ENLK 2014 10-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K



	ý ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014
OR
	o TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from to

Commission file number: 000-50067

ENLINK MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



Delaware (State of organization)		16-1616605 (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
2501 CEDAR SPRINGS DALLAS, TEXAS (Address of principal executive offices)		75201 (Zip Code)

(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

(214) 953-9500

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT:



Title of Each Class		Name of Exchange on which Registered
Common Units Representing Limited Partnership Interests		The New York Stock Exchange

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(g) OF THE ACT: None.

Indicate by check mark if registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ý No o

Indicate by check mark if registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No ý

Indicate by check mark whether registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ý No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant's knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act. (Check one):



Large accelerated filer ý	Accelerated filer o	Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller reporting company o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes o No ý

The aggregate market value of the Common Units representing limited partner interests held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $2.9 billion on June 30, 2014, based on $31.43 per unit, the closing price of the Common Units as reported on The New York Stock Exchange on such date.

At February 11, 2015, there were 245,490,788 common units outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE:

None.

TABLE OF CONTENTS



Item	DESCRIPTION	Page
PART I
1.	BUSINESS	3
1A.	RISK FACTORS	27
1B.	UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS	47
2.	PROPERTIES	47
3.	LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	48
4.	MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES	49
PART II
5.	MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED UNITHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES	49
6.	SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA	50
7.	MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS	56
7A.	QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK	75
8.	FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA	76
9.	CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE	76
9A.	CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES	77
9B.	OTHER INFORMATION	77
PART III
10.	DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE	77
11.	EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION	82
12.	SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED UNITHOLDER MATTERS	98
13.	CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE	100
14.	PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES	103
PART IV
15.	EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES	108

ENLINK MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP

PART I

Item 1. Business

General

EnLink Midstream Partners, LP is a publicly traded Delaware limited partnership formed in 2002. Our common units are traded on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the symbol “ENLK.” Our business activities are conducted through our subsidiary, EnLink Midstream Operating, LP, a Delaware limited partnership (the “Operating Partnership”), and the subsidiaries of the Operating Partnership. Our executive offices are located at 2501 Cedar Springs Rd., Dallas, Texas 75201, and our telephone number is (214) 953-9500. Our Internet address is www.enlink.com. We post the following filings in the “Investors” section of our website as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission: our annual reports on Form 10-K; our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q; our current reports on Form 8-K; and any amendments to those reports or statements filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All such filings on our website are available free of charge. In this report, the terms “Partnership” and “Registrant,” as well as the terms “our,” “we,” “us” and “its,” are sometimes used as abbreviated references to EnLink Midstream Partners, LP itself or EnLink Midstream Partners, LP together with its consolidated subsidiaries, including the Operating Partnership.

EnLink Midstream GP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, is our general partner (the “General Partner”). Our General Partner manages our operations and activities. Our General Partner is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of EnLink Midstream, LLC (“ENLC” or “EnLink Midstream”). ENLC’s units are traded on the NYSE under the symbol “ENLC.” ENLC’s manager is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Devon Energy Corporation (“Devon”).

Effective as of March 7, 2014, the Operating Partnership acquired (the “Acquisition”) 50% of the outstanding equity interests in EnLink Midstream Holdings, LP (“Midstream Holdings”) and all of the outstanding equity interests in EnLink Midstream Holdings GP, LLC, the general partner of Midstream Holdings, in exchange for the issuance by the Partnership of 120,542,441 units representing a new class of limited partnership interests in the Partnership. At the same time, EnLink Midstream, Inc. (“EMI”), the entity that directly owns our General Partner, became a wholly-owned subsidiary of ENLC (together with the Acquisition, the “business combination”). At the conclusion of the business combination, another wholly-owned subsidiary of ENLC, Acacia Natural Gas Corp. I, Inc. (“Acacia”), owned the remaining 50% of the outstanding equity interests in Midstream Holdings. On February 17, 2015, Acacia contributed a 25% interest in Midstream Holdings to us in exchange for 31.6 million Class D Common Units in the Partnership. See “Recent Growth Developments.” In this report, the term “Midstream Holdings” is sometimes used to refer to EnLink Midstream Holdings, LP itself or to EnLink Midstream Holdings, LP together with EnLink Midstream Holdings GP, LLC and their subsidiaries.

Midstream Holdings was formerly a wholly-owned subsidiary of Devon Energy Corporation (“Devon”) and it gathers, processes and transports natural gas, primarily for Devon. Midstream Holdings also fractionates natural gas liquids (“NGLs”) into component NGL products. Under the acquisition method of accounting, Midstream Holdings is considered the historical predecessor of our business because Devon obtained control of us through its control of ENLC and through the indirect acquisition of our General Partner.

The following diagram depicts the organization and ownership of the Partnership as of December 31, 2014.

Definitions

The following terms as defined generally are used in the energy industry and in this document:

/d = per day

Bbls = barrels

Bcf = billion cubic feet

Boe = six Mcf of gas per Bbl of oil

Btu = British thermal units

CO2= Carbon dioxide

CPI= Consumer Price Index

Gal = gallon

Mcf = thousand cubic feet

MMBtu = million British thermal units

MMcf = million cubic feet

NGL = natural gas liquid and natural gas liquids

Capacity volumes for our facilities are measured based on physical volume and stated in cubic feet (“Bcf”, “Mcf” or “MMcf”). Throughput volumes are measured based on energy content and stated in British thermal units (“Btu” or “MMBtu”). A volume capacity of 100 MMcf generally correlates to volume capacity of 100,000 MMBtu. Fractionated volumes are measured based on physical volumes and stated in gallons. Crude oil, condensate and brine services volumes are measured based on physical volume and stated in barrels (“Bbls”).

Our Operations

We connect the wells of natural gas producers in our market areas to our gathering systems, process natural gas for the removal of NGLs, fractionate NGLs into purity products and market those products for a fee, transport natural gas and ultimately provide natural gas to a variety of markets. We purchase natural gas from natural gas producers and other supply sources and sell that natural gas to utilities, industrial consumers, other marketers and pipelines. We operate processing plants that process gas transported to the plants by major interstate pipelines or from our own gathering systems under a variety of fee-based arrangements. We provide a variety of crude oil and condensate services, which include crude oil and condensate gathering via pipelines, barges, rail and trucks, condensate stabilization and brine disposal. We also have crude oil and condensate terminal facilities in south Louisiana that provide access for crude oil and condensate producers to the premium markets in this area. Our gas gathering systems consist of networks of pipelines that collect natural gas from points near producing wells and transport it to larger pipelines for further transmission. Our transmission pipelines primarily receive natural gas from our gathering systems and from third party gathering and transmission systems and deliver natural gas to industrial end-users, utilities and other pipelines. We also have transmission lines that transport NGLs from east Texas and from our south Louisiana processing plants to our fractionators in south Louisiana. Additionally, we own an economic interest in an NGL fractionator located at Mont Belvieu, Texas that receives raw mix NGLs from customers, fractionates such raw mix and redelivers the finished products to the customers for a fee. Devon is one of the largest customers of this fractionator. Our crude oil and condensate gathering and transmission systems consist of trucking facilities, pipelines, rail and barge facilities that, in exchange for a fee, transport oil from a producer site to an end user. Our processing plants remove NGLs and CO2 from a natural gas stream and our fractionators separate the NGLs into separate NGL products, including ethane, propane, iso-butane, normal butane and natural gasoline.

Our assets are comprised of systems and other assets in which our interest is held through our wholly-owned subsidiaries as well as systems and other assets owned by Midstream Holdings, in which we own a 75% interest as of February 17, 2015, and are located in four primary regions:


•	Texas. Our Texas assets consist of transmission pipelines with a capacity of approximately 1.3 Bcf/d, processing facilities with a total processing capacity of approximately 1.2 Bcf/d and gathering systems with total capacity of approximately 2.8 Bcf/d.


•	Oklahoma. Our Oklahoma assets consist of processing facilities with a total processing capacity of approximately 550 MMcf/d and gathering systems with total capacity of approximately 605 MMcf/d.


•	Louisiana. Our Louisiana assets consist of transmission pipelines with a capacity of approximately 3.5 Bcf/d, processing facilities with a total processing capacity of approximately 1.7 Bcf/d and gathering systems with total capacity of approximately 510 MMcf/d.

•

Ohio River Valley. Our Ohio River Valley (“ORV”) operations are an integrated network of assets comprised of a 5,000-barrel-per-hour crude oil and condensate barge loading terminal on the Ohio River, a 20-spot operation crude oil and condensate rail loading terminal on the Ohio Central Railroad network and approximately 200 miles of crude oil and condensate pipelines in Ohio and West Virginia. The assets also include 500,000 barrels of above ground storage and a trucking fleet of approximately 100 vehicles comprised of both semi and straight trucks. We have eight existing brine disposal wells with an injection capacity of approximately 5,000 Bbls/d. Additionally, our ORV operations include five condensate stabilization and natural gas compression stations, including two stations under construction, with combined capacities of 19,000 Bbls/d of condensate stabilization and 580 MMcf/d of natural gas compression.

About Devon

Devon (NYSE: DVN) is a leading independent energy company engaged primarily in the exploration, development and production of crude oil, natural gas and NGLs. Devon’s operations are concentrated in various onshore areas in the U.S. and Canada. Please see Devon’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 for additional information concerning Devon’s business.

Our Business Strategies

Our primary business objectives are to have sustained growth in partnership distributions and to maintain a strong balance sheet. We intend to accomplish these objectives by executing the following strategies:

•

Organic Growth: pursue opportunities around our existing footprint. We expect to grow certain of our systems organically over time by meeting Devon’s and our other customers’ midstream service needs that result from their drilling activity in our areas of operation. We continually evaluate whether to pursue economically attractive organic expansion opportunities in existing or new areas of operation that allow us to leverage our existing infrastructure, operating expertise and customer relationships by constructing and expanding systems to meet new or increased demand for our services.


•	Growing with Devon: We expect our relationship with Devon will continue to provide us with significant business opportunities. Devon is a leading North American E&P company with a focus on five core growth areas: Eagle Ford, Permian Basin, Anadarko Basin, Canadian oil sands and the Barnett Shale.

•

Dropdowns: maximize opportunities provided by Devon’s sponsorship and assets held by ENLC. We plan to execute our growth in part through pursuing accretive dropdown opportunities from Devon and ENLC. On February 17, 2015, we purchased a 25% interest in Midstream Holdings from ENLC increasing our ownership in Midstream Holdings to 75% and expect to be given the opportunity over time to purchase the remaining interest. ENLC and Devon are parties to a first offer agreement pursuant to which ENLC has a right of first offer with respect to Devon’s 50% interest in the Access Pipeline (the “First Offer Agreement”). We are party to a preferential rights agreement with ENLC pursuant to which ENLC granted us a right of first refusal, for a period of 10 years, with respect to Devon’s 50% interest in the Access Pipeline transportation system, to the extent ENLC in the future obtains such interest pursuant to the First Offer Agreement. In addition, if ENLC has the opportunity to exercise its right of first offer for Devon’s interest in the Access Pipeline pursuant to the First Offer Agreement, but determines not to exercise such right, ENLC is required to assign such right to us. Though there is no contractual obligation, we anticipate being given the opportunity to purchase the Victoria Express Pipeline from Devon in the future. We also believe there will continue to be significant opportunities as Devon continues to develop its oil and gas production. However, we cannot be certain that these opportunities will be made available to us, or that we will choose to pursue any such opportunity.


•	Acquisitions: pursue strategic and accretive acquisitions. We pursue strategic and accretive acquisition opportunities within the midstream energy industry, both in new and existing lines of business and geographic areas of operation.

•

Strong Balance Sheet: maintain an investment grade quality financial profile. We intend to maintain appropriate leverage and other key financial metrics in line with other partnerships in our sector that have received investment grade credit ratings. By maintaining an investment grade quality financial profile, we believe that we will be able to pursue strategic acquisitions and large growth projects at a lower cost of capital, which enhances our competitiveness.

Our Competitive Strengths

We believe that we are well-positioned to execute our business strategies and to achieve our business objectives due to the following competitive strengths:


•	Devon’s sponsorship. We expect our relationship with Devon will continue to provide us with significant business opportunities. Devon is one of the largest independent oil and gas producers in North America. Devon has a significant interest in promoting the success of our business, due to its approximate 70% ownership interest in ENLC and approximate 49% ownership interest in us.

•

Strategically-located assets. Our assets are strategically located in strategic producing regions with the potential for increasing throughput volume and cash flow generation. Our assets are in areas consistent with Devon's strategic focus. Our asset portfolio includes gathering, transmission, fractionation, processing and stabilization systems that are located in areas in which producer activity is focused on crude oil, condensate and NGLs as well as natural gas. We have developed or are in the process of developing platforms in these areas through organic development and acquisitions.

•

Stable cash flows. Approximately 95% of our cash flows were derived from fee-based services with no direct commodity exposure during 2014. Midstream Holdings has entered into 10-year, fixed-fee gathering and processing agreements with a subsidiary of Devon pursuant to which Midstream Holdings or its subsidiary provide gathering, treating, compression, dehydration, stabilization, processing and fractionation services, as applicable, for natural gas delivered by Devon to Midstream Holdings’ gathering and processing systems in the Barnett and Cana-Woodford Shales. These agreements provide Midstream Holdings with dedication of all of the natural gas owned or controlled by Devon and produced from or attributable to existing and future wells located on certain oil, natural gas and mineral leases covering lands within the acreage dedications, excluding properties previously dedicated to other natural gas gathering systems not owned and operated by Devon. These agreements also include five-year minimum volume commitments and annual rate escalators. Please read “—Midstream Holdings’ Contractual Relationship with Devon.” We will continue to focus on contract structures that reduce volatility and support long-term stability of cash flows.

•

Integrated midstream services. We span the energy value chain by providing natural gas, NGL, crude oil, condensate and water services across a diverse customer base. These services include gathering, compressing, treating, processing, transporting, storing and selling natural gas, producing, fractionating, transporting, storing and selling NGLs, and gathering, transporting, storing and trans-loading crude oil and condensate. We believe our ability to provide all of these services gives us an advantage in competing for new opportunities because we can provide substantially all services that producers, marketers and others require to move natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate from the wellhead to the market on a cost-effective basis.


•	Financial flexibility to pursue expansion and acquisition opportunities. We believe our stable cash flows, strong balance sheet and access to debt and equity capital markets provide us with the financial flexibility to competitively pursue acquisition and expansion opportunities and to execute our strategy across capital market cycles.

•

Experienced management team. We believe our management team has a proven track record of creating value through the development, acquisition, optimization and integration of midstream assets. Our management team has an average of over 20 years of experience in the energy industry. We believe this team provides us with a strong foundation for evaluating growth opportunities and operating our assets in a safe, reliable and efficient manner.

We believe that we will leverage our competitive strengths to successfully implement our strategy; however, our business involves numerous risks and uncertainties that may prevent us from achieving our primary business objective. For a more complete description of the risks associated with our business, please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors.”

Midstream Holdings' Contractual Relationship with Devon

Upon the consummation of the business combination, Midstream Holdings entered into a 10-year transportation contract with Devon for the Acacia transmission system as well as the following additional fee-based agreements with Devon:



		Contract Term	Minimum Gathering Volume Commitment	Minimum Processing Volume Commitment	Minimum Volume Commitment Term	Annual Rate
Contract		(Years)	(MMcf/d)	(MMcf/d)	(Years)	Escalators
Bridgeport gathering and processing contract (1)		10	850	650	5	CPI
East Johnson County gathering contract		10	125	—	5	CPI
Northridge gathering and processing contract (2)		10	40	40	5	CPI
Cana gathering and processing contract		10	330	330	5	CPI

(1)	The Bridgeport gathering and processing contract includes volume commitments to the Bridgeport processing facility as well as the Bridgeport gathering systems.
(2)	On December 1, 2014, Devon Gas Services (“Gas Services”) assigned its 10-year gathering and processing agreement to Linn Exchange Properties, LLC (“Linn Energy”), which is a subsidiary of Linn Energy, LLC, in connection with Gas Services' divestiture of certain of its southeastern Oklahoma assets. Accordingly, on December 1, 2014, Linn Energy assumed all of Gas Services' obligations under the agreement, which remains in full force and effect. This agreement relates to production dedicated to our Northridge assets in southeastern Oklahoma.

Recent Growth Developments

Organic Growth

Ohio River Valley Condensate Pipeline and Condensate Stabilization Facilities. In August 2014, we announced plans to construct a new 45-mile, eight-inch condensate pipeline and six natural gas compression and condensate stabilization facilities that will service major producer customers in the Utica Shale, including Eclipse Resources. As a component of the project, the Partnership has entered into a long-term, fee-based agreement under which Eclipse Resources will receive compression and stabilization services and has agreed to sell stabilized condensate to us.

The new-build stabilized condensate pipeline will connect to our existing 200-mile pipeline in the ORV, providing producer customers in the region access to premium market outlets through our barge facility on the Ohio River and rail terminal in Ohio. The pipeline, which is expected to be complete in the second half of 2015, is expected to have an initial capacity of approximately 50,000 Bbls/d with potential to expand.

We will also build and operate six natural gas compression and condensate stabilization facilities in Noble, Belmont, and Guernsey counties in Ohio. Upon completion, the facilities will have a combined capacity of approximately 560 MMcf/d of natural gas compression and approximately 41,500 Bbls/d of condensate stabilization. The first two compression and condensate stabilization facilities began operations during the fourth quarter of 2014 and the remaining four facilities are expected to be operational by the end of 2015.

In support of the project, we plan to leverage and expand our existing midstream assets in the region, including increasing condensate storage capacity and handling capabilities at our barge terminal on the Ohio River. We will add approximately 130,000 barrels of above ground storage, bringing our total storage capacity at the barge facility to over 360,000 barrels.

Marathon Petroleum Joint Venture. We have entered into a series of agreements with a subsidiary of Marathon Petroleum Corporation (“Marathon Petroleum”), to create a 50/50 joint venture named Ascension Pipeline Company, LLC. This joint venture will build a new 30-mile NGL pipeline connecting our existing Riverside fractionation and terminal complex to Marathon Petroleum's Garyville refinery located on the Mississippi River. The bolt-on project to our Cajun-Sibon NGL system is supported by long-term, fee-based contracts with Marathon Petroleum. Under the arrangement, we will serve as the construction manager and operator of the pipeline project, which is expected to be operational in the first half of 2017.

Cajun-Sibon Phases I and II. In Louisiana, we have transformed our business that historically has been focused on processing offshore natural gas to a business that is now focused on NGLs with additional opportunities for growth from new onshore supplies of NGLs. The Louisiana petrochemical market historically has relied on liquids from offshore production; however, the decrease in offshore production and increase in onshore rich gas production have changed the market structure. Cajun-Sibon Phases I and II now bridge the gap between supply, which aggregates in the Mont Belvieu area, and demand, located in the Mississippi River corridor of Louisiana, thereby building a strategic NGL position in this region.

The pipeline expansion and the Eunice fractionation expansion under Phase I were completed and commenced operation in November 2013. Phase II of the Cajun-Sibon expansion, which was completed and commenced operation in September 2014, increased the Cajun-Sibon pipeline capacity by an additional 50,000 Bbls/d to approximately 130,000 Bbls/d and added a new 100,000 Bbl/d fractionator at our Plaquemine gas processing complex. The throughput of the pipeline averaged 109,900

Bbls/d during the fourth quarter of 2014. Our fractionators in south Louisiana averaged approximately 98,300 Bbls/d during the fourth quarter of 2014.

We believe the Cajun-Sibon project represents a tremendous growth step by leveraging our Louisiana assets and also by creating a significant platform for continued growth of our NGL business. We believe this project, along with our existing assets, will provide a number of additional opportunities to grow this business, including expanding market optionality and connectivity, upgrading products, expanding rail imports, exporting NGLs and expanding fractionation and product storage capacity.

Bearkat Natural Gas Gathering and Processing System. In September 2014, we completed construction of a new natural gas processing complex and rich gas gathering pipeline system in the Permian Basin called Bearkat. The natural gas processing complex includes treating, processing and gas takeaway solutions for regional producers. The project, which is fully owned by us, is supported by a 10-year, fee-based contract.

Bearkat is strategically located near our existing Deadwood joint venture assets in Glasscock County, Texas. The processing plant has an initial capacity of 60 MMcf/d, increasing our total operational processing capacity in the Permian to approximately 115 MMcf/d. We also completed construction of a 30-mile high-pressure gathering system upstream of the Bearkat complex to provide additional gathering capacity for producers in Glasscock and Reagan counties.

During 2014, we constructed a new 35-mile, 12-inch diameter high-pressure pipeline to provide gathering capacity for the Bearkat natural gas processing complex. The pipeline has an initial capacity of approximately 100 MMcf/d and provides gas takeaway solutions for constrained producer customers in Howard, Martin and Glasscock counties. The pipeline commenced operation in the fourth quarter of 2014.

Growing with Devon

West Texas Expansion. We are expanding our natural gas gathering and processing system in the Permian Basin by constructing a new natural gas processing plant and expanding our rich gas gathering system. The new 120 MMcf/d gas processing plant will be strategically located on the north end of our existing midstream assets and will offer additional gas processing capabilities to producer customers in the region, including Devon. Due to the impact from the current commodity environment and a shift in producers’ drilling expectations, we are delaying construction on the processing plant until late 2015. Upon completion, our total operated processing capacity in the region will be approximately 240 MMcf/d.

As a part of the expansion, we are a party to a long-term, fee-based agreement with Devon to provide gathering and processing services for over 18,000 acres under development in Martin County. We constructed multiple low pressure gathering pipelines and a new 23-mile, 12-inch high pressure gathering pipeline that will tie into the Bearkat natural gas gathering system. The new pipelines commenced operation in January 2015.

Drop Downs

E2 Drop Down. On October 22, 2014, the Partnership acquired from EMI, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ENLC, 100% of the Class A Units and 50% of the Class B Units (collectively, the “E2 Appalachian Units”) in E2 Appalachian Compression, LLC (“E2 Appalachian”), and 93.7% of the Class A Units (the “Energy Services Units” and, together with the E2 Appalachian Units, the “Purchased Units”) in E2 Energy Services, LLC (“Energy Services” and, together with E2 Appalachian, “E2”). The total consideration paid by the Partnership to EMI for the Purchased Units included (i) $13.0 million in cash for the Energy Services Units and (ii) $150.0 million in cash and 1,016,322 common units representing limited partner interests in the Partnership for the E2 Appalachian Units. The remaining 50% of the Class B Units in E2 Appalachian are owned by members of the E2 Appalachian management team and are designed to provide such management team members with equity incentives.

E2’s assets include five condensate stabilization and natural gas compression stations with combined capacities of 19,000 Bbls/d of condensate stabilization and 580 MMcf/d of natural gas compression located in the ORV. Currently, three of the five stations are in service and commercial start-up of the two remaining stations is expected in the first half of 2015. The assets are supported by a long-term, fee-based contract with Antero Resources.

Acquisitions

Reliance, in its capacity as representative of the Sellers, to acquire all of the equity interests in Coronado Midstream Holdings LLC, the parent company of Coronado Midstream LLC (“Coronado”), which owns natural gas gathering and processing facilities in the Permian Basin, for approximately $600.0 million in cash and equity, subject to certain adjustments. Coronado operates three cryogenic gas processing plants and a gas gathering system in the North Midland Basin including approximately 270 miles of gathering pipelines, 175 MMcf/d of processing capacity and 35,000 horsepower of compression. The Coronado system is underpinned by long-term contracts, which include the dedication of production from over 190,000 acres.

LPC Crude Oil Marketing. On January 31, 2015, the Partnership, through one of its wholly owned subsidiaries, acquired LPC Crude Oil Marketing LLC (“LPC”), which has crude oil gathering, transportation and marketing operations in the Permian Basin, for approximately $100.0 million. LPC is an integrated crude oil logistics service provider with operations throughout the Permian Basin. LPC's integrated logistics services are supported by 41 tractor trailers, 13 pipeline injection stations and 67 miles of crude oil gathering pipeline.

Natural Gas Pipeline Assets. On November 1, 2014, we acquired from affiliates of Chevron Corporation certain Gulf Coast natural gas pipeline assets predominantly located in southern Louisiana for $234.0 million, subject to certain adjustments. These natural gas pipeline assets include the following:


•	Bridgeline System: approximately 990 miles of natural gas pipelines in southern Louisiana with a total system capacity of approximately 900 MMcf/d;


•	Sabine Pipeline: approximately 130 miles of natural gas pipelines in Texas and southern Louisiana with a total capacity of approximately 300 MMcf/d;


•	Chandeleur System: approximately 215 miles of offshore Mississippi and Alabama pipelines with a total capacity of approximately 300 MMcf/d;


•	Storage Assets: three caverns located in southern Louisiana with a combined working capacity of approximately 11 Bcf of natural gas, including two near Sorrento, LA with a capacity of approximately 4.0 Bcf and one inactive cavern near Napoleonville, LA with a capacity of approximately 7.0 Bcf; and


•	Henry Hub: ownership and management of the title tracking services offered at the Henry Hub, the delivery location for the New York Mercantile Exchange (the “NYMEX”) natural gas futures contracts. Henry Hub is connected to 13 major interstate and intrastate natural gas pipeline and storage systems.

