1
|
)
|
|
|
(24.2
|
)
|
Interest rate swaps:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in fair value
|
|
|
(21.0
|
)
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
Reclassification adjustment for settled periods
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling
interest
|
|
|
24.0
|
|
|
|
(46.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling
interest
|
|
|
70.2
|
|
|
|
(29.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
$
|
84.3
|
|
|
$
|
(50.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-50
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid in
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Treasury Stock
|
|
|
Controlling
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except shares in thousands)
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2009
|
|
|
7,951.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
194.0
|
|
|
$
|
(85.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20.3
|
)
|
|
|
198.0
|
|
|
$
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
667.5
|
|
|
$
|
754.9
|
|
Issuance of non-vested common stock
|
|
|
61.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option exercises
|
|
|
2,420.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.0
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
Proceeds from Partnership equity offerings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
318.1
|
|
|
|
318.1
|
|
Proceeds from secondary offering of interests in the Partnership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
224.4
|
|
|
|
224.4
|
|
Impact of equity transactions of the Partnership
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
243.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(243.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Tax impact of secondary offering
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(79.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(79.1
|
)
|
Distributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(200.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(101.2
|
)
|
|
|
(301.2
|
)
|
Dividends on Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8.4
|
)
|
Amortization of equity awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24.0
|
|
|
|
45.3
|
|
Net income (Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
39.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, September 30, 2010
|
|
|
10,432.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
151.4
|
|
|
$
|
(93.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
223.0
|
|
|
$
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
935.5
|
|
|
$
|
994.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-51
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
39.0
|
|
|
$
|
30.7
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided
by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization in interest expense
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
Paid-in-kind interest expense
|
|
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
20.7
|
|
Amortization in general and other administrative expense
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
136.9
|
|
|
|
127.9
|
|
Accretion of asset retirement obligations
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
Deferred income tax expense
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments, net of
distributions
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Risk management activities
|
|
|
(16.5
|
)
|
|
|
35.1
|
|
Gain on sale of assets
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on debt repurchases
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
Gain on early debt extinguishment
|
|
|
(8.1
|
)
|
|
|
(10.4
|
)
|
Interest payments on Holdco loan facility
|
|
|
(23.1
|
)
|
|
|
(6.0
|
)
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable and other assets
|
|
|
(7.8
|
)
|
|
|
(33.8
|
)
|
Inventory
|
|
|
(16.0
|
)
|
|
|
17.9
|
|
Accounts payable and other liabilities
|
|
|
(54.3
|
)
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
104.0
|
|
|
|
202.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(84.2
|
)
|
|
|
(74.9
|
)
|
Proceeds from property insurance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23.8
|
|
Other
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(81.8
|
)
|
|
|
(50.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchases of Holdco loan facility
|
|
|
(108.3
|
)
|
|
|
(33.3
|
)
|
Repayments of senior secured debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(456.9
|
)
|
Repayments of senior secured credit facility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(95.9
|
)
|
Senior secured term loan facility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings
|
|
|
495.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments
|
|
|
(557.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured credit facility of the Partnership:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings
|
|
|
1,178.1
|
|
|
|
397.6
|
|
Repayments
|
|
|
(904.0
|
)
|
|
|
(374.9
|
)
|
Repurchases of senior notes
|
|
|
(260.9
|
)
|
|
|
(18.9
|
)
|
Proceeds from issuance of senior notes of the Partnership
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
237.4
|
|
Distributions to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
(101.2
|
)
|
|
|
(73.7
|
)
|
Proceeds from sale of limited partner interests in the
Partnership
|
|
|
224.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from partnership equity offering
|
|
|
318.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributions from noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104.2
|
|
Repurchases of common stock
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options exercised
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to preferred shareholders
|
|
|
(219.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to common and common equivalent shareholders
|
|
|
(200.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Costs incurred in connection with financing arrangements
|
|
|
(39.5
|
)
|
|
|
(12.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
75.4
|
|
|
|
(327.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
97.6
|
|
|
|
(174.9
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
|
|
252.4
|
|
|
|
362.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period
|
|
$
|
350.0
|
|
|
$
|
187.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-52
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
(Unaudited)
Except as noted within the context of each footnote
disclosure, the dollar amounts presented in the tabular data
within these footnote disclosures are stated in millions of
dollars.
Note 1Organization
and Operations
Organization
and Operations
Targa Resources Corp., formerly Targa Resources Investments
Inc., is a Delaware corporation formed on October 27, 2005.
Unless the context requires otherwise, references to
we, us, our, the
Company or Targa are intended to mean the
consolidated business and operations of Targa Resources Corp.
Our only significant asset is our ownership of 100% of the
outstanding capital stock of Targa Resources Investment Sub
Inc., an intermediate holding company, whose sole asset is its
ownership of 100% of the outstanding capital stock of TRI
Resources Inc., formerly Targa Resources, Inc. (TRI).
Our business operations consist of natural gas gathering and
processing, and the fractionation, storing, terminalling,
transporting, distributing and marketing of NGL liquids
(NGLs). Essentially all these business operations
are currently owned by Targa Resources Partners LP (the
Partnership), a publicly traded master limited
partnership. Targa Resources GP LLC, the general partner of the
Partnership is wholly owned by us.
Basis of
Presentation
These unaudited consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) for
interim financial information. Accordingly, they do not include
all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for
complete financial statements. The year-end balance sheet data
was derived from audited financial statements but does not
include disclosures required by GAAP for annual periods. The
unaudited consolidated financial statements for the nine months
ended September 30, 2010 and 2009 include all adjustments
and disclosures which we believe are necessary for a fair
presentation of the results for the interim periods.
Our financial results for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 are not necessarily indicative of the
results that may be expected for the full year ending
December 31, 2010. These unaudited consolidated financial
statements and other information included in this Quarterly
Report should be read in conjunction with our consolidated
financial statements and notes thereto included in our Annual
Report.
As of September 30, 2010, we own a 17.1% interest in the
Partnership, including our 2% general partner interest. The
Partnership is consolidated within our financial statements
under the presumption, as well as presence, of general partner
control in accordance with GAAP.
In preparing the accompanying consolidated financial statements,
the Company has reviewed, as determined necessary by the
Company, events that have occurred after September 30,
2010, up until December 7, 2010.
|
|
Note 2
|
Out of
Period Adjustments
|
During 2009, we recorded adjustments related to prior periods
which decreased our income before income taxes for 2009 by
$5.4 million. The adjustments consisted of
$7.2 million related to debt issue costs that should have
been expensed during 2007 and $1.8 million of revenue which
should have been recorded during 2006.
F-53
Had these adjustments been previously recorded in their
appropriate periods, net income attributable to Targa for the
year ended December 31, 2009 would have increased by
$3.4 million.
After evaluating the quantitative and qualitative aspects of
these errors, we concluded that our previously issued financial
statements were not materially misstated and the effect of
recognizing these adjustments in the 2009 financial statements
were not material to the 2009 or 2007 results of operations,
financial position, or cash flows.
|
|
Note 3
|
Accounting
Policies and Related Matters
|
Accounting
Policy Updates/Revisions
The accounting policies followed by us are set forth in
Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in
our Annual Report for the year ended December 31, 2009, and
are supplemented by the notes to these consolidated financial
statements. There have been no significant changes to these
policies and it is suggested that these consolidated financial
statements be read in conjunction with the consolidated
financial statements and notes included in our Annual Report.
Accounting
Pronouncements Recently Adopted
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU
2010-06,
Improving Disclosures About Fair Value Measurements,
which provides amendments to fair value disclosures. ASU
2010-06
requires additional disclosures and clarifications of existing
disclosures for recurring and nonrecurring fair value
measurements. The revised guidance for transfers into and out of
Level 1 and Level 2 categories, as well as increased
disclosures around inputs to fair value measurement, was adopted
January 1, 2010. The amendments to Level 3 disclosures
were delayed until periods beginning after December 15,
2010 and are not anticipated to have a material impact on our
financial statements upon adoption.
Note 4Property,
Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment, at cost, were as follows as of
the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Range of
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Years
|
|
Natural gas gathering systems
|
|
$
|
1,616.3
|
|
|
$
|
1,578.0
|
|
|
5 to 20
|
Processing and fractionation facilities
|
|
|
961.9
|
|
|
|
956.0
|
|
|
5 to 25
|
Terminalling and natural gas liquids storage facilities
|
|
|
249.1
|
|
|
|
246.6
|
|
|
5 to 25
|
Transportation assets
|
|
|
272.7
|
|
|
|
271.6
|
|
|
10 to 25
|
Other property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
68.3
|
|
|
|
66.2
|
|
|
3 to 25
|
Land
|
|
|
52.9
|
|
|
|
52.7
|
|
|
|
Construction in progress
|
|
|
55.1
|
|
|
|
22.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,276.3
|
|
|
$
|
3,193.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-54
Note 5Debt
Obligations
Consolidated debt obligations consisted of the following as of
the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Long-term debt:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of Targa:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holdco loan facility, variable rate, due February
2015(1)
|
|
$
|
230.2
|
|
|
$
|
385.4
|
|
Obligations of TRI:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility, variable rate, due
July
2014(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured term loan facility, variable rate, due October
2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62.2
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
81/2%
fixed rate, due November 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
Obligations of the
Partnership:(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility, variable rate, due
February 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
479.2
|
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility, variable rate, due
July
2015(4)
|
|
|
753.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
81/4%
fixed rate, due July 2016
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
111/4%
fixed rate, due July 2017
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
Unamortized discounts, net of premiums
|
|
|
(10.5
|
)
|
|
|
(11.2
|
)
|
Senior unsecured notes,
77/8%
fixed rate, due October 2018
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
|
|
1,606.0
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
|
|
1,593.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Irrevocable standby letters of credit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letters of credit outstanding under senior secured credit
agreement
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letters of credit outstanding under senior secured synthetic
letter of credit facility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.5
|
|
Letters of credit outstanding under senior secured revolving
credit facility of the Partnership
|
|
|
101.5
|
|
|
|
108.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
104.5
|
|
|
$
|
117.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Quarterly, we make an election to pay interest when due or
refinance the interest as part of our long-term debt. |
|
(2) |
|
As of September 30, 2010, availability under TRIs
senior secured revolving credit facility was $72.0 million,
after giving effect to $3.0 million in outstanding letters
of credit. |
|
(3) |
|
We consolidate the debt of the Partnership with that of our own;
however, we do not have the obligation to make interest payments
or debt payments with respect to the debt of the Partnership. |
|
(4) |
|
As of September 30, 2010, availability under the
Partnerships senior secured revolving credit facility was
$245.2 million. |
F-55
The following table shows the range of interest rates paid and
weighted average interest rate paid on our variable-rate debt
obligations during the nine months ended September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Range of Interest
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
|
|
Rates Paid
|
|
Interest Rate Paid
|
|
|
Holdco loan facility of Targa
|
|
5.2% to 5.3%
|
|
|
5.3%
|
|
Senior secured term loan facility of TRI, due 2016
|
|
5.8% to 6.0%
|
|
|
5.8%
|
|
Senior secured revolving credit facility of the Partnership
|
|
1.2% to 5.0%
|
|
|
1.9%
|
|
Compliance
with Debt Covenants
As of September 30, 2010, we are in compliance with the
covenants contained in our various debt agreements.
