USA Compression Partners, LP - Annual Report: 2018 (Form 10-K)

X`

 

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

Form 10-K

 

(Mark One)

 

☒ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018

 

or

 

☐TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the transition period from              to

 

Commission file number: 001-35779

 

USA Compression Partners, LP

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

 

 

 

 

(512) 473-2662

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

 

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

 

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

 

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 ☒    No ☐

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒    No ☐

 

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

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” or an “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

 

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

 

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

 

The aggregate market value of common units held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 29, 2018, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter was $831,898,973. This calculation does not reflect a determination that such persons are affiliates for any other purpose.

 

As of February 14, 2019, there were 90,000,504 common units and 6,397,965 Class B Units outstanding.

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: NONE

 

 

 

Table of Contents

 

 

 

 

PART I

 

DISCLOSURE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

 

This report contains “forward-looking statements.” All statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this report are forward-looking statements, including, without limitation, statements regarding our plans, strategies, prospects and expectations concerning our business, results of operations and financial condition. You can identify many of these statements by looking for words such as “believe,” “expect,” “intend,” “project,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “continue,”  “if,” “outlook,” “will,” “could,” “should,” or similar words or the negatives thereof.

 

Known material factors that could cause our actual results to differ from those in these forward-looking statements are described below, in Part I, Item 1A (“Risk Factors”) and in Part II, Item 7 (“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”). Important factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements include, among other things:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

All forward-looking statements included in this report are based on information available to us on the date of this report and speak only as of the date of this report. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. All subsequent written and oral forward-looking statements attributable to us or persons acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the foregoing cautionary statements.

 

ITEM 1.Business

 

Following the transactions described in further detail below, CDM Resource Management LLC and CDM Environmental & Technical Services LLC, which together represent the CDM Compression Business (the “USA Compression Predecessor”), has been determined to be the historical predecessor of USA Compression Partners, LP (the “Partnership”) for financial reporting purposes. The USA Compression Predecessor is considered the predecessor of the Partnership because Energy Transfer Equity, L.P. (“ETE”), through its wholly owned subsidiary Energy Transfer Partners, L.L.C., controlled the USA Compression Predecessor prior to the transactions described below and obtained control of the Partnership through its acquisition of USA Compression GP, LLC, the general partner of the Partnership (the “General Partner”).

 

The closing of the Transactions occurred on April 2, 2018 (the “Transactions Date”) and has been reflected in the consolidated financial statements of the Partnership.

 

In October 2018, ETE and Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. (“ETP”) completed the merger of ETP with a wholly owned subsidiary of ETE in a unit-for-unit exchange (the “ETE Merger”).  Following the closing of the ETE Merger, ETE changed its name to “Energy Transfer LP” and ETP changed its name to “Energy Transfer Operating, L.P.” (“ETO”). Upon the closing of the ETE Merger, ETE contributed to ETP 100% of the limited liability company interests in the General Partner. References herein to “ETP” refer to Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. for periods prior to the ETE Merger and ETO following the ETE Merger, and references to “ETE” refer to Energy Transfer Equity, L.P. for periods prior to the ETE Merger and Energy Transfer LP following the ETE Merger.

 

All references in this report to the USA Compression Predecessor, as well as the terms “our,” “we,” “us” and “its” refer to the USA Compression Predecessor when used in a historical context or in reference to the periods prior to the Transactions Date, unless the context otherwise requires or where otherwise indicated. All references in this section to the Partnership, as well as the terms “our,” “we,” “us” and “its” refer to USA Compression Partners, LP, together with its consolidated subsidiaries, including the USA Compression Predecessor, when used in the present or future tense and for periods subsequent to the Transactions Date, unless the context otherwise requires or where otherwise indicated.

 

Overview

 

We are a growth-oriented Delaware limited partnership, and we believe that we are one of the largest independent providers of compression services in the United States (“U.S.”) in terms of total compression fleet horsepower. USA Compression Partners, LP has been providing compression services since 1998 and completed its initial public offering in January 2013. The USA Compression Predecessor has been providing compression services since 1997 and was a wholly owned indirect subsidiary of ETP prior to the Transactions Date. As of December 31, 2018, we had 3,597,097 horsepower in our fleet and 131,750 horsepower on order for expected delivery during 2019. We provide compression services to our customers primarily in connection with infrastructure applications, including both allowing for the processing and transportation of natural gas through the domestic pipeline system and enhancing crude oil production through artificial lift processes. As such, our compression services play a critical role in the production, processing and transportation of both natural gas and crude oil.

 

We provide compression services in a number of shale plays throughout the U.S., including the Utica, Marcellus, Permian Basin, Delaware Basin, Eagle Ford, Mississippi Lime, Granite Wash, Woodford, Barnett, Haynesville, Niobrara and Fayetteville shales. Demand for our services is driven by the domestic production of natural gas and crude oil; as such, we have focused our activities in areas with attractive natural gas and crude oil production growth, which are generally found in these shale and unconventional resource plays. According to studies promulgated by the Energy Information Agency (“EIA”), the production and transportation volumes in these shale plays are expected to increase over the long term due to the comparatively attractive economic returns versus returns achieved in many conventional basins. Furthermore, the changes in production volumes and pressures of shale plays over time require a wider range of compression services than in conventional basins. We believe we are well-positioned to meet these changing operating conditions due to the flexibility of our compression units. While our business focuses largely on compression services serving infrastructure applications, including centralized natural gas gathering systems and processing facilities, which utilize large horsepower compression units, typically in shale plays, we also provide compression services in more mature conventional basins, including gas lift applications on crude oil wells targeted by horizontal drilling techniques. Gas lift, a process by which natural gas is injected into the production tubing of an existing producing well, in order to reduce the hydrostatic pressure and allow the oil to flow at a higher rate, and other artificial lift technologies are critical to the enhancement of oil production from horizontal wells operating in tight shale plays.

 

We operate a modern fleet of compression units, with an average age of approximately five years. We acquire our compression units from third-party fabricators who build the units to our specifications, utilizing specific components from original equipment manufacturers and assembling the units in a manner that provides us the ability to meet certain operating condition thresholds. Our standard new-build compression units are generally configured for multiple compression stages allowing us to operate our units across a broad range of operating conditions. The design flexibility of our units, particularly in midstream applications, allows us to enter into longer-term contracts and reduces the

redeployment risk of our horsepower in the field. Our modern and standardized fleet, decentralized field level operating structure and technical proficiency in predictive and preventive maintenance and overhaul operations have enabled us to achieve average service run times consistently at or above the levels required by our customers and maintain high overall utilization rates for our fleet.

 

As part of our services, we engineer, design, operate, service and repair our compression units and maintain related support inventory and equipment. The compression units in our modern fleet are designed to be easily adaptable to fit our customers’ changing compression requirements. Focusing on the needs of our customers and providing them with reliable and flexible compression services in geographic areas of attractive growth helps us to generate stable cash flows for our unitholders.

 

We provide compression services to our customers under fixed-fee contracts with initial contract terms typically between six months and five years, depending on the application and location of the compression unit. We typically continue to provide compression services at a specific location beyond the initial contract term, either through contract renewal or on a month-to-month or longer basis. We primarily enter into take-or-pay contracts whereby our customers are required to pay our monthly fee even during periods of limited or disrupted throughput, which enhances the stability and predictability of our cash flows. We are not directly exposed to commodity price risk because we do not take title to the natural gas or crude oil involved in our services and because the natural gas used as fuel by our compression units is supplied by our customers without cost to us.

 

We provide compression services to major oil companies and independent producers, processors, gatherers and transporters of natural gas and crude oil.  Regardless of the application for which our services are provided, our customers rely upon the availability of the equipment used to provide compression services and our expertise to maximize the throughput of product, reduce fuel costs and minimize emissions. While we significantly expanded our geographic footprint with our acquisition of the USA Compression Predecessor from ETP (the “CDM Acquisition”), our customers may have compression demands in areas of the U.S. in conjunction with their field development projects where we are not currently operating. We continually consider further expansion of our geographic areas of operation in the U.S. based upon the level of customer demand. Our modern, flexible fleet of compression units, which have been designed to be rapidly deployed and redeployed throughout the country, provides us with opportunities to expand into other areas with both new and existing customers. 

 

We also own and operate a fleet of equipment used to provide natural gas treating services, such as carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide removal, natural gas cooling and dehydration, to natural gas producers and midstream companies.

 

Our assets and operations are organized into a single reportable segment and are all located and conducted in the U.S. See our consolidated financial statements, and the notes thereto, included elsewhere in this report for financial information on our operations and assets; such information is incorporated herein by reference.

 

Recent Developments

 

Senior Notes Issuance

 

On March 23, 2018, USA Compression Partners, LP and its wholly-owned subsidiary, USA Compression Finance Corp., a Delaware corporation (“Finance Corp.” and, together with USA Compression Partners, LP, the “Issuers”) co-issued $725 million in aggregate principal amount of 6.875% senior notes due 2026 (the “Senior Notes”) and entered into an Indenture (the “Indenture”), among the Issuers, the Guarantors (as defined below) and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee. The Senior Notes are guaranteed (the “Guarantees”), jointly and severally, on a senior unsecured basis by all of the Partnership’s existing subsidiaries (other than Finance Corp.) and will be guaranteed by each of its future restricted subsidiaries that either borrows under, or guarantees, the Credit Agreement (as defined below) or guarantees certain of the Partnership’s other indebtedness (collectively, the “Guarantors”). The Senior Notes accrue interest at the rate of 6.875% per year, and interest on the Senior Notes is payable semi-annually in arrears on April 1 and October 1, with the first such payment having occurred on October 1, 2018.

 

On January 14, 2019, the Partnership completed an exchange offer whereby holders of the Senior Notes exchanged all of the Senior Notes for an equivalent amount of senior notes registered under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Exchange Notes”).  The Exchange Notes are substantially identical to the Senior Notes, except that the Exchange Notes have been registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and do not contain the transfer restrictions, restrictive legends, registration rights or additional interest provisions of the Senior Notes.

 

The Indenture contains customary terms, events of default and covenants relating to, among other things, the incurrence of debt, the payment of distributions or similar restricted payments, undertaking transactions with affiliates and limitations on asset sales.

 

CDM Acquisition and Issuance of Class B Units

 

On the Transactions Date, we completed the CDM Acquisition for aggregate consideration to ETP of approximately $1.7 billion, consisting of (i) 19,191,351 common units, (ii) 6,397,965 Class B units representing limited partner interests in us (the “Class B Units”) and (iii) $1.2 billion in cash (including customary closing adjustments). The Class B Units are a class of partnership interests in the Partnership that have substantially all of the rights and obligations of our common units, except that the Class B Units do not receive any quarterly distributions paid on our common units until the Class B Units automatically convert into common units following the record date attributable to the quarter ending June 30, 2019.

 

General Partner Purchase Agreement

 

On the Transactions Date and in connection with the closing of the CDM Acquisition, pursuant to that certain Purchase Agreement, dated as of January 15, 2018, by and among  ETE, Energy Transfer Partners, L.L.C. (together with ETE, the “GP Purchasers”), USA Compression Holdings, LLC (“USAC Holdings”) and, solely for certain purposes therein, R/C IV USACP Holdings, L.P. and ETP, the GP Purchasers acquired from USAC Holdings (i) all of the outstanding limited liability company interests in the General Partner and (ii) 12,466,912 common units of the Partnership for cash consideration equal to $250 million. Upon the closing of the ETE Merger, ETE contributed all of the outstanding limited liability company interests in the General Partner and the 12,466,912 common units to ETP.

 

Equity Restructuring Agreement

 

On the Transactions Date and in connection with the closing of the CDM Acquisition, we consummated the transactions contemplated by the Equity Restructuring Agreement dated January 15, 2018, by and among us, the General Partner and ETE, including, among other things, the cancellation of the Incentive Distribution Rights (as defined in the Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of the Partnership (the “Partnership Agreement”)) in the Partnership and conversion of the General Partner’s General Partner Interest (as defined in the Partnership Agreement) into a non-economic general partner interest, in exchange for our issuance of 8,000,000 common units to the General Partner. In addition, at any time after one year following the Transactions Date, ETE has the right to contribute (or cause any of its subsidiaries to contribute) to us all of the outstanding equity interests in any of its subsidiaries that owns the general partner interest in us in exchange for $10 million (the “GP Contribution”); provided that the GP Contribution will occur automatically if at any time following the Transactions Date (i) ETE or one of its subsidiaries (including ETP) owns, directly or indirectly, the general partner interest in us and (ii) ETE and its subsidiaries (including ETP) collectively own less than 12,500,000 of our common units.

 

Series A Preferred Unit and Warrant Private Placement

 

On the Transactions Date, we also consummated the transactions contemplated by the Series A Preferred Unit and Warrant Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”), dated January 15, 2018, between the Partnership and certain investment funds managed or sub-advised by EIG Global Energy Partners (“EIG”) and FS Energy and Power Fund (collectively, the “Purchasers”), whereby the Partnership issued and sold in a private placement $500 million in the aggregate of (i) newly authorized and established Series A Preferred Units representing limited partner interests in us (the “Preferred Units”) and (ii) two tranches of warrants to purchase our common units (collectively, the “Warrants”). Pursuant to the terms of the Purchase Agreement, on the Transactions Date, we issued (i) 500,000 Preferred Units to the

Purchasers at a price of $1,000 per Preferred Unit,  (ii) Warrants to purchase 5,000,000 common units with a strike price of $17.03 per unit and (iii) Warrants to purchase 10,000,000 common units with a strike price of $19.59 per unit. The Warrants may be exercised by the holders thereof at any time beginning on the one year anniversary of the Transactions Date and before the tenth anniversary of the Transactions Date. Upon exercise of the Warrants, we may, at our option, elect to settle the Warrants in common units on a net basis.

 

Credit Agreement Amendment and Restatement

 

On the Transactions Date, we entered into the Sixth Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the “Credit Agreement”) by and among the Partnership, as borrower, USAC OpCo 2, LLC, USAC Leasing 2, LLC, USA Compression Partners, LLC, USAC Leasing, LLC, CDM Resource Management LLC, CDM Environmental & Technical Services LLC and Finance Corp., the lenders party thereto from time to time, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as agent and an LC issuer, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., Barclays Bank PLC, Regions Capital Markets, a division of Regions Bank, RBC Capital Markets and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as joint lead arrangers and joint book runners, Barclays Bank PLC, Regions Bank, RBC Capital Markets and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as syndication agents, and MUFG Union Bank, N.A., SunTrust Bank and The Bank of Nova Scotia, as senior managing agents. The Credit Agreement amended and restated that certain Fifth Amended and Restated Credit Agreement, dated as of December 13, 2013, as amended (the “Fifth A&R Credit Agreement”).

