e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005
Commission File Number 1-32225
HOLLY ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P.
Formed under the laws of the State of Delaware
I.R.S. Employer Identification No. 20-0833098
100 Crescent Court, Suite 1600
Dallas, Texas 75201
Telephone Number: (214) 871-3555
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Common Limited Partner Units
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule
405 of the Securities Act.
Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to
file reports pursuant to Section 13 or
Section 15(d) of the Act.
Yes o No þ
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 þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is
not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrants knowledge, in
definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in part III of the Form 10-K
or any amendments to the Form 10-K.
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 o
|
|
Accelerated filer þ
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act).
Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of common limited partner units held by non-affiliates of the registrant
was approximately $310 million on June 30, 2005, based on the last sales price as quoted on the New
York Stock Exchange.
The number of the registrants outstanding common limited partners units at February 17, 2006 was
8,170,000.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: None
PART I
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of
the federal securities laws. All statements, other than statements of historical fact included in
this Form 10-K, including, but not limited to, those under Business, Risk Factors and
Properties in Items 1, 1A and 2 and Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations in Item 7, are forward-looking statements. These statements are based
on managements belief and assumptions using currently available information and expectations as of
the date hereof, are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and
uncertainties. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking
statements are reasonable, we cannot assure you that our expectations will prove to be correct.
Therefore, actual outcomes and results could differ materially from what is expressed, implied or
forecast in these statements. Any differences could be caused by a number of factors including,
but not limited to:
|
|
|
Risks and uncertainties with respect to the actual quantities of refined petroleum
products shipped on our pipelines and/or terminalled in our terminals; |
|
|
|
|
The economic viability of Holly Corporation, Alon USA, Inc. and our other customers; |
|
|
|
|
The demand for refined petroleum products in markets we serve; |
|
|
|
|
Our ability to successfully purchase and integrate any future acquired operations; |
|
|
|
|
The availability and cost of our financing; |
|
|
|
|
The possibility of reductions in production or shutdowns at refineries utilizing our
pipeline and terminal facilities; |
|
|
|
|
The effects of current and future government regulations and policies; |
|
|
|
|
Our operational efficiency in carrying out routine operations and capital construction projects; |
|
|
|
|
The possibility of terrorist attacks and the consequences of any such attacks; |
|
|
|
|
General economic conditions; and |
|
|
|
|
Other financial, operations and legal risks and uncertainties detailed from time to time
in our Securities and Exchange Commission filings. |
Cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to differ
materially from our expectations are set forth in this Form 10-K, including without limitation, in
conjunction with the forward-looking statements included in the Form 10-K that are referred to
above. When considering forward-looking statements, you should keep in mind the risk factors and
other cautionary statements set forth in this Form 10-K under Risk Factors in Item 1A. All
forward-looking statements included in this Form 10-K and all subsequent written or oral
forward-looking statements attributable to us or persons acting on our behalf are expressly
qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements. The forward-looking statements speak
only as of the date made and, other than as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly
update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future
events or otherwise.
- 3 -
INDEX TO DEFINED TERMS AND NAMES
The following terms and names that appear in this form 10-K are defined on the following pages:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alon |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Alon PTA |
|
|
5 |
|
|
BP |
|
|
22 |
|
|
bpd |
|
|
6 |
|
|
Credit Agreement |
|
|
8 |
|
|
Distributable cash flow |
|
|
36 |
|
|
DOT |
|
|
10 |
|
|
EBITDA |
|
|
30 |
|
|
FASB |
|
|
45 |
|
|
FERC |
|
|
11 |
|
|
FIN 47 |
|
|
46 |
|
|
HEP |
|
|
5 |
|
|
HLS |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Holly |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Holly IPA |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Holly PTA |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Intermediate Pipelines |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Kaneb |
|
|
24 |
|
|
LIBOR |
|
|
42 |
|
|
LPG |
|
|
6 |
|
|
Maintenance capital expenditures |
|
|
30 |
|
|
mbbls |
|
|
20 |
|
|
mbpd |
|
|
37 |
|
|
Navajo Refinery |
|
|
5 |
|
|
NPL |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Omnibus Agreement |
|
|
7 |
|
|
PPI |
|
|
7 |
|
|
Purchase Agreement |
|
|
8 |
|
|
Rio Grande |
|
|
5 |
|
|
SEC |
|
|
5 |
|
|
Senior Notes |
|
|
8 |
|
|
SFAS |
|
|
45 |
|
|
U.S. GAAP |
|
|
30 |
|
Terms used in the financial statements and footnotes are as defined therein.
- 4 -
Item 1. Business
OVERVIEW
Holly Energy Partners, L.P. (HEP) is a Delaware limited partnership formed by Holly
Corporation and is the successor to Navajo Pipeline Co., L.P. (Predecessor) (NPL). We operate a
system of refined product pipelines and distribution terminals primarily in west Texas, New Mexico,
Utah and Arizona. We maintain our principal corporate offices at 100 Crescent Court, Suite 1600,
Dallas, Texas 75201-6927. Our telephone number is 214-871-3555 and our internet website address
is www.hollyenergy.com. The information contained on our website does not constitute part of this
Annual Report on Form 10-K. A copy of this Annual Report on Form 10-K will be provided without
charge upon written request to the Vice President, Investor Relations at the above address. A
direct link to our filings at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) website is
available on our website on the Investors page. Additionally available on our website are copies
of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Audit Committee Charter, Compensation Committee Charter,
and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, all of which will be provided without charge upon written
request to the Vice President, Investor Relations at the above address. In this document, the
words we, our, ours and us refer to HEP and its consolidated subsidiaries or to HEP or an
individual subsidiary and not to any other person. Holly refers to Holly Corporation and its
subsidiaries, other than HEP and its subsidiaries and other than Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C.
(HLS), a subsidiary of Holly Corporation that is the general partner of the general partner of
HEP and manages HEP.
On March 15, 2004, we filed a Registration Statement on Form S-1 with the SEC relating to a
proposed underwritten initial public offering of limited partnership units in HEP. HEP was formed
to acquire, own and operate substantially all of the refined product pipeline and terminalling
assets that support Hollys refining and marketing operations in west Texas, New Mexico, Utah and
Arizona and a 70% interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company (Rio Grande). On July 7, 2004, we
priced 6,100,000 common units for the initial public offering and on July 8, 2004, our common units
began trading on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol HEP. On July 13, 2004, we closed
our initial public offering of 7,000,000 common units at a price of $22.25 per unit, which included
a 900,000 unit over-allotment option that was exercised by the underwriters
On February 28, 2005, we closed on a contribution agreement with Alon USA, Inc. and several of its
wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, Alon) that provided for our acquisition of four refined
products pipelines, an associated tank farm and two refined products terminals located primarily in
Texas. On July 8, 2005, we closed on a purchase agreement to acquire Hollys two 65-mile parallel
intermediate feedstock pipelines (the Intermediate Pipelines) which connect its Lovington, New
Mexico and Artesia, New Mexico refining facilities (collectively, the Navajo Refinery)
We generate revenues by charging tariffs for transporting petroleum products through our pipelines
and by charging fees for terminalling refined products and other hydrocarbons, and storing and
providing other services at our terminals. We do not take ownership of products that we transport
or terminal; therefore, we are not directly exposed to changes in commodity prices. We serve
Hollys refineries in New Mexico and Utah under a 15-year pipelines and terminals agreement with
Holly (Holly PTA) expiring 2019 and the 15-year Holly Intermediate Pipeline Agreement expiring
2020 (Holly IPA). We also serve Alons Big Spring Refinery under the Alon Pipelines and
Terminals Agreement expiring 2020 (Alon PTA). The substantial majority of our business is
devoted to providing transportation and terminalling services to Holly. We operate our business as
one business segment. Our assets include:
Pipelines:
|
|
|
approximately 780 miles of refined product pipelines, including 340 miles of
leased pipelines, that transport gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel principally from Hollys
Navajo Refinery in New Mexico to its
customers in the metropolitan and rural areas of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Utah
and northern Mexico; |
- 5 -
|
|
|
approximately 510 miles of refined product pipelines that transport refined
products from Alons Big Spring Refinery in Texas to customers in Texas and Oklahoma; |
|
|
|
|
two parallel 65-mile pipelines that transport intermediate feedstocks and crude
oil from Hollys Lovington, New Mexico refinery facilities to Hollys Artesia, New Mexico
refining facilities; and |
|
|
|
|
a 70% interest in Rio Grande, a joint venture that owns a 249-mile refined
product pipeline that transports liquid petroleum gases (LPG) from west Texas to the
Texas/Mexico border near El Paso for further transport into northern Mexico. |
Refined Product Terminals:
|
|
|
five refined product terminals (one of which is 50% owned), located in El Paso,
Texas; Moriarty, Bloomfield and Albuquerque, New Mexico; and Tucson, Arizona, with an
aggregate capacity of approximately 1.1 million barrels, that are integrated with our
refined product pipeline system that serves Hollys Navajo Refinery; |
|
|
|
|
three refined product terminals (two of which are 50% owned), located in Burley
and Boise, Idaho and Spokane, Washington, with an aggregate capacity of approximately
500,000 barrels, that serve third-party common carrier pipelines; |
|
|
|
|
one refined product terminal near Mountain Home, Idaho with a capacity of
120,000 barrels, that serves a nearby United States Air Force Base; |
|
|
|
|
two refined product terminals, located in Wichita Falls and Abilene, Texas, and
one tank farm in Orla, Texas with aggregate capacity of 480,000 barrels, that are
integrated with our refined product pipelines that serve Alons Big Spring, Texas refinery;
and |
|
|
|
|
two refined product truck loading racks, one located within Hollys Navajo
Refinery that is permitted to load over 40,000 barrels per day (bpd) of light refined
products, and one located within Hollys Woods Cross Refinery near Salt Lake City, Utah,
that is permitted to load over 25,000 bpd of light refined products. |
Historical Results of Operations
In reviewing the historical results of operations that are discussed below, you should be aware of
the following:
The historical financial data prior to July 13, 2004 do not reflect any general and administrative
expenses as Holly did not historically allocate any of its general and administrative expenses to
its pipelines and terminals. Also, our historical results of operations prior to July 13, 2004
include revenues and costs associated with crude oil and intermediate product pipelines, which were
not contributed to our partnership at its inception.
For periods after commencement of operations by HEP on July 13, 2004, our financial statements
reflect:
|
|
net proceeds from our initial public offering which closed on July 13, 2004 (see Liquidity and Capital
Resources in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in Item 7); |
|
|
|
the transfer of certain of our predecessors operations to HEP, which |
|
|
|
includes our predecessors refined product pipeline and terminal assets and
short-term debt due to Holly (which was repaid upon the closing of our initial public
offering), and |
|
|
|
|
excludes our predecessors intermediate product pipelines prior to our purchase
of those pipelines in July 2005, crude oil systems, accounts receivable from or payable to
affiliates, and other miscellaneous assets and liabilities; |
- 6 -
|
|
the execution of the Holly PTA and the recognition of
revenues derived therefrom for serving Hollys refineries in
New Mexico and Utah; and |
|
|
|
the execution of a three-year omnibus agreement expiring
in 2007 with Holly and several of its subsidiaries (the
Omnibus Agreement) and the recognition of allocated general
and administrative expenses in addition to direct general and
administrative expense related to our operation as a publicly
owned entity. |
NPL constitutes HEPs predecessor. The transfer of ownership of assets from NPL to HEP represented
a reorganization of entities under common control and was recorded at historical cost.
Accordingly, our financial statements include the historical results of operations of NPL prior to
the transfer to HEP.
Agreements with Holly Corporation
Under the 15-year Holly PTA, Holly pays us fees to transport on our refined product pipelines or
throughput in our terminals a volume of refined products that will produce a minimum level of
revenue. This minimum revenue commitment will increase each year at a rate equal to the percentage
change in the producer price index (PPI), but will not decrease as a result of a decrease in the
PPI. Following the July 1, 2005 PPI adjustment, the volume commitments by Holly under the Holly
PTA will produce at least $36.7 million of revenue for the twelve months ending June 30, 2006.
Holly pays the published tariff rates on the refined product pipelines and contractually agreed
upon fees at the terminals. The tariffs will adjust annually at a rate equal to the percentage
change in the PPI. The terminal fees will adjust annually based upon an index comprised of
comparable fees posted by third parties. Hollys minimum revenue commitment applies only to the
initial assets we acquired from Holly and may not be spread among assets we subsequently acquire.
If Holly fails to meet its minimum revenue commitment in any quarter, it will be required to pay us
in cash the amount of any shortfall by the last day of the month following the end of the quarter.
A shortfall payment may be applied as a credit in the following four quarters after Hollys minimum
obligations are met.
Furthermore, if new laws or regulations that affect terminals or pipelines generally are enacted
that require us to make substantial and unanticipated capital expenditures at the pipelines or
terminals, we will have the right to negotiate a monthly surcharge on Holly for the use of the
terminals or to file for an increased tariff rate for use of the pipelines to cover Hollys pro
rata portion of the cost of complying with these laws or regulations, after we have made efforts to
mitigate their effect. We and Holly will negotiate in good faith to agree on the level of the
monthly surcharge or increased tariff rate.
Hollys obligations under this agreement may be proportionately reduced or suspended if Holly shuts
down or materially reconfigures one of its refineries. Holly will be required to give at least
twelve months advance notice of any long-term shutdown or material reconfiguration. Hollys
obligations may also be temporarily suspended or terminated in certain circumstances.
Prior to July 13, 2004, Holly did not allocate any of its general and administrative expenses to
its pipeline and terminalling operations. Under the Omnibus Agreement, we have agreed to pay Holly
an annual administrative fee, initially in the amount of $2.0 million, for the provision by Holly
or its affiliates of various general and administrative services to us for three years following
the closing of our initial public offering. The fee may increase on the second and third
anniversaries by the greater of 5% or the percentage increase in the consumer price index for the
applicable year. In addition, our general partner has the right to agree to further increases in
connection with expansions of our operations through the acquisition or construction of new assets
or businesses. The $2.0 million fee includes expenses incurred by Holly and its affiliates to
perform centralized corporate functions, such as executive management, legal, accounting, treasury,
information technology and other corporate services, including the administration of employee
benefit plans. This fee does not include the salaries of pipeline and terminal personnel or other
employees of HLS or the cost of their employee benefits, such as 401(k), pension and health
insurance benefits, which are separately charged to us by Holly. We also reimburse Holly and its affiliates
for direct expenses they incur on our behalf. In addition, we incur additional general and
administrative costs, including costs relating to operating as a separate publicly held entity,
such as costs for preparation of
- 7 -
partners K-1 tax information, annual and quarterly reports to
unitholders, investor relations, directors compensation, directors and officers insurance and
registrar and transfer agent fees. Under the Omnibus Agreement, Holly also agreed to indemnify us
in an aggregate amount not to exceed $15 million for ten years after the closing of our initial
public offering for any environmental noncompliance and remediation liabilities associated with the
assets transferred to us and occurring or existing prior to the closing date of our initial public
offering.
See Holly Intermediate Pipelines Transaction below for discussion of another 15-year pipelines
agreement entered into with Holly relating to the intermediate pipelines acquired in July 2005 and
expiring in 2020.
Alon Transaction
On February 28, 2005, we closed on a contribution agreement with Alon that provided for our
acquisition of four refined products pipelines aggregating approximately 500 miles, an associated
tank farm and two refined products terminals with aggregate storage capacity of approximately
347,000 barrels. These pipelines and terminals are located primarily in Texas and transport
approximately 70% of the light refined products from Alons 65,000 bpd capacity refinery in Big
Spring, Texas.
The total consideration paid for these pipeline and terminal assets was $120 million in cash and
937,500 of our Class B subordinated units which, subject to certain conditions, will convert into
an equal number of common units in five years. We financed the cash portion of the Alon
transaction through our private offering of $150 million of 6.25% senior notes due 2015 (the
Senior Notes). We used the proceeds of the offering to fund the $120 million cash portion of the
consideration for the Alon transaction and used the balance to repay $30 million of outstanding
indebtedness under our four-year, $100 million senior secured revolving credit agreement (the
Credit Agreement), including $5 million drawn shortly before the closing of the Alon transaction.
Under the 15-year Alon PTA, Alon agreed to transport on the pipelines and throughput through the
terminals a volume of refined products that would result in minimum revenues to us of $20.2 million
per year in the first year. The agreed upon tariffs at the minimum volume commitment will increase
or decrease each year at a rate equal to the percentage change in the producer price index, but not
below the initial tariffs. Alons minimum volume commitment was calculated based on 90% of Alons
then recent usage of these pipeline and terminals taking into account a 5,000 bpd expansion of
Alons Big Spring Refinery completed in February 2005. At revenue levels above 105% of the base
revenue amount, as adjusted each year for changes in the PPI, Alon will receive an annual 50%
discount on incremental revenues. Alons obligations under the pipelines and terminals agreement
may be reduced or suspended under certain circumstances. We granted Alon a second mortgage on the
pipelines and terminals acquired from Alon to secure certain of Alons rights under the pipelines
and terminals agreement. Alon will have a right of first refusal to purchase the pipelines and
terminals if we decide to sell them in the future. Additionally, we entered into an environmental
agreement with Alon with respect to pre-closing environmental costs and liabilities relating to the
pipelines and terminals acquired from Alon, where Alon will indemnify us subject to a $100,000
deductible and a $20 million maximum liability cap.
Holly Intermediate Pipelines Transaction
On July 6, 2005, we entered into a definitive purchase agreement (the Purchase Agreement) with
Holly to acquire Hollys Intermediate Pipelines that connect its Lovington, New Mexico and
Artesia, New Mexico refining facilities. On July 8, 2005, we closed on the acquisition for $81.5
million, which consisted of $77.7 million in cash, 70,000 common units of HEP and a capital account
credit of $1.0 million to maintain Hollys existing general partner interest in the Partnership.
We financed the cash portion of the consideration for the Intermediate Pipelines with the proceeds
raised from (a) the private sale of 1,100,000 of our common units for $45.1 million to a limited
number of institutional investors which closed simultaneously with the acquisition and (b) an
additional $35.0 million in principal amount of the 6.25% Senior Notes due 2015. This acquisition
was made pursuant to an option to purchase these pipelines granted by Holly to us at the time of our initial
public offering in July 2004.
- 8 -
Under the 15-year Holly IPA, Holly agreed to transport volumes of intermediate products on the
Intermediate Pipelines that, at the agreed tariff rates, will result in minimum revenues to us of
approximately $11.8 million per calendar year. The minimum commitment and the full base tariff
will be adjusted each year at a rate equal to the percentage change in the PPI, but the minimum
commitment will not decrease as a result of a decrease in the PPI. Hollys minimum revenue
commitment will apply only to the Intermediate Pipelines, and Holly will not be able to spread its
minimum revenue commitment among pipeline assets HEP already owns or subsequently acquires. If
Holly fails to meet its minimum revenue commitment in any quarter, it will be required to pay us in
cash the amount of any shortfall by the last day of the month following the end of the quarter. A
shortfall payment may be applied as a credit in the following four quarters after Hollys minimum
obligations are met. The pipelines agreement may be extended by the mutual agreement of the
parties.
We have agreed to expend up to $3.5 million to expand the capacity of the Intermediate Pipelines to
meet the needs of Hollys previously announced expansion of their Navajo Refinery, of which we
spent $2.3 million through December 31, 2005. If new laws or regulations are enacted that require
us to make substantial and unanticipated capital expenditures with regard to the Intermediate
Pipelines, we have the right to amend the tariff rates to recover our costs of complying with these
new laws or regulations (including a reasonable rate of return). Under certain circumstances,
either party may temporarily suspend its obligations under the pipelines agreement. We granted
Holly a second mortgage on the Intermediate Pipelines to secure certain of Hollys rights under the
pipelines agreement. Holly has agreed to provide $2.5 million of additional indemnification above
that previously provided in the Omnibus Agreement for environmental noncompliance and remediation
liabilities occurring or existing before the closing date of the Purchase Agreement, bringing the
total indemnification provided to us from Holly to $17.5 million. Of this total, indemnification
above $15 million relates solely to the Intermediate Pipelines.
As a result of the Alon transaction, Hollys ownership interest was reduced from 51% to 47.9%,
including the 2% general partner interest. Hollys ownership was further reduced to 45.0% in July
2005 as a result of the Intermediate Pipelines transaction.
CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS
Our pipeline and terminalling operations are capital intensive, requiring investments to maintain,
expand, upgrade or enhance existing operations and to meet environmental and operational
regulations. Our capital requirements have consisted of, and are expected to continue to consist
of, maintenance capital expenditures and expansion capital expenditures. Maintenance capital
expenditures represent capital expenditures to replace partially or fully depreciated assets to
maintain the operating capacity of existing assets. Maintenance capital expenditures include
expenditures required to maintain equipment reliability, tankage and pipeline integrity, and safety
and to address environmental regulations. Expansion capital expenditures represent capital
expenditures to expand the operating capacity of existing or new assets, whether through
construction or acquisition. Expansion capital expenditures include expenditures to acquire assets
to grow our business and to expand existing facilities, such as projects that increase throughput
capacity on our pipelines and in our terminals. Repair and maintenance expenses associated with
existing assets that are minor in nature and do not extend the useful life of existing assets are
charged to operating expenses as incurred.
Each year our board of directors approves capital projects that our management is authorized to
undertake in our annual capital budget. Additionally, at times when conditions warrant or as new
opportunities arise, special projects may be approved. The funds allocated for a particular
capital project may be expended over a period of years, depending on the time required to complete
the project. Therefore, our planned capital expenditures for a given year consist of expenditures
approved for capital projects included in the current years capital budget as well as, in certain
cases, expenditures approved for capital projects in capital budgets for prior years. Our total
approved capital budget for 2006 is $2.8 million, which does not include amounts for possible
acquisition transactions.
We anticipate that the currently planned expansion capital expenditures will be funded with cash
generated by operations. However, we may fund future expansion capital requirements or
acquisitions through long-term debt and/or equity capital offerings.
- 9 -
SAFETY AND MAINTENANCE
We perform preventive and normal maintenance on all of our pipeline systems and make repairs and
replacements when necessary or appropriate. We also conduct routine and required inspections of
our pipelines and other assets as required by code or regulation. We inject corrosion inhibitors
into our mainlines to help control internal corrosion. External coatings and impressed current
cathodic protection systems are used to protect against external corrosion. We conduct all
cathodic protection work in accordance with National Association of Corrosion Engineers standards.
We regularly monitor, test and record the effectiveness of these corrosion-inhibiting systems.
We monitor the structural integrity of selected segments of our pipeline systems through a program
of periodic internal inspections using both dent pigs and electronic smart pigs, as well as
hydrostatic testing that conforms to Federal standards. We follow these inspections with a review
of the data and we make repairs as necessary to ensure the integrity of the pipeline. We have
initiated a risk-based approach to prioritizing the pipeline segments for future smart pig runs or
other approved integrity testing methods. We believe this approach will ensure that the pipelines
that have the greatest risk potential receive the highest priority in being scheduled for
inspections or pressure tests for integrity.
We started our smart pigging program in 1988, prior to Department of Transportation (DOT)
regulations requiring the program. Beginning in 2002, the DOT required smart pigging or other
integrity testing of all DOT-regulated crude oil and refined product pipelines. This requirement
is being phased in over a five-year period. Since 1998, we have inspected approximately 98% of the
total miles of the pipelines that we owned upon our initial public offering in 2004, 100% of the
Intermediate Pipelines acquired in 2005, and 73% of the pipelines acquired from Alon in 2005.
Maintenance facilities containing equipment for pipe repairs, spare parts, and trained response
personnel are located along the pipelines. Employees participate in simulated spill deployment
exercises on a regular basis. They also participate in actual spill response boom deployment
exercises in planned spill scenarios in accordance with Oil Pollution Act of 1990 requirements. We
believe that all of our pipelines have been constructed and are maintained in all material respects
in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local laws and the regulations and standards
prescribed by the American Petroleum Institute, the DOT, and accepted industry practice.
At our terminals, tanks designed for gasoline storage are equipped with internal or external
floating roofs that minimize emissions and prevent potentially flammable vapor accumulation between
fluid levels and the roof of the tank. Our terminal facilities have facility response plans, spill
prevention and control plans, and other plans and programs to respond to emergencies.
Many of our terminal loading racks are protected with water deluge systems activated by either heat
sensors or an emergency switch. Several of our terminals are also protected by foam systems that
are activated in case of fire. All of our terminals are subject to participation in a
comprehensive environmental management program to assure compliance with applicable air, solid
waste, and wastewater regulations.
COMPETITION
As a result of our physical integration with Hollys Navajo Refinery and our contractual
relationship with Holly under the Omnibus Agreement and the two Holly pipelines and terminals
agreements, we believe that we will not face significant competition for barrels of refined
products transported from Hollys Navajo Refinery, particularly during the term of our Holly PTA
and Holly IPA expiring in 2019 and 2020, respectively. Additionally, with our contractual
relationship with Alon under the Alon PTA, we believe that we will not face significant competition
for those barrels of refined products we transport from Alons Big Spring refinery.
- 10 -
We do, however, face competition from other pipelines that may be able to supply the end-user
markets of Holly or Alon with refined products on a more competitive basis. Additionally, If
Hollys wholesale customers reduced their purchases of refined products due to the increased
availability of cheaper product from other suppliers or for other reasons, the volumes transported
through our pipelines would be reduced, which, subject to the minimum revenue commitments, would
cause a decrease in cash and revenues generated from our operations.
The petroleum refining business is highly competitive. Among Hollys competitors are some of the
worlds largest integrated petroleum companies, which have their own crude oil supplies and
distribution and marketing systems. Holly competes with independent refiners as well. Competition
in particular geographic areas is affected primarily by the amounts of refined products produced by
refineries located in such areas and by the availability of refined products and the cost of
transportation to such areas from refineries located outside those areas.
In addition, we face competition from trucks that deliver product in a number of areas we serve.
While their costs may not be competitive for longer hauls or large volume shipments, trucks compete
effectively for incremental and marginal volumes in many areas we serve. The availability of truck
transportation places some competitive constraints on us.
Historically, the vast majority of the throughput at our terminal facilities, other than
third-party receipts at the Spokane terminal, Alon volumes at El Paso, and the Abilene and Wichita
Falls terminals recently acquired from Alon that serve their Big Springs refinery, has come from
Holly. Under the terms of the Holly PTA, we continue to receive a significant portion of the
throughput at these facilities from Holly.
Our eleven refined product terminals compete with other independent terminal operators as well as
integrated oil companies on the basis of terminal location, price, versatility and services
provided. Our competition primarily comes from integrated petroleum companies, refining and
marketing companies, independent terminal companies and distribution companies with marketing and
trading arms.
RATE REGULATION
Some of our existing pipelines are subject to rate regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (the FERC) under the Interstate Commerce Act. The Interstate Commerce Act requires
that tariff rates for oil pipelines, a category that includes crude oil and petroleum product
pipelines, be just and reasonable and non-discriminatory. The Interstate Commerce Act permits
challenges to proposed new or changed rates by protest, and challenges to rates that are already on
file and in effect by complaint. Upon the appropriate showing, a successful complainant may obtain
damages or reparations for generally up to two years prior to the filing of a complaint. The FERC
generally has not investigated interstate rates on its own initiative when those rates, like ours,
have not been the subject of a protest or a complaint by a shipper. However, the FERC could
investigate any new interstate rates we might file if those rates were protested by a third party
and the third party were able to show that it had a substantial economic interest in our tariff
rate level. The FERC could also investigate any of our existing interstate rates if a complaint
were filed against the rate.
While the FERC regulates the rates for interstate shipments on our refined product pipelines, the
New Mexico Public Regulation Commission regulates the rates for intrastate shipments in New Mexico,
the Texas Railroad Commission regulates the rates for intrastate shipments in Texas, and the Idaho
Public Utilities Commission regulates the rates for intrastate shipments in Idaho. State commissions have
generally not been aggressive in regulating common carrier pipelines and have generally not
investigated the rates or practices of petroleum pipelines in the absence of shipper complaints,
and we do not believe the intrastate tariffs now in effect are likely to be challenged. A state
regulatory commission could, however, investigate our rates if such a challenge were filed.
- 11 -
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION AND REMEDIATION
Our operation of pipelines, terminals, and associated facilities in connection with the storage and
transportation of refined products is subject to stringent and complex federal, state, and local
laws and regulations governing the discharge of materials into the environment, or otherwise
relating to the protection of the environment. As with the industry generally, compliance with
existing and anticipated laws and regulations increases our overall cost of business, including our
capital costs to construct, maintain, and upgrade equipment and facilities. While these laws and
regulations affect our maintenance capital expenditures and net income, we believe that they do not
affect our competitive position in that the operations of our competitors are similarly affected.
We believe that our operations are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and
regulations. However, these laws and regulations, and the interpretation or enforcement thereof,
are subject to frequent change by regulatory authorities, and we are unable to predict the ongoing
cost to us of complying with these laws and regulations or the future impact of these laws and
regulations on our operations. Violation of environmental laws, regulations, and permits can
result in the imposition of significant administrative, civil and criminal penalties, injunctions,
and construction bans or delays. A discharge of hydrocarbons or hazardous substances into the
environment could, to the extent the event is not insured, subject us to substantial expense,
including both the cost to comply with applicable laws and regulations and claims made by
employees, neighboring landowners and other third parties for personal injury and property damage.
We inspect our pipelines regularly using equipment rented from third-party suppliers. Third
parties also assist us in interpreting the results of the inspections.
Holly has agreed to indemnify us in an aggregate amount not to exceed $15 million for ten years
after the closing of our initial public offering on July 13, 2004 for environmental noncompliance
and remediation liabilities associated with the assets initially transferred to us and occurring or
existing before that date, and provide $2.5 million of additional indemnification for the
Intermediate Pipelines acquired in July 2005. Additionally, we entered into an
environmental agreement with Alon with respect to pre-closing environmental costs and liabilities
relating to the pipelines and terminals acquired from Alon in February 2005, where Alon will
indemnify us for ten years subject to a $100,000 deductible and a $20 million maximum liability
cap.
Contamination resulting from spills of refined products and crude oil is not unusual within the
petroleum pipeline industry. Historic spills along our existing pipelines and terminals as a
result of past operations have resulted in contamination of the environment, including soils and
groundwater. Site conditions, including soils and groundwater, are being evaluated at a few of our
properties where operations may have resulted in releases of hydrocarbons and other wastes.
An environmental remediation project is in progress currently at our El Paso terminal, the
remaining costs of which are projected to be approximately $0.6 million over the next three years.
Other parties are undertaking remediation projects at our Boise, Burley and Albuquerque terminals,
and we are obligated to pay a portion of these costs at the Albuquerque terminal, but not at the
Boise or Burley terminals. The estimated cost for our share of the environmental remediation at
the Albuquerque terminal is approximately $0.3 million, to be incurred over the next five years.
Holly has agreed, subject to a $15 million limit, to indemnify us for environmental liabilities
related to the assets transferred to us to the extent such liabilities exist or arise from
operation of these assets prior to the closing of our initial public offering on July 13, 2004 and
are asserted within 10 years after that date. The Holly indemnification will cover the costs
associated with remediation projects at El Paso and Albuquerque, including assessment, monitoring,
and remediation programs.
In the fourth quarter of 2005, we experienced a refined product release in Jones County, Texas on
one of the pipelines recently acquired from Alon. This event is not subject to indemnification
from Alon. As of December 31, 2005, we estimate that the total remediation costs for this incident
are $0.2 million, of which $0.1 million was incurred during 2005 and $0.1 million remains to be
incurred within the next year.
- 12 -
We may experience future releases of refined products into the environment from our pipelines and
terminals, or discover historical releases that were previously unidentified or not assessed.
Although we maintain an extensive inspection and audit program designed, as applicable, to prevent,
detect and address these releases promptly, damages and liabilities incurred due to any future
environmental releases from our assets nevertheless have the potential to substantially affect our
business.
EMPLOYEES
To carry out our operations, HLS employs 82 people who provide direct support to our operations.
None of these employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements. Holly Logistic Services,
L.L.C. considers its employee relations to be good. Neither we nor our general partner have
employees. We reimburse Holly for direct expenses Holly incurs on our behalf for the employees of
HLS.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Investing in us involves a degree of risk, including the risks described below. You should
carefully consider the following risk factors together with all of the other information included
in this Annual Report on Form 10K, including the financial statements and related notes, when
deciding to invest in us. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we
currently deem to be immaterial may also materially and adversely affect our business operations.
If any of the following risks were to actually occur, our business, financial condition or results
of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
We depend upon Holly and particularly its Navajo Refinery for a majority of our revenues; and if
those revenues were reduced or if Hollys financial condition materially deteriorated, there would
be a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
For the year ended December 31, 2005, Holly accounted for 52% of the revenues of our petroleum
products pipelines and 70% of the revenues of our terminals and truck loading racks. We expect to
continue to derive a majority of our revenues from Holly for the foreseeable future. If Holly
satisfies only its minimum obligations under the Holly PTA and Holly IPA or is unable to meet its
minimum revenue commitment for any reason, including due to prolonged downtime or a shutdown at the
Navajo Refinery or the Woods Cross Refinery, our revenues would decline.
