UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

FORM 10-Q

 

x QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF

THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2007

 

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: 1-14323

 

ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.

(Exact name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes x No o

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

Large accelerated filer x Accelerated filer [ ] Non-accelerated filer [ ]

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Yes o No x

 

There were 434,736,708 common units of Enterprise Products Partners L.P. outstanding at November 1, 2007. These common units trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol “EPD.”

 

---

ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

 

---

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION.

 

Item 1. Financial Statements.

 

ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.

UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Dollars in thousands)

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

2

 

---

ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.

UNAUDITED CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CONSOLIDATED OPERATIONS

(Dollars in thousands, except per unit amounts)

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

 

3

 

---

ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.

UNAUDITED CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CONSOLIDATED

COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(Dollars in thousands)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

 

4

 

---

ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.

UNAUDITED CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CONSOLIDATED CASH FLOWS

(Dollars in thousands)

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

5

 

---

ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.

UNAUDITED CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CONSOLIDATED PARTNERS’ EQUITY

(See Note 10 for Unit History and Detail of Changes in Limited Partners’ Equity)

(Dollars in thousands)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

See Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

 

6

 

---

ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P.

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

 

Note 1. Partnership Organization

 

Partnership Organization

 

Enterprise Products Partners L.P. is a publicly traded Delaware limited partnership, the common units of which are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the ticker symbol “EPD.” Unless the context requires otherwise, references to “we,” “us,” “our,” or “Enterprise Products Partners” are intended to mean the business and operations of Enterprise Products Partners L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries.

 

We were formed in April 1998 to own and operate certain natural gas liquids (“NGLs”) related businesses of EPCO, Inc. (“EPCO”). We conduct substantially all of our business through our wholly owned subsidiary, Enterprise Products Operating LLC (“EPO”), as successor in interest by merger to Enterprise Products Operating L.P. We are owned 98% by our limited partners and 2% by Enterprise Products GP, LLC (our general partner, referred to as “Enterprise Products GP”). Enterprise Products GP is owned 100% by Enterprise GP Holdings L.P. (“Enterprise GP Holdings”), a publicly traded affiliate, the units of which are listed on the NYSE under the ticker symbol “EPE.” The general partner of Enterprise GP Holdings is EPE Holdings, LLC (“EPE Holdings”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Dan Duncan LLC, the membership interests of which are owned by Dan L. Duncan. We, Enterprise Products GP, Enterprise GP Holdings, EPE Holdings and Dan Duncan LLC are affiliates under the common control of Dan L. Duncan, the Chairman and controlling shareholder of EPCO.

 

References to “TEPPCO” mean TEPPCO Partners, L.P., a publicly traded affiliate, the units of which are listed on the NYSE under the ticker symbol “TPP.” References to “TEPPCO GP” refer to Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC, which is the general partner of TEPPCO and is wholly owned by Enterprise GP Holdings.

 

References to “Energy Transfer Equity” mean the business and operations of Energy Transfer Equity, L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries. References to “ETE GP” mean LE GP, LLC, which is the general partner of Energy Transfer Equity. On May 7, 2007, Enterprise GP Holdings acquired non-controlling interests in both ETE GP and Energy Transfer Equity.

 

References to “Employee Partnerships” mean EPE Unit L.P. (“EPE Unit I”), EPE Unit II, L.P. (“EPE Unit II”) and EPE Unit III, L.P. (“EPE Unit III”), collectively, which are private company affiliates of EPCO.

 

On February 5, 2007, a consolidated subsidiary of ours, Duncan Energy Partners L.P. (“Duncan Energy Partners”), completed an initial public offering of its common units (see Note 12). Duncan Energy Partners owns equity interests in certain of our midstream energy businesses.

 

For financial reporting purposes, we consolidate the financial statements of Duncan Energy Partners with those of our own and reflect its operations in our business segments. We control Duncan Energy Partners through our ownership of its general partner. Also, due to common control of the entities by Dan L. Duncan, the initial consolidated balance sheet of Duncan Energy Partners reflects our historical carrying basis in each of the subsidiaries contributed to Duncan Energy Partners. Public ownership of Duncan Energy Partners’ net assets and earnings are presented as a component of minority interest in our consolidated financial statements. The borrowings of Duncan Energy Partners are presented as part of our consolidated debt; however, we do not have any obligation for the payment of interest or repayment of borrowings incurred by Duncan Energy Partners.

 

 

 

7

 

---

Basis of Presentation

 

Our results of operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007 are not necessarily indicative of results expected for the full year.

 

Except per unit amounts, or as noted within the context of each footnote disclosure, the dollar amounts presented in the tabular data within these footnote disclosures are stated in thousands of dollars.

 

Essentially all of our assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses are recorded at EPO’s level in our consolidated financial statements. We act as guarantor of certain of EPO’s debt obligations. See Note 17 for condensed consolidated financial information of EPO.

 

In our opinion, the accompanying Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements include all adjustments consisting of normal recurring accruals necessary for fair presentation. Although we believe the disclosures in these financial statements are adequate to make the information presented not misleading, certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in annual financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). These Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 (Commission File No. 1-14323).

 

Note 2. General Accounting Policies and Related Matters

 

Accounting for Employee Benefit Plans

 

Dixie Pipeline Company (“Dixie”), a consolidated subsidiary, employs the personnel that operate its pipeline system and certain of these employees are eligible to participate in Dixie’s defined contribution plan and pension and postretirement benefit plans. Due to the immaterial nature of Dixie’s employee benefit plans to our consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows, our discussion is limited to the following:

 

Defined Contribution Plan. Dixie contributed $0.1 million to its company-sponsored defined contribution plan during each of the three month periods ended September 30, 2007 and 2006. During each of the nine month periods ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, Dixie contributed $0.2 million to its company-sponsored defined contribution plan.

 

Pension and Postretirement Benefit Plans. Dixie’s net pension benefit costs were $0.1 million and $0.2 million for the three months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, Dixie’s net pension benefit costs were $0.4 million and $0.5 million, respectively. Dixie’s net postretirement benefit costs were $0.1 million for each of the three month periods ended September 30, 2007 and 2006. For the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, Dixie’s net postretirement benefit costs were $0.3 million and $0.2 million, respectively. During the remainder of 2007, Dixie expects to contribute approximately $0.1 million to its postretirement benefit plan and approximately $1.2 million to its pension plan.

 

Consolidation Policy

 

We evaluate our financial interests in business enterprises to determine if they represent variable interest entities where we are the primary beneficiary. If such criteria are met, we consolidate the financial statements of such businesses with those of our own. Our consolidated financial statements include our accounts and those of our majority-owned subsidiaries in which we have a controlling interest, after the elimination of all material intercompany accounts and transactions. We also consolidate other entities and ventures in which we possess a controlling financial interest as well as partnership interests where we are the sole general partner of the partnership.

 

8

 

---

If the entity is organized as a limited partnership or limited liability company and maintains separate ownership accounts, we account for our investment using the equity method if our ownership interest is between 3% and 50% and we exercise significant influence over the entity’s operating and financial policies. For all other types of investments, we apply the equity method of accounting if our ownership interest is between 20% and 50% and we exercise significant influence over the entity’s operating and financial policies. Our proportionate share of profits and losses from transactions with equity method unconsolidated affiliates are eliminated in consolidation to the extent such amounts are material and remain on our balance sheet (or those of our equity method investees) in inventory or similar accounts.

 

If our ownership interest in an entity does not provide us with either control or significant influence, we account for the investment using the cost method.

 

Cumulative Effect of Change in Accounting Principle

 

In January 2006, we adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) 123(R), “Share-Based Payment.” Upon adoption of this accounting standard, we recognized, as a benefit, a cumulative effect of change in accounting principle of $1.5 million.

 

Environmental Costs

 

Environmental costs for remediation are accrued based on estimates of known remediation requirements. Such accruals are based on management’s best estimate of the ultimate cost to remediate a site and are adjusted as further information and circumstances develop. Those estimates may change substantially depending on information about the nature and extent of contamination, appropriate remediation technologies and regulatory approvals. Ongoing environmental compliance costs are charged to expense as incurred. In accruing for environmental remediation liabilities, costs of future expenditures for environmental remediation are not discounted to their present value, unless the amount and timing of the expenditures are fixed or reliably determinable. Expenditures to mitigate or prevent future environmental contamination are capitalized.

 

At September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, our accrued liabilities for environmental remediation projects totaled $27.9 million and $24.2 million, respectively. These amounts were derived from a range of reasonable estimates based upon studies and site surveys. Unanticipated changes in circumstances and/or legal requirements could result in expenses being incurred in future periods in addition to an increase in actual cash required to remediate contamination for which we are responsible.