 

The Credit Agreement amended the Fifth A&R Credit Agreement to, among other things, (i) increase the borrowing capacity under the Credit Agreement from $1.1 billion to $1.6 billion (subject to availability under a borrowing base), (ii) extend the termination date (and the maturity date of the obligations thereunder) from January 6, 2020 to April 2, 2023, (iii) subject to the terms of the Credit Agreement, permit up to $400 million of future increases in borrowing capacity, (iv) modify the leverage ratio covenant to be 5.75 to 1.0 through the end of the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2019, 5.5 to 1.0 through the end of the fiscal quarter ending December 31, 2019, and 5.0 to 1.0 thereafter and (v) increase the applicable margin for eurodollar borrowings to range from 2.00% to 2.75%, depending on our leverage ratio, all as more fully set forth in the Credit Agreement. Amounts borrowed and repaid under the Credit Agreement may be re-borrowed. Please read Part II, Item 7 (“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Description of Revolving Credit Facility.”)

 

Business Strategies

 

Our principal business objective is to maintain or increase the quarterly cash distributions that we pay to our common unitholders over time while ensuring the ongoing stability and growth of our business. We expect to achieve this objective by executing on the following strategies:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our Operations

 

Compression Services

 

We provide compression services for a monthly service fee. As part of our services, we engineer, design, operate, service and repair our fleet of compression units and maintain related support inventory and equipment. In certain instances, we also engineer, design, install, operate, service and repair certain ancillary equipment used in conjunction with our compression services. We have consistently provided average service run times at or above the levels required by our customers. In general, our team of field service technicians services only our compression fleet and ancillary equipment. In limited circumstances and for established customers, we will agree to service third-party owned equipment. We do not own any compression fabrication facilities.

 

Our Compression Fleet

 

The fleet of compression units that we own and use to provide compression services consists of specially engineered compression units that utilize standardized components, principally engines manufactured by Caterpillar, Inc. and compressor frames and cylinders manufactured by Ariel Corporation. Our units can be rapidly and cost effectively modified for specific customer applications. As of December 31, 2018, the average age of our compression units was approximately five years. Our modern, standardized compression unit fleet is powered primarily by the Caterpillar 3400, 3500 and 3600 engine classes, which range from 401 to 5,000 horsepower per unit. These larger horsepower units, which we define as 400 horsepower per unit or greater, represented 85.8% of our total fleet horsepower (including compression units on order) as of December 31, 2018. In addition, a portion of our fleet consists of smaller horsepower units ranging from 40 horsepower to 399 horsepower that are primarily used in gas lift applications. We believe the young age and

overall composition of our compressor fleet result in fewer mechanical failures, lower fuel usage, and reduced environmental emissions.

 

The following table provides a summary of our compression units by horsepower as of December 31, 2018:

 

 

The following table sets forth certain information regarding our compression fleet as of the dates and for the periods indicated and excludes certain gas treating assets for which horsepower is not a relevant metric:

 

 

A growing number of our compression units contain electronic control systems that enable us to monitor the units remotely by satellite or other means to supplement our technicians’ on-site monitoring visits. We intend to continue to selectively add remote monitoring systems to our fleet during 2019 where beneficial from an operational and financial standpoint. All of our compression units are designed to automatically shut down if operating conditions deviate from a pre-determined range. While we retain the care, custody, ongoing maintenance and control of our compression units, we allow our customers, subject to a defined protocol, to start, stop, accelerate and slow down compression units in response to field conditions.

 

We adhere to routine, preventive and scheduled maintenance cycles. Each of our compression units is subjected to rigorous sizing and diagnostic analyses, including lubricating oil analysis and engine exhaust emission analysis. We have proprietary field service automation capabilities that allow our service technicians to electronically record and track operating, technical, environmental and commercial information at the discrete unit level. These capabilities allow our field technicians to identify potential problems and often act on them before such problems result in down-time.

 

Generally, we expect each of our compression units to undergo a major overhaul between service deployment cycles. The timing of these major overhauls depends on multiple factors, including run time and operating conditions. A major overhaul involves the periodic rebuilding of the unit to materially extend its economic useful life or to enhance the unit’s ability to fulfill broader or more diversified compression applications. Because our compression fleet is comprised of units of varying horsepower that have been placed into service with staggered initial on-line dates, we are able to schedule overhauls in a way that avoids excessive annual maintenance capital expenditures and minimizes the revenue impact of down-time.

 

We believe that our customers, by outsourcing their compression requirements, can achieve higher compression run-times, which translates into increased volumes of either natural gas or crude oil production and, therefore, increased revenues. Utilizing our compression services also allows our customers to reduce their operating, maintenance and equipment costs by allowing us to efficiently manage their changing compression needs. In many of our service contracts, we guarantee our customers availability (as described below) ranging from 95% to 98%, depending on field- level requirements.

 

General Compression Service Contract Terms

 

The following discussion describes the material terms generally common to our compression service contracts. We generally have separate contracts for each distinct location for which we will provide compression services.

 

Term and termination. Our contracts typically have an initial term of between six months and five years, depending on the application and location of the compression unit. After the expiration of the initial term, the contract continues on a month-to-month or longer basis until terminated by us or our customer upon notice as provided for in the applicable contract. As of December 31, 2018, approximately 47% of our compression services on a revenue basis were provided on a month-to-month basis to customers who continue to utilize our services following expiration of the primary term of their contracts with us.

 

Availability. Our contracts often provide a guarantee of specified availability. We define availability as the percentage of time in a given period that our compression services are being provided or are capable of being provided. Availability is reduced by instances of “down-time” that are attributable to anything other than events of force majeure or acts or failures to act by the customer. Down-time under our contracts usually begins when our services stop being provided or when we receive notice from the customer of the problem. Down-time due to scheduled maintenance is excluded from our availability commitment. Our failure to meet a stated availability guarantee may result in a service fee credit to the customer. As a consequence of our availability guarantee, we are incentivized to perform predictive and preventive maintenance on our fleet as well as promptly respond to a problem to meet our contractual commitments and ensure our customers the compression availability on which their business and our service relationship are based. For service contracts that do not have a stated availability guarantee, we work with those customers to ensure that our compression services meet their operational needs.

 

Fees and expenses. Our customers pay a fixed monthly fee for our services. Compression services generally are billed monthly in advance of the service period, except for certain customers whom we bill at the beginning of the service month; and payments are generally due 30 days from the date of the invoice. We are not responsible for acts of force majeure, and our customers generally are required to pay our monthly fee even during periods of limited or disrupted throughput. We are generally responsible for the costs and expenses associated with operation and maintenance of our compression equipment, although certain fees and expenses are the responsibility of our customers under the terms of their contracts. For example, all fuel gas is provided by our customers without cost to us, and in many cases customers are required to provide all water and electricity. At the customer’s option, we can provide fluids necessary to run the unit to the customer for an additional fee. We provide such fluids for a substantial majority of the compression units deployed in gas lift applications. We are also reimbursed by our customers for certain ancillary expenses such as trucking and crane operation, depending on the terms agreed to in the applicable contract, resulting in little to no impact to gross operating margin.

 

Service standards and specifications. We commit to provide compression services under service contracts that typically provide that we will supply all compression equipment, tools, parts, field service support and engineering in order to meet our customers’ requirements. Our contracts do not specify the specific compression equipment we will use; instead, in consultation with the customer, we determine what equipment is necessary to perform our contractual commitments.

 

Title; Risk of loss. We own all of the compression equipment in our fleet that we use to provide compression services, and we normally bear the risk of loss or damage to our equipment and tools and injury or death to our personnel.

 

Insurance. Our contracts typically provide that both we and our customers are required to carry general liability, workers’ compensation, employers’ liability, automobile and excess liability insurance.

 

Marketing and Sales

 

Our marketing and client service functions are performed on a coordinated basis by our sales team and field technicians. Salespeople, applications engineers and field technicians qualify, analyze and scope new compression applications as well as regularly visit our customers to ensure customer satisfaction, determine a customer’s needs related to existing services being provided and determine the customer’s future compression service requirements. This ongoing communication allows us to quickly identify and respond to our customers’ compression requirements.

 

Customers

 

Our customers consist of more than 400 companies in the energy industry, including major integrated oil companies, public and private independent exploration and production companies and midstream companies. Our ten largest customers accounted for approximately 33%  and 43% of our revenue for the year ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively.

 

Suppliers and Service Providers

 

The principal manufacturers of components for our natural gas compression equipment include Caterpillar, Inc., Cummins Inc., and Arrow Engine Company for engines, Air-X-Changers and Alfa Laval (US) for coolers, and Ariel Corporation, GE Oil & Gas Gemini products and Arrow Engine Company for compressor frames and cylinders. We also rely primarily on four vendors, A G Equipment Company, Alegacy Equipment, LLC, Standard Equipment Corp. and Genis Holdings LLC, to package and assemble our compression units. Although we rely primarily on these suppliers, we believe alternative sources for natural gas compression equipment are generally available if needed. However, relying on alternative sources may increase our costs and change the standardized nature of our fleet. We have not experienced any material supply problems to date. Although lead-times for new Caterpillar engines and new Ariel compressor frames have in the past been in excess of one year due to increased demand and supply allocations imposed on equipment packagers and end-users, currently lead-times for such engines and frames are approximately one year or shorter. Please

read Part I, Item 1A (“Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business—We depend on a limited number of suppliers and are vulnerable to product shortages and price increases, which could have a negative impact on our results of operations”).

 

Competition

 

The compression services business is highly competitive. Some of our competitors have a broader geographic scope and greater financial and other resources than we do. On a regional basis, we experience competition from numerous smaller companies that may be able to more quickly adapt to changes within our industry and changes in economic conditions as a whole, more readily take advantage of available opportunities and adopt more aggressive pricing policies. Additionally, the historical availability of attractive financing terms from financial institutions and equipment manufacturers has made the purchase of individual compression units affordable to our customers. We believe that we compete effectively on the basis of price, equipment availability, customer service, flexibility in meeting customer needs, quality and reliability of our compressors and related services. Please read Part I, Item 1A (“Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business—We face significant competition that may cause us to lose market share and reduce our cash available for distribution”).

 

Seasonality

 

Our results of operations have not historically been materially affected by seasonality, and we do not currently have reason to believe that seasonal fluctuations will have a material impact in the foreseeable future.

 

Insurance

 

We believe that our insurance coverage is customary for the industry and adequate for our business. As is customary in the energy services industry, we review our safety equipment and procedures and carry insurance against most, but not all, risks of our business. Losses and liabilities not covered by insurance would increase our costs. The compression business can be hazardous, involving unforeseen circumstances such as uncontrollable flows of gas or well fluids, fires and explosions or environmental damage. To address the hazards inherent in our business, we maintain insurance coverage that, subject to significant deductibles, includes physical damage coverage, third party general liability insurance, employer’s liability, environmental and pollution and other coverage, although coverage for environmental and pollution related losses is subject to significant limitations. Under the terms of our standard compression services contract, we are responsible for maintaining insurance coverage on our compression equipment. Please read Part I, Item 1A (“Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business—We do not insure against all potential losses and could be seriously harmed by unexpected liabilities”).

 

Environmental and Safety Regulations

 

We are subject to stringent and complex federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the discharge of materials into the environment or otherwise relating to protection of human health, safety and the environment. These regulations include compliance obligations for air emissions, water quality, wastewater discharges and solid and hazardous waste disposal, as well as regulations designed for the protection of human health and safety and threatened or endangered species. Compliance with these environmental laws and regulations may expose us to significant costs and liabilities and cause us to incur significant capital expenditures in our operations. We are often obligated to assist customers in obtaining permits or approvals in our operations from various federal, state and local authorities. Permits and approvals can be denied or delayed, which may cause us to lose potential and current customers, interrupt our operations and limit our growth and revenue. Moreover, failure to comply with these laws and regulations may result in the assessment of administrative, civil and criminal penalties, imposition of remedial obligations and the issuance of injunctions delaying or prohibiting operations. Private parties may also have the right to pursue legal actions to enforce compliance as well as to seek damages for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations or for personal injury or property damage. While we believe that our operations are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and that continued compliance with current requirements would not have a material adverse effect on us, we cannot predict whether our cost of compliance will materially increase in the future. Any changes in, or more stringent enforcement of, existing environmental laws and regulations, or passage of additional

environmental laws and regulations that result in more stringent and costly pollution control equipment, waste handling, storage, transport, disposal or remediation requirements could have a material adverse effect on our operations and financial position.

 

We do not believe that compliance with federal, state or local environmental laws and regulations will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position or results of operations or cash flows. We cannot assure you, however, that future events such as changes in existing laws or enforcement policies, the promulgation of new laws or regulations, or the development or discovery of new facts or conditions or unforeseen incidents will not cause us to incur significant costs. The following is a discussion of material environmental and safety laws that relate to our operations. We believe that we are in substantial compliance with all of these environmental laws and regulations. Please read Part I, Item 1A (“Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business—We are subject to substantial environmental regulation, and changes in these regulations could increase our costs or liabilities”).

 

Air emissions. The Clean Air Act (“CAA”) and comparable state laws regulate emissions of air pollutants from various industrial sources, including natural gas compressors, and impose certain monitoring and reporting requirements. Such emissions are regulated by air emissions permits, which are applied for and obtained through various state or federal regulatory agencies. Our standard natural gas compression contract provides that the customer is responsible for obtaining air emissions permits and assuming the environmental risks related to site operations. In some instances, our customers may be required to aggregate emissions from a number of different sources on the theory that the different sources should be considered a single source. Any such determinations could have the effect of making projects more costly than our customers expected and could require the installation of more costly emissions controls, which may lead some of our customers not to pursue certain projects.

 

Increased obligations of operators to reduce air emissions of nitrogen oxides and other pollutants from internal combustion engines in transmission service have been enacted by governmental authorities. For example, in 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) published new regulations under the CAA to control emissions of hazardous air pollutants from existing stationary reciprocal internal combustion engines, also known as Quad Z regulations. The rule requires us to undertake certain expenditures and activities, including purchasing and installing emissions control equipment on certain compressor engines and generators.