Any significant curtailing of production at the Navajo Refinery could, by reducing throughput in
our pipelines and terminals, result in our realizing materially lower levels of revenues and cash
flow for the duration of the shutdown. For the year ended December 31, 2005, production from the
Navajo Refinery accounted for 50% of the throughput volumes transported by our refined product
pipelines. The Navajo Refinery also received 100% of the petroleum products shipped on our
Intermediate Pipelines. Operations at the Navajo Refinery could be partially or completely shut
down, temporarily or permanently, as the result of:
|
|
|
competition from other refineries and pipelines that may be able to supply Hollys
end-user markets on a more cost-effective basis; |
|
|
|
|
operational problems such as catastrophic events at the refinery, labor difficulties or
environmental proceedings or other litigation that compel the cessation of all or a portion
of the operations at the refinery; |
|
|
|
|
increasingly stringent environmental laws and regulations, such as the Environmental
Protection Agencys gasoline and diesel sulfur control requirements that limit the
concentration of sulfur in
motor gasoline and diesel fuel for both on-road and non-road usage as well as various state
and federal emission requirements that may affect the refinery itself; |
|
|
|
|
an inability to obtain crude oil for the refinery at competitive prices; or |
- 13 -
|
|
|
a general reduction in demand for refined products in the area due to: |
|
|
|
a local or national recession or other adverse economic condition that
results in lower spending by businesses and consumers on gasoline and diesel fuel; |
|
|
|
|
higher gasoline prices due to higher crude oil prices, higher taxes or
stricter environmental laws or regulations; or |
|
|
|
|
a shift by consumers to more fuel-efficient or alternative fuel vehicles
or an increase in fuel economy, whether as a result of technological advances by
manufacturers, legislation either mandating or encouraging higher fuel economy or the
use of alternative fuel or otherwise. |
The magnitude of the effect on us of any shutdown would depend on the length of the shutdown and
the extent of the refinery operations affected by the shutdown. We have no control over the
factors that may lead to a shutdown or the measures Holly may take in response to a shutdown.
Holly makes all decisions at the Navajo Refinery concerning levels of production, regulatory
compliance, refinery turnarounds (planned shutdowns of individual process units within the refinery
to perform major maintenance activities), labor relations, environmental remediation and capital
expenditures; is responsible for all related costs; and is under no contractual obligation to us to
maintain operations at the Navajo Refinery.
Furthermore, Hollys obligations under the Holly PTA and Holly IPA would be temporarily suspended
during the occurrence of a force majeure that renders performance impossible with respect to an
asset for at least 30 days. If such an event were to continue for a year, we or Holly could
terminate the agreements. The occurrence of any of these events could reduce our revenues and cash
flows.
We depend on Alon and particularly its Big Spring Refinery for a substantial portion of our
revenues; and if those revenues were significantly reduced, there would be a material adverse
effect on our results of operations.
During the 10 months of 2005 that we owned the assets acquired from Alon on February 28, 2005, Alon
generated 33% of our revenues for that time period, including revenues we received from Alon under
a capacity lease agreement.
A decline in production at Alons Big Spring Refinery would materially reduce the volume of refined
products we transport and terminal for Alon. As a result, our revenues would be materially
adversely affected. The Big Spring Refinery could partially or completely shut down its
operations, temporarily or permanently, due to factors affecting its ability to produce refined
products. Such factors would include the factors discussed above under the discussion of risk
factors for the Navajo Refinery.
The magnitude of the effect on us of any shutdown would depend on the length of the shutdown and
the extent of the refinery operations affected. We have no control over the factors that may lead
to a shutdown or the measures Alon may take in response to a shutdown. Alon makes all decisions
and is responsible for all costs at the Big Spring Refinery concerning levels of production,
regulatory compliance, refinery turnarounds, labor relations, environmental remediation and capital
expenditures.
In addition, under the Alon PTA, if we are unable to transport or terminal refined products that
Alon is prepared to ship, then Alon has the right to reduce its minimum volume commitment to us
during the period of interruption. If a force majeure event occurs beyond the control of either of
us, we or Alon could terminate the Alon pipelines and terminals agreement after the expiration of
certain time periods. The occurrence of any of these events could reduce our revenues and cash
flows.
- 14 -
We are exposed to the credit risks of our key customers.
We are subject to risks of loss resulting from nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers. As
stated above, we receive substantial revenues from both Holly and Alon under their respective
pipelines and terminals agreements. In addition, a subsidiary of BP is the only shipper on the Rio
Grande Pipeline, a joint venture in which we own a 70% interest and from which we derived 11% of
our revenues for the year ended December 31, 2005.
If any of our key customers default on their obligations to us, our financial results could be
adversely affected. Furthermore, some of our customers may be highly leveraged and subject to
their own operating and regulatory risks.
Competition from other pipelines that may be able to supply our shippers customers with refined
products at a lower price could cause us to reduce our rates or could reduce our revenues.
We and our shippers could face increased competition if other pipelines are able to competitively
supply our shippers end-user markets with refined products. The Longhorn Pipeline is a common
carrier pipeline that is capable of delivering refined products utilizing a direct route from the
Texas Gulf Coast to El Paso and, through interconnections with third-party common carrier
pipelines, into the Arizona market. Since inception of Longhorn Pipeline operations in late 2005,
little impact has been seen on the operations of Holly, Alon, or HEP. However, if the Longhorn
Pipeline is ever able to operate as has been proposed and significantly increases the volumes of
refined products it transports, it could result in downward pressure on wholesale refined product
prices and refined product margins in El Paso and related markets. Additionally, an increased
supply of refined products from Gulf Coast refiners entering the El Paso and Arizona markets on
this pipeline and a resulting increase in the demand for shipping product on the interconnecting
common carrier pipelines, which are currently capacity constrained, could cause a decline in the
demand for refined product from Holly or Alon. For Holly, this eventuality could ultimately result
in a reduction in Hollys minimum revenue commitment to us under the Holly PTA and Holly IPA; and
while our pipelines and terminals agreement with Alon does not provide for a reduction in Alons
minimum volume commitment obligation in these circumstances, such eventuality could reduce our
opportunity to earn revenue from Alon in excess of Alons minimum volume commitment obligation.
An additional factor that could affect some of Hollys and Alons markets is excess pipeline
capacity from the West Coast into our shippers Arizona markets on the pipeline from the West Coast
to Phoenix. If refined products become available on the West Coast in excess of demand in that
market, additional products could be shipped into our shippers Arizona markets with resulting
possible downward pressure on refined products shipments by Holly and Alon to these markets.
A material decrease in the supply, or a material increase in the price, of crude oil available to
Hollys and Alons refineries, could materially reduce our revenues.
The volume of refined products we transport in our refined products pipelines depends on the level
of production of refined products from Hollys and Alons refineries, which, in turn, depends on
the availability of attractively-priced crude oil produced in the areas accessible to those
refineries. In order to maintain or increase production levels at their refineries, our shippers
must continually contract for new crude oil supplies. A material decrease in crude oil production
from the fields that supply their refineries, as a result of depressed commodity prices, lack of
drilling activity, natural production declines or otherwise, could result in a decline in the
volume of crude oil our shippers refine, absent the availability of transported crude oil to offset
such declines. Such an event would result in an overall decline in volumes of refined products
transported through our pipelines and therefore a corresponding reduction in our cash flow. In
addition, the future growth of our shippers operations will depend in part upon whether our
shippers can contract for additional supplies of crude oil at a greater rate than the rate of
natural decline in their currently connected supplies.
Fluctuations in crude oil prices can greatly affect production rates and investments by third
parties in the development of new oil reserves. Drilling activity generally decreases as crude oil
prices decrease. We and our shippers have no control over the level of drilling activity in the
areas of operations, the amount of
- 15 -
reserves underlying the wells and the rate at which production from a well will decline, or
producers or their production decisions, which are affected by, among other things, prevailing and
projected energy prices, demand for hydrocarbons, geological considerations, governmental
regulation and the availability and cost of capital. Similarly, a material increase in the price
of crude oil supplied to our shippers refineries without an increase in the value of the products
produced by the refineries, either temporary or permanent, which caused a reduction in the
production of refined products at the refineries, would cause a reduction in the volumes of refined
products we transport, and our cash flow could be adversely affected.
We may not be able to retain existing customers or acquire new customers.
The renewal or replacement of existing contracts with our customers at rates sufficient to maintain
current revenues and cash flows depends on a number of factors outside our control, including
competition from other pipelines and the demand for refined products in the markets that we serve.
Alons obligations to lease capacity on the Artesia-Orla-El Paso pipeline have remaining terms
ranging from three to six years. BPs agreement to ship on the Rio Grande Pipeline expires in
2007. Our pipelines and terminals agreements with Holly and Alon expire in 2019 and 2020.
Our operations are subject to federal, state, and local laws and regulations relating to
environmental protection and operational safety that could require us to make substantial
expenditures.
Our pipelines and terminal operations are subject to increasingly strict environmental and safety
laws and regulations. The transportation and storage of refined products produces a risk that
refined products and other hydrocarbons may be suddenly or gradually released into the environment,
potentially causing substantial expenditures for a response action, significant government
penalties, liability to government agencies for natural resources damages, personal injury or
property damages to private parties and significant business interruption. We own or lease a
number of properties that have been used to store or distribute refined products for many years.
Many of these properties have also been operated by third parties whose handling, disposal, or
release of hydrocarbons and other wastes were not under our control. If we were to incur a
significant liability pursuant to environmental laws or regulations, it could have a material
adverse effect on us.
Our operations are subject to operational hazards and unforeseen interruptions for which we may not
be adequately insured.
Our operations are subject to operational hazards and unforeseen interruptions such as natural
disasters, adverse weather, accidents, fires, explosions, hazardous materials releases, mechanical
failures and other events beyond our control. These events might result in a loss of equipment or
life, injury, or extensive property damage, as well as an interruption in our operations. We may
not be able to maintain or obtain insurance of the type and amount we desire at reasonable rates.
As a result of market conditions, premiums and deductibles for certain of our insurance policies
have increased, and could escalate further. In some instances, certain insurance could become
unavailable or available only for reduced amounts of coverage. If we were to incur a significant
liability for which we were not fully insured, it could have a material adverse effect on our
financial position.
Any reduction in the capacity of, or the allocations to, our shippers in interconnecting,
third-party pipelines could cause a reduction of volumes transported in our pipelines and through
our terminals.
Holly, Alon and the other users of our pipelines and terminals are dependent upon connections to
third-party pipelines to receive and deliver crude oil and refined products. Any reduction of
capacities of these interconnecting pipelines due to testing, line repair, reduced operating
pressures, or other causes could result in reduced volumes transported in our pipelines or through
our terminals. Similarly, if additional shippers begin transporting volumes of refined products
over interconnecting pipelines, the allocations to existing shippers in these pipelines would be
reduced, which could also reduce volumes transported in our pipelines or through our terminals.
For example, the common carrier pipelines used by Holly to serve
- 16 -
the Arizona and Albuquerque markets are currently operated at or near capacity and are subject to
proration. As a result, the volumes of refined product that Holly and other shippers have been
able to deliver to these markets have been limited. The flow of additional products into El Paso
for shipment to Arizona, could further exacerbate such constraints on deliveries to Arizona. Any
reduction in volumes transported in our pipelines or through our terminals could adversely affect
our revenues and cash flows.
If our assumptions concerning population growth are inaccurate or if Hollys growth strategy is not
successful, our ability to grow may be adversely affected.
Our growth strategy is dependent upon:
|
|
|
the accuracy of our assumption that many of the markets that we serve in the
Southwestern and Rocky Mountain regions of the United States will experience population
growth that is higher than the national average; and |
|
|
|
|
the willingness and ability of Holly to capture a share of this additional demand in its
existing markets and to identify and penetrate new markets in the Southwestern and Rocky
Mountain regions of the United States. |
If our assumptions about growth in market demand prove incorrect, Holly may not have any incentive
to increase refinery capacity and production or shift additional throughput to our pipelines, which
would adversely affect our growth strategy. Furthermore, Holly is under no obligation to pursue a
growth strategy. If Holly chooses not to, or is unable to, gain additional customers in new or
existing markets in the Southwestern and Rocky Mountain regions of the United States, our growth
strategy would be adversely affected. Moreover, Holly may not make acquisitions that would provide
acquisition opportunities to us; or, if those opportunities arise, they may not be on terms
attractive to us. Finally, Holly also will be subject to integration risks with respect to any new
acquisitions it chooses to make.
Growing our business by constructing new pipelines and terminals, or expanding existing ones,
subjects us to construction risks.
One of the ways we may grow our business is through the construction of new pipelines and terminals
or the expansion of existing ones. The construction of a new pipeline or the expansion of an
existing pipeline, by adding horsepower or pump stations or by adding a second pipeline along an
existing pipeline, involves numerous regulatory, environmental, political, and legal uncertainties,
most of which are beyond our control. These projects may not be completed on schedule or at all or
at the budgeted cost. In addition, our revenues may not increase immediately upon the expenditure
of funds on a particular project. For instance, if we build a new pipeline, the construction will
occur over an extended period of time and we will not receive any material increases in revenues
until after completion of the project. Moreover, we may construct facilities to capture
anticipated future growth in demand for refined products in a region in which such growth does not
materialize. As a result, new facilities may not be able to attract enough throughput to achieve
our expected investment return, which could adversely affect our results of operations and
financial condition.
Rate regulation may not allow us to recover the full amount of increases in our costs.
The primary rate-making methodology of the FERC is price indexing. We use this methodology in all
of our interstate markets. The indexing method allows a pipeline to increase its rates by a
percentage equal to the change in the producer price index for finished goods. If the index falls,
we will be required to reduce our rates that are based on the FERCs price indexing methodology if
they exceed the new maximum allowable rate. In addition, changes in the index might not be large
enough to fully reflect actual increases in our costs. The FERCs rate-making methodologies may
limit our ability to set rates based on our true costs or may delay the use of rates that reflect
increased costs. Any of the foregoing would adversely affect our revenues and cash flow.
- 17 -
If our interstate or intrastate tariff rates are successfully challenged, we could be required to
reduce our tariff rates, which would reduce our revenues.
Under the Energy Policy Act adopted in 1992, our interstate pipeline rates were deemed just and
reasonable or grandfathered. As that Act applies to our rates, a person challenging a
grandfathered rate must, as a threshold matter, establish that a substantial change has occurred
since the date of enactment of the Act, in either the economic circumstances or the nature of the
service that formed the basis for the rate. If the FERC were to find a substantial change in
circumstances, then our existing rates could be subject to detailed review. If our rates were
found to be in excess of levels justified by our cost of service, the FERC could order us to reduce
our rates. In addition, a state commission could also investigate our intrastate rates or our
terms and conditions of service on its own initiative or at the urging of a shipper or other
interested party. If a state commission found that our rates exceeded levels justified by our cost
of service, the state commission could order us to reduce our rates. Any such reductions would
result in lower revenues and cash flows.
Holly and Alon have agreed not to challenge, or to cause others to challenge or assist others in
challenging, our tariff rates in effect during the terms of their respective pipelines and
terminals agreements. These agreements do not prevent other current or future shippers from
challenging our tariff rates.
Potential changes to current petroleum pipeline rate-making methods and procedures may impact the
federal and state regulations under which we will operate in the future.
If the FERCs petroleum pipeline rate-making methodology changes, the new methodology could result
in tariffs that generate lower revenues and cash flow.
Terrorist attacks, and the threat of terrorist attacks, have resulted in increased costs to our
business. Continued hostilities in the Middle East or other sustained military campaigns may
adversely impact our results of operations.
The long-term impact of terrorist attacks, such as the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001,
and the threat of future terrorist attacks, on the energy transportation industry in general, and
on us in particular, is not known at this time. Increased security measures taken by us as a
precaution against possible terrorist attacks have resulted in increased costs to our business.
Uncertainty surrounding continued hostilities in the Middle East or other sustained military
campaigns may affect our operations in unpredictable ways, including disruptions of crude oil
supplies and markets for refined products, and the possibility that infrastructure facilities could
be direct targets of, or indirect casualties of, an act of terror.
Changes in the insurance markets attributable to terrorist attacks may make certain types of
insurance more difficult for us to obtain. Moreover, the insurance that may be available to us may
be significantly more expensive than our existing insurance coverage. Instability in the financial
markets as a result of terrorism or war could also affect our ability to raise capital including
our ability to repay or refinance debt.
Our leverage may limit our ability to borrow additional funds, comply with the terms of our
indebtedness or capitalize on business opportunities.
As of December 31, 2005, our total outstanding long-term debt was $180.7 million. Various
limitations in our Credit Agreement and the indenture for our Senior Notes may reduce our ability
to incur additional debt, to engage in some transactions and to capitalize on business
opportunities. Any subsequent refinancing of our current indebtedness or any new indebtedness
could have similar or greater restrictions.
Our leverage could have important consequences. We will require substantial cash flow to meet our
payment obligations with respect to our indebtedness. Our ability to make scheduled payments, to
refinance our obligations with respect to our indebtedness or our ability to obtain additional
financing in the future will depend on our financial and operating performance, which, in turn, is
subject to prevailing economic conditions and to financial, business and other factors. We believe
that we will have sufficient
- 18 -
cash flow from operations and available borrowings under our Credit Agreement to service our
indebtedness. However, a significant downturn in our business or other development adversely
affecting our cash flow could materially impair our ability to service our indebtedness. If our
cash flow and capital resources are insufficient to fund our debt service obligations, we may be
forced to refinance all or a portion of our debt or sell assets. We cannot assure you that we
would be able to refinance our existing indebtedness or sell assets on terms that are commercially
reasonable.
The instruments governing our debt contain restrictive covenants that may prevent us from engaging
in certain beneficial transactions. The agreements governing our debt generally require us to
comply with various affirmative and negative covenants including the maintenance of certain
financial ratios and restrictions on incurring additional debt, entering into mergers,
consolidations and sales of assets, making investments and granting liens. Additionally, our
contribution agreement with Alon restricts us from selling the pipelines and terminals acquired
from Alon and from prepaying more than $30 million of the Senior Notes for ten years, subject to
certain limited exceptions. Our leverage may adversely affect our ability to fund future working
capital, capital expenditures and other general partnership requirements, future acquisition,
construction or development activities, or to otherwise fully realize the value of our assets and
opportunities because of the need to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from
operations to payments on our indebtedness or to comply with any restrictive terms of our
indebtedness. Our leverage may also make our results of operations more susceptible to adverse
economic and industry conditions by limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to,
changes in our business and the industry in which we operate and may place us at a competitive
disadvantage as compared to our competitors that have less debt.
Our growth through acquisitions may be limited by future market considerations.
Future business or asset acquisitions may be dependent upon financial market conditions. Increases
in our average cost of capital resulting from increases in interest rates or changes in our bond
rating or from increased cost of equity capital may prevent us from making accretive acquisitions
and thus limit our growth opportunities.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
We do not have any unresolved SEC staff comments.
Item 2. Properties
PIPELINES
Our refined product pipelines transport light refined products from Hollys Navajo Refinery in New
Mexico and Alons Big Spring Refinery in Texas to their customers in the metropolitan and rural
areas of Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arizona, Colorado, Utah and northern Mexico. The refined
products transported in these pipelines include conventional gasolines, federal, state and local
specification reformulated gasoline, low-octane gasoline for oxygenate blending, distillates that
include high- and low-sulfur diesel and jet fuel and LPGs (such as propane, butane and isobutane).
Our pipelines are regularly inspected and are well maintained, and we believe they are in good
repair. Generally, other than as provided in the pipelines and terminal agreements with Holly and
Alon, all of our pipelines are unrestricted as to the direction in which product flows and the
types of refined products that we can transport on them. The FERC regulates the transportation
tariffs for interstate shipments on our refined product pipelines and state regulatory agencies
regulate the transportation tariffs for intrastate shipments on our pipelines.
Our intermediate product pipelines consist of two parallel pipelines that originate at Hollys
Lovington, New Mexico refining facilities and terminate at Hollys Artesia, New Mexico refining
facilities. These pipelines transport intermediate feedstocks and crude oil for Hollys refining
operations in New Mexico.
- 19 -
The following table details the average aggregate daily number of barrels of petroleum products
transported on our pipelines in each of the periods set forth below for Holly and for third
parties.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2005(1) |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
2001 |
|
Refined products transported for (bpd): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly |
|
|
94,473 |
|
|
|
65,525 |
|
|
|
51,456 |
|
|
|
55,288 |
|
|
|
47,364 |
|
Third parties (2) |
|
|
65,053 |
|
|
|
29,967 |
|
|
|
23,469 |
|
|
|
13,553 |
|
|
|
12,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
159,526 |
|
|
|
95,492 |
|
|
|
74,925 |
|
|
|
68,841 |
|
|
|
60,252 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total annual barrels in thousands (mbbls) |
|
|
58,227 |
|
|
|
34,950 |
|
|
|
27,348 |
|
|
|
25,127 |
|
|
|
21,992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes volumes transported on the pipelines acquired from Alon as of February 28, 2005, and
volumes transported on the Intermediate Pipelines acquired as of July 8, 2005. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes Rio Grande Pipeline volumes beginning June 30, 2003, when we increased our ownership
from 25% to 70% and began consolidating the results of Rio Grande Pipeline. |
The following table sets forth certain operating data for each of our petroleum product
pipelines. Except as shown below, we own 100% of our refined product pipelines. Throughput is the
total average number of barrels per day transported on a pipeline, but does not aggregate barrels
moved between different points on the same pipeline. Revenues reflect tariff revenues generated by
barrels shipped from an origin to a delivery point on a pipeline. Revenues also include payments
made by Alon under capacity lease arrangements on our Orla to El Paso pipeline. Under these
arrangements, we provide space on our pipeline for the shipment of up to 20,000 barrels of refined
product per day. Alon pays us whether or not it actually ships the full volumes of refined
products it is entitled to ship. To the extent Alon does not use its capacity, we are entitled to
use it. We calculate the capacity of our pipelines based on the throughput capacity for barrels of
gasoline equivalent that may be transported in the existing configuration; in some cases, this
includes the use of drag reducing agents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diameter |
|
|
Length |
|
|
Capacity |
|
Origin and Destination |
|
(inches) |
|
|
(miles) |
|
|
(bpd) |
|
Refined Product Pipelines: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Artesia, NM to El Paso, TX |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
24,000 |
|
Artesia, NM to Orla, TX to El Paso, TX |
|
|
8/12/8 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
60,000 |
(1) |
Artesia, NM to Moriarty, NM(2) |
|
|
12/8 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
45,000 |
(3) |
Moriarty, NM to Bloomfield, NM(2) |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Big Spring, TX to Abilene, TX(4) |
|
|
6/8 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
20,000 |
|
Big Spring, TX to Wichita Falls,
TX(4) |
|
|
6/8 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
23,000 |
|
Wichita Falls, TX to Duncan, OK(4) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
21,000 |
|
Midland, TX to Orla, TX(4) |
|
|
8/10 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
Intermediate Product Pipelines: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lovington, NM to Artesia, NM(5) |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
24,000 |
|
Lovington, NM to Artesia, NM(5) |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
60,000 |
|
Rio Grande Pipeline Company: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rio Grande Pipeline(6) |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
27,000 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes 20,000 bpd of capacity on the Orla to El Paso segment of this pipeline that is
leased to Alon under capacity lease agreements. |
|
(2) |
|
The White Lakes Junction to Moriarty segment of our Artesia to Moriarty pipeline and our
Moriarty to Bloomfield pipeline is leased from Mid-America Pipeline Company, LLC under a
long-term lease agreement. |
|
(3) |
|
Capacity for this pipeline is reflected in the information for the Artesia to Moriarty
pipeline. |
|
(4) |
|
Acquired from Alon on February 28, 2005. |
|
(5) |
|
Acquired from Holly on July 8, 2005. |
|
(6) |
|
We have a 70% joint venture interest in the entity that owns this pipeline. Capacity
reflects a 100% interest. We increased our ownership interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company
from 25% to 70% on June 30, 2003. |
For the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, Holly accounted for an aggregate of 50.4% and
68.6%, respectively, of the petroleum products transported on our refined product pipelines and
100% of the petroleum products transported on our Intermediate Pipelines. For the same periods, these
pipelines transported approximately 92% of the light refined products produced by Hollys Navajo
Refinery.
- 20 -
Artesia, New Mexico to El Paso, Texas
The Artesia to El Paso refined product pipeline is regulated by the FERC. It was constructed in
1959 and consists of 156 miles of 6-inch pipeline. This pipeline is used for the shipment of
refined products produced at Hollys Navajo Refinery to our El Paso terminal, where we deliver to
common carrier pipelines for transportation to Arizona, northern New Mexico and northern Mexico and
to the terminals truck rack for local delivery by tanker truck. Holly is the only shipper on this
pipeline. The refined products shipped on this pipeline represented 18.1% of the total light
refined products produced at Hollys Navajo Refinery during 2005. Refined products produced at
Hollys Navajo Refinery destined for El Paso are transported on either this pipeline or our Artesia
to Orla to El Paso pipeline.
Artesia, New Mexico to Orla, Texas to El Paso, Texas
The Artesia to Orla to El Paso refined product pipeline is a common-carrier pipeline regulated by
the FERC and consists of three segments:
|
|
|
an 8-inch, 81-mile segment from the Navajo Refinery to Orla, Texas, constructed in 1981 |
|
|
|
|
a 12-inch, 98-mile segment from Orla to outside El Paso, Texas, constructed in 1996; and |
|
|
|
|
an 8-inch, 35-mile segment from outside El Paso to our El Paso terminal, constructed in
the mid 1950s |
There are two shippers on this pipeline, Holly and Alon. In 2005, this pipeline transported to our
El Paso terminal 44.3% of the light refined products produced at Hollys Navajo Refinery. As
mentioned above, refined products destined to the El Paso terminal are delivered to common carrier
pipelines for transportation to Arizona, northern New Mexico and northern Mexico and to the
terminals truck rack for local delivery by tanker truck.
At Orla, the pipeline received volumes of gasoline and diesel from Alons Big Spring, Texas
refinery through a tie-in to an Alon pipeline system.
Artesia, New Mexico to Moriarty, New Mexico
The Artesia to Moriarty refined product pipeline consists of a 59.5-mile, 12-inch pipeline from
Hollys Artesia facility to White Lakes Junction, New Mexico that was constructed in 1999, and
approximately 155 miles of 8-inch pipeline that was constructed in 1973 and extends from White
Lakes Junction to our Moriarty terminal, where it also connects to our Moriarty to Bloomfield
pipeline. We own the 12-inch pipeline from Artesia to White Lakes Junction. We lease the White
Lakes Junction to Moriarty segment of this pipeline and our Moriarty to Bloomfield pipeline
described below, from Mid-America Pipeline Company, LLC under a long-term lease agreement entered
into in 1996, which expires in 2007 and has one ten-year extension at our option. At our Moriarty
terminal, volumes shipped on this pipeline can be transported to other markets in the area,
including Albuquerque, Santa Fe and west Texas, via tanker truck. The 155-mile White Lakes
Junction to Moriarty segment of this pipeline is operated by Mid-America Pipeline Company, LLC (or
its designee). Holly is the only shipper on this pipeline. We currently pay a monthly fee (which
is subject to adjustments based on changes in the producer price index) of $469,000 to Mid-America
Pipeline Company, LLC to lease the White Lakes Junction to Moriarty and Moriarty to Bloomfield
pipelines.
Moriarty, New Mexico to Bloomfield, New Mexico
The Moriarty to Bloomfield refined product pipeline was constructed in 1973 and consists of 191
miles of 8-inch pipeline leased from Mid-America Pipeline Company, LLC. This pipeline serves our
terminal in Bloomfield. At our Bloomfield terminal, volumes shipped on this pipeline are
transported to other markets in the Four Corners area via tanker truck. This pipeline is operated
by Mid-America Pipeline Company, LLC (or its designee). Holly is the only shipper on this
pipeline.
Big Spring, Texas to Abilene, Texas
The Big Spring to Abilene refined product pipeline was constructed in 1957 and consists of 100
miles of 6-inch pipeline and 5 miles of 8-inch pipeline. This pipeline is used for the shipment of
refined products produced at Alons Big Spring Refinery to the Abilene terminal. Alon is the only
shipper on this pipeline.
- 21 -
Big Spring, Texas to Wichita Falls, Texas
Segments of the Big Spring to Wichita Falls refined product pipeline were constructed in 1969 and
1989, and consist of 95 miles of 6-inch pipeline and 132 miles of 8-inch pipeline. This pipeline
is used for the shipment of refined products produced at Alons Big Spring Refinery to the Wichita
Falls terminal. Alon is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Wichita Falls, Texas to Duncan, Oklahoma
The Wichita Falls to Duncan refined product pipeline is a common carrier and is regulated by the
FERC. It was constructed in 1958 and consists of 47 miles of 6-inch pipeline. This pipeline is
used for the shipment of refined products from the Wichita Falls terminal to Alons Duncan
terminal, which we do not own. Alon is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Midland, Texas to Orla, Texas
Segments of the Midland to Orla refined product pipeline were constructed in 1928 and 1998, and
consist of 50 miles of 10-inch pipeline and 85 miles of 8-inch pipeline. This pipeline is used for
the shipment of refined products produced at Alons Big Spring Refinery from Midland, Texas to our
tank farm at Orla, Texas. Alon is the only shipper on this pipeline.
8 Pipeline from Lovington, New Mexico to Artesia, New Mexico
The 65-mile 8-inch diameter pipeline was constructed in 1981. This pipeline is used for the
shipment of intermediate feedstocks and crude oil from Hollys Lovington, New Mexico facility to
Hollys Artesia, New Mexico facility. Holly is the only shipper on this pipeline.
10 Pipeline from Lovington, New Mexico to Artesia, New Mexico
The 65-mile 10-inch diameter pipeline was constructed in 1999. The pipeline is used for the
shipment of intermediate feedstocks and crude oil from Hollys Lovington, New Mexico facility to
Hollys Artesia, New Mexico facility. Holly is the only shipper on this pipeline.
Rio Grande Pipeline
We own a 70% interest in Rio Grande, a joint venture that owns a 249-mile, 8-inch common carrier
LPG pipeline regulated by the FERC. The other owner of Rio Grande is a subsidiary of BP Plc
(BP). The pipeline originates from a connection with an Enterprise pipeline in west Texas at
Lawson Junction and terminates at the Mexican border near San Elizario, Texas, with a delivery
point and an additional receipt point near Midland, Texas, for ultimate use by PEMEX (the
government-owned energy company of Mexico). Rio Grande does not own any facilities or pipelines in
Mexico. The pipeline has a current capacity of approximately 27,000 bpd. This pipeline was
originally constructed in the mid 1950s, was first reconditioned in 1988, and subsequently
reconditioned in 1996 and 2003. Approximately 75 miles of this pipeline has been replaced with new
pipe, and an additional 50 miles has been recoated.
Rio Grande was formed in 1996, at which time we contributed nearly 220 miles of pipeline from near
Odessa, Texas to outside El Paso, Texas in exchange for a 25% interest in the joint venture. Rio
Grande Pipeline began operations in 1997. In June 2003, we acquired an additional 45% interest in
the joint venture from Juarez Pipeline Co., an affiliate of The Williams Companies, Inc., for $28.7
million. The pipeline has recently completed a reconditioning project that could facilitate an
expansion to 32,000 bpd. Currently, only LPGs are transported on this pipeline, and BP is the
only shipper. BPs contract provides that BP will ship a minimum average of 16,500 bpd for the
duration of the agreement. This contract expires in July 2007, but will continue year-to-year
thereafter unless cancelled by either party at the beginning of a contract year. The tariff rates
and shipping regulations are regulated by the FERC.
In January 2005, Rio Grande appointed us as operator of the pipeline system effective April 1, 2005
through January 31, 2010. We paid $745,000 to the then-current operator as an inducement to and
consideration for its early resignation. As operator, we receive a management fee of $1.0 million
per year, adjusted annually for any changes in the producer price index.
An officer of HLS is one of the two members of Rio Grandes management committee.
- 22 -
REFINED PRODUCT TERMINALS AND TRUCK RACKS
Our refined product terminals receive products from pipelines, Hollys Navajo and Woods Cross
refineries and Alons Big Spring Refinery. We then distribute them to Holly and third parties, who
in turn deliver them to end-users and retail outlets. Our terminals are generally complementary to
our pipeline assets and serve Hollys and Alons marketing activities. Terminals play a key role
in moving product to the end-user market by providing the following services:
|
|
|
distribution; |
|
|
|
|
blending to achieve specified grades of gasoline; |
|
|
|
|
other ancillary services that include the injection of additives and filtering of jet fuel; and |
|
|
|
|
storage and inventory management. |
Typically, our refined product terminal facilities consist of multiple storage tanks and are
equipped with automated truck loading equipment that operates 24 hours a day. This automated
system provides for control of security, allocations, and credit and carrier certification by
remote input of data by our customers. In addition, nearly all of our terminals are equipped with
truck loading racks capable of providing automated blending to individual customer specifications.
Our refined product terminals derive most of their revenues from terminalling fees paid by
customers. We charge a fee for transferring refined products from the terminal to trucks or to
pipelines connected to the terminal. In addition to terminalling fees, we generate revenues by
charging our customers fees for blending, injecting additives, and filtering jet fuel. Holly
currently accounts for the substantial majority of our refined product terminal revenues.