Our Assets

Our assets consist of gathering systems, transmission pipelines, processing facilities, fractionation facilities, stabilization facilities, storage facilities and ancillary assets. Except as stated otherwise, the following tables provide information about our assets as of and for the year ended December 31, 2014:



				Year Ended December 31, 2014
Gathering and Transmission Pipelines		Approximate Length (Miles)	Compression (1) (HP)	Estimated Capacity (MMcf/d)		Average Throughput (Thousands of MMBtu/d)
Texas Assets:
Partnership Assets ^		895	131,834	1,715		958,300
Midstream Holdings Assets*		3,267	262,000	2,330		1,999,600
Oklahoma Assets:
Cana System*		340	87,499	530		414,000
Northridge System*		140	17,895	75		57,000
Louisiana Assets:
LIG System^ (2)		3,320	78,648	3,975		615,000
South Louisiana Assets^		600	—	—	(3)	—	(4)
Total		8,562	577,876	8,625		4,043,900


^	Assets wholly-owned by the Partnership.
*	Assets owned by Midstream Holdings, in which the Partnership held a 50% interest as of December 31, 2014 and a 75% interest as of February 17, 2015.
(1)	Includes power generation units.
(2)	Includes natural gas pipelines acquired from Chevron Corporation on November 1, 2014. Average throughput volumes reflect throughput for the period from November 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014.
(3)	Our South Louisiana assets also have estimated capacity for liquid pipeline transportation of approximately 130 MBbls/d.
(4)	Our South Louisiana Cajun-Sibon liquids pipeline, including the Cajun-Sibon II expansion which commenced operations in late September 2014, had an average throughput of 72,900 Bbls/d for the year ended December 31, 2014.



			Year Ended December 31, 2014
Processing Facilities		Processing Capacity (MMcf/d)	Average Throughput (MMBtu/d)
Texas Assets
Partnership Assets^		369	357,100
Midstream Holdings Assets*		790	788,700
Oklahoma Assets
Cana System*		350	368,400
Northridge System*		200	73,400
Louisiana Assets
LIG Assets^		335	193,400
South Louisiana Assets^		1,375	354,000
Total		3,419	2,135,000


^	Assets wholly-owned by the Partnership.
*	Assets owned by Midstream Holdings, in which the Partnership held a 50% interest as of December 31, 2014 and a 75% interest as of February 17, 2015.



Fractionation Facilities		Estimated NGL Fractionation Capacity (MBbls/d)	Average Throughput (MBbls/d)
Texas Assets
Partnership Assets^		15	—	(2	)
Midstream Holdings Assets*		15	—	(2	)
Louisiana Assets
LIG Assets^		11	5
South Louisiana Assets^		183	116
Gulf Coast Fractionators (1)		56	44
Total		280	165


^	Assets wholly-owned by the Partnership.
*	Assets owned by Midstream Holdings, in which the Partnership held a 50% interest as of December 31, 2014 and a 75% interest as of February 17, 2015.
(1)	Volumes are shown net of Midstream Holdings’ net contractual right to the burdens and benefits of a 38.75% economic interest in Gulf Coast Fractionators held by Devon.
(2)	We are in the process of connecting our Texas fractionation facility to our Deadwood processing plant in the Permian Basin and the Midstream Holdings fractionation facility is connected to our Bridgeport processing plant. These fractionation facilities will provide operational flexibility for the related processing plants, but are not the primary fractionation facilities for the NGLs produced by the processing plants. Under the Partnership’s current contracts, it does not earn fractionation fees for operating these fractionation facilities so throughput volumes through these facilities are not captured on a routine basis and are not significant to its operating margins.

Texas Assets. Our Texas assets consist of systems and other assets in which our interest is held through our wholly-owned subsidiaries as well as systems and other assets owned by Midstream Holdings, in which we own a 75% interest as of February 17, 2015, and include transmission pipelines with a capacity of approximately 1.3 Bcf/d, processing facilities with a total processing capacity of approximately 1.2 Bcf/d and gathering systems with total capacity of approximately 2.8 Bcf/d.


•	Transmission Systems. Our transmission systems in Texas include approximately 260 miles of pipeline with an aggregate capacity of approximately 1.3 Bcf/d and consist of the following:

•

North Texas Pipeline. Our North Texas Pipeline (“NTPL”) is a 140-mile pipeline extending from an area near Fort Worth, Texas to a point near Paris, Texas and connects production from the Barnett Shale to markets in north Texas accessed by the Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America, LLC, Kinder Morgan, Inc., Houston Pipeline Company, L.P., Atmos Energy Corporation and Gulf Crossing Pipeline Company, LLC. The NTPL has approximately 375 MMcf/d of capacity and 18,960 horsepower of compression and, for the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014, the average throughput on the NTPL was approximately 338,000 MMBtu/d.

•

Acacia transmission system. The Acacia transmission system, which is owned by Midstream Holdings, is a 120-mile pipeline that connects production from the Barnett Shale to markets in north Texas accessed by Atmos Energy, Brazos Electric, Enbridge Energy Partners, Energy Transfer Partners, Enterprise Product Partners and GDF Suez. The Acacia transmission system has approximately 920 MMcf/d of capacity and 17,000 horsepower of compression and, for the year ended December 31, 2014, average throughput was approximately 733,900 MMBtu/d. Devon is the Acacia transmission system’s only customer and has entered into a 10-year fixed-fee transportation agreement that covers transmission services on the Acacia transmission pipeline and includes annual rate escalators.


•	Processing and Fractionation Facilities. Our processing facilities in Texas include six gas processing plants with total processing throughput that averaged 1,145,749 MMBtu/d for the year ended December 31, 2014 and our 38.75% interest in GCF and consist of the following:

•

Bridgeport processing facility. Our Bridgeport natural gas processing facility, located in Wise County, Texas, approximately 40 miles northwest of Fort Worth, Texas, is owned by Midstream Holdings and is one of the largest processing plants in the U.S. with seven cryogenic turboexpander plants that have a total of 790 MMcf/d of processing capacity and 15 MBbls/d of NGL fractionation capacity, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2014, throughput volumes at the Bridgeport processing facility averaged 788,700 MMBtu/d of natural gas. Devon is the Bridgeport facility’s largest customer with approximately 717,700 MMBtu/d of natural gas processed for the year ended December 31, 2014, which represented approximately 91% of the total volumes processed at the facility during such period. In March 2014, Devon and Midstream Holdings entered into a 10-year, fixed-fee processing agreement pursuant to which Midstream Holdings provides processing services for natural gas delivered by Devon to the Bridgeport processing facility. This contractual arrangement includes a five-year minimum volume commitment from Devon of 650 MMcf/d of natural gas delivered to the Bridgeport processing facility as well as annual rate escalators.

•

Silver Creek processing complex. The Partnership’s Silver Creek processing complex, located in Weatherford, Azle and Fort Worth, Texas, includes three processing plants. The Partnership’s Silver Creek plants have a total of 280 MMcf/d of processing capacity, with the Azle Plant, Silver Creek Plant and Goforth Plant accounting for 50 MMcf/d, 200 MMcf/d and 30 MMCf/d of processing capacity, respectively. For the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014, throughput volumes at the Silver Creek processing facility averaged 283,600 MMBtu/d of natural gas.

•

Permian Basin assets. Our Permian Basin assets consist of our Deadwood natural gas processing plant, our Bearkat natural gas processing plant and gathering facilities, and our Mesquite Terminal fractionator. The Partnership has a 50% undivided working interest in the Deadwood processing facility which is located in Glasscock County, Texas. The Deadwood plant is supported by acreage dedication from a major producer in the Permian Basin. The Deadwood processing facility has a total capacity of 58 MMcf/d and total processing throughput that averaged 71,000 MMBtu/d for the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014. The Mesquite Terminal, which has 15,000 BBls/d of fractionation capacity, is located in Midland County and serves as a terminal for third-party raw-make NGLs. We are also transloading crude oil and condensate at this facility. The Bearkat facility came online in the third quarter of 2014 and consists of a natural gas processing plant with condensate stabilization. The Bearkat plant has a total capacity of 60MMcf/d, and is supplied from approximately 90 miles of high pressure gathering pipelines and 6 compressor stations. The high pressure gathering system has a capacity of approximately 240 MMcf/d. The Bearkat plant averaged 3,000 MMBtu/d for December 2014 which was the first full month of operations.

•

Gulf Coast Fractionators. Midstream Holdings is entitled to receive the economic benefits and burdens of the 38.75% interest in Gulf Coast Fractionators held by Devon, with the remaining interests owned 22.50% by Phillips 66 and 38.75% by Targa Resources Partners. Gulf Coast Fractionators owns an NGL fractionator located on the Gulf Coast at Mont Belvieu, Texas. Phillips 66 is the operator of the fractionator. Gulf Coast Fractionators receives raw mix NGLs from customers, fractionates the raw mix and redelivers the finished products to the customers for a fee. The facility has a capacity of approximately 145 MBbls/d. The plant fractionated 44,000 Bbls/d of liquids during 2014.


•	Gathering Systems. Our gathering systems in Texas include approximately 3,902 miles of pipeline with total throughput of approximately 1,886,000 MMBtu/d for the year ended December 31, 2014 and consist of the following:

•

Bridgeport rich gathering system. This rich natural gas gathering system, which is owned by Midstream Holdings, consists of approximately 1,922 miles of pipeline segments with approximately 145,000 horsepower of compression. A substantial majority of the natural gas gathered on the system is delivered to the Bridgeport processing facility. For the year ended December 31, 2014, throughput volumes on the Bridgeport rich gathering system averaged 826,300 MMBtu/d of natural gas. Devon is the largest customer on the Bridgeport rich gathering system with approximately 751,900 MMBtu/d of natural gas gathered for the year ended December 31, 2014, which represented approximately 91% of the total throughput on the system during such period. As described above, Devon and Midstream Holdings have entered into a 10-year, fixed-fee gathering agreement pursuant to which Midstream Holdings provides gathering services on the Bridgeport system, which includes a five-year minimum volume commitment from Devon of a combined 850 MMcf/d of natural gas delivered for gathering into the Bridgeport rich and Bridgeport lean gathering systems.


•	Bridgeport lean gathering system. This lean natural gas gathering system, which is owned by Midstream Holdings, consists of approximately 935 miles of pipeline segments with approximately 59,000 horsepower

of compression. Natural gas gathered on this system is delivered to the Acacia transmission system and intrastate pipelines without processing. For the year ended December 31, 2014, throughput volumes on the Bridgeport lean gathering system averaged 245,900 MMBtu/d of natural gas. Devon is the largest customer on the Bridgeport lean gathering system with approximately 228,700 MMBtu/d of natural gas gathered for the year ended December 31, 2014, which represented approximately 93% of the total throughput on the system during such period. As described above, Devon and Midstream Holdings have entered into a 10-year, fixed-fee gathering and processing agreement that covers gathering services on the Bridgeport system.

•

East Johnson County gathering system. This natural gas gathering system, which is owned by Midstream Holdings, consists of approximately 290 miles of pipeline segments. Natural gas gathered on this system is delivered to intrastate pipelines without processing. For the year ended December 31, 2014, throughput volumes on the East Johnson County gathering system averaged 193,500 MMBtu/d of natural gas. Devon is the largest customer on the East Johnson County gathering system with approximately 181,900 MMBtu/d of natural gas gathered for the year ended December 31, 2014, which represented approximately 94% of the total throughput on the system during such period. In March 2014, Devon and Midstream Holdings entered into a 10-year, fixed-fee gathering agreement pursuant to which Midstream Holdings provides gathering services on the East Johnson County gathering system, which includes a five-year minimum volume commitment from Devon of 125 MMcf/d of natural gas delivered for gathering into the East Johnson County gathering system as well as annual rate escalators.

•

Silver Creek gathering systems. Our Silver Creek gathering system includes two gathering systems. Our north Texas gathering system, which we refer to as NTG, consists of approximately 690 miles of gathering lines with approximately 112,900 horsepower of compression and had an average throughput of approximately 608,700 MMBtu/d for the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014. The Denton system consists of approximately 35 miles of gathering lines and had an average throughput of approximately 11,600 MMBtu/d for the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014.

•

Howard Energy Partners (“HEP”). HEP owns and operates over 500 miles of pipeline and a 200 MMcf/d processing plant, serving production from the Eagle Ford, Escondido, Olmos, Pearsall and other formations in south Texas and pursues a growth strategy focused on the needs of south Texas producers. HEP’s system has 145 MMcf/d of amine treating capacity and more than 9,000 horsepower of compression. In addition, HEP has a 10 MBbls/d stabilizer in Live Oak County and a 220 MBbls/d liquids storage terminal near Brownsville, Texas. As of December 31, 2014, we owned a 30.6% interest in HEP and accounted for this investment under the equity method of accounting. We include our equity investment in HEP in our corporate segment. Alinda Capital Partners owns a 59% capital interest in HEP.

Oklahoma Assets. Our Oklahoma assets consist of processing facilities with a total processing capacity of approximately 550 MMcf/d, gathering systems with total capacity of approximately 605 MMcf/d and a crude oil and condensate stabilization facility. All of the systems and other assets comprising our Oklahoma assets are owned by Midstream Holdings, in which we own a 75% interest and ENLC holds the remaining 25% interest as of February 17, 2015.


•	Cana system. Our Cana gathering and processing system is located in the Cana-Woodford Shale in West Central Oklahoma and consists of the following:

•

Cana processing facilities. Our Cana processing facilities include a multi-train 350 MMcf/d cryogenic processing plant and a crude oil and condensate stabilization facility. For the year ended December 31, 2014, throughput volumes at the Cana processing facility averaged 368,400 MMBtu/d. The residue natural gas from the Cana processing facility is delivered to Enable Midstream Partners and ONEOK Partners. Devon is the primary customer of the Cana processing facilities and has entered into a 10-year, fixed-fee gathering and processing agreement with Midstream Holdings pursuant to which Midstream Holdings provides processing services for natural gas delivered by Devon to the Cana processing facility. This contractual arrangement includes a five-year minimum volume commitment from Devon of 330 MMcf/d of natural gas delivered to the processing facility as well as annual rate escalators.

•

Cana gathering system. Our Cana gathering system includes an approximately 340-mile gathering system with approximately 87,500 horsepower of compression. For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Cana system gathered approximately 413,900 MMBtu/d of gas. Devon is the primary customer of the Cana gathering system and, as described above, has entered into a 10-year, fixed-fee gathering agreement with Midstream Holdings pursuant to which Midstream Holdings provides gathering services on the Cana

gathering system and that includes a five-year minimum volume commitment from Devon of 330 MMcf/d of natural gas delivered for gathering into the Cana gathering system.


•	Northridge system. Our Northridge gathering and processing system is located in the Arkoma-Woodford Shale in Southeastern Oklahoma and consists of the following:

•

Northridge processing plant. Our Northridge processing plant has 200 MMcf/d of processing capacity. For the year ended December 31, 2014, throughput volumes at the Northridge processing facility averaged 73,400 MMBtu/d. The residue natural gas from the Northridge processing facility is delivered to Centerpoint, Enable Midstream Partners and MarkWest. In August 2014, Linn Energy acquired certain of Devon's southeastern Oklahoma assets and became the largest customer of the Northridge processing facility. In connection with this acquisition Linn Energy assumed Devon's 10-year fixed-fee gathering and processing agreement with Midstream Holdings pursuant to which Midstream Holdings provides processing services for natural gas delivered to the Northridge processing facility. This contractual arrangement includes a five-year minimum volume commitment of 40 MMcf/d of natural gas delivered to the Northridge processing facility as well as annual rate escalators.

•

Northridge gathering system. Our Northridge gathering system includes an approximate 140-mile gathering system with approximately 17,900 horsepower of compression. For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Northridge system gathered 56,900 MMBtu/d of gas. Linn Energy is the only customer on the Northridge gathering system and, as described above, has entered into a 10-year fixed-fee gathering and processing agreement with Midstream Holdings pursuant to which Midstream Holdings provides gathering services on the Northridge gathering system. This contract includes a five-year minimum volume commitment from Linn Energy of 40 MMcf/d of natural gas delivered for gathering into the Northridge gathering system.

Louisiana Assets. Our Louisiana assets consist of transmission pipelines with a capacity of approximately 3.5 Bcf/d, processing facilities with a total processing capacity of approximately 1.7 Bcf/d and gathering systems with total capacity of approximately 510 MMcf/d.


•	LIG Assets. The LIG system includes gathering and transmission systems with total capacity of approximately 4.0 Bcf/d, processing facilities with a total processing capacity of approximately 335 MMcf/d and fractionation facilities with total capacity of 10,800 Bbls/d.

•

The LIG gathering and transmission pipeline system is comprised of the 3,320-mile southern system, which has a capacity in excess of 1.5 Bcf/d and approximately 31,318 horsepower of compression, and the 815-mile northern system, which has a capacity of 465 MMcf/d and approximately 47,330 horsepower of compression. The south system has access to both rich and lean gas supplies from onshore production in south central and southeast Louisiana. LIG has a variety of transportation and industrial sales customers in the south, with the majority of its sales being made into the industrial Mississippi River corridor between Baton Rouge and New Orleans. In the north, the LIG system serves the natural gas fields south of Shreveport, Louisiana and extends into the Haynesville Shale gas play in north Louisiana. The Partnership’s north Louisiana system is connected to its south Louisiana system and has the capacity to move approximately 145 MMcf/d of gas to our markets in the south. The Partnership’s LIG gathering system had an average throughput of approximately 449,700 MMbtu/d for the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014.


•	The south system also includes two operating, on-system processing plants, the Partnership’s Gibson and Plaquemine plants, with 110 MMcf/d and 225 MMcf/d of processing capacity, respectively. For the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014, throughput volumes on the LIG processing system averaged 193,400 MMBtu/d of natural gas.


•	The Plaquemine plant also has a fractionation capacity of 10,800 Bbls/d of raw-make NGL products, and total volume for fractionated liquids at Plaquemine averaged approximately 4,500 Bbls/d for the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014.

•

The Gulf Coast gathering and transmission system is comprised of 1,120 miles of onshore systems with a capacity of 1.2 Bcf/d, approximately 37,785 horsepower of compression, underground storage facilities with a storage capacity of 4.2 Bcf of active storage capacity, 7.0 Bcf of inactive storage capacity, and Henry Hub transfer services with a capacity of 2.1 Bcf/d. The onshore system has access to the Gulf Coast and the industrial rich Mississippi River corridor, which is seeing an abundance of new growth in chemical and

fertilizer plants. The onshore system had an average throughput of 157,000 MMBtu/d from November 1, 2014 (the date of acquisition) through December 31, 2014. The offshore system is comprised of 215 miles of pipeline with a capacity of 0.3 Bcf/d. The average throughput for the period November 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 was 8,500 MMBtu/d.


•	South Louisiana NGL and Processing Assets. Our south Louisiana NGL and natural gas processing assets include approximately 600 miles of liquids transport lines, processing and fractionation assets and underground storage.

•

Cajun-Sibon Pipeline System. The Cajun-Sibon pipeline system consists of approximately 600 miles of raw make NGL pipelines with a current system capacity of approximately 130,000 Bbls/d. The pipelines transport unfractionated NGLs, referred to as raw make, from areas such as the Liberty, Texas interconnects near Mont Belvieu and from the Partnership’s Eunice and Pelican processing plants in south Louisiana to either the Riverside or Eunice fractionators or to third party fractionators when necessary.


•	Processing Facilities. Our processing facilities in south Louisiana include three gas processing plants, of which only one is currently operational, with total processing throughput that averaged 354,000 MMBtu/d for the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014 and two fractionation facilities that averaged 115,500 Bbls/d for the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014.

•

Pelican Processing Plant. The Pelican processing plant complex is located in Patterson, Louisiana and has a designed capacity of 600 MMcf/d of natural gas. For the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014, the plant processed approximately 336,000 MMBtu/d of natural gas. The Pelican plant is connected with continental shelf and deepwater production and has downstream connections to the ANR Pipeline. This plant has an interconnection with the LIG pipeline allowing us to process natural gas from the LIG system at our Pelican plant when markets are favorable.

•

Blue Water Gas Processing Plant. We operate and own a 64.29% interest in the Blue Water gas processing plant. The Blue Water plant is located in Crowley, Louisiana and is connected to the Blue Water pipeline system. The plant has a net capacity with respect to our interest of approximately 300 MMcf/d. The plant is not expected to operate in the future unless fractionation spreads are favorable and volumes are sufficient to run the plant.


•	Eunice Processing Plant. The Eunice processing plant is located in south central Louisiana and has a capacity of 475 MMcf/d of natural gas. In August 2013, we shut down the Eunice processing plant due to adverse economics driven by low NGL prices and low processing volumes, which we do not see improving in the near future based on forecasted prices.

•

Plaquemine Fractionation Facility. The Plaquemine fractionator is located at our Plaquemine gas processing plant complex and is connected to our Cajun-Sibon pipeline. The Plaquemine fractionation facility has a capacity of approximately 100,000 Bbls/d, and produces purity ethane and propane for sale by pipeline to long-term markets with the butane and heavier products sent to our Riverside facility for further processing. The plant commenced operations during September and fractionated 49,700 Bbls/d during the fourth quarter of 2014.

•

Eunice Fractionation Facility. The Eunice fractionation facility is located in south central Louisiana. The Eunice fractionation facility has a capacity of 55,000 Bbls/d of liquid products, including ethane, propane, iso-butane, normal butane and natural gasoline, and is directly connected to the southeast propane market and pipelines to the Anse La Butte storage facility. The plant fractionated 48,600 Bbls/d of liquids for the period March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014.

•

Riverside Fractionation Facility. The Riverside fractionator and loading facility is located on the Mississippi River upriver from Geismar, Louisiana. The Riverside plant has a fractionation capacity of approximately 28,000 Bbls/d of liquids delivered by the Cajun-Sibon pipeline system from the Eunice and Pelican processing plants or by third-party truck and rail assets. The Riverside fractionator was converted to a butane-and-heavier facility during 2014 in conjunction with the Cajun-Sibon II project. The Riverside facility has above-ground storage capacity of approximately 233,000 Bbls. The loading/unloading facility has the capacity to transload 15,000 Bbls/d of crude oil and condensate from rail cars to barges. Total volumes for fractionated liquids at Riverside averaged 17,200 Bbls/d for the year ended December 31,

2014. During the periods of full operation at Riverside for 2014 (excluding the 65 days of shut down related to the Cajun-Sibon II project completion), the average throughput was 22,000 Bbls/d.


•	Napoleonville Storage Facility. The Napoleonville NGL storage facility is connected to the Riverside facility and has a total capacity of 3.2 million barrels of underground storage comprised of two existing caverns. The caverns are currently operated in butane service, and space is leased to customers for a fee.

Ohio River Valley Assets. Our ORV operations are an integrated network of assets comprised of a 5,000-barrel-per-hour crude oil and condensate barge loading terminal on the Ohio River, a 20-spot crude oil and condensate rail loading terminal on the Ohio Central Railroad network and approximately 200 miles of crude oil and condensate pipelines in Ohio and West Virginia. The assets also include 500,000 barrels of above ground storage and a trucking fleet of approximately 100 vehicles comprised of both semi and straight trucks with a current capacity of 25,000 Bbls/d. Total crude oil and condensate handled averaged approximately 16,300 Bbls/d for the year ended December 31, 2014. We have eight existing brine disposal wells with an injection capacity of approximately 5,000 Bbls/d and an average disposal rate of 4,700 Bbls/d for the year ended December 31, 2014. Additionally, our ORV operations consist of five condensate stabilization and natural gas compression stations with combined capacities of 19,000 Bbls/d of condensate stabilization and 580 MMcf/d of natural gas compression. Currently, three of the five stations are in service and commercial start-up of the two remaining stations is expected in the first half of 2015. The assets are supported by a long-term, fee-based contract with Antero Resources.

Industry Overview

The following diagram illustrates the gathering, processing, fractionation, stabilization and transmission process.

The midstream industry is the link between the exploration and production of natural gas and crude oil and condensate and the delivery of its components to end-user markets. The midstream industry is generally characterized by regional competition based on the proximity of gathering systems and processing plants to natural gas and crude oil and condensate producing wells.

Natural gas gathering. The natural gas gathering process follows the drilling of wells into gas-bearing rock formations. After a well has been completed, it is connected to a gathering system. Gathering systems typically consist of a network of

small diameter pipelines and, if necessary, compression and treating systems that collect natural gas from points near producing wells and transport it to larger pipelines for further transmission.

Compression. Gathering systems are operated at pressures that will maximize the total natural gas throughput from all connected wells. Because wells produce gas at progressively lower field pressures as they age, it becomes increasingly difficult to deliver the remaining production in the ground against the higher pressure that exists in the connected gathering system. Natural gas compression is a mechanical process in which a volume of gas at an existing pressure is compressed to a desired higher pressure, allowing gas that no longer naturally flows into a higher-pressure downstream pipeline to be brought to market. Field compression is typically used to allow a gathering system to operate at a lower pressure or provide sufficient discharge pressure to deliver gas into a higher-pressure downstream pipeline. The remaining natural gas in the ground will not be produced if field compression is not installed because the gas will be unable to overcome the higher gathering system pressure. Also, a declining well can continue delivering natural gas if field compression is installed.

Natural gas processing. The principal components of natural gas are methane and ethane, but most natural gas also contains varying amounts of heavier NGLs and contaminants, such as water and CO2, sulfur compounds, nitrogen or helium. Natural gas produced by a well may not be suitable for long-haul pipeline transportation or commercial use and may need to be processed to remove the heavier hydrocarbon components and contaminants. Natural gas in commercial distribution systems mostly consists of methane and ethane, and moisture and other contaminants have been removed so there are negligible amounts of them in the gas stream. Natural gas is processed to remove unwanted contaminants that would interfere with pipeline transportation or use of the natural gas and to separate those hydrocarbon liquids from the gas that have higher value as NGLs. The removal and separation of individual hydrocarbons through processing is possible due to differences in weight, boiling point, vapor pressure and other physical characteristics. Natural gas processing involves the separation of natural gas into pipeline-quality natural gas and a mixed NGL stream and the removal of contaminants.

NGL fractionation. NGLs are separated into individual, more valuable components during the fractionation process. NGL fractionation facilities separate mixed NGL streams into discrete NGL products: ethane, propane, isobutane, normal butane, natural gasoline and stabilized crude oil and condensate. 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. Propane is used as a petrochemical feedstock in the production of ethylene and propylene and as a heating fuel, an engine fuel and industrial fuel. Isobutane is used principally to enhance the octane content of motor gasoline. Normal butane is used as a petrochemical feedstock in the production of ethylene and butylene (a key ingredient in synthetic rubber), as a blend stock for motor gasoline and to derive isobutene through isomerization. Natural gasoline, a mixture of pentanes and heavier hydrocarbons, is used primarily as motor gasoline blend stock or petrochemical feedstock.