Holdco Credit
Agreement
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, we
completed transactions that have been recognized in our
consolidated financial statements as a debt extinguishment, and
recognized a pretax gain of $32.8 million. The
transactions, executed by TRI, were payments of
$131.4 million to acquire $164.2 million of
outstanding borrowings (including accrued interest of
$23.1 million) under our Holdco credit agreement
(Holdco debt) and write offs of associated debt
issue costs totaling $1.2 million.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, we
completed a transaction that has been recognized in our
consolidated financial statements as a debt extinguishment, and
recognized a pretax gain of $24.5 million. The transactions
executed by TRI were payments of $39.3 million to acquire
$64.5 million of outstanding borrowings (including accrued
interest of $6.0 million) under our Holdco debt.
Senior Secured
Credit Agreement of TRI
On January 5, 2010 TRI entered into a senior secured credit
agreement (the credit agreement) providing senior
secured financing of $600.0 million, consisting of:
|
|
|
|
|
$500.0 million senior secured term loan facility; and
|
|
|
|
$100.0 million senior secured revolving credit facility
(the credit facility).
|
The entire amount of TRIs credit facility is available for
letters of credit and includes a limited borrowing capacity for
borrowings on
same-day
notice. TRI may increase the commitments under our credit
facility in an aggregate amount up to $75.0 million,
subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions and lender
approval.
Borrowings under the credit agreement will bear interest at a
rate equal to an applicable margin, plus at our option, either
(a) a base rate determined by reference to the higher of
(1) the prime rate of Deutsche Bank, (2) the federal
funds rate plus 0.5%, and (3) solely in the case of term
loans, 3%, or (b) LIBOR as determined by reference to the
higher of (1) the British Bankers Association LIBOR Rate
and (2) solely in the case of term loans, 2%.
In addition to paying interest on outstanding principal under
the senior secured credit facilities, TRI is required to pay
other fees. TRI is required to pay a commitment fee equal to
0.75% of the currently unutilized commitments thereunder. The
commitment fee rate may fluctuate based upon TRIs leverage
ratios. TRI is also required to pay a fronting fee equal to
0.25% on outstanding letters of credit.
The credit agreement requires TRI to prepay loans outstanding
under the senior secured term loan facility, subject to certain
exceptions, with:
|
|
|
|
|
50% of our annual excess cash flow (which percentage will be
reduced to 25% if our total leverage ratio is no more than 3.00
to 1.00 and to 0% if our total leverage ratio is no more than
2.50 to 1.00);
|
F-56
|
|
|
|
|
up to 100% of the net cash proceeds of all non-ordinary course
asset sales, transfers or other dispositions of property,
subject to our consolidated leverage ratio; and
|
|
|
|
100% of the net cash proceeds of any incurrence of debt, other
than debt permitted under the credit agreement.
|
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, our term
loan facility was paid in full, including the mandatory
prepayments of $422.9 million as disclosed in Note 7.
All obligations under the credit agreement and certain secured
hedging arrangements are unconditionally guaranteed, subject to
certain exceptions, by each of TRIs existing and future
domestic restricted subsidiaries, referred to, collectively, as
the guarantors. TRI has pledged the following assets, subject to
certain exceptions, as collateral:
|
|
|
|
|
the capital stock and other equity interests held by TRI or any
guarantor; and
|
|
|
|
a security interest in, and mortgages on, TRIs and its
guarantors tangible and intangible assets.
|
The credit agreement contains a number of covenants that, among
other things, restrict, subject to certain exceptions,
TRIs ability to incur additional indebtedness (including
guarantees and hedging obligations); create liens on assets;
enter into sale and leaseback transactions; engage in mergers or
consolidations; sell assets; pay dividends and make
distributions or repurchase capital stock and other equity
interests; make investments, loans or advances; make capital
expenditures; repay, redeem or repurchase certain indebtedness;
make certain acquisitions; engage in certain transactions with
affiliates; amend certain debt and other material agreements;
change TRIs lines of business; and impose certain
restrictions on restricted subsidiaries that are not guarantors,
including restrictions on the ability of such subsidiaries that
are not guarantors to pay dividends.
The credit agreement requires TRI to maintain certain specified
maximum total leverage ratios and certain specified minimum
interest coverage ratios. In each case we are required to comply
with certain limitations, including minimum cash consideration
requirements.
On January 5, 2010, concurrent with the execution of the
credit agreement, TRI borrowed $500.0 million on the term
loan facility net of a $5.0 million discount. There was no
initial funding on the revolving credit line. The proceeds from
the term loan were used to:
|
|
|
|
|
complete the cash tender offer and consent solicitation for all
$250.0 million of TRIs outstanding
81/2% senior
notes due 2013;
|
|
|
|
repay the outstanding balance of $62.2 million on
TRIs existing senior secured term loan due 2012;
|
|
|
|
purchase $164.2 million in face value of the Holdco Notes
for $131.4 million; and
|
|
|
|
fund working capital and pay fees and expenses under the credit
agreement.
|
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010, TRI
incurred a loss on early debt extinguishments of
$8.1 million from the write-off of debt issue costs related
to the repayments of TRIs term loan and the cash tender
offer for the outstanding
81/2% senior
notes due 2013 as discussed above.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2009, TRI also
incurred a loss on debt repurchases of $17.4 million
comprising $10.9 million of premiums paid and
$6.5 million from the write-off of debt issue costs related
to the repurchase of TRIs
81/2% senior
notes discussed above. The premiums paid were included as a cash
outflow from a financing activity in the Statement of Cash Flows.
Senior Secured
Credit Facility of the Partnership
On July 19, 2010, the Partnership entered into an Amended
and Restated Credit Agreement that replaced the
Partnerships existing variable rate Senior Secured Credit
Facility with a new variable rate
F-57
Senior Secured Credit Facility due July 2015. The new Senior
Secured Credit Facility increases available commitments to
$1.1 billion from $958.5 million, and allows the
Partnership to request increases in commitments up to an
additional $300 million.
The Partnership incurred a charge of $0.8 million related
to a partial write-off of debt issue costs associated with this
amended and restated credit facility related to a change in
syndicate members. The remaining balance in debt issue costs of
$4.7 million is being amortized over the life of the
amended and restated credit facility.
The new credit facility bears interest at LIBOR plus an
applicable margin ranging from 2.25% to 3.5% dependent on our
consolidated funded indebtedness to consolidated adjusted EBITDA
ratio. The Partnerships new credit facility is secured by
substantially all of the Partnerships assets. As of
September 30, 2010, availability under the
Partnerships senior secured revolving credit facility was
$245.2 million, after giving effect to $101.5 million
in outstanding letters of credit.
77/8% Notes
of the Partnership
On August 13, 2010, the Partnership closed a
$250.0 million face value notes offering. These notes
issued bear interest at
77/8%
and will mature in October 2018. The net proceeds of this
offering were $245.0 million, after deducting initial
purchasers discounts and the expenses of the offering. The
Partnership used the net proceeds from this offering to reduce
borrowings under its senior secured credit facility.
Subsequent
Event
On November 3, 2010, we amended our Holdco Loan to name our
wholly-owned subsidiary, TRI, as guarantor to our obligations
under the credit agreement. The operations and assets of the
Partnership continue to be excluded as guarantors of the Holdco
debt.
On November 5, 2010, we agreed to purchase from certain
holders of the Holdco Loan $141.3 million of face value for
$137.4 million, which includes estimated transaction costs
of $0.4 million. Additionally, we will write off
$0.9 million of associated debt issue costs.
Note 6Convertible
Participating Preferred Stock
At September 30, 2010, we had 6,409,697 shares of
Convertible Cumulative Participating Series B Preferred
Stock (Series B) outstanding, with a
liquidation value of $96.8 million. The Series B stock
ranks senior to our common stock.
The holders of the Series B stock accrue dividends at an
annual rate of 6% of the accreted value of the stock (purchase
price plus unpaid dividends, compounded quarterly) until
October 31, 2012, and thereafter at an annual rate of 14%.
Cash dividends on the Series B stock are payable when
declared by our Board of Directors, subject to restrictions
under our debt agreements. In the event that we have paid all
accrued dividends on the Series B stock, we may also pay an
additional dividend, the amount of which shall reduce the
purchase price of the Series B stock. During the nine
months ended September 30, 2010, we paid distributions of
$219.9 million to the Series B preferred shareholders
and an additional $200.0 million to the common and common
equivalent shareholders. The common equivalent shareholders are
the holders of the Series B stock that participate ratably
in such common dividend in proportion to the number of shares of
common stock that would be issuable upon conversion of all
shares of Series B stock on an if-converted basis.
Upon the occurrence of the liquidation, dissolution, or winding
up of the Company, the holders of the Series B stock are
entitled to receive an amount equal to the Series B
stocks accreted value per share (the Series B
preference amount). If the assets and funds of the Company
available for distribution exceeds the Series B preference
amount, the remaining assets of the corporation are
distributable ratably among the holders of the Series B
stock and common stock, where each Series B holder is
treated for this purpose as holding ten shares of common stock
for each share of Series B stock held.
F-58
The holders of the Series B stock are entitled to vote with
the holders of the common stock, wherein each Series B
holder is treated for this purpose as holding ten shares of
common stock for each share of Series B stock held.
In the case of a qualified public offering (as defined in the
Series B stock certificate of designation), each share of
Series B stock automatically converts into (i) a
number of shares of common stock calculated by dividing the
accreted value of such share of Series B stock by the
initial public offering price of the common stock, less all
underwriters discounts and commissions, plus (ii) ten
shares of common stock for each share of Series B stock,
subject to certain adjustments.