 

In February 2007, we entered into a settlement with a third party, which resulted in our receiving, in part, $6.5 million in cash from such third party. We reserved such cash payment to fund anticipated future environmental remediation costs associated with certain assets that we had acquired from the third party. Previously, the third party had been obligated to indemnify us for such costs. As a result of the settlement, this indemnification was terminated.

 

Estimates

 

Preparing our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Our actual results could differ from these estimates. On an ongoing basis, management reviews its estimates based on currently available information. Changes in facts and circumstances may result in revised estimates.

 

Income Taxes

 

We are organized as a pass-through entity for income tax purposes. As a result, our partners are responsible for federal income taxes on their share of our taxable income. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, our provision for income taxes is applicable to state tax obligations

 

9

 

---

under the Revised Texas Franchise Tax and certain federal and state tax obligations of Seminole Pipeline Company (“Seminole”) and Dixie.

 

In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation (“FIN”) 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” we must recognize the tax effects of any uncertain tax positions we may adopt, if the position taken by us is more likely than not sustainable. If a tax position meets such criteria, the tax effect to be recognized by us would be the largest amount of benefit with more than a 50% chance of being realized upon settlement. This guidance was effective January 1, 2007, and our adoption of this guidance had no material impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

 

Minority Interest

 

As presented in our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, minority interest represents third-party ownership interests in the net assets of our consolidated subsidiaries. For financial reporting purposes, the assets and liabilities of our majority owned subsidiaries are consolidated with those of our own, with any third-party ownership in such amounts presented as minority interest. Effective February 1, 2007, the public owners of Duncan Energy Partners’ common units are presented as a minority interest in our consolidated financial statements.

 

Minority interest, as reflected on our September 30, 2007 balance sheet, includes $290.2 million attributable to third party owners of Duncan Energy Partners and the remainder to our other consolidated affiliates.

 

Minority interest expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007 includes $3.2 million and $9.4 million, respectively, attributable to third party owners of Duncan Energy Partners. The remaining minority interest expense amounts for these periods in 2007 and likewise those for 2006 are attributable to our other consolidated affiliates.

 

Contributions from minority interests for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 includes $290.5 million received from third parties in connection with the initial public offering of Duncan Energy Partners in February 2007.

 

Recent Accounting Developments

 

SFAS 157, “Fair Value Measurements” defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in GAAP and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS 157 applies only to fair-value measurements that are already required or permitted by other accounting standards and is expected to increase the consistency of those measurements. SFAS 157 emphasizes that fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based on the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. Companies will be required to disclose the extent to which fair value is used to measure assets and liabilities, the inputs used to develop the measurements and the effect of certain of the measurements on earnings (or changes in net assets) for the period. SFAS 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and we are required to adopt SFAS 157 as of January 1, 2008.

 

SFAS 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities – Including an amendment of FASB Statement No. 115” permits entities to choose to measure many financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value. Unrealized gains and losses on items for which the fair value option has been elected would be reported in net income. SFAS 159 also establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to draw comparisons between the different measurement attributes the company elects for similar types of assets and liabilities. SFAS 159 is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We are currently evaluating this statement and have not yet determined the impact of such on our financial statements.

 

 

 

10

 

---

Note 3. Accounting for Unit-Based Awards

 

We account for unit-based awards in accordance with SFAS 123(R). SFAS 123(R) requires us to recognize compensation expense related to unit-based awards based on the fair value of the award at grant date. The fair value of restricted unit awards is based on the market price of the underlying common units on the date of grant. The fair value of other unit-based awards is estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. Under SFAS 123(R), the fair value of an equity-classified award (such as a restricted unit award) is amortized to earnings on a straight-line basis over the requisite service or vesting period. Compensation expense for liability-classified awards (such as unit appreciation rights (“UARs”)) is recognized over the requisite service or vesting period of an award based on the fair value of the award remeasured at each reporting period. Liability-type awards are cash settled upon vesting.

 

The following table summarizes our compensation amounts by plan during each of the periods indicated:

 

 

1998 Plan

 

The 1998 Plan provides for the issuance of up to 7,000,000 of our common units. After giving effect to outstanding option awards at September 30, 2007 and the issuance and forfeiture of restricted unit awards through September 30, 2007, a total of 1,271,456 additional common units could be issued under the 1998 Plan.

 

 

 

 

 

11

 

---

Unit options. Under the 1998 Plan, non-qualified incentive options to purchase a fixed number of our common units may be granted to key employees of EPCO who perform management, administrative or operational functions for us. The following table presents option activity under the 1998 Plan for the periods indicated:

 

 

The total intrinsic value of option awards exercised during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007 was $0.1 million and $2.9 million, respectively. At September 30, 2007, there was an estimated $3.1 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested option awards granted under the 1998 Plan. We expect to recognize this amount over a weighted-average period of 3.1 years. We will recognize our share of these costs in accordance with the EPCO administrative services agreement.

 

During the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, we received cash of $7.7 million and $4.0 million, respectively, from the exercise of option awards granted under the 1998 Plan. Conversely, our option-related reimbursements to EPCO were $2.9 million and $1.7 million, respectively.

 

Restricted units. Under the 1998 Plan, we may also issue restricted common units to key employees of EPCO and directors of our general partner. The following table summarizes information regarding our restricted unit awards for the periods indicated:

 

 

 

12

 

---

The total fair value of restricted unit awards that vested during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007 was nominal. At September 30, 2007, there was an estimated $27.5 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to restricted unit awards granted under the 1998 Plan, which we expect to recognize over a weighted-average period of 2.6 years. We will recognize our share of such costs in accordance with the EPCO administrative services agreement.

 

Employee Partnerships

 

EPCO formed the Employee Partnerships to serve as an incentive arrangement for key employees of EPCO by providing them a “profits interest” in the Employee Partnerships. Currently, there are three Employee Partnerships. EPE Unit I was formed in August 2005 in connection with Enterprise GP Holdings’ initial public offering and EPE Unit II was formed in December 2005. EPE Unit III was formed in May 2007. For a detailed description of EPE Unit I and EPE Unit II, see our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

At September 30, 2007, there was an estimated $28.7 million of combined unrecognized compensation cost related to the Employee Partnerships. We will recognize our share of these costs in accordance with the EPCO administrative services agreement over a weighted-average period of 4.2 years.

 

EPE Unit III. EPE Unit III owns 4,421,326 units of Enterprise GP Holdings contributed to it by a private company affiliate of EPCO, which, in turn, was made the Class A limited partner of EPE Unit III. The units of Enterprise GP Holdings contributed by the Class A limited partner had a fair value of $170.0 million on the date of contribution (the “Class A limited partner capital base”). Certain EPCO employees were issued Class B limited partner interests and admitted as Class B limited partners of EPE Unit III without any capital contribution. The profits interest awards (i.e., Class B limited partner interests) in EPE Unit III entitle the holder to participate in the appreciation in value of Enterprise GP Holdings’ units owned by EPE Unit III.

 

Unless otherwise agreed to by EPCO, the Class A limited partner and a majority in interest of the Class B limited partners of EPE Unit III, EPE Unit III will be liquidated upon the earlier of: (i) May 7, 2012 or (ii) a change in control of Enterprise GP Holdings or its general partner. EPE Unit III has the following material terms regarding its quarterly cash distribution to partners:

 

 

 

 

The Class B limited partner interests in EPE Unit III that are owned by EPCO employees are subject to forfeiture if the participating employee’s employment with EPCO and its affiliates is terminated prior to May 7, 2012, with customary exceptions for death, disability and certain retirements. The risk of

 

13

 

---

forfeiture associated with the Class B limited partner interests in EPE Unit III will also lapse upon certain change of control events.

 

DEP Holdings, LLC Unit Appreciation Rights

 

The non-employee directors of DEP Holdings, LLC, the general partner of Duncan Energy Partners (“DEPGP”), have been granted UARs in the form of letter agreements. These liability awards are not part of any established long-term incentive plan of EPCO, Enterprise GP Holdings or us. The compensation expense associated with these awards is recognized by DEPGP, which is our consolidated subsidiary. The UARs entitle each non-employee director to receive a cash payment on the vesting date equal to the excess, if any, of the fair market value of Enterprise GP Holdings’ units (determined as of a future vesting date) over the grant date fair value. If a director resigns prior to vesting, his UAR awards are forfeited. These UARs are accounted for similar to liability awards under SFAS 123(R) since they will be settled with cash.

 

As of September 30, 2007, a total of 90,000 UARs had been granted to non-employee directors of DEPGP that cliff vest in 2012. If a director resigns prior to vesting, his UAR awards are forfeited. The grant date fair value with respect to these UARs is based on an Enterprise GP Holdings’ unit price of $36.68.