The table below sets forth the total average throughput for our refined product terminals in each
of the periods presented:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2005(1) |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
Refined products terminalled for (bpd): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holly |
|
|
120,795 |
|
|
|
114,991 |
|
|
|
86,780 |
|
|
|
81,969 |
|
|
|
69,611 |
|
Third parties |
|
|
42,334 |
|
|
|
24,821 |
|
|
|
19,956 |
|
|
|
12,374 |
|
|
|
13,409 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
163,129 |
|
|
|
139,812 |
|
|
|
106,736 |
|
|
|
94,343 |
|
|
|
83,020 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total annual barrels in thousands (mbbls) |
|
|
59,542 |
|
|
|
51,171 |
|
|
|
38,959 |
|
|
|
34,435 |
|
|
|
30,302 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes volumes for the terminals and tank farm acquired from Alon February 28, 2005. |
- 23 -
The following table outlines the locations of our terminals and their storage capacities,
number of tanks, supply source, and mode of delivery:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Storage |
|
Number |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity |
|
of |
|
Supply |
|
|
Terminal Location |
|
(barrels) |
|
Tanks |
|
Source |
|
Mode of Delivery |
|
El Paso, TX |
|
|
507,000 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
Pipeline/ rail |
|
Truck/Pipeline |
Moriarty, NM |
|
|
189,000 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Truck |
Bloomfield, NM |
|
|
193,000 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Truck |
Albuquerque, NM |
|
|
64,000 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Truck |
Tucson, AZ(1) |
|
|
176,000 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Truck |
Mountain Home, ID(2) |
|
|
120,000 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Pipeline |
Boise, ID(3) (4) |
|
|
111,000 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Pipeline |
Burley, ID(3) |
|
|
70,000 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Truck |
Spokane, WA |
|
|
333,000 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
Pipeline/Rail |
|
Truck |
Abilene, TX(5) |
|
|
127,000 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Truck/Pipeline |
Wichita Falls, TX(5) |
|
|
220,000 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Truck/Pipeline |
Orla tank farm(5) |
|
|
135,000 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
Pipeline |
|
Pipeline |
Artesia facility truck rack |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
Refinery |
|
Truck |
Woods Cross facility
truck rack |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
Refinery |
|
Truck/Pipeline |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
2,245,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The Tucson terminal consists of two parcels. On one parcel, we lease the underlying ground
as a 50% co-tenant with a division of Kaneb Pipe Partners, L.P. (Kaneb) pursuant to which we
own 50% of the improvements on that parcel. On the other parcel, our joint venture with Kaneb
leases the underlying ground and owns the improvements. This joint venture agreement gives us
rights to 100% of the terminal capacity (for both parcels), which is operated by Kaneb for a
fee. |
|
(2) |
|
Handles only jet fuel. |
|
(3) |
|
We have a 50% ownership interest in these terminals. The capacity and throughput information
represents the proportionate share of capacity and throughput attributable to our ownership
interest. |
|
(4) |
|
This terminal has seen limited use since its acquisition in June 2003. |
|
(5) |
|
Acquired from Alon as of February 28, 2005. |
El Paso Terminal
We receive light refined products at this terminal from Hollys Artesia facility through our
Artesia to El Paso and Artesia to Orla to El Paso pipelines and by rail that account for
approximately 80% of the volumes at this terminal. We also receive product from Alons Big Spring,
Texas refinery that accounted for 20% of the volumes at this terminal in 2005. Refined products
received at this terminal are sold locally via the truck rack, transported to our Tucson terminal
on Kinder Morgan Energy partners L.P.s East System pipeline or to our Albuquerque terminal on
Chevron Texacos Juarez pipeline. Competition in this market includes a refinery and terminal
owned by Western Refining, a joint venture pipeline and terminal owned by ConocoPhillips and
Valero, L.P. and a terminal connected to the Longhorn Pipeline.
Moriarty Terminal
We receive light refined products at this terminal from Hollys Artesia facility through our
pipelines. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack; Holly
is our only customer at this terminal. There are no competing terminals in Moriarty.
Bloomfield Terminal
We receive light refined products at this terminal from Hollys Artesia facility through our
pipelines. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack; Holly
is our only customer at this terminal. Competition in this market includes a refinery and terminal
owned by Giant Industries.
Albuquerque Terminal
We receive light refined products from Holly that are transported on Chevron Texacos Albuquerque
pipeline from our El Paso terminal and account for over 90% of the volumes at this terminal. We
also receive product from ConocoPhillips and Valero, L.P. that are transported to the Albuquerque
terminal on Valero, L.P.s West Emerald pipeline from its McKee, Texas refinery. Refined products
received at this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack. Competition in the Albuquerque
market includes terminals owned by ChevronTexaco, ConocoPhillips, Giant and Valero. We and
ConocoPhillips each owned a
- 24 -
50% interest in the Albuquerque terminal through July 2004, at which time we acquired the 50%
interest owned by ConocoPhillips.
Tucson Terminal
The Tucson terminal consists of two parcels. On one parcel, we lease the underlying ground as a
50% co-tenant with a division of Kaneb pursuant to which we own 50% of the improvements on that
parcel. On the other parcel, our joint venture with Kaneb leases the underlying ground and owns
the improvements. This joint venture agreement gives us rights to 100% of the terminal capacity
(for both parcels), which is operated by Kaneb for a fee. We receive light refined products at
this terminal from Kinder Morgans East System pipeline, which transports refined products from
Hollys Artesia facility that it receives at our El Paso terminal. Refined products received at
this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack. Competition in this market includes terminals
owned by Kinder Morgan and CalJet.
Mountain Home Terminal
We receive jet fuel from third parties at this terminal that is transported on ChevronTexacos Salt
Lake City to Boise, Idaho pipeline. We then transport the jet fuel from the Mountain Home terminal
through our 13-mile, 4-inch pipeline to the United States Air Force base outside of Mountain Home.
Our pipeline associated with this terminal is the only pipeline that supplies jet fuel to the air
base. We are paid a single fee, from the Defense Energy Support Center, for injecting, storing,
testing and transporting jet fuel at this terminal.
Boise Terminal
We and Sinclair each own a 50% interest in the Boise terminal. Sinclair is the operator of the
terminal. The Boise terminal receives light refined products from Holly and Sinclair shipped
through ChevronTexacos pipeline originating in Salt Lake City, Utah. The Woods Cross Refinery, as
well as other refineries in the Salt Lake City area, and Pioneers terminal in Salt Lake City are
connected to the ChevronTexaco pipeline. All loading of products out of the Boise terminal is
conducted at ChevronTexacos loading rack, which is connected to the Boise terminal by pipeline.
Holly and Sinclair are the only customers at this terminal.
Burley Terminal
We and Sinclair each own a 50% interest in the Burley terminal. Sinclair is the operator of the
terminal. The Burley terminal receives product from Holly and Sinclair shipped through
ChevronTexacos pipeline originating in Salt Lake City, Utah. Refined products received at this
terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack. Holly and Sinclair are the only customers at this
terminal.
Spokane Terminal
This terminal is connected to the Woods Cross Refinery via a ChevronTexaco common carrier pipeline.
The Spokane terminal also is supplied by ChevronTexaco and Yellowstone pipelines and by rail and
truck. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally, via the truck rack. Shell,
ChevronTexaco and Holly are the major customers at this terminal. Other terminals in the Spokane
area include terminals owned by ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips.
Abilene Terminal
This terminal receives refined products from Alons Big Spring Refinery, which accounted for all of
its volumes in 2005. Refined products received at this terminal are sold locally via a truck rack
or pumped over a 2-mile pipeline to Dyess Air Force Base. Alon is the only customer at this
terminal.
Wichita Falls Terminal
This terminal receives refined products from Alons Big Spring Refinery, which accounted for all of
its volumes in 2005. Refined products received at this terminal are sold via a truck rack or
shipped to Alons terminal in Duncan, Oklahoma. Alon is the only customer at this terminal.
Orla Tank Farm
The Orla tank farm was constructed in 1998. It receives refined products from Alons Big Spring
Refinery that accounted for all of its volumes in 2005. Refined products received at the tank farm
are delivered into our Orla to El Paso pipeline. Alon is the only customer at this tank farm.
- 25 -
Artesia Facility Truck Rack
The truck rack at Hollys Artesia facility loads light refined products, produced at the facility,
onto tanker trucks for delivery to markets in the surrounding area. Holly is the only customer of
this truck rack.
Woods Cross Facility Truck Rack
The truck rack at Hollys Woods Cross facility loads light refined products produced at Hollys
Woods Cross Refinery onto tanker trucks for delivery to markets in the surrounding area. Holly is
the only customer of this truck rack; Holly also makes transfers to a common carrier pipeline at
this facility.
PIPELINE AND TERMINAL CONTROL OPERATIONS
All of our pipelines are operated via geosynchronous satellite, microwave, radio and frame relay
communication systems from one of two central control rooms. The pipelines acquired from Alon in
February 2005 are operated from the control room located in Big Spring, Texas, which was also
acquired from Alon in February 2005. All other pipelines are operated from the control room
located in Artesia, New Mexico. We also monitor activity at our terminals from these control
rooms.
The control centers operate with modern, state-of-the-art System Control and Data Acquisition, or
SCADA, systems. Our control centers are equipped with computer systems designed to continuously
monitor operational data, including refined product and crude oil throughput, flow rates, and
pressures. In addition, the control centers monitor alarms and throughput balances. The control
centers operate remote pumps, motors, engines, and valves associated with the delivery of refined
products and crude oil. The computer systems are designed to enhance leak-detection capabilities,
sound automatic alarms if operational conditions outside of pre-established parameters occur, and
provide for remote-controlled shutdown of pump stations on the pipelines. Pump stations and
meter-measurement points on the pipelines are linked by satellite or telephone communication
systems for remote monitoring and control, which reduces our requirement for full-time on-site
personnel at most of these locations.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
We are a party to various legal and regulatory proceedings, which we believe will not have a
material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
No matter was submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of 2005.
- 26 -
PART II
Item 5. Market for the Registrants Common Units and Related Unitholder Matters
Our common limited partner units began trading on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol
HEP commencing with our initial public offering on July 8, 2004. The following table sets forth
the range of the daily high and low sales prices per common unit, cash distributions to common
unitholders and the trading volume of common units for the period indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash |
|
Total |
Years Ended December 31, |
|
High |
|
Low |
|
Distributions |
|
Volume |
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
44.14 |
|
|
$ |
35.80 |
|
|
|
$0.600 |
|
|
|
1,014,800 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
45.40 |
|
|
$ |
39.10 |
|
|
|
$0.575 |
|
|
|
1,068,700 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
47.00 |
|
|
$ |
37.28 |
|
|
|
$0.550 |
|
|
|
1,375,300 |
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
40.45 |
|
|
$ |
32.25 |
|
|
|
$0.500 |
|
|
|
1,825,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
35.15 |
|
|
$ |
28.25 |
|
|
|
$0.435 |
|
|
|
1,498,100 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
29.99 |
|
|
$ |
23.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,439,500 |
|
The distribution for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 was paid on November 19, 2004, and
reflects the pro rata portion of the minimum quarterly distribution rate of $.50, covering the
period from the closing of the initial public offering through September 30, 2004. A distribution
for the quarter ended December 31, 2005 of $0.625 was paid on February 14, 2006. That
distribution, as well as each of the two preceding distributions, was at the second target
distribution level, as described below.
As of February 10, 2006, we had approximately 5,000 common unitholders, including beneficial owners
of common units held in street name.
We will consider cash distributions to unitholders on a quarterly basis, although there is no
assurance as to the future cash distributions since they are dependent upon future earnings, cash
flows, capital requirements, financial condition and other factors. Our revolving credit facility
prohibits us from making cash distributions if any potential default or event of default, as
defined in the Credit Agreement, occurs or would result from the cash distribution. The indenture
relating to our Senior Notes will prohibit us from making cash distributions under certain
circumstances.
Within 45 days after the end of each quarter, we will distribute all of our available cash (as
defined in our partnership agreement) to unitholders of record on the applicable record date. The
amount of available cash generally is all cash on hand at the end of the quarter: less the amount
of cash reserves established by our general partner to provide for the proper conduct of our
business; comply with applicable law, any of our debt instruments, or other agreements; or provide
funds for distributions to our unitholders and to our general partner for any one or more of the
next four quarters; plus all cash on hand on the date of determination of available cash for the
quarter resulting from working capital borrowings made after the end of the quarter. Working
capital borrowings are generally borrowings that are made under our revolving credit facility and
in all cases are used solely for working capital purposes or to pay distributions to partners.
Upon the closing of our initial public offering, Holly received 7,000,000 subordinated units.
During the subordination period, the common units will have the right to receive distributions of
available cash from operating surplus in an amount equal to the minimum quarterly distribution of
$0.50 per quarter, plus any arrearages in the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the
common units from prior quarters, before any distributions of available cash from operating surplus
may be made on the subordinated units. The purpose of the subordinated units is to increase the
likelihood that during the subordination period there will be available cash to be distributed on
the common units. The subordination period will extend until the first day of any quarter
beginning after June 30, 2009 that each of the following tests are met: distributions of available
cash from operating surplus on each of the outstanding common units and
- 27 -
subordinated units equaled or exceeded the minimum quarterly distribution for each of the three
consecutive, non-overlapping four-quarter periods immediately preceding that date; the adjusted
operating surplus (as defined in our partnership agreement) generated during each of the three
consecutive, non-overlapping four-quarter periods immediately preceding that date equaled or
exceeded the sum of the minimum quarterly distributions on all of the outstanding common units and
subordinated units during those periods on a fully diluted basis and the related distribution on
the 2% general partner interest during those periods; and there are no arrearages in payment of the
minimum quarterly distribution on the common units. If the unitholders remove the general partner
without cause, the subordination period may end before June 30, 2009.
The Class B subordinated units issued to Alon generally vote as a single class and rank equally
with our existing subordinated units. There will be a subordination period with respect to the
Class B subordinated units with generally similar provisions to the subordinated units held by
Holly, except that the subordination period will end on the last day of any quarter ending on or
after March 31, 2010 if Alon has not defaulted on its minimum volume commitment payment obligations
for the three consecutive, non-overlapping four quarter periods immediately preceding that date,
subject to certain grace periods. If Holly is removed as the general partner without cause, the
subordination period for the Class B subordinated units may end before March 31, 2010.
We will make distributions of available cash from operating surplus for any quarter during any
subordination period in the following manner: first, 98% to the common unitholders, pro rata, and
2% to the general partner, until we distribute for each outstanding common unit an amount equal to
the minimum quarterly distribution for that quarter; second, 98% to the common unitholders, pro
rata, and 2% to the general partner, until we distribute for each outstanding common unit an amount
equal to any arrearages in payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the common units for
any prior quarters during the subordination period; third, 98% to the subordinated unitholders, pro
rata, and 2% to the general partner, until we distribute for each subordinated unit an amount equal
to the minimum quarterly distribution for that quarter; and thereafter, cash in excess of the
minimum quarterly distributions is distributed to the unitholders and the general partner based on
the percentages below.
The general partner, HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., is entitled to incentive distributions if the
amount we distribute with respect to any quarter exceeds specified target levels shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marginal Percentage Interest in |
|
|
Total Quarterly Distribution |
|
Distributions |
|
|
Target Amount |
|
Unitholders |
|
General Partner |
Minimum Quarterly
Distribution |
|
|
$0.50 |
|
|
|
98 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
First Target Distribution |
|
Up to $0.55 |
|
|
98 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
Second Target Distribution |
|
above $0.55 up to $0.625 |
|
|
85 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
Third Target distribution |
|
above $0.625 up to $0.75 |
|
|
75 |
% |
|
|
25 |
% |
Thereafter |
|
Above $0.75 |
|
|
50 |
% |
|
|
50 |
% |
The equity compensation plan information required by Item 201(d) of Regulation S-K in response
to this item is incorporated by reference into Item 12, Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial
Owners and Management, of this annual report on Form 10-K.
- 28 -
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
The following table shows selected financial information for HEP. This table should be read in
conjunction with Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations and the consolidated financial statements of HEP and related notes thereto included
elsewhere in this Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined |
|
|
Successor |
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
January 1, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Through |
|
|
2004 Through |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
July 12, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 (1) |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
|
( In thousands, except per unit data) |
|
Statement Of Income Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue |
|
$ |
80,120 |
|
|
$ |
67,766 |
|
|
$ |
28,182 |
|
|
$ |
39,584 |
|
|
$ |
30,800 |
|
|
$ |
23,581 |
|
|
$ |
20,647 |
|
Operating costs and expenses
Operations |
|
|
25,332 |
|
|
|
23,641 |
|
|
|
10,104 |
|
|
|
13,537 |
|
|
|
24,193 |
|
|
|
19,442 |
|
|
|
17,388 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14,201 |
|
|
|
7,224 |
|
|
|
3,241 |
|
|
|
3,983 |
|
|
|
6,453 |
|
|
|
4,475 |
|
|
|
3,740 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
4,047 |
|
|
|
1,860 |
|
|
|
1,859 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
43,580 |
|
|
|
32,725 |
|
|
|
15,204 |
|
|
|
17,521 |
|
|
|
30,646 |
|
|
|
23,917 |
|
|
|
21,128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
|
36,540 |
|
|
|
35,041 |
|
|
|
12,978 |
|
|
|
22,063 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
(336 |
) |
|
|
(481 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
649 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
620 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(9,633 |
) |
|
|
(697 |
) |
|
|
(697 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of Rio Grande Pipeline
Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
894 |
|
|
|
2,737 |
|
|
|
2,284 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,984 |
) |
|
|
(553 |
) |
|
|
(632 |
) |
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
1,185 |
|
|
|
3,006 |
|
|
|
2,904 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before minority interest |
|
|
27,556 |
|
|
|
34,488 |
|
|
|
12,346 |
|
|
|
22,142 |
|
|
|
1,339 |
|
|
|
2,670 |
|
|
|
2,423 |
|
Minority interest in Rio Grande Pipeline
Company |
|
|
(740 |
) |
|
|
(1,994 |
) |
|
|
(956 |
) |
|
|
(1,038 |
) |
|
|
(758 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
26,816 |
|
|
|
32,494 |
|
|
|
11,390 |
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
2,670 |
|
|
|
2,423 |
|
Less: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
2,670 |
|
|
|
2,423 |
|
General partner interest in net income |
|
|
721 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in net income |
|
$ |
26,095 |
|
|
$ |
11,162 |
|
|
$ |
11,162 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
per limited partner unit basic
and diluted |
|
$ |
1.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash distributions declared per unit
applicable to limited partners |
|
$ |
2.225 |
|
|
$ |
0.435 |
|
|
$ |
0.435 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA (2) |
|
$ |
50,001 |
|
|
$ |
40,271 |
|
|
$ |
15,263 |
|
|
$ |
25,008 |
|
|
$ |
6,743 |
|
|
$ |
6,876 |
|
|
$ |
5,543 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
$ |
42,628 |
|
|
$ |
15,867 |
|
|
$ |
15,371 |
|
|
$ |
496 |
|
|
$ |
5,909 |
|
|
$ |
4,271 |
|
|
$ |
10,273 |
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
$ |
(131,795 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,977 |
) |
|
$ |
(305 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,672 |
) |
|
$ |
(27,947 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,271 |
) |
|
$ |
(10,273 |
) |
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
$ |
90,646 |
|
|
$ |
(480 |
) |
|
$ |
1,770 |
|
|
$ |
(2,250 |
) |
|
$ |
28,372 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance capital expenditures (3) |
|
$ |
364 |
|
|
$ |
1,197 |
|
|
$ |
305 |
|
|
$ |
892 |
|
|
$ |
1,934 |
|
|
$ |
1,178 |
|
|
$ |
760 |
|
Expansion capital expenditures |
|
|
3,519 |
|
|
|
1,780 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,780 |
|
|
|
4,837 |
|
|
|
5,580 |
|
|
|
10,756 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital expenditures |
|
$ |
3,883 |
|
|
$ |
2,977 |
|
|
$ |
305 |
|
|
$ |
2,672 |
|
|
$ |
6,771 |
|
|
$ |
6,758 |
|
|
$ |
11,516 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data (at period end): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net property, plant and equipment |
|
$ |
162,298 |
|
|
$ |
74,626 |
|
|
$ |
74,626 |
|
|
$ |
95,337 |
|
|
$ |
95,826 |
|
|
$ |
60,073 |
|
|
$ |
57,801 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
254,775 |
|
|
$ |
103,758 |
|
|
$ |
103,758 |
|
|
$ |
156,373 |
|
|
$ |
140,425 |
|
|
$ |
88,338 |
|
|
$ |
84,282 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
$ |
180,737 |
|
|
$ |
25,000 |
|
|
$ |
25,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
190,962 |
|
|
$ |
28,998 |
|
|
$ |
28,998 |
|
|
$ |
53,146 |
|
|
$ |
57,089 |
|
|
$ |
20,059 |
|
|
$ |
18,674 |
|
Net partners equity |
|
$ |
52,060 |
|
|
$ |
61,528 |
|
|
$ |
61,528 |
|
|
$ |
89,964 |
|
|
$ |
68,860 |
|
|
$ |
68,279 |
|
|
$ |
65,609 |
|
- 29 -
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Combined results for the year ended December 31, 2004 is a non-GAAP measure and is
presented here to provide the investor with additional information for comparing
year-over-year information. |
|
(2) |
|
Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) are
calculated as net income plus (a) interest expense net of interest income and (b)
depreciation and amortization. EBITDA is not a calculation based upon U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP). However, the amounts included in the EBITDA
calculation are derived from amounts included in our consolidated financial statements.
EBITDA should not be considered as an alternative to net income or operating income, as an
indication of our operating performance or as an alternative to operating cash flow as a
measure of liquidity. EBITDA is not necessarily comparable to similarly titled measures of
other companies. EBITDA is presented here because it enhances an investors understanding
of our ability to satisfy principal and interest obligations with respect to our
indebtedness and to use cash for other purposes, including capital expenditures. EBITDA is
also used by our management for internal analysis and as a basis for compliance with
financial covenants. See Historical Results of Operations under Item 7, Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, for certain
changes made effective January 1, 2004 in how we recorded transactions, which would affect
the comparability of EBITDA for 2005 and 2004 with EBITDA for the prior years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined |
|
|
Successor |
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
January 1, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Through |
|
|
2004 Through |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
July 12, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation of EBITDA to net income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
26,816 |
|
|
$ |
32,494 |
|
|
$ |
11,390 |
|
|
$ |
21,104 |
|
|
$ |
581 |
|
|
$ |
2,670 |
|
|
$ |
2,423 |
|
Add: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14,201 |
|
|
|
7,224 |
|
|
|
3,241 |
|
|
|
3,983 |
|
|
|
6,453 |
|
|
|
4,475 |
|
|
|
3,740 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
9,633 |
|
|
|
697 |
|
|
|
697 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50,650 |
|
|
|
40,415 |
|
|
|
15,328 |
|
|
|
25,087 |
|
|
|
7,034 |
|
|
|
7,145 |
|
|
|
6,163 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
649 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
620 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA |
|
$ |
50,001 |
|
|
$ |
40,271 |
|
|
$ |
15,263 |
|
|
$ |
25,008 |
|
|
$ |
6,743 |
|
|
$ |
6,876 |
|
|
$ |
5,543 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3) |
|
Maintenance capital expenditures represent capital expenditures to replace partially or
fully depreciated assets to maintain the operating capacity of existing assets.
Maintenance capital expenditures include expenditures required to maintain equipment
reliability, tankage and pipeline integrity, and safety and to address environmental
regulations. |
- 30 -
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
This Item 7, including but not limited to the sections on Liquidity and Capital Resources,
contains forward-looking statements. See Forward-Looking Statements at the beginning of Part I.
In this document, the words we, our, ours and us refer to HEP and its consolidated
subsidiaries or to HEP or an individual subsidiary and not to any other person.
OVERVIEW
HEP is a Delaware limited partnership formed by Holly and is the successor to NPL. On March 15,
2004, we filed a Registration Statement on Form S-1 with the SEC relating to a proposed
underwritten initial public offering of limited partnership units in HEP. HEP was formed to
acquire, own and operate substantially all of the refined product pipeline and terminalling assets
that support Hollys refining and marketing operations in west Texas, New Mexico, Utah and Arizona
and a 70% interest in Rio Grande. On July 7, 2004, we priced 6,100,000 common units for the
initial public offering and on July 8, 2004, our common units began trading on the New York Stock
Exchange under the symbol HEP. On July 13, 2004, we closed our initial public offering of
7,000,000 common units at a price of $22.25 per unit, which included a 900,000 unit over-allotment
option that was exercised by the underwriters. Total proceeds from the sale of the units were
$145.5 million, net of $10.3 million of underwriting commissions. All the initial assets of HEP
were contributed by Holly and its subsidiaries in exchange for (a) 7,000,000 subordinated units,
representing 49% limited partner interest in HEP, (b) incentive distribution rights, (c) the 2%
general partner interest and d) an aggregate cash distribution of $125.6 million.
We operate a system of petroleum product pipelines in Texas, New Mexico and Oklahoma, and
distribution terminals in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Idaho, and Washington. We generate
revenues by charging tariffs for transporting petroleum products through our pipelines and by
charging fees for terminalling refined products and other hydrocarbons, and storing and providing
other services at our terminals. We do not take ownership of products that we transport or
terminal; therefore, we are not directly exposed to changes in commodity prices.
On February 28, 2005, we closed on a contribution agreement with Alon that provided for our
acquisition of four refined products pipelines, an associated tank farm and two refined products
terminals located primarily in Texas. Please read Alon Transaction under Liquidity and Capital
Resources below for additional information.
On July 8, 2005, we closed on a purchase agreement to acquire Hollys Intermediate Pipelines which
connect its Lovington, New Mexico and Artesia, New Mexico refining facilities. Please read Holly
Intermediate Pipelines Transaction under Liquidity and Capital Resources below for additional
information.
As a result of the Alon transaction, Hollys ownership interest was reduced from 51% to 47.9%,
including the 2% general partner interest. Hollys ownership was further reduced to 45.0% in July
2005 following the Intermediate Pipelines transaction.
Historical Results of Operations
In reviewing the historical results of operations that are discussed below, you should be aware of
the following:
Until January 1, 2004, our historical revenues included only actual amounts received from:
|
|
|
third parties who utilized our pipelines and terminals; |
|
|
|
|
Holly for use of our FERC-regulated refined product pipeline; and |
|
|
|
|
Holly for use of the Lovington crude oil pipelines, which were not contributed to our partnership. |
- 31 -
Until January 1, 2004, we did not record revenue for:
|
|
|
transporting products for Holly on our intrastate refined product pipelines; |
|
|
|
|
providing terminalling services to Holly; and |
|
|
|
|
transporting crude oil and feedstocks on the Intermediate Pipelines that
connect Hollys Artesia and Lovington facilities, which were not contributed to our
partnership. |
Commencing January 1, 2004, we began charging Holly fees for the use of all of our pipelines and
terminals at the rates set forth in the Holly PTA described below under Agreements with Holly.
In addition, our historical results of operations reflect the impact of the following acquisitions
completed in June 2003:
|
|
the purchase of an additional 45% interest in Rio Grande
on June 30, 2003, bringing our total ownership to 70%, which
resulted in our consolidating Rio Grande effective from the
date of this acquisition rather than accounting for it on the
equity method; and |
|
|
|
the purchase of terminals in Spokane, Washington, and
Boise and Burley, Idaho, as well as the Woods Cross truck
rack, all of which are related to Hollys Woods Cross
Refinery. |
Furthermore, the historical financial data do not reflect any general and administrative expenses
prior to July 13, 2004 as Holly did not historically allocate any of its general and administrative
expenses to its pipelines and terminals. Our historical results of operations prior to July 13,
2004 include costs associated with crude oil and intermediate product pipelines, which were not
contributed to our partnership.
For periods after commencement of operations by HEP on July 13, 2004, our financial statements
reflect:
|
|
net proceeds from our initial public offering which closed on July 13, 2004 (see Liquidity and Capital
Resources below); |
|
|
|
the transfer of certain of our predecessors operations to HEP, which |
|
|
|
includes our predecessors refined product pipeline and terminal assets and
short-term debt due to Holly (which was repaid upon the closing of our initial public
offering), and |
|
|
|
|
excludes our predecessors crude oil systems, intermediate product pipelines,
accounts receivable from or payable to affiliates, and other miscellaneous assets and
liabilities; |
|
|
the execution of the Holly PTA and the recognition of revenues derived therefrom; and |
|
|
|
the execution of the Omnibus Agreement with Holly and several of its subsidiaries and the recognition of
allocated general and administrative expenses in addition to direct general and administrative expense related to
our operation as a publicly owned entity. |
NPL constitutes HEPs predecessor. The transfer of ownership of assets from NPL to HEP represented
a reorganization of entities under common control and was recorded at historical cost.
Accordingly, our financial statements include the historical results of operations of NPL prior to
the transfer to HEP.
- 32 -
Agreements with Holly Corporation
Under the 15-year Holly PTA, Holly pays us fees to transport on our refined product pipelines or
throughput in our terminals a volume of refined products that will produce a minimum level of
revenue. Following the July 1, 2005 producer price index adjustment, the volume commitments by
Holly under the Holly PTA will produce at least $36.7 million of revenue annually.
Prior to July 13, 2004, Holly did not allocate any of its general and administrative expenses to
its pipeline and terminalling operations. Under the Omnibus Agreement with Holly, we have agreed
to pay Holly an annual administrative fee, initially in the amount of $2.0 million, for the
provision by Holly or its affiliates of various general and administrative services to us for three
years following the closing of our initial public offering. This fee does not include the salaries
of pipeline and terminal personnel or other employees of HLS or the cost of their employee
benefits, such as 401(k), pension and health insurance benefits, which are separately charged to us
by Holly. We will also reimburse Holly and its affiliates for direct expenses they incur on our
behalf.
In connection with our acquisition of the Intermediate Pipelines, we entered into the 15-year Holly
IPA. Under this agreement, Holly agreed to transport volumes of intermediate products on the
Intermediate Pipelines that, at the agreed tariff rates, will result in minimum revenues to us of
approximately $11.8 million annually.
Please read Agreements with Holly Corporation under Item 1, Business for additional information
on these agreements with Holly.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following tables present our operating income (loss), volume information, and cash flow summary
information for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003. Prior to January 1, 2004, we
recorded pipeline tariff revenues only on FERC-regulated pipelines and terminal service fee
revenues from third-party customers. No revenues from affiliates were recorded on non-FERC
regulated pipelines and no terminal services fee revenues from affiliates were recorded for use of
our terminal facilities. Commencing January 1, 2004, affiliate revenues have been recorded for all
pipeline and terminal facilities included in our pipeline and terminal facilities. Additionally,
the 2004 information is split for the period prior to our initial public offering, captioned
Predecessor and for the period following our initial public offering, captioned Successor. As
a result, the information included in the following table of operating income (loss) is not
comparable on a year-over-year basis.
- 33 -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined |
|
|
Successor |
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
through |
|
|
January 1, |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
2004 through |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 (1) |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
July 12, 2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per unit data) |
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pipelines: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates
refined product pipelines |
|
$ |
29,288 |
|
|
$ |
28,533 |
|
|
$ |
13,498 |
|
|
$ |
15,035 |
|
|
$ |
9,935 |
|
Affiliates
intermediate pipelines |
|
|
4,643 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Third parties |
|
|
31,447 |
|
|
|
18,952 |
|
|
|
8,915 |
|
|
|
10,037 |
|
|
|
13,249 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65,378 |
|
|
|
47,485 |
|
|
|
22,413 |
|
|
|
25,072 |
|
|
|
23,184 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terminals and truck loading racks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates |
|
|
10,253 |
|
|
|
9,194 |
|
|
|
4,419 |
|
|
|
4,775 |
|
|
|
|
|
Third parties |
|
|
4,489 |
|
|
|
3,179 |
|
|
|
1,349 |
|
|
|
1,830 |
|
|
|
2,551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,742 |
|
|
|
12,373 |
|
|
|
5,768 |
|
|
|
6,605 |
|
|
|
2,551 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for pipelines and terminal assets |
|
|
80,120 |
|
|
|
59,873 |
|
|
|
28,182 |
|
|
|
31,691 |
|
|
|
25,863 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude system and intermediate pipelines not
contributed to HEP at inception (2): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lovington crude oil pipelines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,325 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,325 |
|
|
|
4,937 |
|
Intermediate pipelines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,568 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,568 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for crude system and intermediate
pipeline assets not contributed to HEP at
inception |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,893 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,893 |
|
|
|
4,937 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
80,120 |
|
|
|
67,766 |
|
|
|
28,182 |
|
|
|
39,584 |
|
|
|
30,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs related to refined product pipeline and
terminal assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations |
|
|
25,332 |
|
|
|
21,361 |
|
|
|
10,104 |
|
|
|
11,257 |
|
|
|
18,762 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14,201 |
|
|
|
6,791 |
|
|
|
3,241 |
|
|
|
3,550 |
|
|
|
5,622 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
4,047 |
|
|
|
1,860 |
|
|
|
1,859 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,580 |
|
|
|
30,012 |
|
|
|
15,204 |
|
|
|
14,808 |
|
|
|
24,384 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude system and intermediate pipelines not
contributed to HEP at inception (2): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,280 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,280 |
|
|
|
5,431 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
831 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,713 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,713 |
|
|
|
6,262 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
43,580 |
|
|
|
32,725 |
|
|
|
15,204 |
|
|
|
17,521 |
|
|
|
30,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
36,540 |
|
|
|
35,041 |
|
|
|
12,978 |
|
|
|
22,063 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of Rio Grande Pipeline Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
894 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
649 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
Interest expense, including amortization |
|
|
(9,633 |
) |
|
|
(697 |
) |
|
|
(697 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company |
|
|
(740 |
) |
|
|
(1,994 |
) |
|
|
(956 |
) |
|
|
(1,038 |
) |
|
|
(758 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
26,816 |
|
|
|
32,494 |
|
|
|
11,390 |
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income applicable to Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
General partner interest in net income,
including incentive distributions
(3) |
|
|
721 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in net income |
|
$ |
26,095 |
|
|
$ |
11,162 |
|
|
$ |
11,162 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per limited partner unit basic and
diluted (3) |
|
$ |
1.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average limited partners units
outstanding |
|
|
15,356 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA (4) |
|
$ |
50,001 |
|
|
$ |
40,271 |
|
|
$ |
15,263 |
|
|
$ |
25,008 |
|
|
$ |
6,743 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributable cash flow (5) |
|
$ |
41,438 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
14,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 34 -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined |
|
|
Successor |
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
through |
|
|
January 1, |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
2004 through |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
July 12, 2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
Volumes (bpd) (6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pipelines: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates
refined product pipelines |
|
|
66,206 |
|
|
|
65,525 |
|
|
|
66,017 |
|
|
|
65,089 |
|
|
|
51,456 |
|
Affiliates
intermediate pipelines |
|
|
28,267 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Third parties |
|
|
65,053 |
|
|
|
29,967 |
|
|
|
30,310 |
|
|
|
29,663 |
|
|
|
23,469 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
159,526 |
|
|
|
95,492 |
|
|
|
96,327 |
|
|
|
94,752 |
|
|
|
74,925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Terminals & truck loading racks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates |
|
|
120,795 |
|
|
|
114,991 |
|
|
|
114,690 |
|
|
|
115,259 |
|
|
|
86,780 |
|
Third parties |
|
|
42,334 |
|
|
|
24,821 |
|
|
|
22,922 |
|
|
|
26,505 |
|
|
|
19,956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
163,129 |
|
|
|
139,812 |
|
|
|
137,612 |
|
|
|
141,764 |
|
|
|
106,736 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for pipelines and terminal assets (bpd) |
|
|
322,655 |
|
|
|
235,304 |
|
|
|
233,939 |
|
|
|
236,516 |
|
|
|
181,661 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Combined results for the year ended December 31, 2004 is a non-GAAP measure and is
presented here to provide the investor with additional information for comparing
year-over-year information. |
|
(2) |
|
Revenue and expense items generated by the crude system and Intermediate Pipeline assets that
were not contributed to HEP at inception in July 2004. Historically, these items were
included in the income of NPL as predecessor, but are not included in the income of HEP
beginning July 13, 2004. The Intermediate Pipelines were later purchased by HEP on July 8,
2005. |
|
(3) |
|
Net income is allocated between limited partners and the general partner interest in
accordance with the provisions of the partnership agreement. Net income allocated to the
general partner includes any incentive distributions made in the period. As of December 31,
2005, $188,000 of incentive distributions had been made. The limited partners interest in
net income is divided by the weighted average limited partner units outstanding in computing
the net income per unit applicable to limited partners. |
|
(4) |
|
Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) is calculated as
net income plus (a) interest expense net of interest income and (b) depreciation and
amortization. EBITDA is not a calculation based upon U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles (U.S. GAAP). However, the amounts included in the EBITDA calculation are derived
from amounts included in our consolidated financial statements. EBITDA should not be
considered as an alternative to net income or operating income, as an indication of our
operating performance or as an alternative to operating cash flow as a measure of liquidity.