On September 9, 2010, we filed an initial registration
statement on
Form S-1
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
for the purpose of registering our common stock for public sale.
This registration statement was further amended on
October 15, 2010. The SEC has not declared this
registration statement effective at this date.
Note 7Partnership
Units and Related Matters
On January 19, 2010, the Partnership completed a public
offering of 5,500,000 common units representing limited partner
interests in the Partnership (common units) under
its existing shelf registration statement on
Form S-3
(Registration Statement) at a price of $23.14 per
common unit ($22.17 per common unit, net of underwriting
discounts), providing net proceeds of $121.9 million.
Pursuant to the exercise of the underwriters overallotment
option, the Partnership sold an additional 825,000 common units,
providing net proceeds of $18.3 million. In addition, we
contributed $3.0 million for 129,082 common units to
maintain our 2% general partner interest. The Partnership used
the net proceeds from the offering for general partnership
purposes, which included reducing borrowings under its senior
secured credit facility.
On April 14, 2010, Targa LP Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary
of ours, closed on a secondary public offering of 8,500,000
common units of the Partnership at $27.50 per common unit.
Proceeds from this offering, after underwriting discounts and
commission were $224.4 million before expenses associated
with the offering. This offering also triggered a mandatory
prepayment on our senior secured credit agreement of
$3.2 million related to TRIs senior secured revolving
credit facility and $105.6 million on TRIs senior
secured term loan facility.
On April 27, 2010, we completed the sale of our interests
in the Permian and Straddle Systems to the Partnership for
$420.0 million, effective April 1, 2010. This sale
triggered a mandatory prepayment on TRIs senior secured
credit agreement of $152.5 million, which was paid on
April 27, 2010. As part of the closing of the sale of our
Permian and Straddle Systems, we amended our Omnibus Agreement
with the Partnership, to continue to provide general and
administrative and other services to the Partnership through
April 2013.
On August 13, 2010, the Partnership completed an offering
of 6,500,000 of its common units under the Registration
Statement at a price of $24.80 per common unit ($23.82 per
common unit, net of underwriting discounts) providing net
proceeds to the Partnership of approximately
$154.8 million. Pursuant to the exercise of the
underwriters overallotment option, the Partnership sold an
additional 975,000 common units, providing net proceeds of
approximately $23.2 million. In addition, we contributed
$3.8 million for 152,551 common units to maintain a 2%
general partner interest. The Partnership used the net proceeds
from this offering to reduce borrowings under its senior secured
credit facility.
On August 25, 2010, we completed the sale to the
Partnership of our 63% equity interest in the Versado System,
effective August 1, 2010, for $247.2 million in the
form of $244.7 million in cash and $2.5 million in
partnership interests represented by 89,813 common units and
1,833 general partner units. The sale triggered a mandatory
prepayment of $91.3 million under TRIs senior secured
credit facility. Under the terms of the Versado Purchase and
Sale Agreement, Targa will reimburse the Partnership for future
maintenance capital expenditures required pursuant to our New
Mexico Environmental Department settlement agreement, of which
our share is currently estimated at $19.0 million, to be
incurred through 2011.
F-59
On September 28, 2010, we completed the sale to the
Partnership of our Venice Operations, which includes
Targas 76.8% interest in Venice Energy Services, L.L.C.
(VESCO), for aggregate consideration of
$175.6 million, effective September 1, 2010. The sale
triggered a mandatory prepayment of $73.5 million under
TRIs senior secured credit facility.
The net impact of our sale of assets to the Partnership resulted
in an increase to additional paid-in capital of
$243.5 million and a corresponding reduction of the
non-controlling interest in these assets.
The following table lists the Partnerships distributions
declared and paid in the nine months ended September 30,
2010 and 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions Paid
|
|
|
Distributions
|
|
|
|
For the Three
|
|
Limited Partners
|
|
|
General Partner
|
|
|
|
|
|
per limited
|
|
Date Paid
|
|
Months Ended
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Subordinated
|
|
|
Incentive
|
|
|
2%
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
partner unit
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per unit amounts)
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 13, 2010
|
|
June 30, 2010
|
|
$
|
35.9
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.5
|
|
|
$
|
0.8
|
|
|
$
|
40.2
|
|
|
$
|
0.5275
|
|
May 14, 2010
|
|
March 31, 2010
|
|
|
35.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
0.5175
|
|
February 12, 2010
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
35.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
38.8
|
|
|
|
0.5175
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 14, 2009
|
|
June 30, 2009
|
|
$
|
23.9
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.9
|
|
|
$
|
0.5
|
|
|
$
|
26.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.5175
|
|
May 15, 2009
|
|
March 31, 2009
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
26.3
|
|
|
|
0.5175
|
|
February 13, 2009
|
|
December 31, 2008
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
26.4
|
|
|
|
0.5175
|
|
Subsequent Events
of the Partnership
On October 8, 2010, we announced a cash distribution of
$0.5375 per unit on our outstanding common units for the three
months ended September 30, 2010. The distribution will be
paid on November 12, 2010. The total distribution to be
paid is $46.1 million.
Note 8Insurance
Claims
Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita affected certain of our Gulf Coast
facilities in 2005. The final purchase price allocation of
Targas acquisition from Dynegy in October 2005 included an
$81.1 million receivable for insurance claims related to
property damage caused by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Prior to
nine months ended September 30, 2009, expenditures related
to these hurricanes included $0.4 million capitalized as
improvements. The insurance claim process is now complete with
respect to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita for property damage and
business interruption insurance.
Hurricanes Gustav
and Ike
Certain of our Louisiana and Texas facilities sustained damage
and had disruption to their operations during the 2008 hurricane
season from two Gulf Coast hurricanesGustav and Ike. As of
December 31, 2008, we recorded a $19.3 million loss
provision (net of estimated insurance reimbursements) related to
the hurricanes. During 2009, the estimate was reduced by
$3.7 million.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2010,
expenditures related to the hurricanes included $.8 million
for previously accrued repair costs. During the nine months
ended September 30, 2009, expenditures related to the
hurricanes included $32.8 million for repairs and
$7.5 million for improvements.
F-60
Note 9Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities
Commodity
Hedges
In an effort to reduce the variability of our cash flows we have
hedged the commodity price associated with a significant portion
of our expected natural gas, NGL and condensate equity volumes
for the years 2010 through 2013 by entering into derivative
financial instruments including swaps and purchased puts
(floors).
We have tailored our hedges to generally match the NGL product
composition and the NGL and natural gas delivery points to those
of our physical equity volumes. Our NGL hedges cover baskets of
ethane, propane, normal butane, iso-butane and natural gasoline
based upon our expected equity NGL composition, as well as
specific NGL hedges of ethane and propane. We believe this
strategy avoids uncorrelated risks resulting from employing
hedges on crude oil or other petroleum products as
proxy hedges of NGL prices. Additionally, our NGL
hedges are based on published index prices for delivery at Mont
Belvieu and our natural gas hedges are based on published index
prices for delivery at Mid-Continent, Waha and Permian Basin
(El Paso), which closely approximate our actual NGL and
natural gas delivery points.
We hedge a portion of our condensate sales using crude oil
hedges that are based on the NYMEX futures contracts for West
Texas Intermediate light, sweet crude, which approximates the
prices received for condensate. This necessarily exposes us to a
market differential risk if the NYMEX futures do not move in
exact parity with the sales price of our underlying West Texas
condensate equity volumes.
At September 30, 2010, the notional volumes of our
commodity hedges were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
|
|
Instrument
|
|
Unit
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
Swaps
|
|
MMBtu/d
|
|
|
36,146
|
|
|
|
30,100
|
|
|
|
23,100
|
|
|
|
8,000
|
|
NGL
|
|
Swaps
|
|
Bbl/d
|
|
|
9,064
|
|
|
|
7,000
|
|
|
|
4,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
NGL
|
|
Floors
|
|
Bbl/d
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
253
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensate
|
|
Swaps
|
|
Bbl/d
|
|
|
851
|
|
|
|
750
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
Interest Rate
Swaps
As of September 30, 2010, the Partnership had
$753.3 million outstanding under its credit facility, with
interest accruing at a base rate plus an applicable margin. In
order to mitigate the risk of changes in cash flows attributable
to changes in market interest rates the Partnership has entered
into interest rate swaps and interest rate basis swaps that
effectively fix the base rate on $300.0 million in
borrowings as shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
Fixed Rate
|
|
|
Notional Amount
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Remainder of 2010
|
|
|
3.67
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
$
|
(2.6
|
)
|
2011
|
|
|
3.52
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)
|
2012
|
|
|
3.38
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(7.9
|
)
|
2013
|
|
|
3.39
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(5.8
|
)
|
01/014/24/2014
|
|
|
3.39
|
%
|
|
|
300 million
|
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(26.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All interest rate swaps and interest rate basis swaps have been
designated as cash flow hedges of variable rate interest
payments on borrowings under the Partnerships credit
facility.