Natural gas transmission. Natural gas transmission pipelines receive natural gas from mainline transmission pipelines, processing plants and gathering systems and deliver it to industrial end-users, utilities and to other pipelines.

Crude oil and condensate transmission. Crude oil and condensate are transported by pipelines, barges, rail cars and tank trucks. The method of transportation used depends on, among other things, the resources of the transporter, the locations of the production points and the delivery points, cost-efficiency and the quantity of product being transported.

Condensate Stabilization. Condensate stabilization is the distillation of the condensate product to remove the lighter end components, which ultimately creates a higher quality condensate product that is then delivered via truck, rail or pipeline to local markets.

Brine gathering and disposal services. Typically, shale wells produce significant amounts of water that, in most cases, require disposal. Produced water and frac-flowback is hauled via truck transport or is pumped through pipelines from its origin at the oilfield tank battery or drilling pad to the disposal location. Once the water reaches the delivery disposal location, water is processed and filtered to remove impurities and injection wells place fluids underground for storage and disposal.

Crude oil and condensate terminals. Crude oil and condensate rail terminals are an integral part of ensuring the movement of new crude oil and condensate production from the developing shale plays in the United States and Canada. In general, the crude oil and condensate rail loading terminals are used to load rail cars and transport the commodity out of developing basins into market rich areas of the country where crude oil and condensate rail unloading terminals are used to unload rail cars and store crude oil and condensate volumes for third parties until the crude oil and condensate is redelivered to premium markets via pipelines, trucks or rail to delivery points.

Balancing Supply and Demand

When we purchase natural gas, crude oil and condensate, we establish a margin normally by selling it for physical delivery to third-party users. We can also use over-the-counter derivative instruments or enter into future delivery obligations under futures contracts on the NYMEX related to our natural gas purchases. Through these transactions, we seek to maintain a position that is balanced between purchases, on the one hand, and sales or future delivery obligations, on the other hand. Our

policy is not to acquire and hold natural gas futures contracts or derivative products for the purpose of speculating on price changes.

Competition

The business of providing gathering, transmission, processing and marketing services for natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate is highly competitive. We face strong competition in obtaining natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate supplies and in the marketing and transportation of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate. Our competitors include major integrated and independent exploration and production companies, natural gas producers, interstate and intrastate pipelines, other natural gas, NGLs and crude oil and condensate gatherers and natural gas processors. Competition for natural gas and crude oil and condensate supplies is primarily based on geographic location of facilities in relation to production or markets, the reputation, efficiency and reliability of the gatherer and the pricing arrangements offered by the gatherer. As a result of the relationship between Devon and Midstream Holdings, we will not compete for the portion of Devon’s existing operations subject to existing acreage dedication and for which Midstream Holdings will provide midstream services. For areas where acreage is not dedicated to Midstream Holdings, we will compete with similar enterprises in providing additional gathering and processing services in its respective areas of operation, which may offer more services or have strong financial resources and access to larger natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate supplies than we do. Our competition varies in different geographic areas.

In marketing natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate, we have numerous competitors, including marketing affiliates of interstate pipelines, major integrated oil and gas companies, and local and national natural gas producers, gatherers, brokers and marketers of widely varying sizes, financial resources and experience. Local utilities and distributors of natural gas are, in some cases, engaged directly and through affiliates in marketing activities that compete with our marketing operations.

We face strong competition for acquisitions and development of new projects from both established and start-up companies. Competition increases the cost to acquire existing facilities or businesses and results in fewer commitments and lower returns for new pipelines or other development projects. Our competitors may have greater financial resources than we possess or may be willing to accept lower returns or greater risks. Our competition differs by region and by the nature of the business or the project involved.

Natural Gas, NGL, Crude Oil and Condensate Supply

Our gathering and transmission pipelines have connections with major intrastate and interstate pipelines, which we believe have ample natural gas and NGL supplies in excess of the volumes required for the operation of these systems. Our ORV pipeline, terminals, trucks and storage facilities are strategically located in crude oil and condensate producing regions. We evaluate well and reservoir data that is either publicly available or furnished by producers or other service providers in connection with the construction and acquisition of our gathering systems and assets to determine the availability of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate supply for our systems and assets and/or obtain a minimum volume commitment from the producer that results in a rate of return on investment. We do not routinely obtain independent evaluations of reserves dedicated to our systems and assets due to the cost and relatively limited benefit of such evaluations. Accordingly, we do not have estimates of total reserves dedicated to our systems and assets or the anticipated life of such producing reserves.

Credit Risk and Significant Customers

We diligently attempt to ensure that we issue credit to only credit-worthy customers. However, our purchase and resale of crude oil, condensate, gas and other products exposes us to significant credit risk, as the margin on any sale is generally a very small percentage of the total sales price. Therefore, a credit loss can be very large relative to our overall profitability.

For the year ended December 31, 2014, Devon represented 30.4% of our consolidated revenues and Dow Hydrocarbons & Resources LLC represented 11.0% of our consolidated revenues. No other customer represented greater than 10.0% of our revenue. Midstream Holdings’ operations are dependent on the volume of natural gas that Devon provides to us under commercial agreements, which constitutes a substantial portion of their natural gas supply. For the foreseeable future, we expect our profitability to be substantially dependent on Devon. Further, the loss of Dow Hydrocarbons as a customer could have a material impact on our results of operations if we were not able to sell our products to another customer with similar margins because the gross operating margins received from transactions with this customer are material to our total gross operating margin.

Regulation

Interstate Natural Gas Pipelines Regulation. We own interstate natural gas pipelines that are subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) under the Natural Gas Act (“NGA”). Under the NGA, FERC has authority to regulate natural gas companies that provide natural gas pipeline transportation services in interstate commerce. FERC regulation extends to such matters as the following:


•	rates, services, and terms and conditions of service;


•	the certification and construction of new facilities;


•	the extension or abandonment of services and facilities;


•	the maintenance of accounts and records;


•	the acquisition and disposition of facilities;


•	maximum rates payable for certain services;


•	the initiation and discontinuation of services;


•	internet posting requirements for available capacity, discounts and other matters;


•	pipeline segmentation to allow multiple simultaneous shipments under the same contract;


•	capacity release to create a secondary market for transportation services;


•	relationships between affiliated companies involved in certain aspects of the natural gas business;


•	market manipulation in connection with interstate sales, purchases or transportation of natural gas and NGLs; and


•	participation by interstate pipelines in cash management arrangements.

Natural gas companies are prohibited from charging rates that have been determined not to be just and reasonable by FERC. In addition, FERC prohibits natural gas companies from unduly preferring or unreasonably discriminating against any person with respect to pipeline rates or terms and conditions of service.

The rates and terms and conditions for our interstate pipeline services are set forth in FERC-approved tariffs. Pursuant to FERC’s jurisdiction over rates, existing rates may be challenged by complaint or by action of FERC under Section 5 of the NGA, and proposed rate increases may be challenged by protest. The outcome of any successful complaint or protest against our rates could have an adverse impact on revenues associated with providing transportation service.

For example, one such matter relates to FERC’s policy regarding allowances for income taxes in determining a regulated entity’s cost of service. FERC allows regulated companies to recover an allowance for income taxes in rates only to the extent the company or its owners, such as our unitholders, are subject to U.S. income tax. This policy affects whom we allow to own our units, and if we are not successful in limiting ownership of our units to persons or entities subject to U.S. income tax, our FERC-regulated rates and revenues for our interstate natural gas pipelines could be adversely affected.

Interstate natural gas pipelines regulated by the FERC are required to comply with numerous regulations related to standards of conduct, market transparency, and market manipulation. The FERC’s standards of conduct regulate the manner in which interstate natural gas pipelines may interact with their marketing affiliates (unless the FERC has granted a waiver of such standards). The FERC’s market oversight and transparency regulations require annual reports of purchases or sales of natural gas meeting certain thresholds and criteria and certain public postings of information on scheduled volumes. FERC’s market manipulation regulations promulgated pursuant to the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (the “EPAct 2005”) make it unlawful for any entity, directly or indirectly 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, to (1) use or employ any device, scheme or artifice to defraud; (2) make any untrue statement of material fact or omit to make any statement necessary to make the statements made not misleading; or (3) engage in any act or practice that operates as a fraud or deceit upon any person. The EPAct 2005 also amends the NGA and the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (“NGPA”) to give FERC authority to impose civil penalties for violations of these statutes, up to $1.0 million per day per violation for violations occurring after August 8, 2005. Should we fail to comply with all applicable FERC-administered statutes, rules, regulations and orders, we could be subject to substantial penalties and fines.

We also transport gas in interstate commerce that is subject to FERC jurisdiction under Section 311 of the NGPA. The maximum rates for services provided under Section 311 of the NGPA may not exceed a “fair and equitable rate,” as defined in the NGPA. The rates are generally subject to review every five years by FERC or by an appropriate state agency. The inability to obtain approval of rates at acceptable levels could result in refund obligations, the inability to achieve adequate returns on investments in new facilities and the deterrence of future investment or growth of the regulated facilities.

Interstate Liquids Pipelines Regulation. We own liquids transportation, storage and other assets in the ORV, including certain assets providing common carrier interstate service subject to regulation by FERC under the Interstate Commerce Act (“ICA”), the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and related rules and orders. Our Cajun-Sibon NGL pipeline is also subject to FERC regulation as a common carrier under the ICA, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and related rules and orders.

FERC regulation requires that interstate liquids pipeline rates and terms and conditions of service, including rates for transportation of crude oil, condensate and NGLs, be filed with FERC and that these rates and terms and conditions of service be “just and reasonable” and not unduly discriminatory or unduly preferential.

Rates of interstate liquids pipelines are currently regulated by FERC primarily through an annual indexing methodology, under which pipelines increase or decrease their rates in accordance with an index adjustment specified by FERC. For the five-year period beginning in 2010, FERC established an annual index adjustment equal to the change in the producer price index for finished goods plus 2.65%. This adjustment is subject to review every five years. Under FERC’s regulations, liquids pipelines can request a rate increase that exceeds the rate obtained through application of the indexing methodology by using a cost-of-services approach, but only after the pipeline establishes that a substantial divergence exists between the actual costs experienced by the pipeline and the rates resulting from application of the indexing methodology.

The ICA permits interested persons to challenge proposed new or changed rates and authorizes FERC to suspend the effectiveness of such rates for up to seven months and investigate such rates. If, upon completion of an investigation, FERC finds that the new or changed rate is unlawful, it is authorized to require the pipeline to refund revenues collected in excess of the just and reasonable rate during the term of the investigation. FERC may also investigate, upon complaint or on its own motion, rates that are already in effect and may order a carrier to change its rates prospectively. Under certain circumstances, FERC could limit our ability to set rates based on our costs or could order us to reduce our rates and could require the payment of reparations to complaining shippers for up to two years prior to the date of the complaint. FERC also has the authority to change our terms and conditions of service if it determines that they are unjust and unreasonable or unduly discriminatory or preferential.

As we acquire, construct and operate new liquids assets and expand our liquids transportation business, the classification and regulation of our liquids transportation services are subject to ongoing assessment and change based on the services we provide and determinations by FERC and the courts. Such changes may subject additional services we provide to regulation by FERC.

Intrastate Natural Gas Pipeline Regulation. Our intrastate natural gas pipeline operations are subject to regulation by various agencies of the states in which they are located. Most states have agencies that possess the authority to review and authorize natural gas transportation transactions and the construction, acquisition, abandonment and interconnection of physical facilities. Some states also have state agencies that regulate transportation rates, service terms and conditions and contract pricing to ensure their reasonableness and to ensure that the intrastate pipeline companies that they regulate do not discriminate among similarly situated customers.

The FERC’s anti-manipulation rules apply to non-jurisdictional entities to the extent the activities are conducted “in connection with” gas sales, purchases or transportation subject to FERC jurisdiction. The new anti-manipulation rules do not apply to activities that relate only to intrastate or other non-jurisdictional sales or gathering, but only to the extent such transactions do not have a “nexus” to jurisdictional transactions. As noted above, the FERC’s civil penalty authority under EPAct 2005 would apply to violations of these rules to the extent applicable to our intrastate natural gas services.

Intrastate NGL Pipeline Regulation. Intrastate NGL and other petroleum pipelines are not generally subject to rate regulation by FERC, but they are subject to regulation by various agencies in the respective states where they are located. While the regulatory regime varies from state to state, state agencies typically require intrastate NGL and petroleum pipelines to file their rates with the agencies and permit shippers to challenge existing rates or proposed rate increases.

Gathering Pipeline Regulation. Section 1(b) of the NGA exempts natural gas gathering facilities from the jurisdiction of FERC under the NGA. We own a number of natural gas pipelines that we believe meet the traditional tests FERC has used to establish a pipeline’s status as a gatherer not subject to FERC jurisdiction. State regulation of gathering facilities generally includes various safety, environmental and, in some circumstances, nondiscriminatory take requirements, and in some instances complaint-based rate regulation.

We are subject to some state ratable take and common purchaser statutes. The ratable take statutes generally require gatherers to take, without undue discrimination, natural gas production that may be tendered to the gatherer for handling. Similarly, common purchaser statutes generally require gatherers to purchase without undue discrimination as to source of supply or producer. These statutes are designed to prohibit discrimination in favor of one producer over another producer or one source of supply over another source of supply.

Intrastate Natural Gas Storage Regulation. The storage field’s injection and withdrawal wells used in association with the Acacia system, along with water disposal wells located at the Bridgeport processing facility, are under the jurisdiction of the Texas Railroad Commission (“TRRC”). Regulatory requirements for these wells involve monthly and annual reporting of the natural gas and water disposal volumes associated with the operation of such wells, respectively. Results of periodic mechanical integrity tests run on these wells must also be reported to the TRRC.

Sales of Natural Gas and NGLs. The prices at which we sell natural gas and NGLs currently are not subject to federal regulation and, for the most part, are not subject to state regulation. Our natural gas and NGL sales are affected by the availability, terms and cost of pipeline transportation. As noted above, the price and terms of access to pipeline transportation are subject to extensive federal and state regulation. FERC is continually proposing and implementing new rules and regulations affecting those segments of the natural gas and NGL industries, most notably interstate natural gas transmission companies and NGL pipeline companies that remain subject to FERC’s jurisdiction. These initiatives also may affect the intrastate transportation of natural gas and NGLs under certain circumstances. We cannot predict the ultimate impact of these regulatory changes on our natural gas and NGL marketing operations, but we do not believe that we will be affected by any such FERC action in a manner that is materially different from the natural gas and NGL marketers with whom we compete.

Environmental Matters

General. Our operations involve processing and pipeline services for delivery of hydrocarbons (natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensates) from point-of-origin at oil and gas wellheads operated by our suppliers to our end-use market customers. Our facilities include natural gas processing and fractionation plants, natural gas and NGL storage caverns, brine disposal wells, pipelines and associated facilities, fractionation and storage units for NGLs, and transportation and delivery of petroleum. As with all companies in our industrial sector, our operations are subject to stringent and complex federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to release of hazardous substances or solid wastes into the environment or otherwise relating to protection of the environment. Compliance with existing and anticipated environmental laws and regulations increases our overall costs of doing business, including costs of planning, constructing, and operating plants, pipelines, and other facilities, as well as capital cost items necessary to maintain or upgrade equipment and facilities. Similar costs are likely upon changes in laws or regulations and upon any future acquisition of operating assets.

Any failure to comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations, including those relating to equipment failures, and obtaining required governmental approvals, may result in the assessment of administrative, civil or criminal penalties, imposition of investigatory or remedial activities and, in less common circumstances, issuance of temporary or permanent injunctions or construction or operation bans or delays. As part of the regular evaluation of our operations, we routinely review and update governmental approvals as necessary.

The continuing trend in environmental regulation is to place more restrictions and limitations on activities that may affect the environment, and thus there can be no assurance as to the amount or timing of future expenditures for environmental compliance or remediation, and actual future expenditures may be different from the amounts we currently anticipate. Moreover, risks of process upsets, accidental releases or spills are associated with possible future operations, and we cannot assure you that we will not incur significant costs and liabilities, including those relating to claims for damage to property and persons as a result of any such upsets, releases or spills. In the event of future increases in environmental costs, we may be unable to pass on those cost increases to our customers. A discharge of hazardous substances or solid wastes into the environment could, to the extent losses related to the event are not insured, subject us to substantial expense, including both the cost to comply with applicable laws and regulations and to pay fines or penalties that may be assessed and the cost related to claims made by neighboring landowners and other third parties for personal injury or damage to natural resources or property. We attempt to anticipate future regulatory requirements that might be imposed and plan accordingly to comply with changing environmental laws and regulations and to minimize costs with respect to more stringent future laws and regulations or more rigorous enforcement of existing laws and regulations.

Hazardous Substances and Solid Waste. Environmental laws and regulations that relate to the release of hazardous substances or solid wastes into soils, groundwater and surface water and/or include measures to prevent and control pollution may pose the highest potential cost to our industry sector. These laws and regulations generally regulate the generation, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes and may require investigatory and corrective actions at facilities where such waste may have been released or disposed. For instance, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), also known as the federal “Superfund” law, and comparable state laws impose liability without regard to fault or the legality of the original conduct on certain classes of persons that contributed to a release of a “hazardous substance” into the environment. Potentially liable persons include the owner or operator of the site where a release occurred and companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substances found at an off-site location, such as a landfill. Under CERCLA, these persons may be subject to joint and several liability for the costs of cleaning up and restoring sites where hazardous substances have been released into the environment and for damages to natural resources. CERCLA also authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and, in some cases, third parties to take actions in response to threats to public health or the environment and to seek recovery of costs they incur from the potentially responsible classes of persons. It is not uncommon for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by hazardous substances or solid wastes released into the environment. Although petroleum, natural gas and NGLs are excluded from CERCLA’s definition of a “hazardous substance,” in the course of ordinary operations, we may generate wastes that may fall within the definition of a “hazardous substance.” In addition, there are other laws and regulations that can create liability for releases of petroleum, natural gas or NGLs. Moreover, we may be responsible under CERCLA or other laws for all or part of the costs required to clean up sites at which such

substances have been disposed. We have not received any notification that we may be potentially responsible for cleanup costs under CERCLA or any analogous federal or state law.

We also generate, and may in the future generate, both hazardous and nonhazardous solid wastes that are subject to requirements of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) and/or comparable state statutes. From time to time, the EPA and state regulatory agencies have considered the adoption of stricter disposal standards for nonhazardous wastes, including crude oil, condensate and natural gas wastes. Moreover, it is possible that some wastes generated by us that are currently exempted from the definition of hazardous waste may in the future be designated as “hazardous wastes,” resulting in the wastes being subject to more rigorous and costly management and disposal requirements. Additionally, the Toxic Substances Control Act (“TSCA”) and analogous state laws impose requirements on the use, storage and disposal of various chemicals and chemical substances. Changes in applicable laws or regulations may result in an increase in our capital expenditures or plant operating expenses or otherwise impose limits or restrictions on our production and operations.

We currently own or lease, have in the past owned or leased, and in the future may own or lease, properties that have been used over the years for brine disposal operations, crude oil and condensate transportation, natural gas gathering, treating or processing and for NGL fractionation, transportation or storage. Solid waste disposal practices within the NGL industry and other oil and natural gas related industries have improved over the years with the passage and implementation of various environmental laws and regulations. Nevertheless, some hydrocarbons and other solid wastes may have been disposed of on or under various properties owned, leased or operated by us during the operating history of those facilities. In addition, a number of these properties may have been operated by third parties over whose operations and hydrocarbon and waste management practices we had no control. These properties and wastes disposed thereon may be subject to the Safe Drinking Water Act, CERCLA, RCRA, TSCA and analogous state laws. Under these laws, we could be required, alone or in participation with others, to remove or remediate previously disposed wastes or property contamination, if present, including groundwater contamination, or to take action to prevent future contamination.

Air Emissions. Our current and future operations are subject to the federal Clean Air Act and comparable state laws and regulations. These laws and regulations regulate emissions of air pollutants from various industrial sources, including our facilities, and impose various controls together with monitoring and reporting requirements. Pursuant to these laws and regulations, we may be required to obtain environmental agency pre-approval for the construction or modification of certain projects or facilities expected to produce air emissions or result in an increase in existing air emissions, obtain and comply with the terms of air permits, which include various emission and operational limitations, or use specific emission control technologies to limit emissions. We likely will be required to incur certain capital expenditures in the future for air pollution control equipment in connection with maintaining or obtaining governmental approvals addressing air emission-related issues. Failure to comply with applicable air statutes or regulations may lead to the assessment of administrative, civil or criminal penalties and may result in the limitation or cessation of construction or operation of certain air emission sources. Although we can give no assurances, we believe such requirements will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or operating results, and the requirements are not expected to be more burdensome to us than to any similarly situated company.

In addition, the EPA included Wise County in its January 2012 revision to the Dallas-Ft. Worth ozone nonattainment area for the 2008 revised ozone national ambient air quality standard (“NAAQS”). As a result of this designation, new major sources, meaning sources that emit greater than 100 tons/year of nitrogen oxides (“NOx”) and volatile organic compounds (“VOCs”), as well as major modifications of existing facilities resulting in net emissions increases of greater than 40 tons/year of NOx or VOCs, are subject to more stringent new source review (“NSR”) pre-construction permitting requirements than they would be in an area that is in attainment with the 2008 ozone NAAQS. NSR pre-construction permits can take twelve to eighteen months to obtain and require the permit applicant to offset the proposed emission increases with reductions elsewhere at a 1.15 to 1 ratio. Devon, Texas industry trade groups and the State of Texas filed petitions for reconsideration with the EPA and a petition for review in the U.S. D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals challenging the nonattainment designation of Wise County under the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The appeal remains pending.

On April 17, 2012, the EPA approved final rules under the Clean Air Act that establish new air emission controls for oil and natural gas production, pipelines and processing operations. These rules became effective on October 15, 2012. For new or reworked hydraulically-fractured gas wells, the rules require the control of emissions through flaring or reduced emission (or “green”) completions until 2015, when the rules require the use of green completions by all such wells except wildcat (exploratory) and delineation gas wells and low reservoir pressure non-wildcat and non-delineation gas wells. The rules also establish specific new requirements regarding emissions from wet seal and reciprocating compressors at production facilities, gathering systems, boosting facilities and onshore natural gas processing plants, effective October 15, 2012, and from pneumatic controllers and storage vessels at production facilities, gathering systems, boosting facilities and onshore natural gas processing plants, effective October 15, 2013. In addition, the rules revise existing requirements for volatile organic compound emissions from equipment leaks at onshore natural gas processing plants by lowering the leak definition for valves from 10,000 parts per million to 500 parts per million and requiring the monitoring of connectors, pumps, pressure relief devices and open-ended lines, effective October 15, 2012. These rules required a number of modifications to our assets and operations.

In October 2012, several challenges to the EPA’s April 17, 2012 rules were filed by various parties, including environmental groups and industry associations. In a January 16, 2013 unopposed motion to hold this litigation in abeyance, the EPA indicated that it may reconsider some aspects of the rules. The case remains in abeyance. The EPA has since revised certain aspects of the rules and has indicated that it may reconsider other aspects of the rules. Depending on the outcome of such proceedings, the rules may be further modified or rescinded or the EPA may issue new rules. We cannot predict the costs of compliance with any modified or newly issued rules. Additionally, the EPA has signaled its intent to regulate emissions of methane and volatile organic compounds from the oil and gas sector as a measure to implement President Obama’s Climate Action Plan. While the EPA has not yet issued a proposed rulemaking, it has released a series of white papers addressing methane reductions from the oil and gas sector. Depending on whether such rules are promulgated and the applicability and restrictions in any promulgated rule, compliance with such rules could result in additional costs, including increased capital expenditures and operating costs for us and for other companies in our industry. While we are not able at this time to estimate such additional costs, as is the case with similarly situated entities in the industry, they could be significant for us. Compliance with such rules, as well as any new state rules, may also make it more difficult for our suppliers and customers to operate, thereby reducing the volume of natural gas transported through our pipelines, which may adversely affect our business.

Climate Change. In December 2009, the EPA determined that emissions of certain gases, commonly referred to as “greenhouse gases,” present an endangerment to public health and the environment because emissions of such gases are, according to the EPA, contributing to the warming of the earth’s atmosphere and other climatic changes. Based on these findings, the EPA has adopted regulations under existing provisions of the federal Clean Air Act, that establish Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”) pre construction permits, and Title V operating permits for greenhouse gas emissions from certain large stationary sources. Under these regulations, facilities required to obtain PSD permits must meet “best available control technology” standards for their greenhouse gas emissions established by the states or, in some cases, by the EPA on a case by case basis. The EPA has also adopted rules requiring the monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions from specified sources in the United States, including, among others, certain onshore oil and natural gas processing and fractionating facilities.

Because regulation of greenhouse gas emissions is relatively new, further regulatory, legislative and judicial developments are likely to occur. Such developments in greenhouse gas initiatives may affect us and other companies operating in the oil and gas industry. In addition to these developments, recent judicial decisions have allowed certain tort claims alleging property damage to proceed against greenhouse gas emissions sources, which may increase our litigation risk for such claims. Due to the uncertainties surrounding the regulation of and other risks associated with greenhouse gas emissions, we cannot predict the financial impact of related developments on us.

Federal or state legislative or regulatory initiatives that regulate or restrict emissions of greenhouse gases in areas in which we conduct business could adversely affect the availability of, or demand for, the products we store, transport and process, and, depending on the particular program adopted, could increase the costs of our operations, including costs to operate and maintain our facilities, install new emission controls on our facilities, acquire allowances to authorize our greenhouse gas emissions, pay any taxes related to our greenhouse gas emissions and/or administer and manage a greenhouse gas emissions program. We may be unable to recover any such lost revenues or increased costs in the rates we charge our customers, and any such recovery may depend on events beyond our control, including the outcome of future rate proceedings before FERC or state regulatory agencies and the provisions of any final legislation or regulations. Reductions in our revenues or increases in our expenses as a result of climate control initiatives could have adverse effects on our business, financial position, results of operations and prospects.