 

In recent years, the EPA has lowered the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”) for several air pollutants. For example, in 2015, the EPA finalized a rule strengthening the primary and secondary standards for ground level ozone, both of which are 8-hour concentration standards of 70 parts per billion. After the EPA revises a NAAQS standard, the states are expected to establish revised attainment/non-attainment regions. State implementation of the revised NAAQS could result in stricter permitting requirements, delay or prohibit our customers’ ability to obtain such permits, and result in increased expenditures for pollution control equipment, which could impact our customers’ operations, increase the cost of additions to property, plant, and equipment, and negatively impact our business.

 

In 2012, the EPA finalized rules that establish new air emissions controls for oil and natural gas production and natural gas processing operations. Specifically, the EPA’s rule package included New Source Performance Standards to address emissions of sulfur dioxide and volatile organic compounds (“VOCs”) and a separate set of emissions standards to address hazardous air pollutants frequently associated with oil and natural gas production and processing activities. The rules established specific new requirements regarding emissions from compressors and controllers at natural gas processing plants, dehydrators, storage tanks and other production equipment as well as the first federal air standards for natural gas wells that are hydraulically fractured. In June 2016, the EPA took steps to expand on these regulations when it published New Source Performance Standards, known as Subpart OOOOa, that require certain new, modified or reconstructed facilities in the oil and natural gas sector to reduce methane gas and VOC emissions. These Subpart OOOOa standards would expand the 2012 New Source Performance Standards by using certain equipment-specific emissions control practices, requiring additional controls for pneumatic controllers and pumps as well as compressors, and imposing leak detection and repair requirements for natural gas compressor and booster stations. However, the EPA announced in April 2017 that it intended to reconsider certain aspects of the 2016 New Source Performance Standards, and in May 2017, the EPA issued an administrative stay of key provisions of the rule, but was promptly ordered by the D.C. Circuit to implement the rule. The EPA also proposed 60-day and two-year stays of certain provisions in June 2017 and published a Notice of Data Availability in November 2017 seeking comment and providing clarification regarding

the agency’s legal authority to stay the rule. In March 2018, EPA finalized narrow amendments to the rule, and in October 2018, EPA proposed further reconsideration amendments to the rule.  Among other things, these amendments would alter fugitive emissions requirements, monitoring frequencies, and well site pneumatic pump standards.  

 

Depending upon whether EPA finalizes these further amendments, Subpart OOOOa and any additional regulation of air emissions from the oil and gas sector could result in increased expenditures for pollution control equipment, which could impact our customers’ operations and negatively impact our business.

 

We are also subject to air regulation at the state level. For example, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (“TCEQ”) has finalized revisions to certain air permit programs that significantly increase the air permitting requirements for new and certain existing oil and gas production and gathering sites for 15 counties in the Barnett Shale production area. The final rule establishes new emissions standards for engines, which could impact the operation of specific categories of engines by requiring the use of alternative engines, compressor packages or the installation of aftermarket emissions control equipment. The rule became effective for the Barnett Shale production area in April 2011, with the lower emissions standards becoming applicable between 2015 and 2030 depending on the type of engine and the permitting requirements. The cost to comply with the revised air permit programs is not expected to be material at this time. However, the TCEQ has stated it will consider expanding application of the new air permit program statewide. At this point, we cannot predict the cost to comply with such requirements if the geographic scope is expanded.

 

There can be no assurance that future requirements compelling the installation of more sophisticated emissions control equipment would not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash available for distribution.

 

Climate change. Methane, a primary component of natural gas, and carbon dioxide, a byproduct of the burning of natural gas, are examples of greenhouse gases (“GHGs”). In recent years, the U.S. Congress has considered legislation to reduce GHG emissions. It presently appears unlikely that comprehensive climate legislation will be passed in the near future, although energy legislation and other initiatives are expected to be proposed that may be relevant to GHG emissions issues. For example, such initiatives could include a carbon tax or cap and trade program. Further, although Congress has not passed such legislation, almost half of the states have begun to address GHG emissions, primarily through the planned development of emissions inventories or regional GHG cap and trade programs. Depending on the particular program, we could be required to control GHG emissions or to purchase and surrender allowances for GHG emissions resulting from our operations.

 

Independent of Congress, the EPA undertook to adopt regulations controlling GHG emissions under its existing CAA authority. For example, in 2009, the EPA officially published its findings that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs endanger human health and the environment, allowing the agency to proceed with the adoption of regulations that restrict emissions of GHG under existing provisions of the CAA. In 2009 and 2010, the EPA adopted rules regarding regulation of GHG emissions from motor vehicles and requiring the reporting of GHG emissions in the U.S. from specified large GHG emissions sources, including petroleum and natural gas facilities such as natural gas transmission compression facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of carbon dioxide equivalent per year.

 

In 2015, the EPA published standards of performance for GHG emissions from new power plants. The final rule establishes a performance standard for integrated gasification combined cycled units and utility boilers based on the use of the best system of emissions reduction that the EPA has determined has been adequately demonstrated for each type of unit. The rule also sets limits for stationary natural gas combustion turbines based on the use of natural gas combined cycle technology.

 

The EPA also promulgated the Clean Power Plan rule (“CPP”), which is intended to reduce carbon emissions from existing power plants by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. In February 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a stay of the implementation of the CPP, which will remain in effect throughout the pendency of the appeals process, including at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court through any certiorari petition that may be granted. The stay suspends the rule, including the requirement that states must start submitting implementation plans. It is not yet clear how the courts will ultimately rule on the legality of the CPP. Additionally, in October 2017, the EPA proposed to repeal the CPP, and in August 2018, the EPA proposed the Affordable Clean Energy rule (“ACE”) to

replace the CPP.  If the effort to replace the CPP with the ACE rule is unsuccessful and rules similar to the CPP are upheld to control GHG emissions from electric utility generating units, demand for the oil and natural gas our customers produce may decrease. In addition, the costs of electricity for our operations may also increase, thereby adversely impacting our business.

 

In addition to the EPA, the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) has also promulgated rules to regulate hydraulic fracturing. Hydraulic fracturing involves the injection of water, sand and chemicals under pressure into the rock formation to stimulate gas production. In 2015, the BLM promulgated new requirements relating to well construction, water management, and chemical disclosure for companies drilling on federal and tribal land, but subsequently finalized a rule in December 2017 rescinding the 2015 rule. This rescission has been challenged and that litigation is ongoing. If this rescission is not upheld, it could increase the costs of operation for our customers who operate on BLM land, and negatively impact our business. Additionally, on November 15, 2016, the BLM also finalized a rule to reduce the flaring, venting and leaking of methane from oil and gas operations on federal and Indian lands (the “Venting Rule”). The Venting Rule requires operators to use certain technologies and equipment to reduce flaring and to periodically inspect their operations for leaks. The Venting Rule also specifies when operators owe the government royalties for flared gas. In December 2017, BLM finalized a decision to delay implementation of key requirements in the Venting Rule for one year. The agency subsequently finalized a rule in September 2018 to revise the 2016 Venting rule (the “Revised Venting Rule”) by rescinding certain requirements, such as the requirement to use certain technologies and equipment, as well as the leak detection and repair requirement. The Revised Venting Rule also specifies that BLM will defer to the appropriate State or tribal authorities in determining whether royalties are owed for flared gas. Challenges to the Venting Rule and the Revised Venting Rule are pending in court. If the Revised Venting Rule is not upheld, and the Venting Rule is fully implemented,  it could increase the costs of operations for our customers who operate on BLM land, and negatively impact our business.

At the international level, nearly 200 nations entered into an international climate agreement at the 2015 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris, under which participating countries did not assume any binding obligation to reduce future emissions of GHGs but instead pledged to voluntarily limit or reduce future emissions. Although the U.S. became a party to the Paris Agreement in April 2016, the Trump administration announced in June 2017 its intention to either withdraw from the Paris Agreement or renegotiate more favorable terms. However, the Paris Agreement stipulates that participating countries must wait four years before withdrawing from the agreement. Despite the planned withdrawal, certain U.S. city and state governments have announced their intention to satisfy their proportionate obligations under the Paris Agreement.

Although it is not currently possible to predict with specificity how any proposed or future GHG legislation, regulation, agreements or initiatives will impact our business, any legislation or regulation of GHG emissions that may be imposed in areas in which we conduct business or on the assets we operate could result in increased compliance or operating costs or additional operating restrictions or reduced demand for our services, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Notwithstanding potential risks related to climate change, the International Energy Agency estimates that oil and gas will continue to represent a major share of global energy use through 2040, and other private sector studies project continued growth in demand for the next two decades.  However, recent activism directed at shifting funding away from companies with energy-related assets could result in limitations or restrictions on certain sources of funding for the energy sector.

 

Finally, it should be noted that some scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHG in Earth’s atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant weather-related effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, droughts, floods and other climatic events. If any of those effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our assets and operations.

 

Water discharge. The Clean Water Act (“CWA”) and analogous state laws impose restrictions and strict controls with respect to the discharge of pollutants, including spills and leaks of oil and other substances, into waters of the United States. The discharge of pollutants into regulated waters is prohibited, except in accordance with the terms of a permit issued by the EPA or an analogous state agency. The CWA and regulations implemented thereunder also prohibit the discharge of dredge and fill material into regulated waters, including jurisdictional wetlands, unless authorized by an appropriately issued permit. The CWA also requires the development and implementation of spill prevention, control and countermeasures, including the construction and maintenance of containment berms and similar structures, if

required, to help prevent the contamination of navigable waters in the event of a petroleum hydrocarbon tank spill, rupture or leak at such facilities. In addition, the CWA and analogous state laws require individual permits or coverage under general permits for discharges of storm water runoff from certain types of facilities. Federal and state regulatory agencies can impose administrative, civil and criminal penalties as well as other enforcement mechanisms for non-compliance with discharge permits or other requirements of the CWA and analogous state laws and regulations.

 

Our compression operations do not generate process wastewaters that are discharged to waters of the United States. In any event, our customers assume responsibility under the majority of our standard natural gas compression contracts for obtaining any permits that may be required under the CWA, whether for discharges or developing property by filling wetlands. Considerable legal uncertainty exists surrounding the standard for what constitutes jurisdictional waters and wetlands subject to the protections and requirements of the CWA. A 2015 rulemaking by the EPA that would significantly expand the scope of jurisdictional waters has been enjoined in a significant number of states by various district courts. As a result, while the 2015 rule is currently implemented in some states, in other states, the EPA continues to implement the pre-2015 definition of waters of the United States as determined by the preexisting regulatory definition, the Supreme Court’s holding in Rapanos v. United States, and the agency’s post-Rapanos guidance. In 2018, the Supreme Court held that challenges to the rule must be heard in district courts before appeals to the circuit courts can be made; litigation is ongoing regarding substantive challenges to the rule. EPA has also proposed two separate rulemakings to repeal and replace the 2015 Rule, both of which are likely to be challenged if finalized. Should the 2015 rule take effect nationwide, or should a different rule expand the jurisdictional reach of the CWA, our customers could face increased costs and delays due to additional permitting and regulatory requirements and possible challenges to permitting decisions.

 

Safe Drinking Water Act. A significant portion of our customers’ natural gas production is developed from unconventional sources that require hydraulic fracturing as part of the completion process. Legislation to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act (“SDWA”) to repeal the exemption for hydraulic fracturing from the definition of “underground injection” and require federal permitting and regulatory control of hydraulic fracturing, as well as legislative proposals to require disclosure of the chemical constituents of the fluids used in the fracturing process, have been proposed and the U.S. Congress continues to consider legislation to amend the SDWA. Scrutiny of hydraulic fracturing activities continues in other ways, with the EPA having commenced a multi-year study of the potential environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing. In December 2016, the EPA released its final report on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources. The final report concluded that “water cycle” activities associated with hydraulic fracturing may impact drinking water resources “under some circumstances,” noting that the following hydraulic fracturing water cycle activities and local- or regional-scale factors are more likely than others to result in more frequent or more severe impacts: water withdrawals for fracturing in times or areas of low water availability; surface spills during the management of fracturing fluids, chemicals or produced water; injection of fracturing fluids into wells with inadequate mechanical integrity; injection of fracturing fluids directly into groundwater resources; discharge of inadequately treated fracturing wastewater to surface waters; and disposal or storage of fracturing wastewater in unlined pits. The EPA has also announced that it believes hydraulic fracturing using fluids containing diesel fuel can be regulated under the SDWA notwithstanding the SDWA’s general exemption for hydraulic fracturing. Several states have also proposed or adopted legislative or regulatory restrictions on hydraulic fracturing, including prohibitions on the practice. We cannot predict the future of such legislation and what additional, if any, provisions would be included. If additional levels of regulation, restrictions and permits were required through the adoption of new laws and regulations at the federal or state level or if the agencies that issue the permits develop new interpretations of those requirements, that could lead to delays, increased operating costs and process prohibitions that could reduce demand for our compression services, which could materially adversely affect our revenue and results of operations.

 

Solid waste. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) and comparable state laws control the management and disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous waste. These laws and regulations govern the generation, storage, treatment, transfer and disposal of wastes that we generate including, but not limited to, used oil, antifreeze, filters, sludges, paint, solvents and sandblast materials. The EPA and various state agencies have limited the approved methods of disposal for these types of wastes.

 

Site remediation. The Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”) and comparable state laws impose strict, joint and several liability without regard to fault or the legality of the original

conduct on certain classes of persons that contributed to the release of a hazardous substance into the environment. These persons include the owner and operator of a disposal site where a hazardous substance release occurred and any company that transported, disposed of or arranged for the transport or disposal of hazardous substances released at the site. Under CERCLA, such persons may be liable for the costs of remediating the hazardous substances that have been released into the environment, for damages to natural resources, and for the costs of certain health studies. In addition, where contamination may be present, it is not uncommon for the neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury, property damage and recovery of response costs. While we generate materials in the course of our operations that may be regulated as hazardous substances, we have not received notification that we may be potentially responsible for cleanup costs under CERCLA at any site.

 

While we do not currently own or lease any material facilities or properties for storage or maintenance of our inactive compression units, we may use third party properties for such storage and possible maintenance and repair activities. In addition, our active compression units typically are installed on properties owned or leased by third party customers and operated by us pursuant to terms set forth in the natural gas compression services contracts executed by those customers. Under most of our natural gas compression services contracts, our customers must contractually indemnify us for certain damages we may suffer as a result of the release into the environment of hazardous and toxic substances. We are not currently responsible for any remedial activities at any properties we use; however, there is always the possibility that our future use of those properties may result in spills or releases of petroleum hydrocarbons, wastes or other regulated substances into the environment that may cause us to become subject to remediation costs and liabilities under CERCLA, RCRA or other environmental laws. We cannot provide any assurance that the costs and liabilities associated with the future imposition of such remedial obligations upon us would not have a material adverse effect on our operations or financial position.