F-61
The following schedules reflect the fair values of derivative
instruments in our financial statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset Derivatives
|
|
|
Liability Derivatives
|
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
Fair Value as of
|
|
|
Balance
|
|
Fair Value as of
|
|
|
|
Sheet
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
Sheet
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
Location
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Location
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity contracts
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$
|
37.3
|
|
|
$
|
31.6
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
$
|
12.2
|
|
|
$
|
20.7
|
|
|
|
Long-term assets
|
|
|
27.5
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
11.0
|
|
|
|
39.1
|
|
Interest rate contracts
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
Long-term assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments
|
|
|
|
|
64.8
|
|
|
|
45.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
49.2
|
|
|
|
72.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity contracts
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
Long-term assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments
|
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total derivatives
|
|
|
|
$
|
65.4
|
|
|
$
|
46.7
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
49.5
|
|
|
$
|
73.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables reflect amounts recorded in OCI and amounts
reclassified from OCI to revenue and expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (Loss)
|
|
|
|
Recognized in OCI
|
|
|
|
on Derivatives
|
|
|
|
(Effective Portion)
|
|
Derivatives in Cash Flow
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
Hedging Relationships
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts
|
|
$
|
(23.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7.8
|
)
|
Commodity contracts
|
|
|
88.1
|
|
|
|
(43.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
64.6
|
|
|
$
|
(51.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (Loss)
|
|
|
|
Reclassified from OCI
|
|
|
|
into Income
|
|
Location of Gain (Loss)
|
|
(Effective Portion)
|
|
Reclassified from
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
OCI into Income
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
8.4
|
|
|
$
|
12.4
|
|
Revenues
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
59.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
16.4
|
|
|
$
|
71.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of
|
|
|
|
Gain (Loss)
|
|
|
|
Recognized in Income on
|
|
|
|
Derivatives
|
|
|
|
(Ineffective Portion)
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30,
|
|
Location of Gain (Loss)
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
|
$
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our earnings are also affected by the use of the
mark-to-market
method of accounting for our derivative financial instruments
that do not qualify for hedge accounting or that have not been
designated as hedges. The changes in fair value of these
instruments are recorded on the balance sheets and through
earnings (i.e., using the
mark-to-market
method) rather than being deferred until the anticipated
transaction affects earnings. The use of
mark-to-market
accounting for financial instruments can cause non-cash earnings
volatility due to changes in the underlying commodity price
indices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain (Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognized in Income on Derivatives
|
|
|
|
Location of Gain (Loss)
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
Derivatives Not Designated as
|
|
Recognized in Income
|
|
September 30,
|
|
Hedging Instruments
|
|
on Derivatives
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Realized gain (loss) on commodity contracts
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3.0
|
)
|
Realized gain (loss) on commodity contracts
|
|
Other income (expense)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table shows the unrealized gains (losses) included
in OCI:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Unrealized net gain (loss) on commodity hedges
|
|
$
|
31.6
|
|
|
$
|
(29.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized net gain (loss) on interest rate hedges
|
|
$
|
(24.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009, AOCI consisted of
$29.4 million ($18.3 million, net of tax) of
unrealized net losses on commodity hedges, and $3.1 million
($1.9 million, net of tax) of unrealized net losses on
interest rate hedges.
As of September 30, 2010, AOCI consisted of
$31.6 million ($20.4 million, net of tax) of
unrealized net gains on commodity hedges, and $24.2 million
($20.4 million, net of tax) of unrealized net losses on
interest rate hedges. Deferred net gains of $25.0 million
on commodity hedges and deferred net losses of $7.4 million
on interest rate hedges recorded in AOCI are expected to be
reclassified to revenues from third parties and interest expense
during the next twelve months.
We have deferred losses primarily related to the
Partnerships 2008 termination of certain
out-of-the-money
natural gas and NGL commodity swaps. During the nine months
ending September 30, 2010 deferred net losses of
$22.2 million were reclassified from AOCI as a non-cash
reduction of revenue. During the nine months ending
September 30, 2009 deferred net losses of
$13.7 million were reclassified from AOCI as a non-cash
reduction of revenue.
See Note 10, Note 13 and Note 17 for additional
disclosures related to derivative instruments and hedging
activity.
F-63
Note 10Related
Party Transactions
Relationship
with Warburg Pincus LLC
Two of the directors of Targa are Managing Directors of Warburg
Pincus LLC and are also directors of Broad Oak Energy, Inc.
(Broad Oak) from whom we buy natural gas and NGL
products. Affiliates of Warburg Pincus LLC own a controlling
interest in Broad Oak. During the nine months ended
September 30, 2010, we purchased $29.4 million of
product from Broad Oak. During the nine months ended
September 30, 2009, we purchased $5.7 million of
product from Broad Oak.
A Targa director is also a director of Antero Resources
Corporation (Antero) from whom we buy natural gas
and NGL products. Affiliates of Warburg Pincus LLC own a
controlling interest in Antero. We purchased $0.1 million of
product from Antero during the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009. These transactions were at
market prices consistent with similar transactions with
nonaffiliated entities.
Relationship
with Maritech Resources, Inc.
One of the directors of the General Partner of the Partnership
is also a director of Tetra Technologies, Inc.
(Tetra). Maritech Resources, Inc.
(Maritech) is a subsidiary of Tetra. During the nine
months ended September 30, 2010, we purchased
$2.5 million of product from Maritech. During the nine
months ended September 30, 2009, we purchased
$0.7 million of product from Maritech. These transactions
were at market prices consistent with similar transactions with
nonaffiliated entities.
Relationships
with Bank of America (BofA)
Equity. BofA currently holds a 6.5% equity
interest in Targa.
Financial Services. BofA is a lender and the
administrative agent under our existing senior secured credit
facilities. Additionally, BofA is a lender and the
administrative agent under the Partnerships senior secured
credit facility.
Commodity hedges. We have previously entered
into various commodity derivative transactions with BofA. As of
September 30, 2010, the fair value of these open positions
was an asset of $0.9 million. During the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 we received from BofA $2.1 million
in commodity derivative settlements. During the nine months
ended September 30, 2009 we received $44.1 million
from BofA to settle payments due under hedge transactions.
We had the following open commodity derivatives with BofA as of
September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period
|
|
Commodity
|
|
Daily Volumes
|
|
Average Price
|
|
Index
|
|
Oct 2010Dec 2010
|
|
Natural Gas
|
|
3,289 MMBtu
|
|
|
$7
|
.39 per MMBtu
|
|
WAHA_IF
|
Oct 2010Dec 2010
|
|
Condensate
|
|
181 Bbl
|
|
|
$69
|
.28 per Bbl
|
|
WTI
|
Commercial Relationships. Our product sales
and product purchases with BofA were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Included in revenues
|
|
$
|
20.9
|
|
|
$
|
29.1
|
|
Included in costs and expenses
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
Note 11Commitments
and Contingencies
Environmental
For environmental matters, we record liabilities when remedial
efforts are probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated.
Environmental reserves do not reflect managements
assessment of any insurance coverage that may be applicable to
the matters at issue. Management has assessed each of the
F-64
matters based on current information and made a judgment
concerning its potential outcome, considering the nature of the
claim, the amount and nature of damages sought and the
probability of success.
Our environmental liability at September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009 was $1.8 million and
$3.2 million. Our September 30, 2010 liability
consisted of $0.2 million for gathering system leaks,
$1.5 million for ground water assessment and remediation,
and $0.1 million for the gas processing plant environmental
violations.
In May 2007, the New Mexico Environment Department
(NMED) alleged air emissions violations at the
Eunice, Monument and Saunders gas processing plants operated by
Targa Midstream Services Limited Partnership and owned by
Versado Gas Processors, LLC (Versado), which were
identified in the course of an inspection of the Eunice plant
conducted by the NMED in August 2005.
Subsequent event. In January 2010, Versado
settled the alleged violations with NMED for a penalty of
approximately $1.5 million. As part of the settlement,
Versado agreed to install two acid gas injection wells,
additional emission control equipment and monitoring equipment,
the cost of which we estimate to be approximately
$33.4 million.
Legal
Proceedings
We are a party to various legal proceedings
and/or
regulatory proceedings and certain claims, suits and complaints
arising in the ordinary course of business that have been filed
or are pending against us. We believe all such matters are
without merit or involve amounts which, if resolved unfavorably,
would not have a material effect on our financial position,
results of operations, or cash flows, except for the items more
fully described below.
On December 8, 2005, WTG Gas Processing (WTG)
filed suit in the 333rd District Court of Harris County,
Texas against several defendants, including TRI Resources Inc.
and two other Targa entities and private equity funds affiliated
with Warburg Pincus LLC, seeking damages from the defendants.
The suit alleges that Targa and private equity funds affiliated
with Warburg Pincus, along with ConocoPhillips Company
(ConocoPhillips) and Morgan Stanley, tortiously
interfered with (i) a contract WTG claims to have had to
purchase the SAOU System from ConocoPhillips and
(ii) prospective business relations of WTG. WTG claims the
alleged interference resulted from Targas competition to
purchase the ConocoPhillips assets and its successful
acquisition of those assets in 2004. In October 2007, the
District Court granted defendants motions for summary
judgment on all of WTGs claims. In February 2010, the 14th
Court of Appeals affirmed the District Courts final
judgment in favor of defendants in its entirety. WTGs
appeal is pending before the Texas Supreme Court, and Targa
intends to contest the appeal, but can give no assurances
regarding the outcome of the proceeding. We have agreed to
indemnify the Partnership for any claim or liability arising out
of the WTG suit.
|
|
Note 12
|
Fair Value of
Financial Instruments
|
We have determined the estimated fair values of assets and
liabilities classified as financial instruments using available
market information and valuation methodologies described below.
We apply considerable judgment when interpreting market data to
develop the estimates of fair value. The use of different market
assumptions or valuation methodologies may have a material
effect on the estimated fair value amounts.
The carrying value of the senior secured revolving credit
facility approximates its fair value, as its interest rate is
based on prevailing market rates. The fair value of the senior
unsecured notes is based on quoted market prices based on trades
of such debt.
The carrying values of items comprising current assets and
current liabilities approximate fair values due to the
short-term maturities of these instruments. Derivative financial
instruments included in our financial statements are stated at
fair value.
F-65
The carrying amounts and fair values of our other financial
instruments are as follows as of the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
Carrying
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Holdco loan
facility(1)
|
|
$
|
230.2
|
|
|
$
|
230.2
|
|
|
$
|
385.4
|
|
|
$
|
278.9
|
|
Senior secured term loan facility, due
2012(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62.2
|
|
|
|
61.9
|
|
Senior unsecured notes,
81/2%
fixed
rate(3)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
259.2
|
|
Senior unsecured notes of the Partnership,
81/4%
fixed rate
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
|
|
220.6
|
|
|
|
209.1
|
|
|
|
206.5
|
|
Senior unsecured notes of the Partnership,
111/4%
fixed rate
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
|
|
266.0
|
|
|
|
231.3
|
|
|
|
253.5
|
|
Senior unsecured notes of the Partnership,
77/8%
fixed rate
|
|
|
250.0
|
|
|
|
261.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We are unable to obtain an indicative quote for our Holdco loan
facility. |
|
(2) |
|
The carrying amount of the debt as of December 31, 2009
approximates the fair value as the variable rate is periodically
reset to prevailing market rates. |
|
(3) |
|
The fair value as of December 31, 2009 represents the value
of the last trade of the year which occurred on December 9,
2009. On January 5, 2010 we paid $264.7 million to
complete a cash tender offer for all outstanding aggregate
principal amount plus accrued interest of $3.8 million. |
|
|
Note 13
|
Fair Value
Measurements
|
We categorize the inputs to the fair value of our financial
assets and liabilities using a three-tier fair value hierarchy
that prioritizes the significant inputs used in measuring fair
value:
|
|
|
|
|
Level 1observable inputs such as quoted prices
in active markets;
|
|
|
|
Level 2inputs other than quoted prices in
active markets that are either directly or indirectly
observable; and
|
|
|
|
Level 3unobservable inputs in which little or
no market data exists, therefore requiring an entity to develop
its own assumptions.
|
Our derivative instruments consist of financially settled
commodity and interest rate swap and option contracts and fixed
price commodity contracts with certain counterparties. We
determine the value of our derivative contracts utilizing a
discounted cash flow model for swaps and a standard option
pricing model for options, based on inputs that are readily
available in public markets. We have consistently applied these
valuation techniques in all periods presented and believe we
have obtained the most accurate information available for the
types of derivative contracts we hold.