Some scientific studies on climate change suggest that adverse weather events may become stronger or more frequent in the future in certain of the areas in which we operate, although the scientific studies are not unanimous. Due to their location, our operations along the Gulf Coast are vulnerable to operational and structural damages resulting from hurricanes and other severe weather systems, while inland operations include areas subject to tornadoes. Our insurance may not cover all associated losses. We are taking steps to mitigate physical risks from storms, but no assurance can be given that future storms will not have a material adverse effect on our business.

Hydraulic Fracturing and Wastewater. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, and comparable state laws impose restrictions and strict controls regarding the discharge of pollutants, including NGL related wastes, into state waters or waters of the United States. The EPA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recently proposed a rule to clarify the meaning of the term “waters of the United States.” While the practical effects of the proposed rule are ambiguous, many interested parties, including the State of Texas, believe that the proposed rule will expand federal jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act if it is promulgated in its current form as a final rule. Regulations promulgated pursuant to these laws require that entities that discharge into federal and state waters obtain National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permits and/or state permits authorizing these discharges. The Clean Water Act and analogous state laws assess administrative, civil and criminal penalties for discharges of unauthorized pollutants into the water and impose substantial liability for the costs of removing spills from such waters. In addition, the Clean Water Act and analogous state laws require that individual permits or coverage under general permits be obtained by covered facilities for discharges of storm water runoff.

We believe that we are in substantial compliance with Clean Water Act permitting requirements as well as the conditions imposed thereunder and that continued compliance with such existing permit conditions will not have a material effect on our results of operations.

We operate brine disposal wells that are regulated as Class II wells under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (“SDWA”). The SDWA imposes requirements on owners and operators of Class II wells through the EPA’s Underground Injection Control program, including construction, operating, monitoring and testing, reporting and closure requirements. Our brine disposal wells are also subject to comparable state laws and regulations, which in some cases are more stringent than requirements under the federal SDWA. Compliance with current and future laws and regulations regarding our brine disposal wells may impose substantial costs and restrictions on our brine disposal operations, as well as adversely affect demand for our brine disposal services. State and federal regulatory agencies recently have focused on a possible connection between the operation of injection wells used for oil and gas waste waters and an observed increase in minor seismic activity and tremors. When caused by human activity, such events are called induced seismicity. In a few instances, operators of injection wells in the vicinity of minor seismic events have reduced injection volumes or suspended operations, often voluntarily. A 2012 report published by the National Academy of Sciences concluded that only a very small fraction of the tens of thousands of injection wells have been suspected to be, or have been, the likely cause of induced seismicity. However, some state regulatory agencies have modified their regulations to account for induced seismicity. For example, TRRC rules allow the TRRC to modify, suspend, or terminate a permit based on a determination that the permitted activity is likely to be contributing to seismic activity. Regulatory agencies are continuing to study possible linkage between injection activity and induced seismicity. To the extent these studies result in additional regulation of injection wells, such regulations could impose additional regulations, costs and restrictions on our brine disposal operations.

It is common for our customers or suppliers to recover natural gas from deep shale formations through the use of hydraulic fracturing, combined with sophisticated horizontal drilling. Hydraulic fracturing is an important and commonly used process in the completion of wells by oil and gas producers. 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 and localities have been initiated to require or make more stringent the permitting and other regulatory requirements for hydraulic fracturing operations. There are certain governmental reviews either underway or being proposed that focus on environmental aspects of hydraulic fracturing practices. The White House Council on Environmental Quality is coordinating an administration-wide review of hydraulic fracturing practices, and a committee of the United States House of Representatives has conducted an investigation of hydraulic fracturing practices. In addition, the EPA is conducting a study of the potential environmental effects of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water and groundwater and has initiated plans to promulgate regulations controlling wastewater disposal associated with hydraulic fracturing and shale gas development. These ongoing or proposed studies, depending on their degree of pursuit and any meaningful results obtained, could spur initiatives to further regulate hydraulic fracturing. The EPA has also issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking under the Toxic Substances Control Act to gather information regarding the potential regulation of chemical substances and mixtures used in oil and gas exploration and production. Additional regulatory burdens in the future, whether federal, state or local, could increase the cost of or restrict the ability of our customers or suppliers to perform hydraulic fracturing. As a result, any increased federal, state or local regulation could reduce the volumes of natural gas that our customers move through our gathering systems which would materially adversely affect our revenues and results of operations.

Endangered Species and Migratory Birds. The Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), Migratory Bird Treaty Act (“MBTA”), and similar state and local laws restrict activities that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats or migratory birds. Some of our pipelines may be located in areas that are designated as habitats for endangered or threatened species, potentially exposing us to liability for impacts on an individual member of a species or to habitat. The Endangered Species Act can also make it more difficult to secure a federal permit for a new pipeline.

Employee Safety. We are subject to the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (“OSHA”), and comparable state laws that regulate the protection of the health and safety of workers. In addition, the OSHA hazard communication standard requires that information be maintained about hazardous materials used or produced in operations and that this information be provided to employees, state and local government authorities and citizens. We believe that our operations are in substantial compliance with the OSHA requirements including general industry standards, record keeping requirements, and monitoring of occupational exposure to regulated substances.

Pipeline Safety Regulations. Our pipelines are subject to regulation by the U.S. Department of Transportation (“DOT”). DOT’s Pipeline Hazardous Material Safety Administration (“PHMSA”), acting through the Office of Pipeline Safety (“OPS”), administers the national regulatory program to assure the safe transportation of natural gas, petroleum and other hazardous materials by pipeline. OPS develops regulations and other approaches to risk management to assure safety in design, construction, testing, operation, maintenance and emergency response of pipeline facilities. The main bodies of safety regulations that cover our operations are set forth at 49 CFR Parts 192 (covering pipelines that transport natural gas) and 195 (pipelines that transport crude oil and condensate, carbon dioxide, NGL and petroleum products). In addition to recordkeeping

and reporting requirements, amendments to 49 CFR Part 192 and 195 created the Pipeline Integrity Management in High Consequence Areas requiring operators of transmission pipelines to ensure the integrity of their pipelines through hydrostatic pressure testing, the use of in-line inspection tools or through risk-based direct assessment techniques. In January 2012, the President signed into law the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011 which increases potential penalties for pipeline safety violations, gives new rulemaking authority to DOT with respect to shut-off valves on transmission pipeline facilities constructed or entirely replaced after the rule is promulgated, requires DOT to revise incident notification guidance and imposes new records requirements on pipeline owners and operators. This legislation also requires DOT to study and report to Congress on other areas of pipeline safety, including expanding the reach of the integrity management regulations beyond high consequences areas, but restricts DOT from promulgating expanded integrity management rules during the review period and for a period following submission of its report to Congress unless the rulemaking is needed to address a present condition that poses a risk to public safety, property or the environment. PHMSA issued a final rule effective October 25, 2013 that implemented aspects of the new legislation. Among other things, the final rule increases the maximum civil penalties for violations of pipeline safety statutes or regulations, broadens PHMSA’s authority to submit information requests, and provides additional detail regarding PHMSA’s corrective action authority. Additionally, PHMSA issued an Advisory Bulletin in May 2012, which advised pipeline operators of anticipated changes in annual reporting requirements and that if they are relying on design, construction, inspection, testing or other data to determine the pressures at which their pipelines should operate, the records of that data must be traceable, verifiable and complete. Locating such records and, in the absence of any such records, verifying maximum pressures through physical testing or modifying or replacing facilities to meet the demands of such pressures could significantly increase our costs. Additionally, failure to locate such records or verify maximum pressures could result in reductions of allowable operating pressures, which would reduce available capacity on our pipelines. A December 2012 PHMSA Advisory Bulletin provides further clarity on the reporting requirements of the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty, and Job Creation Act of 2011, describing a general requirement that pipeline owners or operators report an exceedance of the maximum allowable operating pressure or allowable build-up for pressure-limiting or control devices within five days of the date that the exceedance occurs. At the state level, several states have passed legislation or promulgated rulemaking dealing with pipeline safety. We believe that our pipeline operations are in substantial compliance with applicable PHMSA and state requirements; however, due to the possibility of new or amended laws and regulations or reinterpretation of existing laws and regulations, there can be no assurance that future compliance with the PHMSA or state requirements will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial positions.

Bayou Corne Sinkhole Incident. We own and operate a high-pressure pipeline and underground natural gas and NGL storage reservoirs and associated facilities near Bayou Corne, Louisiana. In August 2012, a large sinkhole formed in the vicinity of this pipeline and our underground storage reservoirs located in Napoleonville, Louisiana.

Following the formation of the sinkhole, we and other pipeline operators in the area promptly undertook steps to depressurize and shut down our pipelines in the affected area. As a result of the sinkhole, it was necessary to permanently remove from service a section of our 36-inch diameter natural gas pipeline. We worked with customers to secure alternative natural gas supplies to minimize disruptions while a replacement pipeline was constructed. The replacement pipeline was completed and services resumed in May 2014. We also implemented additional inspection and operational measures at our nearby underground facility. The damage to our business related to the sinkhole, including costs and loss of business, has been considerable.

We are seeking to recover our losses from responsible parties. We have sued Texas Brine Company, LLC (“Texas Brine”), the operator of a failed cavern in the area, and its insurers seeking recovery for this damage. We also filed a claim with our insurers, which our insurers denied. We disputed the denial and sued our insurers, but we have agreed to stay the matter pending resolution of our claims against Texas Brine and its insurers. In August 2014, we received a partial settlement with respect to the Texas Brine claims in the amount of $6.1 million, but additional claims remain outstanding. We cannot give assurance that we will be able to fully recover our losses through insurance recovery or claims against responsible parties. Please read “Item 3. Legal Proceedings.”

Office Facilities

We occupy approximately 108,500 square feet of space at our executive offices in Dallas, Texas under a lease expiring in August 2019, approximately 25,100 square feet of office space for our Louisiana operations in Houston, Texas with lease terms expiring in April 2023 and approximately 9,000 square feet of office space in Lafayette, Louisiana with lease terms expiring in January 2023. We also occupy approximately 12,500 square feet, 2,200 square feet and 4,700 square feet at Devon’s Bridgeport, Oklahoma City and Cresson office buildings, respectively, under leases with a wholly-owned subsidiary of Devon which are scheduled to expire in March 2016.

In November 2014, we entered into a new agreement to lease approximately 157,600 square feet of space for our offices in Dallas, Texas with a lease term commencing in June 2016.

Employees

As of December 31, 2014, we (through our subsidiaries) employed approximately 1,148 full-time employees. Approximately 256 of our employees were general and administrative, engineering, accounting and commercial personnel and the remainder were operational employees. We are not party to any collective bargaining agreements and we have not had any significant labor disputes in the past. We believe that we have good relations with our employees.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

The following risk factors and all other information contained in this report should be considered carefully when evaluating us. These risk factors could affect our actual results. Other risks and uncertainties, in addition to those that are described below, may also impair our business operations. If any of the following risks occur, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be affected materially and adversely. In that case, we may be unable to make distributions to our unitholders and the trading price of our common units could decline. These risk factors should be read in conjunction with the other detailed information concerning us set forth in our accompanying financial statements and notes and contained in “Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included herein.

We are dependent on Devon Energy Corporation for a substantial portion of the natural gas that we gather, process and transport. After the expiration of the five-year minimum volume commitments from Devon, a material decline in the volumes of natural gas that we gather, process and transport for Devon could result in a material decline in our operating results and cash available for distribution.

We are dependent on Devon for a substantial portion of our natural gas supply. In particular, Midstream Holdings relies on Devon for substantial portion of its natural gas supply. For the year ended December 31, 2014, Devon represented a 30.4% of our consolidated revenues. In order to minimize volumetric exposure, in March 2014 Midstream Holdings received five-year minimum volume commitments from Devon at the Bridgeport processing facility, Bridgeport and East Johnson County gathering systems and the Cana system. After the expiration of these five-year minimum volume commitments, a material decline in the volume of natural gas that Midstream Holdings gathers and transports on its systems would result in a material decline in our combined total operating revenues and cash flow. In addition, Devon may determine in the future that drilling activity in areas of operation other than ours is strategically more attractive. A shift in Devon’s focus away from our areas of operation could result in reduced throughput on our systems after the five-year minimum volume commitments expire and cause a material decline in our total operating revenues and cash flow.

Because we are substantially dependent on Devon as our primary customer and through its indirect control of our general partner, any development that materially and adversely affects Devon’s operations, financial condition or market reputation could have a material and adverse impact on us. Material adverse changes at Devon could restrict our access to capital, make it more expensive to access the capital markets or increase the costs of our borrowings.

We are substantially dependent on Devon as our primary customer and through its indirect control of our general partner, and we expect to derive a substantial majority of our gross operating margin from Devon for the foreseeable future. As a result, any event, whether in our area of operations or otherwise, that adversely affects Devon’s production, financial condition, leverage, market reputation, liquidity, results of operations or cash flows may adversely affect our revenues and cash available for distribution. Accordingly, we are indirectly subject to the business risks of Devon, some of which are the following:


•	potential changes in the supply of and demand for oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids (“NGLs”) and related products and services;


•	risks relating to Devon’s exploration and drilling programs, including potential environmental liabilities;


•	adverse effects of governmental and environmental regulation; and


•	general economic and financial market conditions.

Further, we are subject to the risk of non-payment or non-performance by Devon, including with respect to our gathering and processing agreements. We cannot predict the extent to which Devon’s business will be impacted by deteriorating pricing conditions in the energy industry, nor can we estimate the impact such conditions would have on Devon’s ability to perform under our gathering and processing agreements. Additionally, due to our relationship with Devon, our ability to access the capital markets, or the pricing or other terms of any capital markets transactions, may be adversely affected by any impairments to Devon’s financial condition or adverse changes in its credit ratings. Any material limitations on our ability to access capital as a result of such adverse changes at Devon could limit our ability to obtain future financing under favorable terms, or at all, or could result in increased financing costs in the future. Similarly, material adverse changes at Devon could negatively impact our unit price, limiting our ability to raise capital through equity issuances or debt financing or our ability to engage in, expand or pursue our business activities and could also prevent us from engaging in certain transactions that might otherwise be considered beneficial to us.

Please see Item 1.A in Devon’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014 for a full discussion of the risks associated with Devon’s business.

Due to our lack of asset diversification, adverse developments in our gathering, transmission, processing, crude oil, condensate, natural gas and NGL services businesses would reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

We rely exclusively on the revenues generated from our gathering, transmission, processing, fractionation, crude oil, natural gas, condensate and NGL services businesses and as a result our financial condition depends upon prices of, and continued demand for, natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate. Due to our lack of asset diversification, an adverse development in one of these businesses may have a significant impact on our financial condition and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

A significant portion of our operations are located in the Barnett Shale, making us vulnerable to risks associated with having revenue-producing operations concentrated in a limited number of geographic areas.

Our revenue-producing operations are geographically concentrated in the Barnett Shale, causing us to be disproportionally exposed to risks associated with regional factors. Specifically, our operations in the Barnett Shale accounted for approximately 24.3% of our consolidated revenues for the period following the business combination, from March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014. The concentration of our operations in these regions also increases exposure to unexpected events that may occur in these regions such as natural disasters or labor difficulties. Any one of these events has the potential to have a relatively significant impact on our operations and growth plans, decrease cash flows, increase operating and capital costs and prevent development within originally anticipated time frames. Any of these risks could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We must continually compete for crude oil, condensate and natural gas supplies, and any decrease in supplies of such commodities could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

In order to maintain or increase throughput levels in our natural gas gathering systems and asset utilization rates at our processing plants and to fulfill our current sales commitments, we must continually contract for new product supplies. We may not be able to obtain additional contracts for crude oil, condensate, natural gas and NGL supplies. The primary factors affecting our ability to connect new wells to our gathering facilities include our success in contracting for existing supplies that are not committed to other systems and the level of drilling activity near our gathering systems. If we are unable to maintain or increase the volumes on our systems by accessing new supplies to offset the natural decline in reserves, our business and financial results could be materially, adversely affected. In addition, our future growth will depend in part upon whether we can contract for additional supplies at a greater rate than the rate of natural decline in our current supplies.

Fluctuations in energy prices can greatly affect production rates and investments by third parties in the development of new oil, condensate and natural gas reserves. Continued periods of low commodity prices may put downward pressure on future drilling activity which may result in lower volumes. Tax policy changes or additional regulatory restrictions on development could also have a negative impact on drilling activity, reducing supplies of product available to our systems and assets. Additional governmental regulation of, or delays in issuance of permits for, the offshore exploration and production industry may negatively impact current and future volumes from offshore pipelines supplying our processing plants. We have no control over producers and depend on them to maintain sufficient levels of drilling activity. A material decrease in production or in the level of drilling activity in our principal geographic areas for a prolonged period, as a result of depressed commodity prices or otherwise, likely would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial position.

Any decrease in the volumes that we gather, process, fractionate or transport would adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Our financial performance depends to a large extent on the volumes of natural gas, crude oil, condensate and NGLs gathered, processed, fractionated and transported on our assets. Decreases in the volumes of natural gas, crude oil, condensate and NGLs we gather, process, fractionate or transport would directly and adversely affect our revenues and results of operations. These volumes can be influenced by factors beyond our control, including:


•	environmental or other governmental regulations;


•	weather conditions;


•	increases in storage levels of natural gas and NGLs;


•	increased use of alternative energy sources;


•	decreased demand for natural gas and NGLs;


•	fluctuations in commodity prices, including the prices of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate;


•	economic conditions;


•	supply disruptions;


•	availability of supply connected to our systems; and


•	availability and adequacy of infrastructure to gather and process supply into and out of our systems.

The volumes of natural gas, crude oil, condensate and NGLs gathered, processed, fractionated and transported on our assets also depend on the production from the regions that supply our systems. Supply of natural gas, crude oil, condensate and NGLs can be affected by many of the factors listed above, including commodity prices and weather. In order to maintain or increase throughput levels on our systems, we must obtain new sources of natural gas, crude oil, condensate and NGLs. The primary factors affecting our ability to obtain non-dedicated sources of natural gas, crude oil, condensate and NGLs include (i) the level of successful leasing, permitting and drilling activity in our areas of operation, (ii) our ability to compete for volumes from new wells and (iii) our ability to compete successfully for volumes from sources connected to other pipelines. We have no control over the level of drilling activity in our areas of operation, the amount of reserves associated with wells connected to our systems or the rate at which production from a well declines. In addition, we have no control over producers or their drilling or production decisions, which are affected by, among other things, the availability and cost of capital, levels of reserves, availability of drilling rigs and other costs of production and equipment.

Our construction of new assets may not result in revenue increases and may be subject to regulatory, environmental, political, legal and economic risks, which could adversely affect our cash flows, results of operations and financial condition.

The construction of additions or modifications to our existing systems and the construction of new midstream assets involves numerous regulatory, environmental, political and legal uncertainties beyond our control and may require the expenditure of significant amounts of capital. Financing may not be available on economically acceptable terms or at all. If we undertake these projects, we may not be able to complete them on schedule, at the budgeted cost or at all. Moreover, our revenues may not increase due to the successful construction of a particular project. For instance, if we expand a pipeline or construct a new pipeline, the construction may occur over an extended period of time, and we may not receive any material increases in revenues promptly following completion of a project or at all. Moreover, we may construct facilities to capture anticipated future production growth in a region in which such growth does not materialize. As a result, new facilities may not be able to attract enough throughput to achieve our expected investment return, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. In addition, the construction of additions to our existing gathering and processing assets will generally require us to obtain new rights-of-way and permits prior to constructing new pipelines or facilities. We may be unable to timely obtain such rights-of-way or permits to connect new product supplies to our existing gathering lines or capitalize on other attractive expansion opportunities. Additionally, it may become more expensive for us to obtain new rights-of-way or to expand or renew existing rights-of-way. If the cost of renewing or obtaining new rights-of-way increases, our cash flows could be adversely affected.

Construction of our major development projects subjects us to risks of construction delays, cost over-runs, limitations on our growth and negative effects on our operating results, liquidity and financial position.

We are engaged in the planning and construction of several major development projects, some of which will take a number of months before commercial operation, such as our ORV condensate pipeline project and our West Texas expansion project. These projects are complex and subject to a number of factors beyond our control, including delays from third-party landowners, the permitting process, complying with laws, unavailability of materials, labor disruptions, environmental hazards, financing, accidents, weather and other factors. Any delay in the completion of these projects could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity. The construction of pipelines and gathering and processing and fractionation facilities requires the expenditure of significant amounts of capital, which may exceed our estimated costs. Estimating the timing and expenditures related to these development projects is very complex and subject to variables that can significantly increase expected costs. Should the actual costs of these projects exceed our estimates, our liquidity and capital position could be adversely affected. This level of development activity requires significant effort from our management and technical personnel and places additional requirements on our financial resources and internal financial controls. We may not have the ability to attract and/or retain the necessary number of personnel with the skills required to bring complicated projects to successful conclusions.

We typically do not regularly obtain independent evaluations of hydrocarbon reserves; therefore, volumes we service in the future could be less than we anticipate.

We typically do not obtain independent evaluations on a regular basis of hydrocarbon reserves connected to our gathering systems or that we otherwise service due to the unwillingness of producers to provide reserve information as well as the cost of such evaluations. Accordingly, we do not have independent estimates of total reserves serviced by our assets or the anticipated

life of such reserves. If the total reserves or estimated life of the reserves is less than we anticipate and we are unable to secure additional sources, then the volumes transported on our gathering systems or that we otherwise service in the future could be less than anticipated. A decline in the volumes could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

We may not be successful in balancing our purchases and sales.

We are a party to certain long-term gas, NGL and condensate sales commitments that we satisfy through supplies purchased under long-term gas, NGL and condensate purchase agreements. When we enter into those arrangements, our sales obligations generally match our purchase obligations. However, over time the supplies that we have under contract may decline due to reduced drilling or other causes and we may be required to satisfy the sales obligations by buying additional gas at prices that may exceed the prices received under the sales commitments. In addition, a producer could fail to deliver contracted volumes or deliver in excess of contracted volumes, or a consumer could purchase more or less than contracted volumes. Any of these actions could cause our purchases and sales not to be balanced. If our purchases and sales are not balanced, we will face increased exposure to commodity price risks and could have increased volatility in our operating income.

We have made commitments to purchase natural gas in production areas based on production-area indices and to sell the natural gas into market areas based on market-area indices, pay the costs to transport the natural gas between the two points and capture the difference between the indices as margin. Changes in the index prices relative to each other (also referred to as basis spread) can significantly affect our margins or even result in losses. For example, we are a party to one contract with a term to 2019 to supply approximately 150,000 MMBtu/d of gas. We buy gas for this contract on several different production-area indices on our NTPL and sell the gas into a different market area index. We realize a loss on the delivery of gas under this contract each month based on current prices. The balance sheet as of December 31, 2014 reflects a liability of $80.7 million related to this performance obligation based on forecasted discounted cash obligations in excess of market under this gas delivery contract. Reduced supplies and narrower basis spreads in recent periods have increased the losses on this contract, and greater losses on this contract could occur in future periods if these conditions persist or become worse.

Our profitability is dependent upon prices and market demand for oil, condensate, natural gas and NGLs, which are beyond our control and have been volatile.

We are subject to significant risks due to fluctuations in commodity prices. We are directly exposed to these risks primarily in the gas processing and NGL fractionation components of our business. For the period following the business combination, from March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014, approximately 1.68% of our total gross operating margin was generated under percent of liquids contracts. Under these contracts we receive a fee in the form of a percentage of the liquids recovered and the producer bears all the cost of the natural gas shrink. Accordingly, our revenues under these contracts are directly impacted by the market price of NGLs.

We also realize processing gross operating margins under processing margin contracts. For the period following the business combination from March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014, approximately 2.10% of our total gross operating margin was generated under processing margin contracts. We have a number of processing margin contracts for activities at our Plaquemine and Pelican processing plants. Under this type of contract, we pay the producer for the full amount of inlet gas to the plant, and we make a margin based on the difference between the value of liquids recovered from the processed natural gas as compared to the value of the natural gas volumes lost (“shrink”) and the cost of fuel used in processing. The shrink and fuel losses are referred to as plant thermal reduction (“PTR”). Our margins from these contracts can be greatly reduced or eliminated during periods of high natural gas prices relative to liquids prices. Although we do not currently have any processing margin contracts for our Blue Water and Eunice plants, we do have the opportunity to process liquids from wet gas flowing on the pipelines connected to these plants, as well as our other processing plants, when market pricing is favorable. Our Eunice and Blue Water plants are not profitable to operate unless market pricing is very favorable.

We are also indirectly exposed to commodity prices due to the negative impacts on production and the development of production of oil, condensate, natural gas and NGLs connected to or near our assets and on our margins for transportation between certain market centers. Low prices for these products will reduce the demand for our services and volumes on our systems.

Although the majority of our NGL fractionation business is under fee-based arrangements, a portion of our business is exposed to commodity price risk because we realize a margin due to product upgrades associated with our Cajun-Sibon fractionation business. For the period following the business combination from March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014, margins realized associated with product upgrades represented less than 1% of our gross operating margin.

The prices of oil, condensate, natural gas and NGLs have been extremely volatile, and we expect this volatility to continue. For example, crude oil prices (based on the NYMEX futures daily close prices for the prompt month) in 2014 ranged from a high of $107.26 per Bbl in June 2014 to a low of $53.27 per Bbl in December 2014. Weighted average NGL prices in 2014 (based on the Oil Price Information Service (“OPIS”) Napoleonville daily average spot liquids prices) ranged from a high of $1.27 per gallon in February 2014 to a low of $0.48 per gallon in December 2014. Natural gas prices (based on Gas Daily

Henry Hub closing prices) during 2014 ranged from a high of $7.94 per MMBtu in March 2014 to a low of $2.75 per MMBtu in December 2014.