 

Safety and health. The Occupational Safety and Health Act (“OSHA”) and comparable state laws strictly govern the protection of the health and safety of employees. The OSHA hazard communication standard, the EPA community right-to-know regulations under Title III of CERCLA and similar state statutes require that we organize and, as necessary, disclose information about hazardous materials used or produced in our operations to various federal, state and local agencies, as well as employees.

 

Employees

 

USAC Management Services, LLC (“USAC Management”), a wholly owned subsidiary of the General Partner, performs certain management and other administrative services for us, such as accounting, corporate development, finance and legal. All of our employees, including our executive officers, are employees of USAC Management. As of December 31, 2018, USAC Management had 864 full time employees. None of our employees are subject to collective bargaining agreements. We consider our employee relations to be good.

 

Available Information

 

Our website address is usacompression.com. We make available, free of charge at the “Investor Relations” section of our website, our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and all amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. The information contained on our website does not constitute part of this report.

 

The SEC maintains a website that contains these reports at sec.gov.

 

ITEM 1A.Risk Factors

 

As described in Part I (“Disclosure Regarding Forward-Looking Statements”), this report contains forward-looking statements regarding us, our business and our industry. The risk factors described below, among others, could cause our actual results to differ materially from the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements. If any of the following risks were to materialize, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. In that case, we might not be able to continue to pay our current quarterly distribution on our common units or increase the level of such distributions in the future, and the trading price of our common units could decline.

 

Risks Related to Our Business

 

We may not have sufficient cash from operations following the establishment of cash reserves and payment of fees and expenses, including cost reimbursements to the General Partner, to enable us to make cash distributions on our common units at the current level.

 

In order to make cash distributions at our current distribution rate of $0.525 per common unit per quarter, or $2.10 per common unit per year, we will require available cash of $47.2 million per quarter, or $189.0 million per year, based on the number of common units outstanding as of February 14, 2019.  In addition, each Class B Unit will automatically convert to one common unit of the Partnership following the record date attributable to the quarter ending June 30, 2019. Distributions on the newly converted Class B Units will require additional available cash of $3.4 million per quarter, or $13.4 million per year at our current distribution rate.

 

Furthermore, the Partnership Agreement prohibits us from paying distributions on our common units unless we have first paid the quarterly distribution on the Preferred Units, including any previously accrued but unpaid distributions on the Preferred Units. The Preferred Unit distributions require $12.2 million quarterly, or $48.8 million annually, based on the number of Preferred Units outstanding and the distribution rate of $24.375 per Preferred Unit per quarter, or $97.50 per Preferred Unit per year.

 

Under our cash distribution policy, the amount of cash we can distribute to our unitholders principally depends upon the amount of cash we generate from our operations, which will fluctuate from quarter to quarter based on, among other things:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In addition, the actual amount of cash we will have available for distribution will depend on other factors, including:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A long-term reduction in the demand for, or production of, natural gas or crude oil could adversely affect the demand for our services or the prices we charge for our services, which could result in a decrease in our revenues and cash available for distribution to unitholders.

 

The demand for our compression services depends upon the continued demand for, and production of, natural gas and crude oil. Demand may be affected by, among other factors, natural gas prices, crude oil prices, weather, availability of alternative energy sources, governmental regulation and the overall demand for energy. Any prolonged, substantial reduction in the demand for natural gas or crude oil would likely depress the level of production activity and result in a decline in the demand for our compression services, which could result in a reduction in our revenues and our cash available for distribution.

 

In particular, lower natural gas or crude oil prices over the long term could result in a decline in the production of natural gas or crude oil, respectively, resulting in reduced demand for our compression services. For example, the North American rig count, as measured by Baker Hughes, hit a 2014 peak of 1,931 rigs on September 12, 2014, and at that time, Henry Hub natural gas spot prices were $3.82 per MMBtu and West Texas Intermediate (“WTI”) crude oil spot prices were $92.18 per barrel. By contrast, the North American rig count hit a modern low of 404 rigs on May 20, 2016, and at that time, Henry Hub natural gas spot prices were $1.81 per MMBtu and WTI crude oil spot prices were $47.67 per barrel. This slowdown in new drilling activity caused some pressure on service rates for new and existing services and contributed to a decline in our utilization during 2015 and into 2016. By the end of December 2018, the North American rig count was 1,083 rigs, the price of WTI crude oil was  $45.15 per barrel and Henry Hub natural gas spot prices were $3.25 per MMBtu. Although commodity prices and our utilization generally increased during 2016, 2017 and 2018, the increased activity resulting from such increased commodity prices may not continue. In addition, a small portion of our fleet is used in gas lift applications in connection with crude oil production using horizontal drilling techniques. During the period of low crude oil prices, we experienced pressure on service rates from our customers in gas lift applications; if commodity prices decline from current levels, we may again experience pressure on service rates.  

 

Additionally, an increasing percentage of natural gas and crude oil production comes from unconventional sources, such as shales, tight sands and coalbeds. Such sources can be less economically feasible to produce in low commodity price environments, in part due to costs related to compression requirements, and a reduction in demand for natural gas or gas lift for crude oil may cause such sources of natural gas or crude oil to become uneconomic to drill and produce, which could in turn negatively impact the demand for our services. Further, if demand for our services decreases, we may be asked to renegotiate our service contracts at lower rates. In addition, governmental regulation and tax policy may impact the demand for natural gas or crude oil or impact the economic feasibility of the development of new fields or production of existing fields, which are important components of our ability to expand.

 

We have several key customers. The loss of any of these customers would result in a decrease in our revenues and cash available for distribution.

 

We provide compression services under contracts with several key customers. The loss of one of these key customers may have a greater effect on our financial results than for a company with a more diverse customer base. Our

ten largest customers accounted for approximately 33% and 43% of our revenue for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. The loss of all or even a portion of the compression services we provide to our key customers, as a result of competition or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash available for distribution. 

 

The deterioration of the financial condition of our customers could adversely affect our business.

 

During times when the natural gas or crude oil markets weaken, our customers are more likely to experience financial difficulties, including being unable to access debt or equity financing, which could result in a reduction in our customers’ spending for our services. For example, our customers could seek to preserve capital by using lower cost providers, not renewing month-to-month contracts or determining not to enter into any new compression service contracts. A significant decline in commodity prices may cause certain of our customers to reconsider their near-term capital budgets, which may impact large-scale natural gas infrastructure and crude oil production activities. Reduced demand for our services could adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

 

We are exposed to counterparty credit risk. Nonpayment and nonperformance by our customers, suppliers or vendors could reduce our revenues, increase our expenses and otherwise have a negative impact on our ability to conduct our business, operating results, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

 

Weak economic conditions and widespread financial distress could reduce the liquidity of our customers, suppliers or vendors, making it more difficult for them to meet their obligations to us. We are therefore subject to risks of loss resulting from nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers. Severe financial problems encountered by our customers could limit our ability to collect amounts owed to us, or to enforce the performance of obligations owed to us under contractual arrangements. In the event that any of our customers was to enter into bankruptcy, we could lose all or a portion of the amounts owed to us by such customer, and we may be forced to cancel all or a portion of our service contracts with such customer at significant expense to us.

 

In addition, nonperformance by suppliers or vendors who have committed to provide us with critical products or services could raise our costs or interfere with our ability to successfully conduct our business.

 

We face significant competition that may cause us to lose market share and reduce our cash available for distribution.

 

The natural gas compression business is highly competitive. Some of our competitors have a broader geographic scope and greater financial and other resources than we do. Our ability to renew or replace existing contracts with our customers at rates sufficient to maintain current revenue and cash flows could be adversely affected by the activities of our competitors and our customers. If our competitors substantially increase the resources they devote to the development and marketing of competitive services or substantially decrease the prices at which they offer their services, we may be unable to compete effectively. Some of these competitors may expand or construct newer, more powerful or more flexible compression fleets, which would create additional competition for us. All of these competitive pressures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash available for distribution.

 

Our customers may choose to vertically integrate their operations by purchasing and operating their own compression fleet, increasing the number of compression units they currently own or using alternative technologies for enhancing crude oil production.

 

Our customers that are significant producers, processors, gatherers and transporters of natural gas and crude oil may choose to vertically integrate their operations by purchasing and operating their own compression fleets in lieu of using our compression services. The historical availability of attractive financing terms from financial institutions and equipment manufacturers facilitates this possibility by making the purchase of individual compression units increasingly affordable to our customers. In addition, there are many technologies available for the artificial enhancement of crude oil production, and our customers may elect to use these alternative technologies instead of the gas lift compression services we provide. Such vertical integration, increases in vertical integration or use of alternative technologies could result in

decreased demand for our compression services, which may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and reduce our cash available for distribution.

 

A significant portion of our services are provided to customers on a month-to-month basis, and we cannot be sure that such customers will continue to utilize our services.

 

Our contracts typically have an initial term of between six months and five years, depending on the application and location of the compression unit. After the expiration of the initial term, the contract continues on a month-to-month or longer basis until terminated by us or our customers upon notice as provided for in the applicable contract. As of December 31, 2018, approximately 47% of our compression services on a revenue basis were provided on a month-to-month basis to customers who continue to utilize our services following expiration of the primary term of their contracts. These customers can generally terminate their month-to-month compression services contracts on 30 days’ written notice. If a significant number of these customers were to terminate their month-to-month services, or attempt to renegotiate their month-to-month contracts at substantially lower rates, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash available for distribution. 

 

We may be unable to grow our cash flows if we are unable to expand our business, which could limit our ability to maintain or increase the level of distributions to our common unitholders.

 

A principal focus of our strategy is to increase our per common unit distribution by expanding our business over time. Our future growth will depend upon a number of factors, some of which we cannot control. These factors include our ability to:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If we do not achieve our expected growth, we may not be able to maintain or increase the level of distributions on our common units, in which event the market price of our common units will likely decline.

 

We may be unable to grow successfully through acquisitions, which may negatively impact our operations and limit our ability to maintain or increase the level of distributions on our common units.

 

From time to time, we may choose to make business acquisitions, such as the CDM Acquisition, to pursue market opportunities, increase our existing capabilities and expand into new geographic areas of operations. While we have reviewed acquisition opportunities in the past and will continue to do so in the future, we may not be able to identify attractive acquisition opportunities or successfully acquire identified targets.

 

Any acquisitions we do complete may require us to issue a substantial amount of equity or incur a substantial amount of indebtedness. If we consummate any future material acquisitions, our capitalization may change significantly,

and unitholders will not have the opportunity to evaluate the economic, financial and other relevant information that we will consider in connection with any future acquisition. Furthermore, competition for acquisition opportunities may escalate, increasing our costs of pursuing acquisitions or causing us to refrain from making acquisitions.

 

Also, our reviews of proposed business or asset acquisitions are inherently imperfect because it is generally not feasible to perform an in-depth review of each such proposal given time constraints imposed by sellers. Even if performed, a detailed review of assets and businesses may not reveal existing or potential problems, and may not provide sufficient familiarity with such business or assets to fully assess their deficiencies and potential. Inspections may not be performed on every asset, and environmental problems, such as groundwater contamination, may not be observable even when an inspection is undertaken.

 

Integration of assets acquired in past acquisitions or future acquisitions with our existing business can be a complex, time-consuming and costly process, particularly in the case of material acquisitions such as the CDM Acquisition, which significantly increased our size and expanded the geographic areas in which we operate. A failure to successfully integrate the acquired assets with our existing business in a timely manner may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

 

The difficulties of integrating past and future acquisitions with our business include, among other things:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If any of these risks or other unanticipated liabilities or costs were to materialize, we may not realize the desired benefits from past and future acquisitions, resulting in a negative impact on our results of operations. For example, subsequent to the CDM Acquisition the attrition rate of specialized field technicians exceeded our projections and, as a result, we incurred unanticipated costs to utilize third-party contractors to service our compression units at a greater cost than we would have incurred to compensate employees to perform the same work.

 

We may not be successful in integrating acquisitions, including the CDM Acquisition, into our existing operations within our anticipated timeframe, which may result in unforeseen operational difficulties or diminished financial performance or require a disproportionate amount of our management’s attention. In addition, acquired assets may perform at levels below the forecasts used to evaluate their acquisition, due to factors beyond our control. If the acquired assets perform at levels below the forecasts, then our future results of operations could be negatively impacted.

 

Our ability to fund purchases of additional compression units and complete acquisitions in the future is dependent on our ability to access external expansion capital.

 

The Partnership Agreement requires us to distribute all of our available cash to our unitholders (excluding prudent operating reserves). We expect that we will rely primarily upon cash generated by operating activities and, where necessary, borrowings under the Credit Agreement and the issuance of debt and equity securities, to fund expansion capital expenditures. However, we may not be able to obtain equity or debt financing on terms favorable to us or at all. To the extent we are unable to efficiently finance growth through external sources, our ability to maintain or increase the level of distributions on our common units could be significantly impaired. In addition, because we distribute all of our available cash, excluding prudent operating reserves, we may not grow as quickly as businesses that are able to reinvest their available cash to expand ongoing operations.

 

There are no limitations in the Partnership Agreement on our ability to issue additional equity securities, including securities ranking senior to the common units, subject to certain restrictions in the Partnership Agreement limiting our ability to issue units senior to or pari passu with the Preferred Units. To the extent we issue additional equity securities, including common units and preferred units, the payment of distributions on those additional securities may increase the risk that we will be unable to maintain or increase our per common unit distribution level. Similarly, our incurrence of borrowings or other debt to finance our growth strategy would increase our interest expense, which in turn would decrease our cash available for distribution.

 

Our debt level may limit our flexibility in obtaining additional financing, pursuing other business opportunities and paying distributions.

 

The Credit Agreement is a $1.6 billion revolving credit facility that matures in April 2023. In addition, we have the option to increase the amount of total commitments under the Credit Agreement by up to $400.0 million, subject to receipt of lender commitments and satisfaction of other conditions. As of December 31, 2018, we had outstanding borrowings under the Credit Agreement of $1.1 billion and a leverage ratio of 4.33x, borrowing base availability (based on our borrowing base) of $550.5 million and, subject to compliance with the applicable financial covenants, available borrowing capacity under the Credit Agreement of $550.5 million. Financial covenants in the Credit Agreement permit a maximum leverage ratio of (A) 5.75 to 1.0 through the end of the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2019, (B) 5.50 to 1.0 through the end of the fiscal quarter ending December 31, 2019 and (C) 5.00 to 1.0 thereafter. As of February 14, 2019, we had outstanding borrowings under the Credit Agreement of $1.1 billion. 