EBITDA is not necessarily comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. EBITDA
is presented here because it is a widely used financial indicator used by investors and
analysts to measure performance. EBITDA is also used by our management for internal analysis
and as a basis for compliance with financial covenants. |
Set forth below is our calculation of EBITDA.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined |
|
|
Successor |
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
through |
|
|
January 1, |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
2004 through |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
July 12, 2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
26,816 |
|
|
$ |
32,494 |
|
|
$ |
11,390 |
|
|
$ |
21,104 |
|
|
$ |
581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add interest expense |
|
|
8,848 |
|
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add amortization of discount and
deferred debt issuance costs |
|
|
785 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtract interest income |
|
|
(649 |
) |
|
|
(144 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
|
(291 |
) |
Add depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14,201 |
|
|
|
7,224 |
|
|
|
3,241 |
|
|
|
3,983 |
|
|
|
6,453 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EBITDA |
|
$ |
50,001 |
|
|
$ |
40,271 |
|
|
$ |
15,263 |
|
|
$ |
25,008 |
|
|
$ |
6,743 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 35 -
|
|
|
(5) |
|
Distributable cash flow is not a calculation based upon U.S. GAAP. However, the amounts
included in the calculation are derived from amounts separately presented in our consolidated
financial statements, with the exception of maintenance capital expenditures. Distributable
cash flow should not be considered in isolation or as an alternative to net income or
operating income, as an indication of our operating performance or as an alternative to
operating cash flow as a measure of liquidity. Distributable cash flow is not necessarily
comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. Distributable cash flow is
presented here because it is a widely accepted financial indicator used by investors to
compare partnership performance. We believe that this measure provides investors an enhanced
perspective of the operating performance of our assets and the cash our business is
generating. |
Set forth below is our calculation of distributable cash flow attributable to partners
subsequent to the formation on July 13, 2004.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
through |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
26,816 |
|
|
$ |
11,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14,201 |
|
|
|
3,241 |
|
Add amortization of discount and deferred debt issuance costs |
|
|
785 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
Subtract maintenance capital expenditures* |
|
|
(364 |
) |
|
|
(305 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributable cash flow |
|
$ |
41,438 |
|
|
$ |
14,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Maintenance capital expenditures are capital expenditures made to replace partially
or fully depreciated assets in order to maintain the existing operating capacity of our
assets and to extend their useful lives. |
|
(6) |
|
The amounts reported represent volumes from the initial assets contributed to HEP at
inception in July 2004 and additional volumes from the assets acquired from Alon starting in
March 2005 and the Intermediate Pipelines acquired from Holly starting in July 2005. The
amounts reported in the 2005 periods include volumes on the acquired assets from their
respective acquisition dates averaged over the full reported periods. |
- 36 -
Results
of Operations Year Ended December 31, 2005 Compared with Year Ended December 31, 2004
Summary
Net income was $26.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, a decrease of $5.7 million from
$32.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The decrease in income was principally due to
the inclusion in earnings of $5.2 million in the prior year period of the crude oil and
intermediate product pipelines that were not contributed to the Partnership at inception, reduced
revenues from the Rio Grande Pipeline, general and administrative charges currently being incurred
by the Partnership that were not allocated prior to the initial public offering, and interest
expense principally related to the Senior Notes issued in connection with the Alon and Intermediate
Pipelines transactions, partially offset by the additional income generated from the assets
acquired from Alon and the Intermediate Pipelines subsequently acquired from Holly, and additional
revenues from our existing pipelines and terminals.
Revenues
Revenues of $80.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 were $12.3 million greater than the
$67.8 million in the comparable period of 2004, principally due to $17.6 million of revenues from
the pipeline and terminal assets acquired from Alon on February 28, 2005 and $4.6 million of
revenues from the Intermediate Pipeline assets acquired from Holly on July 8, 2005, partially
offset by revenues of $7.9 million in the year ended December 31, 2004 from assets not originally
contributed to the Partnership. Also, we had additional revenues from our existing pipelines and
terminals of $1.7 million and reduced revenues from the Rio Grande Pipeline of $3.7 million.
Revenues from refined product pipelines increased by $13.2 million from $47.5 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 to $60.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. Shipments on the
Partnerships refined product pipelines averaged 131.3 thousand barrels per day (mbpd) for the
year ended December 31, 2005 as compared to 95.5 mbpd for the year ended December 31, 2004,
principally due to the incremental March to December 2005 volumes from the pipelines acquired from
Alon, combined with increased volumes shipped by Holly and its affiliates, partially offset by
reduced volumes shipped on the Rio Grande Pipeline. Revenues from the intermediate product
pipelines purchased from Holly in July 2005 contributed $4.6 million to revenue in the year ended
December 31, 2005. Revenues from crude system and Intermediate Pipeline assets not contributed to
HEP were $7.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004, as a result of including operations of
the predecessor only until July 13, 2004, the commencement of operations of HEP. As anticipated,
during the first quarter of 2005 based on the aggregate volumes shipped by BP on the Rio Grande
Pipeline, BP is no longer required to pay the border crossing fee pursuant to its contract. For
the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, the border crossing fee was $0.8 million and $4.5
million, respectively.
Revenues from terminal and truck loading rack service fees increased by $2.3 million from $12.4
million for the year ended December 31, 2004 to $14.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2005.
Refined products terminalled in our facilities for the comparable periods rose to 163.1 mbpd in
the year ended December 31, 2005 from 139.8 mbpd in the year ended December 31, 2004, due to the
incremental March to December 2005 volumes from the terminals acquired from Alon and volume gains
at our existing terminals.
Operating Costs
Operating costs increased $1.7 million from the year ended December 31, 2004 to the year ended
December 31, 2005. This increase in expense was principally due to $3.4 million of operating costs
relating to the assets acquired from Alon, combined with operating costs of $0.6 million for the
Intermediate Pipelines that were acquired in July 2005, partially offset by operating costs of $2.3
million for the crude oil and Intermediate Pipelines that were not contributed to HEP in July 2004.
- 37 -
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization was $7.0 million higher in the year ended December 31, 2005 than in
the year ended December 31, 2004, due principally to the increase in depreciation from the assets
acquired from Alon.
General and Administrative
General and administrative costs were $4.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, an
increase of $2.1 million from $1.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. No general and
administrative costs were incurred prior to HEPs formation date of July 13, 2004, as Holly did not
allocate any general and administrative costs to its subsidiaries.
Interest Expense
Interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2005 totaled $9.6 million, an increase of $8.9
million from $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The increase is due to the debt
issued in connection with the Alon and Intermediate Pipelines acquisitions. In the year ended
December 31, 2005, interest expense consisted of: $8.4 million of interest on the outstanding debt,
net of the impact of the interest rate swap; $0.4 million of commitment fees on the unused portion
of the Credit Agreement; and $0.8 million of amortization of the discount on the Senior Notes and
deferred debt issuance costs. As no interest expense was incurred prior to formation on July 13,
2004, only $0.7 million of interest expense was recorded on the Credit Agreement and commitment
fees for the year ended December 31, 2004.
Minority Interest in Earnings of Rio Grande
The minority interest related to the 30% of Rio Grande that we do not own reduced our income by
$0.7 million in year ended December 31, 2005 compared to $2.0 million in the year ended December
31, 2004.
Results
of Operations Year Ended December 31, 2004 Compared with Year Ended December 31, 2003
Summary
Net income for the year ended December 31, 2004 was $32.5 million, a $31.9 million increase from
the $0.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2003, due mainly to the commencement of recording
all affiliate revenues beginning January 1, 2004. As a result, we recorded $30.2 million of
revenue in 2004 for which no comparable revenues had been recognized in the 2003 period.
We also began consolidating the results of Rio Grande as of July 1, 2003 due to increasing our
ownership to 70%. This resulted in $2.0 million more net income in 2004 than in 2003.
The remaining increase in earnings is due to general increased volumes for our pipeline and
terminalling services in 2004, the purchase of several new terminals on June 2003, and decreased
environmental remediation expenses in 2004.
Revenues
Revenues of $59.9 million from the combined operations of the assets contributed to the Partnership
for the year ended December 31, 2004 were $34.0 million higher than the $25.9 million in the
comparable period of 2003, primarily as a result of commencement of recording of revenues on
intra-company transactions effective January 1, 2004. During the year ended December 31, 2004,
revenues from assets not contributed to the Partnership increased to $7.9 million from $4.9 million
largely as a result of recording revenues on intermediate product pipelines. Refined product
shipments on the Partnerships pipeline system averaged 95.5 mbpd for the year ended December 31,
2004 as compared to 74.9 mbpd for the year ended December 31, 2003, largely as a result of the
expansion of the Navajo refinery and the consolidation of Rio Grande in July 2003, when the
ownership interest increased to 70%.
- 38 -
Revenues of $12.4 million from terminal and truck loading rack service fees for the year ended
December 31, 2004 were $9.8 million higher than the $2.6 million in 2003. Revenues from third
parties increased by $0.6 million, largely as a result of the acquisition of the Spokane terminal
in June 2003, while affiliate revenues, first recognized in 2004, were $9.2 million. Average
volumes of products terminalled in Partnership facilities increased to 139.8 mbpd for the year
ended December 31, 2004 from 106.7 mbpd in 2003. In addition to the increase in capacity of the
Navajo refinery, the average volume was significantly impacted by the acquisition of the Woods
Cross refinery by Holly in June 2003, which resulted in the Partnerships acquisition of terminals
and truck loading facilities in Utah, Idaho and Washington.
Operating Costs
Operating costs decreased $0.6 million from the year ended December 31, 2003 to the year ended
December 31, 2004. The expenses for the Lovington crude system (not contributed to HEP) decreased
$3.0 million from 2003 to 2004 due to a $1.3 million reduction of environmental remediation and
maintenance expenses from 2003 and a $1.7 million decrease because 2004 expenses are only included
until HEPs formation on July 13, 2004. The purchase of the Spokane, Boise and Burley terminals
and Woods Cross truck rack in June 2003 added $0.5 million to operating expense for 2004 due to
only being included in our operations for seven months in 2003. Increased volumes on our remaining
pipelines and terminals added $2.1 million of operating expense for 2004 over 2003, partially
offset by exclusion of costs for the Intermediate Pipelines from July 13, 2004. Finally, our
operating costs increased by $1.2 million from 2003 to 2004 as we started consolidating the results
of Rio Grande in July 2003.
Depreciation and Amortization
Depreciation and amortization expense was $0.8 million higher in the year ended December 31, 2004
than in year ended December 31, 2003. Of this increase, $1.2 million is due to the consolidation
of Rio Grande beginning July 1, 2003. There was an offsetting $0.4 million decrease due to the
crude system and Intermediate Pipelines not being contributed to HEP on July 13, 2004.
General and Administrative
General and administrative costs increased $1.9 million, reflecting costs incurred beginning on
HEPs formation date of July 13, 2004. Prior to that date, Holly did not allocate any general and
administrative costs to its subsidiaries.
Interest Expense
We recorded $0.7 million of total interest expense during the year ended December 31, 2004,
including interest expense on the $25 million outstanding debt, cost of commitment fees for the
unused portion of the $100 million revolving Credit Agreement, and amortization of deferred debt
issuance costs. No interest expense was incurred in 2003.
Equity in Earnings of Rio Grande Pipeline Company and Minority Interest
We recorded $0.9 million equity in earnings of Rio Grande in the year ended December 31, 2003,
reflecting our 25% ownership during the first half of 2003. Since our acquisition of an additional
45% interest on June 30, 2003, we have included the revenues and expenses of Rio Grande in our
consolidated financial statements. The minority interest related to the 30% that we do not own
reduced our income by $2.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 and by $0.8 million in the
year ended December 31, 2003.
- 39 -
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Overview
We financed the $120 million cash portion of the consideration for the Alon transaction through our
private offering on February 28, 2005 of $150 million of 6.25% Senior Notes due 2015. We used the
balance to repay $30 million of outstanding indebtedness under our revolving Credit Agreement,
including $5 million drawn shortly before the closing of the Alon transaction. We financed a
portion of the cash consideration for the Intermediate Pipelines transaction with the private
offering in June 2005 of an additional $35 million in principal amount of the Senior Notes.
As of December 31, 2005, we have no amounts outstanding under the Credit Agreement, and now have
$100 million available and unused under our revolving credit facility. We believe our current cash
balances, future internally-generated funds and funds available under our Credit Agreement will
provide sufficient resources to meet our working capital liquidity needs for the foreseeable
future. In November 2005, we paid a regular cash distribution for the third quarter of 2005 of
$0.60 on all units, an aggregate amount of $10.0 million. Included in this distribution was
$123,000 paid to the general partner as an incentive distribution, as the distribution per unit
exceeded $0.55.
We financed a portion of the cash consideration paid for the Intermediate Pipelines with $45.1
million of proceeds raised from the private sale of 1,100,000 of our common units to a limited
number of institutional investors which closed simultaneously with the closing of the acquisition
of the Intermediate Pipelines on July 8, 2005. On September 2, 2005, we filed a registration
statement with the SEC using a shelf registration process which will allow the institutional
investors to freely transfer their units. Additionally under this shelf process, we may offer from
time to time up to $800 million of our securities, through one or more prospectus supplements that
would describe, among other things, the specific amounts, prices and terms of any securities
offered and how the proceeds would be used. Any proceeds from the sale of securities would be used
for general business purposes, which may include, among other things, funding acquisitions of
assets or businesses, working capital, capital expenditures, investments in subsidiaries, the
retirement of existing debt and/or the repurchase of common units or other securities.
Cash and cash equivalents increased by $1.5 million during the year ended December 31, 2005. The
cash flow generated from operating activities of $42.6 million in addition to the cash provided by
financing activities of $90.6 million exceeded the cash used for investing activities of $131.8
million. Working capital increased during the year by $0.3 million to $19.5 million at December
31, 2005.
Cash Flows Operating Activities
Cash flows from operating activities increased by $26.7 million from $15.9 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 to $42.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. Net income for the
year ended December 31, 2005 was $26.8 million, a decrease of $5.7 million from net income of $32.5
million for the year ended December 31, 2005. The non-cash items of depreciation and amortization,
minority interest, and equity-based compensation increased $5.9 million in 2005 as compared to
2004. Total working capital items did not change significantly during the year ended December 31,
2005, as compared to a decrease of $25.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The large
decrease for the year ended December 31, 2004 was principally due to an increase in accounts
receivable affiliates, which were not contributed to HEP upon formation in July 2004.
Cash Flows Investing Activities
Cash flows used for investing activities increased by $128.8 million from $3.0 million for the year
ended December 31, 2004 to $131.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. On February 28,
2005, we closed on the Alon transaction which required $120 million in cash plus transaction costs
of $2.0 million. Additionally, we issued 937,500 Class B subordinated units valued at $24.7
million to Alon as part of the consideration. See Alon Transaction below for additional
information. On July 8, 2005, we closed on the acquisition of the Holly Intermediate Pipelines for
$81.5 million, which consisted of $77.7 million in cash, 70,000 common units of HEP and a capital
account credit of $1.0 million to maintain Hollys existing
- 40 -
general partner interest in the Partnership. As this was a transaction between entities under
common control, we recorded the acquired assets at Hollys historic book value. This resulted in
payment to Holly of a purchase price of $71.9 million in excess of the basis of the assets
received, which is included in cash flows from financing activities. See Holly Intermediate
Pipelines Transaction below for additional information. Additions to properties and equipment for
the year ended December 31, 2005 was $3.9 million, an increase of $0.9 million from $3.0 million
for the year ended December 31, 2004.
Cash Flows Financing Activities
Cash flows provided by financing activities amounted to $90.6 million for the year ended December
31, 2005. This compared to cash flows used in financing activities of $0.5 million in the year
ended December 31, 2004. In February 2005, we received proceeds of $147.4 million from the
issuance of Senior Notes in connection with the Alon asset acquisition. Additionally, we used
proceeds from the original senior note offering to repay $30 million of outstanding indebtedness
under our Credit Agreement, including $5 million drawn shortly before the closing of the Alon
transaction. In June 2005, in anticipation of the July 2005 Holly Intermediate Pipelines
transaction, we received additional proceeds from Senior Notes issued of $33.9 million. See
Senior Notes Due 2015 below for additional information. We financed a portion of the cash
consideration paid for the Intermediate Pipelines with $45.1 million of proceeds raised from the
private sale of 1,100,000 of our common units to a limited number of institutional investors which
closed simultaneously with the closing of the acquisition of the Intermediate Pipelines on July 8,
2005. Of the cash paid to Holly for the Intermediate Pipelines, the $71.9 million excess of the
cash paid over the asset basis is considered a deemed distribution to partners. During 2005, we
paid cash distributions on all units and the general partner interest in the aggregate amount of
$35.0 million. Other cash flows from financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2005
included an additional capital contribution from our general partner of $0.6 million and deferred
debt issuance costs incurred of $1.2 million. We completed our initial public offering of
7,000,000 common units on July 13, 2004, receiving net proceeds of $145.5 million and drawing $25
million on our Credit Agreement. The proceeds from these financings were utilized to repay $30.1
million owed to Holly as well as making a $125.6 million distribution to Holly. In addition, we
used $3.5 million to pay for offering costs and $1.4 million to pay deferred debt issuance costs
associated with our Credit Agreement. Additionally, we paid $0.7 million in late 2004 in deferred
debt costs relating to the financing of the then pending Alon transaction. Distributions to the
minority interest owner in Rio Grande were $2.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005, a
decrease of $1.0 million from $3.2 million for the year months ended December 31, 2004.
Capital Requirements
Our pipeline and terminalling operations are capital intensive, requiring investments to maintain,
expand, upgrade or enhance existing operations and to meet environmental and operational
regulations. Our capital requirements have consisted of, and are expected to continue to consist
of, maintenance capital expenditures and expansion capital expenditures. Maintenance capital
expenditures represent capital expenditures to replace partially or fully depreciated assets to
maintain the operating capacity of existing assets. Maintenance capital expenditures include
expenditures required to maintain equipment reliability, tankage and pipeline integrity, and safety
and to address environmental regulations. Expansion capital expenditures represent capital
expenditures to expand the operating capacity of existing or new assets, whether through
construction or acquisition. Expansion capital expenditures include expenditures to acquire assets
to grow our business and to expand existing facilities, such as projects that increase throughput
capacity on our pipelines and in our terminals. Repair and maintenance expenses associated with
existing assets that are minor in nature and do not extend the useful life of existing assets are
charged to operating expenses as incurred.
Each year our board of directors approves capital projects that our management is authorized to
undertake in our annual capital budget. Additionally, at times when conditions warrant or as new
opportunities arise, special projects may be approved. The funds allocated for a particular
capital project may be expended over a period of years, depending on the time required to complete
the project. Therefore, our planned capital expenditures for a given year consist of expenditures
approved for capital projects included in the current years capital budget as well as, in certain
cases, expenditures approved
- 41 -
for capital projects in capital budgets for prior years. Our total approved capital budget for
2006 is $2.8 million, which does not include amounts for possible acquisition transactions.
We anticipate that the currently planned capital expenditures will be funded with cash generated by
operations. However, we may fund future expansion capital requirements or acquisitions through
long-term debt and/or equity capital offerings.
Credit Agreement
In conjunction with our initial public offering on July 13, 2004, we entered into a four-year, $100
million senior secured revolving Credit Agreement. Union Bank of California, N.A. is a lender and
serves as administrative agent under this agreement. Upon closing of our initial public offering,
we drew $25 million under the Credit Agreement, which was outstanding at December 31, 2004.
We amended the Credit Agreement effective February 28, 2005 to allow for the closing of the Alon
transaction and the related Senior Notes offering as well as to amend certain of the restrictive
covenants. With a portion of the proceeds from the senior note offering, we repaid $30 million of
outstanding indebtedness under the Credit Agreement, including $5 million drawn shortly before the
closing of the Alon transaction. As of June 17, 2005, we amended the Credit Agreement to restate
the definition of certain terms used in the restrictive covenants. Additionally, we amended the
Credit Agreement effective July 8, 2005 to allow for the closing of the Holly Intermediate
Pipelines transaction as well as to amend certain of the restrictive covenants. As of December 31,
2005, we had no amounts outstanding under the Credit Agreement.
The Credit Agreement is available to fund capital expenditures, acquisitions, and working capital
and for general partnership purposes. Advances under the Credit Agreement that are designated for
working capital are short-term liabilities. Other advances under the Credit Agreement are
classified as long-term liabilities. In addition, the Credit Agreement is available to fund
letters of credit up to a $50 million sub-limit. Up to $5 million is available to fund
distributions to unitholders.
We have the right to request an increase in the maximum amount of the Credit Agreement, up to $175
million. Such request will become effective if (a) certain conditions specified in the Credit
Agreement are met and (b) existing lenders under the Credit Agreement or other financial
institutions reasonably acceptable to the administrative agent commit to lend such increased
amounts under the agreement.
Our obligations under the Credit Agreement are secured by substantially all of our assets.
Indebtedness under the Credit Agreement is recourse to our general partner and guaranteed by our
wholly-owned subsidiaries.
We may prepay all loans at any time without penalty. We are required to reduce all working capital
borrowings under the Credit Agreement to zero for a period of at least 15 consecutive days once
each twelve-month period prior to the maturity date of the agreement. The initial $25 million
borrowing was not a working capital borrowing under the Credit Agreement and was classified as a
long-term liability at December 31, 2004.
Indebtedness under the Credit Agreement bears interest, at our option, at either (a) the base rate
as announced by the administrative agent plus an applicable margin (ranging from 0.25% to 1.00%) or
(b) at a rate equal to the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) plus an applicable margin
(ranging from 1.50% to 2.25%). In each case, the applicable margin is based upon the ratio of our
funded debt (as defined in the agreement) to EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation
and amortization, as defined in the Credit Agreement). We incur a commitment fee on the unused
portion of the Credit Agreement at a rate of 0.375% or 0.500% based upon the ratio of our funded
debt to EBITDA for the four most recently completed fiscal quarters. The agreement matures in July
2008. At that time, the agreement will terminate and all outstanding amounts thereunder will be
due and payable.
The Credit Agreement imposes certain requirements, including: a prohibition against distribution to
unitholders if, before or after the distribution, a potential default or an event of default as
defined in the
- 42 -
agreement would occur; limitations on our ability to incur debt, make loans, acquire other
companies, change the nature of our business, enter a merger or consolidation, or sell assets; and
covenants that require maintenance of EBITDA to interest expense ratio and debt to EBITDA ratio.
If an event of default exists under the agreement, the lenders will be able to accelerate the
maturity of the debt and exercise other rights and remedies.
Senior Notes Due 2015
We financed the $120 million cash portion of the consideration for the Alon transaction through our
private offering on February 28, 2005 of $150 million principal amount of 6.25% Senior Notes due
2015 . We used the balance to repay $30 million of outstanding indebtedness under our Credit
Agreement, including $5 million drawn shortly before the closing of the Alon transaction. We
financed a portion of the cash consideration for the Intermediate Pipelines transaction with the
private offering in June 2005 of an additional $35.0 million in principal amount of the Senior
Notes.
The Senior Notes mature on March 1, 2015 and bear interest at 6.25%. The Senior Notes are
unsecured and impose certain restrictive covenants, including limitations on our ability to incur
additional indebtedness, make investments, sell assets, incur certain liens, pay distributions,
enter into transactions with affiliates, and enter into mergers. At any time when the Senior Notes
are rated investment grade by both Moodys and Standard & Poors and no default or event of default
exists, we will not be subject to many of the foregoing covenants. Additionally, we have certain
redemption rights under the Senior Notes.
The $185.0 million principal amount of Senior Notes is recorded at $180.7 on our accompanying
consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2005. The difference is due to the $3.5 million
unamortized discount and $0.8 relating to the fair value of the interest rate swap contract
discussed below.
Alon Transaction
The total consideration paid for the Alon pipeline and terminal assets was $120 million in cash and
937,500 of our Class B subordinated units which, subject to certain conditions, will convert into
an equal number of common units in five years. We financed the cash portion of the Alon
transaction through our private offering of the $150 million Senior Notes. We used the proceeds of
the offering to fund the $120 million cash portion of the consideration for the Alon transaction,
and used the balance to repay $30 million of outstanding indebtedness under our Credit Agreement,
including $5 million drawn shortly before the closing of the Alon transaction. In connection with
the Alon transaction, we entered into the 15-year Alon PTA. Under the Alon PTA, Alon agreed to
transport on the pipelines and throughput volumes through the terminals, a volume of refined
products that would result in minimum revenues to us of $20.2 million per year in the first year.
For additional information on the Alon transaction, please see Alon Transaction under Item 1,
Business.
The consideration for the Alon pipeline and terminal assets was allocated to the individual assets
acquired based on their estimated fair values as determined by an independent appraisal. The
aggregate consideration amounted to $146.7 million, which consisted of $24.7 million fair value of
our Class B subordinated units, $120 million in cash and $2.0 million of transaction costs. In
accounting for this acquisition, we recorded pipeline and terminal assets of $86.7 million and an
intangible asset of $60.0 million, representing the value of the 15-year pipelines and terminals
agreement for transportation.
Holly Intermediate Pipelines Transaction
On July 6, 2005, we entered into the Purchase Agreement with Holly to acquire Hollys two 65-mile
parallel Intermediate Pipelines which connect its Lovington, New Mexico and Artesia, New
Mexico refining facilities. On July 8, 2005, we closed on the acquisition for $81.5 million, which
consisted of $77.7 million in cash, 70,000 common units of HEP and a capital account credit of $1.0
million to maintain Hollys existing general partner interest in the Partnership. We financed the
cash portion of the consideration for the Intermediate Pipelines with the proceeds raised from (a)
the private sale of 1,100,000 of our common units for $45.1 million to a limited number of
institutional investors which closed simultaneously with the
- 43 -
acquisition and (b) an additional $35.0 million in principal amount of our 6.25% Senior Notes due
2015. This acquisition was made pursuant to an option to purchase these pipelines granted by Holly
to us at the time of our initial public offering in July 2004.
In connection with this transaction, we entered into a 15-year pipelines agreement with Holly.
Under this agreement, Holly agreed to transport volumes of intermediate products on the
Intermediate Pipelines that, at the agreed tariff rates, will result in minimum revenues to us of
approximately $11.8 million per calendar year. For additional information on this transaction,
please see Holly Intermediate Pipelines Transaction under Item 1, Business.
As this transaction is among entities under common control, we recorded the acquired assets at
Hollys historic book value of $6.8 million. This resulted in payment to Holly of a purchase price
of $71.9 million in excess of the basis of the assets received and a $71.9 million reduction of our
net partners equity.
Contractual Obligations and Contingencies
The following table presents our long-term contractual obligations as of December 31, 2005. Our
pipeline operating lease contains one 10-year renewal option that is not reflected in the table
below and that is likely to be exercised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Over 5 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1 Year |
|
|
2-3 Years |
|
|
4-5 Years |
|
|
Years |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Long-term debt principal |
|
$ |
185,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
185,000 |
|
Long-term debt interest |
|
|
109,844 |
|
|
|
11,563 |
|
|
|
23,125 |
|
|
|
23,125 |
|
|
|
52,031 |
|
Pipeline operating lease |
|
|
8,434 |
|
|
|
5,623 |
|
|
|
2,811 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Right of way leases |
|
|
2,502 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
1,728 |
|
Other |
|
|
4,467 |
|
|
|
2,575 |
|
|
|
1,892 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
310,247 |
|
|
$ |
20,099 |
|
|
$ |
28,107 |
|
|
$ |
23,282 |
|
|
$ |
238,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact of Inflation
Inflation in the United States has been relatively low in recent years and did not have a material
impact on our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003.
Environmental Matters
Our operation of pipelines, terminals, and associated facilities in connection with the storage and
transportation of refined products is subject to stringent and complex federal, state, and local
laws and regulations governing the discharge of materials into the environment, or otherwise
relating to the protection of the environment. For additional discussion on
environmental matter, please see Environment Matters under Item 1, Business.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our
consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. The preparation of these financial statements
requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets,
liabilities, revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities as
of the date of the financial statements. Actual results may differ from these estimates under
different assumptions or conditions. We consider the following policies to be the most critical to
understanding the judgments that are involved and the uncertainties that could impact our results
of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
- 44 -
Revenue Recognition
Revenues are recognized as products are shipped through our pipelines and terminals, except that
prior to January 1, 2004 pipeline tariff and terminal services fee revenues were not recorded on
services utilizing non-FERC regulated pipelines. These revenues had not previously been recognized
as the pipelines and terminals were operated as a component of Hollys petroleum refining and
marketing business. Commencing January 1, 2004, we began charging Holly pipeline tariffs and
terminal service fees in the amounts set forth in the Holly PTA. Additional pipeline
transportation revenues result from an operating lease by Alon USA, L.P. of an interest in the
capacity of one of our pipelines.
Billings to customers for obligations under their quarterly minimum revenue commitments are
recorded as deferred revenue liabilities if the customer has the right to receive future services
for these billings. The revenue is recognized at the earlier of:
|
|
the customer receives the future services provided by these billings, |
|
|
|
the period in which the customer is contractually allowed to receive the services expires, or |
|
|
|
we determine a very high likelihood that we will not be required to provide services within the allowed period. |
The only revenues reflected in the historical financial data prior to January 1, 2004 are from (a)
third parties who used our pipelines and terminals, (b) Hollys use of our Artesia, New Mexico to
Orla, Texas to El Paso refined product pipeline and (c) Hollys use of the Lovington crude oil
pipelines, which were not contributed to us.
Long-Lived Assets
We calculate depreciation and amortization based on estimated useful lives and salvage values of
our assets. When assets are placed into service, we make estimates with respect to their useful
lives that we believe are reasonable. However, factors such as competition, regulation or
environmental matters could cause us to change our estimates, thus impacting the future calculation
of depreciation and amortization. We evaluate long-lived assets for potential impairment by
identifying whether indicators of impairment exist and, if so, assessing whether the long-lived
assets are recoverable from estimated future undiscounted cash flows. The actual amount of
impairment loss, if any, to be recorded is equal to the amount by which a long-lived assets
carrying value exceeds its fair value. Estimates of future discounted cash flows and fair value of
assets require subjective assumptions with regard to future operating results, and actual results
could differ from those estimates. No impairments of long-lived assets were recorded during the
years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004.
Contingencies
It is common in our industry to be subject to proceedings, lawsuits and other claims related to
environmental, labor, product and other matters. We are required to assess the likelihood of any
adverse judgments or outcomes to these types of matters as well as potential ranges of probable
losses. A determination of the amount of reserves required, if any, for these types of
contingencies is made after careful analysis of each individual issue. The required reserves may
change in the future due to developments in each matter or changes in approach such as a change in
settlement strategy in dealing with these potential matters.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) 123 (revised), Share-Based Payment. This revision prescribes the
accounting for a wide range of equity-based compensation arrangements, including share options,
restricted share plans, performance-based awards, share appreciation rights and employee share
purchase plans, and generally requires the fair value of equity-based awards to be expensed on the
income statement. This standard was to become effective for us for the first interim period
beginning after June 15, 2005. However, in April 2005, the Securities and Exchange Commission
allowed for the
- 45 -
delay in the implementation of this standard, with the result that we are now
required to adopt this standard by calendar year 2006. SFAS 123 (revised) allows for either
modified prospective recognition of compensation expense or modified retrospective recognition,
which may be back to the original issuance of SFAS 123 or only to interim periods in the year of
adoption. We elected early adoption of this standard on July 1, 2005 based on modified prospective
application. The adoption of this standard did not have a material effect on our financial
condition, results of operations or cash flows.
In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections a
replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3. This statement changes the
requirements for accounting for and reporting a change in accounting principles and applies to all
voluntary changes in accounting principles. It also applies to changes required by an accounting
pronouncement in the unusual instance that the pronouncement does not include specific transition
provisions. When a pronouncement includes specific transition provisions, those provisions should
be followed. This statement requires retrospective application to prior periods financial
statements of changes in accounting principles, unless it is impracticable to determine either the
period-specific effects or the cumulative effect of change. This statement becomes effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. We believe the adoption of this standard will not
have an impact on our financial statements.