The following tables present the fair value of our financial
assets and liabilities according to the fair value hierarchy.
These financial assets and liabilities are classified in their
entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant
to the fair value measurement. Our assessment of the
significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement
requires judgment, and may affect the valuation of the fair
value assets and liabilities and their placement within the fair
value hierarchy levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
|
Level 2
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
|
Assets from commodity derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
65.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
64.3
|
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
Assets from interest rate derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
65.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
64.3
|
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities from commodity derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
23.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
21.2
|
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
Liabilities from interest rate derivatives
|
|
|
26.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
$
|
49.5
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
47.2
|
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-66
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
|
Level 2
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
|
Assets from commodity derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
44.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
44.7
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Assets from interest rate derivatives
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
46.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
46.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities from commodity derivative contracts
|
|
$
|
60.4
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
46.7
|
|
|
$
|
13.7
|
|
Liabilities from interest rate derivatives
|
|
|
12.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
$
|
73.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
59.4
|
|
|
$
|
13.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table sets forth a reconciliation of the changes
in the fair value of our financial instruments classified as
Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
|
|
|
|
Derivative Contracts
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
(13.7
|
)
|
Unrealized gains included in OCI
|
|
|
12.2
|
|
Settlements
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, September 30, 2010
|
|
$
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
On April 14, 2010, Targa LP Inc. closed on a secondary
public offering of 8,500,000 common units of the Partnership.
The direct tax effect of the change in ownership interest in the
Partnership as a result of the secondary public offering was
recorded as a reduction in shareholders equity of
$79.1 million, an increase in current tax liability of
$41.9 million and an increase in deferred tax liability of
$37.2 million. There was no tax impact on consolidated net
income as a result of the secondary public offering.
On April 27, 2010, Targa sold its interests in the Permian
and Straddle Systems to the Partnership. On September 28,
2010, Targa sold its interests in the Venice Operations to the
Partnership. Under applicable accounting principles, the tax
consequences of transactions with common control entities are
not to be reflected in pre-tax income. Consequently, there was
no tax impact on consolidated pre-tax net income as a result of
the sale of the Permian and Straddle Systems and the Venice
Operations. The tax effect of these sales was recorded as an
increase in other long term assets of $65.9 million, to be
amortized over the remaining book life of the underlying assets,
an increase in current tax liability of $93.7 million, a
decrease in deferred tax liability of $26.1 million and an
increase in current tax expense of $1.7 million.
Note 15Supplemental
Cash Flow Information
Supplemental cash flow information was as follows for the
periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Cash:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid
|
|
$
|
99.4
|
|
|
$
|
50.2
|
|
Income taxes paid
|
|
|
52.7
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
Non-cash:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory line-fill transferred to property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
F-67
Note 16Segment
Information
Our operations are presented under four reportable segments:
(1) Field Gathering and Processing, (2) Coastal
Gathering and Processing, (3) Logistics Assets, and
(4) Marketing and Distribution. The financial results of
our hedging activities are reported in Other.
The Natural Gas Gathering and Processing division includes
assets used in the gathering of natural gas produced from oil
and gas wells and processing this raw natural gas into
merchantable natural gas by extracting natural gas liquids and
removing impurities. The Field Gathering and Processing segment
assets are located in North Texas and the Permian Basin and the
Coastal Gathering and Processing segment assets are located in
the onshore region of the Louisiana Gulf Coast and the Gulf of
Mexico.
The NGL Logistics and Marketing division is also referred to as
our Downstream Business. It includes all the activities
necessary to convert raw natural gas liquids into NGL products,
market the finished products and provide certain value added
services.
The Logistics Assets segment is involved in transporting and
storing mixed NGLs and fractionating, storing, and transporting
finished NGLs. These assets are generally connected to and
supplied, in part, by our gathering and processing segments and
are predominantly located in Mont Belvieu, Texas and
Southwestern Louisiana.
The Marketing and Distribution segment covers all activities
required to distribute and market raw and finished natural gas
liquids and all natural gas marketing activities. It includes
(1) marketing our own natural gas liquids production and
purchasing natural gas liquids products in selected United
States markets; (2) providing liquefied petroleum gas
balancing services to refinery customers; (3) transporting,
storing and selling propane and providing related propane
logistics services to multi-state retailers, independent
retailers and other end users; and (4) marketing natural
gas available to us from our Gathering and Processing segments
and the purchase and resale of natural gas in selected United
States markets.
The Other segment contains the results of our derivatives and
hedging transactions. Eliminations of inter-segment transactions
are reflected in the eliminations column.
Our reportable segment information is shown in the following
tables:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2010
|
|
|
|
Field
|
|
|
Coastal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Logistics
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Third party revenues
|
|
$
|
160.5
|
|
|
$
|
351.2
|
|
|
$
|
61.6
|
|
|
$
|
3,361.2
|
|
|
$
|
7.6
|
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,942.0
|
|
Intersegment revenues
|
|
|
793.4
|
|
|
|
565.5
|
|
|
|
61.8
|
|
|
|
380.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,801.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
953.9
|
|
|
$
|
916.7
|
|
|
$
|
123.4
|
|
|
$
|
3,741.5
|
|
|
$
|
7.6
|
|
|
$
|
(1,801.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,942.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
$
|
176.9
|
|
|
$
|
75.8
|
|
|
$
|
54.8
|
|
|
$
|
48.9
|
|
|
$
|
7.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
364.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other financial information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
1,627.7
|
|
|
$
|
452.2
|
|
|
$
|
432.7
|
|
|
$
|
426.4
|
|
|
$
|
65.4
|
|
|
$
|
455.5
|
|
|
$
|
3,459.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended September 30, 2009
|
|
|
|
Field
|
|
|
Coastal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
Gathering
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Logistics
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Processing
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
Distribution
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Eliminations
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Third party revenues
|
|
$
|
134.5
|
|
|
$
|
271.4
|
|
|
$
|
52.9
|
|
|
$
|
2,627.1
|
|
|
$
|
59.0
|
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
|
$
|
3,145.0
|
|
Intersegment revenues
|
|
|
530.8
|
|
|
|
343.8
|
|
|
|
57.5
|
|
|
|
229.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,161.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenues
|
|
$
|
665.3
|
|
|
$
|
615.2
|
|
|
$
|
110.4
|
|
|
$
|
2,856.5
|
|
|
$
|
59.0
|
|
|
$
|
(1,161.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,145.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating margin
|
|
$
|
123.8
|
|
|
$
|
52.1
|
|
|
$
|
48.0
|
|
|
$
|
54.5
|
|
|
$
|
59.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
337.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other financial information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
1,746.4
|
|
|
$
|
476.5
|
|
|
$
|
412.7
|
|
|
$
|
394.2
|
|
|
$
|
86.6
|
|
|
$
|
156.6
|
|
|
$
|
3,273.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 17Significant
Risks and Uncertainties
Nature of
Operations in Midstream Energy Industry
We operate in the midstream energy industry. Our business
activities include gathering, transporting, processing,
fractionating and storage of natural gas and NGLs. Our results
of operations, cash flows and financial condition may be
affected by (i) changes in the commodity prices of these
hydrocarbon products and (ii) changes in the relative price
levels among these hydrocarbon products. In general, the prices
of natural gas, NGLs, condensate and other hydrocarbon products
are subject to fluctuations in response to changes in supply,
market uncertainty and a variety of additional factors that are
beyond our control.
Our profitability could be impacted by a decline in the volume
of natural gas, NGLs and condensate transported, gathered or
processed at our facilities. A material decrease in natural gas
or condensate production or condensate refining, as a result of
depressed commodity prices, a decrease in exploration and
development activities or otherwise, could result in a decline
in the volume of natural gas, NGLs and condensate handled by our
facilities.
A reduction in demand for NGL products by the petrochemical,
refining or heating industries, whether because of
(i) general economic conditions, (ii) reduced demand
by consumers for the end products made with NGL products,
(iii) increased competition from petroleum-based products
due to the pricing differences, (iv) adverse weather
conditions, (v) government regulations affecting commodity
prices and production levels of hydrocarbons or the content of
motor gasoline or (vi) other reasons, could also adversely
affect our results of operations, cash flows and financial
position.
Our principal market risks are our exposure to changes in
commodity prices, particularly to the prices of natural gas and
NGLs, as well as changes in interest rates. The fair value of
our commodity and interest rate derivative instruments,
depending on the type of instrument, was determined by the use
of present value methods or standard option valuation models
with assumptions about commodity prices based on those observed
in underlying markets. These contracts may expose us to the risk
of financial loss in certain circumstances. Our hedging
arrangements provide us protection on the hedged volumes if
prices decline below the prices at which these hedges are set.
If prices rise above the prices at which we have hedged, we will
receive less revenue on the hedged volumes than we would receive
in the absence of hedges.
Commodity Price Risk. A majority of the
revenues from our natural gas gathering and processing business
are derived from
percent-of-proceeds
contracts under which we receive a portion of the natural gas
and/or NGLs
or equity volumes, as payment for services. The prices of
natural gas and NGLs are subject to market fluctuations in
response to changes in supply, demand, market uncertainty and a
variety of additional factors beyond our control. We monitor
these risks and enter into commodity derivative transactions
designed to mitigate the impact of commodity price fluctuations
on our business. Cash flows from a derivative instrument
designated as a hedge are classified in the same category as the
cash flows from the item being hedged.
F-69
In an effort to reduce the variability of our cash flows we have
hedged the commodity price associated with a significant portion
of our expected natural gas, NGL and condensate equity volumes
for the years 2010 through 2013 by entering into derivative
financial instruments including swaps and purchased puts (or
floors). The percentages of our expected equity volumes that are
hedged decrease over time. With swaps, we typically receive an
agreed upon fixed price for a specified notional quantity of
natural gas or NGL and we pay the hedge counterparty a floating
price for that same quantity based upon published index prices.