 

Our ability to incur additional debt is also subject to limitations in the Credit Agreement, including certain financial covenants. Our level of debt could have important consequences to us, including the following:

 

 

 

 

Additionally, in March 2018, the Issuers co-issued $725.0 million of Senior Notes. The Senior Notes mature in 2026 and accrue interest at the rate of 6.875% per year. Interest on the Senior Notes is payable semiannually in arrears on April 1 and October 1.

 

Our ability to service our debt will depend upon, among other things, our future financial and operating performance, which will be affected by prevailing economic conditions and financial, business, regulatory and other factors, some of which are beyond our control. In addition, our ability to service our debt under the Credit Agreement could be impacted by market interest rates, as all of our outstanding borrowings under the Credit Agreement are subject to variable interest rates that fluctuate with changes in market interest rates. A substantial increase in the interest rates

applicable to our outstanding borrowings could have a material negative impact on our cash available for distribution. If our operating results are not sufficient to service our current or future indebtedness, we could be forced to take actions such as reducing the level of distributions on our common units, curtailing or delaying our business activities, acquisitions, investments or capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring or refinancing our debt or seeking additional equity capital. We may be unable to effect any of these actions on terms satisfactory to us or at all.

 

The terms of the Credit Agreement and the Indenture restrict our current and future operations, particularly our ability to respond to changes or to take certain actions, may limit our ability to pay distributions and may limit our ability to capitalize on acquisitions and other business opportunities.

 

The Credit Agreement and the Indenture governing the Senior Notes contain a number of restrictive covenants that impose significant operating and financial restrictions on us and may limit our ability to engage in acts that may be in our long-term best interest, including restrictions on our ability to:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In addition, the Credit Agreement contains certain operating and financial covenants and requires us to maintain specified financial ratios and satisfy other financial condition tests. Our ability to comply with those covenants and meet those financial ratios and tests can be affected by events beyond our control, including prevailing economic, financial and industry conditions. If market or other conditions deteriorate, our ability to comply with these covenants may be impaired.

 

A breach of the covenants or restrictions under the Credit Agreement or the Indenture could result in an event of default, in which case a significant portion of our indebtedness may become immediately due and payable and any other debt to which a cross-acceleration or cross-default provision applies may also be accelerated, our lenders’ commitment to make further loans to us may terminate, and we may be prohibited from making distributions to our unitholders. We might not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient funds to make these accelerated payments. If we were unable to repay amounts due and payable under the Credit Agreement, those lenders could proceed against the collateral securing that indebtedness. We may not be able to replace the Credit Agreement, or if we are, any subsequent replacement of the Credit Agreement or any new indebtedness could be equally or more restrictive.

 

These restrictions may negatively affect our ability to grow in accordance with our strategy. In addition, our financial results, substantial indebtedness and credit ratings could adversely affect the availability and terms of our

financing. Please read Part II, Item 7 (“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Revolving Credit Facility and— Senior Notes”).

 

The Preferred Units have rights, preferences and privileges that are not held by, and are preferential to the rights of, holders of our common units.

 

The Preferred Units rank senior to all of our other classes or series of equity securities with respect to distribution rights and rights upon liquidation. These preferences could adversely affect the market price for our common units, or could make it more difficult for us to sell our common units in the future.

 

In addition, distributions on the Preferred Units accrue and are cumulative, at the rate of 9.75% per annum on the original issue price, which amounts to a quarterly distribution of $24.375 per Preferred Unit. If we do not pay the required distributions on the Preferred Units, we will be unable to pay distributions on our common units. Additionally, because distributions on the Preferred Units are cumulative, we will have to pay all unpaid accumulated distributions on the Preferred Units before we can pay any distributions on our common units. Also, because distributions on our common units are not cumulative, if we do not pay distributions on our common units with respect to any quarter, our common unitholders will not be entitled to receive distributions covering any prior periods if we later recommence paying distributions on our common units.

 

The Preferred Units are convertible into common units by the holders of the Preferred Units or by us in certain circumstances. Our obligation to pay distributions on the Preferred Units, or on the common units issued following the conversion of the Preferred Units, could impact our liquidity and reduce the amount of cash flow available for working capital, capital expenditures, growth opportunities, acquisitions, and other general Partnership purposes. Our obligations to the holders of the Preferred Units could also limit our ability to obtain additional financing or increase our borrowing costs, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition. See Note 11 to our consolidated financial statements.

 

Restrictions in the Partnership Agreement related to the Preferred Units may limit our ability to make distributions to our common unitholders and our ability to capitalize on acquisition and other business opportunities.

 

The operating and financial restrictions and covenants in the Partnership Agreement related to the Preferred Units could restrict our ability to finance future operations or capital needs or to expand or pursue our business activities. The Partnership Agreement restricts or limits our ability (subject to certain exceptions) to:

 

 

 

 

A prolonged downturn in the economic environment could cause an impairment of goodwill or other intangible assets and reduce our earnings.

 

We have recorded $619.4 million of goodwill and $392.6 million of other intangible assets as of December 31, 2018. Goodwill is recorded when the purchase price of a business exceeds the fair market value of the tangible and separately measurable intangible net assets. Generally accepted accounting principles of the United States (“GAAP”) requires us to test goodwill for impairment on an annual basis or when events or circumstances occur indicating that goodwill might be impaired. Any event that causes a reduction in demand for our services could result in a reduction of

our estimates of future cash flows and growth rates in our business. These events could cause us to record impairments of goodwill or other intangible assets.

 

If we determine that any of our goodwill or other intangible assets are impaired, we will be required to take an immediate charge to earnings with a corresponding reduction of partners’ capital resulting in an increase in balance sheet leverage as measured by debt to total capitalization. For example, for the year ended December 31, 2017, the USA Compression Predecessor recognized a $223.0 million impairment of goodwill (see Note 7 to our consolidated financial statements).

 

Impairment in the carrying value of long-lived assets could reduce our earnings.

 

We have a significant number of long-lived assets on our consolidated balance sheet. Under GAAP, we are required to review our long-lived assets for impairment when events or circumstances indicate that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable or such assets will no longer be utilized in the operating fleet. The carrying value of a long-lived asset is not recoverable if it exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset. If business conditions or other factors cause the expected undiscounted cash flows to decline, we may be required to record non-cash impairment charges. Events and conditions that could result in impairment in the value of our long-lived assets include changes in the industry in which we operate, competition, advances in technology, adverse changes in the regulatory environment, or other factors leading to a reduction in our expected long-term profitability. For example, during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, we evaluated the future deployment of our idle fleet under then-current market conditions and determined to retire and re-utilize key components of 103 compressor units, or approximately 33,000 horsepower, that were previously used to provide services in our business. As a result, we recognized impairments of $8.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2018.  The USA Compression Predecessor did not recognize any impairment of long-lived assets during the years ended December 31, 2017 or 2016.

 

Our ability to manage and grow our business effectively may be adversely affected if we lose key management or operational personnel.

 

We depend on the continuing efforts of our executive officers and the departure of any of our executive officers could have a significant negative effect on our business, operating results, financial condition and on our ability to compete effectively in the marketplace.

 

Additionally, our ability to hire, train and retain qualified personnel will continue to be important and could become more challenging as we grow and to the extent energy industry market conditions are competitive. When general industry conditions are favorable, the competition for experienced operational and field technicians increases as other energy and manufacturing companies’ needs for the same personnel increases. Our ability to grow or even to continue our current level of service to our current customers could be adversely impacted if we are unable to successfully hire, train and retain these important personnel.

 

We depend on a limited number of suppliers and are vulnerable to product shortages and price increases, which could have a negative impact on our results of operations.

 

The substantial majority of the components for our natural gas compression equipment are supplied by Caterpillar Inc., Cummins Inc. and Arrow Engine Company for engines, Air-X-Changers and Alfa Laval (US) for coolers, and Ariel Corporation, GE Oil & Gas Gemini products and Arrow Engine Company for compressor frames and cylinders.  Our reliance on these suppliers involves several risks, including price increases and a potential inability to obtain an adequate supply of required components in a timely manner. We also rely primarily on four vendors, A G Equipment Company, Alegacy Equipment, LLC, Standard Equipment Corp. and Genis Holdings LLC, to package and assemble our compression units. We do not have long-term contracts with these suppliers or packagers, and a partial or complete loss of any of these sources could have a negative impact on our results of operations and could damage our customer relationships. Some of these suppliers manufacture the components we purchase in a single facility, and any damage to that facility could lead to significant delays in delivery of completed compression units to us. 

 

We are subject to substantial environmental regulation, and changes in these regulations could increase our costs or liabilities.

 

We are subject to stringent and complex federal, state and local laws and regulations, including laws and regulations regarding the discharge of materials into the environment, emissions controls and other environmental protection and occupational health and safety concerns, as discussed in detail in Item 1 (“Business—Our Operations—Environmental and Safety Regulations”). Environmental laws and regulations may, in certain circumstances, impose strict liability for environmental contamination, which may render us liable for remediation costs, natural resource damages and other damages as a result of our conduct that was lawful at the time it occurred or the conduct of, or conditions caused by, prior owners or operators or other third parties. In addition, where contamination may be present, it is not uncommon for neighboring land owners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury, property damage and recovery of response costs. Remediation costs and other damages arising as a result of environmental laws and regulations, and costs associated with new information, changes in existing environmental laws and regulations or the adoption of new environmental laws and regulations could be substantial and could negatively impact our financial condition or results of operations. Moreover, failure to comply with these environmental laws and regulations may result in the imposition of administrative, civil and criminal penalties and the issuance of injunctions delaying or prohibiting operations.

 

We conduct operations in a wide variety of locations across the continental U.S. These operations require U.S. federal, state or local environmental permits or other authorizations. Our operations may require new or amended facility permits or licenses from time to time with respect to storm water discharges, waste handling or air emissions relating to equipment operations, which subject us to new or revised permitting conditions that may be onerous or costly to comply with. Additionally, the operation of compression units may require individual air permits or general authorizations to operate under various air regulatory programs established by rule or regulation. These permits and authorizations frequently contain numerous compliance requirements, including monitoring and reporting obligations and operational restrictions, such as emissions limits. Given the wide variety of locations in which we operate, and the numerous environmental permits and other authorizations that are applicable to our operations, we may occasionally identify or be notified of technical violations of certain requirements existing under various permits or other authorizations. We could be subject to penalties for any noncompliance in the future.

 

In our business, we routinely deal with natural gas, oil and other petroleum products at our worksites. Hydrocarbons or other hazardous substances or wastes may have been disposed or released on, under or from properties used by us to provide compression services or inactive compression unit storage or on or under other locations where such substances or wastes have been taken for disposal. These properties may be subject to investigatory, remediation and monitoring requirements under federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations.

 

The modification or interpretation of existing environmental laws or regulations, the more vigorous enforcement of existing environmental laws or regulations, or the adoption of new environmental laws or regulations may also negatively impact oil and natural gas exploration and production, gathering and pipeline companies, including our customers, which in turn could have a negative impact on us.

 

New regulations, proposed regulations and proposed modifications to existing regulations under the Clean Air Act, if implemented, could result in increased compliance costs.

 

New regulations or proposed modifications to existing regulations under the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), as discussed in detail in Item 1 (“Business—Our Operations—Environmental and Safety Regulations”), may lead to adverse impacts on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash available for distribution. For example, in 2015, the EPA finalized a rule strengthening the primary and secondary National Ambient Air Quality Standards (“NAAQS”) for ground level ozone, both of which are 8-hour concentration standards of 70 parts per billion. After the EPA revises a NAAQS standard, the states are expected to establish revised attainment/non-attainment regions. State implementation of the revised NAAQS could result in stricter permitting requirements, delay or prohibit our customers’ ability to obtain such permits, and result in increased expenditures for pollution control equipment, which could negatively impact our customers’ operations, increase the cost of additions to property, plant, and equipment, and negatively impact our business.

 

In 2012, the EPA finalized rules that establish new air emissions controls for oil and natural gas production and natural gas processing operations. Specifically, the EPA’s rule package included New Source Performance Standards to address emissions of sulfur dioxide and volatile organic compounds (“VOCs”) and a separate set of emissions standards to address hazardous air pollutants frequently associated with oil and natural gas production and processing activities. The rules established specific new requirements regarding emissions from compressors and controllers at natural gas processing plants, dehydrators, storage tanks and other production equipment as well as the first federal air standards for natural gas wells that are hydraulically fractured. In June 2016, the EPA took steps to expand on these regulations when it published New Source Performance Standards, known as Subpart OOOOa, that require certain new, modified or reconstructed facilities in the oil and natural gas sector to reduce methane gas and VOC emissions. These Subpart OOOOa standards would expand the 2012 New Source Performance Standards by using certain equipment-specific emissions control practices, requiring additional controls for pneumatic controllers and pumps as well as compressors, and imposing leak detection and repair requirements for natural gas compressor and booster stations. However, the EPA announced in April 2017 that it intended to reconsider certain aspects of the 2016 New Source Performance Standards, and in May 2017, the EPA issued an administrative stay of key provisions of the rule, but was promptly ordered by the D.C. Circuit to implement the rule. The EPA also proposed 60-day and two-year stays of certain provisions in June 2017 and published a Notice of Data Availability in November 2017 seeking comment and providing clarification regarding the agency’s legal authority to stay the rule. In March 2018, the EPA finalized narrow amendments to the rule, and in October 2018, the EPA proposed further reconsideration amendments to the rule. Among other things, these amendments would alter fugitive emissions requirements, monitoring frequencies and well site pneumatic pump standards.

 

Depending on whether the EPA finalizes these further amendments, Subpart OOOOa and any additional regulation of air emissions from the oil and gas sector could result in increased expenditures for pollution control equipment, which could impact our customers’ operations and negatively impact our business.

 

Climate change legislation and regulatory initiatives could result in increased compliance costs.