In March 2005, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 47, Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement
Obligations (FIN 47). FIN 47 clarifies that the term conditional asset retirement obligation
as used in FASB Statement No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations, refers to a legal
obligation to perform an asset retirement activity in which the timing and/or method of settlement
are conditional on a future event that may or may not be within the control of the entity. Since
the obligation to perform the asset retirement activity is unconditional, FIN 47 provides that a
liability for the fair value of a conditional asset retirement obligation should be recognized if
that fair value can be reasonably estimated, even though uncertainty exists about the timing and/or
method of settlement. FIN 47 also clarifies when an entity would have sufficient information to
reasonably estimate the fair value of a conditional asset retirement obligation under FASB
Statement No. 143. FIN 47 is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2005. We
adopted the standard effective as of December 31, 2005. The adoption of this standard did not have
a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
RISK MANAGEMENT
We have entered into an interest rate swap contract to effectively convert the interest expense
associated with $60 million of our 6.25% Senior Notes from a fixed rate to variable rates. Under
the swap agreement, we receive 6.25% fixed rate on the notional amount and pay a variable rate
equal to three month LIBOR plus an applicable margin of 1.1575%. The variable rate being paid on
the notional amount at December 31, 2005 was 5.5675%, including the applicable margin. The
maturity of the swap contract is March 1, 2015, matching the maturity of the Senior Notes.
This interest rate swap has been designated as a fair value hedge as defined by SFAS No. 133. Our
interest rate swap meets the conditions required to assume no ineffectiveness under SFAS No. 133
and, therefore, we have used the shortcut method of accounting prescribed for fair value hedges
by SFAS No. 133. Accordingly, we adjust the carrying value of the swap to its fair value each
quarter, with an offsetting entry to adjust the carrying value of the debt securities whose fair
value is being hedged. We record interest expense equal to the variable rate payments under the
swaps.
The fair value of the interest rate swap agreement of $0.8 million is included in Other long-term
liabilities in our accompanying consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2005. The offsetting
entry to adjust the carrying value of the debt securities whose fair value is being hedged is
recognized as a reduction of Long-term debt on our accompanying consolidated balance sheet at
December 31, 2005.
The market risk inherent in our debt instruments and positions is the potential change arising from
increases or decreases in interest rates as discussed below.
At December 31, 2005, we had an outstanding principal balance on our unsecured Senior Notes of
$185.0 million. By means of our interest rate swap contract, we have effectively converted $60.0
million
- 46 -
of the Senior Notes from a fixed rate to variable rate. For the fixed rate debt portion of
$125.0 million, changes in interest rates would generally affect the fair value of the debt, but
not our earnings or cash flows. Conversely, for the variable rate debt portion of $60.0 million,
changes in interest rates would generally not impact the fair value of the debt, but may affect our
future earnings and cash flows. We estimate a hypothetical 10% change in the yield-to-maturity
applicable to our fixed rate debt portion of $125.0 million as of December 31, 2005 would result in
a change of approximately $5.5 million in the fair value of the debt. A hypothetical 10% change in
the interest rate applicable to our variable rate debt portion of $60.0 million would not have a
material effect on our earnings or cash flows.
At December 31, 2005, our cash and cash equivalents included highly liquid investments with a
maturity of three months or less at the time of purchase. Due to the short-term nature of our cash
and cash equivalents, a hypothetical 10% increase in interest rates would not have a material
effect on the fair market value of our portfolio. Since we have the ability to liquidate this
portfolio, we do not expect our operating results or cash flows to be materially affected to any
significant degree by the effect of a sudden change in market interest rates on our investment
portfolio.
Our operations are subject to normal hazards of operations, including fire, explosion and
weather-related perils. We maintain various insurance coverages, including business interruption
insurance, subject to certain deductibles. We are not fully insured against certain risks because
such risks are not fully insurable, coverage is unavailable, or premium costs, in our judgment, do
not justify such expenditures.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Market risk is the risk of loss arising from adverse changes in market rates and prices. See Risk
Management under Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations for a discussion of market risk exposures that we have with respect to our cash and
cash equivalents and long-term debt. We utilize derivative instruments to hedge our interest rate
exposure, also discussed under Risk Management.
Since we do not own products shipped on our pipelines or terminalled at our terminal facilities we
do not have market risks associated with commodity prices.
- 47 -
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
MANAGEMENTS REPORT ON ITS ASSESSMENT OF THE COMPANYS INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Management of Holly Energy Partners, L.P. (the Partnership) is responsible for establishing and
maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting.
All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore,
even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to
financial statement preparation and presentation.
Management assessed the Partnerships internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2005 using the criteria for effective control over financial reporting established in Internal
Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. Based on this assessment, management believes that, as of December 31, 2005, the
Partnership maintained effective internal control over financial reporting.
The Partnerships independent registered public accounting firm has issued an attestation report on
managements assessment of the Partnerships internal control over financial reporting. That
report appears on page 49.
- 48 -
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors of Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. and
Unitholders of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.
We have audited managements assessment, included in the accompanying managements report, that
Holly Energy Partners, L.P. (the Partnership) maintained effective internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31 2005, based on criteria established in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (the COSO criteria). The Partnerships management is responsible for maintaining
effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
managements assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the partnerships internal control
over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was
maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal
control over financial reporting, evaluating managements assessment, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A
companys internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1)
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the
transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that
transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company;
and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized
acquisition, use, or disposition of the companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or
detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are
subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that
the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, managements assessment that the Partnership maintained effective internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, is fairly stated, in all material respects, based
on the COSO criteria. Also, in our opinion, the Partnership maintained, in all material respects,
effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on the COSO
criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Holly Energy Partners, L.P. as of
December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of income, Partners equity
(deficit), and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2005 (successor), the period from July
13, 2004 through December 31, 2004 (successor), the period from January 1, 2004 through July 12,
2004 (predecessor), and the year ended December 31, 2003 (predecessor), of Holly Energy Partners,
L.P. and our report dated February 20, 2006, expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
Dallas, Texas
February 20, 2006
- 49 -
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
|
|
Reference |
|
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56 |
|
- 50 -
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors of Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. and
Unitholders of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Holly Energy Partners, L.P. (the
Partnership) as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of income,
Partners equity (deficit), and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2005 (successor), the
period from July 13, 2004 through December 31, 2004 (successor), the period from January 1, 2004
through July 12, 2004 (predecessor), and the year ended December 31, 2003 (predecessor). These
financial statements are the responsibility of the Partnerships management. Our responsibility is
to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An
audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made
by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
material respects, the consolidated financial position of Holly Energy Partners, L.P. at December
31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows, for
the year ended December 31, 2005 (successor), the period from July 13, 2004 through December 31,
2004 (successor), the period from January 1, 2004 through July 12, 2004 (predecessor), and the year
ended December 31, 2003 (predecessor), in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the effectiveness of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, based on criteria established in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission and our report dated February 20, 2006 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
Dallas, Texas
February 20, 2006
- 51 -
Holly Energy Partners, L.P.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except unit data) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
20,583 |
|
|
$ |
19,104 |
|
Accounts receivable: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade |
|
|
3,076 |
|
|
|
807 |
|
Affiliates |
|
|
3,645 |
|
|
|
2,052 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,721 |
|
|
|
2,859 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid and other current assets |
|
|
1,401 |
|
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
28,705 |
|
|
|
22,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Properties and equipment, net |
|
|
162,298 |
|
|
|
74,626 |
|
Transportation agreements, net |
|
|
60,903 |
|
|
|
4,718 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
2,869 |
|
|
|
1,881 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
254,775 |
|
|
$ |
103,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
3,020 |
|
|
$ |
1,716 |
|
Accrued interest |
|
|
2,892 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
1,013 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
2,326 |
|
|
|
1,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
9,251 |
|
|
|
3,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
180,737 |
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
974 |
|
|
|
585 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
11,753 |
|
|
|
13,232 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Partners equity (deficit): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common unitholders (8,170,000 and
7,000,000 units issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively) |
|
|
184,650 |
|
|
|
144,318 |
|
Subordinated unitholders (7,000,000 units
issued and outstanding at December 31,
2005 and 2004) |
|
|
(63,235 |
) |
|
|
(59,470 |
) |
Class B subordinated unitholders (937,500
units issued and outstanding at December
31, 2005) |
|
|
24,388 |
|
|
|
|
|
General partner interest (2% interest) |
|
|
(93,743 |
) |
|
|
(23,320 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total partners equity |
|
|
52,060 |
|
|
|
61,528 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and partners equity |
|
$ |
254,775 |
|
|
$ |
103,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
- 52 -
Holly Energy Partners, L.P.
Consolidated Statements of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor |
|
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
through |
|
|
|
January 1, |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2004 through |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
31, 2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
July 12, 2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per unit data) |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates |
|
$ |
44,184 |
|
|
$ |
17,917 |
|
|
|
$ |
27,429 |
|
|
$ |
13,901 |
|
Third parties |
|
|
35,936 |
|
|
|
10,265 |
|
|
|
|
12,155 |
|
|
|
16,899 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80,120 |
|
|
|
28,182 |
|
|
|
|
39,584 |
|
|
|
30,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations |
|
|
25,332 |
|
|
|
10,104 |
|
|
|
|
13,537 |
|
|
|
24,193 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14,201 |
|
|
|
3,241 |
|
|
|
|
3,983 |
|
|
|
6,453 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
4,047 |
|
|
|
1,859 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,580 |
|
|
|
15,204 |
|
|
|
|
17,521 |
|
|
|
30,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
|
36,540 |
|
|
|
12,978 |
|
|
|
|
22,063 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
649 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
291 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(9,633 |
) |
|
|
(697 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of Rio Grande Pipeline
Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
894 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,984 |
) |
|
|
(632 |
) |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
1,185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before minority interest |
|
|
27,556 |
|
|
|
12,346 |
|
|
|
|
22,142 |
|
|
|
1,339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company |
|
|
(740 |
) |
|
|
(956 |
) |
|
|
|
(1,038 |
) |
|
|
(758 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
26,816 |
|
|
|
11,390 |
|
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income attributable to Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
General partner interest in net income |
|
|
721 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partners interest in net income |
|
$ |
26,095 |
|
|
$ |
11,162 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per limited partners unit
basic and diluted |
|
$ |
1.70 |
|
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average limited partners units
outstanding |
|
|
15,356 |
|
|
|
14,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
- 53 -
Holly Energy Partners, L.P.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor |
|
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
through |
|
|
|
January 1, |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December |
|
|
December |
|
|
|
2004 through |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
31, 2005 |
|
|
31, 2004 |
|
|
|
July 12, 2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
26,816 |
|
|
$ |
11,390 |
|
|
|
$ |
21,104 |
|
|
$ |
581 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14,201 |
|
|
|
3,241 |
|
|
|
|
3,983 |
|
|
|
6,453 |
|
Minority interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company |
|
|
740 |
|
|
|
956 |
|
|
|
|
1,038 |
|
|
|
758 |
|
Equity in earnings of Rio Grande Pipeline Company |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(894 |
) |
Amortization of restricted units |
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase) decrease in current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
(2,338 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
(95 |
) |
|
|
(603 |
) |
Accounts receivable affiliates |
|
|
(1,594 |
) |
|
|
(2,052 |
) |
|
|
|
(21,544 |
) |
|
|
(7,394 |
) |
Prepaid and other current assets |
|
|
(1,499 |
) |
|
|
(323 |
) |
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
Increase (decrease) in current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
1,305 |
|
|
|
1,377 |
|
|
|
|
(1,293 |
) |
|
|
2,303 |
|
Accounts payable affiliates |
|
|
2,840 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,506 |
) |
|
|
4,636 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
1,693 |
|
|
|
773 |
|
|
|
|
(146 |
) |
|
|
65 |
|
Other, net |
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
42,628 |
|
|
|
15,371 |
|
|
|
|
496 |
|
|
|
5,909 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties and equipment |
|
|
(3,883 |
) |
|
|
(305 |
) |
|
|
|
(2,672 |
) |
|
|
(6,771 |
) |
Acquisitions of pipeline and terminal assets |
|
|
(127,912 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase 45% interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company, net of
cash acquired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21,176 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used for investing activities |
|
|
(131,795 |
) |
|
|
(305 |
) |
|
|
|
(2,672 |
) |
|
|
(27,947 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of senior notes, net of discounts |
|
|
181,238 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common units, net of underwriter
discount |
|
|
45,100 |
|
|
|
145,460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to Holly concurrent with initial public offering |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125,612 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess purchase price over contributed basis of intermediate
pipelines |
|
|
(71,850 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributions to partners |
|
|
(35,022 |
) |
|
|
(6,214 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings (payback) of short-term of debt affiliates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,082 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,082 |
|
Borrowings (payback) under revolving credit agreement |
|
|
(25,000 |
) |
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs of issuing common units |
|
|
(349 |
) |
|
|
(3,486 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred debt issuance costs |
|
|
(1,228 |
) |
|
|
(2,086 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash distributions to minority interest |
|
|
(2,220 |
) |
|
|
(987 |
) |
|
|
|
(2,250 |
) |
|
|
(1,350 |
) |
Cash contribution from general partner |
|
|
612 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of units for restricted grants |
|
|
(635 |
) |
|
|
(223 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used for) financing activities |
|
|
90,646 |
|
|
|
1,770 |
|
|
|
|
(2,250 |
) |
|
|
28,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) for the period |
|
|
1,479 |
|
|
|
16,836 |
|
|
|
|
(4,426 |
) |
|
|
6,694 |
|
Beginning of period |
|
|
19,104 |
|
|
|
2,268 |
|
|
|
|
6,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
$ |
20,583 |
|
|
$ |
19,104 |
|
|
|
$ |
2,268 |
|
|
$ |
6,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
- 54 -
Holly Energy Partners, L.P.
Consolidated Statements of Partners Equity (Deficit)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
Successor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Class B |
|
|
General |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Subordinated |
|
|
Subordinated |
|
|
Partner |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent |
|
|
Units |
|
|
Units |
|
|
Units |
|
|
Interest |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Predecessor: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2002 |
|
$ |
68,279 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
68,279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2003 |
|
|
68,860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68,860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets and liabilities
not contributed to Holly
Energy Partners, L.P. |
|
|
(49,782 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,782 |
) |
Net income |
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance July 12, 2004 |
|
|
40,182 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,182 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allocation of net parent
investment to
unitholders |
|
|
(40,182 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,606 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,576 |
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from initial
public offering, net of
underwriter discount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
145,460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
145,460 |
|
Costs of issuing common
units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,486 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,486 |
) |
Distributions to partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,045 |
) |
|
|
(103,657 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,124 |
) |
|
|
(131,826 |
) |
Purchase of units for
restricted grants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(222 |
) |
Amortization of
restricted units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,581 |
|
|
|
5,581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
11,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
144,318 |
|
|
|
(59,470 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23,320 |
) |
|
|
61,528 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,100 |
|
Cost of issuing common
units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(349 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(349 |
) |
Issuance of Class B
subordinated units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,674 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,674 |
|
Capital contribution |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
Distributions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16,863 |
) |
|
|
(15,657 |
) |
|
|
(1,617 |
) |
|
|
(885 |
) |
|
|
(35,022 |
) |
Excess purchase price
over contributed basis
of intermediate
pipelines |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(71,850 |
) |
|
|
(71,850 |
) |
Purchase of units for
restricted grants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(635 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(635 |
) |
Amortization of
restricted units |
|
|
|
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
207 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,872 |
|
|
|
11,892 |
|
|
|
1,331 |
|
|
|
721 |
|
|
|
26,816 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
184,650 |
|
|
$ |
(63,235 |
) |
|
$ |
24,388 |
|
|
$ |
(93,743 |
) |
|
$ |
52,060 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
- 55 -
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
December 31, 2005
Note 1: Description of Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Description of Business
Holly Energy Partners, L.P. (HEP) together with its consolidated subsidiaries, is a publicly held
master limited partnership, currently 45% owned by Holly Corporation (Holly). HEP commenced
operations July 13, 2004. Concurrently with the completion of its initial public offering, Navajo
Pipeline Co., L.P. (Predecessor) (NPL) and its affiliates, a wholly owned subsidiary of Holly,
contributed a substantial portion of its assets to HEP. In this document, the words we, our,
ours and us refer to HEP and NPL collectively unless the context otherwise indicates. See Note
2 for a further description of these transactions.
NPL constitutes HEPs predecessor. The transfer of ownership of assets from NPL to HEP represented
a reorganization of entities under common control and was recorded at historical cost.
Accordingly, our financial statements include the historical results of operations of NPL prior to
the transfer to HEP.
We operate in one business segment the operation of petroleum pipelines and terminal facilities.
Navajo Refining Company, L.P. (Navajo), another of Hollys wholly-owned subsidiaries, owns a
refinery in Artesia, New Mexico, which Navajo operates in conjunction with crude, vacuum
distillation and other facilities situated in Lovington, New Mexico (collectively, the Navajo
Refinery). The Navajo Refinery, which produces high-value refined products such as gasoline,
diesel fuel and jet fuel, can process a variety of sour (high sulfur) crude oils and serves markets
in the southwestern United States and northern Mexico. In conjunction with Hollys operation of
the Navajo Refinery, we operate refined product pipelines as part of our product distribution
network. In July 2005, we acquired from Holly two parallel intermediate feedstock pipelines which
connect its Lovington, New Mexico and Artesia, New Mexico refining facilities. Our terminal
operations serving the Navajo Refinery include one truck rack at the Navajo Refinery and five
integrated refined product terminals located in New Mexico, Texas and Arizona. Additionally, we
own a refined product terminal in Mountain Home, Idaho.
In June 2003, Holly acquired the Woods Cross refinery located in Salt Lake City and a related truck
rack, as well as terminal facilities located in Washington and Idaho. In conjunction with Hollys
acquisition of the Woods Cross refinery, we acquired the related truck rack at the Woods Cross
Refinery, a refined product terminal in Spokane, Washington and a 50% non-operating interest in
product terminals in Boise and Burley, Idaho.
In February 2005, we closed on a contribution agreement with Alon USA, Inc. and several of its
wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, Alon) that provided for our acquisition of four refined
products pipelines, an associated tank farm and two refined products terminals. These pipelines
and terminals are located primarily in Texas and transport light refined products for Alons
refinery in Big Spring, Texas.
Additionally, we own a 70% interest in Rio Grande Pipeline Company (Rio Grande), which provides
transportation of liquid petroleum gases (LPG) to northern Mexico.
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include our accounts and those of our subsidiaries. All
significant inter-company transactions and balances have been eliminated. The consolidated
financial statements include the financial position and results of operations of pipeline and
terminal facilities previously owned by Holly and/or Navajo, which were contributed to HEP
concurrently with the completion of our initial public offering, as well as the intermediate assets
that were purchased from Holly in July 2005. Both of these acquisition of assets from Holly were
accounted for as transactions among entities under common
- 56 -
control. Therefore, the assets were recorded on our balance sheets at Hollys basis instead of the
purchase price or fair value.
If the assets acquired from Holly upon formation and the intermediate pipelines transaction had
been acquired from third parties, the cash payment upon formation and the excess of the
intermediate pipeline purchase price over its basis would have been recorded as properties or
intangible assets instead of reductions of partners equity. Also, the subordinated units issued
to Holly would have been recorded at fair value instead of the carryover basis of the contributed
assets.
The consolidated financial statements also include financial data, at historical cost, related to
the assets owned by Holly and its wholly-owned subsidiaries through July 12, 2004, other than HEP,
that were not contributed to us upon completion of our initial public offering.
On June 30, 2003, we acquired an additional 45% partnership interest in Rio Grande, bringing our
ownership to 70%. Prior to June 30, 2003, we accounted for our interest in Rio Grande as an equity
investment, recognizing our representative share of Rio Grandes reported income, plus amortization
of the difference between the historical cost of our investment and the underlying equity in Rio
Grande. Effective June 30, 2003, we consolidated the balance sheet of Rio Grande and fully
consolidated Rio Grandes operations and cash flows commencing July 1, 2003.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported
in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the statements of cash flows, we consider all highly liquid investments with
maturity of three months or less at the time of purchase to be cash equivalents. The carrying
amounts reported on the balance sheet approximate fair value due to the short-term maturity of
these instruments.
Accounts Receivable
The majority of the accounts receivable are due from affiliates of Holly or independent companies
in the petroleum industry. Credit is extended based on evaluation of the customers financial
condition and, in certain circumstances, collateral such as letters of credit or guarantees, may be
required. Credit losses are charged to income when accounts are deemed uncollectible and
historically have been minimal.
Inventories
Inventories consisting of materials and supplies are stated at the lower of cost, using the average
cost method, or market and are shown under prepaid and other current assets on our balance sheet.
Properties and Equipment
Properties and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation is provided by the straight-line method
over the estimated useful lives of the assets; primarily 10 to 16 years for pipeline and terminal
facilities, 23 to 33 years for regulated pipelines and 3 to 10 years for corporate and other
assets. Maintenance, repairs and major replacements are generally expensed as incurred. Costs of
replacements constituting improvement are capitalized.
Transportation Agreements
The transportation agreement assets are stated at cost and are being amortized over the periods of
the agreements.
- 57 -
Long-Lived Assets
We evaluate long-lived assets, including intangible assets, for potential impairment by identifying
whether indicators of impairment exist and, if so, assessing whether the long-lived assets are
recoverable from estimated future undiscounted cash flows. The actual amount of impairment loss,
if any, to be recorded is equal to the amount by which a long-lived assets carrying value exceeds
its fair value. No impairments of long-lived assets were recorded during the periods included in
these financial statements.
Investments in Joint Ventures
We account for investments in and earnings from joint ventures, where we have ownership of 50% or
less, using the equity method. We currently have no investments in joint ventures in which we have
less than 50% ownership.
Revenue Recognition
Revenues are recognized as products are shipped through our pipelines and terminals, except that
prior to January 1, 2004, pipeline tariff and terminal services fee revenues were not recorded on
services to affiliates for utilizing facilities not considered common carriers. Effective January
1, 2004, we began recording all tariffs and terminal service fees from affiliates, resulting in
recognition of $30.2 million of revenue in the year ended December 31, 2004. Prior to January 1,
2004, the affiliate revenues on these pipelines, terminals, and truck loading racks had not been
recognized as the facilities were operated as a component of Hollys petroleum refining and
marketing business and there was no impact on Hollys consolidated financial position or results of
operations.
Billings to customers for obligations under their quarterly minimum revenue commitments are
recorded as deferred revenue liabilities if the customer has the right to receive future services
for these billings. The revenue is recognized at the earlier of:
|
|
the customer receives the future services provided by these billings, |
|
|
|
the period in which the customer is contractually allowed to receive the services expires, or |
|
|
|
we determine a very high likelihood that we will not be required to provide services within the allowed period. |
Additional pipeline transportation revenues result from an operating lease to a third party of an
interest in the capacity of one of our pipelines.
Environmental Costs
Environmental costs are expensed if they relate to an existing condition caused by past operations
and do not contribute to current or future revenue generation. Liabilities are recorded when site
restoration and environmental remediation and cleanup obligations are either known or considered
probable and can be reasonably estimated. Environmental costs recoverable through insurance,
indemnification arrangements or other sources are included in other assets to the extent such
recoveries are considered probable.
Income Taxes
As a partnership, we are an entity that is not subject to income taxes. Therefore, there is no
provision for income taxes included in our consolidated financial statements. Taxable income,
gain, loss and deductions are allocated to the unitholders who are responsible for payment of any
income taxes thereon.
Net income for financial statement purposes may differ significantly from taxable income reportable
to unitholders as a result of differences between the tax bases and financial reporting bases of
assets and liabilities and the taxable income allocation requirements under the partnership
agreement. Individual unitholders have different investment bases depending upon the timing and
price of acquisition of their partnership units. Furthermore, each unitholders tax accounting,
which is partially dependent upon the
- 58 -
unitholders tax position, differs from the accounting followed in the consolidated financial
statements. Accordingly, the aggregate difference in the basis of our net assets for financial and
tax reporting purposes cannot be readily determined because information regarding each unitholders
tax attributes in our partnership is not available to us.
Net Income per Limited Partners Unit
The computation of net income per limited partners unit is based on the weighted-average number of
common and subordinated units outstanding during the year. Net income per unit applicable to
limited partners (including subordinated units and Class B subordinated units) is computed by
dividing limited partners interest in net income, after deducting the general partners 2%
interest and incentive distributions, and after deducting net income attributable to the
Predecessor (before July 13, 2004), by the weighted-average number of units outstanding for each
class of limited partners units. Basic and diluted net income per unit applicable to limited
partners is the same because we have no potentially dilutive securities outstanding.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
SFAS No. 123 (revised) Share-Based Payment
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) 123 (revised), Share-Based Payment. This revision prescribes the
accounting for a wide range of equity-based compensation arrangements, including share options,
restricted share plans, performance-based awards, share appreciation rights and employee share
purchase plans, and generally requires the fair value of equity-based awards to be expensed on the
income statement. SFAS 123 (revised) allows for either modified prospective recognition of
compensation expense or modified retrospective recognition, which may be back to the original
issuance of SFAS 123 or only to interim periods in the year of adoption. We elected early adoption
of this standard on July 1, 2005 based on modified prospective application (see Note 7 for further
discussion of equity-based compensation). The adoption of this standard did not have a material
effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
SFAS No. 154 Accounting Changes and Error Corrections a replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and
FASB Statement No. 3
In May 2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections a
replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3. This statement changes the
requirements for accounting for and reporting a change in accounting principles and applies to all
voluntary changes in accounting principles. It also applies to changes required by an accounting
pronouncement in the unusual instance that the pronouncement does not include specific transition
provisions. When a pronouncement includes specific transition provisions, those provisions should
be followed. This statement requires retrospective application to prior periods financial
statements of changes in accounting principles, unless it is impracticable to determine either the
period-specific effects or the cumulative effect of change. This statement becomes effective for
fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. We believe the adoption of this standard will not
have an impact on our financial statements.
FASB Interpretation No. 47, Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations
In March 2005, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 47, Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement
Obligations (FIN 47). FIN 47 clarifies that the term conditional asset retirement obligation
as used in FASB Statement No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations, refers to a legal
obligation to perform an asset retirement activity in which the timing and/or method of settlement
are conditional on a future event that may or may not be within the control of the entity. Since
the obligation to perform the asset retirement activity is unconditional, FIN 47 provides that a
liability for the fair value of a conditional asset retirement obligation should be recognized if
that fair value can be reasonably estimated, even
- 59 -
though uncertainty exists about the timing and/or method of settlement. FIN 47 also clarifies when
an entity would have sufficient information to reasonably estimate the fair value of a conditional
asset retirement obligation under FASB Statement No. 143. FIN 47 is effective for fiscal years
ending after December 15, 2005. We adopted the standard effective as of December 31, 2005. The
adoption of this standard did not have a material effect on our financial condition, results of
operations or cash flows.
Note 2: Initial Public Offering of HEP
HEP was formed to acquire, own and operate substantially all of the refined product pipeline and
terminalling assets that support Hollys refining and marketing operations in West Texas, New
Mexico, Utah and Arizona and a 70% interest in Rio Grande.
On July 7, 2004, we priced 6,100,000 common units for the initial public offering; and on July 8,
2004, our common units began trading on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol HEP. On
July 13, 2004, we closed our initial public offering of 7,000,000 common units at a price of $22.25
per unit, which included a 900,000 unit over-allotment option that was exercised by the
underwriters. Total proceeds from the sale of the units were $145.5 million, net of $10.3 million
underwriting commissions. After the offering, Holly, through a subsidiary, owned a 51% interest in
HEP, including the general partner interest. The initial public offering represented the sale of a
49% interest in HEP.
All of our initial assets were contributed by Holly and its subsidiaries in exchange for: (a) an
aggregate of 7,000,000 subordinated units, representing 49% limited partner interests in HEP, (b)
incentive distribution rights (as set forth in HEPs partnership agreement), (c) the 2% general
partner interest, and (d) an aggregate cash distribution of $125.6 million.
The following table presents the assets and liabilities of our predecessor immediately prior to
contributing assets to HEP, the assets and liabilities contributed to HEP, and the predecessors
assets and liabilities that were not contributed to HEP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Navajo Pipeline |
|
|
Contributed to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Co., L.P. |
|
|
Holly Energy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Predecessor) |
|
|
Partners, L.P. |
|
|
Not |
|
|
|
July 12, 2004 |
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
Contributed |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Cash |
|
$ |
2,268 |
|
|
$ |
2,268 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Accounts receivable trade |
|
|
850 |
|
|
|
800 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Accounts receivable affiliates |
|
|
51,934 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,934 |
|
Prepaid and other current assets |
|
|
292 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
Properties and equipment, net |
|
|
95,337 |
|
|
|
76,605 |
|
|
|
18,732 |
|
Transportation agreement, net |
|
|
5,692 |
|
|
|
5,692 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
|
156,373 |
|
|
|
85,538 |
|
|
|
70,835 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable trade |
|
|
1,452 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
1,113 |
|
Accounts payable affiliates |
|
|
18,819 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,819 |
|
Accrued liabilities |
|
|
1,018 |
|
|
|
534 |
|
|
|
484 |
|
Short-term debt |
|
|
30,082 |
|
|
|
30,082 |
|
|
|
|
|
Non-current liabilities |
|
|
1,775 |
|
|
|
1,138 |
|
|
|
637 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
13,263 |
|
|
|
13,263 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
66,409 |
|
|
|
45,356 |
|
|
|
21,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Assets |
|
$ |
89,964 |
|
|
$ |
40,182 |
|
|
$ |
49,782 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We used the proceeds of the public offering and $25 million drawn under our credit facility
agreement to: establish $9.9 million working capital for HEP, distribute $125.6 million to Holly,
repay $30.1 million of short-term debt to Holly, pay $13.8 million underwriting commissions and
other offering costs, and pay $1.4 million of deferred debt issuance costs related to the credit
facility.
- 60 -
In connection with the offering, we entered into a 15-year pipelines and terminals agreement with
Holly and several of its subsidiaries (the Holly PTA) under which they agreed generally to
transport or terminal volumes on certain of our initial facilities that will result in funds to HEP
that will equal or exceed a specified minimum revenue amount annually (which is currently $36.7
million and adjusts upward each year based on the producer price index) over the term of the
agreement.
We also entered into an omnibus agreement with Holly and certain of its subsidiaries that became
effective July 13, 2004 (the Omnibus Agreement) that specifies the services that Holly provides
to us. Under the Omnibus Agreement, Holly is charging us $2.0 million annually for general and
administrative services that it provides, including but not limited to: executive, finance, legal,
information technology and administrative services.
Note 3: Acquisitions
Alon Transaction
On February 28, 2005, we closed on a contribution agreement with Alon that provided for our
acquisition of four refined products pipelines, an associated tank farm and two refined products
terminals. These pipelines and terminals are located primarily in Texas and transport light
refined products for Alons refinery in Big Spring, Texas.
The total consideration paid for these pipeline and terminal assets was $120 million in cash and
937,500 of our Class B subordinated units which, subject to certain conditions, will convert into
an equal number of common units in five years. We financed the Alon transaction with a portion of
the proceeds of our private offering of $150 million principal amount of 6.25% senior notes due
2015 (see Note 8 for further information on the Senior Notes). In connection with the Alon
transaction, we entered into a 15-year pipelines and terminals agreement with Alon (the Alon
PTA). Under this agreement, Alon agreed to transport on the pipelines and throughput volumes
through the terminals, a volume of refined products that would result in minimum revenues to us of
$20.2 million per year in the first year. The agreed upon tariffs at the minimum volume commitment
will increase or decrease each year at a rate equal to the percentage change in the producer price
index (PPI), but not below the initial tariffs. Alons minimum volume commitment was calculated
based on 90% of Alons then recent usage of these pipelines and terminals taking into account an
expansion of Alons Big Spring Refinery completed in February 2005. At revenue levels above 105%
of the base revenue amount, as adjusted each year for changes in the PPI, Alon will receive an
annual 50% discount on incremental revenues. Alons obligations under the Alon PTA may be reduced
or suspended under certain circumstances. We granted Alon a second mortgage on the pipelines and
terminals acquired from Alon to secure certain of Alons rights under the Alon PTA. Alon will have
a right of first refusal to purchase the pipelines and terminals if we decide to sell them in the
future. Additionally, we entered into an environmental agreement with Alon with respect to
pre-closing environmental costs and liabilities relating to the pipelines and terminals acquired
from Alon, where Alon will indemnify us subject to a $100,000 deductible and a $20 million maximum
liability cap.
The consideration for the Alon pipeline and terminal assets was allocated to the individual assets
acquired based on their estimated fair values. The allocation of the consideration is based on an
independent appraisal. The aggregate consideration amounted to $146.7 million, which consisted of
$24.7 million fair value of our Class B subordinated units, $120 million in cash and $2.0 million
of transaction costs. In accounting for this acquisition, we recorded pipeline and terminal assets
of $86.7 million and an intangible asset of $60.0 million, representing the allocated value of the
15-year Alon PTA. This intangible asset is included in Transportation agreements, net in our
consolidated balance sheets.
- 61 -
Holly Intermediate Pipelines Transaction
On July 6, 2005, we entered into a definitive purchase agreement (the Purchase Agreement) with
Holly to acquire Hollys two parallel intermediate feedstock pipelines (the Intermediate
Pipelines) which connect its Lovington, New Mexico and Artesia, New Mexico refining facilities.
On July 8, 2005, we closed on the acquisition for $81.5 million, which consisted of $77.7 million
in cash, 70,000 common units of HEP and a capital account credit of $1.0 million to maintain
Hollys existing general partner interest in the Partnership. We financed the cash portion of the
consideration for the Intermediate Pipelines with the proceeds raised from (a) the private sale of
1,100,000 of our common units for $45.1 million to a limited number of institutional investors
which closed simultaneously with the acquisition and (b) an additional $35.0 million in principal
amount of our 6.25% senior notes due 2015. This acquisition was made pursuant to an option to
purchase these pipelines granted by Holly to us at the time of our initial public offering in July
2004.