 

Note 4. Financial Instruments

 

We are exposed to financial market risks, including changes in commodity prices and interest rates. In addition, we are exposed to fluctuations in exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and Canadian dollar. We may use financial instruments (i.e., futures, forwards, swaps, options and other financial instruments with similar characteristics) to mitigate the risks of certain identifiable and anticipated transactions. In general, the types of risks we attempt to hedge are those related to (i) variability of future earnings, (ii) fair values of certain debt instruments and (iii) cash flows resulting from changes in applicable interest rates, commodity prices or exchange rates. As a matter of policy, we do not use financial instruments for speculative (or “trading”) purposes.

 

Interest Rate Risk Hedging Program

 

Our interest rate exposure results from variable and fixed interest rate borrowings under various debt agreements. We manage a portion of our interest rate exposure by utilizing interest rate swaps and similar arrangements, which allow us to convert a portion of fixed rate debt into variable rate debt or a portion of variable rate debt into fixed rate debt.

 

Fair Value Hedges – Interest Rate Swaps. As summarized in the following table, we had eleven interest rate swap agreements outstanding at September 30, 2007 that were accounted for as fair value hedges.

 

                

The total fair value of these eleven interest rate swaps at September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, was a liability of $19.7 million and $29.1 million, respectively, with an offsetting decrease in the fair value of the underlying debt. Interest expense for the three months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006 includes a $2.3 million and $1.9 million loss from these swap agreements, respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, interest expense reflects a loss of $6.9 million and $2.8 million from these swap agreements, respectively.

 

14

 

---

 

Cash Flow Hedges – Interest Rate Swaps. In September 2007, Duncan Energy Partners executed three floating-to-fixed interest rate swaps having a combined notional value of $175.0 million. The purpose of these financial instruments, which are accounted for as cash flow hedges, is to reduce the sensitivity of Duncan Energy Partners’ earnings to variable interest rates charged under its revolving credit facility. The fair value of these swaps at September 30, 2007 and the benefit recognized from them in September 2007 was nominal.

 

Cash Flow Hedges – Treasury Locks. At times, we may use treasury lock financial instruments to hedge the underlying U.S. treasury rates related to our anticipated issuances of debt. Gains or losses on the termination of such instruments are amortized to earnings using the effective interest method over the estimated term of the underlying fixed-rate debt. The following table summarizes changes in our treasury lock portfolio since December 31, 2006 (dollars in millions):

 

 

Since September 30, 2007, we have executed an additional $350.0 million in notional amount of treasury lock financial instruments.

 

Commodity Risk Hedging Program

 

The prices of natural gas, NGLs and certain petrochemical products are subject to fluctuations in response to changes in supply, market uncertainty and a variety of additional factors that are beyond our control. In order to manage the price risks associated with such products, we may enter into commodity financial instruments.

 

The primary purpose of our commodity risk management activities is to hedge our exposure to price risks associated with (i) natural gas purchases, (ii) the value of NGL production and inventories, (iii) related firm commitments, (iv) fluctuations in transportation revenues where the underlying fees are based on natural gas index prices and (v) certain anticipated transactions involving either natural gas, NGLs or certain petrochemical products. From time to time, we inject natural gas into storage and utilize hedging instruments to lock in the value of our inventory positions. The commodity financial instruments we utilize may be settled in cash or with another financial instrument.

 

At September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006, we had a limited number of commodity financial instruments in our portfolio, which primarily consisted of cash flow hedges. The fair value of our commodity financial instrument portfolio at September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006 was a liability of $23.4 million and $3.2 million, respectively. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007, we recorded an expense of $10.5 million and $11.9 million, respectively, related to our commodity financial instruments. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2006, we recorded $7.8 million and $2.4 million, respectively, of expense related to our commodity financial instruments.

 

 

15

 

---

Foreign Currency Hedging Program

 

We own an NGL marketing business located in Canada and have entered into a construction agreement where payments are indexed to the Canadian dollar. As a result, we could be adversely affected by fluctuations in the foreign currency exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the Canadian dollar. We attempt to hedge this risk using foreign exchange purchase contracts to fix the exchange rate. We use mark-to-market accounting for those foreign exchange contracts associated with our Canadian NGL marketing business. The duration of these contracts is typically one month. At September 30, 2007, $1.1 million of these exchange contracts were outstanding, all of which expired in October 2007. The foreign exchange contracts associated with our construction activities are accounted for using hedge accounting. At September 30, 2007, the fair value of these contracts was $2.9 million. These contracts settle through May 2008.

 

Note 5. Inventories

 

Our inventory amounts were as follows at the dates indicated:

 

 

Our inventory values reflect payments for product purchases, freight charges associated with such purchase volumes, terminal and storage fees, vessel inspection costs, demurrage charges and other related costs. We value our inventories at the lower of average cost or market.

 

Operating costs and expenses, as presented on our Unaudited Condensed Statements of Consolidated Operations, include cost of sales amounts related to the sale of inventories. Our cost of sales was $3.5 billion and $3.2 billion for the three months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, our cost of sales was $9.9 billion and $9.0 billion, respectively.

 

Due to fluctuating commodity prices in the NGL, natural gas and petrochemical industry, we recognize lower of cost or market (“LCM”) adjustments when the carrying value of our inventories exceed their net realizable value. These non-cash charges are a component of cost of sales in the period they are recognized. For the three months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, we recognized LCM adjustments of approximately $0.2 million and $5.7 million, respectively. We recognized LCM adjustments of $13.3 million and $17.7 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

16

 

---

Note 6. Property, Plant and Equipment

 

Our property, plant and equipment values and accumulated depreciation balances were as follows at the dates indicated:

 

 

The following table summarizes our depreciation expense and capitalized interest amounts for the periods indicated:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

17

 

---

Asset retirement obligations

 

An ARO is a legal obligation associated with the retirement of a tangible long-lived asset that results from its acquisition, construction, development or normal operation, or a combination of these factors. The following table summarizes amounts recognized in connection with AROs since December 31, 2006:

 

 

Property, plant and equipment at September 30, 2007 includes $11.6 million of asset retirement costs capitalized as an increase in the associated long-lived asset. Also, as of September 30, 2007, we estimate that accretion expense will approximate $0.5 million for the last three months of 2007, $2.2 million for 2008, $2.0 million for 2009, $2.1 million for 2010 and $2.3 million for 2011.

 

Note 7. Investments In and Advances to Unconsolidated Affiliates

 

We own interests in a number of related businesses that are accounted for using the equity method of accounting. Our investments in and advances to unconsolidated affiliates are grouped according to the business segment to which they relate. See Note 11 for a general discussion of our business segments. The following table presents our investments in and advances to unconsolidated affiliates at the dates indicated:

                

 

On occasion, the price we pay to acquire an ownership interest in a company exceeds the underlying book value of the capital accounts we acquire. Such excess cost amounts are included within the carrying values of our investments in and advances to unconsolidated affiliates. At September 30, 2007

 

18

 

---

and December 31, 2006, our investments in Promix, La Porte, Neptune, Poseidon, Cameron Highway, Nemo and Jonah included excess cost amounts totaling $42.9 million and $38.7 million, respectively. These amounts are attributable to the excess of the fair value of each entity’s tangible assets over their respective book carrying values at the time we acquired an interest in each entity. We amortize such excess cost amounts as a reduction in equity earnings. Amortization of such excess cost amounts was $0.5 million during each of the three month periods ended September 30, 2007 and 2006. For the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, amortization of such amounts was $1.5 million and $1.6 million, respectively.

 

The following table presents our equity in income (loss) of unconsolidated affiliates by business segment for the periods indicated:

 

 

Summarized Financial Information of Unconsolidated Affiliates

 

The following tables present unaudited income statement data for our current unconsolidated affiliates, aggregated by business segment, for the periods indicated (on a 100% basis).

 

 

 

 

 

19

 

---

Cameron Highway. We own a 50.0% interest in Cameron Highway, which owns a crude oil pipeline that gathers production from deepwater areas of the Gulf of Mexico, primarily the Southern Green Canyon area, for delivery to refineries and terminals in southeast Texas. In May 2007, we made an approximate $191.0 million cash contribution to Cameron Highway. This capital contribution, along with an equal amount contributed by our joint venture partner in Cameron Highway, was used by Cameron Highway to repay $365.0 million outstanding under its Senior Notes A and $14.1 million of related make-whole premiums and accrued interest. In June 2007, we and our joint venture partner in Cameron Highway made an additional capital contribution of approximately $25.5 million each. These capital contributions were used by Cameron Highway to repay its Series B notes on June 7, 2007. The amount of the repayment was $50.9 million, which included $0.9 million of related make-whole premiums and accrued interest. As a result of these events, Cameron Highway no longer has any outstanding debt.