 

Climate change continues to attract considerable public and scientific attention. Methane, a primary component of natural gas, and carbon dioxide, a byproduct of the burning of natural gas, are examples of greenhouse gases (“GHGs”). In recent years, the U.S. Congress has considered legislation to reduce GHG emissions. It presently appears unlikely that comprehensive climate legislation will be passed in the near future, although energy legislation and other initiatives are expected to be proposed that may be relevant to GHG emissions issues. For example, such initiatives could include a carbon tax or cap and trade program. Further, although Congress has not passed such legislation, almost half of the states have begun to address GHG emissions, primarily through the planned development of emissions inventories or regional GHG cap and trade programs. Depending on the particular program, we could be required to control GHG emissions or to purchase and surrender allowances for GHG emissions resulting from our operations.

 

Independent of Congress, and as discussed in detail in Item 1 (“Business—Our Operations—Environmental and Safety Regulations”), the EPA undertook to adopt regulations controlling GHG emissions under its existing CAA authority. For example, in 2015, the EPA published standards of performance for GHG emissions from new power plants. The final rule establishes a performance standard for integrated gasification combined cycled units and utility boilers based on the use of the best system of emissions reduction that the EPA has determined has been adequately demonstrated for each type of unit. The rule also sets limits for stationary natural gas combustion turbines based on the use of natural gas combined cycle technology. The EPA also promulgated the Clean Power Plan rule (“CPP”), which is intended to reduce carbon emissions from existing power plants by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030. In February 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a stay of the implementation of the CPP, which will remain in effect throughout the pendency of the appeals process, including at the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court through any certiorari petition that may be granted. The stay suspends the rule, including the requirement that states must start submitting implementation plans. It is not yet clear how the courts will ultimately rule on the legality of the CPP. Additionally, in October 2017, the EPA proposed to repeal the CPP, and in August 2018, the EPA proposed the Affordable Clean Energy rule (“ACE”) to replace the CPP. If the effort to replace the CPP with the ACE is unsuccessful and rules similar to the CPP are upheld to control GHG emissions from electric utility generating units, demand for the oil and natural gas our customers produce may decrease.

 

Although it is not currently possible to predict with specificity how any proposed or future GHG legislation, regulation, agreements or initiatives will impact our business, any legislation or regulation of GHG emissions that may be imposed in areas in which we conduct business or on the assets we operate could result in increased compliance or operating costs or additional operating restrictions or reduced demand for our services, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Finally, it should be noted that some scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHG in Earth’s atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant weather-related effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, droughts, floods and other climatic events. If any of those effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our assets and operations. Also, recent activism directed at shifting funding away from companies with energy-related assets could result in a reduction of funding for the energy sector overall, which could have an adverse effect on our ability to obtain external financing.

 

Increased regulation of hydraulic fracturing could result in reductions of, or delays in, natural gas production by our customers, which could adversely impact our revenue.

 

A significant portion of our customers’ natural gas production is developed from unconventional sources that require hydraulic fracturing as part of the completion process. Hydraulic fracturing involves the injection of water, sand and chemicals under pressure into the rock formation to stimulate gas production. Legislation to amend the Safe Drinking Water Act (“SDWA”) to repeal the exemption for hydraulic fracturing from the definition of “underground injection” and require federal permitting and regulatory control of hydraulic fracturing, as well as legislative proposals to require disclosure of the chemical constituents of the fluids used in the fracturing process, have been proposed and the U.S. Congress continues to consider legislation to amend the SDWA. Scrutiny of hydraulic fracturing activities continues in other ways, with the EPA having commenced a multi-year study of the potential environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing. In December 2016, the EPA released its final report on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources. The final report concluded that “water cycle” activities associated with hydraulic fracturing may impact drinking water resources “under some circumstances,” noting that the following hydraulic fracturing water cycle activities and local- or regional-scale factors are more likely than others to result in more frequent or more severe impacts: water withdrawals for fracturing in times or areas of low water availability; surface spills during the management of fracturing fluids, chemicals or produced water; injection of fracturing fluids into wells with inadequate mechanical integrity; injection of fracturing fluids directly into groundwater resources; discharge of inadequately treated fracturing wastewater to surface waters; and disposal or storage of fracturing wastewater in unlined pits.

 

In addition to the EPA, the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) has also promulgated rules to regulate hydraulic fracturing. In 2015, the BLM promulgated new requirements relating to well construction, water management, and chemical disclosure for companies drilling on federal and tribal land, but subsequently finalized a rule in December 2017 rescinding the 2015 rule. This rescission has been challenged, and that litigation is ongoing. If this rescission is not upheld, it could increase the costs of operation for our customers who operate on BLM land, and negatively impact our business. Additionally, on November 15, 2016, the BLM also finalized a rule to reduce the flaring, venting and leaking of methane from oil and gas operations on federal and Indian lands. The Venting Rule requires operators to use certain technologies and equipment to reduce flaring and to periodically inspect their operations for leaks. The Venting Rule also specifies when operators owe the government royalties for flared gas. In December 2017, BLM finalized a decision to delay implementation of key requirements in the Venting Rule for one year. The agency subsequently finalized a rule in September 2018 to revise the 2016 Venting rule by rescinding certain requirements, such as the requirement to use certain technologies and equipment, as well as the leak detection and repair requirement. The Revised Venting Rule also specifies that the BLM will defer to the appropriate State or tribal authorities in determining whether royalties are owed for flared gas. Challenges to the Venting Rule and the Revised Venting Rule are pending in court. If the Revised Venting Rule is not upheld, and the Venting Rule is fully implemented, it could increase the costs of operations for our customers who operate on BLM land, and in turn negatively impact our business.

State and federal regulatory agencies have also recently focused on a possible connection between the operation of injection wells used for oil and gas waste disposal and seismic activity. Similar concerns have been raised that hydraulic fracturing may also contribute to seismic activity. When caused by human activity, such events are called induced seismicity. Developing research suggests that the link between seismic activity and wastewater disposal may vary by

region, and that only a very small fraction of the tens of thousands of injection wells have been suspected to be, or have been, the likely cause of induced seismicity. In March 2016, the United States Geological Survey identified six states with the most significant hazards from induced seismicity, including Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arkansas. In light of these concerns, some state regulatory agencies have modified their regulations or issued orders to address induced seismicity. Increased regulation and attention given to induced seismicity could lead to greater opposition to, and litigation concerning, oil and gas activities utilizing hydraulic fracturing or injection wells for waste disposal, which could indirectly impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, these concerns may give rise to private tort suits against our customers from individuals who claim they are adversely impacted by seismic activity they allege was induced. Such claims or actions could result in liability to our customers for property damage, exposure to waste and other hazardous materials, nuisance or personal injuries, and require our customers to expend additional resources or incur substantial costs or losses. This could in turn adversely affect the demand for our services.

 

We cannot predict the future of any such legislation or tort liability. If additional levels of regulation, restrictions and permits were required through the adoption of new laws and regulations at the federal or state level or the development of new interpretations of those requirements by the agencies that issue the required permits, that could lead to operational delays, increased operating costs and process prohibitions that could reduce demand for our compression services, which would materially adversely affect our revenue and results of operations.

 

The CDM Acquisition could expose us to additional unknown and contingent liabilities.

 

The CDM Acquisition could expose us to additional unknown and contingent liabilities. We performed due diligence in connection with the CDM Acquisition and attempted to verify the representations made by ETP in connection therewith, but there may be unknown and contingent liabilities of which we are currently unaware. ETP has agreed to indemnify us for losses or claims relating to the operation of the business or otherwise only to a limited extent and for a limited period of time. There is a risk that we could ultimately be liable for obligations relating to the CDM Acquisition for which indemnification is not available, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and cash flow.

 

We do not insure against all potential losses and could be seriously harmed by unexpected liabilities.

 

Our operations are subject to inherent risks such as equipment defects, malfunctions and failures, and natural disasters that can result in uncontrollable flows of gas or well fluids, fires and explosions. These risks could expose us to substantial liability for personal injury, death, property damage, pollution and other environmental damages. Our insurance may be inadequate to cover our liabilities. Further, insurance covering the risks we face or in the amounts we desire may not be available in the future or, if available, the premiums may not be commercially justifiable. If we were to incur substantial liability and such damages were not covered by insurance or were in excess of policy limits, or if we were to incur liability at a time when we are not able to obtain liability insurance, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

 

Cybersecurity breaches and other disruptions of our information systems could compromise our information and operations and expose us to liability, which would cause our business and reputation to suffer.

 

We rely on our information technology infrastructure to process, transmit and store electronic information critical to our business activities. In recent years, there has been a rise in the number of cyberattacks on other companies’ network and information systems by both state-sponsored and criminal organizations, and as a result, the risks associated with such an event continue to increase. A significant failure, compromise, breach or interruption of our information systems could result in a disruption of our operations, customer dissatisfaction, damage to our reputation, a loss of customers or revenues and potential regulatory fines. If any such failure, interruption or similar event results in improper disclosure of information maintained in our information systems and networks or those of our customers, suppliers or vendors, including personnel, customer, pricing and other sensitive information, we could also be subject to liability under relevant contractual obligations and laws and regulations protecting personal data and privacy. Our financial results could also be adversely affected if our information systems are breached or an employee causes our information systems to fail, either as a result of inadvertent error or by deliberately tampering with or manipulating such systems.

 

Terrorist attacks, the threat of terrorist attacks or other sustained military campaigns may adversely impact our results of operations.

 

The long-term impact of terrorist attacks and the magnitude of the threat of future terrorist attacks on the energy industry in general and on us in particular are not known at this time. Uncertainty surrounding sustained military campaigns may affect our operations in unpredictable ways, including disruptions of crude oil and natural gas supplies and markets for crude oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids 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 insurance against such attacks more difficult for us to obtain, if we choose to do so. Moreover, the insurance that may be available to us may be significantly more expensive than our existing insurance coverage. Instability in the financial markets resulting from terrorism or war could also negatively affect our ability to raise capital.

 

If we fail to develop or maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to report our financial results accurately or prevent fraud, which would likely have a negative impact on the market price of our common units.

 

Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports, prevent fraud and to operate successfully as a publicly traded partnership. Although we continuously evaluate the effectiveness of and improve upon our internal controls, our efforts to develop and maintain our internal controls may not be successful, and we may be unable to maintain effective controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future or to comply with our obligations under Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 (“Section 404”). For example, Section 404 requires us to, among other things, review and report annually on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. In addition, our independent registered public accountants are now required to assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting since we ceased to be an emerging growth company under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (the “JOBS Act”) on December 31, 2018, which means that we will no longer benefit from the reduced reporting requirements afforded to emerging growth companies under the JOBS Act.

 

Any failure to develop, implement or maintain effective internal controls or to improve our internal controls could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Given the difficulties inherent in the design and operation of internal controls over financial reporting, we can provide no assurance as to our independent registered public accounting firm’s conclusions about the effectiveness of our internal controls, and we may incur significant costs in our efforts to comply with Section 404. Ineffective internal controls will subject us to regulatory scrutiny and may result in a loss of confidence in our reported financial information, which could have an adverse effect on our business and would likely have a negative effect on the trading price of our common units.

 

Risks Inherent in an Investment in Us

 

Holders of our common units have limited voting rights and are not entitled to elect the General Partner or its directors.

 

Unlike the holders of common stock in a corporation, our common unitholders have only limited voting rights on matters affecting our business and, therefore, limited ability to influence management’s decisions regarding our business. Common unitholders have no right to elect the General Partner or the board of directors of the General Partner (the “Board”). ETO is the sole member of the General Partner and has the right to appoint the majority of the members of the Board, including all but one of its independent directors. Also, pursuant to that certain Board Representation Agreement entered into by us, the General Partner, ETE and EIG Veteran Equity Aggregator, L.P. (along with its affiliated funds, “EIG”) in connection with our private placement of Preferred Units and Warrants to EIG, EIG Management Company, LLC has the right to designate one of the members of the Board for so long as the holders of the Preferred Units hold more than 5% of the Partnership’s outstanding common units in the aggregate (taking into account the common units that would be issuable upon conversion of the Preferred Units and exercise of the Warrants).

 

If our common unitholders are dissatisfied with the General Partner’s performance, they have little ability to remove the General Partner. As a result of these limitations, the price of our common units may decline because of the absence or reduction of a takeover premium in the trading price. Furthermore, the Partnership Agreement contains provisions

limiting the ability of common unitholders to call meetings or to obtain information about our operations, as well as other provisions limiting our common unitholders’ ability to influence the manner or direction of management.

 

ETO owns and controls the General Partner, and the General Partner has sole responsibility for conducting our business and managing our operations. The General Partner and its affiliates, including ETO, have conflicts of interest with us and limited fiduciary duties, and they may favor their own interests to the detriment of us and our unitholders.

 

ETO owns and controls the General Partner and appointed all of the officers and a majority of the directors of the General Partner, some of whom are also officers and directors of ETO. Although the General Partner has a fiduciary duty to manage us in a manner that is beneficial to us and our unitholders, the directors and officers of the General Partner also have a fiduciary duty to manage the General Partner in a manner that is beneficial to its owner. Conflicts of interest will arise between the General Partner and its owner, on the one hand, and us and our unitholders, on the other hand. In resolving these conflicts of interest, the General Partner may favor its own interests and the interests of its owner over our interests and the interests of our unitholders. These conflicts include the following situations, among others:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The General Partner’s liability for our obligations is limited.

 

The General Partner has included, and will continue to include, provisions in its and our contractual arrangements that limit its liability under such contractual arrangements so that the counterparties to such arrangements have recourse only against our assets, and not against the General Partner or its assets. The General Partner may therefore cause us to incur indebtedness or other obligations that are nonrecourse to it. The Partnership Agreement provides that any action taken by the General Partner to limit its liability is not a breach of the General Partner’s fiduciary duties, even if we could have obtained more favorable terms without such limitation on liability. In addition, we are obligated to reimburse or indemnify the General Partner to the extent that it incurs obligations on our behalf. Any such reimbursement or indemnification payments would reduce our amount of cash otherwise available for distribution.

 

The Partnership Agreement limits the General Partner’s fiduciary duties to our unitholders.

 

The Partnership Agreement contains provisions that modify and reduce the fiduciary standards to which the General Partner would otherwise be held by state fiduciary duty law. For example, the Partnership Agreement permits the General Partner to make a number of decisions in its individual capacity, as opposed to its capacity as the General Partner, or otherwise free of fiduciary duties to us and our unitholders. This entitles the General Partner to consider only the interests and factors that it desires and relieves it of any duty or obligation to give any consideration to any interest of, or factors affecting, us, our affiliates or our limited partners. Examples of decisions that the General Partner may make in its individual capacity include:

 

 

 

 

 

By purchasing a unit, a unitholder agrees to become bound by the provisions of the Partnership Agreement, including the provisions discussed above.