In connection with this transaction, we entered into a 15-year pipelines agreement with Holly (the
Holly IPA). Under this agreement, Holly agreed to transport volumes of intermediate products on
the Intermediate Pipelines that, at the agreed tariff rates, will result in minimum funds to us of
approximately $11.8 million per calendar year. The minimum commitment and the full base tariff
will be adjusted each year at a rate equal to the percentage change in the PPI, but the minimum
commitment will not decrease as a result of a decrease in the PPI. Hollys minimum revenue
commitment will apply only to the Intermediate Pipelines, and Holly will not be able to spread its
minimum revenue commitment among pipeline assets HEP already owns or subsequently acquires. If
Holly fails to meet its minimum revenue commitment in any quarter, it will be required to pay us in
cash the amount of any shortfall by the last day of the month following the end of the quarter. A
shortfall payment may be applied as a credit in the following four quarters after Hollys minimum
obligations are met. As of December 31, 2005, $1.0 million of shortfalls had been billed to Holly
under the Holly IPA and is available to be applied as credits to the billings in 2006 for shipments
on the Intermediate Pipelines that exceed the minimum commitment. The Holly IPA may be extended by
the mutual agreement of the parties.
We have agreed to expend up to $3.5 million to expand the capacity of the Intermediate Pipelines to
meet the needs of Hollys previously announced expansion of their Navajo Refinery, of which we had
spent $2.3 million as of December 31, 2005. If new laws or regulations are enacted that require us
to make substantial and unanticipated capital expenditures with regard to the Intermediate
Pipelines, we have the right to amend the tariff rates to recover our costs of complying with these
new laws or regulations (including a reasonable rate of return). Under certain circumstances,
either party may temporarily suspend its obligations under the Holly IPA. We granted Holly a
second mortgage on the Intermediate Pipelines to secure certain of Hollys rights under the Holly
IPA. Holly has agreed to provide $2.5 million of additional indemnification above that previously
provided in the Omnibus Agreement for environmental noncompliance and remediation liabilities
occurring or existing before the closing date of the Purchase Agreement, bringing the total
indemnification provided to us from Holly to $17.5 million. Of this total, indemnification above
$15 million relates solely to the Intermediate Pipelines.
As this transaction was among entities under common control, we recorded the acquired assets at
Hollys historic book value of $6.8 million. The $71.9 million excess of the purchase price over
the historic book value is recorded as a reduction to partners equity for financial accounting
purposes.
- 62 -
Note 4: Properties and Equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Pipelines and terminals |
|
$ |
184,464 |
|
|
$ |
97,084 |
|
Land and right of way |
|
|
22,163 |
|
|
|
11,587 |
|
Other |
|
|
5,728 |
|
|
|
4,725 |
|
Construction in progress |
|
|
2,792 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
215,147 |
|
|
|
113,597 |
|
Less accumulated depreciation |
|
|
52,849 |
|
|
|
38,971 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
162,298 |
|
|
$ |
74,626 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, we did not capitalize any interest related
to major construction projects.
Note 5: Transportation Agreements
The costs of 2 transportation agreements are recorded on our consolidated balance sheets at
December 31, 2005:
|
|
Costs incurred by Rio Grande in constructing certain
pipeline and terminal facilities located in Mexico, which were
then contributed to an affiliate of Pemex, the national oil
company of Mexico. In exchange, Rio Grande received a 10-year
transportation agreement from BP plc expiring in 2007. This
asset is being amortized over the 10-year term of the
agreement. |
|
|
|
A portion of the total purchase price of the Alon assets
was allocated to the transportation agreement asset based on
the fair value appraisal provided by an independent firm.
This asset is being amortized over 30 years ending 2035, the
15-year initial term of the Alon PTA plus the expected 15-year
extension period. |
The carrying amounts of the transportation agreements are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Rio Grande transportation agreement |
|
$ |
20,836 |
|
|
$ |
20,836 |
|
Alon transportation agreement |
|
|
59,933 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less accumulated amortization |
|
|
19,866 |
|
|
|
16,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
60,903 |
|
|
$ |
4,718 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 6: Investment in Rio Grande Pipeline Company
In 1995, our predecessor (NPL) entered into a joint venture, Rio Grande, to transport liquid
petroleum gas to northern Mexico. NPL had a 25% interest in the joint venture through June 30,
2003 and accounted for this interest using the equity method. Effective June 30, 2003, we acquired
an additional 45% interest in Rio Grande for $28.7 million, less cash acquired of $7.3 million.
Subsequent to June 30, 2003, Rio Grande has been consolidated in our financial statements. The
following condensed financial information of Rio Grande relates to the period prior to its full
consolidation in our financial statements.
- 63 -
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2003 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Current assets |
|
$ |
7,914 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
34,905 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
7,843 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
50,662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities |
|
$ |
437 |
|
Partners equity |
|
|
50,225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
50,662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, 2003 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
6,591 |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
2,140 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
2,156 |
|
|
|
|
|
The $28.7 million purchase price for the additional 45% was $6.1 million greater than the
underlying equity in the net assets of Rio Grande. Had the purchase been made effective January 1,
2003, the financial statements of Rio Grande would have been included in our consolidated financial
statements for each subsequent period with the following pro forma impact on the consolidated
statements of operations for the year ended December 31, 2003.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2003 |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
Revenues as reported |
|
$ |
30,800 |
|
Revenues from Rio Grande Pipeline Company |
|
|
6,591 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma revenues |
|
$ |
37,391 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income as reported |
|
$ |
581 |
|
Additional income from acquired interest |
|
|
970 |
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income |
|
$ |
1,551 |
|
|
|
|
|
Note 7: Employees, Retirement and Benefit Plans
Employees who provide direct services to us are employed by Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C., a
Holly subsidiary. Their costs, including salaries, bonuses, payroll taxes, benefits, and other
direct costs, are charged to us monthly in accordance with the Omnibus Agreement.
These employees participate in the retirement and benefit plans of Holly. Our share of retirement
and benefits costs for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003 was $0.9 million, $0.8
million and $0.8 million, respectively. Included in these amounts are retirement benefit costs of
$0.4 million, $0.3 million, and $0.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003,
respectively.
We have adopted a Long-Term Incentive Plan for employees, consultants and directors who perform
services for us. The Long-Term Incentive Plan consists of four components: restricted units,
performance units, unit options and unit appreciation rights.
On December 31, 2005, we had two types of equity-based compensation, which are described below.
The compensation cost charged against income for these plans was $225,000, $30,000 and $0 for the
years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. It is currently our policy to purchase
units in the open market instead of issuing new units for settlement of restricted unit grants. At
December 31, 2005, 350,000 units were authorized to be granted under the equity-based compensation
plans, of which 329,074 had not yet been granted.
- 64 -
We elected early adoption of SFAS 123 (revised) on July 1, 2005, based on modified prospective
application. The effect of this change in accounting principle was immaterial to our financial
condition and results of operations.
Restricted Units
Under our Long-Term Incentive Plan, we grant restricted units to selected employees, consultants
and directors who perform services for us, with vesting generally over a period of two to five
years. Although full ownership of the units does not transfer to the recipients until the units
vest, the recipients have distribution and voting rights on these units from the date of grant.
The vesting for certain key executives is contingent upon certain earnings per unit targets being
realized. The fair value of each unit of restricted unit awards was measured at the market price
as of the date of grant and is being amortized over the vesting period, including the units issued
to the key executives, as we expect those units to fully vest.
A summary of restricted unit activity as of December 31, 2005, and changes during the years ended
December 31, 2005 and 2004 is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant-Date |
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Value |
|
Restricted Units |
|
Grants |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Term |
|
|
($000) |
|
Outstanding January 1, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
6,489 |
|
|
|
34.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting and transfer of
full ownership to
recipients |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December
31, 2004 (not vested) |
|
|
6,489 |
|
|
|
34.32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
14,437 |
|
|
|
43.97 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vesting and transfer of
full ownership to
recipients |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December
31, 2005 (not vested) |
|
|
20,926 |
|
|
$ |
40.98 |
|
|
2.5 years |
|
$ |
772 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There were no restricted units vested or transferred to recipients during the years ended December
31, 2005 and 2004. As of December 31, 2005, there was $0.5 million of total unrecognized
compensation costs related to nonvested restricted unit grants. That cost is expected to be
recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.5 years.
Performance Units
Under our Long-Term Incentive Plan, we grant performance units to selected executives and employees
who perform services for us. These performance units are payable in cash upon meeting the
performance criteria over a service period, and generally vest over a period of three years. The
cash benefit payable under these grants is based upon our unit price and upon our total unitholder
return during the requisite period as compared to the total unitholder return of a selected peer
group of partnerships. The fair value of each performance unit award is revalued quarterly based
on our valuation model and the corresponding expense is amortized over the vesting periods.
The fair value of the performance units is based on an expected cash flow approach at the grant
date and at the end of each subsequent quarter. The analysis utilizes the current unit price,
distribution yield, historical total returns as of the measurement date, expected total returns
based on a capital asset pricing model methodology, standard deviation of historical returns, and
comparison of expected total returns with the peer group. The expected total return and historical
standard deviation is applied to a lognormal expected return distribution in a Monte Carlo
simulation model to identify the expected range of potential
- 65 -
returns and probabilities of expected returns. The range of inputs reflects changes in the
remaining life of the performance units and changes in market conditions between measurement dates.
The inputs affecting the range of expected total returns for HEP and the peer group are based on a
capital asset pricing model utilizing information available at each measurement date.
|
|
|
|
|
Data Elements Used in Analysis |
Closing price of HEP common units December 30, 2005 |
|
$ |
36.89 |
|
Latest quarterly distribution per limited unit |
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
Risk-free rate |
|
|
4.41 |
% |
The monthly standard deviation of returns is based on the standard deviation of historical
return information. The range of expected returns and standard deviation is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected Return |
|
|
Standard Deviation |
|
Company |
|
on Equity |
|
|
(Monthly) |
|
HEP |
|
|
13.75% |
|
|
|
7.6% |
|
Peer group |
|
9.75% to 11.25% |
|
4.3% to 5.4% |
A summary of performance units activity as of December 31, 2005, and changes during the year
ended December 31, 2005 is presented below:
|
|
|
|
|
Performance Units |
|
Grants |
|
Outstanding at January 1, 2005 (not vested) |
|
|
|
|
Vesting and payment of cash benefit to recipients |
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
1,514 |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2005 (not vested) |
|
|
1,514 |
|
|
|
|
|
There were no cash payments for performance units vesting during the years ended December 31,
2005, 2004 and 2003. As of December 31, 2005, the liability associated with these awards was
$18,000 and is recorded in Other current liabilities on our balance sheet. Based on the weighted
average fair value at December 31, 2005 of $42.30, there was $43,000 of total unrecognized
compensation cost related to nonvested performance units. That cost is expected to be recognized
over a weighted-average period of 2.0 years.
In February 2006, we announced our intent to amend certain existing performance units agreements to
provide payment of these awards in HEP common units rather than payment in cash.
Under SFAS 123 (revised), the performance unit awards are measured and recorded at fair value, we
previously recorded them at intrinsic value. The total cumulative effect of this change in
accounting principle is immaterial.
Note 8: Debt
Credit Agreement
In conjunction with our initial public offering on July 13, 2004, we entered into a four-year, $100
million senior secured revolving credit agreement (the Credit Agreement). Union Bank of
California, N.A. is one of the lenders and serves as administrative agent under this agreement.
Upon closing of our initial public offering, we drew $25 million under the Credit Agreement, which
was outstanding at December 31, 2004.
We amended the Credit Agreement effective February 28, 2005 to allow for the closing of the Alon
transaction and the related senior notes offering as well as to amend certain of the restrictive
covenants. With a portion of the proceeds from the senior note offering, we repaid $30 million of
outstanding
- 66 -
indebtedness under the Credit Agreement, including $5 million drawn shortly before the closing of
the Alon transaction. As of June 17, 2005, we amended the Credit Agreement to restate the
definition of certain terms used in the restrictive covenants. We amended the Credit Agreement
effective July 8, 2005 to allow for the closing of the Holly Intermediate Pipelines transaction as
well as to amend certain of the restrictive covenants. As of December 31, 2005, we had no amounts
outstanding under the Credit Agreement.
The Credit Agreement is available to fund capital expenditures, acquisitions, and working capital
and for general partnership purposes. Advances under the Credit Agreement that are designated for
working capital are short-term liabilities. Other advances under the Credit Agreement are
classified as long-term liabilities. In addition, the Credit Agreement is available to fund
letters of credit up to a $50 million sub-limit. Up to $5 million is available to fund
distributions to unitholders.
We have the right to request an increase in the maximum amount of the Credit Agreement, up to $175
million. Such request will become effective if (a) certain conditions specified in the Credit
Agreement are met and (b) existing lenders under the Credit Agreement or other financial
institutions reasonably acceptable to the administrative agent commit to lend such increased
amounts under the agreement.
Our obligations under the Credit Agreement are secured by substantially all of our assets.
Indebtedness under the Credit Agreement is recourse to our general partner and guaranteed by our
wholly-owned subsidiaries.
We may prepay all loans at any time without penalty. We are required to reduce all working capital
borrowings under the Credit Agreement to zero for a period of at least 15 consecutive days once
each twelve-month period prior to the maturity date of the agreement. The initial $25 million
borrowing was not a working capital borrowing under the Credit Agreement and was classified as a
long-term liability at December 31, 2004.
Indebtedness under the Credit Agreement bears interest, at our option, at either (a) the base rate
as announced by the administrative agent plus an applicable margin (ranging from 0.25% to 1.00%) or
(b) at a rate equal to the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) plus an applicable margin
(ranging from 1.50% to 2.25%). In each case, the applicable margin is based upon the ratio of our
funded debt (as defined in the agreement) to EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation
and amortization, as defined in the Credit Agreement). We incur a commitment fee on the unused
portion of the Credit Agreement at a rate of 0.375% or 0.500% based upon the ratio of our funded
debt to EBITDA for the four most recently completed fiscal quarters. At December 31, 2005, we are
subject to the 0.500% rate on the $100 million of the unused commitment on the Credit Agreement.
The agreement matures in July 2008. At that time, the agreement will terminate and all outstanding
amounts thereunder will be due and payable.
The Credit Agreement imposes certain requirements, including: a prohibition against distribution to
unitholders if, before or after the distribution, a potential default or an event of default as
defined in the agreement would occur; limitations on our ability to incur debt, make loans, acquire
other companies, change the nature of our business, enter a merger or consolidation, or sell
assets; and covenants that require maintenance of EBITDA to interest expense ratio and debt to
EBITDA ratio. If an event of default exists under the agreement, the lenders will be able to
accelerate the maturity of the debt and exercise other rights and remedies.
Senior Notes Due 2015
We financed the $120 million cash portion of the Alon transaction through our private offering on
February 28, 2005 of $150 million principal amount of 6.25% senior notes due 2015 (Senior Notes).
We used the balance to repay $30 million of outstanding indebtedness under our Credit Agreement,
including $5 million drawn shortly before the closing of the Alon transaction.
We financed a portion of the cash consideration for the Intermediate Pipelines transaction with the
private offering in June 2005 of an additional $35.0 million in principal amount of the Senior
Notes.
- 67 -
The Senior Notes mature on March 1, 2015 and bear interest at 6.25%. The Senior Notes are
unsecured and impose certain restrictive covenants, including limitations on our ability to incur
additional indebtedness, make investments, sell assets, incur certain liens, pay distributions,
enter into transactions with affiliates, and enter into mergers. At any time when the Senior Notes
are rated investment grade by both Moodys and Standard & Poors and no default or event of default
exists, we will not be subject to many of the foregoing covenants. Additionally, we have certain
redemption rights under the Senior Notes.
On July 28, 2005, we filed a registration statement to allow the holders of the Senior Notes to
exchange the Senior Notes for exchange notes registered with the SEC with substantially identical
terms, which registration became effective in September 2005. The exchange was completed in
October 2005. The exchange notes are generally freely transferable but are a new issue of
securities for which certain of the initial purchasers have indicated they intend to make a market
but for which there may not initially be a market.
The $185 million principal amount of Senior Notes is recorded at $180.7 million on our consolidated
balance sheet at December 31, 2005. The difference of $4.3 million is due to $3.5 million of
unamortized discount and $0.8 million relating to the fair value of the interest rate swap contract
discussed below.
Interest Rate Risk Management
We have entered into an interest rate swap contract to effectively convert the interest expense
associated with $60 million of our 6.25% Senior Notes from a fixed rate to a variable rate. The
interest rate on the $60 million notional amount is equal to three month LIBOR plus an applicable
margin of 1.1575%, which equaled an effective interest rate of 4.84% on $60 million of the debt
during the year ended December 31, 2005. The maturity of the swap contract is March 1, 2015,
matching the maturity of the Senior Notes.
This interest rate swap has been designated as a fair value hedge as defined by SFAS No. 133. Our
interest rate swap meets the conditions required to assume no ineffectiveness under SFAS No. 133
and, therefore, we have used the shortcut method of accounting prescribed for fair value hedges
by SFAS No. 133. Accordingly, we adjust the carrying value of the swap to its fair value each
quarter, with an offsetting entry to adjust the carrying value of the debt securities whose fair
value is being hedged. We record interest expense equal to the variable rate payments under the
swaps.
The fair value of our interest rate swap of $0.8 million is included in Other long-term
liabilities in our consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2005. The offsetting entry to
adjust the carrying value of the debt securities whose fair value is being hedged is recognized as
a reduction of Long-term debt on our consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2005.
Other Debt Information
For the year ended December 31, 2005, interest expense includes: $8.4 million of interest on
outstanding debt, net of the impact of the interest rate swap; $0.4 million of commitment fees on
the unused portion of the Credit Agreement; and $0.8 million of amortization of the discount on the
Senior Notes and deferred debt issuance costs. As no interest expense was incurred prior to
formation on July 13, 2004, only $0.7 million of interest expense was recorded on the Credit
Agreement and commitment fees for the year ended December 31, 2004. We made cash payments of $8.5
million, $0.5 million and $0 for interest in the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003,
respectively.
The carrying amounts of our debt recorded on our consolidated balance sheets approximate fair
value, based on a determination by a third-party investment firm.
- 68 -
Note 9: Commitments and Contingencies
We lease certain facilities, pipelines and rights of way under operating leases, most of which
contain renewal options. The pipeline lease terminates in 2007, but has a 10-year renewal option
that is likely to be exercised. The right of way agreements have various termination dates through
2036.
As of December 31, 2005, the minimum future rental commitments under operating leases having
non-cancelable lease terms in excess of one year are as follows (not including a 10-year renewal
option on the pipeline operating lease that is likely to be exercised):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$000s |
|
2006 |
|
$ |
5,961 |
|
2007 |
|
|
2,951 |
|
2008 |
|
|
139 |
|
2009 |
|
|
85 |
|
2010 |
|
|
72 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
1,728 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
10,936 |
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expense charged to operations was $5.6 million, $5.3 million and $5.6 million in the
years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
We are a party to various legal and regulatory proceedings, none of which we believe will have a
material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Note 10: Significant Customers
All revenues are domestic revenues, of which over 90% are currently generated from our three
largest customers: Holly and two third party customers. The major concentration of our petroleum
products pipeline systems revenues is derived from activities conducted in the southwest United
States. The following table presents the percentage of total revenues generated by each of these
three customers for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
2003 |
Holly |
|
|
55 |
% |
|
|
67 |
% |
|
|
45 |
% |
BP plc |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
18 |
% |
|
|
22 |
% |
Alon |
|
|
30 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
Note 11: Related Party Transactions
Holly
We have related party transactions with Holly for pipeline and terminal revenues, certain employee
costs, insurance costs, and administrative costs under the Holly PTA, Holly IPA and Omnibus
Agreement (see Notes 2 and 3). Additionally, we received interest income from Holly during the
years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003, based on common treasury accounts prior to our initial
public offering on July 13, 2004. Since that date, we maintain our own treasury accounts separate
from Holly.
|
|
Pipeline and terminal revenues received from Holly were
$44.2 million, $45.3 million and $13.9 million for the years
ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. These
amounts include the revenues received under the Holly PTA and
Holly IPA, as well as revenues received by the predecessor
prior to formation in July 2004. |
- 69 -
|
|
Holly charged general and administrative services under
the Omnibus Agreement of $2.0 million and $0.9 million for the
years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. |
|
|
|
We reimbursed Holly for costs of employees supporting our
operations of $6.5 million and $2.2 million for the years
ended December 31, 2005 and 2004. |
|
|
|
In the year ended December 31, 2005, Holly reimbursed
$0.2 million to us for certain costs paid on their behalf. In
the year ended December 31, 2004, we reimbursed Holly $3.9
million for certain formation, debt issuance and other costs
paid on our behalf. |
|
|
|
In the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, we
distributed $16.5 million and $3.2 million, respectively, to
Holly as regular distributions on its subordinated units,
common units and general partner interest. |
|
|
|
We acquired the Intermediate Pipelines from Holly in July
2005, which resulted in payment to Holly of a purchase price
of $71.9 million in excess of the basis of the assets
received. See Note 3 for further information on the
Intermediate Pipelines transaction. |
|
|
|
In the year ended December 31, 2004, we distributed
$125.6 million to Holly concurrent with our initial public
offering and we repaid $30.1 million to Holly for short-term
borrowings that originated in 2003. |
|
|
|
Our net accounts receivable from Holly were $3.6 million
and $2.1 million at December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. |
|
|
|
Included in Deferred revenue at December 31, 2005 is
$1.0 million of shortfall commitments that we billed to Holly
under the Holly IPA in 2005. |
BP plc
Beginning June 30, 2003, we have a 70% ownership interest in Rio Grande. Due to the ownership
interest and resulting consolidation, the other partner of Rio Grande BP plc (BP) is a
related party to us.
|
|
BP is the sole customer of Rio Grande, and we recorded
revenues from them of $8.8 million, $12.4 million and $6.9
million in the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and for the
period from June 30, 2003 to December 31, 2003, respectively. |
|
|
|
Rio Grande paid distributions to BP of $2.2 million, $3.2
million and $1.4 million in the years ended December 31, 2005,
2004 and the period from June 30, 2003 to December 31, 2003,
respectively. |
|
|
|
Included in our accounts receivable trade at December
31, 2005 and 2004 were $0.5 million, which represented the
receivable balance of Rio Grande from BP. |
Alon
Alon became a related party when it acquired all of our Class B subordinated units in connection
with our acquisition of assets from them on February 28, 2005.
|
|
Subsequent to the issuance of these units, we recognized
$17.6 million of revenues for pipeline transportation
terminalling services under the Alon PTA and $5.6 million
under a capacity lease for the year ended December 31, 2005. |
|
|
|
In the year ended December 31, 2005, we paid $1.6 million
to Alon for distributions on our Class B subordinated units. |
|
|
|
At December 31, 2005, $2.4 million accounts receivable
from Alon were included in our accounts receivable trade
balance. |
- 70 -
Note 12: Partners Equity, Allocations and Cash Distributions
Issuances of units
Upon the closing of our initial public offering, Holly received 7,000,000 subordinated units, which
constituted 49% ownership of us at that time, and a 2% general partner interest. During the
subordination period, the common units will have the right to receive distributions of available
cash from operating surplus in an amount equal to the minimum quarterly distribution of $0.50 per
quarter, plus any arrearages in the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the common
units from prior quarters, before any distributions of available cash from operating surplus may be
made on the subordinated units. The purpose of the subordinated units is to increase the
likelihood that during the subordination period there will be available cash to be distributed on
the common units. The subordination period will extend until the first day of any quarter
beginning after June 30, 2009 that each of the following tests are met: distributions of available
cash from operating surplus on each of the outstanding common units and subordinated units equaled
or exceeded the minimum quarterly distribution for each of the three consecutive, non-overlapping
four-quarter periods immediately preceding that date; the adjusted operating surplus (as defined
in its partnership agreement) generated during each of the three consecutive, non-overlapping
four-quarter periods immediately preceding that date equaled or exceeded the sum of the minimum
quarterly distributions on all of the outstanding common units and subordinated units during those
periods on a fully diluted basis and the related distribution on the 2% general partner interest
during those periods; and there are no arrearages in payment of the minimum quarterly distribution
on the common units. If the unitholders remove the general partner without cause, the
subordination period may end before June 30, 2009.
The Holly subordinated units may convert to common units on a one-for-one basis when certain
conditions are met. The partnership agreement sets forth the calculation to be used to determine
the amount and priority of cash distributions that the common unitholders, subordinated unitholders
and general partner will receive.
As partial consideration in the Alon transaction in the first quarter of 2005, we issued 937,500 of
our Class B subordinated units at a fair value of $24.7 million. Additionally, our general partner
contributed $0.6 million as an additional capital contribution to maintain its 2% general partner
interest.
We financed a portion of the cash consideration paid for the Intermediate Pipelines with $45.1
million of proceeds raised from the private sale of 1,100,000 of our common units to a limited
number of institutional investors which closed on July 8, 2005. On September 2, 2005, we filed a
registration statement with the SEC using a shelf registration process which allows the
institutional investors to freely transfer their units. Additionally under this shelf process, we
may offer from time to time up to $800 million of our securities, through one or more prospectus
supplements that would describe, among other things, the specific amounts, prices and terms of any
securities offered and how the proceeds would be used. Any proceeds from the sale of securities
would be used for general business purposes, which may include, among other things, funding
acquisitions of assets or businesses, working capital, capital expenditures, investments in
subsidiaries, the retirement of existing debt and/or the repurchase of common units or other
securities.
In connection with the Intermediate Pipelines transaction, we issued 70,000 common units to Holly.
We also received a portion of the Intermediate Pipeline assets with $1.0 million book value as a
capital contribution from HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P. in order to maintain their 2% general
partner interest.
As a result of these transactions, Hollys total ownership interest was reduced from 51% at the
time of our initial public offering to 45.0% in July 2005 following the Intermediate Pipelines
transaction.
- 71 -
Allocations of Net Income
Net income is allocated between limited partners and the general partner interest in accordance
with the provisions of the partnership agreement. Net income allocated to the general partner
includes any incentive distributions declared in the period. After the amount of incentive
distributions is allocated to the general partner, the remaining net income for the period is
generally allocated to the partners based on their weighted average ownership percentage during the
period.
Cash Distributions
Concurrent with our initial public offering in July 2004, we distributed $125.6 million to Holly
and its subsidiaries. See Note 2 for additional information. In July 2005, our cash payment to
Holly in excess of the basis of the assets received in the acquisition of the Intermediate
Pipelines was also recorded as a distribution to our general partner in the amount of $71.9
million. See Note 3 for further discussion of this transaction.
We intend to consider regular cash distributions to unitholders on a quarterly basis, although
there is no assurance as to the future cash distributions since they are dependent upon future
earnings, cash flows, capital requirements, financial condition and other factors. Our Credit
Agreement prohibits us from making cash distributions if any potential default or event of default,
as defined in the Credit Agreement, occurs or would result form the cash distribution.
Within 45 days after the end of each quarter, we will distribute all of our available cash (as
defined in our partnership agreement) to unitholders of record on the applicable record date. The
amount of available cash generally is all cash on hand at the end of the quarter; less the amount
of cash reserves established by our general partner to provide for the proper conduct of our
business, comply with applicable law, any of our debt instruments, or other agreements; or provide
funds for distributions to our unitholders and to our general partner for any one or more of the
next four quarters; plus all cash on hand on the date of determination of available cash for the
quarter resulting from working capital borrowings made after the end of the quarter. Working
capital borrowings are generally borrowings that are made under our revolving Credit Agreement and
in all cases are used solely for working capital purposes or to pay distributions to partners.
We will make distributions of available cash from operating surplus for any quarter during any
subordination period in the following manner: firstly, 98% to the common unitholders, pro rata, and
2% to the general partner, until we distribute for each outstanding common unit an amount equal to
the minimum quarterly distribution for that quarter; secondly, 98% to the common unitholders, pro
rata, and 2% to the general partner, until we distribute for each outstanding common unit an amount
equal to any arrearages in payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the common units for
any prior quarters during the subordination period; thirdly, 98% to the subordinated unitholders,
pro rata, and 2% to the general partner, until we distribute for each subordinated unit an amount
equal to the minimum quarterly distribution for that quarter; and thereafter, cash in excess of the
minimum quarterly distributions is distributed to the unitholders and the general partner based on
the percentages below.
The general partner, HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., is entitled to incentive distributions if the
amount we distribute with respect to any quarter exceeds specified target levels shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marginal Percentage Interest in |
|
|
Total Quarterly Distribution |
|
Distributions |
|
|
Target Amount |
|
Unitholders |
|
General Partner |
Minimum Quarterly Distribution |
|
$ |
0.50 |
|
|
|
98 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
First Target Distribution |
|
Up to $0.55 |
|
|
98 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
Second Target Distribution |
|
above $0.55 up to $0.625 |
|
|
85 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
Third Target distribution |
|
above $0.625 up to $0.75 |
|
|
75 |
% |
|
|
25 |
% |
Thereafter |
|
Above $0.75 |
|
|
50 |
% |
|
|
50 |
% |
- 72 -
In November 2004, we paid our first regular cash distribution for the third quarter of 2004 of
$0.435 per unit, based on the minimum quarterly cash distribution of $0.50 prorated for the period
since the initial public offering on July 13, 2004.
The following table presents the allocation of our regular quarterly cash distributions to the
general and limited partners for each period in which declared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 |
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
through |
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per unit data) |
|
General partner interest |
|
$ |
697 |
|
|
$ |
124 |
|
General partner incentive distribution |
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total general partner distribution |
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
Limited partner distribution |
|
|
34,137 |
|
|
|
6,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total regular quarterly cash distribution |
|
$ |
35,022 |
|
|
$ |
6,214 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash distribution per unit applicable to
limited partners |
|
$ |
2.225 |
|
|
$ |
0.435 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On January 27, 2006, we announced a cash distribution for the fourth quarter of 2005 of $0.625
per unit. The distribution is payable on all common, subordinated, and general partner units and
was paid February 14, 2006 to all unitholders of record on February 6, 2006. The aggregate amount
of the distribution was $10.5 million, including $189,000 paid to the general partner as an
incentive distribution.
- 73 -
Note 13: Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)
Summarized quarterly financial data is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First |
|
Second |
|
Third |
|
Fourth |
|
Total |
|
|
(In thousands, except per unit data) |
Year ended December 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
16,513 |
|
|
$ |
19,521 |
|
|
$ |
21,517 |
|
|
$ |
22,569 |
|
|
$ |
80,120 |
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
7,785 |
|
|
$ |
8,234 |
|
|
$ |
10,185 |
|
|
$ |
10,336 |
|
|
$ |
36,540 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
6,326 |
|
|
$ |
6,041 |
|
|
$ |
7,292 |
|
|
$ |
7,157 |
|
|
$ |
26,816 |
|
Limited partners interest in net income |
|
$ |
6,200 |
|
|
$ |
5,920 |
|
|
$ |
7,084 |
|
|
$ |
6,891 |
|
|
$ |
26,095 |
|
Net income per limited partner unit basic and diluted |
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
|
$ |
0.40 |
|
|
$ |
0.44 |
|
|
$ |
0.43 |
|
|
$ |
1.70 |
|
Distributions declared per limited partner unit |
|
$ |
0.50 |
|
|
$ |
0.55 |
|
|
$ |
0.575 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
2.225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
18,771 |
|
|
$ |
18,520 |
|
|
$ |
14,482 |
|
|
$ |
15,993 |
|
|
$ |
67,766 |
|
Operating income |
|
$ |
10,273 |
|
|
$ |
10,621 |
|
|
$ |
6,600 |
|
|
$ |
7,547 |
|
|
$ |
35,041 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
9,620 |
|
|
$ |
10,351 |
|
|
$ |
5,991 |
|
|
$ |
6,532 |
|
|
$ |
32,494 |
|
Limited partners interest in net income (1) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4,762 |
|
|
$ |
6,400 |
|
|
$ |
11,162 |
|
Net income per limited partner unit basic and
diluted (1) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.34 |
|
|
$ |
0.46 |
|
|
$ |
0.80 |
|
Distributions declared per limited partner unit |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.435 |
|
|
$ |
0.435 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
5,662 |
|
|
$ |
6,112 |
|
|
$ |
9,563 |
|
|
$ |
9,463 |
|
|
$ |
30,800 |
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
$ |
(683 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,161 |
) |
|
$ |
479 |
|
|
$ |
1,519 |
|
|
$ |
154 |
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
(361 |
) |
|
$ |
(872 |
) |
|
$ |
354 |
|
|
$ |
1,460 |
|
|
$ |
581 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Calculated for the period beginning with our initial public offering on July 13, 2004. |
Note 14: Supplemental Guarantor/Non-Guarantor Financial Information
Obligations of Holly Energy Partners, L.P. (Parent) under the Senior Notes have been jointly and
severally guaranteed by each of its direct and indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries (Guarantor
Subsidiaries). These guarantees are full and unconditional. Rio Grande (Non-Guarantor), in
which we have a 70% ownership interest, is the only subsidiary which has not guaranteed these
obligations.
The following financial information presents condensed consolidating balance sheets, statements of
income, and statements of cash flows of the Parent, the Guarantor Subsidiaries and the
Non-Guarantor. The information has been presented as if the Parent accounted for its ownership in
the Guarantor Subsidiaries, and the Guarantor Subsidiaries accounted for the ownership of the
Non-Guarantor, using the equity method of accounting.