 

Nemo. Nemo was formed in 1999 to construct, own and operate the Nemo Gathering System, a 24-mile natural gas gathering system in the Gulf of Mexico offshore Louisiana. The Nemo Gathering System, which began operations in 2001, gathers natural gas from certain developments in the Green Canyon area of the Gulf of Mexico to a pipeline interconnect with the Manta Ray Gathering System. Due to a recent decrease in throughput volumes on the Nemo Gathering System, we evaluated our 33.9% investment in Nemo for impairment during the second quarter of 2007. The decrease in throughput volumes is primarily due to underperformance of certain fields and natural depletion.

 

At December 31, 2006, the carrying value of our investment in Nemo was $11.2 million, which included $0.6 million of excess cost related to its original acquisition in 2001. Our review of Nemo’s estimated future cash flows during the second quarter of 2007 indicated that the carrying value of our investment exceeded its fair value, which resulted in a non-cash impairment charge of $7.0 million. This loss is recorded as a component of “Equity in income of unconsolidated affiliates” in our Unaudited Condensed Statements of Consolidated Operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2007. Equity earnings from our investment in Nemo are classified under our Offshore Pipelines & Services business segment. After recording this impairment charge, the carrying value of our investment in Nemo at September 30, 2007 was $2.6 million, which reflects $0.6 million in losses and $2.1 million of distributions we recorded during the first nine months of 2007.

 

Our investment in Nemo was written down to fair value, which management prepared using recognized business valuation techniques. The fair value analysis is based upon management’s expectation of future cash flows. Such expectation of future cash flows incorporates industry information and assumptions made by management. For example, the review of Nemo included management estimates regarding the remaining natural gas reserves of producers served by the Nemo Gathering System. If the assumptions underlying our fair value analysis change and expected cash flows are reduced, additional impairment charges may result.

 

 

 

 

20

 

---

Note 8. Intangible Assets and Goodwill

 

Identifiable Intangible Assets

 

The following table summarizes our intangible assets at the dates indicated:

 

 

The following table presents the amortization expense of our intangible assets by segment for the periods indicated:

 

 

For the remainder of 2007, amortization expense associated with our intangible assets is currently estimated at $22.4 million.

 

Goodwill

 

The following table summarizes our goodwill amounts by segment at the dates indicated:

 

 

 

 

 

21

 

---

Note 9. Debt Obligations

 

Our consolidated debt obligations consisted of the following at the dates indicated:

 

 

Parent-Subsidiary guarantor relationships

 

We act as guarantor of the debt obligations of EPO with the exception of the Dixie revolving credit facility and the senior subordinated notes we assumed in connection with the GulfTerra Merger. If EPO were to default on any debt we guarantee, we would be responsible for full repayment of that obligation. We do not act as guarantor of the debt obligations of Duncan Energy Partners.

 

EPO’s debt obligations

 

Apart from that discussed below, there have been no significant changes in the terms of EPO’s debt obligations since those reported in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

Junior Notes B. EPO sold $700 million in principal amount of fixed/floating, unsecured, long-term subordinated notes due January 2068 (“Junior Notes B”) during the second quarter of 2007. EPO used the proceeds from this subordinated debt to temporarily reduce borrowings outstanding under its Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility and for general partnership purposes. EPO’s payment obligations

 

22

 

---

under Junior Notes B are subordinated to all of its current and future senior indebtedness (as defined in the Indenture Agreement). We have guaranteed repayment of amounts due under Junior Notes B through an unsecured and subordinated guarantee.

 

The indenture agreement governing Junior Notes B allows EPO to defer interest payments on one or more occasions for up to ten consecutive years subject to certain conditions. During any period in which interest payments are deferred and subject to certain exceptions, neither we nor EPO can declare or make any distributions to any of our respective equity securities or make any payments on indebtedness or other obligations that rank pari passu with or are subordinate to Junior Notes B. Junior Notes B rank pari passu with the Junior Subordinated Notes A, due August 2066 (“Junior Notes A”), which were issued during the third quarter of 2006.

 

The Junior Notes B will bear interest at a fixed annual rate of 7.034% through January 15, 2018, payable semi-annually in arrears in January and July of each year, commencing in January 2008. After January 2018, the Junior Notes B will bear variable rate interest at the greater of (1) the sum of the 3-month London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) for the related interest period plus a spread of 268 basis points or (2) 7.034% per annum, payable quarterly in arrears in January, April, July and October of each year commencing in April 2018. Interest payments may be deferred on a cumulative basis for up to ten consecutive years, subject to certain provisions. The Junior Notes B mature in January 2068 and are not redeemable by EPO prior to January 2018 without payment of a make-whole premium.

 

In connection with the issuance of Junior Notes B, we and EPO entered into a Replacement Capital Covenant in favor of the covered debt holders (as named therein) pursuant to which we and EPO agreed for the benefit of such debt holders that neither we nor EPO would redeem or repurchase such junior notes on or before January 15, 2038, unless such redemption or repurchase is made from the proceeds of issuance of certain securities.

 

Senior Notes L. In September 2007, EPO sold $800.0 million in principal amount of ten-year senior unsecured notes (the “Senior Notes L”) under its new universal shelf registration statement. These notes were issued at 99.953% of their principal amount, have a fixed-rate interest of 6.30% and a maturity date of September 15, 2017. The Senior Notes L will pay interest semi-annually in arrears on March 15 and September 15 of each year, beginning March 15, 2008. EPO used the net proceeds from the issuance of these notes to temporarily reduce indebtedness outstanding under its Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility and for general partnership purposes. In October 2007, EPO used borrowing capacity under its Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility to repay its $500.0 million Senior Notes E.

 

These fixed-rate notes are unsecured obligations of EPO and rank equally with its existing and future unsecured and unsubordinated indebtedness (as defined in the Indenture Agreement). We have guaranteed repayment of amounts due under these notes through an unsecured and unsubordinated guarantee. However, in the future, should any of EPO’s subsidiaries become guarantors or co-obligors of its debt obligations maturing in one year or more, then these subsidiaries will jointly and severally, fully and unconditionally, guarantee the payment obligations under the notes. We may redeem the notes before their maturity in whole, at any time, or in part, from time to time, prior to maturity, at a redemption price that includes accrued and unpaid interest and a make-whole premium. These notes were issued under an indenture containing certain covenants, which restrict our ability, with certain exceptions, to incur debt secured by liens and engage in sale and leaseback transactions.

 

Petal MBFC Loan. In August 2007, Petal Gas Storage L.L.C. (“Petal”), a wholly owned subsidiary of EPO, entered into a loan agreement and a promissory note with the Mississippi Business Finance Corporation (“MBFC”) under which Petal may borrow up to $29.5 million.  On the same date, the MBFC issued taxable bonds to EPO in the maximum amount of $29.5 million.  As of September 30, 2007, there was $8.9 million outstanding under the loan and the bonds.  EPO will make advances on the bonds to the MBFC and the MBFC will in turn make identical advances to Petal under the promissory note. The promissory note and the taxable bonds have identical terms including fixed interest rates of 5.90% and maturities of fifteen years.  The bonds and the associated tax incentives are authorized under the Mississippi Business Finance Act.  Petal may prepay on the promissory note without penalty, and thus

 

23

 

---

cause the bonds to be redeemed, any time after one year from their date of issue.  The loan and bonds are netted in preparing our consolidated balance sheet, as well the related interest expense and income amounts are netted in preparing our consolidated income statement.

 

Petal GO Zone Bonds. In August 2007, Petal borrowed $57.5 million from the MBFC pursuant to a loan agreement and promissory note between Petal and the MBFC to pay a portion of the costs of certain natural gas storage facilities located in Petal, Mississippi.  The promissory note between Petal and MBFC is guaranteed by EPO and supported by a letter of credit issued under EPO’s Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility. On the same date, the MBFC issued $57.5 million in Gulf Opportunity Zone Tax-Exempt (“GO Zone”) bonds to various third parties. A portion of the GO Zone bond proceeds are being held by a third party trustee and reflected as a component of other assets on our balance sheet. The remaining proceeds held by the trustee will be released to us as we spend capital to complete the construction of the natural gas storage facilities. At September 30, 2007, $39.3 million of the GO Zone bond proceeds remained held by the third party trustee.  The promissory note and the GO Zone bonds have identical terms including floating interest rates and maturities of twenty-seven years.  The bonds and the associated tax incentives are authorized under the Mississippi Business Finance Act and the Gulf Opportunity Zone Act of 2005. 

 

Duncan Energy Partners’ debt obligation

 

We consolidate the debt of Duncan Energy Partners with that of our own; however, we do not have the obligation to make interest payments or debt payments with respect to the debt of Duncan Energy Partners.