 

Even if holders of our common units are dissatisfied, they currently cannot remove the General Partner without ETO’s consent.

 

Common unitholders are currently unable to remove the General Partner because the General Partner and its affiliates own sufficient number of our common units to prevent its removal. The vote of the holders of at least 662/3% of all outstanding common units is required to remove the General Partner, and ETO currently owns over 331/3% of our outstanding common units.

 

The Partnership Agreement restricts the remedies available to holders of our common units for actions taken by the General Partner that might otherwise constitute breaches of fiduciary duty.

 

The Partnership Agreement contains provisions that restrict the remedies available to common unitholders for actions taken by the General Partner that might otherwise constitute breaches of fiduciary duty under state fiduciary duty law. For example, the Partnership Agreement:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In a situation involving a transaction with an affiliate or a conflict of interest, any determination by the General Partner must be made in good faith. If an affiliate transaction or the resolution of a conflict of interest is not approved by our common unitholders or the conflicts committee and the Board determines that the resolution or course of action taken with respect to the affiliate transaction or conflict of interest satisfies either of the standards set forth in subclauses (c) or (d) above, then it will conclusively be deemed that, in making its decision, the Board acted in good faith.

 

The Partnership Agreement restricts the voting rights of unitholders owning 20% or more of our common units.

 

Common unitholders’ voting rights are further restricted by a provision of the Partnership Agreement providing that any units held by a person or group that owns 20% or more of such class of units then outstanding, other than, with respect to our common units, the General Partner, its affiliates, their direct transferees and their indirect transferees approved by the General Partner (which approval may be granted in its sole discretion) and persons who acquired such common units with the prior approval of the General Partner, cannot vote on any matter.

The general partner interest or the control of the General Partner may be transferred to a third party without unitholder consent.

 

The General Partner may transfer its general partner interest to a third party in a merger or in a sale of all or substantially all of its assets without the consent of the common unitholders. Furthermore, the Partnership Agreement does not restrict the ability of ETO to transfer all or a portion of its ownership interest in the General Partner to a third party. The new owner of the General Partner would then be in a position to replace the majority of the Board, and all of the officers, of the General Partner with its own designees and thereby exert significant control over the decisions made by the Board and the officers of the General Partner.

 

An increase in interest rates may cause the market price of our common units to decline.

 

The market price of master limited partnership units, like other yield-oriented securities, may be affected by, among other factors, implied distribution yield. The distribution yield is often used by investors to compare and rank yield-oriented securities for investment decision-making purposes. Therefore, increases or decreases in interest rates may affect whether or not certain investors decide to invest in master limited partnership units, including ours, and a rising interest rate environment could have an adverse impact on our common unit price and impair our ability to issue additional equity or incur debt to fund growth or for other purposes, including distributions.

 

We may issue additional limited partner interests without the approval of the common unitholders, which would dilute the common unitholders’ existing ownership interests and may increase the risk that we will not have sufficient available cash to maintain or increase our per common unit distribution level.

 

The Partnership Agreement does not limit the number or timing of additional limited partner interests that we may issue, including limited partner interests that are convertible into our common units, without the approval of our common unitholders. Also, for the first four full calendar quarters following the Transactions Date, we are permitted to pay a portion of the quarterly distribution on the Preferred Units with additional Preferred Units, and the Preferred Units are convertible into common units in the future at the option of the holders of the Preferred Units, or under certain circumstances, at our option.

 

If a substantial portion of the Preferred Units are converted into common units, common unitholders could experience significant dilution. Furthermore, if holders of such converted Preferred Units were to dispose of a substantial portion of these common units in the public market, whether in a single transaction or series of transactions, it could adversely affect the market price of our common units. In addition, these sales, or the possibility that these sales may occur, could make it more difficult for us to sell our common units in the future.

 

Our issuance of additional common units, including pursuant to our Distribution Reinvestment Plan (“DRIP”), or other equity securities of equal or senior rank, such as additional preferred units, will have the following effects:

 

 

 

 

 

 

ETO and the holders of the Preferred Units may sell our common units in the public or private markets, and such sales could have an adverse impact on the trading price of our common units.

 

As of December 31, 2018, ETO holds an aggregate of 46,056,228 common units in us (after giving effect to the conversion of 6,397,965 Class B Units to common units). We have granted certain registration rights to ETO and its affiliates with respect to any common units they own, and have filed a registration statement with the SEC for the benefit of the holders of the Preferred Units with respect to any common units they may own upon conversion of the Preferred Units or exercise of the Warrants. The sale of these common units in the public or private markets could have an adverse impact on the price of our common units or on any trading market that may develop. 

 

The General Partner has a call right that may require you to sell your common units at an undesirable time or price.

 

If at any time the General Partner and its affiliates own more than 80% of our outstanding common units, the General Partner will have the right, but not the obligation, which it may assign to any of its affiliates or to us, to acquire all, but not less than all, of our common units held by unaffiliated persons at a price that is not less than their then-current market price, as calculated pursuant to the terms of the Partnership Agreement. As a result, you may be required to sell your common units at an undesirable time or price. You may also incur a tax liability upon a sale of your common units. ETO currently owns an aggregate of approximately 44% of our outstanding common units (before giving effect to the conversion of the Class B Units into common units).

 

Your liability may not be limited if a court finds that unitholder action constitutes control of our business.

 

A general partner of a partnership generally has unlimited liability for the obligations of the partnership, except for those contractual obligations of the partnership that are expressly made without recourse to the general partner. The Partnership is organized under Delaware law and conducts business in a number of other states, and in some of those states, the limitations on the liability of holders of limited partner interests for the obligations of a limited partnership have not been clearly established. You could be liable for any and all of our obligations as if you were a general partner if a court or governmental agency were to determine that:

 

 



 

Unitholders may have liability to repay distributions that were wrongfully distributed to them.

 

Under certain circumstances, unitholders may have to repay amounts wrongfully returned or distributed to them. Under Section 17-607 of the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act (the “Delaware Act”), we may not make a distribution if the distribution would cause our liabilities to exceed the fair value of our assets. The Delaware Act provides that for a period of three years from the date of an impermissible distribution, limited partners who received the distribution and who knew at the time of the distribution that it violated Delaware law will be liable to the limited partnership for the distribution amount. Liabilities to partners on account of their interest in the Partnership and liabilities that are nonrecourse to the Partnership are not counted for purposes of determining whether a distribution is permissible.

 

The NYSE does not require a publicly traded partnership like us to comply with certain of its corporate governance requirements.

 

Our common units are listed on the NYSE. Because we are a publicly traded partnership, the NYSE does not require us to have a majority of independent directors on the Board or to establish a compensation committee or a nominating and corporate governance committee. Accordingly, unitholders do not have the same protections afforded to investors in certain corporations that are subject to all of the NYSE corporate governance requirements. Please read Part III, Item 10 (“Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance”).

 

Tax Risks to Common Unitholders

 

Our tax treatment depends on our status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. If the IRS were to treat us as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, then our cash available for distribution would be substantially reduced.

 

The anticipated after-tax economic benefit of an investment in our common units depends largely on our being treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. We have not requested a ruling from the IRS on this or any other tax matter affecting us.

 

Despite the fact that we are a limited partnership under Delaware law, it is possible in certain circumstances for a partnership such as ours to be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes. Although we do not believe based upon our current operations that we are or will be so treated, a change in our business or a change in current law could cause us to be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject us to taxation as an entity.

 

If we were treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, we would pay federal income tax on our taxable income at the corporate tax rate, and would likely pay state and local income tax at varying rates. Distributions would generally be taxed again as corporate dividends (to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits), and no income, gains, losses, deductions or credits would flow through to you. Because a tax would be imposed upon us as a corporation, our cash available for distribution would be substantially reduced. Therefore, if we were treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, there would be a material reduction in the anticipated cash flow and after-tax return to our unitholders, likely causing a substantial reduction in the value of our common units.

 

The Partnership Agreement provides that, if a law is enacted or existing law is modified or interpreted in a manner that subjects us to taxation as a corporation or otherwise subjects us to entity level taxation for federal, state or local income tax purposes, the level of distributions on our common units may be adjusted to reflect the impact of that law or interpretation on us.

 

If we were subjected to a material amount of additional entity level taxation by individual states, it would reduce our cash available for distribution.

 

Changes in current state law may subject us to additional entity level taxation by individual states. Because of widespread state budget deficits and other reasons, several states are evaluating ways to subject partnerships to entity level taxation through the imposition of state income, franchise and other forms of taxation. For example, we are required to pay the Texas Franchise Tax each year at a maximum effective rate of 0.75% of our “margin”, as defined in the law, apportioned to Texas in the prior year. Imposition of any similar taxes by any other state may substantially reduce the cash available for distribution and, therefore, negatively impact the value of an investment in our common units.

 

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

 

The present federal income tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships, including us, or an investment in our common units, may be modified by administrative, legislative or judicial changes or differing interpretations at any time. From time to time, members of the U.S. Congress have proposed and considered substantive changes to the existing federal income tax laws that would affect publicly traded partnerships, including a prior legislative proposal that would have eliminated the qualifying income exception to the treatment of all publicly traded partnerships as corporations upon which we rely for our treatment as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. In addition, the Treasury Department has issued, and in the future may issue, regulations interpreting those laws that affect publicly traded partnerships.  Although there are no such current legislative or administrative proposals, there can be no assurance that there will not be further changes to U.S. federal income tax laws or the Treasury Department’s interpretation of the qualifying income rules in a manner that could impact our ability to qualify as a publicly traded partnership in the future.

 

Any modification to the federal income tax laws may be applied retroactively and could make it more difficult or impossible for us to meet the exception for certain publicly traded partnerships to be treated as partnerships for federal

income tax purposes. We are unable to predict whether any changes or other proposals will ultimately be enacted. Any future legislative changes could negatively impact the value of an investment in our common units. You are urged to consult with your own tax advisor with respect to the status of regulatory or administrative developments and proposals and their potential effect on your investment in our common units.

 

Our unitholders’ share of our income will be taxable to them for federal income tax purposes even if they do not receive any cash distributions from us.

 

Because a unitholder will be treated as a partner to whom we will allocate taxable income that could be different in amount than the cash we distribute, a unitholder’s allocable share of our taxable income will be taxable to it, which may require the payment of federal income taxes and, in some cases, state and local income taxes, on its share of our taxable income even if it receives no cash distributions from us. Our unitholders may not receive cash distributions from us equal to their share of our taxable income or even equal to the actual tax liability that results from that income.

 

We may engage in transactions to de-lever the Partnership and manage our liquidity that may result in income and gain to our unitholders. For example, if we sell assets and use the proceeds to repay existing debt or fund capital expenditures, you may be allocated taxable income and gain resulting from the sale. Further, taking advantage of opportunities to reduce our existing debt, such as debt exchanges, debt repurchases, or modifications of our existing debt could result in “cancellation of indebtedness income” (also referred to as “COD income”) being allocated to our unitholders as taxable income. Unitholders may be allocated COD income, and income tax liabilities arising therefrom may exceed cash distributions. The ultimate effect of any such allocations will depend on the unitholder’s individual tax position with respect to its units. Unitholders are encouraged to consult their tax advisors with respect to the consequences of potential COD income or other transactions that may result in income and gain to unitholders.

 

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

 

We have not requested a ruling from the IRS with respect to our treatment as a partnership for federal income tax purposes or any other matter affecting us. The IRS may adopt positions that differ from the positions we take, and the IRS’s positions may ultimately be sustained.

 

It may be necessary to resort to administrative or court proceedings to sustain some or all of the positions we take. A court may not agree with some or all of the positions we take. Any contest with the IRS, and the outcome of any IRS contest, may have a materially adverse impact on the market for our common units and the price at which they trade. In addition, our costs of any contest with the IRS will be borne indirectly by our unitholders and the General Partner because the costs will reduce our cash available for distribution.

 

If the IRS makes audit adjustments to our income tax returns for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, it (and some states) may assess and collect any taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) resulting from such audit adjustments directly from us, in which case our cash available for distribution to our unitholders might be substantially reduced.

 

Pursuant to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, if the IRS makes audit adjustments to our income tax returns, it (and some states) may assess and collect any taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) resulting from such audit adjustments directly from us. To the extent possible under the new rules, the General Partner may elect to either pay the taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) directly to the IRS or, if we are eligible, issue a revised information statement to each unitholder and former unitholder with respect to an audited and adjusted return. Although the General Partner may elect to have our unitholders and former unitholders take such audit adjustment into account and pay any resulting taxes (including applicable penalties or interest) in accordance with their interests in us during the tax year under audit, there can be no assurance that such election will be practical, permissible or effective in all circumstances. As a result, our current unitholders may bear some or all of the tax liability resulting from such audit adjustment, even if such unitholders did not own units in us during the tax year under audit. If, as a result of any such audit adjustment, we are required to make payments of taxes,

penalties and interest, our cash available for distribution to our unitholders might be reduced. These rules are not applicable for tax years beginning on or prior to December 31, 2017.

 

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

 

If our unitholders sell common units, they will recognize a gain or loss for federal income tax purposes equal to the difference between the amount realized and their tax basis in those common units. Because distributions in excess of their allocable share of our net taxable income decrease their tax basis in their common units, the amount, if any, of such prior excess distributions with respect to the common units a unitholder sells will, in effect, become taxable income to the unitholder if it sells such common units at a price greater than its tax basis in those common units, even if the price received is less than its original cost. In addition, because the amount realized includes a unitholder’s share of our nonrecourse liabilities, a unitholder that sells common units may incur a tax liability in excess of the amount of cash received from the sale.

A substantial portion of the amount realized from a unitholder’s sale of our units, whether or not representing gain, may be taxed as ordinary income to such unitholder due to potential recapture items, including depreciation recapture. Thus, a unitholder may recognize both ordinary income and capital loss from the sale of units if the amount realized on a sale of such units is less than such unitholder’s adjusted basis in the units. Net capital loss may only offset capital gains and, in the case of individuals, up to $3,000 of ordinary income per year. In the taxable period in which a unitholder sells its units, such unitholder may recognize ordinary income from our allocations of income and gain to such unitholder prior to the sale and from recapture items that generally cannot be offset by any capital loss recognized upon the sale of units.