- 74 -
Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
17,770 |
|
|
$ |
2,811 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
20,583 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,206 |
|
|
|
515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,721 |
|
Intercompany accounts receivable (payable) |
|
|
(21,182 |
) |
|
|
21,458 |
|
|
|
(276 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid and other current assets |
|
|
232 |
|
|
|
1,169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
(20,948 |
) |
|
|
46,603 |
|
|
|
3,050 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,705 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Properties and equipment, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
128,077 |
|
|
|
34,221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
162,298 |
|
Investment in subsidiaries |
|
|
256,416 |
|
|
|
27,423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(283,839 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Transportation agreements, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
58,269 |
|
|
|
2,634 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,903 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
1,594 |
|
|
|
1,275 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,869 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
237,062 |
|
|
$ |
261,647 |
|
|
$ |
39,905 |
|
|
$ |
(283,839 |
) |
|
$ |
254,775 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,666 |
|
|
$ |
354 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
3,020 |
|
Accrued interest |
|
|
2,892 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,892 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,013 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
594 |
|
|
|
1,357 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,326 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
3,486 |
|
|
|
5,036 |
|
|
|
729 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,251 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
180,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
180,737 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
779 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
974 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,753 |
|
|
|
11,753 |
|
Partners equity |
|
|
52,060 |
|
|
|
256,416 |
|
|
|
39,176 |
|
|
|
(295,592 |
) |
|
|
52,060 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and partners equity |
|
$ |
237,062 |
|
|
$ |
261,647 |
|
|
$ |
39,905 |
|
|
$ |
(283,839 |
) |
|
$ |
254,775 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidating Balance Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2004 |
|
Parent |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
15,143 |
|
|
$ |
3,959 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
19,104 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,373 |
|
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,859 |
|
Intercompany accounts receivable (payable) |
|
|
(5,658 |
) |
|
|
5,658 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid and other current assets |
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
(5,476 |
) |
|
|
23,512 |
|
|
|
4,497 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Properties and equipment, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,097 |
|
|
|
35,529 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,626 |
|
Investment in subsidiaries |
|
|
67,551 |
|
|
|
30,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(98,427 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Transportation agreements, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,718 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,718 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,881 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,881 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
62,075 |
|
|
$ |
95,366 |
|
|
$ |
44,744 |
|
|
$ |
(98,427 |
) |
|
$ |
103,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,467 |
|
|
$ |
249 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,716 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
547 |
|
|
|
763 |
|
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,697 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
547 |
|
|
|
2,230 |
|
|
|
636 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,413 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
585 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
585 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,232 |
|
|
|
13,232 |
|
Partners equity |
|
|
61,528 |
|
|
|
67,551 |
|
|
|
44,108 |
|
|
|
(111,659 |
) |
|
|
61,528 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and partners equity |
|
$ |
62,075 |
|
|
$ |
95,366 |
|
|
$ |
44,744 |
|
|
$ |
(98,427 |
) |
|
$ |
103,758 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 75 -
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor |
|
|
|
Holly Energy |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2005 |
|
Partners, L.P. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
44,184 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
44,184 |
|
Third parties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,000 |
|
|
|
8,770 |
|
|
|
(834 |
) |
|
|
35,936 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,184 |
|
|
|
8,770 |
|
|
|
(834 |
) |
|
|
80,120 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,270 |
|
|
|
2,896 |
|
|
|
(834 |
) |
|
|
25,332 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,824 |
|
|
|
3,377 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,201 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
1,966 |
|
|
|
2,064 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,047 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,966 |
|
|
|
36,158 |
|
|
|
6,290 |
|
|
|
(834 |
) |
|
|
43,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
|
(1,966 |
) |
|
|
36,026 |
|
|
|
2,480 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of subsidiaries |
|
|
37,410 |
|
|
|
1,728 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39,138 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Interest income (expense) |
|
|
(8,628 |
) |
|
|
(344 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,984 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(740 |
) |
|
|
(740 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
26,816 |
|
|
$ |
37,410 |
|
|
$ |
2,468 |
|
|
$ |
(39,878 |
) |
|
$ |
26,816 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor |
|
|
|
Holly Energy |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 through December 31, 2004 |
|
Partners, L.P. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
17,917 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
17,917 |
|
Third parties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,435 |
|
|
|
5,830 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,265 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,352 |
|
|
|
5,830 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,182 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,144 |
|
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,104 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,660 |
|
|
|
1,581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,241 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,859 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
11,667 |
|
|
|
2,641 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,204 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
|
(896 |
) |
|
|
10,685 |
|
|
|
3,189 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,978 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of subsidiaries |
|
|
12,286 |
|
|
|
2,232 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,518 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Interest income (expense) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(631 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(632 |
) |
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(956 |
) |
|
|
(956 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
11,390 |
|
|
$ |
12,286 |
|
|
$ |
3,188 |
|
|
$ |
(15,474 |
) |
|
$ |
11,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 76 -
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
Holly Energy |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 1, 2004 through July 12, 2004 |
|
Partners, L.P. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
27,429 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
27,429 |
|
Third parties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,541 |
|
|
|
6,614 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,155 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,970 |
|
|
|
6,614 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,178 |
|
|
|
1,359 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,537 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,186 |
|
|
|
1,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,983 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,364 |
|
|
|
3,157 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,521 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,606 |
|
|
|
3,457 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,420 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,420 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,038 |
) |
|
|
(1,038 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
21,104 |
|
|
$ |
3,458 |
|
|
$ |
(3,458 |
) |
|
$ |
21,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
Holly Energy |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2003 |
|
Partners, L.P. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Affiliates |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
13,901 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
13,901 |
|
Third parties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,989 |
|
|
|
13,501 |
|
|
|
(6,591 |
) |
|
|
16,899 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,890 |
|
|
|
13,501 |
|
|
|
(6,591 |
) |
|
|
30,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,039 |
|
|
|
3,944 |
|
|
|
(2,790 |
) |
|
|
24,193 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,206 |
|
|
|
4,908 |
|
|
|
(1,661 |
) |
|
|
6,453 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,245 |
|
|
|
8,852 |
|
|
|
(4,451 |
) |
|
|
30,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,355 |
) |
|
|
4,649 |
|
|
|
(2,140 |
) |
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in earnings of subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,664 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,770 |
) |
|
|
894 |
|
Interest income (expense) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
291 |
|
Minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(758 |
) |
|
|
(758 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
581 |
|
|
$ |
4,684 |
|
|
$ |
(4,684 |
) |
|
$ |
581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 77 -
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor |
|
|
|
Holly Energy |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2005 |
|
Partners, L.P. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
$ |
7,566 |
|
|
$ |
28,765 |
|
|
$ |
6,297 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
42,628 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions of pipeline and terminal assets |
|
|
(125,801 |
) |
|
|
(2,111 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(127,912 |
) |
Additions to properties and equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,838 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,883 |
) |
Investments in subsidiaries, net |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
5,180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,179 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125,802 |
) |
|
|
(769 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(5,179 |
) |
|
|
(131,795 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of senior notes, net
of discounts |
|
|
181,238 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
181,238 |
|
Issuance of common units, net of underwriter
discount |
|
|
45,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,100 |
|
Excess purchase price over contributed basis
of intermediate pipelines |
|
|
(71,850 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(71,850 |
) |
Contributions from (distributions to) partners |
|
|
(34,410 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(7,400 |
) |
|
|
7,399 |
|
|
|
(34,410 |
) |
Borrowings (paydowns) of debt, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,000 |
) |
Cash distribution to minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,220 |
) |
|
|
(2,220 |
) |
Other financing activities, net |
|
|
(1,842 |
) |
|
|
(370 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,212 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
118,236 |
|
|
|
(25,369 |
) |
|
|
(7,400 |
) |
|
|
5,179 |
|
|
|
90,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) for the year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,627 |
|
|
|
(1,148 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,479 |
|
Beginning of year |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
15,143 |
|
|
|
3,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
17,770 |
|
|
$ |
2,811 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
20,583 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Successor |
|
|
|
Holly Energy |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
July 13, 2004 through December 31, 2004 |
|
Partners, L.P. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
$ |
5,159 |
|
|
$ |
5,169 |
|
|
$ |
5,043 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
15,371 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties and equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(243 |
) |
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(305 |
) |
Investments in subsidiaries, net |
|
|
(15,082 |
) |
|
|
2,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,779 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,082 |
) |
|
|
2,060 |
|
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
12,779 |
|
|
|
(305 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common units, net of underwriter
discount |
|
|
145,460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
145,460 |
|
Distributions to Holly concurrent with IPO |
|
|
(125,612 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125,612 |
) |
Contributions from (distributions to) partners |
|
|
(6,214 |
) |
|
|
15,082 |
|
|
|
(3,290 |
) |
|
|
(11,792 |
) |
|
|
(6,214 |
) |
Borrowings (paydowns) of debt, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,082 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,082 |
) |
Cash distribution to minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(987 |
) |
|
|
(987 |
) |
Other financing activities, net |
|
|
(3,709 |
) |
|
|
(2,086 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,795 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,925 |
|
|
|
7,914 |
|
|
|
(3,290 |
) |
|
|
(12,779 |
) |
|
|
1,770 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase for the period |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
15,143 |
|
|
|
1,691 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,836 |
|
Beginning of period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
15,143 |
|
|
$ |
3,959 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
19,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 78 -
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
Holly Energy |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 1, 2004 through July 12, 2004 |
|
Partners, L.P. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3,233 |
) |
|
$ |
3,729 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
496 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to properties and equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,017 |
) |
|
|
(655 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,672 |
) |
Investments in subsidiaries, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,250 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,233 |
|
|
|
(655 |
) |
|
|
(5,250 |
) |
|
|
(2,672 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributions from (distributions to) partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,500 |
) |
|
|
7,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cash distribution to minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,250 |
) |
|
|
(2,250 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,500 |
) |
|
|
5,250 |
|
|
|
(2,250 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease for the period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,426 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,426 |
) |
Beginning of period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
2,268 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
2,268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidating Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Predecessor |
|
|
|
Holly Energy |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Non- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2003 |
|
Partners, L.P. |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
Guarantor |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(in thousands) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1,217 |
) |
|
$ |
10,139 |
|
|
$ |
(3,013 |
) |
|
$ |
5,909 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions, net of cash acquired |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28,652 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,476 |
|
|
|
(21,176 |
) |
Additions to properties and equipment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,363 |
) |
|
|
(3,408 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,771 |
) |
Investments in subsidiaries, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,150 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(28,865 |
) |
|
|
(3,408 |
) |
|
|
4,326 |
|
|
|
(27,947 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contributions from (distributions to) partners |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,500 |
) |
|
|
4,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings (paydowns) of debt, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,082 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,082 |
|
Cash distribution to minority interest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,350 |
) |
|
|
(1,350 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,082 |
|
|
|
(4,500 |
) |
|
|
3,150 |
|
|
|
28,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase for the year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,231 |
|
|
|
4,463 |
|
|
|
6,694 |
|
Beginning of year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,463 |
|
|
|
(4,463 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,694 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- 79 -
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
We have had no change in, or disagreement with, our independent registered public accounting firm
on matters involving accounting and financial disclosure.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
(a) Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures
Our principal executive officer and principal financial officer have evaluated, as required by Rule
13a-15(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act), our disclosure controls
and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e)) as of the end of the period covered by
this annual report on Form 10-K. Based on that evaluation, the principal executive officer and
principal financial officer concluded that the design and operation of our disclosure controls and
procedures are effective in ensuring that information we are required to disclose in the reports
that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported
within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and forms.
(b) Changes in internal control over financial reporting
There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule
13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act) that occurred during our last fiscal quarter that have materially
affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect our internal control over financial
reporting.
Item 9B. Other Information
There have been no events that occurred in the fourth quarter of 2005 that would need to be
reported on Form 8-K that have not been previously reported.
- 80 -
PART III
Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant
HLS, as the general partner of HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., our general partner, manages our
operations and activities on our behalf. Our general partner is not elected by our unitholders.
Unitholders are not entitled to elect the directors of HLS or directly or indirectly participate in
our management or operation. Our general partner owes a fiduciary duty to our unitholders. Our
general partner is liable, as general partner, for all of our debts (to the extent not paid from
our assets), except for indebtedness or other obligations that are made specifically non-recourse
to it. Whenever possible, our general partner intends to incur indebtedness or other obligations
that are non-recourse.
Three members of the board of directors of HLS serve on a conflicts committee to review specific
matters that the board believes may involve conflicts of interest. The conflicts committee
determines if the resolution of the conflict of interest is fair and reasonable to us. The members
of the conflicts committee may not be officers or employees of HLS or directors, officers, or
employees of its affiliates, and must meet the independence and experience standards established by
the New York Stock Exchange and the Exchange Act to serve on the audit committee of a board of
directors. Any matters approved by the conflicts committee will be conclusively deemed to be fair
and reasonable to us, approved by all of our partners, and not a breach by our general partner of
any duties it may owe us or our unitholders. In addition, we have an audit committee of three
independent directors that reviews our external financial reporting, recommends engagement of our
independent registered public accounting firm, and reviews procedures for internal auditing and the
adequacy of our internal accounting controls. We also have a compensation committee, which
oversees compensation decisions for the officers of HLS, as well as the compensation plans
described below. In addition, we have an executive committee of the board consisting of one
independent director and two directors employed by Holly.
The board of directors of HLS has determined that Messrs. Darling, Pinkerton and Stengel meet the
applicable criteria for independence under the currently applicable rules of the New York Stock
Exchange and under the Exchange Act. These directors serve as the members of our audit, conflicts
and compensation committees.
Mr. Darling has been selected to preside at regularly scheduled meetings of non-management
directors. Persons wishing to communicate with the non-management directors are invited to email
the Presiding Director at presiding.director@hollyenergypartners.com or write to: Charles
M. Darling, IV, Presiding Director, c/o Secretary, Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C., 100 Crescent
Court, Dallas, Texas 75201-6927.
The board of directors of HLS held eight meetings during 2005, with the audit committee, conflicts
committee and compensation committee holding five, nine and seven meetings, respectively. All
board members attended each board meeting and all committee members attended each committee meeting
for the committees on which they serve.
We are managed and operated by the directors and officers of HLS on behalf of our general partner.
Most of our operational personnel are employees of HLS.
Mr. Clifton spends approximately half his time overseeing the management of our business and
affairs. Mr. Townsend spends approximately three quarters of his time managing the operational
aspects of our business. Mr. Ridenour spends approximately half his time overseeing our accounting
activities and in corporate development. The rest of our officers devote approximately one-quarter
of their time to us. Our non-executive directors devote as much time as is necessary to prepare
for and attend board of directors and committee meetings.
- 81 -
The following table shows information for the current directors and executive officers of HLS.
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Age |
|
Position with HLS |
Matthew P. Clifton |
|
54 |
|
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer 1 |
P. Dean Ridenour |
|
64 |
|
Director, Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer 1 |
Stephen J. McDonnell |
|
54 |
|
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
W. John Glancy |
|
63 |
|
Vice President and General Counsel |
James G. Townsend |
|
51 |
|
Vice President Pipeline Operations |
Lamar Norsworthy |
|
59 |
|
Director |
Charles M. Darling, IV |
|
57 |
|
Director 234 |
Jerry W. Pinkerton |
|
65 |
|
Director 1234 |
William P. Stengel |
|
57 |
|
Director 234 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Member of the Executive Committee |
|
2 |
|
Member of the Conflicts Committee |
|
3 |
|
Member of the Audit Committee |
|
4 |
|
Member of the Compensation Committee |
Matthew P. Clifton was elected Chairman of our Board, and Chief Executive Officer in March
2004. He has been employed by Holly for over twenty years. Mr. Clifton served as Hollys Vice
President of economics, engineering and legal affairs from 1988 to 1991, Senior Vice President of
Holly Corporation from 1991 to 1995, President of Navajo Pipeline Company, a wholly owned
subsidiary of Holly Corporation, since its inception in 1981, President of Holly Corporation from
1995 to 2005, and has served as Chief Executive Officer of Holly Corporation since January 1, 2006.
Mr. Clifton has also served as a director of Holly Corporation since 1995.
P. Dean Ridenour was elected to our Board of Directors in August 2004 and to the position of Vice
President and Chief Accounting Officer in January 2005. Mr. Ridenour has served as Vice President
and Chief Accounting Officer of Holly Corporation since December 2004. Beginning in October 2002,
Mr. Ridenour began providing full-time consulting services to Holly Corporation, and in August
2004, Mr. Ridenour became a full-time employee and officer of Holly Corporation in the position of
Vice President, Special Projects, serving in that position until December 2004. From April 2001
until October 2002, Mr. Ridenour was temporarily retired. From July 1999 through April 2001, Mr.
Ridenour served as Chief Financial Officer and director of GeoUtilities, Inc., an internet-based
superstore for energy, telecom and other utility services, which was purchased by AES Corporation
in March 2000. Mr. Ridenour was employed for 34 years by Ernst & Young LLP, including 20 years as
an audit partner, retiring in 1997.
Stephen J. McDonnell was elected Vice President and Chief Financial Officer in March 2004. Mr.
McDonnell held the office of Vice President, Finance and Corporate Development of Holly Corporation
from August 2000 to September 2001, when he became the Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of Holly Corporation. Mr. McDonnell was previously employed with Central and South West
Corporation as Vice President in the mergers and acquisitions area from 1996 to June 2000. Mr.
McDonnell joined Central and South West in 1977 as Manager of Financial Reporting. Mr. McDonnell
held a number of accounting and finance positions with Central and South West, including the
position of Corporate Treasurer from 1989 to 1996.
- 82 -
W. John Glancy was elected Vice President and General Counsel in August 2004, and served as
Secretary from August 2004 to April 2005. Mr. Glancy has served as Senior Vice President and
General Counsel of Holly Corporation since September 1999. From December 1998 to September 1999,
he was Senior Vice PresidentLegal of Holly Corporation and held the office of Secretary of Holly
Corporation from April 1999 until February 2005. From 1997 through March 1999, he practiced law in
the Law Offices of W. John Glancy in Dallas. From 1972 through 1996, he was in private law
practice with several different law firms in Dallas. He also was a director of Holly Corporation
from 1975 to 1995, and for part of that period was Secretary of Holly Corporation.
James G. Townsend was elected Vice President Pipeline Operations in March 2004. He has been Vice
President of Pipelines and Terminals for Holly Corporation since 1997. Mr. Townsend served as
Manager of Transportation for Navajo Refining Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Holly
Corporation, from 1995 to 1997. Mr. Townsend has worked in Navajo Refinings pipeline group since
joining Navajo Refining in 1984.
Lamar Norsworthy was elected to our Board of Directors in March 2004. He joined Holly Corporation
in 1967, was elected to the Board of Directors in 1968 and has been Chairman of the Board since
1977. He served as Chief Executive Officer of Holly Corporation from 1971 to 2005. Mr. Norsworthy
is also a Director of Cooper Cameron Corporation, a publicly traded manufacturer of oil field
services equipment.
Charles M. Darling, IV was elected to our Board of Directors in July 2004. Mr. Darling has served
as President of DQ Holdings, L.L.C., a venture capital investment and consulting firm focused
primarily on opportunities in the energy industry, since August 1998. From 1997 to 1998, Mr.
Darling was the President and General Counsel, and was a Director from 1993 to 1998, of DeepTech
International, which was acquired by El Paso Energy Corp. in August 1998. Mr. Darling was also a
Director at Leviathan Gas Pipeline Company from 1993 through 1998. Prior to joining DeepTech in
1997, Mr. Darling practiced law at the law firm of Baker Botts, L.L.P., for over 20 years.
Jerry W. Pinkerton was elected to our Board of Directors in July 2004. Since December 2003, Mr.
Pinkerton has been retired. From December 2000 to December 2003, Mr. Pinkerton served as a
consultant to TXU Corp., an energy services company, with respect to accounting-related projects
principally involving financial reporting. From August 1997 to December 2000, Mr. Pinkerton served
as Controller of TXU and its U.S. subsidiaries. From August 1988 until its merger with TXU in
August 1997, Mr. Pinkerton served as the Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer of ENSERCH
Corporation/Lone Star Gas Company, a diversified energy company. Prior to joining ENSERCH, Mr.
Pinkerton was employed for 26 years as an auditor by Deloitte Haskins & Sells, a predecessor firm
of Deloitte & Touche, LLP, including 15 years as an audit partner.
William P. Stengel was elected to our Board of Directors in July 2004. Mr. Stengel has been
retired since May 2003. From 1997 to May 2003, Mr. Stengel served as Managing Director of the
global energy and mining group at Citigroup/Citibank, N.A. and was responsible for Citigroups
global relationships with U.S. multinational oil and gas companies headquartered in the United
States. From 1973 to 1997, Mr. Stengel served in various other capacities with Citigroup/Citibank,
N.A.
- 83 -
Compliance With Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires directors, executive officers
and persons who beneficially own more than 10% of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s units to file
certain reports with the SEC and New York Stock Exchange concerning their beneficial ownership of
Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s equity securities. Holly Energy Partners, L.P. believes that during
the year ended December 31, 2005, its officers, directors and 10% unitholders were in compliance
with applicable requirements of Section 16(a), except that Stephen D. Wise filed a Form 3 on
January 6, 2006, reporting his election as Treasurer, which should have been filed by November 7,
2005.
Audit Committee
HLSs audit committee is composed of three directors who are not officers or employees of HEP
or any of its subsidiaries or Holly Corporation or any of its subsidiaries. The board of directors
of HLS has adopted a written charter for the audit committee. The board of directors of HLS has
determined that a member of the audit committee, namely Jerry W. Pinkerton, is an audit committee
financial expert (as defined by the SEC) and has designated Mr. Pinkerton as the audit committee
financial expert.
The audit committee makes recommendations to the board regarding the selection of HEPs
independent registered public accounting firm and reviews the professional services they provide.
It reviews the scope of the audit performed by the independent registered public accounting firm,
the audit report issued by the independent auditor, HEPs annual and quarterly financial
statements, any material comments contained in the auditors letters to management, HEPs internal
accounting controls and such other matters relating to accounting, auditing and financial reporting
as it deems appropriate. In addition, the audit committee reviews the type and extent of any
non-audit work being performed by the independent auditor and its compatibility with their
continued objectivity and independence.
Report of the Audit Committee for the Year Ended December 31, 2005
Management of Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. is responsible for Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s
internal controls and the financial reporting process. Ernst & Young LLP, Holly Energy Partners,
L.P.s Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the year ended December 31, 2005, is
responsible for performing an independent audit of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s consolidated
financial statements in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board and to issue a report thereon as well as to issue a report on both managements assessment of
and the effectiveness of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s internal control over financial reporting.
The audit committee monitors and oversees these processes. The audit committee recommends to the
board of directors the selection of Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s independent registered public
accounting firm.
The audit committee has reviewed and discussed Holly Energy Partners, L.P.s audited
consolidated financial statements with management and the independent registered public accounting
firm. The audit committee has discussed with Ernst & Young LLP the matters required to be
discussed by Statement on Auditing Standards No. 61, Communications with Audit Committees. The
audit committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from Ernst & Young LLP required
by Independence Standards Board Standard No. 1, Independence Discussions with Audit Committees,
and has discussed with Ernst & Young LLP that firms independence.
The audit committee of the board of directors of our general partner selected Ernst & Young
LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, to audit the books, records and accounts of the
Partnership for the 2005 calendar year.
The audit committee of our general partners board of directors has adopted an audit committee
charter, which is available on our website at
www.hollyenergy.com. The charter requires the audit
committee to approve in advance all audit and non-audit services to be provided by our independent
registered public accounting firm. All services reported in the audit, audit-related, tax and all
other fees categories above were approved by the audit committee.
- 84 -
Based on the foregoing review and discussions and such other matters the audit committee deemed
relevant and appropriate, the audit committee recommended to the board of directors that the
audited consolidated financial statements of Holly Energy Partners, L.P. be included in Holly
Energy Partners, L.P.s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005.
Members of the Audit Committee:
Jerry W. Pinkerton, Chairman
Charles M. Darling, IV
William P. Stengel
Code of Ethics
HEP has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that applies to all officers, directors
and employees, including the companys principal executive officer, principal financial officer,
and principal accounting officer.
Available
on our website at www.hollyenergy.com are copies of our Corporate Governance Guidelines,
Audit Committee Charter, Compensation Committee Charter, and Code of Business Conduct and Ethics,
all of which also will be provided without charge upon written request to the Vice President,
Investor Relations at: Holly Energy Partners, L.P., 100 Crescent Court, Suite 1600, Dallas, TX,
75201-6927. The Partnership intends to satisfy the disclosure requirement under Item 5.05 of Form
8-K regarding an amendment to, or waiver from, a provision of its Code of Business Conduct and
Ethics with respect to its principal financial officers by posting such information on this
website.
New York Stock Exchange Certification
In 2005, Mr. Clifton, as the Companys Chief Executive Officer, provided to the New York Stock
Exchange the annual CEO certification regarding the Companys compliance with the New York Stock
Exchanges corporate governance listing standards.
- 85 -
Item 11. Executive and Director Compensation
Reimbursement of Expenses of the General Partner
HEP has no employees. HLS currently has 82 employees that provide general and administrative
services to HEP. Our general partner will not receive any management fee or other compensation for
its management of HEP. Under the terms of the Omnibus Agreement, we pay Holly an annual
administrative fee, initially in the amount of $2.0 million, for the provision of general and
administrative services for our benefit. The Omnibus Agreement provides that the administrative
fee may increase in the second and third years by the greater of 5% or the percentage increase in
the consumer price index and may also increase if we make an acquisition that requires an increase
in the level of general and administrative services that we receive from Holly. Additionally,
Holly will be reimbursed for expenses incurred on our behalf. These expenses include the costs of
employee, officer, and director compensation and benefits properly allocable to HEP, and all other
expenses necessary or appropriate to the conduct of the business of, and allocable to, Holly Energy
Partners. The partnership agreement provides that the general partner will determine the expenses
that are allocable to HEP See Item 13, Certain Relationships and Related Transactions of this
Form 10-K Annual Report for additional discussion of relationships and transactions we have with
Holly.
The cash compensation of the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer and certain other
executive officers of HLS who are employees of Holly or its subsidiaries, is included within the
administrative fee. There is no specific allocation of any portion of the administrative fee to
the specific compensation paid by Holly to these executive officers. The only executive officer
whose salary is not included within the administrative fee is James G. Townsend, who is an employee
of only HLS. The following table sets forth a summary of our portion of compensation paid for the
last two years to our Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer and Mr. Townsend.
Summary Executive Compensation Table
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Portion of Annual |
|
|
Long Term Compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation |
|
|
Awards |
|
|
Payouts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reimbursed by HEP |
|
|
Securities |
|
|
Restricted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($) (1) |
|
|
Underlying |
|
|
Unit |
|
|
LTIP |
|
|
All Other |
|
Name and Principal |
|
Fiscal |
|
|
Salary |
|
|
Bonus |
|
|
Options/SARs |
|
|
Awards |
|
|
Payouts |
|
|
Compensation |
|
Position |
|
Year |
|
|
($) |
|
|
($) (2) |
|
|
(#) (3) |
|
|
(#) (3) |
|
|
($) |
|
|
($) (4) |
|
Matthew P. Clifton |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,802 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chairman of the
Board and Chief
Executive
Officer |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James G. Townsend |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
131,549 |
|
|
|
101,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
731 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vice President,
Pipelines and
Terminals |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
53,711 |
|
|
|
44,057 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Mr. Clifton also serves as Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer for Holly
Corporation. Mr. Cliftons salary and bonus were paid to him by Holly Corporation. Mr.
Townsends salary and bonus for 2005 were $175,398 and $135,000, respectively. Mr. Townsends
salary and bonus for 2004 were $152,388 and $125,000, respectively. The table above reflects
the 75% of Mr. Townsends compensation that we began reimbursing to Holly beginning July 13,
2004. As discussed in footnote (3) below, we also provided long-term compensation awards to
Mr. Townsend in 2005. |
|
(2) |
|
Bonuses are paid in March of each year based on services performed in the prior calendar
year. |
|
(3) |
|
Restricted Unit Awards: In February 2005, HLS granted restricted HEP units to its officers
and other key employees, including Messrs. Clifton and Townsend. Of the restricted units
issued in February of 2005, 1/3 will vest after January 1, 2008, 2/3 will vest after January
1, 2009, and all of the restricted units will be fully vested on January 1, 2010. During the
restricted period, executives receive distributions on the restricted units. The price of the
units of the partnership at the time of the February 2005 grant was $39.61 per unit. |
- 86 -
|
|
|
(4) |
|
Any perquisites or other personal benefits received from HLS by Messrs. Clifton and Townsend
were less than $50,000 and 10% of their total salary and bonus. |
Long-Term Incentive Plans Awards in Last Fiscal Year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
Performance or |
|
Estimated Future Payouts Under |
|
|
Shares, |
|
Other Period Until |
|
Non-stock Price-Based Plans |
|
|
Units or Other |
|
Maturation or Payout |
|
Threshold |
|
Target |
|
Maximum |
Name |
|
Rights (#)(1) |
|
(2) |
|
($ or #) |
|
($ or #) |
|
($ or #) |
Matthew P. Clifton |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James G. Townsend |
|
|
731 |
|
|
|
12/31/2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Performance Unit Awards: In February 2005, HLS granted performance units of the
partnership to HLSs officers and other key employees, including Mr. Townsend. The units
represent an award for a performance vesting period of January 1, 2005 through December 31,
2007. Under the current form of performance unit agreement, at the end of the performance
vesting period, the recipients are entitled to a cash payment equal to the value of the units
as determined by reference to the total unitholder return (the TUR) of the partnership
compared to the TUR of a select group of peer companies (the Peer Group). HLS plans to
amend by agreement certain Performance Share Unit Agreements between HLS and employees
including executive officers to provide that the payment of awards under the agreements as
amended will be made in the form of common units of the partnership rather than in cash. TUR
includes both appreciation in unit price during the performance period and the assumed
reinvestment of any distributions into additional units at the time distributions are paid.
If the payment is made in cash, the unit price for the TUR calculation is the average unit
price for the final 30 trading day period of the performance period (the Unit Price). The
amount of cash payable to the recipient at the end of the period is determined by multiplying
the number of Units by a performance percentage, which may be from 0% to 200% depending upon
the partnerships TUR ranking as compared to the ranking of the Peer Group (the Performance
Percentage), further multiplied by the Unit Price. If the payment is made in the form of
common units, the number of units awarded to the recipient at the end of the period is
determined by multiplying the number of Units by the Performance Percentage. |
Compensation of Directors
Officers or employees of HLS who also serve as directors do not receive additional compensation.
Directors who are not officers or employees of HLS or Holly receive: (a) a $25,000 annual cash
retainer, payable in four quarterly installments; (b) $1,500 for each meeting of the board of
directors attended; (c) $1,500 for each board committee meeting attended (limited to payment for
one committee meeting per day); and (d) an annual grant of restricted units equal in value to
$40,000 on the date of grant. In addition to the foregoing, each director who serves as the
chairperson of a committee of the board of directors also receives a $5,000 special annual retainer
for his service as committee chair. In addition, each director is reimbursed for out-of-pocket
expenses in connection with attending meetings of the board of directors or committees. Each
director will be fully indemnified by us for actions associated with being a director to the extent
permitted under Delaware law.
Each of the directors who are not officers or employees of HLS or Holly each received total cash
compensation for the annual retainer and for board and committee meetings totaling $61,500 in 2005.
During the periods ended December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2005, grants of restricted HEP units
were made to directors of HLS as set forth below:
- 87 -
2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
Period Until |
|
Future Payout |
Name |
|
Units |
|
Maturation |
|
Number of Units |
Charles M. Darling, IV
|
|
1,538 |
|
|
August 04, 2007
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
Jerry W. Pinkerton
|
|
1,538 |
|
|
August 04, 2007
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
P. Dean Ridenour*
|
|
1,875 |
|
|
August 04, 2007
|
|
|
1,875 |
|
William P. Stengel
|
|
1,538 |
|
|
August 04, 2007
|
|
|
1,538 |
|
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
Period Until |
|
Future Payout |
Name |
|
Units |
|
Maturation |
|
Number of Units |
Charles M. Darling, IV
|
|
901 |
|
|
August 01, 2008
|
|
|
901 |
|
Jerry W. Pinkerton
|
|
901 |
|
|
August 01, 2008
|
|
|
901 |
|
William P. Stengel
|
|
901 |
|
|
August 01, 2008
|
|
|
901 |
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Mr. Ridenour became an executive officer of HLS in January 2005. |
Long-Term Incentive Plan
HLS adopted the Holly Energy Partners, L.P. Long-Term Incentive Plan for employees, consultants and
directors of HLS and employees and consultants of its affiliates who perform services for HLS or
its affiliates. The Long-Term Incentive Plan consists of four components: restricted units,
phantom units, unit options and unit appreciation rights. The long-term incentive plan currently
permits the grant of awards covering an aggregate of 350,000 units. The plan is administered by
the Compensation Committee of the board of directors of HLS.
HLSs board of directors, or its compensation committee, in its discretion may terminate, suspend
or discontinue the Long-Term Incentive Plan at any time with respect to any award that has not yet
been granted. HLSs board of directors, or its compensation committee, also has the right to alter
or amend the long-term incentive plan or any part of the plan from time to time, including
increasing the number of units that may be granted subject to unitholder approval as required by
the exchange upon which the common units are listed at that time. However, no change in any
outstanding grant may be made that would materially impair the rights of the participant without
the consent of the participant.
Restricted Units and Phantom Units
A restricted unit is a common unit subject to forfeiture prior to the vesting of the award. A
phantom unit is a notional unit that entitles the grantee to receive a common unit upon the vesting
of the phantom unit or, as provided in the applicable agreement between the grantee and HLS, the
cash equivalent to the value of a common unit. A performance unit is a form of a phantom unit.
The Compensation Committee may make grants on such terms as the Compensation Committee shall
determine. The Compensation Committee will determine the period over which restricted units and
phantom units granted to employees, consultants and directors will vest. The committee may base
its determination upon the achievement of specified financial objectives. In addition, the
restricted units and phantom units will vest upon a change of control of HEP, our general partner,
HLS or Holly, unless provided otherwise by the Compensation Committee.
If a grantees employment, service relationship or membership on the board of directors terminates
for any reason, the grantees restricted units and phantom units are automatically forfeited
unless, and to the extent, the Compensation Committee provides otherwise. Common units to be
delivered in connection with the grant of restricted units or upon the vesting of phantom units may
be common units acquired by HLS on the open market, common units already owned by HLS, common units
acquired by HLS directly from us or any other person or any combination of the foregoing. HLS is
entitled to reimbursement by us
- 88 -
for the cost incurred in acquiring common units. Thus, the cost of the restricted units and
delivery of common units upon the vesting of phantom units will be borne by us. If we issue new
common units in connection with the grant of restricted units or upon vesting of the phantom units,
the total number of common units outstanding will increase. The Compensation Committee, in its
discretion, may grant tandem distribution rights with respect to restricted units and tandem
distribution equivalent rights with respect to phantom units.