Since we receive from our customers substantially the same
floating index price from the sale of the underlying physical
commodity, these transactions are designed to effectively
lock-in the agreed fixed price in advance for the volumes
hedged. In order to avoid having a greater volume hedged than
our actual equity volumes, we typically limit our use of swaps
to hedge the prices of less than our expected natural gas and
NGL equity volumes. We utilize purchased puts (or floors) to
hedge additional expected equity commodity volumes without
creating volumetric risk. Our commodity hedges may expose us to
the risk of financial loss in certain circumstances. Our hedging
arrangements provide us protection on the hedged volumes if
market prices decline below the prices at which these hedges are
set. If market prices rise above the prices at which we have
hedged, we will receive less revenue on the hedged volumes than
we would receive in the absence of hedges.
Interest Rate Risk. We are exposed to changes
in interest rates, primarily as a result of our variable rate
borrowings under our credit facility. In an effort to reduce the
variability of our cash flows, we have entered into several
interest rate swap and interest rate basis swap agreements.
Under these agreements, which are accounted for as cash flow
hedges, the base interest rate on the specified notional amount
of our variable rate debt is effectively fixed for the term of
each agreement.
Counterparty
RiskCredit and Concentration
Derivative
Counterparty Risk
Where we are exposed to credit risk in our financial instrument
transactions, management analyzes the counterpartys
financial condition prior to entering into an agreement,
establishes credit
and/or
margin limits and monitors the appropriateness of these limits
on an ongoing basis. Generally, management does not require
collateral and does not anticipate nonperformance by our
counterparties.
We have agreements with all of our hedge counterparties that
allow us to net settle asset and liability positions with the
same counterparties. As of September 30, 2010, we had
$19.7 million in liabilities to offset the default risk of
counterparties with which we also had asset positions of
$41.9 million as of that date. Our credit exposure related
to commodity derivative instruments is represented by the fair
value of contracts with a net positive fair value to us at the
reporting date. At such times, these outstanding instruments
expose us to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the
counterparties to the agreements. Should the creditworthiness of
one or more of our counterparties decline, our ability to
mitigate nonperformance risk is limited to a counterparty
agreeing to either a voluntary termination and subsequent cash
settlement or a novation of the derivative contract to a third
party. In the event of a counterparty default, we may sustain a
loss and our cash receipts could be negatively impacted.
As of September 30, 2010, affiliates of Barclays, Goldman
Sachs and BP accounted for 47%, 20% and 18% of our net
counterparty credit exposure related to commodity derivative
instruments. Goldman Sachs and Barclays are major financial
institutions or corporations, BP is a major industrial company,
each possessing investment grade credit ratings based upon
minimum credit ratings assigned by Standard &
Poors Ratings Services.
Customer Credit
Risk
We extend credit to customers and other parties in the normal
course of business. We have established various procedures to
manage our credit exposure, including initial credit approvals,
credit limits and terms, letters of credit, and rights of
offset. We also use prepayments and guarantees to limit credit
risk to ensure that our established credit criteria are met.
F-70
Significant
Commercial Relationships
We are exposed to concentration risk when a significant customer
or supplier accounts for a significant portion of our business
activity. We have not had a material change in the
make-up of
our customers or suppliers during the nine months ended
September 30, 2010.
Casualty or
Other Risks
We maintain coverage in various insurance programs on our
behalf, which provides us with property damage, business
interruption and other coverages which are customary for the
nature and scope of our operations. A portion of the costs of
these insurance programs is allocated to the Partnership by us
pursuant to the Omnibus Agreement between the Partnership and us.
|
|
Note 18
|
Stock and Other
Compensation Plans
|
Stock Option
Plan
As discussed in our annual financial statements, our 2005
Incentive Compensation Plan (the Plan) grants
options to purchase a fixed number of shares of our stock to our
employees, directors and consultants. Generally, options granted
under the Plan have a vesting period of four years and remain
exercisable for ten years from the date of grant.
The following table shows stock activity for the period
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
Options
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
4,505,853
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
93,593
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(2,419,990
|
)
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(50,777
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at September 30, 2010
|
|
|
2,128,679
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In connection with TRIs extraordinary special distribution
of dividends to our common and common equivalent shareholders
(Note 6) in May 2010, we reduced the strike price on
all of our outstanding options by $2.77. This reduction is
considered an award modification for accounting purposes,
therefore, we redetermined the fair value of the options
immediately following the reduction. The modification did not
result in any additional compensation expense.
|
|
Note 19
|
Revenue
Reclassification
|
During 2009, we reclassified NGL marketing fractionation and
other service fees to revenues that were originally recorded in
product purchase costs. This reclassification had no impact on
our income from operations, net income, financial position or
cash flows. For the nine months ended September 30, 2009,
the adjustment was $18.6 million.
|
|
Note 20
|
Subsequent
Events
|
Distribution to
Series B Shareholders
On November 22, 2010, we paid an $18.0 million
distribution to the Series B preferred shareholders. The
cash distribution represents a portion of the accreted value of
the Series B stock included in our September 30, 2010
balance sheet.
F-71
Initial Public
Offering
In connection with our initial public offering
(IPO), the following occurred:
|
|
|
|
|
On December 6, 2010, the pricing of our common shares being
sold in our IPO was set at $22.00 per common share, less
underwriting discounts and commissions of $1.21 per common
share, providing net proceeds to the selling stockholders of
$20.79 per common share. We will not receive any proceeds from
this offering.
|
|
|
|
On December 6, 2010, our Board of Directors approved a 1
for 2.03 reverse stock split of our common stock and a
proportional adjustment to the existing conversion ratio for the
Series B Stock upon the pricing of our common shares in
connection with our IPO. The reverse stock split will be
effective prior to the closing of our IPO.
|
|
|
|
On December 6, 2010, the Compensation Committee approved
initial awards of an aggregate 1.35 million shares of
restricted stock under the New Incentive Plan to employees,
including our named executive officers. Additionally, the
Compensation Committee approved a bonus award of 556,514 common
shares and $3 million cash to the executive team in
connection with the IPO. The incentive awards related to our IPO
will result in approximately $14.2 million in additional
compensation expense that will be recorded in the fourth quarter
of 2010.
|
|
|
Note 21
|
Pro Forma
Information
|
Pro Forma Balance
Sheet
The Pro Forma Balance Sheet (unaudited) presents our cash,
Series B stock and stockholders equity balances as
though the $18.0 million distribution to the Series B
shareholders and the conversion of the remaining Series B
stock into shares of common stock on a one to 4.93 basis had
occurred as of September 30, 2010.
Pro Forma
Earnings per Share for Reverse Stock Split
The following table presents pro forma basic and diluted net
income per share of common stock and the basic and diluted pro
forma weighted average shares outstanding (in millions) after
giving effect to the 1 for 2.03 reverse stock split that was
approved by the Board of Directors on December 6, 2010 and
will become effective upon the closing of the IPO.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Pro forma net loss available per common share basic
and diluted
|
|
$
|
(43.74
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.05
|
)
|
Pro forma weighted average shares outstanding basic
and diluted
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
Pro Forma
Earnings per Share for Reverse Stock Split and Preferred
Conversion
Pro forma basic and diluted net income per share of common stock
(unaudited) has been computed to give effect to (a) the 1
for 2.03 reverse stock split that was approved by the Board of
Directors on December 6, 2010 and will become effective
upon the closing of the initial public offering and (b) the
assumed conversion of the Series B stock into common stock
as if it had occurred at the beginning of the period. The
unaudited pro forma basic and diluted net loss per share does
not give effect to the issuance of shares under the new long
term incentive plan that occurred in connection with the initial
public offering nor does it give effect to potential dilutive
securities where the impact would be anti-dilutive. Also, the
numerator in the pro forma basic and diluted net loss per share
calculation has been adjusted to remove the dividends on
Series B stock and distributions to common equivalents as
these events would not have occurred if the conversion of the
Series B stock to common shares had occurred at the
beginning of the period.
F-72
The following table sets forth the computation of our pro forma
basic and diluted net loss per share of common stock (unaudited)
(in millions, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Net loss available to common shareholders (historical)
|
|
$
|
(193.4
|
)
|
Dividends on Series B Preferred Stock
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
Distributions to common equivalents
|
|
|
177.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
$
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in computing net loss per common
share, basic and diluted
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Pro forma share adjustments to reflect conversion of
Series B stock
|
|
|
35.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares used in computing pro forma net loss per
common share, basic and diluted
|
|
|
39.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net loss per share of common stock, basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.18
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-73
Targa Resources
Corp.
Unaudited Pro
Forma Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
Introduction
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated financial
statements of Targa Resources Corp., formerly Targa Resources
Investments Inc., (TRC) as of September 30,
2010, for the year ended December 31, 2009, and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010 are based upon the
historical audited and unaudited financial statements of TRC, as
adjusted for the transactions discussed in more detail in the
notes accompanying these pro forma financial statements. The
unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated financial statements
should be read in conjunction with the notes accompanying these
unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated financial statements
and with the historical consolidated financial statements and
related notes of TRC set forth elsewhere in this prospectus.
The adjustments to the historical audited and unaudited
financial statements are based upon currently available
information and certain estimates and assumptions. The actual
effect of the transactions discussed below may ultimately differ
from the pro forma adjustments assumed herein. However,
management believes that the assumptions provide a reasonable
basis for presenting the significant effects of the transactions
as contemplated and that the pro forma adjustments are factually
supportable, give appropriate effect to the expected impact of
events that are directly attributable to the transactions, and
reflect those items expected to have a continuing impact on TRC.
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated financial
statements are not necessarily indicative of the results that
actually would have occurred if TRC had completed the
transactions on the dates indicated or which could be obtained
in the future.