 

Duncan Energy Partners entered into a $300.0 million revolving credit facility, all of which may be used for letters of credit, with a $30.0 million sublimit for Swingline loans. Letters of credit outstanding under this facility reduce the amount available for borrowings. At the closing of its initial public offering, Duncan Energy Partners made its initial borrowing of $200.0 million under the facility to fund the $198.9 million cash distribution to EPO and the remainder to pay debt issuance costs. At September 30, 2007, the principal balance outstanding under this facility was $215.0 million.

 

This credit facility matures in February 2011 and will be used by Duncan Energy Partners in the future to fund working capital and other capital requirements and for general partnership purposes. Duncan Energy Partners may make up to two requests for one-year extensions of the maturity date (subject to certain restrictions). The revolving credit facility is available to pay distributions upon the initial contribution of assets to Duncan Energy Partners, fund working capital, make acquisitions and provide payment for general purposes. Duncan Energy Partners can increase the revolving credit facility, without consent of the lenders, by an amount not to exceed $150.0 million by adding to the facility one or more new lenders and/or increasing the commitments of existing lenders. No existing lender is required to increase its commitment, unless it agrees to do so in its sole discretion.

 

This revolving credit facility offers the following unsecured loans, each having different interest requirements: (i) LIBOR loans bear interest at a rate per annum equal to LIBOR plus the applicable LIBOR margin (as defined in the credit agreement), (ii) Base Rate loans bear interest at a rate per annum equal to the higher of (a) the rate of interest publicly announced by the administrative agent, Wachovia Bank, National Association, as its Base Rate and (b) 0.5% per annum above the Federal Funds Rate in effect on such date and (iii) Swingline loans bear interest at a rate per annum equal to LIBOR plus an applicable LIBOR margin.

 

The revolving credit facility requires Duncan Energy Partners to maintain a leverage ratio for the prior four fiscal quarters of not more than 4.75 to 1.00 at the last day of each fiscal quarter commencing June 30, 2007; provided that, upon the closing of a permitted acquisition, such ratio shall not exceed (a) 5.25 to 1.00 at the last day of the fiscal quarter in which such specified acquisition occurred and at the last day of each of the two fiscal quarters following the fiscal quarter in which such specified acquisition occurred, and (b) 4.75 to 1.00 at the last day of each fiscal quarter thereafter. In addition, prior to obtaining an investment-grade rating by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services, Moody’s Investors Service or Fitch Ratings, Duncan Energy Partners’ interest coverage ratio, for the prior four fiscal quarters shall not be less

 

24

 

---

than 2.75 to 1.00 at the last day of each fiscal quarter commencing June 30, 2007.

 

The Duncan Energy Partners’ credit facility contains other customary covenants. Also, if an event of default exists under the credit agreement, the lenders will be able to accelerate the maturity date of amounts borrowed under the credit agreement and exercise other rights and remedies.

 

Canadian Debt Obligations

 

In May 2007, Canadian Enterprise Gas Products, Ltd. (“Canadian Enterprise”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of EPO, entered into a $30.0 million Canadian revolving credit facility with The Bank of Nova Scotia. The credit facility, which includes the issuance of letters of credit, matures in October 2011. Letters of credit outstanding under this facility reduce the amount available for borrowings.

 

Borrowings may be made in Canadian or U.S. dollars. Canadian denominated borrowings may be comprised of Canadian Prime Rate (“CPR”) loans or Bankers’ Acceptances and U.S. denominated borrowings may be comprised of Alternative Base Rate (“ABR”) or Eurodollar loans, each having different interest rate requirements. CPR loans bear interest at a rate determined by reference to the Canadian Prime Rate. ABR loans bear interest at a rate determined by reference to an alternative base rate as defined in the credit agreement. Eurodollar loans bear interest at a rate determined by the LIBOR plus an applicable rate as defined in the credit agreement. Bankers’ Acceptances carry interest at the rate for Canadian bankers’ acceptances plus an applicable rate as defined in the credit agreement.

 

The credit facility contains customary covenants and events of default. The restrictive covenants limit Canadian Enterprise from materially changing the nature of its business or operations, dissolving, or completing mergers. A continuing event of default would accelerate the maturity of amounts borrowed under the credit facility. The obligations under the credit facility are guaranteed by EPO. As of September 30, 2007, there were no debt obligations outstanding under this credit facility.

 

Covenants

 

We are in compliance with the covenants of our consolidated debt agreements at September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006.

 

Information regarding variable interest rates paid

 

The following table presents the range of interest rates paid and weighted-average interest rate paid on our consolidated variable-rate debt obligations during the nine months ended September 30, 2007.

 

 

 

 

25

 

---

Consolidated debt maturity table

 

The following table presents the scheduled maturities of principal amounts of our debt obligations for the next five years and in total thereafter.

 

 

In accordance with SFAS 6, long-term and current maturities of debt reflect the classification of such obligations at September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006. With respect to the $500.0 million in principal due under Senior Notes E in October 2007, EPO repaid this note on October 15, 2007 using cash and available credit capacity under its Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility. The preceding table and our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at September 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006 reflect this ability to refinance.

 

Debt Obligations of Unconsolidated Affiliates

 

We have two unconsolidated affiliates with long-term debt obligations. The following table shows (i) our ownership interest in each entity at September 30, 2007, (ii) total debt of each unconsolidated affiliate at September 30, 2007 (on a 100% basis to the affiliate) and (iii) the corresponding scheduled maturities of such debt.

 

 

Cameron Highway repaid its $365.0 million Series A notes and $50.0 million Series B notes in May and June 2007, respectively, using cash contributions from its partners. We funded our 50% share of the capital contributions using borrowings under EPO’s Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility. Cameron Highway incurred an $11.0 million make-whole premium in connection with the repayment of its Series A notes.

 

The credit agreements of our unconsolidated affiliates contain various affirmative and negative covenants, including financial covenants. These businesses were in compliance with such covenants at September 30, 2007. The credit agreements of our unconsolidated affiliates restrict their ability to pay cash dividends if a default or an event of default (as defined in each credit agreement) has occurred and is continuing at the time such dividend is scheduled to be paid.

 

Apart from the repayment of Cameron Highway’s Series A and Series B notes, there have been no significant changes in the terms of the debt obligations of our unconsolidated affiliates since those reported in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

Note 10. Partners’ Equity and Distributions

 

Our common units represent limited partner interests, which give the holders thereof the right to participate in distributions and to exercise the other rights or privileges available to them under our Fifth Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership (together with all amendments thereto, the “Partnership Agreement”). We are managed by our general partner, Enterprise Products GP.

 

26

 

---

 

In accordance with the Partnership Agreement, capital accounts are maintained for our general partner and limited partners. The capital account provisions of our Partnership Agreement incorporate principles established for U.S. Federal income tax purposes and are not comparable to the equity accounts reflected under GAAP in our consolidated financial statements.

 

Our Partnership Agreement sets forth the calculation to be used in determining the amount and priority of cash distributions that our limited partners and general partner will receive. The Partnership Agreement also contains provisions for the allocation of net earnings and losses to our limited partners and general partner. For purposes of maintaining partner capital accounts, the Partnership Agreement specifies that items of income and loss shall be allocated among the partners in accordance with their respective percentage interests. Normal income and loss allocations according to percentage interests are done only after giving effect to priority earnings allocations in an amount equal to incentive cash distributions allocated to our general partner.

 

Equity Offerings and Registration Statements

 

In general, the Partnership Agreement authorizes us to issue an unlimited number of additional limited partner interests and other equity securities for such consideration and on such terms and conditions as may be established by Enterprise Products GP in its sole discretion (subject, under certain circumstances, to the approval of our unitholders).

 

In April 2007, we filed a registration statement with the SEC authorizing the issuance of up to 25,000,000 common units in connection with our distribution reinvestment plan (“DRIP”). The DRIP provides unitholders of record and beneficial owners of our common units a voluntary means by which they can increase the number of common units they own by reinvesting the quarterly cash distributions they would otherwise receive into the purchase of additional common units. A total of 1,518,291 of our common units were issued in February, May and August of 2007 in connection with the DRIP and the employee unit purchase plan (“EUPP”). The issuance of these units generated $45.3 million in net proceeds.

 

In August 2007, we filed a universal shelf registration statement with the SEC that allows us to issue an unlimited amount of debt and equity securities.

 

The following table reflects the number of common units issued and the net proceeds received from underwritten and other common unit offerings completed during the nine months ended September 30, 2007:

 

 

 

 

27

 

---

 

Summary of Changes in Outstanding Units

 

The following table summarizes changes in our outstanding units since December 31, 2006:

 

 

Summary of Changes in Limited Partners’ Equity

 

The following table details the changes in limited partners’ equity since December 31, 2006:

 

  

Distributions to Partners

 

The percentage interest of Enterprise Products GP in our quarterly cash distributions is increased after certain specified target levels of quarterly distribution rates are met. At current distribution rates, we are in the highest tier of such incentive targets. Enterprise Products GP’s quarterly incentive distribution thresholds are as follows:

 

 

We paid incentive distributions of $27.4 million and $22.4 million to Enterprise Products GP during the three months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. During the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, we paid incentive distributions of $79.0 million and $62.5 million, respectively, to Enterprise Products GP.