We intend the issuance of restricted units and common units upon the vesting of the phantom units
under the plan to serve as a means of incentive compensation for performance and not primarily as
an opportunity to participate in the equity appreciation of the common units. Therefore, at this
time it is not contemplated that plan participants will pay any consideration for restricted units
or common units they receive, and at this time we do not contemplate that we will receive any
remuneration for the restricted units and common units.
Unit Options and Unit Appreciation Rights
The long-term incentive plan permits the grant of options covering common units and the grant of
unit appreciation rights. A unit appreciation right is an award that, upon exercise, entitles the
participant to receive the excess of the fair market value of a unit on the exercise date over the
exercise prices established for the unit appreciation right. Such excess may be paid in common
units, cash, or a combination thereof, as determined by the Compensation Committee in its
discretion. The Compensation Committee is able to make grants of unit options and unit
appreciation rights under the plan to employees, consultants and directors containing such terms as
the committee shall determine. Unit options and unit appreciation rights may have an exercise
price that is less than, equal to or greater than the fair market value of the common units on the
date of grant. In general, unit options and unit appreciation rights granted will become
exercisable over a period determined by the Compensation Committee. In addition, the unit options
and unit appreciation rights will become exercisable upon a change in control of HEP, our general
partner, HLS or Holly, unless provided otherwise by the committee.
Upon exercise of a unit option (or a unit appreciation right settled in common units), HLS may use
common units already owned by HLS, acquire common units directly from us or any other person,
acquire common units on the open market, or utilize any combination of the foregoing. HLS is
entitled to reimbursement by us for the difference between the cost incurred by HLS in acquiring
these common units and the proceeds received from a participant at the time of exercise. Thus, the
cost of the unit options (or a unit appreciation right settled in common units) will be borne by
us. If we issue new common units upon exercise of the unit options (or a unit appreciation right
settled in common units), the total number of common units outstanding will increase, and HLS will
pay us the proceeds it received from an optionee upon exercise of a unit option. The availability
of unit options and unit appreciation rights is intended to furnish additional compensation to
employees, consultants and directors and to align their economic interests with those of common
unitholders.
Management Incentive Plan
HLS has adopted the Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. Annual Incentive Compensation Plan. The
management incentive plan is designed to enhance the performance of HLSs key employees by
rewarding them with cash awards for achieving annual financial and operational performance
objectives. The compensation committee in its discretion may determine individual participants and
payments, if any, for each fiscal year. The board of directors of HLS may amend or change the
management incentive plan at any time. We will reimburse HLS for payments and costs incurred under
the plan.
COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The basic objective of our compensation program is to provide levels of compensation that attract
and retain productive executives who are motivated to protect and enhance the long-term value of
the partnership for its unitholders. Competitive compensation levels are determined on the basis
of available information on compensation paid by companies in the partnerships industry that are
most similar to the partnership, taking into account the partnerships size and place in its
industry. We participate in and
- 89 -
regularly review compensation surveys of the partnerships industry conducted by a major
independent executive compensation consulting firm. Executive compensation programs are intended
to reward each executive based on the partnerships performance and individual performance and to
balance appropriately short-term and long-term considerations. We target the median
(50th percentile) of competitive pay data for establishing base salary levels and
incentive opportunities.
Elements of Executive Compensation
Our executive compensation programs and plans are comprised of the following elements:
|
|
Base salaries |
|
|
|
Annual incentive (bonus) opportunities |
|
|
|
Long-term incentive opportunities under the Holly Energy Partners, L.P. Long-Term Incentive Plan |
|
|
|
Employee retirement and welfare benefit plans and arrangements sponsored by Holly. |
In February 2005, HLS granted restricted units of the partnership to employees and executives of
HLS, including the named executive officers. In February 2005, HLS also granted performance units
to non-executive employees of HLS and one named executive officer, James G. Townsend. The February
2005 restricted unit grants are time-lapse restricted units with the restrictions lapsing during
years three, four and five of a five-year restricted period. During the restricted period,
executives receive distributions on the restricted units. The February 2005 performance unit
grants provide that they will be earned over a three-year performance period. The number of
performance units earned will be based upon the partnerships total unitholder return as compared
to a select group of its industry sector peer companies. The number of performance units earned
will be in the range of zero to 200 percent of the number of units granted, depending upon the
partnerships relative total unitholder return. The value of the award at the conclusion of the
performance period will be based upon both the number of performance units earned and the price of
the partnerships common units at the end of the period. Under the current form of performance
unit agreement, the performance units are paid in the form of cash. HLS plans to amend by
agreement certain Performance Share Unit Agreements to provide that the payment of awards under the
agreements as amended will be made in the form of units of the partnership rather than in cash,
eliminating any existing obligation to make payment of such awards in cash.
Compensation of the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
As discussed above, the salary and bonus of HLSs Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
Officer, Matthew P. Clifton, is determined and paid by Holly. In addition, Holly awards a
percentage of long-term equity compensation to Mr. Clifton relevant to the time devoted by Mr.
Clifton to Hollys business. HLS also awards a percentage of Mr. Cliftons long-term compensation
according to the time devoted by Mr. Clifton to the partnerships business. The amount awarded by
HLS is determined by the Compensation Committee of the HLS board of directors based on
consideration of the compensation programs and principles described above. In 2005, Mr. Clifton
received annual incentive awards from HLS totaling $308,975. Such awards were made based on the
Compensation Committees consultation with an independent executive compensation consulting firm
and on the Compensation Committees review of awards customarily granted to officers serving in a
similar capacity in a similar industry, taking into account the partnerships size and place in the
industry. The awards were also based on other factors, including Mr. Cliftons role in the
formation of Holly Energy Partners in 2004.
- 90 -
Deductibility of Executive Compensation
With respect to Section 162(m) of the Code and underlying regulations pertaining to the
deductibility of compensation to named executive officers in excess of $1 million, we have adopted
a policy to comply with such limitations to the extent practicable. Certain elements of the Holly
Energy Partners, L.P. Long-Term Incentive Plan are designed to provide performance-based incentive
compensation which would be fully deductible under Section 162(m). Restricted Units and
Performance Units made to executive officers who are also directors of HLS are intended to be fully
deductible under Section 162(m). However, the Compensation Committee has also determined that some
flexibility is required, notwithstanding the statutory and regulatory provisions, in negotiating
and implementing the partnerships incentive compensation programs. It has, therefore, retained
the discretion to award some bonus payments based on non-quantitative performance measurements and
other criteria that it may determine, in its discretion, from time to time.
Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors
Charles M. Darling, IV, Chairman
Jerry W. Pinkerton
William P. Stengel
COMPENSATION COMMITTEE INTERLOCKS AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION
The members of the Compensation Committee of the HLS board of directors during the year ending
December 31, 2005 were Charles M. Darling, IV, Jerry W. Pinkerton and William P. Stengel. None of
the members of the Committee was an officer or employee of HLS, the partnership, or any of its
subsidiaries during the year ending December 31, 2005. No executive officer of HLS served as a
member of the compensation committee of another entity that had an executive officer serving as a
member of the HLS board of directors or the Compensation Committee.
- 91 -
Stock Performance Graph
Set forth below is a line graph comparing, for the period since the closing of our initial public
offering on July 13, 2004 and ending December 31, 2005, the percentage change in the cumulative
total unitholder return of our common units to the cumulative total return of the S&P Composite 500
Stock Index and of an industry peer group. The amounts assume that the value of each investment
was $100 in July 2004 and that all dividends or distributions were reinvested. The price
performance depicted in the foregoing graph is not necessarily indicative of future price
performance. The graph will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in any filing we make
under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate
such graph by reference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Company/Index |
|
July 2004 |
|
Dec. 2004 |
|
Dec. 2005 |
Holly Energy Partners, L.P. |
|
$ |
100.00 |
|
|
$ |
156.85 |
|
|
$ |
177.49 |
|
S&P500 Index |
|
$ |
100.00 |
|
|
$ |
109.66 |
|
|
$ |
115.05 |
|
Industry Peer Group (1) |
|
$ |
100.00 |
|
|
$ |
107.92 |
|
|
$ |
114.34 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We have selected a peer group of companies similar to ours with respect to business
operations and organizational structure. Our industry Peer Group is comprised of: Buckeye
Partners, L.P.; Enbridge Energy Partners, L.P.; Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P.; Magellan
Midstream Partners, L.P.; Sunoco Logistics Partners, L.P.; TEPPCO Partners, L.P.; and Valero,
L.P. |
- 92 -
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
The following table sets forth as of January 31, 2006 the beneficial ownership of units of HEP held
by beneficial owners of 5% or more of the units, by directors of HLS, the general partner of our
general partner, by each officer and by all directors and officers of HLS as a group. HEP
Logistics Holdings, L.P. is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Holly Corporation. Unless
otherwise indicated, the address for each unitholder shall be c/o Holly Energy Partners, L.P., 100
Crescent Court, Suite 1600, Dallas, Texas 75201.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage |
|
|
|
|
|
of |
|
Percentage |
|
|
Common |
|
of Common |
|
Subordinated |
|
Subordinated |
|
of Total |
|
|
Units |
|
Units |
|
Units |
|
Units |
|
Units |
|
|
Beneficially |
|
Beneficially |
|
Beneficially |
|
Beneficially |
|
Beneficially |
Name of Beneficial Owner |
|
Owned |
|
Owned |
|
Owned |
|
Owned |
|
Owned |
Holly Corporation (1) |
|
|
70,000 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
7,000,000 |
|
|
|
88.2 |
|
|
|
45.0 |
|
HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P. (1) |
|
|
70,000 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
7,000,000 |
|
|
|
88.2 |
|
|
|
45.0 |
|
Fiduciary Asset Management,
LLC (2) |
|
|
951,510 |
|
|
|
11.6 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
|
Alon USA |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
937,500 |
|
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors, L.P.
(3) |
|
|
690,300 |
|
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
Tortoise Capital Advisors LLC (4) |
|
|
550,764 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
Matthew P. Clifton |
|
|
36,802 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
W. John Glancy |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Stephen J. McDonnell |
|
|
13,505 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
P. Dean Ridenour (5) |
|
|
11,721 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
James G. Townsend |
|
|
2,731 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Lamar Norsworthy |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
Charles M. Darling, IV (5) |
|
|
13,639 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Jerry W. Pinkerton (5) |
|
|
3,439 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
William P. Stengel (5) |
|
|
2,439 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
All directors and executive officers as
group (9 persons) (5) |
|
|
85,276 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
(1) |
|
Holly Corporation is the ultimate parent company of HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., and
may, therefore, be deemed to beneficially own the units held by HEP Logistics Holdings,
L.P. Holly Corporation files information with or furnishes information to, the Securities
and Exchange Commission pursuant to the information requirements of the Exchange Act. The
percentage of total units beneficially owned includes a 2% general partner interest held by
HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P. |
|
|
(2) |
|
Fiduciary Asset Management, LLC has filed with the SEC a Schedule 13G/A, dated August
16, 2005. Based on this Schedule 13G/A, Fiduciary Asset Management, LLC has sole voting
power and sole dispositive power with respect to 951,510 units, and shared voting and
dispositive power with respect to zero units. The address of Fiduciary Asset Management,
LLC is 8112 Maryland Avenue, Suite 400 St. Louis, MO 63105. |
|
|
(3) |
|
Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors, L.P. has filed with the SEC a Schedule 13G, dated
February 9, 2006. Based on this Schedule 13G, Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors, L.P. has
sole voting power and sole dispositive power with respect to zero units, and shared voting
power and shared dispositive power with respect to 690,300 units. The address of Kayne
Anderson Capital Advisors, L.P. is 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Second Floor, Los Angeles, CA
90067. |
|
|
(4) |
|
Tortoise Capital Advisors LLC has filed with the SEC a Schedule 13G, dated February 6,
2006. Based on this Schedule 13G, Tortoise Capital Advisors LLC has sole voting power and
sole dispositive power with respect to zero units, shared voting power with respect to
518,842 units and shared dispositive power with respect to 550,764 units. The address of
Tortoise Capital Advisors LLC is 10801 Mastin Blvd., Suite 222, Overland Park, Kansas
66210. |
- 93 -
|
(5) |
|
The number of units beneficially owned includes restricted common units granted as
follows: 2,439 units each to Mr. Darling, Mr. Pinkerton and Mr. Stengel, 2,721 units to Mr.
Ridenour, a total of 10,038 units. |
Equity Compensation Plan Table
The following table summarizes information about our equity compensation plans as of December 31,
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of securities |
|
|
|
Securities to be |
|
|
|
|
|
|
remaining available for |
|
|
|
issued upon |
|
|
Weighted average |
|
|
future issuance under |
|
|
|
exercise of |
|
|
exercise price of |
|
|
equity compensation |
|
|
|
outstanding options, |
|
|
outstanding options, |
|
|
plans (excluding |
|
|
|
warrants and rights |
|
|
warrants and rights |
|
|
securities reflected) |
|
Equity compensation
plans approved by
security holders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity compensation
plans not approved
by security holders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
329,074 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
329,074 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For more information about our Long-Term Incentive Plan, which did not require approval by our
limited partners, refer to Item 11, Executive and Director Compensation Long-Term Incentive
Plans.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
Our general partner and its affiliates own 7,000,000 of our subordinated units and 70,000 of our
common units, which combined represent a 43% limited partner interest in us. In addition, the
general partner owns a 2% general partner interest in us. Transactions with the general partner
are discussed below.
On February 28, 2005, we completed the transactions with Alon described on page 8 of this report,
by which we acquired certain pipelines and terminals from Alon for $120 million in cash and 937,500
of our Class B subordinated units and entered into our pipelines and terminals agreement with Alon.
Following this transaction, Alon owns all of our Class B subordinated units, which comprise
approximately 5.7% of our total outstanding equity ownership. During the period from February 28,
2005 through December 31, 2005, we received revenues of $17.6 million from Alon pursuant to the
pipelines and terminals agreement and $5.6 million from Alon pursuant to capacity lease
arrangements on our Orla to El Paso.
DISTRIBUTIONS AND PAYMENTS TO THE GENERAL PARTNER AND ITS AFFILIATES
The following table summarizes the distributions and payments to be made by us to our general
partner and its affiliates in connection with the ongoing operation and liquidation of HEP These
distributions and payments were determined by and among affiliated entities and, consequently, are
not the result of arms-length negotiations.
- 94 -
Operational stage
|
|
|
Distributions of available cash to our
general partner and its affiliates
|
|
We generally make cash
distributions 98% to the
unitholders, including our
general partner and its
affiliates as the holders
of an aggregate of
7,000,000 of the
subordinated units, 70,000
common units and 2% to the
general partner. In
addition, if distributions
exceed the minimum
quarterly distribution and
other higher target
levels, our general
partner is entitled to
increasing percentages of
the distributions, up to
50% of the distributions
above the highest target
level. |
|
|
|
Payments to our general partner and its
affiliates
|
|
We pay Holly or its
affiliates an
administrative fee,
currently $2.0 million per
year, for the provision of
various general and
administrative services
for our benefit. The
administrative fee may
increase following the
second and third
anniversaries by the
greater of 5% or the
percentage increase in the
consumer price index and
may also increase if we
make an acquisition that
requires an increase in
the level of general and
administrative services
that we receive from Holly
or its affiliates. In
addition, the general
partner is entitled to
reimbursement for all
expenses it incurs on our
behalf, including other
general and administrative
expenses. These
reimbursable expenses
include the salaries and
the cost of employee
benefits of employees of
HLS who provide services
to us. Please read
Omnibus Agreement below.
Our general partner
determines the amount of
these expenses. |
|
|
|
Withdrawal or removal of our general
partner
|
|
If our general partner
withdraws or is removed,
its general partner
interest and its incentive
distribution rights will
either be sold to the new
general partner for cash
or converted into common
units, in each case for an
amount equal to the fair
market value of those
interests. |
Liquidation stage |
|
|
|
|
|
Liquidation
|
|
Upon our liquidation, the partners, including our general
partner, will be entitled to receive liquidating distributions
according to their particular capital account balances. |
OMNIBUS AGREEMENT
On July 13, 2004, we entered into the Omnibus Agreement with Holly and our general partner that
addressed the following matters:
|
|
our obligation to pay Holly an annual administrative fee, currently in the amount of $2.0 million, for the
provision by Holly of certain general and administrative services; |
|
|
|
Hollys and its affiliates agreement not to compete with us under certain circumstances; |
|
|
|
an indemnity by Holly for certain potential environmental liabilities; |
- 95 -
|
|
our obligation to indemnify Holly for environmental liabilities related to our assets existing on the date of
our initial public offering to the extent Holly is not required to indemnify us; |
|
|
|
our three-year option to purchase the Intermediate Pipelines owned by Holly; and |
|
|
|
Hollys right of first refusal to purchase our assets that serve Hollys refineries. |
Payment of general and administrative services fee
Under the Omnibus Agreement we pay Holly an annual administrative fee, currently in the amount of
$2.0 million, for the provision of various general and administrative services for our benefit.
The contract provides that this amount may be increased on the second and third anniversaries
following our initial public offering by the greater of 5% or the percentage increase in the
consumer price index for the applicable year. Our general partner, with the approval and consent
of its conflicts committee, also has the right to agree to further increases in connection with
expansions of our operations through the acquisition or construction of new assets or businesses.
After this three-year period, our general partner will determine the general and administrative
expenses that will be allocated to us.
The $2.0 million fee includes expenses incurred by Holly and its affiliates to perform centralized
corporate functions, such as legal, accounting, treasury, information technology and other
corporate services, including the administration of employee benefit plans. The fee does not
include salaries of pipeline and terminal personnel or other employees of HLS or the cost of their
employee benefits, such as 401(k), pension, and health insurance benefits which are separately
charged to us by Holly. We will also reimburse Holly and its affiliates for direct general and
administrative expenses they incur on our behalf.
Noncompetition
Holly and its affiliates have agreed, for so long as Holly controls our general partner, not to
engage in, whether by acquisition or otherwise, the business of operating crude oil pipelines or
terminals, refined products pipelines or terminals, Intermediate Pipelines or terminals, truck
racks or crude oil gathering systems in the continental United States. This restriction will not
apply to:
|
|
any business operated by Holly or any of its affiliates at the time of the closing of our initial public
offering; |
|
|
|
any business conducted by Holly with the approval of our conflicts committee; |
|
|
|
any crude oil pipeline or gathering system acquired or constructed by Holly or any of its affiliates after the
closing of our initial public offering that is physically interconnected to Hollys refining facilities; |
|
|
|
any business or asset that Holly or any of its affiliates acquires or constructs that has a fair market value
or construction cost of less than $5.0 million; and |
|
|
|
any business or asset that Holly or any of its affiliates acquires or constructs that has a fair market value
or construction cost of $5.0 million or more if we have been offered the opportunity to purchase the business or
asset at fair market value, and we decline to do so with the concurrence of our conflicts committee. |
The limitations on the ability of Holly and its affiliates to compete with us will terminate upon a
change of control of Holly.
Indemnification
Under the Omnibus Agreement, Holly indemnifies us for ten years from July 13, 2004 against certain
potential environmental liabilities associated with the operation of the assets and occurring
before the closing date of our initial public offering. Hollys maximum liability for this
indemnification obligation will not exceed $15.0 million and Holly will not have any obligation
under this indemnification until our losses
- 96 -
exceed $200,000. Holly has agreed to provide $2.5 million of additional indemnification above that
previously provided in the Omnibus Agreement for environmental noncompliance and remediation
liabilities occurring or existing before the closing date of the Intermediate Pipelines
transaction, bringing the total indemnification provided to us from Holly to $17.5 million. Of
this total, indemnification above $15 million relates solely to the Intermediate Pipelines.
We indemnified Holly and its affiliates against environmental liabilities related to our assets
existing on the date of our initial public offering to the extent Holly has not indemnified us.
Right of first refusal to purchase our assets
The Omnibus Agreement also contains the terms under which Holly has a right of first refusal to
purchase our assets that serve its refineries. Before we enter into any contract to sell pipeline
and terminal assets serving Hollys refineries, we must give written notice of the terms of such
proposed sale to Holly. The notice must set forth the name of the third party purchaser, the
assets to be sold, the purchase price, all details of the payment terms and all other terms and
conditions of the offer. To the extent the third party offer consists of consideration other than
cash (or in addition to cash), the purchase price shall be deemed equal to the amount of any such
cash plus the fair market value of such non-cash consideration, determined as set forth in the
Omnibus Agreement. Holly will then have the sole and exclusive option for a period of thirty days
following receipt of the notice, to purchase the subject assets on the terms specified in the
notice.
PIPELINES AND TERMINALS AGREEMENTS
At the time of our initial public offering, we entered into a pipelines and terminals agreement
with Holly, and in July 2005, we entered into an Intermediate Pipelines agreement, both as
described under Business Agreements with Holly Corporation under Item 1 of this Form 10-K
Annual Report.
Hollys obligations under this agreement will not terminate if Holly and its affiliates no longer
own the general partner. These agreements may be assigned by Holly only with the consent of our
conflicts committee.
SUMMARY OF TRANSACTIONS WITH HOLLY CORPORATION
|
|
Pipeline and terminal revenues received from Holly were
$44.2 million, $45.3 million and $13.9 million for the years
ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. These
amounts include the revenues received under the pipelines and
terminals agreements as well as revenues received by the
predecessor prior to formation in July 2004. |
|
|
|
Holly charged general and administrative services under
the Omnibus Agreement of $2.0 million and $0.9 million for the
years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. |
|
|
|
We reimbursed Holly for costs of employees supporting our
operations of $6.5 million and $2.2 million for the years
ended December 31, 2005 and 2004. |
|
|
|
During 2004, we reimbursed Holly $3.9 million for certain
formation, debt issuance and other costs paid on our behalf.
In 2005, Holly reimbursed $0.2 million to us for certain costs
paid on their behalf. |
|
|
|
In the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, we
distributed $16.5 million and $3.2 million, respectively, to
Holly as regular distributions on its subordinated units,
common units and general partner interest. |
|
|
|
In July 2005, we acquired the Intermediate Pipelines from
Holly, which resulted in payment to Holly of a purchase price
of $71.9 million in excess of the basis of the assets
received. See Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements
for further information on the Intermediate Pipelines
transaction. |
- 97 -
|
|
In the year ended December 31, 2004, we distributed
$125.6 million to Holly concurrent with our initial public
offering and we repaid $30.1 million to Holly for short-term
borrowings that originated in 2003. |
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
The audit committee of the board of directors of HLS selected Ernst & Young LLP, Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm, to audit the books, records and accounts of the Partnership for
the 2005 calendar year.
Fees paid to Ernst & Young LLP for 2005 and 2004 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Audit Fees (1) |
|
$ |
457,820 |
|
|
$ |
327,500 |
|
Audit Related Fees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax Fees (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Other Fees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
457,820 |
|
|
$ |
327,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents fees for professional services provided in connection with the audit of our
annual financial statements and internal controls over financial reporting, review of our
quarterly financial statements, and audits performed as part of our securities filings.
Additionally, we reimbursed Holly $431,000 for the audit services performed in 2003 and
2004 for NPL in connection with the initial public offering of the Partnerships common
units in July 2004. |
|
(2) |
|
Tax services are among the administrative services that Holly provides to HEP under the
Omnibus Agreement. Therefore, Holly paid $373,000 and $13,000 to Ernst & Young LLP for tax services
provided to HEP in the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. |
The audit committee of our general partners board of directors has adopted an audit committee
charter, which is available on our website at
www.hollyenergy.com. The charter requires the audit
committee to approve in advance all audit and non-audit services to be provided by our independent
registered public accounting firm. All services reported in the audit, audit-related, tax and all
other fees categories above were approved by the audit committee in advance.
- 98 -
Part IV
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules and Reports on Form 8-K
(a) Documents filed as part of this report
(1) Index to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page in |
|
|
Form 10-K |
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2005 and 2004
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Income for the year ended
December 31, 2005, the period from July 13, 2004
through December 31, 2004, the period from January 1,
2004 through July 12, 2004, and the year ended
December 31, 2003
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the year ended
December 31, 2005, the period from July 13, 2004
through December 31, 2004, the period from January 1,
2004 through July 12, 2004, and the year ended
December 31, 2003
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Partners Equity for the year ended
December 31, 2005, the period from July 13, 2004
through December 31, 2004, the period from January 1,
2004 through July 12, 2004, and the year ended
December 31, 2003
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
56 |
|
(2) Index to Consolidated Financial Statement Schedules
All schedules are omitted since the required information is not present in or not present in
amounts sufficient to require submission of the schedule, or because the information required is
included in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.
(3) Exhibits
|
2.1 |
|
Contribution Agreement, dated January 25, 2005, by and among Holly Energy Partners,
L.P., Holly Energy Partners Operating, L.P., T&R Assets, Inc., Fin-Tex Pipe Line
Company, Alon USA Refining, Inc., Alon Pipeline Assets, LLC, Alon Pipeline Logistics,
LLC, Alon USA, Inc., and Alon USA, L.P. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 of
Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated January 25, 2005). |
|
|
2.2 |
|
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated July 6, 2005 by and among Holly Corporation,
Navajo Pipeline Co., L.P., Navajo Refining Company, L.P., Holly Energy Partners, L.P.,
Holly Energy Partners Operating, L.P. and HEP Pipeline, L.L.C. (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 2.1 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated July 6, 2005). |
- 99 -
|
3.1 |
|
First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Holly Energy
Partners, L.P. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of Registrants Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
3.2 |
|
Amendment No. 1 to the First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership
of Holly Energy Partners, L.P., dated February 28, 2005 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 3.1 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated February 28, 2005, File No.
1-32225). |
|
|
3.3 |
|
Amendment No. 2 to the First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership
of Holly Energy Partners, L.P., as amended, dated July 6, 2005 (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 3.1 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated July 6, 2005, File No.
1-32225). |
|
|
3.4 |
|
First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of HEP Operating
Company, L.P. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 of Registrants Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
3.5 |
|
Certificate of Amendment to the Certificate of Limited Partnership of HEP Operating
Company, L.P., dated July 30, 2004, changing the name from HEP Operating Company, L.P. to
Holly Energy Partners Operating, L.P. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 of
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended June 30, 2004,
File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
3.6 |
|
First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of HEP Logistics
Holdings, L.P. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.4 of Registrants Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
3.7 |
|
First Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of Holly Logistic
Services, L.L.C. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.5 of Registrants Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
3.8 |
|
First Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of HEP Logistics GP,
L.L.C. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.6 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for its quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
4.1 |
|
Indenture, dated February 28, 2005, among the Issuers, the Guarantors and the
Trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report
dated February 28, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
4.2 |
|
Form of 6.25% Senior Note Due 2015 (included as Exhibit A to the Indenture filed as
Exhibit 4.1 hereto) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 of Registrants Form 8-K
Current Report dated February 28, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
4.3 |
|
Form of Notation of Guarantee (included as Exhibit E to the Indenture filed as
Exhibit 4.1 hereto) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 of Registrants Form 8-K
Current Report dated February 28, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
4.4 |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated February 28, 2005, among the Issuers and the
Initial Purchasers (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 of Registrants Form 8-K
Current Report dated February 28, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
4.5 |
|
First Supplemental Indenture, dated March 10, 2005, among HEP Fin-Tex/Trust-River,
L.P., Holly Energy Partners, L.P., Holly Energy Finance Corp., the other Guarantors, and
U.S. Bank National Association (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 of Registrants
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended March 31, 2005, File No.
1-32225). |
- 100 -
|
4.6 |
|
Second Supplemental Indenture, dated April 27, 2005, among Holly Energy Partners,
L.P., Holly Energy Finance Corp., the other Guarantors, and U.S. Bank National
Association (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 of Registrants Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended March 31, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
4.7 |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated June 28, 2005, among Holly Energy Partners,
L.P., Holly Energy Finance Corp. and the Initial Purchasers identified therein
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated
June 28, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
4.8 |
|
Registration Rights Agreement, dated July 8, 2005, among Holly Energy Partners,
L.P., Fiduciary/Claymore MLP Opportunity Fund, Perry Partners, L.P., Structured Finance
Americas, LLC, Kayne Anderson MLP Investment Company and Kayne Anderson Energy Total
Return Fund, Inc. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of Registrants Form 8-K
Current Report dated July 6, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.1 |
|
Credit Agreement, dated as of July 7, 2004, among HEP Operating Company, L.P., as
borrower, the financial institutions party to this agreement, as banks, Union Bank of
California, N.A., as administrative agent and sole lead arranger, Bank of America,
National Association, as syndication agent, and Guaranty Bank, as documentation agent
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for its quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.2 |
|
Consent and Agreement, entered into as of July 13, 2004 (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.3 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period
ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.3 |
|
Consent, Waiver and Amendment No. 2, dated February 28, 2005, among OLP, the
existing guarantors identified therein, Union Bank of California, N.A., as administrative
agent, and certain other lending institutions identified therein (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.4 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated February 28,
2005). |
|
|
10.4 |
|
Waiver and Amendment No. 3, dated June 17, 2005, among Holly Energy Partners, L.P.,
Union Bank of California, N.A., as administrative agent, and certain other lending
institutions identified therein (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended June 30, 2005,
File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.5 |
|
Consent and Amendment No. 4, dated July 8, 2005, among Holly Energy Partners, L.P.,
Union Bank of California, N.A., as administrative agent, and certain other lending
institutions identified therein (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of
Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated July 6, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.6 |
|
Pledge Agreement, dated as of July 13, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.2 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended June
30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.7 |
|
Guaranty Agreement, dated as of July 13, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.4 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended June
30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.8 |
|
Security Agreement, dated as of July 13, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.5 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended June
30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
- 101 -
|
10.9 |
|
Form of Mortgage, Deed of Trust, Security Agreement, Assignment of Rents and
Leases, Fixture Filing and Financing Statement, dated July 13, 2004 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.6 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly
period ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.10 |
|
Form of Mortgage and Deed of Trust (Oklahoma) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated February 28, 2005, File No.
1-32225). |
|
|
10.11 |
|
Form of Mortgage and Deed of Trust (Texas) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.3 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated February 28, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.12 |
|
Mortgage and Deed of Trust, dated July 8, 2005, by HEP Pipeline, L.L.C. for the
benefit of Holly Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 of Registrants
Form 8-K Current Report dated July 6, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.13 |
|
Omnibus Agreement, effective as of July 13, 2004, among Holly Corporation, Navajo
Pipeline Co., L.P., Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. , HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., Holly
Energy Partners, L.P., HEP Logistics GP, L.L.C. and HEP Operating Company, L.P.
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for its quarterly period ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.14 |
|
Pipelines and Terminals Agreement, dated July 13, 2004, by and among Holly
Corporation, Navajo Refining Company, L.P., Holly Refining and Marketing Company, Holly
Energy Partners, L.P., HEP Operating Company, L.P., HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., Holly
Logistic Services, L.L.C., and HEP Logistics GP, L.L.C. (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.8 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended
June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.15 |
|
Pipelines and Terminals Agreement, dated February 28, 2005, among the Partnership
and Alon USA, LP2005 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Registrants Form 8-K
Current Report dated February 28, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.16 |
|
Pipelines Agreement, dated July 8, 2005, among Holly Energy Partners, L.P., Holly
Energy Partners Operating, L.P., Holly Corporation, HEP Pipeline, L.L.C., Navajo
Refining Company, L.P., HEP Logistics Holdings, L.P., Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. and
HEP Logistics GP, L.L.C. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Registrants Form
8-K Current Report dated July 6, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.17+ |
|
Holly Energy Partners, L.P. Long-Term Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.9 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period ended
June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.18+ |
|
Holly Logistic Services, L.L.C. Annual Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.10 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for its quarterly period
ended June 30, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.19+ |
|
Form of Director Restricted Unit Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1
of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 15, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.20+ |
|
Form of Employee Restricted Unit Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2
of Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 15, 2004, File No. 1-32225). |
- 102 -
|
10.21+ |
|
Form of Restricted Unit Agreement (with Performance Vesting) (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.1 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated August 4, 2005, File No.
1-32225). |
|
|
10.22+ |
|
Form of Restricted Unit Agreement (without Performance Vesting) (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 of Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated August 4, 2005,
File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.23+ |
|
Form of Performance Unit Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 of
Registrants Form 8-K Current Report dated August 4, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.24+ |
|
First Amendment to the Holly Energy Partners, L.P. Long-Term Incentive Plan
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 of Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for its quarterly period ended September 30, 2005, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
10.25+ |
|
Form of Amendment to Performance Unit Agreement Under the Holly Energy Partners, L.P.
Long-Term Incentive Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of the Registrants
Form 8-K Current Report dated February 10, 2006, File No. 1-32225). |
|
|
12.1* |
|
Statement of Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges. |
|
|
21.1* |
|
Subsidiaries of Registrant. |
|
|
23.1* |
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. |
|
|
31.1* |
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
31.2* |
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer under Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
32.1* |
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
32.2* |
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
* |
|
Filed herewith. |
|
+ |
|
Constitutes management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements. |
- 103 -
HOLLY ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
HOLLY ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P. |
|
|
(Registrant) |
|
|
|
|
|
By: HEP LOGISTICS HOLDINGS, L.P. |
|
|
its General Partner |
|
|
|
|
|
By: HOLLY LOGISTIC SERVICES, L.L.C. |
|
|
its General Partner |
|
|
|
Date: February 21, 2006
|
|
/s/ Matthew P. Clifton |
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew P. Clifton |
|
|
Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief |
|
|
Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ P. Dean Ridenour |
|
|
|
|
|
P. Dean Ridenour |
|
|
Vice President and Chief Accounting Officer and Director |
|
|
(Principal Accounting Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Stephen J. McDonnell |
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen J. McDonnell |
|
|
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
(Principal Financial Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Lamar Norsworthy |
|
|
|
|
|
Lamar Norsworthy |
|
|
Director |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Charles M. Darling, IV |
|
|
|
|
|
Charles M. Darling, IV |
|
|
Director |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Jerry W. Pinkerton |
|
|
|
|
|
Jerry W. Pinkerton |
|
|
Director |
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ William P. Stengel |
|
|
|
|
|
William P. Stengel |
|
|
Director |
- 104 -