The markets and prices for oil, condensate, natural gas and NGLs depend upon factors beyond our control. These factors include the supply and demand for oil, condensate, natural gas and NGLs, which fluctuate with changes in market and economic conditions and other factors, including:


•	the impact of weather on the demand for oil and natural gas;


•	the level of domestic oil, condensate and natural gas production;


•	technology, including improved production techniques (particularly with respect to shale development);


•	the level of domestic industrial and manufacturing activity;


•	the availability of imported oil, natural gas and NGLs;


•	international demand for oil and NGLs;


•	actions taken by foreign oil and gas producing nations;


•	the availability of local, intrastate and interstate transportation systems;


•	the availability of downstream NGL fractionation facilities;


•	the availability and marketing of competitive fuels;


•	the impact of energy conservation efforts; and


•	the extent of governmental regulation and taxation, including the regulation of “greenhouse gases.”

Changes in commodity prices also indirectly impact our profitability by influencing drilling activity and well operations, and thus the volume of gas, crude oil and condensate we gather and process and NGLs we fractionate. The volatility in commodity prices may cause our gross operating margin and cash flows to vary widely from period to period. Our hedging strategies may not be sufficient to offset price volatility risk and, in any event, do not cover all of our throughput volumes. Moreover, hedges are subject to inherent risks, which we describe in “Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk.” Our use of derivative financial instruments does not eliminate our exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices and interest rates and has in the past and could in the future result in financial losses or reduce our income.

If third-party pipelines or other midstream facilities interconnected to our gathering or transportation systems become partially or fully unavailable, or if the volumes we gather, process or transport do not meet the natural gas quality requirements of such pipelines or facilities, our gross operating margin and cash flow could be adversely affected.

Our gathering, processing and transportation assets connect to other pipelines or facilities owned and operated by unaffiliated third parties, including Atmos Energy, Enable Midstream Partners, ONEOK Partners and others. The continuing operation of, and our continuing access to, such third-party pipelines, processing facilities and other midstream facilities is not within our control. These pipelines, plants and other midstream facilities may become unavailable because of testing, turnarounds, line repair, maintenance, reduced operating pressure, lack of operating capacity, regulatory requirements and curtailments of receipt or deliveries due to insufficient capacity or because of damage from severe weather conditions or other operational issues. In addition, if our costs to access and transport on these third-party pipelines significantly increase, our profitability could be reduced. If any such increase in costs occurs, if any of these pipelines or other midstream facilities become unable to receive, transport or process natural gas, or if the volumes we gather or transport do not meet the natural gas quality requirements of such pipelines or facilities, our operating margin and cash flow could be adversely affected.

Our debt levels could limit our flexibility and adversely affect our financial health or limit our flexibility to obtain financing and to pursue other business opportunities.

We continue to have the ability to incur debt, subject to limitations in our credit facility. Our level of indebtedness could have important consequences to us, including the following:


•	our ability to obtain additional financing, if necessary, for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions or other purposes may be impaired or such financing may not be available on favorable terms;


•	our funds available for operations, future business opportunities and distributions to unitholders will be reduced by that portion of our cash flows required to make interest payments on our debt;


•	our debt level will make us more vulnerable to general adverse economic and industry conditions; and


•	limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate.

In addition, our ability to make scheduled payments or to refinance our obligations depends on our successful financial and operating performance, which will be affected by prevailing economic conditions and financial, business, regulatory and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. If our cash flow and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we may be forced to take actions such as reducing distributions, reducing or delaying our business activities, acquisitions, investments or capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring or refinancing our debt or seeking additional equity capital. We may not be able to effect any of these actions on satisfactory terms or at all.

A default under ENLC’s credit facility could have an adverse effect on the price of our common units and could result in a change of control of our general partner.

ENLC has entered into a credit facility that is secured by, among other things, a first priority lien on 17,431,152 of our common units and the 100% membership interest in our general partner indirectly held by ENLC, along with ENLC’s 50% limited partner interest in Midstream Holdings as of December 31, 2014. Although we are not a party to this credit facility, if a default under such credit facility were to occur, the lenders could foreclose on the pledged security interests. Any such foreclosure on our common units could have an adverse effect on the market price of our common units. In addition, any foreclosure on ENLC’s interest in the general partner would allow the new owner of our general partner to replace the board of directors and officers of our general partner with its own choices and to control the decisions taken by the board of directors and officers. Moreover, any change of control of our general partner (i) would permit the lenders under our credit facility to declare all amounts thereunder immediately due and payable and (ii) may permit the holders of our 7.125% Senior Notes due 2022 to require us to repurchase such notes. If any such event occurs, we may be required to refinance our debt on unfavorable terms, which could negatively impact our results of operations and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

We are vulnerable to operational, regulatory and other risks due to our concentration of assets in south Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico, including the effects of adverse weather conditions such as hurricanes.

Our operations and revenues will be significantly impacted by conditions in south Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico because we have a significant portion of our assets located in these two areas. Our concentration of activity in Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico makes us more vulnerable than many of our competitors to the risks associated with these areas, including:


•	adverse weather conditions, including hurricanes and tropical storms;


•	delays or decreases in production, the availability of equipment, facilities or services; and


•	changes in the regulatory environment.

Because a significant portion of our operations could experience the same condition at the same time, these conditions could have a relatively greater impact on our results of operations than they might have on other midstream companies that have operations in more diversified geographic areas.

A reduction in demand for NGL products by the petrochemical, refining or other industries or by the fuel markets could materially adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

The NGL products we produce 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 we handle or reduce the fees we charge for our services. Our NGL products and the demand for these products are affected as follows:

•

Ethane. Ethane is typically supplied as purity ethane or 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 our 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 for ethane, propane, normal butane, isobutane or natural gasoline in the markets we access for any of the reasons stated above could adversely affect demand for the services we provide as well as NGL prices, which would negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition.

We expect to encounter significant competition in any new geographic areas into which we seek to expand, and our ability to enter such markets may be limited.

If we expand our operations into new geographic areas, we expect to encounter significant competition for natural gas, condensate, NGLs and crude oil supplies and markets. Competitors in these new markets will include companies larger than us, which have both lower cost of capital and greater geographic coverage, as well as smaller companies, which have lower total cost structures. As a result, we may not be able to successfully develop acquired assets and markets located in new geographic areas and our results of operations could be adversely affected.

The terms of our credit facility and indentures may restrict our current and future operations, particularly our ability to respond to changes in business or to take certain actions.

Our credit agreement and the indentures governing our senior notes contain, and any future indebtedness we incur will likely contain, a number of restrictive covenants that impose significant operating and financial restrictions, including restrictions on our ability to engage in acts that may be in our best long-term interest. One or more of these agreements include covenants that, among other things, restrict our ability to:


•	incur subsidiary indebtedness;


•	engage in transactions with our affiliates;


•	consolidate, merge or sell substantially all of our assets;


•	incur liens;


•	enter into sale and lease back transactions; and


•	change business activities we conduct.

In addition, our credit facility requires us to satisfy and maintain a specified financial ratio. Our ability to meet that financial ratio can be affected by events beyond our control, and we cannot assure you that we will continue to meet that ratio.

A breach of any of these covenants could result in an event of default under our 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 indebtedness under our credit facility or indentures is accelerated, there can be no assurance that we 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 our ability to finance future operations or capital needs or to engage in other business activities.

We do not own most of the land on which our pipelines and compression facilities are located, which could disrupt our operations.

We do not own most of the land on which our pipelines and compression facilities are located, and we are therefore subject to the possibility of more onerous terms and/or increased costs to retain necessary land use if we do not have valid rights-of-way or leases or if such rights-of-way or leases lapse or terminate. We sometimes obtain the rights to land owned by third parties and governmental agencies for a specific period of time. Our loss of these rights, through our inability to renew right-of-way contracts, leases or otherwise, could cause us to cease operations on the affected land, increase costs related to continuing operations elsewhere and reduce our revenue.

We offer pipeline, truck, rail and barge services. Significant delays, inclement weather or increased costs affecting these transportation methods could materially affect our operations and earnings.

We offer pipeline, truck, rail and barge services. The costs of conducting these services could be negatively affected by factors outside of our control, including rail service interruptions, new laws and regulations, rate increases, tariffs, rising fuel costs or capacity constraints. Inclement weather, including hurricanes, tornadoes, snow, ice and other weather events, can negatively impact our distribution network. In addition, rail, truck or barge accidents involving the transportation of hazardous materials could result in significant claims arising from personal injury, property damage and environmental penalties and remediation.

We could experience increased severity or frequency of trucking accidents and other claims.

Potential liability associated with accidents in the trucking industry is severe and occurrences are unpredictable. A material increase in the frequency or severity of accidents or workers’ compensation claims or the unfavorable development of existing claims could be expected to materially adversely affect our results of operations. In the event that accidents occur, we may be unable to obtain desired contractual indemnities, and our insurance may be inadequate in certain cases. The occurrence of an event not fully insured or indemnified against, or the failure or inability of a customer or insurer to meet its indemnification or insurance obligations, could result in substantial losses.

Changes in trucking regulations may increase our costs and negatively impact our results of operations.

Our trucking services are subject to regulation as a motor carrier by the DOT and by various state agencies, whose regulations include certain permit requirements of state highway and safety authorities. These regulatory authorities exercise broad powers over our trucking operations, generally governing such matters as the authorization to engage in motor carrier operations, safety, equipment testing and specifications and insurance requirements. There are additional regulations specifically relating to the trucking industry, including testing and specification of equipment and product handling requirements. The trucking industry is subject to possible regulatory and legislative changes that may impact our operations and affect the economics of the industry by requiring changes in operating practices or by changing the demand for or the cost of providing trucking services. Some of these possible changes include increasingly stringent fuel emission limits, changes in the regulations that govern the amount of time a driver may drive or work in any specific period, limits on vehicle weight and size and other matters, including safety requirements.

If we do not make acquisitions on economically acceptable terms or efficiently and effectively integrate the acquired assets with our asset base, our future growth will be limited.

Our ability to grow depends, in part, on our ability to make acquisitions that result in an increase in cash generated from operations on a per unit basis. If we are unable to make accretive acquisitions either because we are (1) unable to identify attractive acquisition candidates or negotiate acceptable purchase contracts with them, (2) unable to obtain financing for these acquisitions on economically acceptable terms or at all or (3) outbid by competitors, then our future growth and our ability to increase distributions will be limited.

From time to time, we may evaluate and seek to acquire assets or businesses that we believe complement our existing business and related assets. We may acquire assets or businesses that we plan to use in a manner materially different from their prior owner’s use. Any acquisition involves potential risks, including:


•	the inability to integrate the operations of recently acquired businesses or assets, especially if the assets acquired are in a new business segment or geographic area;


•	the diversion of management’s attention from other business concerns;


•	the failure to realize expected volumes, revenues, profitability or growth;


•	the failure to realize any expected synergies and cost savings;


•	the coordination of geographically disparate organizations, systems and facilities;


•	the assumption of unknown liabilities;


•	the loss of customers or key employees from the acquired businesses;


•	a significant increase in our indebtedness; and


•	potential environmental or regulatory liabilities and title problems.

Management’s assessment of these risks is inexact and may not reveal or resolve all existing or potential problems associated with an acquisition. Realization of any of these risks could adversely affect our operations and cash flows. If we consummate any future acquisition, our capitalization and results of operations may change significantly, and you will not have the opportunity to evaluate the economic, financial and other relevant information that we will consider in determining the application of these funds and other resources.

We may not be able to retain existing customers or acquire new customers, which would reduce our revenues and limit our future profitability.

The renewal or replacement of existing contracts with our customers at rates sufficient to maintain current revenues and cash flows depends on a number of factors beyond our control, including competition from other midstream service providers, and the price of, and demand for, crude oil, condensate, NGLs and natural gas in the markets we serve. The inability of our management to renew or replace our current contracts as they expire and to respond appropriately to changing market conditions could have a negative effect on our profitability.

In particular, our ability to renew or replace our existing contracts with industrial end-users and utilities impacts our profitability. For the period following the business combination, from March 7, 2014 through December 31, 2014, approximately 59.5% of our sales of gas that was transported using our physical facilities were to industrial end-users and utilities. As a consequence of the increase in competition in the industry and volatility of natural gas prices, end-users and utilities may be reluctant to enter into long-term purchase contracts. Many end-users purchase natural gas from more than one natural gas company and have the ability to change providers at any time. Some of these end-users also have the ability to switch between gas and alternate fuels in response to relative price fluctuations in the market. Because there are numerous companies of greatly varying size and financial capacity that compete with us in the marketing of natural gas, we often compete in the end-user and utilities markets primarily on the basis of price.

We are exposed to the credit risk of our customers and counterparties, and a general increase in the nonpayment and nonperformance by our customers could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Risks of nonpayment and nonperformance by our customers are a major concern in our business. We are subject to risks of loss resulting from nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers and other counterparties, such as our lenders and hedging counterparties. Any increase in the nonpayment and nonperformance by our customers could adversely affect our results of operations and reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

Increased federal, state and local legislation and regulatory initiatives, as well as government reviews, relating to hydraulic fracturing could result in increased costs and reductions or delays in natural gas production by our customers, which could adversely impact our revenues.

A portion of our suppliers’ and customers’ natural gas production is developed from unconventional sources, such as deep gas shales, that require hydraulic fracturing as part of the completion process. Hydraulic fracturing involves the injection of water, sand and chemicals under pressure into the formation to stimulate gas production. Hydraulic fracturing activities are generally regulated by state oil and gas commissions; however, the EPA has asserted federal regulatory authority over certain hydraulic fracturing activities involving diesel under the Safe Drinking Water Act and has released draft permitting guidance for hydraulic fracturing activities that use diesel in fracturing fluids in those states where the EPA is the permitting authority. In addition, legislation has been proposed, but not yet passed, that would provide for federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing and require disclosure of the chemicals used in the hydraulic-fracturing process. State legislatures and agencies are also enacting legislation and promulgating rules to regulate hydraulic fracturing and require disclosure of hydraulic fracturing chemicals. In January 2013, the Bureau of Land Management of the U.S. Department of the Interior published for public comment a revised proposed rule containing disclosure requirements and other mandates for hydraulic fracturing on federal lands with respect to which the Department of Interior is expected to promulgate a final rule sometime in 2015.

There are certain governmental reviews either underway or being proposed that focus on environmental aspects of hydraulic fracturing practices. On April 13, 2012, President Obama created the Interagency Working Group on Unconventional Natural Gas and Oil, which is charged with coordinating and aligning federal agency research and scientific studies on unconventional natural gas and oil resources. The White House Council on Environmental Quality is coordinating an administration-wide review of hydraulic fracturing practices, and a committee of the United States House of Representatives has conducted an investigation of hydraulic fracturing practices. In addition, the EPA is conducting a study of the potential environmental effects of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water and groundwater and has initiated plans to promulgate regulations controlling wastewater disposal associated with hydraulic fracturing and shale gas development. The EPA has also issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking under the Toxic Substances Control Act to gather information regarding the potential regulation of chemical substances and mixtures used in oil and gas exploration. In addition to the EPA, other federal

agencies are analyzing, or have been requested to review, a variety of issues, environmental and otherwise, associated with hydraulic fracturing. These on-going or proposed studies, depending on their degree of pursuit and any meaningful results obtained, could spur initiatives to further regulate hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, or other statutory and/or regulatory mechanisms.

Moreover, some state and local authorities have considered or imposed new laws and rules related to hydraulic fracturing, including temporary or permanent bans, additional permit requirements, operational restrictions and chemical disclosure obligations on hydraulic fracturing in certain jurisdictions or in environmentally sensitive areas. For example, Oklahoma, Texas, and many other states have imposed regulations regarding disclosure of information regarding chemicals in well stimulation operations. State and federal regulatory agencies also have recently focused on a possible connection between the operation of injection wells used for oil and gas waste waters and an observed increase in minor seismic activity and tremors. When caused by human activity, such events are called induced seismicity. In a few instances, operators of injection wells in the vicinity of minor seismic events have reduced injection volumes or suspended operations, often voluntarily, and some state regulatory agencies have modified their regulations to account for induced seismicity. For example, the TRRC rules allow the TRRC to modify, suspend, or terminate a permit based on a determination that the permitted activity is likely to be contributing to seismic activity. The Oklahoma Corporation Commission has also taken steps to focus on induced seismicity, including increasing the frequency of required recordkeeping for wells that dispose into certain formations and considering seismic information in permitting decisions. As regulatory agencies continue to study induced seismicity, such agencies may promulgate additional regulations affecting our brine disposal operations.

We cannot predict whether any additional legislation or regulations will be enacted and, if so, what the provisions would be. If additional levels of regulation and permits were required through the adoption of new laws and regulations at the federal or state level, that could lead to delays, increased operating costs and process prohibitions for our suppliers and customers that could reduce the volumes of natural gas that move through our gathering systems which could materially adversely affect our revenue and results of operations.

Transportation on certain of our natural gas pipelines is subject to federal and state rate and service regulation, which could limit the revenues we collect from our customers and adversely affect the cash available for distribution to our unitholders. The imposition of regulation on our currently unregulated natural gas pipelines also could increase our operating costs and adversely affect the cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

The rates, terms and conditions of service under which we transport natural gas in our pipeline systems in interstate commerce are subject to regulation of by FERC under the NGA and under Section 311 of the Natural Gas Policy Act and the rules and regulations promulgated under those statutes. Under the NGA, FERC regulation requires that interstate natural gas pipeline rates be filed with FERC and that these rates be “just and reasonable” and not unduly discriminatory, although negotiated or settlement rates may be accepted in certain circumstances. Interested persons may challenge proposed new or changed rates, and FERC is authorized to suspend the effectiveness of such rates pending an investigation or hearing. FERC may also investigate, upon complaint or on its own motion, rates that are already in effect and may order a pipeline to change its rates prospectively. Accordingly, action by FERC could adversely affect our ability to establish reasonable rates that cover operating costs and allow for a reasonable return. An adverse determination in any future rate proceeding brought by or against us could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash available for distribution. Under the NGPA, we are required to justify our rates for interstate transportation service on a cost-of-service basis every five years. Our intrastate natural gas pipeline operations are subject to regulation by various agencies of the states in which they are located. Should FERC or any of these state agencies determine that our rates for Section 311 transportation service or intrastate transportation service should be lowered, our business could be adversely affected.

Our natural gas gathering and processing activities generally are exempt from FERC regulation under the Natural Gas Act. However, the distinction between FERC-regulated transmission services and federally unregulated gathering services is the subject of substantial, ongoing litigation, so the classification and regulation of our gathering facilities are subject to change based on future determinations by FERC and the courts. Natural gas gathering may receive greater regulatory scrutiny at both the state and federal levels since FERC has less extensively regulated the gathering activities of interstate pipeline transmission companies and a number of such companies have transferred gathering facilities to unregulated affiliates. Our gathering operations also may be or become subject to safety and operational regulations relating to the design, installation, testing, construction, operation, replacement and management of gathering facilities. Additional rules and legislation pertaining to these matters are considered or adopted from time to time. We cannot predict what effect, if any, such changes might have on our operations, but the industry could be required to incur additional capital expenditures and increased costs depending on future legislative and regulatory changes.

If we fail to comply with all applicable FERC-administered statutes, rules, regulations and orders, we could be subject to substantial penalties and fines. Under the EPAct 2005, FERC has civil penalty authority to impose penalties for current violations of the NGA or NGPA of up to $1.0 million per day for each violation. FERC also has the power to order disgorgement of profits from transactions deemed to violate the NGA and EPAct 2005.

Other state and local regulations also affect our business. We are subject to some ratable take and common purchaser statutes in the states where we operate. Ratable take statutes generally require gatherers to take, without undue discrimination, natural gas production that may be tendered to the gatherer for handling. Similarly, common purchaser statutes generally require gatherers to purchase without undue discrimination as to source of supply or producer. These statutes have the effect of restricting our right as an owner of gathering facilities to decide with whom we contract to purchase or transport natural gas. Federal law leaves any economic regulation of natural gas gathering to the states, and some of the states in which we operate have adopted complaint-based or other limited economic regulation of natural gas gathering activities. States in which we operate that have adopted some form of complaint-based regulation, like Texas, generally allow natural gas producers and shippers to file complaints with state regulators in an effort to resolve grievances relating to natural gas gathering access and rate discrimination.

Transportation on our liquids pipelines is subject to federal and state rate and service regulation, which could limit the revenues we collect from our customers and adversely affect the cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

Our liquids transportation pipelines in the ORV and the Cajun-Sibon NGL pipeline, which went into service in November 2013, are subject to regulation by FERC under the ICA, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and the rules and regulations promulgated under those laws. The ICA and its implementing regulations require that tariff rates and terms and conditions of service for interstate service on liquids pipelines be just, reasonable and not unduly discriminatory or preferential. The ICA also requires that such rates and terms and conditions be set forth in tariffs filed with FERC. The ICA permits interested persons to challenge proposed new or changed rates and authorizes FERC to suspend the effectiveness of such rates for up to seven months and investigate such rates. If, upon completion of an investigation, FERC finds that the new or changed rates are unlawful, it is authorized to require the pipeline to refund revenues collected in excess of the just and reasonable rates during the term of the investigation. FERC may also investigate, upon complaint or on its own motion, rates that are already in effect and may order a carrier to change its rates prospectively. Under certain circumstances, FERC could limit our ability to set rates based on our costs or could order us to reduce our rates and could require the payment of reparations to complaining shippers for up to two years prior to the date of the complaint. FERC also has the authority to change our terms and conditions of service if it determines that they are unjust and unreasonable or unduly discriminatory or preferential.

We may incur significant costs and liabilities resulting from compliance with pipeline safety regulations.

The states in which we conduct operations administer federal pipeline safety standards under the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968. These standards only apply to certain natural gas gathering lines based on the gathering line’s operating pressure and proximity to people. Because of their pressure and location, substantial portions of our gathering facilities are not regulated under that statute. The gathering line exemptions, however, may be revised in the future and place more of our gathering facilities under jurisdiction of the DOT. Nonetheless, our natural gas transmission pipelines are subject to regulation by the DOT. In response to pipeline accidents in other parts of the country, Congress and the DOT, through PHMSA, have passed or are considering heightened pipeline safety requirements that may be applicable to gathering lines. As a result, our pipeline facilities are subject to the Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty and Job Creation Act of 2011, which reauthorized funding for federal safety programs through 2015, increased penalties for safety violations, established additional safety requirements for newly constructed pipelines and required studies of certain safety issues that could result in the adoption of new regulatory requirements for existing pipelines.

At the state level, several states have passed legislation or promulgated rulemaking addressing pipeline safety. Compliance with pipeline integrity and other pipeline safety regulations issued by DOT or those issued by the TRRC could result in substantial expenditures for testing, repairs and replacement. TRRC regulations require periodic testing of all intrastate pipelines meeting certain size and location requirements. Our costs relating to compliance with the required testing under the TRRC regulations were approximately at $2.5 million, $7.0 million, and $8.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. We expect the costs for compliance with TRRC and DOT regulations to be approximately $1.8 million during 2015. If our pipelines fail to meet the safety standards mandated by the TRRC or the DOT regulations, then we may be required to repair or replace sections of such pipelines or operate the pipelines at a reduced maximum allowable operating pressure, the cost of which cannot be estimated at this time.

In addition, our liquids transportation pipelines are subject to regulation by the DOT, through PHMSA, pursuant to the Hazardous Liquids Pipeline Safety Act of 1979, as amended by the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002, and reauthorized and amended by the Pipeline Inspection, Protection, Enforcement and Safety Act of 2006. PHMSA has adopted regulations requiring hazardous liquid pipeline operators to develop and implement integrity management programs for pipeline segments that, in the event of a leak or rupture, could affect “high consequence areas,” such as 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.

Due to the possibility of new or amended laws and regulations or reinterpretation of existing laws and regulations, there can be no assurance that future compliance with PHMSA or state requirements will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial positions. As our operations continue to expand into and around urban or more populated areas, such as the Barnett Shale, we may incur additional expenses to mitigate noise, odor and light that may be emitted in our operations and expenses related to the appearance of our facilities. Municipal and other local or state regulations are imposing various obligations including, among other things, regulating the location of our facilities, imposing limitations on the noise levels of our facilities and requiring certain other improvements that increase the cost of our facilities. We are also subject to claims by neighboring landowners for nuisance related to the construction and operation of our facilities, which could subject us to damages for declines in neighboring property values due to our construction and operation of facilities.

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 us to incur significant costs and liabilities.

Many of the operations and activities of our gathering systems, processing plants, fractionators, brine disposal operations and other facilities are subject to significant federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. The obligations imposed by these laws and regulations include obligations related to air emissions and discharge of pollutants from our facilities and the cleanup of hazardous substances and other wastes that may have been released at properties currently or previously owned or operated by us or locations to which we have sent wastes for treatment or disposal. Various governmental authorities have the power to enforce compliance with these laws and regulations and the permits issued under them, and violators are subject to administrative, civil and criminal penalties, including civil fines, injunctions or both. Strict, joint and several liability may be incurred under these laws and regulations for the remediation of contaminated areas. Private parties, including the owners of properties near our facilities or upon or through which our gathering systems traverse, may also have the right to pursue legal actions to enforce compliance as well as to seek damages for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations for releases of contaminants or for personal injury or property damage.