F-74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Targa
|
|
|
|
Targa
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources
|
|
|
|
Resources
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
Corp.
|
|
|
|
Corp.
|
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
350.0
|
|
|
$
|
(3.3
|
) (b)
|
|
$
|
188.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(137.4
|
) (c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.0
|
) (l)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18.0
|
) (n)
|
|
|
|
|
Trade receivables
|
|
|
350.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
350.5
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
103.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
103.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
803.7
|
|
|
|
(161.7
|
)
|
|
|
642.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, at cost
|
|
|
3,276.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,276.3
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
(781.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(781.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
2,494.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,494.9
|
|
Long-term assets from risk management activities
|
|
|
27.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27.5
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
133.9
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
) (c)
|
|
|
133.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
3,460.0
|
|
|
$
|
(162.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,297.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND OWNERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
174.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
174.0
|
|
Accrued liabilities
|
|
|
314.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
314.5
|
|
Current maturities of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities from risk management activities
|
|
|
20.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.5
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
525.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
525.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities
|
|
|
1,663.4
|
|
|
|
(141.3
|
) (c)
|
|
|
1,522.1
|
|
Long-term liabilities from risk management activities
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29.0
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
84.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84.6
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
66.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66.9
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible cumulative participating series B preferred
stock
|
|
|
96.8
|
|
|
|
(78.8
|
) (a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18.0
|
) (n)
|
|
|
|
|
Owners equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Targa Resources Corp. stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
151.4
|
|
|
|
78.8
|
(a)
|
|
|
241.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.1
|
(l)
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(93.0
|
)
|
|
|
(3.3
|
) (b)
|
|
|
(107.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
) (c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3.0
|
) (l)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11.1
|
) (l)
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
Treasury stock, at cost
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Targa Resources Corp. stockholders equity
|
|
|
58.8
|
|
|
|
75.5
|
|
|
|
134.3
|
|
Noncontrolling interest in subsidiaries
|
|
|
935.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
935.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total owners equity
|
|
|
994.3
|
|
|
|
75.5
|
|
|
|
1,069.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and owners equity
|
|
$
|
3,460.0
|
|
|
$
|
(162.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
3,297.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated financial statements
F-75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Targa
|
|
|
|
Targa
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources
|
|
|
|
Resources
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
Corp.
|
|
|
|
Corp.
|
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share data)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
3,942.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,942.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product purchases
|
|
|
3,387.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,387.6
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
190.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
190.4
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense
|
|
|
136.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136.9
|
|
General and administrative expense
|
|
|
81.0
|
|
|
|
8.8
|
(d)
|
|
|
89.8
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,795.5
|
|
|
|
8.8
|
|
|
|
3,804.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
146.5
|
|
|
|
(8.8
|
)
|
|
|
137.7
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(83.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.4
|
) (e)
|
|
|
(78.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
) (f)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12.5
|
) (g)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.6
|
(h)
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
Loss on debt repurchases
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
Gain (loss) on early debt extinguishment
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
57.5
|
|
|
|
(3.5
|
)
|
|
|
54.0
|
|
Income tax expense:
|
|
|
(18.5
|
)
|
|
|
1.2
|
(j)
|
|
|
(18.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.6
|
) (m)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
39.0
|
|
|
|
(3.9
|
)
|
|
|
35.1
|
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
46.2
|
|
|
|
28.9
|
(i)
|
|
|
75.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
(7.2
|
)
|
|
|
(32.8
|
)
|
|
|
(40.0
|
)
|
Dividends on Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
(8.4
|
)
|
|
|
8.4
|
(a)
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to common equivalents
|
|
|
(177.8
|
)
|
|
|
177.8
|
(a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders
|
|
$
|
(193.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
153.4
|
|
|
$
|
(40.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available per common share basic and diluted
|
|
$
|
(21.51
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.95
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding basic and diluted
|
|
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42.3
|
(k)
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated financial statements
F-76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Targa
|
|
|
|
Targa
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources
|
|
|
|
Resources
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
Corp.
|
|
|
|
Corp.
|
|
|
Adjustments
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share data)
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
4,536.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,536.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product purchases
|
|
|
3,791.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,791.1
|
|
Operating expenses
|
|
|
235.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
235.0
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expenses
|
|
|
170.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
170.3
|
|
General and administrative expenses
|
|
|
120.4
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
(d)
|
|
|
132.1
|
|
Other
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,318.8
|
|
|
|
11.7
|
|
|
|
4,330.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
217.2
|
|
|
|
(11.7
|
)
|
|
|
205.5
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
|
(132.1
|
)
|
|
|
(0.5
|
) (e)
|
|
|
(128.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
) (f)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28.5
|
) (g)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33.5
|
(h)
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated investments
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
Loss on debt repurchases
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
Gain (loss) on early debt extinguishment
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
Gain on
mark-to-market
derivative instruments
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
99.8
|
|
|
|
(7.8
|
)
|
|
|
92.0
|
|
Income tax expense:
|
|
|
(20.7
|
)
|
|
|
2.6
|
(j)
|
|
|
(22.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.4
|
) (m)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
79.1
|
|
|
|
(9.6
|
)
|
|
|
69.5
|
|
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest
|
|
|
49.8
|
|
|
|
52.1
|
(i)
|
|
|
101.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp.
|
|
|
29.3
|
|
|
|
(61.7
|
)
|
|
|
(32.4
|
)
|
Dividends on Series B preferred stock
|
|
|
(17.8
|
)
|
|
|
17.8
|
(a)
|
|
|
|
|
Undistributed earnings attributable to preferred shareholders
|
|
|
(11.5
|
)
|
|
|
11.5
|
(a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(32.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
(32.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available per common share basic
and diluted
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.77
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding basic and diluted
|
|
|
7.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42.3
|
(k)
|
See accompanying notes to unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated financial statements
F-77
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
|
|
Note 1
|
Basis of
Presentation
|
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated financial
statements of Targa Resources Corp., formerly Targa Resources
Investments Inc., (TRC) as of September 30,
2010, for the year ended December 31, 2009, and for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010 are based upon the
historical audited and unaudited financial statements of TRC, as
adjusted for the Offering Transactions, Recent Transactions and
Other Transactions described in more detail below.
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated balance sheet as
of September 30, 2010 has been prepared as if the Offering
Transactions, Recent Transactions and Other Transactions
occurred on September 30, 2010. The unaudited pro forma
condensed consolidated statements of operations for the year
ended December 31, 2009 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 have been prepared as if the Offering
Transactions, Recent Transactions and Other Transactions
occurred as of January 1, 2009.
The unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated statements of
operations do not include the transaction costs associated with
the offering as those costs represent a non-recurring item
related to the Offering Transactions that will occur subsequent
to September 30, 2010.
The Partnership accounts for certain commodity derivative
contracts on a
mark-to-market
basis, because they do not qualify for hedge accounting at the
Partnership level for certain predecessor periods. At the TRC
level, these derivative contracts qualify for hedge accounting
purposes. The
non-controlling
interest adjustment shown in these pro forma financial
statements reflects the reclassification of derivative contracts
from
mark-to-market
to hedge accounting and its impact on the net income of the
Partnership.
Offering
Transactions
Certain Offering Transactions will impact these unaudited pro
forma condensed consolidated financial statements and are
discussed below and elsewhere in this prospectus:
|
|
|
|
|
This is the initial public offering of our common stock. All of
the shares of common stock are being sold by the selling
stockholders. We will not receive any proceeds from the sale of
shares by the selling stockholders, but we expect to incur
approximately $3.3 million of expenses associated with the
offering.
|
|
|
|
Following effectiveness of the registration statement of which
this prospectus forms a part, (1) we will effect a 1 for
2.03x reverse split of our common stock to reduce the number of
shares of our common stock that are currently outstanding and
(2) all of our shares of Series B Preferred will
automatically convert into shares of common stock, based on
(a) the 10 to 1 conversion ratio applicable to the
Series B Preferred plus (b) the accreted value per
share of the Series B Preferred divided by the initial
public offering price for this offering after deducting
underwriting discounts and commissions, in each case after
giving effect to the reverse split. For purposes of these
unaudited pro forma condensed consolidated financial statements,
we have used an initial public offering price of $22.00 per
share.
|
Upon completion of this offering, we anticipate incurring
incremental general and administrative expenses of approximately
$1.0 million per year. These estimated incremental expenses
relate to being a public corporation, such as costs associated
with preparation and distribution of annual and quarterly
reports to shareholders, tax returns, investor relations,
registrar and transfer agent fees, director compensation and
incremental insurance costs, including director and officer
liability insurance. The unaudited pro forma condensed
consolidated financial statements do not reflect these
anticipated incremental general and administrative expenses.
F-78
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
NOTES TO
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
Note 1
|
Basis of
Presentation (Continued)
|
Recent
Transactions
The pro forma financial statements reflect those transactions
which occurred subsequent to September 30, 2010 as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
repurchase agreements that we entered into on November 5,
2010 with certain holders of the TRC Holdco debt, whereby we
agreed to purchase $141.3 million of face value for
$137.4 million;
|
|
|
|
the expected award by the Company of 1.9 million shares of
restricted stock under the long-term incentive plan that we
expect to adopt in connection with this offering; and
|
|
|
|
the $18.0 million cash distribution on the Series B
preferred stock that was paid on November 22, 2010. The
cash distribution represents a portion of the accreted value of
the Series B preferred stock included in our
September 30, 2010 balance sheet.
|
Other
Transactions
The pro forma financial statements reflect those transactions
which occurred subsequent to January 1, 2009 as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships $250 million private placement of
111/4% Senior
Notes due July 2017, which was completed in July 2009;
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships prior offerings, consisting of the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,900,000 common units, which was completed in August 2009
|
|
|
|
6,325,000 common units, which was completed on January 19,
2010
|
|
|
|
secondary offering of 8,500,000 common units which was completed
on April 19, 2010
|
|
|
|
7,475,000 common units, which was completed on August 13,
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
our sales of the Permian Assets and Coastal Straddles, which
closed on April 27, 2010, and the Downstream Business which
closed on September 24, 2009;
|
|
|
|
our mandatory prepayment of debt related to the sale of the
Downstream Assets in September 2009 and the sale of the Permian
Assets and Coastal Straddles in April 2010
|
|
|
|
our refinancing of our senior secured credit facility in January
2010 and related transactions
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships entry on July 19, 2010 into an
amended and restated credit agreement that replaced its prior
variable rate senior secured credit facility with a new variable
rate senior secured credit facility due July 2015
|
|
|
|
the Partnerships private placement of $250 million of
77/8% Senior
Notes due August 2018, which was completed on August 13,
2010
|
|
|
|
our sales of our equity interests in Versado and Venice
Operations to the Partnership, which closed on August 25,
2010 and September 25, 2010, respectively, together with
related financing
|
|
|
|
mandatory and voluntary prepayments totaling $240.7 million
of indebtedness in August and September 2010 under our senior
secured credit facility in connection with the Versado and
Venice Operations transactions.
|
F-79
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
NOTES TO
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 2
Pro Forma Adjustments and Assumptions
(a) Reflects conversion of Series B preferred stock to
common shares as a result of this offering. The unaudited
condensed consolidated pro forma statements of operations for
the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and for the year
ended December 31, 2009 reflect the elimination of the
dividends on the Series B preferred stock, the
undistributed earnings attributable to preferred shareholders
and the distributions to common equivalents as these amounts or
transactions were associated with the Series B preferred
stock.