 

Our quarterly cash distributions for 2007 are presented in the following table:

 

 

 

28

 

---

Note 11. Business Segments

 

We have four reportable business segments: NGL Pipelines & Services; Onshore Natural Gas Pipelines & Services; Offshore Pipelines & Services; and Petrochemical Services. Our business segments are generally organized and managed according to the type of services rendered (or technologies employed) and products produced and/or sold.

 

We evaluate segment performance based on the non-GAAP financial measure of gross operating margin. Gross operating margin (either in total or by individual segment) is an important performance measure of the core profitability of our operations. This measure forms the basis of our internal financial reporting and is used by senior management in deciding how to allocate capital resources among business segments. We believe that investors benefit from having access to the same financial measures that our management uses in evaluating segment results. The GAAP financial measure most directly comparable to total segment gross operating margin is operating income. Our non-GAAP financial measure of total segment gross operating margin should not be considered an alternative to GAAP operating income.

 

We define total segment gross operating margin as consolidated operating income before: (i) depreciation, amortization and accretion expense; (ii) operating lease expenses for which we do not have the payment obligation; (iii) gains and losses on the sale of assets; and (iv) general and administrative costs. Gross operating margin is exclusive of other income and expense transactions, provision for income taxes, minority interest, extraordinary charges and the cumulative effect of change in accounting principle. Gross operating margin by segment is calculated by subtracting segment operating costs and expenses (net of the adjustments noted above) from segment revenues, with both segment totals before the elimination of intersegment and intrasegment transactions.

 

Segment revenues include intersegment and intrasegment transactions, which are generally based on transactions made at market-related rates. Our consolidated revenues reflect the elimination of intercompany (both intersegment and intrasegment) transactions.

 

We include equity earnings from unconsolidated affiliates in our measurement of segment gross operating margin and operating income. Our equity investments with industry partners are a vital component of our business strategy. They are a means by which we conduct our operations to align our interests with those of our customers and/or suppliers. This method of operation enables us to achieve favorable economies of scale relative to the level of investment and business risk assumed versus what we could accomplish on a stand-alone basis. Many of these businesses perform supporting or complementary roles to our other business operations.

 

Our integrated midstream energy asset system (including the midstream energy assets of our equity method investees) provides services to producers and consumers of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil and certain petrochemicals. In general, hydrocarbons enter our asset system in a number of ways, such as an offshore natural gas or crude oil pipeline, an offshore platform, a natural gas processing plant, an onshore natural gas gathering pipeline, an NGL fractionator, an NGL storage facility, or an NGL transportation or distribution pipeline.

 

Many of our equity investees are included within our integrated midstream asset system. For example, we have ownership interests in several offshore natural gas and crude oil pipelines. Other examples include our use of the Promix NGL fractionator to process mixed NGLs extracted by our gas plants. The fractionated NGLs we receive from Promix can then be sold in our NGL marketing activities. Given the integral nature of our equity method investees to our operations, we believe the presentation of earnings from such investees as a component of gross operating margin and operating income is meaningful and appropriate.

 

Historically, substantially all of our consolidated revenues were earned in the United States and derived from a wide customer base. The majority of our plant-based operations are located in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico and Wyoming. Our natural gas, NGL and crude oil pipelines are located in a number of regions of the United States including (i) the Gulf of Mexico offshore Texas and

 

29

 

---

Louisiana; (ii) the south and southeastern United States (primarily in Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama); and (iii) certain regions of the central and western United States, including the Rocky Mountains. Our marketing activities are headquartered in Houston, Texas and serve customers in a number of regions of the United States including the Gulf Coast, West Coast and Mid-Continent areas.

 

Consolidated property, plant and equipment and investments in and advances to unconsolidated affiliates are assigned to each segment on the basis of each asset’s or investment’s principal operations. The principal reconciling difference between consolidated property, plant and equipment and the total value of segment assets is construction-in-progress. Segment assets represent the net book carrying value of facilities and other assets that contribute to gross operating margin of that particular segment. Since assets under construction generally do not contribute to segment gross operating margin, such assets are excluded from segment asset totals until they are placed in service. Consolidated intangible assets and goodwill are assigned to each segment based on the classification of the assets to which they relate.

 

We consolidate the financial statements of Duncan Energy Partners with those of our own. As a result, our consolidated gross operating margin amounts include the gross operating margin amounts of Duncan Energy Partners on a 100% basis.

 

The following table presents our measurement of total segment gross operating margin for the periods indicated:

 

 

A reconciliation of our total segment gross operating margin to operating income and income before provision for income taxes, minority interest and the cumulative effect of change in accounting principle follows:

 

 

 

30

 

---

Information by segment, together with reconciliations to our consolidated totals, is presented in the following table:

 

 

 

31

 

---

The following table summarizes the contribution to consolidated revenues from the sale of NGL, natural gas and petrochemical products for the periods indicated:

 

 

 

Note 12. Related Party Transactions

 

The following table summarizes our related party transactions for the periods indicated:

 

 

We believe that the terms and provisions of our related party agreements are fair to us; however, such agreements and transactions may not be as favorable to us as we could have obtained from unaffiliated third parties.

 

Relationship with EPCO and affiliates

 

We have an extensive and ongoing relationship with EPCO and its affiliates, which include the following significant entities that are not part of our consolidated group of companies:

 

 

We also have an ongoing relationship with Duncan Energy Partners, the financial statements of which are consolidated with those of our own. Our transactions with Duncan Energy Partners are eliminated in consolidation; therefore, they are not part of the totals presented in the preceding table. A description of our relationship with Duncan Energy Partners is presented within this Note 12.

 

EPCO is a private company controlled by Dan L. Duncan, who is also a director and Chairman of Enterprise Products GP, our general partner. At September 30, 2007, EPCO and its affiliates beneficially

 

32

 

---

owned 147,870,309 (or 34.0%) of our outstanding common units, which include 13,454,498 of our common units owned by Enterprise GP Holdings. In addition, at September 30, 2007, EPCO and its affiliates beneficially owned 77.1% of the limited partner interests of Enterprise GP Holdings and 100% of its general partner, EPE Holdings. Enterprise GP Holdings owns all of the membership interests of Enterprise Products GP. The principal business activity of Enterprise Products GP is to act as our managing partner. The executive officers and certain of the directors of Enterprise Products GP and EPE Holdings are employees of EPCO.

 

In connection with its general partner interest in us, Enterprise Products GP received cash distributions of $91.6 million and $73.5 million from us during the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. These amounts include incentive distributions of $79.0 million and $62.5 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

 

We and Enterprise Products GP are both separate legal entities apart from each other and apart from EPCO, Enterprise GP Holdings and their respective other affiliates, with assets and liabilities that are separate from those of EPCO, Enterprise GP Holdings and their respective other affiliates. EPCO and its private company subsidiaries depend on the cash distributions they receive from us, Enterprise GP Holdings and other investments to fund their other operations and to meet their debt obligations. Enterprise GP Holdings, EPCO and its private company affiliates received $260.7 million and $225.5 million in cash distributions from us during the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

 

The ownership interests in us that are owned or controlled by Enterprise GP Holdings are pledged as security under its credit facility. In addition, substantially all of the ownership interests in us that are owned or controlled by EPCO and its affiliates, other than those interests owned by Enterprise GP Holdings, Dan Duncan LLC and certain trusts affiliated with Dan L. Duncan, are pledged as security under the credit facility of a private company affiliate of EPCO. This credit facility contains customary and other events of default relating to EPCO and certain affiliates, including Enterprise GP Holdings, us and TEPPCO.

 

We have entered into an agreement with EPCO to provide trucking services to us for the transportation of NGLs and other products. We also lease office space in various buildings from affiliates of EPCO. The rental rates in these lease agreements approximate market rates.

 

Historically, we entered into transactions with a Canadian affiliate of EPCO for the purchase and sale of NGL products in the normal course of business. These transactions were at market-related prices. We acquired this affiliate in October 2006 and began consolidating its financial statements with those of our own from the date of acquisition.

 

EPCO Administrative Services Agreement

 

We have no employees. All of our management, administrative and operating functions are performed by employees of EPCO pursuant to an administrative services agreement (the “ASA”). We and our general partner, Enterprise GP Holdings and its general partner, Duncan Energy Partners and its general partner, and TEPPCO and its general partner, among other affiliates, are parties to the ASA. The ACG Committees of each general partner have approved the ASA.