There is inherent risk of the incurrence of significant environmental costs and liabilities in our business due to our handling of natural gas, crude oil and other petroleum substances, our brine disposal operations, air emissions related to our operations, historical industry operations, waste disposal practices and the prior use of natural gas flow meters containing mercury. For example, we operate brine disposal wells in Ohio and West Virginia and may gather brine from surrounding states. These wells are regulated under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act as Class II wells and under state laws. State laws and regulations that govern these operations can be more stringent than the Safe Drinking Water Act, such as the Ohio Department of Natural Resources rules which took effect October 1, 2012. These rules imposed new, more stringent environmentally responsible standards for the permitting and operating of brine disposal wells, including extensive review of geologic data and use of state of the art technology. They apply to new disposal wells and, as applicable, to existing wells. The Ohio Department of Natural Resources also imposes requirements on the transportation and disposal of brine. In addition, the possibility exists that stricter laws, regulations or enforcement policies could significantly increase our compliance costs and the cost of any remediation that may become necessary. We may incur material environmental costs and liabilities. Furthermore, our insurance may not provide sufficient coverage in the event an environmental claim is made against us.

In addition, state and federal regulatory agencies recently have focused on a possible connection between the operation of injection wells used for oil and gas waste waters and an observed increase in minor seismic activity and tremors. When caused by human activity, such events are called induced seismicity. Regulatory agencies are continuing to study possible linkage between injection activity and induced seismicity. To the extent these studies result in additional regulation of injection wells, such regulations could impose additional regulations, costs and restrictions on our brine disposal operations.

Our business may be adversely affected by increased costs due to stricter pollution control requirements or liabilities resulting from non-compliance with required operating or other regulatory permits. New environmental laws or regulations, including, for example, legislation relating to the control of greenhouse gas emissions, or changes in existing environmental laws or regulations might adversely affect our products and activities, including processing, storage and transportation, as well as waste management and air emissions. Federal and state agencies could also impose additional safety requirements, any of which could affect our profitability. Changes in laws or regulations could also limit our production or the operation of our assets or adversely affect our ability to comply with applicable legal requirements or the demand for crude oil, brine disposal services or natural gas, which could adversely affect our business and our profitability.

Recently finalized rules under the Clean Air Act imposing more stringent requirements on the oil and gas industry could cause our customers and us to incur increased capital expenditures and operating costs as well as reduce the demand for our services.

On April 17, 2012, the EPA issued final rules under the Clean Air Act that became effective on October 15, 2012. Among other things, these rules require additional emissions controls for natural gas and NGLs production, including New Source

Performance Standards to address emissions of sulfur dioxide and VOCs and a separate set of emission standards to address hazardous air pollutants frequently associated with such production activities. The final regulations require, among other things, the reduction of VOC emissions from natural gas wells through the use of reduced emission completions or “green completions” on all hydraulically fractured wells constructed or refractured after January 1, 2015. Moreover, these rules establish specific requirements regarding emissions from compressors and controllers at natural gas gathering and boosting stations and processing plants together with dehydrators and storage tanks at natural gas processing plants, compressor stations and gathering and boosting stations. The rules also establish new requirements for leak detection and repair of leaks at natural gas processing plants that exceed 500 parts per million in concentration. These regulations could require a number of modifications to our operations and our natural gas exploration and production suppliers’ and customers’ operations, including the installation of new equipment, which could result in significant costs, including increased capital expenditures and operating costs. The incurrence of such expenditures and costs by our suppliers and customers could result in reduced production by those suppliers and customers and thus translate into reduced demand for our services. The rules are subject to an ongoing legal challenge brought by various parties, including environmental groups and industry, and the EPA has revised some aspects of the rules. Any further revisions could affect our operations, as well as the operations of our suppliers and customers.

Climate change legislation and regulatory initiatives could result in increased operating costs and reduced demand for the natural gas and NGL services we provide.

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 earth’s atmosphere and other climatic changes. These findings allowed the EPA to proceed with the adoption and implementation of regulations restricting emissions of GHGs under existing provisions of the federal Clean Air Act. Since 2011, the EPA has required stationary sources that emit GHGs above regulatory and statutory thresholds to obtain a Prevention of Significant Deterioration permit. Moreover, on October 30, 2009, the EPA published a “Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases” final rule that established a comprehensive scheme requiring operators of stationary sources emitting more than established annual thresholds of GHGs to inventory and report their GHG emissions annually on a facility-by-facility basis. The Mandatory Reporting Rule was expanded by a rule promulgated on November 30, 2010 to include owners and operators of onshore oil and natural gas production, processing, transmission, storage and distribution facilities. Reporting emissions from such onshore activities is required on an annual basis. The first reports were due in 2012 for emissions occurring in 2011. Additionally, the EPA has proposed to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from certain electric generating units under the Clean Air Act’s New Source Performance Standards (“NSPS”) program. The EPA may propose to regulate additional source categories under the NSPS program in the future.

On January 14, 2015, the Obama administration announced that the EPA will propose a rule in the summer of 2015 to set standards for methane and volatile organic compound emissions from new and modified sources in the oil and gas sector, including transmission. A final rule is expected in 2016. The Administration’s announcement also stated that other federal agencies, including the Bureau of Land Management, the PHMSA, and the Department of Energy will impose new or more stringent regulations on the oil and gas sector that will have the effect of reducing methane emissions.

In addition, the U.S. Congress has from time to time 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 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, our equipment and operations could require us to incur additional costs to reduce emissions of GHGs associated with our operations, could adversely affect our performance of operations in the absence of any permits that may be required to regulate emission of GHGs or could adversely affect demand for the natural gas we gather, process or otherwise handle in connection with our services.

The Endangered Species Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act govern our operations and additional restrictions may be imposed in the future, which could have an adverse impact on our operations.

The ESA and analogous state laws restrict activities that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. Similar protections are offered to migratory birds under the MBTA. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state agencies may designate critical or suitable habitat areas that they believe are necessary for the survival of threatened or endangered species. Such a designation could materially restrict use of or access to federal, state and private lands. Some of our operations may be located in areas that are designated as habitats for endangered or threatened species or that may attract migratory birds. In these areas, we may be obligated to develop and implement plans to avoid potential adverse impacts to protected species, and we may be prohibited from conducting operations in certain locations or during certain seasons, such as breeding and nesting seasons, when our operations could have an adverse effect on the species. It is also possible that a federal or state agency could order a complete halt to our activities in certain locations if it is determined that such activities may have a serious adverse

effect on a protected species. In addition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state agencies regularly review species that are listing candidates, and designations of additional endangered or threatened species, or critical or suitable habitat, under the ESA could cause us to incur additional costs or become subject to operating restrictions or bans in the affected areas.

Our business involves many hazards and operational risks, some of which may not be fully covered by insurance.

Our operations are subject to the many hazards inherent in the gathering, compressing, processing, transporting, fractionating, disposing and storage of natural gas, NGLs, condensate, crude oil and brine, including:


•	damage to pipelines, related equipment and surrounding properties caused by hurricanes, floods, fires and other natural disasters and acts of terrorism;


•	inadvertent damage from construction and farm equipment;


•	leaks of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil, condensate and other hydrocarbons;


•	induced seismicity;


•	rail accidents, barge accidents and truck accidents; and


•	fires and explosions.

These risks could result in substantial losses due to personal injury and/or loss of life, severe damage to and destruction of property and equipment and pollution or other environmental damage and may result in curtailment or suspension of our related operations. We are not fully insured against all risks incident to our business. In accordance with typical industry practice, we do not have business interruption insurance or any property insurance on any of our underground pipeline systems that would cover damage to the pipelines. We are not insured against all environmental accidents that might occur, other than those considered to be sudden and accidental. If a significant accident or event occurs that is not fully insured, it could adversely affect our operations and financial condition.

The adoption of derivatives legislation by the United States Congress and promulgation of related regulations could have an adverse effect on our ability to hedge risks associated with our business.

Comprehensive financial reform legislation was signed into law by the President on July 21, 2010. The legislation calls for the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) to regulate certain markets for derivative products, including over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives. The CFTC has issued several new relevant regulations and other rulemakings are pending at the CFTC, the product of which would be rules that implement the mandates in the new legislation to cause significant portions of derivatives markets to clear through clearinghouses. The legislation and new regulations may also require counterparties to our derivative instruments to spin off some of their derivatives activities to separate entities, which may not be as creditworthy as the current counterparties. The new legislation and any new regulations could significantly increase the cost of derivative contracts, materially alter the terms of derivative contracts, reduce the availability of derivatives to protect against risks we encounter, reduce our ability to monetize or restructure our existing derivative contracts, and increase our exposure to less creditworthy counterparties. If we reduce our use of derivatives as a result of the legislation and regulations, our results of operations may become more volatile and our cash flows may be less predictable, which could adversely affect our ability to plan for and fund capital expenditures and to generate sufficient cash flow to pay quarterly distributions at current levels or at all. Our revenues could 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 us, our financial condition and our results of operations.

Our use of derivative financial instruments does not eliminate our exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices and interest rates and has in the past and could in the future result in financial losses or reduce our income.

Our operations expose us to fluctuations in commodity prices, and our credit facility exposes us to fluctuations in interest rates. We use over-the-counter price and basis swaps with other natural gas merchants and financial institutions. Use of these instruments is intended to reduce our exposure to short-term volatility in commodity prices. As of December 31, 2014, we have hedged only portions of our expected exposures to commodity price risk. In addition, to the extent we hedge our commodity price risk using swap instruments, we will forego the benefits of favorable changes in commodity prices. Although we do not currently have any financial instruments to eliminate our exposure to interest rate fluctuations, we may use financial instruments in the future to offset our exposure to interest rate fluctuations.

Even though monitored by management, our hedging activities may fail to protect us and could reduce our earnings and cash flow. Our hedging activity may be ineffective or adversely affect cash flow and earnings because, among other factors:


•	hedging can be expensive, particularly during periods of volatile prices;


•	our counterparty in the hedging transaction may default on its obligation to pay or otherwise fail to perform; and


•	available hedges may not correspond directly with the risks against which we seek protection. For example:


•	the duration of a hedge may not match the duration of the risk against which we seek protection;


•	variations in the index we use to price a commodity hedge may not adequately correlate with variations in the index we use to sell the physical commodity (known as basis risk); and

•

we may not produce or process sufficient volumes to cover swap arrangements we enter into for a given period. If our actual volumes are lower than the volumes we estimated when entering into a swap for the period, we might be forced to satisfy all or a portion of our derivative obligation without the benefit of cash flow from our sale or purchase of the underlying physical commodity, which could adversely affect our liquidity.

A failure in our computer systems or a cyber-attack on us, or third parties with whom we have a relationship, may adversely affect our ability to operate our business.

We are reliant on technology to conduct our businesses. Our business is dependent upon our operational and financial computer systems to process the data necessary to conduct almost all aspects of our business, including operating our pipelines, truck fleet and storage facilities, recording and reporting commercial and financial transactions and receiving and making payments. Any failure of our computer systems, or those of our customers, suppliers or others with whom we do business, could materially disrupt our ability to operate our business. Unknown entities or groups have mounted so-called “cyber-attacks” on businesses to disable or disrupt computer systems, disrupt operations and steal funds or data. Any such cyber-attack that affects us or our customers, suppliers or others with whom we do business, could have a material adverse effect on our business, cause us to incur a material financial loss and/or damage our reputation.

Our success depends on key members of our management, the loss or replacement of whom could disrupt our business operations.

We depend on the continued employment and performance of the officers of our general partner and key operational personnel. If any of these officers or other key personnel resign or become unable to continue in their present roles and are not adequately replaced, our business operations could be materially adversely affected. We do not maintain any “key man” life insurance for any officers.

Subsidence and coastal erosion could damage our pipelines along the Gulf Coast and offshore and the facilities of our customers, which could adversely affect our operations and financial condition.

Our pipeline operations along the Gulf Coast and offshore could be impacted by subsidence and coastal erosion. Such processes could cause serious damage to our pipelines, which could affect our ability to provide transportation services. Additionally, such processes could impact our customers who operate along the Gulf Coast, and they may be unable to utilize our services. Subsidence and coastal erosion could also expose our operations to increased risks associated with severe weather conditions, such as hurricanes, flooding and rising sea levels. As a result, we may incur significant costs to repair and preserve our pipeline infrastructure. Such costs could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operation or cash flows.

Our assets were constructed over many decades which may cause our inspection, maintenance or repair costs to increase in the future. In addition, there could be service interruptions due to unknown events or conditions or increased downtime associated with our pipelines that could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our pipelines were constructed over many decades. Pipelines are generally long-lived assets, and pipeline construction and coating techniques have varied over time. Depending on the era of construction, some assets will require more frequent inspections, which could result in increased maintenance or repair expenditures in the future. Any significant increase in these expenditures could adversely affect our results of operations, financial position or cash flows, as well as our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Risk Inherent in an Investment in the Partnership

Cash distributions are not guaranteed and may fluctuate with our performance and the establishment of financial reserves.

Because distributions on our units are dependent on the amount of cash we generate, distributions may fluctuate based on our performance. The actual amount of cash that is available to be distributed each quarter will depend on numerous factors, some of which are beyond our control and the control of our general partner. Cash distributions are dependent primarily on cash flow, including cash flow from financial reserves and working capital borrowings and not solely on profitability, which is affected by non-cash items. Therefore, cash distributions might be made during periods when we record losses and might not be made during periods when we record profits.

We may not have sufficient available cash from operating surplus each quarter to enable us to make cash distributions at our current distribution rate under our cash distribution policy. The amount of cash we can distribute on our units principally depends upon the amount of cash we generate from our operations, which will fluctuate from quarter to quarter based on, among other things:


•	the fees we charge and the margins we realize for our services;


•	the prices of, levels of production of and demand for crude oil, natural gas, condensate and NGLs;


•	the volume of natural gas we gather, compress, process, transport and sell, the volume of NGLs we process or fractionate and sell, the volume of crude oil we handle at our crude terminals, the volume of crude oil we gather, transport, purchase and sell, the volume of condensate we stabilize and transport and the volumes of brine we dispose;


•	the relationship between natural gas and NGL prices;


•	cash settlements of hedging positions;


•	the level of competition from other midstream energy companies;


•	the level of our operating and maintenance and general and administrative costs; and


•	prevailing economic conditions.

In addition, the actual amount of cash we will have available for distribution will depend on other factors, some of which are beyond our control, including:


•	the level of capital expenditures we make;


•	our ability to make borrowings under our credit facility to pay distributions;


•	the cost of acquisitions;


•	our debt service requirements and other liabilities;


•	fluctuations in our working capital needs;


•	general and administrative expenses;


•	restrictions on distributions contained in our debt agreements; and


•	the amount of cash reserves established by our general partner for the proper conduct of our business.

Devon, through its control of ENLC, controls our general partner, which has sole responsibility for conducting our business and managing our operations. Devon, ENLC and our general partner have conflicts of interest with, and may favor Devon’s interests to the detriment of, our unitholders.

Devon, through its control of ENLC, controls our general partner and indirectly has the power to appoint all of the officers and directors of our general partner. Although our general partner has a fiduciary duty to manage us in a manner that is beneficial to us and our unitholders, the directors and officers of our general partner have a fiduciary duty to manage our general partner in a manner that is beneficial to its owner, ENLC, in which Devon owns the manager and a 70.4% limited liability company interest as of December 31, 2014. Conflicts of interest may arise in the future among Devon, ENLC and its affiliates, including our general partner, on the one hand, and our partnership and our unitholders, on the other hand. As a result of these conflicts our general partner may favor its own interests and those of its affiliates, including Devon and ENLC, over our interests. These conflicts include, among others, the following situations:

Conflicts Relating to Control


•	our partnership agreement limits our general partner’s liability and reduces its fiduciary duties, while also restricting the remedies available to our unitholders for actions that might, without these limitations, constitute breaches of fiduciary duty by our general partner;


•	in resolving conflicts of interest, our general partner is allowed to take into account the interests of parties in addition to unitholders, which has the effect of limiting its fiduciary duties to the unitholders;


•	our general partner’s affiliates may engage in limited competition with us;

Conflicts Relating to Costs


•	our general partner determines the amount and timing of asset purchases and sales, capital expenditures, borrowings, issuance of additional limited partner interests and reserves;


•	our general partner determines which costs incurred by it and its affiliates are reimbursable by us; and


•	our general partner is not restricted from causing us to pay it or its affiliates for any services rendered on terms that are fair and reasonable to us or entering into additional contractual arrangements with any of these entities on our behalf.

Our unitholders have no right to elect our general partner or the directors of our general partner and have limited ability to remove our general partner.

Unlike the holders of common stock in a corporation, unitholders have only limited voting rights on matters affecting our business, and therefore limited ability to influence management’s decisions regarding our business. Unitholders did not elect our general partner or the board of directors of our general partner and have no right to elect our general partner or the board of directors of our general partner on an annual or other continuing basis.

Furthermore, if unitholders are dissatisfied with the performance of our general partner, they will have little ability to remove our general partner. The general partner generally may not be removed except upon the vote of the holders of 66 2/3% of the outstanding units voting together as a single class. Affiliates of the general partner controlled approximately 56.5% of all the outstanding units as of December 31, 2014.

In addition, unitholders’ voting rights are further restricted by the partnership agreement. It provides that any units held by a person that owns 20.0% or more of any class of units then outstanding, other than our general partner, its affiliates, their transferees and persons who acquired such units with the prior approval of the board of directors of the general partner, cannot be voted on any matter. In addition, the partnership agreement contains provisions limiting the ability of unitholders to call meetings or to acquire information about our operations, as well as other provisions limiting the unitholders’ ability to influence the manner or direction of management.

As a result of these provisions, it will be more difficult for a third party to acquire our partnership without first negotiating such a purchase with our general partner and, as a result, our unitholders are less likely to receive a takeover premium.

Cost reimbursements due to our general partner may be substantial and will reduce the cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

Prior to making any distributions on the units, we reimburse our general partner and its affiliates, including officers and directors of our general partner, for all expenses they incur on our behalf. The reimbursement of expenses could adversely affect our ability to make distributions to our unitholders. Our general partner has sole discretion to determine the amount of these expenses.

The control of our general partner may be transferred to a third party without unitholder consent.

The general partner may transfer its general partner interest in us to a third party in a merger or in a sale of all or substantially all of its assets without the consent of the unitholders. Furthermore, there is no restriction in the partnership agreement on the ability of (i) ENLC to transfer all or a portion of its ownership interest in the general partner to a third party or (ii) Devon to transfer all or a portion of its ownership interest in ENLC and/or ENLC’s manager to a third party. The new owner of the general partner or ENLC’s manager, as the case may be, would then be in a position to replace the board of directors and officers of the general partner with its own choices and to control the decisions taken by the board of directors and officers.

Our general partner’s absolute discretion in determining the level of cash reserves may adversely affect our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Our partnership agreement requires our general partner to deduct from operating surplus cash reserves that in its reasonable discretion are necessary to fund our future operating expenditures. In addition, the partnership agreement permits our general partner to reduce available cash by establishing cash reserves for the proper conduct of our business, to comply with applicable law or agreements to which we are a party or to provide funds for future distributions to partners. These cash reserves will affect the amount of cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

Our partnership agreement contains provisions that reduce the remedies available to our unitholders for actions that might otherwise constitute a breach of fiduciary duty by our general partner.

Our partnership agreement limits the liability and reduces the fiduciary duties of our general partner to our unitholders. The partnership agreement also restricts the remedies available to our unitholders for actions that would otherwise constitute breaches of our general partner’s fiduciary duties. If you own a unit, you will be treated as having consented to the various

actions contemplated in the partnership agreement and conflicts of interest that might otherwise be considered a breach of fiduciary duties under applicable state law.

We may issue additional units without our unitholders’ approval, which would dilute our unitholders’ ownership interests.

We may issue an unlimited number of limited partner interests of any type without the approval of our unitholders. The issuance of additional limited partner interests will have the following effects:


•	our existing unitholders’ proportionate ownership interest in us will decrease;


•	the amount of cash available for distribution on each unit may decrease;


•	the relative voting strength of each previously outstanding unit may be diminished; and


•	the market price of the common units may decline.

Our general partner has a limited call right that may require our unitholders to sell their common units at an undesirable time or price.

If at any time our general partner and its affiliates own more than 80.0% of the common units, our general partner will have the right, but not the obligation, which it may assign to any of its affiliates or to us, to acquire all, but not less than all, of the common units held by unaffiliated persons at a price not less than their then-current market price. As a result, our unitholders may be required to sell their common units at an undesirable time or price and may therefore not receive any return on their investment. Existing unitholders may also incur a tax liability upon a sale of their units. As of December 31, 2014, ENLC and its affiliates, including Devon, owned 56.5% of our outstanding common units.

ENLC or its affiliates, including our largest holder Devon, may sell units in the public or private markets, and such sales could have an adverse impact on the trading price of the common units.

As of December 31, 2014, ENLC and its affiliates, including our largest holder Devon, held an aggregate of 139,568,567 units. The sale of any or all of these units in the public or private markets could have an adverse impact on the price of common units or on any trading market on which common units are held.

Our unitholders may not have limited liability if a court finds that unitholder action constitutes control of our business.

Our unitholders could be held liable for our obligations to the same extent as a general partner if a court determined that the right or the exercise of the right by our unitholders to remove or replace our general partner, to approve amendments to our partnership agreement, or to take other action under our partnership agreement constituted participation in the “control” of our business, to the extent that a person who has transacted business with the Partnership reasonably believes, based on our unitholders’ conduct, that our unitholders are a general partner. Our general partner generally has unlimited liability for the obligations of the Partnership, such as its debts and environmental liabilities, except for those contractual obligations of the Partnership that are expressly made without recourse to our general partner. In addition, Section 17-607 of the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership 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 that section may be liable to the limited partnership for the amount of the distribution for a period of three years from the date of the distribution. The limitations on the liability of holders of limited partner interests for the obligations of a limited partnership have not been clearly established in some of the other states in which we do business.

Tax Risks to Our Unitholders

Our tax treatment depends on our status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, as well as our not being subject to entity level taxation by individual states. If the IRS treats us as a corporation or we become subject to entity level taxation for state tax purposes, it would substantially reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to you.

The anticipated after-tax economic benefit of an investment in us depends largely on our being treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes.

If we were treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, we would pay additional tax on our income at corporate rates of up to 35.0% (under the law as of the date of this report) and we would probably pay state income taxes as well. In addition, distributions to unitholders would generally be taxed again as corporate distributions and none of our income, gains, losses or deductions would flow through to unitholders. Because a tax would be imposed upon us as a corporation, the cash available for distribution to unitholders would be substantially reduced. Therefore, treatment of us as a corporation would result in a material reduction in the anticipated cash flow and after-tax return to the unitholders and thus would likely result in a material reduction in the value of the common units.

Current law may change so as to cause us to be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject us to entity-level taxation. At the federal level, members of Congress have considered substantive changes to the existing U.S. tax laws that would have affected certain publicly traded partnerships. Although the legislation considered would not have appeared to affect our tax treatment, we are unable to predict whether any such change or other proposals will ultimately be enacted. Moreover, any modification to the federal income tax laws and interpretations thereof may or may not be applied retroactively. At the state level, because of widespread state budget deficits, several states are evaluating ways to subject partnerships to entity level taxation through the imposition of state income, franchise and other forms of taxation. For example, we are required to pay Texas franchise tax at a maximum effective rate of 1.0% of our gross income apportioned to Texas in the prior year. If federal income tax or material amounts of additional state tax were to be imposed on us, the cash available for distribution to unitholders could be reduced and/or the value of an investment in our common units would be adversely impacted. Our partnership agreement provides that, if a law is enacted or existing law is modified or interpreted in a manner that subjects us to taxation as a corporation or otherwise subjects us to entity-level taxation for federal, state, or local income tax purposes, the minimum quarterly distribution amount and the target distribution amounts will be decreased to reflect the impact of that law on us.

If the IRS contests the federal income tax positions we take, the market for our common units may be adversely impacted and the costs of any contest could reduce the cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

We have not requested any ruling from the IRS with respect to our treatment as a partnership for federal income tax purposes or any other matter affecting us. The IRS may adopt positions that differ from our counsel’s conclusions expressed in this annual report or from the positions we take. It may be necessary to resort to administrative or court proceedings to sustain some or all of our counsel’s conclusions or the positions we take. A court may not agree with all of our counsel’s conclusions or the positions we take. Any contest with the IRS may materially and adversely impact the market for our common units and the prices at which our common units trade. In addition, our costs of any contest with the IRS will be borne by us and therefore indirectly by our unitholders and our general partner since such costs will reduce the amount of cash available for distribution by us.

Unitholders may be required to pay taxes on their share of our taxable income even if they do not receive any cash distributions from us.

Because our unitholders will be treated as partners to whom we will allocate taxable income which could be different in amount than the cash we distribute, they will be required to pay federal income taxes and, in some cases, state and local income taxes on their share of our taxable income even if they do not receive cash distributions from us. Unitholders may not receive cash distributions from us equal to their share of our taxable income or even the tax liability that results from that income.

Tax gain or loss on the disposition of our common units could be different than expected.

Unitholders who sell common units will recognize gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and their tax basis in those common units. Because distributions in excess of the unitholder’s allocable share of total net taxable income decrease the unitholder’s tax basis in his or her units, the amount, if any, of such prior excess distributions with respect to the units sold by the unitholder, will, in effect, become taxable income to the unitholder if the common unit is sold at a price greater than the tax basis in that common unit, even if the price received is less than the original cost. Furthermore, a substantial portion of the amount realized, whether or not representing gain, may be taxed as ordinary income to the unitholder due to potential recapture items, including depreciation recapture. In addition, because the amount realized includes a unitholder’s share of our non-recourse liabilities, a unitholder who sells units may incur a tax liability in excess of the amount of cash received from the sale.

Tax-exempt entities and foreign persons face unique tax issues from owning common units that may result in adverse tax consequences to them.

Investment in common units by tax-exempt entities, such as individual retirement accounts (known as IRAs), pension plans, and non-U.S. persons, raises issues unique to them. For example, virtually all of our income allocated to organizations exempt from federal income tax, including individual retirement accounts and other qualified retirement plans, will be unrelated business income and will be taxable to them. Distributions to non-U.S. persons will be reduced by withholding taxes, at the highest applicable effective tax rate, and non-U.S. persons will be required to file federal income tax returns and generally pay tax on their share of our taxable income. If you are a tax-exempt entity or a foreign person, you should consult your tax advisor before investing in our common units.