 

Unitholders may be subject to limitation on their ability to deduct interest expense incurred by us.

 

In general, we are entitled to a deduction for interest paid or accrued on indebtedness properly allocable to our trade or business during our taxable year. However, under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, our deduction for “business interest” is limited to the sum of our business interest income and 30% of our “adjusted taxable income.” For the purposes of this limitation, our adjusted taxable income is computed without regard to any business interest expense or business interest income, and in the case of taxable years beginning before January 1, 2022, any deduction allowable for depreciation, amortization, or depletion.

 

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

 

Investment in our common units by tax-exempt entities, such as employee benefit plans and individual retirement accounts (known as IRAs) raises issues unique to them. For example, virtually all of our income allocated to organizations that are exempt from U.S. federal income tax, including IRAs and other retirement plans, will be unrelated business taxable income and will be taxable to them. With respect to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, subject to the proposed aggregation rules for certain similarly situated businesses or activities issued by the Treasury Department, a tax-exempt entity with more than one unrelated trade or business (including by attribution from investment in a partnership such as ours) is required to compute the unrelated business taxable income of such tax-exempt entity separately with respect to each such trade or business (including for purposes of determining any net operating loss deduction). As a result, for years beginning after December 31, 2017, it may not be possible for tax-exempt entities to utilize losses from an investment in our partnership to offset unrelated business taxable income from another unrelated trade or business and vice versa. Tax-exempt entities should consult a tax advisor before investing in our common units.

Non-U.S. unitholders will be subject to U.S. taxes and withholding with respect to their income and gain from owning our units.

 

Non-U.S. unitholders are generally taxed and subject to income tax filing requirements by the United States on income effectively connected with a U.S. trade or business (“effectively connected income”). Income allocated to our unitholders and any gain from the sale of our units will generally be considered to be “effectively connected” with a U.S.

trade or business. As a result, distributions to a non-U.S. unitholder will be subject to withholding at the highest applicable effective tax rate and a non-U.S. unitholder who sells or otherwise disposes of a unit will also be subject to U.S. federal income tax on the gain realized from the sale or disposition of that unit.

 

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act imposes a withholding obligation of 10% of the amount realized upon a non-U.S. unitholder’s sale or exchange of an interest in a partnership that is engaged in a U.S. trade or business. However, due to challenges of administering a withholding obligation applicable to open market trading and other complications, the IRS has temporarily suspended the application of this withholding rule to open market transfers of interests in publicly traded partnerships pending promulgation of regulations or other guidance that resolves the challenges. It is not clear if or when such regulations or other guidance will be issued. Non-U.S. unitholders should consult a tax advisor before investing in our common units.

 

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

 

Because we cannot match transferors and transferees of common units, we have adopted certain methods for allocating depreciation and amortization deductions that may not conform to all aspects of existing Treasury Regulations. A successful IRS challenge to the use of these methods could adversely affect the amount of tax benefits available to you. It also could affect the timing of these tax benefits or the amount of gain from your sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of our common units or result in audit adjustments to your tax returns.

 

We generally prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction for federal income tax purposes between transferors and transferees of our units each month based upon the ownership of our units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders.

 

We generally prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction for federal income tax purposes between transferors and transferees of our units each month based upon the ownership of our units on the first day of each month (the “Allocation Date”), instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred. Similarly, we generally allocate (i) certain deductions for depreciation of capital additions, (ii) gain or loss realized on a sale or other disposition of our assets, and (iii) in the discretion of the general partner, any other extraordinary item of income, gain, loss or deduction based upon ownership on the Allocation Date. Treasury Regulations allow a similar monthly simplifying convention, but such regulations do not specifically authorize all aspects of our proration method. If the IRS were to challenge our proration method, we may be required to change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders.

 

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

 

Because there are no specific rules governing the federal income tax consequences of loaning a partnership interest, a unitholder whose common units are the subject of a securities loan may be considered to have disposed of the loaned common units. In that case, the unitholder may no longer be treated for federal income tax purposes as a partner with respect to those common units during the period of the loan to the short seller and the unitholder may recognize gain or loss from such disposition. Moreover, during the period of the loan, any of our income, gain, loss or deduction with respect to those common units may not be reportable by the unitholder and any cash distributions received by the unitholder as to those common units could be fully taxable as ordinary income. Unitholders desiring to assure their status as partners and avoid the risk of gain recognition from a securities loan are urged to consult a tax advisor to determine whether it is advisable to modify any applicable brokerage account agreements to prohibit their brokers from borrowing their common units.

 

We have adopted certain valuation methodologies in determining a unitholder’s allocations of income, gain, loss and deduction. The IRS may challenge these methodologies or the resulting allocations, and such a challenge could adversely affect the value of our common units.

 

In determining the items of income, gain, loss and deduction allocable to our unitholders, we must routinely determine the fair market value of our assets. Although we may from time to time consult with professional appraisers regarding valuation matters, we make many fair market value estimates using a methodology based on the market value of our common units as a means to measure the fair market value of our assets. The IRS may challenge these valuation methods and the resulting allocations of income, gain, loss and deduction.

 

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

 

As a result of investing in our common units, you will likely become subject to state and local taxes and income tax return filing requirements in jurisdictions where we operate or own or acquire properties.

 

In addition to federal income taxes, our unitholders will likely be subject to other taxes, including state and local taxes, unincorporated business taxes and estate, inheritance or intangible taxes that are imposed by the various jurisdictions in which we conduct business or control property now or in the future, even if they do not live in any of those jurisdictions. Our unitholders will likely be required to file state and local income tax returns and pay state and local income taxes in some or all of these various jurisdictions. Further, our unitholders may be subject to penalties for failure to comply with state and local filing requirements.

 

We currently conduct business and control assets in several states, many of which currently impose a personal income tax on individuals. Many of these states also impose an income tax on corporations and other entities. As we make acquisitions or expand our business, we may control assets or conduct business in additional states or foreign jurisdictions that impose a personal income tax. It is your responsibility to file all foreign, federal, state and local tax returns and pay any taxes due in these jurisdictions. Unitholders should consult with their own tax advisors regarding the filing of such tax returns, the payment of such taxes, and the deductibility of any taxes paid.

 

ITEM 1B.Unresolved Staff Comments

 

None.

 

ITEM 2.Properties

 

We do not currently own or lease any material facilities or properties for storage or maintenance of our compression units. As of December 31, 2018, our headquarters consisted of 12,342 square feet of leased space located at 100 Congress Avenue, Austin, Texas 78701. 

 

ITEM 3.Legal Proceedings

 

From time to time, we and our subsidiaries may be involved in various claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. In management’s opinion, the resolution of such matters is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.  

 

ITEM 4.Mine Safety Disclosures

 

None.

 

PART II

 

ITEM 5.Market For Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

 

Our Partnership Interests

 

As of February 14, 2019, we had 90,000,504 common units outstanding. ETO owns 100% of the membership interests in the General Partner.  As of February 14, 2019, ETO owned approximately 44% of our outstanding common units (before giving effect to the conversion of the Class B Units into common units).   

 

As of February 14, 2019, we had outstanding 6,397,965 Class B Units which represent limited partner interests in the Partnership, all of which were held by ETO. Each Class B Unit will automatically be converted into one common unit following the record date attributable to the quarter ending June 30, 2019. Each Class B Unit has all of the rights and obligations of a common unit except the right to participate in distributions made prior to conversion into common units.

 

As of February 14, 2019, we had outstanding 500,000 Preferred Units representing limited partner interests in the Partnership, all of which were held by certain investment funds managed or advised by EIG Global Energy Partners and FS Energy and Power Fund (collectively, the “Preferred Unitholders”). The Preferred Units rank senior to the common units with respect to distributions and rights upon liquidation. The Preferred Unitholders are entitled to receive cumulative quarterly distributions equal to $24.375 per Preferred Unit, which may be paid in cash or, subject to certain limits, a combination of cash and additional Preferred Units as determined by the General Partner with respect to any quarter ending on or prior to June 30, 2019.  

 

The Preferred Units are convertible, at the option of the Preferred Unitholders, into common units as follows: one third on or after April 2, 2021, two thirds on or after April 2, 2022, and the remainder on or after April 2, 2023. On or after April 2, 2023, we have the option to redeem all or any portion of the Preferred Units then outstanding. On or after April 2, 2028, the Preferred Unitholders have the right to require us to redeem all or a portion of the Preferred Units then outstanding, the purchase price for which we may elect to pay up to 50% in common units, subject to certain additional limits.

 

Our common units, which represent limited partner interests in us, are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the symbol “USAC.”

 

Holders

 

At the close of business on February 14, 2019, based on information received from the transfer agent of the common units, we had 58 holders of record of our common units. The number of record holders does not include holders of common units held in “street name” or persons, partnerships, associations, corporations or other entities identified in security position listings maintained by depositories. There is no established public trading market for the Preferred Units, all of which are owned by the Preferred Unitholders. Please read Part II, Item 8 (“Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 11—Preferred Units and Warrants and –Note 12—Partners’ Capital”).

 

Selected Information from the Partnership Agreement

 

Set forth below is a summary of the significant provisions of the Partnership Agreement that relate to available cash.

 

Available Cash

 

The Partnership Agreement requires that, within 45 days after the end of each quarter, we distribute all of our available cash to unitholders of record on the applicable record date, first to the holders of the Preferred Units and then to the common unitholders. The Partnership Agreement generally defines available cash, for each quarter, as cash on hand at the end of a quarter plus cash on hand resulting from working capital borrowings made after the end of the quarter less the amount of reserves established by the General Partner to provide for the proper conduct of our business, comply with

applicable law, the Credit Agreement or other agreements; and provide funds for distributions to our unitholders for any one or more of the next four quarters. Working capital borrowings are borrowings made under a credit facility, commercial paper facility or other similar financing arrangement, and in all cases are used solely for working capital purposes or to pay distributions to partners and with the intent of the borrower to repay such borrowings within twelve months from sources other than working capital borrowings.

 

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

 

None.

 

Sales of Unregistered Securities; Use of Proceeds from Sale of Securities

 

None.

 

Equity Compensation Plan

 

For disclosures regarding securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans, see Part III, Item 12 (“Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Unitholder Matters”).

 

ITEM 6.Selected Financial Data

 

SELECTED HISTORICAL FINANCIAL DATA

 

In the table below we have presented certain selected financial data for USA Compression Partners, LP and the USA Compression Predecessor for each of the years in the five-year period ended December 31, 2018, which has been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2018, 2017, 2016 and 2015. The financial data for the year ended December 31, 2014 is unaudited. For periods prior to the Transactions Date, the table presents selected financial data for the USA Compression Predecessor and periods after the Transactions Date refer to the Partnership. The following information should be read together with Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and the Financial Statements contained in Part II, Item 7.

 

Our operating results incorporate a number of significant estimates and uncertainties. Such matters could cause the data included herein not to be indicative of our future financial condition or results of operations. A discussion of our critical accounting estimates and how these estimates could impact our future financial condition and results of operations is included in “Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” contained in Part II, Item 7 of this report. In addition, a discussion of the risk factors that could affect our business and future financial condition and results of operations is included under Part I, Item 1A (“Risk Factors”) of this report. Additionally, Note 2 – Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies and Note 17 – Commitments and Contingencies under Part II, Item 8 (“Financial Statements and Supplementary Data”) of this report provide descriptions of areas where estimates and judgments and contingent liabilities could result in different amounts being recognized in our accompanying consolidated financial statements.

 

We believe that investors benefit from having access to the same financial measures utilized by management. The following table includes the non-GAAP financial measures of gross operating margin, Adjusted EBITDA and Distributable Cash Flow (or “DCF”). For definitions of gross operating margin, Adjusted EBITDA and DCF, and reconciliations of such measures to their most directly comparable financial measures calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP, please read “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” below.

 

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

 

Gross Operating Margin

 

The table above includes gross operating margin, which is a non-GAAP financial measure, and a reconciliation to operating income (loss), its most directly comparable GAAP financial measure. We define gross operating margin as revenue less cost of operations, exclusive of depreciation and amortization expense. We believe that gross operating margin is useful as a supplemental measure of our operating profitability. Gross operating margin is impacted primarily by the pricing trends for service operations and cost of operations, including labor rates for service technicians, volume and per unit costs for lubricant oils, quantity and pricing of routine preventative maintenance on compression units and property tax rates on compression units. Gross operating margin should not be considered an alternative to, or more meaningful than, operating income (loss) or any other measure of financial performance presented in accordance with GAAP. Moreover, gross operating margin as presented may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies. Because we capitalize assets, depreciation and amortization of equipment is a necessary element of our costs. To compensate for the limitations of gross operating margin as a measure of our performance, we believe that it is important to consider operating income (loss) determined under GAAP, as well as gross operating margin, to evaluate our operating profitability.

 

Adjusted EBITDA

 

We define EBITDA as net income (loss) before net interest expense, depreciation and amortization expense, and income tax expense (benefit). We define Adjusted EBITDA as EBITDA plus impairment of compression equipment, impairment of goodwill, interest income on capital lease, unit-based compensation expense, severance charges, certain transaction fees, loss (gain) on disposition of assets and other. We view Adjusted EBITDA as one of management’s primary tools for evaluating our results of operations, and we track this item on a monthly basis both as an absolute amount and as a percentage of revenue compared to the prior month, year-to-date, prior year and budget. Adjusted EBITDA is used as a supplemental financial measure by our management and external users of our financial statements, such as investors and commercial banks, to assess:

 

 

 

 

 

We believe that Adjusted EBITDA provides useful information to investors because, when viewed with our GAAP results and the accompanying reconciliations, it may provide a more complete understanding of our performance than GAAP results alone. We also believe that external users of our financial statements benefit from having access to the same financial measures that management uses in evaluating the results of our business.

 

Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered an alternative to, or more meaningful than, net income (loss), operating income (loss), cash flows from operating activities or any other measure of financial performance or liquidity presented in accordance with GAAP as measures of operating performance and liquidity. Moreover, our Adjusted EBITDA as presented may not be comparable to similarly titled measures of other companies.

 

Because we use capital assets, depreciation, impairment of compression equipment and the interest cost of acquiring compression equipment are also necessary elements of our costs. Unit-based compensation expense related to equity awards to employees is also a necessary component of our business. Therefore, measures that exclude these elements have material limitations. To compensate for these limitations, we believe that it is important to consider both net income (loss) and net cash provided by operating activities determined under GAAP, as well as Adjusted EBITDA, to evaluate