 

Under the ASA, we reimburse EPCO for all costs and expenses it incurs in providing management, administrative and operating services to us. The ASA also addresses potential conflicts in business opportunities that may arise among us, Enterprise GP Holdings, Duncan Energy Partners and other affiliates of EPCO.

 

Relationship with TEPPCO

 

We received $12.7 million and $14.0 million from TEPPCO during the three months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively, primarily from the sale of NGLs. We received $42.8 million and $31.1 million from TEPPCO during the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively,

 

33

 

---

primarily from the sale of NGLs. We paid TEPPCO $4.5 million and $7.1 million for NGL pipeline transportation and storage services during the three months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. We paid TEPPCO $13.8 million and $17.7 million for NGL pipeline transportation and storage services during the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively.

 

Purchase and lease of pipelines for DEP South Texas NGL Pipeline System from TEPPCO. In January 2007, we purchased a 10-mile segment of pipeline from TEPPCO located in the Houston area for $8.0 million that is part of the DEP South Texas NGL Pipeline System. In addition, we entered into a lease with TEPPCO for an 11-mile interconnecting pipeline located in the Houston area. The primary term of this lease expired in September 2007 and continues on a month-to-month basis subject to termination by either party upon 60 days notice. This pipeline is being leased by a subsidiary of Duncan Energy Partners in connection with operations on its DEP South Texas NGL Pipeline System until construction of a parallel pipeline is completed in the first quarter of 2008.

 

Jonah Joint Venture with TEPPCO. In August 2006, we formed a joint venture with TEPPCO to be partners in TEPPCO’s Jonah Gas Gathering Company, or Jonah. Jonah owns the Jonah Gas Gathering System (the “Jonah Gathering System”), located in the Greater Green River Basin of southwestern Wyoming. The Jonah Gathering System gathers and transports natural gas produced from the Jonah and Pinedale fields to regional natural gas processing plants and major interstate pipelines that deliver natural gas to end-user markets.

 

Prior to entering into the Jonah joint venture, we managed the construction of the Phase V expansion and funded the initial construction costs under a letter of intent we signed in February 2006. In connection with the joint venture arrangement, we and TEPPCO will continue the Phase V expansion, which is expected to increase the capacity of the Jonah Gathering System from 1.5 Bcf/d to 2.3 Bcf/d. The Phase V expansion is also expected to significantly reduce system operating pressures, which we anticipate will lead to increased production rates and ultimate reserve recoveries. The first portion of the expansion, which is expected to increase the system gathering capacity to 2.0 Bcf/d, was completed in July 2007. The second portion of the expansion is expected to be completed by the first quarter of 2008. We will operate the Jonah Gathering System.

 

We manage the Phase V construction project. TEPPCO is entitled to all distributions from the joint venture until specified milestones are achieved, at which point, we will be entitled to receive 50% of the incremental cash flow from portions of the system placed in service as part of the expansion. After subsequent milestones are achieved, we and TEPPCO will share distributions based on a formula that takes into account the respective capital contributions of the parties, including expenditures by TEPPCO prior to the expansion.

 

Since August 1, 2006, we and TEPPCO equally share in the construction costs of the Phase V expansion. TEPPCO has reimbursed us $208.8 million for its share of the Phase V costs. At September 30, 2007, we had a receivable from TEPPCO of $13.0 million for additional Phase V costs incurred through September 30, 2007.

 

Upon completion of the expansion project and based on the formula in the joint venture partnership agreement, we expect to own an interest in Jonah of approximately 20%, with TEPPCO owning the remaining 80%. Phase I of this expansion project was completed in July 2007, thus at September 30, 2007, we and TEPPCO owned and shared earnings of approximately 19.4% interest and 80.6% interest, respectively, in Jonah.

 

The joint venture is governed by a management committee comprised of two representatives approved by us and two representatives appointed by TEPPCO, each with equal voting power. After an in-depth consideration of all relevant factors, this transaction was approved by the Audit, Conflicts and Governance Committee of our general partner and that of TEPPCO GP.

 

 

 

34

 

---

Relationship with Energy Transfer Equity

 

Enterprise GP Holdings acquired equity method investments in Energy Transfer Equity and its general partner in May 2007. As a result, Energy Transfer Equity and its consolidated subsidiaries became related parties to our consolidated businesses.

 

For the three and five months ended September 30, 2007, we recorded $79.0 million and $121.5 million of revenues from Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. (“ETP”), primarily from NGL marketing activities. We incurred $2.6 million and $8.4 million in operating costs and expenses for the three and five months ended September 30, 2007. We have a long-term revenue generating contract with Titan Energy Partners, L.P. (“Titan”), a consolidated subsidiary of ETP. Titan purchases substantially all of its propane requirements from us. The contract continues until March 31, 2010 and contains renewal and extension options. We and Energy Transfer Company (“ETC OLP”) transport natural gas on each other’s systems and share operating expenses on certain pipelines. ETC OLP also sells natural gas to us.

 

Relationship with Duncan Energy Partners

 

For financial reporting purposes, we consolidate the financial statements of Duncan Energy Partners with those of our own and reflect its operations in our business segments. All intercompany transactions between us and Duncan Energy Partners are eliminated in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. Also, due to common control of the entities by Dan L. Duncan, the initial consolidated balance sheet of Duncan Energy Partners reflects our historical carrying basis in each of the subsidiaries contributed to Duncan Energy Partners. Public ownership of Duncan Energy Partners’ net assets and earnings are presented as a component of minority interest in our consolidated financial statements.

 

The borrowings of Duncan Energy Partners are presented as part of our consolidated debt; however, we do not have any obligation for the payment of interest or repayment of borrowings incurred by Duncan Energy Partners.

 

On February 5, 2007, Duncan Energy Partners completed its initial public offering of 14,950,000 common units (including an overallotment amount of 1,950,000 common units) at $21.00 per unit, which generated net proceeds to Duncan Energy Partners of $291.9 million. As consideration for assets contributed and reimbursement for capital expenditures related to these assets, Duncan Energy Partners distributed $260.6 million of these net proceeds to us along with $198.9 million in borrowings under its credit facility and a final amount of 5,351,571 common units of Duncan Energy Partners. Duncan Energy Partners used $38.5 million of net proceeds from the overallotment to redeem 1,950,000 of the 7,301,571 common units it had originally issued to Enterprise Products Partners, resulting in the final amount of 5,351,571 common units beneficially owned by Enterprise Products Partners. We used the cash received from Duncan Energy Partners to temporarily reduce amounts outstanding under EPO’s Multi-Year Revolving Credit Facility.

 

We contributed 66% of our equity interests in the following subsidiaries to Duncan Energy Partners:

 

 

 

35

 

---

 

 

 

 

In addition to the 34% direct ownership interest we retained in such entities, we also own the 2% general partner interest in Duncan Energy Partners and 26.4% of Duncan Energy Partners’ outstanding common units at September 30, 2007. Accordingly, we have in effect retained a net economic interest of approximately 52.7% in Duncan Energy Partners as of September 30, 2007. EPO directs the business operations of Duncan Energy Partners indirectly through its ownership and control of the general partner of Duncan Energy Partners.

 

We have significant involvement with all of the subsidiaries of Duncan Energy Partners, including the following types of transactions:

 

 

 

 

We may contribute or sell other equity interests in our subsidiaries to Duncan Energy Partners and use the proceeds we receive from Duncan Energy Partners to fund our capital spending program. We have no obligation or commitment to make such contributions or sales to Duncan Energy Partners.

 

In September 2007, Enterprise Texas Pipeline LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of EPO, purchased certain parcels of land and regulatory permits from Mont Belvieu Caverns for $3.2 million. Due to common control considerations, the approximate $3.2 million excess of the proceeds received from EPO over the carrying value of assets sold was recorded as a general contribution by Mont Belvieu Caverns.

 

Relationships with Unconsolidated Affiliates

 

Our significant related party revenue and expense transactions with unconsolidated affiliates consist of the sale of natural gas to Evangeline and the purchase of NGL storage, transportation and fractionation services from Promix. In addition, we sell natural gas to Promix and process natural gas at VESCO. For additional information regarding our unconsolidated affiliates, see Note 7.

 

See “Relationship with TEPPCO” within this Note 12 for a description of ongoing transactions involving our Jonah joint venture with TEPPCO.

 

Note 13. Earnings Per Unit

 

Basic earnings per unit is computed by dividing net income or loss allocated to limited partner interests by the weighted-average number of distribution-bearing units outstanding during a period. Diluted earnings per unit is computed by dividing net income or loss allocated to limited partner interests by the sum of (i) the weighted-average number of distribution-bearing units outstanding during a period (as used in determining basic earnings per unit); (ii) the weighted-average number of performance-based

 

36

 

---

phantom units outstanding during a period; and (iii) the number of incremental common units resulting from the assumed exercise of dilutive unit options outstanding during a period (the “incremental option units”).