We will treat each purchase of common units as having the same tax benefits without regard to the specific units purchased. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of the common units.

Because we cannot match transferors and transferees of common units and because of other reasons, we will take depreciation and amortization positions that may not conform to all aspects of existing Treasury regulations. A successful IRS

challenge to those positions could adversely affect the amount of tax benefits available to unitholders. It also could affect the timing of these tax benefits or the amount of gain from the sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of our common units or result in audit adjustments to the tax returns of unitholders.

The sale or exchange of 50% or more of our capital and profits interests within a 12-month period will result in the termination of our partnership for federal income tax purposes.

We will be considered to have terminated our partnership for federal income tax purposes if there is a sale or exchange of 50% or more of the total interests in our capital and profits within a 12-month period. Our termination would, among other things, result in the closing of our taxable year for all unitholders, which would result in us filing two tax returns (and our unitholders could receive two Schedules K-1 if relief was not available, as described below) for one fiscal year if the termination occurs on a day other than December 31. Our termination could also result in a deferral of depreciation deductions allowable in computing our taxable income. In the case of a unitholder who has adopted a taxable year other than a fiscal year ending December 31, the closing of our taxable year may also result in more than twelve months of our taxable income or loss being includable in such unitholder’s taxable income for the year of termination. Our termination would cause us to be treated as a new partnership for tax purposes for which we must make new tax elections, and we could be subject to penalties if we were to fail to recognize and properly report on our tax return that a termination occurred.

The IRS has recently announced a publicly traded partnership technical termination relief program whereby, if a publicly traded partnership that technically terminated its partnership makes a request for publicly traded partnership technical termination relief and such relief is granted by the IRS then, among other things, the partnership will only have to provide one Schedule K-1 to unitholders for the year notwithstanding two partnership tax years.

The tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships or an investment in our common units could be subject to potential legislative, judicial or administrative changes and differing interpretations, possibly on a retroactive basis.

The present federal income tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships, including us, or an investment in our common units, may be modified by administrative, legislative or judicial interpretation at any time. Any modification to the federal income tax laws and interpretations thereof may or may not be applied retroactively. Moreover, any such modification could make it more difficult or impossible for us to meet the exception which allows publicly traded partnerships that generate qualifying income to be treated as partnerships (rather than corporations) for U.S. federal income tax purposes, affect or cause us to change our business activities, or affect the tax consequences of an investment in our common units. For example, members of Congress have been considering substantive changes to the definition of qualifying income and the treatment of certain types of income earned from profits interests in partnerships. While these specific proposals would not appear to affect our treatment as a partnership, we are unable to predict whether any of these changes, or other proposals, will ultimately be enacted. Any such changes could negatively impact the value of an investment in our common units.

We will adopt certain valuation methodologies and monthly conventions for federal income tax purposes that may result in a shift of income, gain, loss and deduction between our general partner and our unitholders. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of the common units.

When we issue additional units or engage in certain other transactions, we will determine the fair market value of our assets and allocate any unrealized gain or loss attributable to our assets to the capital accounts of our unitholders and our general partner. Our methodology may be viewed as understating the value of our assets. In that case, there may be a shift of income, gain, loss and deduction between certain unitholders and our general partner, which may be unfavorable to such unitholders. Moreover, under our valuation methods, subsequent purchasers of common units may have a greater portion of their Internal Revenue Code Section 743(b) adjustment allocated to our tangible assets and a lesser portion allocated to our intangible assets. The IRS may challenge our valuation methods, or our allocation of the Section 743(b) adjustment attributable to our tangible and intangible assets, and allocations of taxable income, gain, loss and deduction between our general partner and certain of our unitholders.

A successful IRS challenge to these methods or allocations could adversely affect the amount of taxable income or loss being allocated to our unitholders. It also could affect the amount of taxable gain from our unitholders’ sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of the common units or result in audit adjustments to our unitholders’ tax returns without the benefit of additional deductions.

Entity level taxes on income from our C corporation subsidiary will reduce cash available for distribution, and a unitholder’s share of dividend and interest income from such subsidiary will constitute portfolio income that cannot be offset by the unitholder’s share of other losses or deductions.

A material portion of our taxable income is earned through a C corporation subsidiary. Such C corporation subsidiary is subject to federal income tax on its taxable income at the corporate tax rate, which is currently a maximum of 35%, and will likely pay state (and possibly local) income tax at varying rates, on its taxable income. Any such entity level taxes will reduce the cash available for distribution to our unitholders. Distributions from such C corporation subsidiary will generally be taxed

again to unitholders as dividend income to the extent of current and accumulated earnings and profits of such subsidiary. As of January 1, 2015, the maximum federal income tax rate applicable to such dividend income which is allocable to individuals is 20% plus an unearned income Medicare tax of 3.8%. An individual unitholder’s share of dividend and interest income from our C corporation subsidiary would constitute portfolio income that could not be offset by the unitholder’s share of our other losses or deductions.

As a result of investing in our common units, you will likely be subject to state and local taxes and return filing or withholding requirements in jurisdictions where you do not live.

In addition to federal income taxes, you will likely be subject to other taxes such as state and local income taxes, unincorporated business taxes and estate, inheritance or intangible taxes that are imposed by the various jurisdictions in which we do business or own property. You will likely be required to file state and local tax returns and pay state and local income taxes in some or all of the various jurisdictions in which we do business or own property and you may be subject to penalties for failure to comply with those requirements. We own property or conduct business in a number of states, most of which currently impose a state income tax on individuals. Most of these states also impose an income tax on corporations and other entities. As we make acquisitions or expand our business, we may do business or own property in other states that impose an income tax. It is our unitholders’ responsibility to file all federal, state, local, and foreign tax returns. Under the tax laws of some states where we will conduct business, we may be required to withhold a percentage from amounts to be distributed to a unitholder who is not a resident of that state. Our counsel has not rendered an opinion on the state, local, or foreign tax consequences of owning our common units.

We prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our units each month based upon the ownership of our units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred. The use of this proration method may not be permitted under existing Treasury Regulations, and, accordingly, our counsel is unable to opine as to the validity of this method. Recently, the U.S. Treasury Department issued proposed Treasury Regulations that provide a safe harbor pursuant to which publicly traded partnerships may use a similar monthly simplifying convention to allocate tax items among transferor and transferee unitholders. Nonetheless, the proposed regulations do not specifically authorize the use of the proration method we have adopted. If the IRS were to challenge this method or new Treasury regulations were issued, we may be required to change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders.

A unitholder whose units are loaned to a “short seller” to cover a short sale of units may be considered as having disposed of those units. If so, he would no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those units during the period of the loan and may recognize gain or loss from the disposition.

Because a unitholder whose units are loaned to a “short seller” to cover a short sale of units may be considered as having disposed of the loaned units, he may no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those units during the period of the loan to the short seller and the unitholder may recognize gain or loss from such disposition. Moreover, during the period of the loan to the short seller, any of our income, gain, loss or deduction with respect to those units may not be reportable by the unitholder and any cash distributions received by the unitholder as to those units could be fully taxable as ordinary income. Our counsel has not rendered an opinion regarding the treatment of a unitholder where common units are loaned to a short seller to cover a short sale of common units; therefore, unitholders desiring to assure their status as partners and avoid the risk of gain recognition from a loan to a short seller are urged to modify any applicable brokerage account agreements to prohibit their brokers from borrowing their units.

Compliance with and changes in tax law could adversely affect our performance.

We are subject to extensive tax laws and regulations, including federal and state income taxes and transactional taxes such as excise, sales/use, payroll, franchise and ad valorem taxes. New tax laws and regulations and changes in existing tax laws and regulations are continuously being enacted that could result in increased tax expenditures in the future. Many of these tax liabilities are subject to audits by the respective taxing authority. These audits may result in additional taxes as well as interest and penalties.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

We do not have any unresolved staff comments.

Item 2. Properties

A description of our properties is contained in “Item 1. Business.”

Title to Properties

Substantially all of our pipelines are constructed on rights-of-way granted by the apparent record owners of the property. Lands over which pipeline rights-of-way have been obtained may be subject to prior liens that have not been subordinated to the right-of-way grants. We have obtained, where necessary, easement agreements from public authorities and railroad companies to cross over or under, or to lay facilities in or along, watercourses, county roads, municipal streets, railroad properties and state highways, as applicable. In some cases, property on which our pipeline was built was purchased in fee. Our processing plants are located on land that we lease or own in fee.

We believe that we have satisfactory title to all of our rights-of-way and land assets. Title to these assets may be subject to encumbrances or defects. We believe that none of such encumbrances or defects should materially detract from the value of our assets or from our interest in these assets or should materially interfere with their use in the operation of the business.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

Our operations are subject to a variety of risks and disputes normally incident to our business. As a result, at any given time we may be a defendant in various legal proceedings and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business, including litigation on disputes related to contracts, property use or damage and personal injury. Additionally, as we continue to expand operations into more urban, populated areas, such as the Barnett Shale, we may see an increase in claims brought by area landowners, such as nuisance claims and other claims based on property rights. Except as otherwise set forth herein, we do not believe that any pending or threatened claim or dispute is material to our financial results on our operations. We maintain insurance policies with insurers in amounts and with coverage and deductibles as our general partner believes are reasonable and prudent. However, we cannot assure you that this insurance will be adequate to protect us from all material expenses related to potential future claims for personal and property damage or that these levels of insurance will be available in the future at economical prices.

At times, our gas-utility and common carrier subsidiaries acquire pipeline easements and other property rights by exercising rights of eminent domain. As a result, we (or our subsidiaries) are party to a number of lawsuits under which a court will determine the value of pipeline easements or other property interests obtained by our gas utility subsidiaries by condemnation. Damage awards in these suits should reflect the value of the property interest acquired and the diminution in the value, if any, of the remaining property owned by the landowner. However, some landowners have alleged unique damage theories to inflate their damage claims or assert valuation methodologies that could result in damage awards in excess of the amounts anticipated. Although it is not possible to predict the ultimate outcomes of these matters, we do not expect that awards in these matters will have a material adverse impact on our consolidated results of operations or financial condition.

The Partnership (or its subsidiaries) is defending lawsuits filed by owners of property located near processing facilities or compression facilities constructed by the Partnership as part of its systems. The suits generally allege that the facilities create a private nuisance and have damaged the value of surrounding property. Claims of this nature have arisen as a result of the industrial development of natural gas gathering, processing and treating facilities in urban and occupied rural areas.

In July 2013, the Board of Commissioners for the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority for New Orleans and surrounding areas filed a lawsuit against approximately 100 energy companies, seeking, among other relief, restoration of wetlands allegedly lost due to historic industry operations in those areas. The suit was filed in Louisiana state court in New Orleans, but was removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The amount of damages is unspecified. The Partnership's subsidiary, EnLink LIG, LLC, is one of the named defendants as the owner of pipelines in the area. On February 13, 2015, the court granted defendants’ joint motion to dismiss and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims with prejudice. The court’s ruling is subject to appeal. The Partnership intends to vigorously defend the case. The validity of the causes of action, as well as the Partnership's costs and legal exposure, if any, related to the lawsuit are not currently determinable.

We own and operate a high-pressure pipeline and underground natural gas and NGL storage reservoirs and associated facilities near Bayou Corne, Louisiana. In August 2012, a large sinkhole formed in the vicinity of this pipeline and underground storage reservoirs. We are seeking to recover our losses from responsible parties. We have sued Texas Brine, the operator of a failed cavern in the area, and its insurers seeking recovery for this damage. We also filed a claim with our insurers, which our insurers denied. We disputed the denial and sued our insurers, but we have agreed to stay the matter pending resolution of our claims against Texas Brine and its insurers. In August 2014, we received a partial settlement with respect to the Texas Brine claims in the amount of $6.1 million, but additional claims remain outstanding. We cannot give assurance that we will be able to fully recover our losses through insurance recovery or claims against responsible parties.

In June 2014, a group of landowners in Assumption Parish, Louisiana added a subsidiary of the Partnership, EnLink Processing Services, LLC, as a defendant in a pending lawsuit they had filed against Texas Brine, Occidental Chemical Corporation, and Vulcan Materials Company relating to claims arising from the Bayou Corne sinkhole. The suit is pending in

the 23rd Judicial Court, Assumption Parish, Louisiana. Although plaintiffs’ claims against the other defendants have been pending since October 2012, plaintiffs are now alleging that EnLink Processing Services, LLC’s negligence also contributed to the formation of the sinkhole. The amount of damages is unspecified. The validity of the causes of action, as well as the Partnership's costs and legal exposure, if any, related to the lawsuit are not currently determinable. The Partnership intends to vigorously defend the case. The Partnership has also filed a claim for defense and indemnity with its insurers.

In October 2014, Williams Olefins, L.L.C. filed a lawsuit against a subsidiary of the Partnership, EnLink NGL Marketing, LP, in the District Court of Tulsa County, Oklahoma. The plaintiff alleges breach of contract and negligent misrepresentation relating to an ethane output contract between the parties and the subsidiary’s termination of ethane production from one of its fractionation plants. The amount of damages is unspecified. The plaintiff also seeks specific performance under the contract. The validity of the causes of action, as well as the Partnership’s costs and legal exposure, if any, related to the lawsuit are not currently determinable. The Partnership intends to vigorously defend the case.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant's Common Equity, Related Unitholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Our common units are listed on the NYSE under the symbol “ENLK”. Prior to March 10, 2014, our common units traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market LLC under the symbol “XTEX.” On February 11, 2015, there were approximately 35, 926 record holders and beneficial owners (held in street name) of our common units. For equity compensation plan information, see discussion under “Item. 12 Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Unitholder Matters—Equity Compensation Plan Information.”

The following table shows the high and low sales prices per common unit, as reported by the New York Stock Exchange or the Nasdaq Global Select Market LLC, as applicable, and cash distributions declared per common unit for the periods indicated.



	Range				Cash Distribution Declared Per Unit
	High		Low		Cash Distribution Declared Per Unit
2014:
Quarter Ended December 31	$	31.50	$	25.42	$	0.375
Quarter Ended September 30	32.08		28.15		0.370
Quarter Ended June 30	32.17		29.01		0.365
Quarter Ended March 31	35.10		26.91		0.360

2013:
Quarter Ended December 31	$	29.50	$	19.29	$	0.360
Quarter Ended September 30	22.05		18.22		0.340
Quarter Ended June 30	21.89		17.63		0.330
Quarter Ended March 31	18.58		14.70		0.330

_______________________________________________________________________________

Unless restricted by the terms of our credit facility, within 45 days after the end of each quarter, we will distribute all of our available cash, as defined in our partnership agreement, to unitholders of record on the applicable record date. Our available cash consists generally of all cash on hand at the end of the fiscal quarter, less reserves that our general partner determines are necessary to:


•	provide for the proper conduct of our business;


•	comply with applicable law, any of our debt instruments or other agreements; or


•	provide funds for distributions to our unitholders and to our general partner for any one or more of the next four quarters;


•	plus all cash on hand for the quarter resulting from working capital borrowings made after the end of the quarter on the date of determination of available cash.

Under our existing credit facility, we may be limited from making certain distributions if an event of default exists. Please read “Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation—Description of Indebtedness.”

Our general partner has broad discretion to establish cash reserves that it determines are necessary or appropriate to properly conduct our business. These can include cash reserves for future capital and maintenance expenditures, reserves to stabilize distributions of cash to the unitholders and our general partner, reserves to reduce debt or, as necessary, reserves to comply with the terms of any of our agreements or obligations. Our distributions are made to our general partner based on its ownership interest with the remaining interest to unitholders, subject to the payment of incentive distributions to our general partner if certain target cash distribution levels to common unitholders are achieved. Incentive distributions to our general partner increase to 13.0%, 23.0% and 48.0% based on incremental distribution thresholds as set forth in our partnership agreement.

For a discussion regarding the issuance of our senior unsecured notes, please see “Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Indebtedness.”

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

The historical financial statements included in this report reflect (1) for periods prior to March 7, 2014, the assets, liabilities and operations of EnLink Midstream Holdings, LP Predecessor (the “Predecessor”), the predecessor to EnLink Midstream Holdings, LP (“Midstream Holdings”), which is the historical predecessor of EnLink Midstream Partners, LP (the “Partnership”) and (2) for periods on or after March 7, 2014, the results of operations of EnLink Midstream Partners, LP after giving effect to the business combination discussed under “Devon Energy Transaction” below . The Predecessor was comprised of all of the U.S. midstream assets and operations of Devon Energy Corporation (“Devon”) prior to the business combination, including its 38.75% interest in Gulf Coast Fractionators (“GCF”). However, in connection with the business combination, only the Predecessor’s systems serving the Barnett, Cana-Woodford and Arkoma-Woodford Shales in Texas and Oklahoma, as well as the economic burdens and benefits of the 38.75% interest in GCF, were contributed to Midstream Holdings, effective as of March 7, 2014.

The following table presents the selected historical financial and operating data of the Partnership and the Predecessor for the periods indicated. The selected combined historical financial data of the Predecessor are derived from the historical combined financial statements of the Predecessor and should be read together with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” below and its audited combined financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2014. The following information is only a summary and is not necessarily indicative of the results or future operations of the Partnership.



	Enlink Midstream Partners, LP Years Ended December 31,
	2014			2013			2012			2011			2010
	(In millions, except per unit data)
Statement of Operations Data:
Revenues:
Revenues	$	2,412.7		$	179.4		$	153.9		$	13.6		$	10.9
Revenues- affiliates	1,065.6			2,116.5			1,753.9			2,514.4			1,907.9
Gain on derivatives	22.1			—			—			—			—
Total revenue	3,500.4			2,295.9			1,907.8			2,528.0			1,918.8
Operating costs and expenses:
Purchased gas, NGLs, condensate and crude oil	2,494.5			1,736.3			1,428.1			1,974.9			1,436.1
Operating expenses	278.2			156.2			149.9			137.1			105.8
General and administrative	94.5			45.1			41.7			38.5			37.6
Depreciation and amortization	280.3			187.0			145.4			133.5			112.2
Gain on sale of property	(0.1		)	—			—			—			—
Impairments	—			—			16.4			—			—
Gain on litigation settlement	(6.1		)	—			—			—			—
Other expenses	—			—			—			(58.1		)	0.2
Total operating costs and expenses	3,141.3			2,124.6			1,781.5			2,225.9			1,691.9
Operating income	359.1			171.3			126.3			302.1			226.9
Other income (expense):
Interest expense, net of interest income	(47.4		)	—			—			—			—
Income from equity investments	18.9			14.8			2.0			9.3			5.1
Gain on extinguishment of debt	3.2			—			—			—			—
Other income (expense)	(0.5		)	—			—			—			—
Total other income (expense)	(25.8		)	14.8			2.0			9.3			5.1
Income from continuing operations before non-controlling interest and income taxes	333.3			186.1			128.3			311.4			232.0
Income tax provision	(22.0		)	(67.0		)	(46.2		)	(112.1		)	(83.5		)
Net income from continuing operations	311.3			119.1			82.1			199.3			148.5
Discontinued operations:
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax	1.0			(2.3		)	(5.2		)	18.9			34.8
Income from discontinued operations attributable to non-controlling interest, net of tax	—			(1.3		)	(1.1		)	(2.1		)	(4.6		)
Discontinued operations, net of tax	1.0			(3.6		)	(6.3		)	16.8			30.2
Net income	312.3			115.5			75.8			216.1			178.7
Less: Net income from continuing operations attributable to the non-controlling interest	131.2			—			—			—			—
Net income attributable to EnLink Midstream Partners, LP	$	181.1		$	115.5		$	75.8		$	216.1		$	178.7
Predecessor interest in net income	$	35.5		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—
General partner interest in net income	$	8.9		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—
Limited partners' interest in net income attributable to EnLink Midstream Partners, LP	$	136.7		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—
Net income attributable to EnLink Midstream Partners, LP per limited partners' unit:
Basic and diluted common unit	$	0.59		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—
Distributions declared per limited partner unit	$	1.47		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	—



	Enlink Midstream Partners, LP Years Ended December 31,
	2014	2013	2012	2011	2010
	(In millions, except per unit data)
Balance Sheet Data (end of period):
Property and equipment, net	4,934.3	1,768.1	1,739.4	1,550.7	1,439.0
Total assets	8,592.7	2,309.8	2,535.2	2,305.3	2,195.9
Long-term debt (including current maturities)	2,022.5	—	—	—	—
Partners' equity including non-controlling interest	5,922.2	1,783.7	2,002.0	1,901.2	1,849.0

_______________________________________________________________________________

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

We include the following non-GAAP financial measures in this report: adjusted EBITDA, gross operating margin and distributable cash flow.

Adjusted EBITDA

We define adjusted EBITDA as net income from continuing operations plus interest expense, provision for income taxes, depreciation and amortization expense, impairment expense, stock-based compensation, gain on noncash derivatives, transaction costs, distribution of equity investment and non-controlling interest and income on equity investment. Adjusted EBITDA is used as a supplemental performance measure by our management and by external users of our financial statements, such as investors, commercial banks, research analysts and others, to assess:


•	financial performance of our assets without regard to financing methods, capital structure or historical cost basis;


•	the ability of our assets to generate cash sufficient to pay interest costs, support our indebtedness and make cash distributions to our unitholders and our general partner;


•	our operating performance and return on capital as compared to those of other companies in the midstream energy sector, without regard to financing methods or capital structure; and


•	the viability of acquisitions and capital expenditure projects and the overall rates of return on alternative investment opportunities.

The GAAP measures most directly comparable to adjusted EBITDA are net income from continuing operations and net cash provided by operating activities. Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered an alternative to, or more meaningful than, net income from continuing operations, operating income, cash flows from operating activities or any other measure of financial performance presented in accordance with GAAP. Adjusted EBITDA may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies because other entities may not calculate adjusted EBITDA in the same manner.

Adjusted EBITDA does not include interest expense, income taxes or depreciation and amortization expense. Because we have borrowed money to finance our operations, interest expense is a necessary element of our costs and our ability to generate cash available for distribution. Because we use capital assets, depreciation and amortization are also necessary elements of our costs. Therefore, any measures that exclude these elements have material limitations. To compensate for these limitations, we believe that it is important to consider both net earnings determined under GAAP, as well as adjusted EBITDA, to evaluate our overall performance.

Distributable Cash Flow

We define distributable cash flow as net cash provided by operating activities plus adjusted EBITDA, net to EnLink Midstream Partners, LP, less interest expense, litigation settlement adjustment, interest rate swap, cash taxes and other, maintenance capital expenditures and Predecessor adjusted EBITDA. Distributable cash flow is used as a supplemental performance measure by our management and by external users of our financial statements, such as investors, commercial banks, research analysts and others, to assess the ability of our assets to generate cash sufficient to pay interest costs, support our indebtedness and make cash distributions to our unitholders and our general partner.

The GAAP measure most directly comparable to distributable cash flow is net cash provided by operating activities. Distributable cash flow should not be considered an alternative to, or more meaningful than, net income from continuing operations, operating income, cash flows from operating activities or any other measure of financial performance presented in accordance with GAAP. Distributable cash flow may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies because other entities may not calculate distributable cash flow in the same manner. To compensate for these limitations, we believe that it is important to consider both net earnings determined under GAAP, as well as distributable cash flow, to evaluate our overall performance.

The following tables reconcile adjusted EBITDA to the most directly comparable GAAP measure for the periods indicated.



Reconciliation of net income from continuing operations to Adjusted EBITDA	Years Ended December 31,
	2014			2013			2012
	(In millions)
Net income from continuing operations	$	311.3		$	119.1		$	82.1
Interest expense	47.4			—			—
Depreciation and amortization	280.3			187.0			145.4
Impairment	—			—			16.4
Income from equity investments	(18.9		)	(14.8		)	(2.0		)
Gain on extinguishment of debt	(3.2		)	—			—
Distribution from equity investments	23.7			12.0			2.3
Stock-based compensation	22.2			12.8			12.8
Income taxes	22.0			67.0			46.2
Payments under onerous performance obligation offset to other current and long-term liabilities	(14.7		)	—			—
Other (1)	(18.5		)	—			—
Adjusted EBITDA before non-controlling interest	$	651.6		$	383.1		$	303.2
Non-controlling interest share of adjusted EBITDA (2)	(187.7		)	—			—
Adjusted EBITDA	$	463.9		$	383.1		$	303.2

_______________________________________________________________________________


(1)	Includes financial derivatives marked-to-market, accretion expense associated with asset retirement obligations and transaction costs.


(2)	Includes non-controlling interest share of EMH adjusted EBITDA of $187.9 million and non-controlling interest share of E2 losses of $0.2 million.



Reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to Adjusted EBITDA and Distributable Cash Flow:
	Years Ended December 31,
	2014			2013			2012
	(in millions)
Net cash provided by operating activities	$	477.8		$	330.3		$	209.7
Interest expense, net (1)	48.6			—			—
Unit-based compensation (2)	2.8			12.8			12.8
Current income tax (benefit)	6.7			31.5			59.2
Distributions from equity investment in excess of earnings	10.9			1.1			1.9
Other (3)	3.5			(0.4		)	(0.4		)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities which provided cash:
Accounts receivable, accrued revenues, inventories and other	97.3			(0.8		)	2.5
Accounts payable, accrued purchases and other (4)	4.0			8.6			17.5
Adjusted EBITDA before non-controlling interest	$	651.6		$	383.1		$	303.2
Non-controlling interest share of adjusted EBITDA	$	(187.7	)	$	—		$	—
Adjusted EBITDA, net to EnLink Midstream Partners, LP	$	463.9		$	383.1		$	303.2
Interest expense	(46.3		)	—			—
Litigation settlement adjustment (5)	(4.7		)	—			—
Interest rate swap (6)	(3.6		)	—			—
Cash taxes and other	(0.1		)	—			—
Maintenance capital expenditures	(21.5		)	—			—
Predecessor adjusted EBITDA (7)	(86.3		)	(383.1		)	(303.2		)
Distributable cash flow	$	301.4		$	—		$	—

_______________________________________________________________________________


(1)	Net of amortization of debt issuance costs and discount and premium included in interest expense.


(2)	Represents Predecessor stock-based compensation contributed through equity and reflected in net distributions to Predecessor in cash flows from financing activities in the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.


(3)	Includes transaction costs.


(4)	Net of payments under onerous performance obligation offset to other current and long-term liabilities.


(5)	Represents portion of litigation settlement related to the reimbursement of capital expenditures.


(6)	During the fourth quarter of 2014, we entered into interest rate swap arrangements to mitigate our exposure to interest rate movements prior to our note issuances. The gain on settlement of the interest rate swaps was considered excess proceeds for the note issuance, and therefore, excluded from distributable cash flow.


(7)	Represents Predecessor and recast E2 adjusted EBITDA.

Gross Operating Margin

We define gross operating margin as revenues minus cost of purchased gas, NGLs, condensate and crude oil. We present gross operating margin by segment in “Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Results of Operations”. We disclose gross operating margin in addition to total revenue because it is the primary performance measure used by our management. We believe gross operating margin is an important measure because our business is generally to purchase and resell natural gas, NGLs, condensate and crude oil for a margin or to gather, process, transport or market natural gas, NGLs, condensate and crude oil for a fee. Operating expense is a separate measure used by management to evaluate operating performance of field operations. Direct labor and supervision, property insurance, property taxes, repair and maintenance, utilities and contract services comprise the most significant portion of our operating expenses. We do not deduct operating expenses from total revenue in calculating gross operating margin because these expenses are largely independent of the volumes we transport or process and fluctuate depending on the activities performed during a specific period. As an indicator of our operating performance, gross operating margin should not be considered an alternative

to, or more meaningful than, net income as determined in accordance with GAAP. Our gross operating margin may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies because other entities may not calculate these amounts in the same manner.

The following table provides a reconciliation of gross operating margin to operating income:



	Years Ended December 31,
	2014			2013			2012
	(In millions)
Total gross operating margin	$	1,005.9		$	559.6		$	479.7
Add (deduct):
Operating expenses	(278.2		)	(156.2		)	(149.9		)
General and administrative expenses	(94.5		)	(45.1		)	(41.7		)
Depreciation, amortization and impairments	(280.3		)	(187.0		)	(161.8		)
Gain on sale of property	0.1			—			—
Gain on litigation settlement	6.1			—			—
Operating income	$	359.1		$	171.3		$	126.3

Item 7. Management's 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 financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this report. For more detailed information regarding the basis of presentation for the following information, you should read the notes to the financial statements included in this report.

The historical financial statements included in this report reflect (1) for periods prior to March 7, 2014, the assets, liabilities and operations of EnLink Midstream Holdings, LP Predecessor (the “Predecessor”), the predecessor to EnLink Midstream Holdings, LP (“Midstream Holdings”), which is the historical predecessor of EnLink Midstream Partners, LP and (2) for periods on or after March 7, 2014, the results of operations of EnLink Midstream Partners, LP after giving effect to the business combination discussed under “Devon Energy Transaction” below . The Predecessor was comprised of all of the U.S. midstream assets and operations of Devon Energy Corporation (“Devon”) prior to the business combination, including its 38.75% interest in Gulf Coast Fractionators (“GCF”). However, in connection with the business combination, only the Predecessor’s systems serving the Barnett, Cana-Woodford and Arkoma-Woodford Shales in Texas and Oklahoma, as well as the economic burdens and benefits of the 38.75% interest in GCF, were contributed to Midstream Holdings, effective as of March 7, 2014.

You should read this discussion in conjunction with the historical financial statements and accompanying notes included in this report. All references in this section to the “Partnership”, as well as the terms “our,” “we,” “us” and “its”(1) for periods prior to March 7, 2014 refer to the Predecessor and (2) for periods on or after March 7, 2014 refer to EnLink Midstream Partners, LP, together with its consolidated subsidiaries including EnLink Midstream Operating, LP (formerly known as Crosstex Energy Services, L.P.) (the “Operating Partnership”) and Midstream Holdings.

Overview

We are a Delaware limited partnership formed on July 12, 2002. We primarily focus on providing midstream energy services, including gathering, transmission, processing, fractionation, condensate stabilization, brine services and marketing to producers of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate. Our midstream energy asset network includes approximately 8,800 miles of pipelines, thirteen natural gas processing plants, seven fractionators, 3.1 million barrels of NGL cavern storage, 11.0 Bcf of natural gas storage, rail terminals, barge terminals, truck terminals and a fleet of approximately 100 trucks. We manage and report our activities primarily according to geography. We have five reportable segments: (1) Texas, which includes our activities in north Texas and the Permian Basin in west Texas; (2) Oklahoma, which includes our activities in Cana-Woodford and Arkoma-Woodford Shale areas; (3) Louisiana, which includes our pipelines, processing plants and NGL assets located in Louisiana; (4) ORV, which includes our activities in the Utica and Marcellus Shales and our equity interests in E2 Energy Services, LLC, E2 Appalachian Compression, LLC and E2 Ohio Compression, LLC (collectively, “E2”); and (5) Corporate Segment, or Corporate, which includes our equity investments in Howard Energy Partners, or HEP, in the Eagle Ford Shale, our contractual right to the economic burdens and benefits associated with Devon's ownership interest in GCF in south Texas and our general partnership property and expenses.

We manage our operations by focusing on gross operating margin because our business is generally to purchase and resell natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate for a margin or to gather, process, transport or market natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate for a fee. In addition, we earn a volume based fee for brine disposal services and condensate stabilization. We define gross operating margin as operating revenue minus cost of purchased gas, NGLs, condensate and crude oil. Gross operating margin is a non-generally accepted accounting principle, or non-GAAP, financial measure and is explained in greater detail under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” under “Item 6. Selected Financial Data.”

Our gross operating margins are determined primarily by the volumes of natural gas gathered, transported, purchased and sold through our pipeline systems, processed at our processing facilities, the volumes of NGLs handled at our fractionation facilities, the volumes of crude oil and condensate handled at our crude terminals, the volumes of crude oil and condensate gathered, transported, purchased and sold, the volume of brine disposed and the volume of condensate stabilized. We generate revenues from eight primary sources:


•	purchasing and reselling or transporting natural gas on the pipeline systems we own;


•	processing natural gas at our processing plants;


•	fractionating and marketing the recovered NGLs;


•	providing compression services;


•	purchasing and reselling crude oil and condensate;


•	providing crude oil and condensate transportation and terminal services;


•	providing condensate stabilization services; and


•	providing brine disposal services.

We generally gather or transport gas owned by others through our facilities for a fee, or we buy natural gas from a producer, plant or shipper at either a fixed discount to a market index or a percentage of the market index, then transport and resell the natural gas at the same market index. We attempt to execute all purchases and sales substantially concurrently, or we enter into a future delivery obligation, thereby establishing the basis for the margin we will receive for each natural gas transaction. Our gathering and transportation margins related to a percentage of the index price can be adversely affected by declines in the price of natural gas. We are also party to certain long-term gas sales commitments that we satisfy through supplies purchased under long-term gas purchase agreements. When we enter into those arrangements, our sales obligations generally match our purchase obligations. However, over time the supplies that we have under contract may decline due to reduced drilling or other causes and we may be required to satisfy the sales obligations by buying additional gas at prices that may exceed the prices received under the sales commitments. In our purchase/sale transactions, the resale price is generally based on the same index at which the gas was purchased. However, on occasion we have entered into certain purchase/sale transactions in which the purchase price is based on a production-area index and the sales price is based on a market-area index, and we capture the difference in the indices (also referred to as basis spread), less the transportation expenses from the two areas, as our margin. Changes in the basis spread can increase or decrease our margins.

We have made commitments to purchase natural gas in production areas based on production-area indices and to sell the natural gas into market areas based on market-area indices, pay the costs to transport the natural gas between the two points and capture the difference between the indices as margin. Changes in the index prices relative to each other (also referred to as basis spread) can significantly affect our margins or potentially result in losses. For example, we are a party to one contract with a term to 2019 to supply approximately 150,000 MMBtu/d of gas. We buy gas for this contract on several different production-area indices on its North Texas Pipeline and sell the gas into a different market area index. We realize a loss on the delivery of gas under this contract each month based on current prices. The fair value of this performance obligation was recorded as a result of the March 7, 2014 business combination and was based on forecasted discounted cash obligations in excess of market prices under this gas delivery contract. As of December 31, 2014, the balance sheet reflects a liability of $80.7 million related to this performance obligation. Reduced supplies and narrower basis spreads in recent periods have increased the losses on this contract, and greater losses on this contract could occur in future periods if these conditions persist or become worse.

The majority of our NGL fractionation business, which includes transportation, fractionation, and storage, is under fee-based arrangements. We are typically paid a fixed fee based on the volume of NGLs transported, fractionated or stored. On our Cajun-Sibon pipeline, we buy the mixed NGL stream from our suppliers for an indexed-based price for the component NGLs with a deduction for our fractionation fee. After the NGLs are fractionated, we sell the fractionated NGL products based on the same index-based prices. The operating results of our NGL fractionation business are dependent upon the volume of mixed NGLs fractionated and the level of fractionation fees charged. With our fractionation business, we also have the opportunity for product upgrades for each of the discrete NGL products. The margins we realize on the product upgrade from this fractionation business are higher during periods with high liquids prices.

We generally gather or transport crude oil owned by others by rail, truck, pipeline and barge facilities for a fee, or we buy crude oil from a producer at a fixed discount to a market index, then transport and resell the crude oil at the same market index. We execute all purchases and sales substantially concurrently, thereby establishing the basis for the margin we will receive for each crude oil transaction. Additionally, we provide crude oil, condensate and brine services on a volume basis.

We also realize gross operating margins from our processing services primarily through three different contract arrangements: processing margins ("margin"), percentage of liquids ("POL") or fixed-fee based. Under margin contract arrangements our gross operating margins are higher during periods of high liquid prices relative to natural gas prices. Gross operating margin results under POL contracts are impacted only by the value of the liquids produced with margins higher during periods of higher liquids prices. Under fixed-fee based contracts our gross operating margins are driven by throughput volume. See “Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk—Commodity Price Risk.”

Operating expenses are costs directly associated with the operations of a particular asset. Among the most significant of these costs are those associated with direct labor and supervision, property insurance, property taxes, repair and maintenance expenses, contract services and utilities. These costs are normally fairly stable across broad volume ranges and therefore do not normally decrease or increase significantly in the short term with decreases or increases in the volume of gas, liquids, condensate or crude oil moved through or by the asset.

Our general and administrative expenses are dictated by the terms of our partnership agreement. These expenses include the costs of employee, officer and director compensation and benefits properly allocable to us, fees, services and other transaction costs related to acquisitions, and all other expenses necessary or appropriate to the conduct of business and allocable to us. Our partnership agreement provides that our general partner determines the expenses that are allocable to us in any reasonable manner determined by our general partner in its sole discretion.

Devon Energy Transaction

On March 7, 2014, the Partnership consummated the transactions contemplated by the Contribution Agreement, dated as of October 21, 2013 (the “Contribution Agreement”), among the Partnership, the Operating Partnership, Devon, Devon Gas Corporation, Devon Gas Services, L.P. (“Gas Services”) and Southwestern Gas Pipeline, Inc. (“Southwestern Gas” and, together with Gas Services, the “Contributors”) pursuant to which the Contributors contributed (the “Contribution”) to the Operating Partnership a 50% limited partner interest in Midstream Holdings and all of the outstanding equity interests in EnLink Midstream Holdings GP, LLC, the general partner of Midstream Holdings (“Midstream Holdings GP” and, together with Midstream Holdings and their subsidiaries, the “Midstream Group Entities”), in exchange for the issuance by the Partnership of 120,542,441 units representing a new class of limited partnership interests in the Partnership (the “Class B Units”). On February 17, 2015, Acacia contributed a 25% interest in Midstream Holdings to us in exchange for 31.6 million of our Class D Common Units. See “Recent Growth Developments.”

The Partnership units held by Devon represent approximately 49% of the outstanding limited partner interests in the Partnership, with approximately 43% of the outstanding limited partner interests held by the Partnership’s public unitholders and approximately 7% of the outstanding limited partner interests, the approximate 1% general partner interest and the incentive distribution rights held indirectly by ENLC as of December 31, 2014. The Class B Units were substantially similar in all respects to the Partnership’s common units representing limited partnership interests in the Partnership (“Common Units”), except that they were only entitled to a pro rata distribution for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2014. The Class B Units automatically converted into Common Units on a one-for-one basis on May 6, 2014.

Also on March 7, 2014, EnLink Midstream, Inc. (“EMI”) and Devon consummated the transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement, dated as of October 21, 2013 (the “Merger Agreement”), among the EMI, Devon, ENLC, Acacia Natural Gas Corp I, Inc., formerly a wholly-owned subsidiary of Devon, and certain other wholly-owned subsidiaries of Devon pursuant to which EMI and Acacia each became wholly-owned subsidiaries of ENLC (collectively, the “Mergers” and together with the Contribution, the “business combination”). Upon completion of the merger with Acacia, ENLC indirectly owned the remaining 50% limited partner interest in Midstream Holdings.

Recent Growth Developments

Organic Growth

We also expect to build and operate six natural gas compression and condensate stabilization facilities in Noble, Belmont, and Guernsey counties in Ohio. Upon completion, the facilities will have a combined capacity of approximately 560 MMcf/d of natural gas compression and approximately 41,500 Bbls/d of condensate stabilization. The first two compression and condensate stabilization facilities began operations during the fourth quarter of 2014 and the remaining four facilities are expected to be operational by the end of 2015.

Marathon Petroleum Joint Venture. We have entered into a series of agreements with a subsidiary of Marathon Petroleum Corporation to create a 50/50 joint venture named Ascension Pipeline Company, LLC. This joint venture will build a new 30-mile NGL pipeline connecting our existing Riverside fractionation and terminal complex to Marathon Petroleum's Garyville refinery located on the Mississippi River. The bolt-on project to our Cajun-Sibon NGL system is supported by long-term, fee-based contracts with Marathon Petroleum. Under the arrangement, we will serve as the construction manager and operator of the pipeline project, which is expected to be operational in the first half of 2017.

Cajun-Sibon Phases I and II now bridge the gap between supply, which aggregates in the Mont Belvieu area, and demand, located in the Mississippi River corridor of Louisiana, thereby building a strategic NGL position in this region.

The pipeline expansion and the Eunice fractionation expansion under Phase I were completed and commenced operation in November 2013. Phase II of the Cajun-Sibon expansion was completed and commenced operation in September 2014, which increased the Cajun-Sibon pipeline capacity by an additional 50,000 Bbls/d to approximately 130,000 Bbls/d and added a new 100,000 Bbl/d fractionator at our Plaquemine gas processing complex. The throughput of the pipeline averaged 109,900 Bbls/d during the fourth quarter of 2014. Our fractionators in south Louisiana averaged approximately 98,300 Bbls/d during the fourth quarter of 2014.

Bearkat is strategically located near our existing Deadwood joint venture assets in Glasscock County, Texas. The processing plant has an initial capacity of 60 MMcf/d, increasing our total operational processing capacity in the Permian Basin to approximately 115 MMcf/d. We also completed construction of a 30-mile high-pressure gathering system upstream of the Bearkat complex to provide additional gathering capacity for producers in Glasscock and Reagan counties.

Growing with Devon

As a part of the expansion, we have signed a long-term, fee-based agreement with Devon to provide gathering and processing services for over 18,000 acres under development in Martin County. We constructed multiple low pressure gathering pipelines and a new 23-mile, 12-inch high pressure gathering pipeline that will tie into the previously announced Bearkat natural gas gathering system. The new pipelines commenced operation in January 2015.

Drop Downs

Midstream Holdings Drop Down. On February 17, 2015, the Partnership acquired a 25% limited partner interest in Midstream Holdings (the “Transferred Interest”) from Acacia, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ENLC, the EMH Drop Down. As consideration for the Transferred Interest, the Partnership issued 31.6 million Class D Common Units in the Partnership to Acacia. The Partnership’s Class D Common Units are substantially similar in all respects to the Partnership’s Common Units, except that they will only be entitled to a pro rata distribution for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2015. The Partnership’s Class D Common Units will automatically convert into the Partnership’s Common Units on a one-for-one basis on the first business day following the record date for distribution payments with respect to the distribution for the quarter ended March 31, 2015. After giving effect to the EMH Drop-Down, the Partnership indirectly owns a 75% limited partner interest in Midstream Holdings, with Acacia owning the remaining 25% limited partner interest in Midstream Holdings.

E2 Drop Down. On October 22, 2014, the Partnership acquired from EMI, a wholly-owned subsidiary of ENLC, 100% of the Class A Units and 50% of the Class B Units (collectively, the “E2 Appalachian Units”) in E2 Appalachian Compression, LLC (“E2 Appalachian”), and 93.7% of the Class A Units (the “Energy Services Units” and, together with the E2 Appalachian Units, the “Purchased Units”) in E2 Energy Services, LLC (“Energy Services”). The total consideration paid by the Partnership to EMI for the Purchased Units included (i) $13.0 million in cash for the Energy Services Units and (ii) $150.0 million in cash and 1,016,322 common units representing limited partner interests in the Partnership for the E2 Appalachian Units. The remaining 50% of the Class B Units in E2 Appalachian are owned by members of the E2 Appalachian management team and are designed to provide such management team members with equity incentives.

Acquisitions

Coronado Midstream. On February 1, 2015, the Partnership entered into an agreement with Reliance Midstream, LLC, a Texas limited liability company (“Reliance”), Windsor Midstream LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Windsor”), Wallace Family Partnership, LP, a Texas limited partnership (“Wallace”), and Ted Collins, Jr., an individual residing in Midland, Texas (“Collins” and, collectively with Reliance, Windsor and Wallace, the “Sellers,” and each, a “Seller”), and Reliance in its capacity as representative of the Sellers, to acquire all of the equity interests in Coronado Midstream Holdings LLC, the parent company of Coronado Midstream LLC, which owns natural gas gathering and processing facilities in the Permian Basin for approximately $600.0 million in cash and equity, subject to certain adjustments. Coronado operates three cryogenic gas processing plants and a gas gathering system in the North Midland Basin including approximately 270 miles of gathering pipelines, 175 MMcf/d of processing capacity and 35,000 horsepower of compression. The Coronado system is underpinned by long-term contracts, which include the dedication of production from over 190,000 acres.

LPC Crude Oil Marketing. On January 31, 2015, the Partnership, through one of its wholly owned subsidiaries, acquired LPC, which has crude oil gathering, transportation and marketing operations in the Permian Basin, for approximately $100.0 million. LPC is an integrated crude oil logistics service provider with operation throughout the Permian Basin. LPC's integrated logistics services are supported by 41 tractor trailers, 13 pipeline injection stations and 67 miles of crude oil gathering pipeline.

Natural Gas Pipeline Assets. On November 1, 2014, we acquired Gulf Coast natural gas pipeline assets predominantly located in southern Louisiana, for $234.0 million, subject to certain adjustments. These natural gas pipeline assets include the following:


•	Bridgeline System: approximately 990 miles of natural gas pipelines in southern Louisiana with a total system capacity of approximately 900 MMcf/d;


•	Sabine Pipeline: approximately 130 miles of natural gas pipelines in Texas and southern Louisiana with a total capacity of approximately 300 MMcf/d;


•	Chandeleur System: approximately 215 miles of offshore Mississippi and Alabama pipelines with a total capacity of approximately 300 MMcf/d;


•	Storage Assets: three caverns located in southern Louisiana with a combined working capacity of approximately 11 Bcf of natural gas, including two near Sorrento, LA with a capacity of approximately 4.0 Bcf and one inactive cavern near Napoleonville, LA with approximately 7.0 Bcf of capacity; and


•	Henry Hub: ownership and management of the title tracking services offered at the Henry Hub, the delivery location for the New York Mercantile Exchange (the “NYMEX”) natural gas futures contracts. Henry Hub is connected to 13 major interstate and intrastate natural gas pipeline and storage systems.

Issuance of Common Units

In November 2014, the Partnership issued 12,075,000 common units representing limited partner interests in the Partnership at an offering price of $28.37 per unit for net proceeds of $332.3 million. The net proceeds from the common units offering were used for capital expenditures and general partnership purposes.

In November 2014, the Partnership entered into an Equity Distribution Agreement (the “BMO EDA”) with BMO Capital Markets Corp., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Jefferies LLC, Raymond James & Associates, Inc. and RBC Capital Markets, LLC (collectively, the “Sales Agents”) to sell up to $350.0 million in aggregate gross sales of the Partnership’s common units representing limited partner interests from time to time through an “at the market” equity offering program. The Partnership may also sell Common Units to any Sales Agent as principal for the Sales Agent’s own account at a price agreed upon at the time of sale. The Partnership has no obligation to sell any of the Common Units under the BMO EDA and may at any time suspend solicitation and offers under the BMO EDA. Through December 2014, the Partnership sold an aggregate of 0.3 million common units under the BMO EDA, generating proceeds of approximately $7.8 million (net of approximately $0.1 million of commissions). The Partnership used the net proceeds for general partnership purposes, including working capital, capital expenditures and repayments of indebtedness.

In October 2014, the Partnership issued 1,016,322 common units to ENLC representing limited partner interests in the Partnership as partial consideration for E2 Appalachian Units.

In May 2014, the Partnership entered into an Equity Distribution Agreement (the “EDA”) with BMO Capital Markets Corp. (“BMOCM”). Pursuant to the terms of the EDA, the Partnership may from time to time through BMOCM, as its sales agent, sell common units representing limited partner interests having an aggregate offering price of up to $75.0 million.

Through December 31, 2014, the Partnership sold an aggregate of 2.4 million common units under the EDA, generating proceeds of approximately $71.9 million (net of approximately $0.7 million of commissions to BMOCM). The Partnership used the net proceeds for general partnership purposes.

Results of Operations

The table below sets forth certain financial and operating data for the periods indicated. We manage our operations by focusing on gross operating margin which we define as operating revenue less cost of purchased gas, NGLs, condensate and crude oil as reflected in the table below.

Items Affecting Comparability of Our Financial Results

Our historical financial results discussed below may not be comparable to our future financial results, and our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2013 may not be comparable to our financial results for the year ended December 31, 2014 for the following reasons:

•

In connection with the business combination, Midstream Holdings entered into new agreements with Devon that were effective on March 1, 2014 pursuant to which Midstream Holdings provides services to Devon under fixed-fee arrangements in which Midstream Holdings does not take title to the natural gas gathered or processed or the NGLs it fractionates. Prior to the effectiveness of these agreements, the Predecessor provided services to Devon under a percent-of-proceeds arrangement in which it took title to the natural gas it gathered and processed and the NGLs it fractionated.


•	Prior to March 7, 2014, our financial results only included the assets, liabilities and operations of our Predecessor. Beginning on March 7, 2014, our financial results also consolidate the assets, liabilities and operations of the legacy business of the Partnership prior to giving effect to the business combination.

•

Subsequent to March 7, 2014, we owned a 50% interest in Midstream Holdings rather than the 100% ownership reflected as part of our Predecessor’s historical financial results. We control Midstream Holdings through our ownership of its general partner. Our financial statements after March 7, 2014 consolidate all of Midstream Holdings’ financial results with ours in accordance with GAAP and ENLC’s 50% interest in Midstream Holdings is reflected as a non-controlling interest. On February 17, 2015, Acacia contributed a 25% interest in Midstream Holdings to us in exchange for 31.6 million Class D Common Units in the Partnership. See “Recent Growth Developments.”


•	Our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2014 report financial results according to operating segments based principally upon geographic regions served. The Predecessor had no operations for certain of those reporting segments.

•

All historical affiliated transactions prior to March 7, 2014 related to our continuing operations were net settled within our combined financial statements because these transactions related to Devon and were funded by Devon’s working capital. Beginning on March 7, 2014, all our transactions are funded by our working capital. This impacts the comparability of our cash flow statements, working capital analysis and liquidity discussion.

•

The Predecessor’s historical assets comprised all of Devon’s U.S.-midstream assets and operations. However, only its assets serving the Barnett, Cana-Woodford and Arkoma-Woodford Shales, as well as a contractual right to the economic burdens and benefits of its 38.75% interest in GCF, were contributed to Midstream Holdings in connection with the consummation of the business combination. Assets that were not contributed to Midstream Holdings are included in discontinued operations.


•	The Predecessor’s historical combined financial statements include U.S. federal and state income tax expense. Due to Midstream Holdings’ status as a partnership, Midstream Holdings will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax or certain state income taxes in the future.



	For years ended December 31,
	2014			2013			2012
	(in millions, except volumes)
Texas Segment
Revenues	$	1,067.2		$	1,549.1		$	1,357.2
Purchased gas and NGLs	(490.9		)	(1,130.4		)	(983.3		)
Total gross operating margin	$	576.3		$	418.7		$	373.9
Louisiana Segment
Revenues	$	1,925.5		$	—		$	—
Purchased gas, NGLs and crude oil	(1,754.2		)	—			—
Total gross operating margin	$	171.3		$	—		$	—
Oklahoma Segment
Revenues	$	318.8		$	746.8		$	550.6
Purchased gas and NGLs	(142.5		)	(605.9		)	(444.8		)
Total gross operating margin	$	176.3		$	140.9		$	105.8
Ohio River Valley Segment
Revenues	$	261.3		$	—		$	—
Purchased crude oil and condensate	(201.4		)	—			—
Total gross operating margin	$	59.9		$	—		$	—
Corporate
Revenues	$	(72.4	)	$	—		$	—
Purchased gas, NGLs and crude oil	94.5			—			—
Total gross operating margin	$	22.1		$	—		$	—
Total
Revenues	$	3,500.4		$	2,295.9		$	1,907.8
Purchased gas, NGLs, crude oil and condensate	(2,494.5		)	(1,736.3		)	(1,428.1		)
Total gross operating margin	$	1,005.9		$