(b) Reflects estimated expenses of $3.3 million
associated with the Offering Transactions. These expenses were
allocated to Owners Equity.
(c) Reflects the repurchase of $141.3 million in face
value of Holdco debt for $137.4 million in cash, the
write-off of unamortized debt issue costs of $0.9 million
and an estimated $0.4 million of expenses associated with
this transaction. The gain on the repurchase is non-recurring
and therefore is not recognized in the unaudited pro forma
statement of operations.
(d) Reflects the estimated expense related to the 1.35
million shares of restricted stock under the new long term
incentive plan that the Company is adopting in connection with
this offering. The actual number of shares of restricted stock
to be issued will be determined upon pricing of the offering and
will be effective at closing. The restricted stock issued will
vest over three years. This adjustment increased pro forma
general & administrative expense by $8.8 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and
$11.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 in
the unaudited condensed consolidated pro forma statements of
operations.
(e) Reflects the amortization of debt issue costs related
to the $15.0 million of debt issue costs associated with
the Partnerships new variable rate senior secured credit
facility, which was completed on July 19, 2010. The pro
forma amortization of debt issue costs increased interest
expense by $0.5 million for the year ended
December 31, 2009 and $0.4 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2010 due to the increased debt issue
costs.
(f) Reflects the amortization of debt issue costs related
to the Partnerships private placement of $250 million
of
77/8% Senior
Notes due October 2018, which was completed on August 13,
2010. The amortization of debt issue costs related to the
Partnerships
77/8% Senior
Notes increased interest expense by $0.6 million for the
year ended December 31, 2009 and $0.4 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010 due to the increased
debt issue costs.
(g) Adjustments to interest expense, net, reflect the
following transactions:
|
|
|
|
|
The interest expense, net, that would have been incurred on the
Partnerships July 2009 issuance of $250 million of
111/4% senior
secured notes due 2017, and the use of the $237.4 million
in net proceeds to repay outstanding borrowings. This adjustment
increased pro forma interest expense, net, by $12.3 million
for the year ended December 31, 2009 in the unaudited
condensed consolidated pro forma statements of operations.
|
|
|
|
The reversal of interest expense related to borrowings that
would have been repaid with the net proceeds to the Partnership
of $103.5 million from the issuance and sale of 6,900,000
common units completed in August 2009. This adjustment reduced
pro forma interest expense, net, by $1.1 million for the
year ended December 31, 2009 in the unaudited condensed
consolidated pro forma statements of operations.
|
|
|
|
The reversal of interest expense related to borrowings that
would have been repaid with the net proceeds to the Partnership
of $140.2 million from the issuance and sale of 6,325,000
|
F-80
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
NOTES TO
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 2
Pro Forma Adjustments and
Assumptions (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
common units completed in January 2010. This adjustment reduced
pro forma interest expense, net, by $0.1 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010 and $2.4 million
for the year ended December 31, 2009 in the unaudited
condensed consolidated pro forma statements of operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The interest expense, net, that would have been incurred on the
Partnerships August 2010 issuance of $250 million of
77/8% senior
secured notes due 2018, and the use of the $244 million in
net proceeds to repay outstanding borrowings. This adjustment
increased pro forma interest expense, net, by $9.2 million
for the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and
$15.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 in
the unaudited condensed consolidated pro forma statements of
operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The reversal of interest expense related to borrowings that
would have been repaid with the net proceeds to the Partnership
of $181.4 million from the issuance and sale of 7,475,000
common units completed in August 2010. This adjustment reduced
pro forma interest expense, net, by $2.1 million for the
nine months ended September 30, 2010 and $3.1 million
for the year ended December 31, 2009 in the unaudited
condensed consolidated pro forma statements of operations.
|
|
|
|
The interest expense, net, related to increased borrowings under
the Partnerships senior secured credit facility incurred
in connection with the sale of our equity interests in Versado
and Venice Operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
The borrowings of $244.7 million by the Partnership under
its variable rate senior secured credit facility due July 2015
for the Versado transaction increased pro forma interest
expense, net, by $3.0 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 and $4.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2009 in the unaudited condensed consolidated
pro forma statements of operations;
|
|
|
|
The borrowings of $175.6 million by the Partnership under
its variable rate senior secured credit facility due July 2015
for the Venice Operations transaction increased pro forma
interest expense, net, by $2.5 million for the nine months
ended September 30, 2010 and $3.0 million for the year
ended December 31, 2009 in the unaudited condensed
consolidated pro forma statements of operations;
|
|
|
|
Pro forma interest expense under the Partnerships variable
rate senior secured credit facility due July 2015 is calculated
at an estimated annual rate of 1.9% for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010, and 1.7% for the year ended
December 31, 2009. These rates represent historical
weighted average interest rates paid on the Partnerships
existing variable rate senior secured revolving credit facility
for the periods presented. A one-eighth percentage point change
in the interest rate would change pro forma interest expense by
$0.3 million for the nine months ended September 30,
2010, and $0.5 million for the year ended December 31,
2009.
|
(h) Reflects the reversal of interest expense associated
with term loan prepayments under our senior secured credit
facility and senior unsecured
81/2% notes
due November 2013 as well as the reversal of interest expense
associated with our repurchase of $141.3 million of Holdco
debt. Our senior secured credit facilities had historical
weighted average interest rates of 5.8% for the nine months
ended September 30, 2010 and 3.5% for the year ended
December 31, 2009. Our Holdco loan facility had historical
weighted average interest rates of 5.3% for the nine months
ended September 30, 2010 and 6.3% for the year ended
F-81
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
NOTES TO
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Note 2
Pro Forma Adjustments and
Assumptions (Continued)
December 31, 2009. The following is the impact on pro forma
interest expense, net, of each prepayment on the unaudited
condensed consolidated pro forma statements of operations for
the periods indicated (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
Prepayment Description
|
|
September 30, 2010
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$141.3 Million Face Value of Holdco Debt repurchased
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
|
$
|
7.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$152.5 Million Mandatory PrepaymentPermian and Straddles
transaction
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
13.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$91.3 Million Mandatory PrepaymentVersado transaction
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$73.5 Million Mandatory PrepaymentVenice Operations
transaction
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$75.9 Million Voluntary PrepaymentVenice Operations
transaction
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reversal of interest expense
|
|
$
|
18.6
|
|
|
$
|
33.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(i) The adjustments to noncontrolling interest reflect
(i) the impact on our ownership of our sales to the
Partnership of Venice Operations, Versado, Permian Assets and
Coastal Straddles and the Downstream Business,
(ii) issuances of common units by the Partnership and
(iii) a sale of common units owned by us to the public in a
secondary offering and the impact of such sale on our percentage
ownership in the Partnership, as if these transactions had
occurred as of January 1, 2009 for each of the unaudited
pro forma consolidated statements of operations presented and as
of September 30, 2010 for the pro forma consolidated
balance sheet. Partnership level pro forma income has been
adjusted to reflect (i) our sales of assets as described
above to the Partnership as if the Partnership owned these
assets as of January 1, 2009 and (ii) the impact of
TRC consolidation entries including the elimination of
affiliated interest expense with TRC and the elimination of
mark-to-market
accounting at the Partnership on certain commodity derivative
contracts. Certain of our derivative contracts that are part of
our corporate hedging program qualify for cash flow hedge
accounting treatment in the TRC historical financial statements,
but not in the Partnerships historical financial
statements, as the Partnership was not a direct party to these
hedge transactions. Pro forma net income attributable to
noncontrolling interest for the nine months ended
September 30, 2010 was adjusted $8.8 million for
Venice Operations, $10.7 million for Versado and
$9.4 million for Permian Assets and Coastal Straddles. Pro
forma net income attributable to noncontrolling interest for the
year ended December 31, 2009 was adjusted $8.0 million
for Venice Operations, $4.5 million for Versado, and
$39.6 million for the Downstream Business.
(j) Represents the adjustment to income taxes to reflect
the unaudited pro forma adjustments at a statutory tax rate of
35.0%.
(k) The pro forma weighted average shares outstanding for
the nine months ended September 30, 2010 and for the year
ended December 31, 2009 reflect the impacts of (i) the
reverse split of our outstanding common stock,
(ii) conversion of the Series B preferred stock plus
the accreted value per share of the Series B Preferred to
common stock in each case after giving effect to the reverse
split and (iii) the award of additional shares of
restricted stock related to the new long term incentive plan
that we are adopting in connection with this offering.
F-82
TARGA RESOURCES
CORP.
NOTES TO
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
(l) Reflects a bonus stock award to management of
556,514 shares of common stock under the new incentive plan
that the Company is adopting in connection with this offering
and a $3 million cash award to management in connection
with the offering. The actual number of shares of restricted
stock to be issued will be determined upon pricing of this
offering and will be granted at closing. The common stock
granted is not subject to a vesting requirement.
(m) Reflects the additional amortization expense of the
deferred charge associated with income taxes related to the
Permian Assets and Coastal Straddles transaction and the Vesco
transaction as if they had occurred on January 1, 2009.
(n) Reflects an $18.0 million cash distribution on the
Series B preferred stock that was paid on November 22,
2010. The cash distribution represents a portion of the accreted
value of the Series B preferred stock included in our
September 30, 2010 balance sheet.
F-83
APPENDIX A
GLOSSARY OF
SELECTED TERMS
As generally used in the energy industry and in this
registration statement, the identified terms have the following
meanings:
|
|
|
Abbreviation
|
|
Term
|
|
Bbl
|
|
Barrels (equal to 42 gallons)
|
BBtu
|
|
Billion British thermal units
|
/d
|
|
Per day
|
gal
|
|
Gallons
|
MBbl
|
|
Thousand barrels
|
Mcf
|
|
Thousand cubic feet
|
MMBbl
|
|
Million barrels
|
MMBtu
|
|
Million British thermal units
|
MMcf
|
|
Million cubic feet
|
A-1
16,375,000 Shares
Targa Resources Corp.
Common Stock
Prospectus
December 6, 2010
Barclays Capital
Morgan Stanley
BofA Merrill Lynch
Citi
Deutsche Bank Securities
Credit Suisse
J.P. Morgan
Wells Fargo
Securities
Raymond James
RBC Capital Markets
UBS Investment Bank
Baird
ING