 

In a period of net operating losses, restricted units, phantom units and incremental option units are excluded from the calculation of diluted earnings per unit due to their antidilutive effect. The dilutive incremental option units are calculated using the treasury stock method, which assumes that proceeds from the exercise of all in-the-money options at the end of each period are used to repurchase common units at an average market value during the period. The amount of common units remaining after the proceeds are exhausted represents the potentially dilutive effect of the securities.

 

The amount of net income or loss allocated to limited partner interests is net of our general partner’s share of such earnings. The following table presents the allocation of net income to Enterprise Products GP for the periods indicated:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

37

 

---

The following table presents our calculation of basic and diluted earnings per unit for the periods indicated:

 

 

 

Note 14. Commitments and Contingencies

 

Litigation

 

On occasion, we or our unconsolidated affiliates are named as defendants in litigation relating to our normal business activities, including regulatory and environmental matters. Although we are insured against various business risks to the extent we believe it is prudent, there is no assurance that the nature and amount of such insurance will be adequate, in every case, to indemnify us against liabilities arising from future legal proceedings as a result of our ordinary business activities. We are unaware of any significant

 

38

 

---

litigation, pending or threatened, that could have a significant adverse effect on our financial position, cash flows or results of operations.

 

On September 18, 2006, Peter Brinckerhoff, a purported unitholder of TEPPCO, filed a complaint in the Court of Chancery of New Castle County in the State of Delaware, in his individual capacity, as a putative class action on behalf of other unitholders of TEPPCO, and derivatively on behalf of TEPPCO, concerning, among other things, certain transactions involving TEPPCO and us or our affiliates.  Mr. Brinkerhoff filed an amended complaint on July 12, 2007. The amended complaint names as defendants (i) TEPPCO, its current and certain former directors, and certain of its affiliates; (ii) us and certain of our affiliates; (iii) EPCO, Inc.; and (iv) Dan L. Duncan. 

 

The amended complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants have caused TEPPCO to enter into certain transactions with us or our affiliates that were unfair to TEPPCO or otherwise unfairly favored us or our affiliates over TEPPCO.  These transactions are alleged to include the joint venture to further expand the Jonah Gathering System entered into by TEPPCO and one of our affiliates in August 2006 and the sale by TEPPCO to one of our affiliates of the Pioneer gas processing plant in March 2006. The amended complaint seeks (i) rescission of these transactions or an award of rescissory damages with respect thereto; (ii) damages for profits and special benefits allegedly obtained by defendants as a result of the alleged wrongdoings in the amended complaint; and (iii) awarding plaintiff costs of the action, including fees and expenses of his attorneys and experts. We believe this lawsuit is without merit and intend to vigorously defend against it. See Note 12 for additional information regarding our relationship with TEPPCO.

 

On February 13, 2007, EPO received notice from the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) that it was the subject of a criminal investigation related to an ammonia release in Kingman County, Kansas on October 27, 2004 from a pressurized anhydrous ammonia pipeline owned by a third party, Magellan Ammonia Pipeline, L.P. (“Magellan”). EPO is the operator of this pipeline. On February 14, 2007, EPO received a letter from the Environment and Natural Resources Division (“ENRD”) of the DOJ regarding this incident and a previous release of ammonia on September 27, 2004 from the same pipeline.  The ENRD has indicated that it may pursue civil damages against EPO and Magellan as a result of these incidents.  Based on this correspondence from the ENRD, the statutory maximum amount of civil fines that could be assessed against EPO and Magellan is up to $17.4 million in the aggregate. EPO is cooperating with the DOJ and is hopeful that an expeditious resolution of this civil matter acceptable to all parties will be reached in the near future.  Magellan has agreed to indemnify EPO for the civil matter. On September 4, 2007, we and the DOJ entered into a plea agreement whereby a wholly-owned subsidiary of EPO, Mapletree, LLC, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of negligence in connection with the releases and paid a fine of $1.0 million. The plea agreement concludes the DOJ's criminal investigation into the ammonia releases. At this time, we do not believe that a final resolution of the civil claims by the ENRD will have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, cash flows or results of operations.

 

On October 25, 2006, a rupture in the Magellan Ammonia Pipeline resulted in the release of ammonia near Clay Center, Kansas. The pipeline has been repaired and environmental remediation tasks related to this incident have been completed. At this time, we do not believe that this incident will have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, cash flows or results of operations.

 

Several lawsuits have been filed by municipalities and other water suppliers against a number of manufacturers of reformulated gasoline containing methyl tertiary butyl ether. In general, such suits have not named manufacturers of this product as defendants, and there have been no such lawsuits filed against our subsidiary that owns an octane-additive production facility. It is possible, however, that former manufacturers such as our subsidiary could ultimately be added as defendants in such lawsuits or in new lawsuits.

 

Operating Leases

 

We lease certain property, plant and equipment under noncancelable and cancelable operating leases. Our significant lease agreements involve (i) the lease of underground caverns for the storage of

 

39

 

---

natural gas and NGLs, (ii) leased office space with an affiliate of EPCO, and (iii) land held pursuant to right-of-way agreements. In general, our material lease agreements have original terms that range from 14 to 20 years and include renewal options that could extend the agreements for up to an additional 20 years. Lease expense is charged to operating costs and expenses on a straight line basis over the period of expected economic benefit. Contingent rental payments are expensed as incurred.

 

There have been no material changes in our operating lease commitments since December 31, 2006, except for the commitments associated with a new natural gas storage lease. In order to provide firm natural gas transportation and storage services under long-term agreements with CenterPoint Energy Resources Corp. (“CenterPoint Energy”) in Houston, Texas, we entered into a 2-year agreement during the second quarter of 2007 for firm natural gas storage capacity in Texas. Our rental payments under the lease are at a fixed rate. Contingent rental payments are based upon the actual volume of natural gas we inject or withdraw from the storage cavern over the term of the lease agreement. The incremental future minimum lease payments associated with our new natural gas storage lease are $3.7 million in 2007, $4.9 million in 2008 and $1.2 million in 2009. CenterPoint Energy will reimburse us for the costs we incur associated with this natural gas storage lease.

 

Lease and rental expense included in operating costs and expenses was $9.1 million and $10.3 million during the three months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, respectively. For the nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006, lease and rental expense included in operating costs and expenses was $28.9 million and $30.0 million, respectively.

 

Contractual Obligations

 

With the exception of the debt incurred by Duncan Energy Partners in connection with its initial public offering and the issuance of Junior Notes B and Senior Notes L by EPO, there have been no significant changes in our consolidated scheduled maturities of long-term debt since those reported in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006. See Note 9 for additional information regarding the debt obligations of Duncan Energy Partners and the issuance of Junior Notes B and Senior Notes L.

 

Performance Guaranty

 

In December 2004, a subsidiary of ours entered into the Independence Hub Agreement with six oil and natural gas producers. We guaranteed to the producers the construction-related performance of our subsidiary up to an amount of $340.8 million. The performance guaranty expired during the second quarter of 2007.

 

Other Claims

 

As part of our normal business activities with joint venture partners and certain customers and suppliers, we occasionally make claims against such parties or have claims made against us as a result of disputes related to contractual agreements or similar arrangements. As of September 30, 2007, our contingent asserted claims against such parties were approximately $2.2 million and asserted claims against us for various periods were approximately $35.5 million. These matters are in various stages of assessment and the ultimate outcome of such disputes cannot be reasonably estimated. Such asserted claim amounts may increase or decrease depending on the ultimate resolution of these matters. However, in our opinion, the likelihood of a material adverse outcome related to disputes against us is remote. Accordingly, accruals for loss contingencies related to these matters, if any, that might result from the resolution of such disputes have not been reflected in our consolidated financial statements.

 

 

The following is a discussion of the general status of our insurance claims related to recent significant storm events. To the extent we include any estimate or range of estimates regarding the dollar

 

40

 

---

value of damages, please be aware that a change in our estimates may occur as additional information becomes available. To the extent we receive nonrefundable cash proceeds from business interruption insurance claims, they are recorded as revenue in our Unaudited Condensed Statements of Consolidated Operations in the period of receipt.

 

Hurricane Ivan insurance claims. We have submitted business interruption insurance claims for our estimated losses caused by Hurricane Ivan, which struck the eastern U.S. Gulf Coast region in September 2004. We are continuing our efforts to collect residual balances and expect to complete the process during 2007.

 

Hurricanes Katrina and Rita insurance claims. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, both significant storms, affected certain of our Gulf Coast assets in August and September of 2005, respectively. We continue to pursue collection of our property damage and business interruption claims related to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.

 

The following table summarizes the proceeds we received for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2007 and 2006 from business interruption and property damage insurance claims with respect to certain named storms: