10-K

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
 ______________________________________________________ 

FORM 10-K
______________________________________________________
(Mark One)
ý         Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015
Or
o         Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 For the transition period from                to    
 
Commission file number 1-9356
 ______________________________________________________

Buckeye Partners, L.P.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 ______________________________________________________
Delaware
 
23-2432497
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
 
(IRS Employer Identification number)
One Greenway Plaza
 
 
Suite 600
 
 
Houston, TX
 
77046
(Address of principal executive offices)
 
(Zip Code)
 Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (832) 615-8600
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class
 
Name of each exchange on which registered 
Limited partner units representing limited partnership interests
 
New York Stock Exchange
 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 ý   No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.  Yes o   No ý
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 ý   No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any, every Interactive Date File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes ý   No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer x
 
Accelerated filer o
 
Non-accelerated filer o
 
Smaller reporting company o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).  Yes o   No ý
At June 30, 2015, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s limited partner units held by non-affiliates was $9.4 billion. The calculation of such market value should not be construed as an admission or conclusion by the registrant that any person is in fact an affiliate of the registrant.
As of February 19, 2016, there were 129,723,002 limited partner units outstanding. 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s Proxy Statement being prepared for the solicitation of proxies in connection with the 2016 Annual Meeting of Limited Partners are incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K.




TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
 
 
Page
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
 
The information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (this “Report”) includes “forward-looking statements.”  All statements that express belief, expectation, estimates or intentions, as well as those that are not statements of historical facts, are forward-looking statements.  Such statements use forward-looking words such as “proposed,” “anticipate,” “project,” “potential,” “could,” “should,” “continue,” “estimate,” “expect,” “may,” “believe,” “will,” “plan,” “seek,” “outlook” and other similar expressions that are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although some forward-looking statements are expressed differently.  These statements discuss future expectations and contain projections.  Specific factors that could cause actual results to differ from those in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: (i) changes in federal, state, local, and foreign laws or regulations to which we are subject, including those governing pipeline tariff rates and those that permit the treatment of us as a partnership for federal income tax purposes; (ii) terrorism and other security risks, including cyber risk, adverse weather conditions, including hurricanes, environmental releases, and natural disasters; (iii) changes in the marketplace for our products or services, such as increased competition, changes in product flows, better energy efficiency, or general reductions in demand; (iv) adverse regional, national, or international economic conditions, adverse capital market conditions, and adverse political developments; (v) shutdowns or interruptions at our pipeline, terminalling, storage, and processing assets or at the source points for the products we transport, store, or sell; (vi) unanticipated capital expenditures in connection with the construction, repair, or replacement of our assets; (vii) volatility in the price of liquid petroleum products; (viii) nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers; (ix) our ability to integrate acquired assets with our existing assets and to realize anticipated cost savings and other efficiencies and benefits; and (x) our ability to successfully complete our organic growth projects and to realize the anticipated financial benefits.  These factors are not necessarily all of the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in any of our forward-looking statements.  Other known or unpredictable factors could also have material adverse effects on future results.  Consequently, all of the forward-looking statements made in this document are qualified by these cautionary statements, and we cannot assure you that actual results or developments that we anticipate will be realized or, even if substantially realized, will have the expected consequences to or effect on us or our business or operations.  Also note that we provide additional cautionary discussion of risks and uncertainties under the captions “Risk Factors” and in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and elsewhere in this Report.
 
The forward-looking statements contained in this Report speak only as of the date hereof.  Although the expectations in the forward-looking statements are based on our current beliefs and expectations, caution should be taken not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements because such statements speak only as of the date hereof.  Except as required by federal and state securities laws, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or any other reason.  All forward-looking statements attributable to us or any person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this Report and in our future periodic reports filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).  In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events discussed in this Report may not occur.



Table of Contents

PART I
 
Item 1.                     Business
 
Introduction
 
The original Buckeye Pipe Line Company was founded in 1886 as part of the Standard Oil Company (“Standard Oil”) and became a publicly owned, independent company after the dissolution of Standard Oil in 1911.  Expansion into petroleum products transportation after World War II and subsequent acquisitions thereafter ultimately led to Buckeye Pipe Line Company becoming a leading independent common carrier pipeline.  In 1964, Buckeye Pipe Line Company was acquired by a subsidiary of the Pennsylvania Railroad, which later became the Penn Central Corporation.  In 1986, Buckeye Pipe Line Company was reorganized into a master limited partnership (“MLP”), Buckeye Partners, L.P. We are a publicly traded Delaware master limited partnership, and our limited partnership units representing limited partner interests (“LP Units”) are listed on the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the ticker symbol “BPL.”  Buckeye GP LLC (“Buckeye GP”) is our general partner.  Unless the context requires otherwise, references to “we,” “us,” “our,” the “Partnership” or “Buckeye” are intended to mean the business and operations of Buckeye Partners, L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries.
 
We own and operate a diversified network of integrated assets providing midstream logistic solutions, primarily consisting of the transportation, storage and marketing of liquid petroleum products.  We are one of the largest independent liquid petroleum products pipeline operators in the United States in terms of volumes delivered, with approximately 6,000 miles of pipeline. We also use our service expertise to operate and/or maintain third party pipelines and perform certain engineering and construction services for our customers. Additionally, we are one of the largest independent terminalling and storage operators in the United States in terms of capacity available for service. Our terminal network comprises more than 120 liquid petroleum products terminals with aggregate storage capacity of over 110 million barrels across our portfolio of pipelines, inland terminals and marine terminals located primarily in the East Coast and Gulf Coast regions of the United States and in the Caribbean.  Our network of marine terminals enables us to facilitate global flows of crude oil and refined petroleum products, offering our customers connectivity between supply areas and market centers through some of the world’s most important bulk storage and blending hubs. Our flagship marine terminal in The Bahamas, Bahamas Oil Refining Company International Limited (“BORCO”), is one of the largest marine crude oil and refined petroleum products storage facilities in the world and provides an array of logistics and blending services for the global flow of petroleum products.  Our recent expansion into the Gulf Coast has added another regional hub with world-class marine terminalling, storage and processing capabilities. We are also a wholesale distributor of refined petroleum products in areas served by our pipelines and terminals. 

In December 2015, we realigned our reportable segments into three reportable segments as a result of changes in our organizational structure and renamed one of our reportable segments. Our three reportable segments are: Domestic Pipelines & Terminals (formerly known as Pipelines & Terminals), Global Marine Terminals and Merchant Services. We merged our previously reported Development & Logistics segment into the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment. See Note 25 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a more detailed discussion of our business segments. We have adjusted our prior period segment information to conform to current year presentation.

Business Strategy
 
Our primary business objective is to provide stable and sustainable cash distributions to our unitholders, while maintaining a relatively low investment risk profile.  The key elements of our strategy are to:
 
Operate in a safe and environmentally responsible manner;
Maximize utilization of our assets at the lowest cost per unit;
Maintain stable long-term customer relationships;
Optimize, expand and diversify our portfolio of energy assets through accretive acquisitions and organic growth projects; and
Maintain a solid, conservative financial position and our investment-grade credit rating.
 

1

Table of Contents

We intend to achieve our strategy by:

Acquiring, building and operating high quality, strategically-located assets;
Maintaining and enhancing the integrity of our pipelines, terminals and storage assets;
Pursuing strategic cash flow-accretive acquisitions that:
Complement our existing footprint;
Provide geographic, product and/or asset class diversity; and
Leverage existing management capabilities and infrastructure;
Seeking to acquire or develop other energy-related assets that enable us to leverage our asset base, knowledge base and skill sets;
Valuing the effort, teamwork and innovation of our employees; and
Providing superior customer service.

Recent Developments
 
2015 Transactions
 
Credit Facility
 
In December 2015, Buckeye and its indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries, Buckeye Energy Services LLC (“BES”), Buckeye West Indies Holdings LP (“BWI”) and Buckeye Caribbean Terminals LLC (“BCT”), collectively the Buckeye Merchant Service Companies (“BMSC”), as borrowers, modified the $1.5 billion revolving credit facility with SunTrust Bank, as administrative agent, and other lenders (the “Credit Facility”) to extend the maturity date of the Credit Facility by one year to September 30, 2020, with an option to extend the term for one additional year and a $500.0 million accordion option to increase the commitments with the consent of the lenders.  At the time of the transaction, we had $3.4 million of remaining unamortized deferred financing costs, and we incurred additional debt issuance costs of $0.8 million in connection with the modification and extension of the Credit Facility. At December 31, 2015, Buckeye and BMSC collectively had $472.5 million outstanding under the Credit Facility, of which $111.5 million, attributable to BMSC, was classified as current liabilities in our consolidated balance sheet, as related funds were used to finance current working capital needs.
 
At-the-Market Offering Program
 
During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, we sold 2.2 million and 1.0 million LP Units in aggregate under the equity distribution agreements entered into in May 2013 with each of Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Barclays Capital Inc., SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc. and UBS Securities LLC (each an “Equity Distribution Agreement” and collectively the “Equity Distribution Agreements”), received $161.5 million and $74.5 million in net proceeds after deducting commissions and other related expenses, and paid $1.6 million and $0.8 million of compensation in aggregate to the agents under the Equity Distribution Agreements, respectively.


2

Table of Contents

Business Activities
 
The following discussion describes the business activities of our business segments, which include Domestic Pipelines & Terminals, Global Marine Terminals and Merchant Services.
 
The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals, Global Marine and Merchant Services segments derive a nominal amount of their revenue from U.S. governmental agencies.  All of our operations and assets are conducted and located in the continental United States, except for our terminals located in Puerto Rico, St. Lucia and The Bahamas and, from time to time, our Merchant Services segment buys and/or sells fuel oil to third parties at various locations in the Caribbean.  Detailed financial information regarding revenue, profits and total assets of each segment and major geographic area can be found in Note 25 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.  The following table shows our consolidated revenue and each segment’s revenue and percentage of consolidated revenue for the periods indicated (revenue in thousands):
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
 
Revenue
 
Percent
 
Revenue
 
Percent
 
Revenue
 
Percent
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Domestic Pipelines & Terminals
$
966,749

 
28.0
 %
 
$
938,036

 
14.2
 %
 
$
844,832

 
16.7
 %
Global Marine Terminals
514,301

 
14.9
 %
 
395,306

 
6.0
 %
 
252,270

 
5.0
 %
Merchant Services (1)
2,037,664

 
59.0
 %
 
5,358,626

 
80.9
 %
 
3,990,575

 
79.0
 %
Intersegment
(65,280
)
 
(1.9
)%
 
(71,721
)
 
(1.1
)%
 
(33,576
)
 
(0.7
)%
Total
$
3,453,434

 
100.0
 %
 
$
6,620,247

 
100.0
 %
 
$
5,054,101

 
100.0
 %
 ____________________________________
(1)
The decrease in revenue for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 was primarily related to a decrease in sales volume and a decline of refined petroleum products prices. The decrease in sales volume was primarily related to more effective supply management. See “Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for further discussion.
 
Domestic Pipelines & Terminals Segment
 
The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment owns and operates approximately 6,000 miles of pipeline located primarily in the northeastern and upper midwestern portions of the United States, and services approximately 110 delivery locations.  This segment transports liquid petroleum products, including gasoline, jet fuel, diesel fuel, heating oil and kerosene, from major supply sources to terminals and airports located within end-use markets.  The pipelines within this segment also transport other refined petroleum products, such as propane and butane, refinery feedstock and blending components, as well as crude oil.  The segment also includes 117 active terminals that provide bulk storage and throughput services with respect to liquid petroleum products and renewable fuels, including ethanol, and have an aggregate storage capacity of over 55 million barrels.  In addition, three of our terminals provide crude oil services, including train loading/unloading, storage and throughput.  Of our terminals in the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment, over half are connected to our pipelines.  We generally own property on which the terminals are located.  The segment’s geographical diversity, connections to multiple sources of supply, and extensive delivery system help create a stable base business.
 
Pipelines
 
The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s pipelines conduct business without the benefit of exclusive franchises from government entities.  In addition, our pipelines generally operate as a common carrier, providing transportation services at posted tariffs and without long-term contracts.  Demand for the services provided by our pipelines derives from end-users’ demand for liquid petroleum products in the regions served and the ability and willingness of refiners and marketers to supply such demand by deliveries through our pipelines.  Factors affecting demand for liquid petroleum products include price and prevailing general economic conditions.  Many of the factors impacting demand for the services provided by our pipelines are, therefore, partially or entirely beyond our control. Typically, this segment receives liquid petroleum products from refineries, connecting pipelines, and bulk and marine terminals and transports those products to other locations for a fee.
 

3

Table of Contents

The following table presents product volumes and percentage of products transported by the pipelines in the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment for the periods indicated (barrels per day (“bpd”) in thousands):
 
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pipelines:
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Gasoline
735.9

 
50.4
%
 
702.8

 
49.1
%
 
717.8

 
50.3
%
Jet fuel
358.9

 
24.5
%
 
336.0

 
23.5
%
 
334.4

 
23.5
%
Middle distillates (1)
337.4

 
23.1
%
 
354.9

 
24.8
%
 
345.7

 
24.2
%
Other products (2)
28.5

 
2.0
%
 
36.6

 
2.6
%
 
28.5

 
2.0
%
Total pipelines throughput
1,460.7

 
100.0
%
 
1,430.3

 
100.0
%
 
1,426.4

 
100.0
%
_____________________________
(1)
Includes diesel fuel and heating oil.
(2)
Includes liquefied petroleum gas (“LPG”), intermediate petroleum products and crude oil.
 
We provide pipeline transportation services in the following states: California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Tennessee.  The geographical location and description of these pipelines is as follows:
 
Pennsylvania—New York—New Jersey Our operating subsidiary Buckeye Pipe Line Company, L.P. (“BPLC”) serves major population centers in Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey through approximately 825 miles of pipeline.  Liquid petroleum products are received at Linden, New Jersey from 17 major source points, including two refineries, six connecting pipelines and nine storage and terminalling facilities. Products are then transported through two lines from Linden, New Jersey to Macungie, Pennsylvania.  From Macungie, the pipeline continues west through a connection with our operating subsidiary Laurel Pipe Line Company, L.P. (“Laurel”) pipeline to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (serving Reading, Harrisburg, Altoona/Johnstown, Greensburg and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and north through eastern Pennsylvania into New York (serving Scranton/Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania and Binghamton, Syracuse, Utica, Rochester and, via a connecting carrier, Buffalo, New York).  We lease capacity in one of the pipelines extending from Pennsylvania to upstate New York to a major public pipeline company.  Products received at Linden, New Jersey are also transported through one line to Newark Airport and through two additional lines to JFK Airport and LaGuardia Airport and to commercial liquid petroleum products terminals at Long Island City and Inwood, New York.  These pipelines supply JFK Airport, LaGuardia Airport and Newark Airport with substantially all of each airport’s jet fuel requirements.
 
Our operating subsidiary Buckeye Pipe Line Transportation LLC (“BPL Transportation”) pipeline system delivers liquid petroleum products from a refinery located in Paulsboro, New Jersey to destinations in New Jersey, Pennsylvania and New York through approximately 420 miles of pipeline.  A portion of the pipeline system extends from Paulsboro, New Jersey to Malvern, Pennsylvania.  From Malvern, a pipeline segment delivers liquid petroleum products to locations in upstate New York.
 
The Laurel pipeline system transports liquid petroleum products through a 350-mile pipeline extending westward from three refineries, a marine terminal and a connection to the Colonial pipeline system in the Philadelphia area to Reading, Harrisburg, Altoona/Johnstown, Greensburg and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Illinois—Indiana—Michigan—Missouri—Ohio BPLC, BPL Transportation and our operating subsidiary NORCO Pipe Line Company, LLC (“NORCO”), a subsidiary of Buckeye Pipe Line Holdings, L.P. (“BPH”), transport liquid petroleum products through approximately 1,800 miles of pipeline in northern Illinois, central Indiana, eastern Michigan, western and northern Ohio, and western Pennsylvania. A number of receiving lines and delivery lines connect to a central corridor which runs from Lima, Ohio through Toledo, Ohio to Detroit, Michigan.  Liquid petroleum products are received at refineries and other pipeline connection points near Toledo and Lima, Ohio; Detroit, Michigan; and East Chicago, Indiana. Major market areas served include Huntington/Fort Wayne, Indianapolis and South Bend, Indiana; Bay City, Detroit and Flint, Michigan; Cleveland, Columbus, Lima, Warren and Toledo, Ohio; and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
 

4

Table of Contents

Our operating subsidiary Wood River Pipe Lines LLC (“Wood River”) owns liquid petroleum products pipelines with aggregate mileage of approximately 1,250 miles located in the Midwestern United States.  Liquid petroleum products are received from the Wood River refinery in the East St. Louis, Illinois area and transported to the Chicago area (the “Chicago Complex”), to our terminal in the St. Louis, Missouri area and to the Lambert-St. Louis Airport, to delivery points across Illinois and Indiana and to our pipeline in Lima, Ohio, and from the Chicago Complex to the Kankakee, Illinois area.
 
Other Liquid Petroleum Products Pipelines BPLC serves Connecticut and Massachusetts through an approximately 100-mile pipeline that carries liquid petroleum products from New Haven, Connecticut to Hartford, Connecticut and Springfield, Massachusetts.  This pipeline also serves Bradley International Airport in Windsor Locks, Connecticut.  Also, BPL Transportation owns an approximately 650-mile refined product pipeline that originates in Dubuque, Iowa and runs southwest into Missouri and then northwest back into Iowa, serving the Sugar Creek, Missouri, and Council Bluffs and Des Moines, Iowa markets. BPL Transportation also has an approximately 125-mile pipeline that runs from Portland, Maine to Bangor, Maine.
 
Our operating subsidiary Everglades Pipe Line Company, L.P. (“Everglades”) transports primarily jet fuel through an approximately 40-mile pipeline from Port Everglades, Florida to Ft. Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport and Miami International Airport.  Everglades supplies Miami International Airport with substantially all of its jet fuel requirements.
 
Our operating subsidiary Buckeye Aviation (Reno) LLC (“Buckeye Reno”) owns an approximately 3-mile pipeline serving the Reno/Tahoe International Airport.  Our operating subsidiary Buckeye Aviation (San Diego) LLC (“Buckeye San Diego”) owns an approximately 4-mile pipeline serving the San Diego International Airport.  Buckeye Aviation (Memphis) LLC (“Buckeye Memphis”), formerly known as WesPac Pipelines - Memphis LLC, owns an approximately 16-mile pipeline and a related terminalling facility that primarily serves Federal Express Corporation at the Memphis International Airport.  Buckeye Reno, Buckeye San Diego and Buckeye Memphis, collectively, have terminalling facilities with aggregate storage capacity of 0.5 million barrels.  Buckeye Reno, Buckeye San Diego and Buckeye Memphis were originally created as joint ventures between BPH and Kealine LLC, but in April 2015, BPH purchased the remaining 10% ownership interest in Buckeye Memphis from Kealine LLC, increasing our ownership interest in Buckeye Memphis to 100%.  As such, BPH currently owns 100% of Buckeye Reno, Buckeye San Diego and Buckeye Memphis.  Each of these entities is consolidated into our financial statements.

Additionally, BPH indirectly owns an approximate 63% interest in the Sabina crude butadiene pipeline (the “Sabina Pipeline”) and owns and operates approximately 25 miles of pipeline, which it leases to third parties, all located in Texas.

Terminals
 
The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s terminals receive products from pipelines and, in certain cases, barges, ships or railroads, and distribute them to third parties, who in turn deliver them to end-users and retail outlets.  This segment’s terminals play a key role in moving products to the end-user market by providing efficient product receipt, storage and distribution capabilities, inventory management, ethanol and biodiesel blending, and other ancillary services that include the injection of various additives.  Typically, the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s terminalling facilities consist of multiple storage tanks and are equipped with automated truck loading equipment that is available 24 hours a day.

The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s terminals derive most of their revenues from various fees paid by customers.  A throughput fee is charged for receiving products into the terminal and delivering them to trucks, barges, ships or pipelines.  In addition to these throughput fees, revenues are generated by charging customers fees for blending with renewable fuels, injecting additives and providing storage capacity to customers on either a short-term or long-term basis.  The terminals also derive revenue from recovering and selling vapors emitted during truck loading.  Finally, the terminals derive service fees and blending margins from butane blending activities during the winter months (mid-September through mid-March), whereby butane is blended into various grades of gasoline.  Blending margins depend upon pricing spreads between gasoline and butane, and we use financial derivative instruments to manage the commodity price risk associated with gasoline-to-butane pricing spreads, as deemed necessary.  The fair value of such derivative instruments is recorded in our consolidated balance sheets, with the change in fair value recorded in earnings.  These derivative instruments consist primarily of futures contracts traded on the New York Mercantile Exchange (“NYMEX”) that are executed and managed by our Merchant Services segment.
 

5

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth the total average daily throughput for terminals and storage caverns within the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment for the periods indicated (volume of bpd in thousands):
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
 
 
 
 
 
 
Products throughput (1)
1,215.4

 
1,147.5

 
985.7

 ____________________________
(1)
Amounts include throughput at the five terminals owned by the Merchant Services segment and operated by the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment (as discussed below), as well as two underground propane storage caverns previously reported in our Development & Logistics segment. We have adjusted prior period throughput volumes to conform to current year presentation.

The following table sets forth the number of terminals and storage capacity in barrels by location for terminals reported in the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment (barrels in thousands):
Location 
Number of
Terminals (1)
 
Storage
Capacity (2)
Alabama
2

 
605

California
3

 
530

Connecticut
2

 
1,212

Florida
4

 
1,951

Iowa
5

 
1,302

Illinois
8

 
2,977

Indiana
11

 
9,439

Kentucky
1

 
214

Louisiana
1

 
304

Maine
1

 
140

Maryland
1

 
3,232

Massachusetts
2

 
433

Michigan
14

 
5,467

Missouri
3

 
1,767

Nevada
1

 
50

New Jersey
3

 
4,903

New York
16

 
8,450

North Carolina
1

 
572

Ohio
14

 
4,003

Pennsylvania
11

 
2,536

South Carolina
4

 
2,191

Tennessee
1

 
328

Virginia
4

 
1,805

Wisconsin
4

 
1,228

Total
117

 
55,639

 ____________________________
(1)
This table includes five terminals in Pennsylvania with aggregate storage capacity of approximately 1 million barrels, which are owned by the Merchant Services segment and operated by the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment (as discussed below).
(2)
This table includes approximately 17.0 million barrels of storage capacity with the remaining capacity used for throughput.
 

6

Table of Contents

Operation and Maintenance and Project Management Services
 
We provide turn-key operations and maintenance, asset development and construction services for third-party pipeline and energy assets across the United States. We also operate and/or maintain third-party pipelines under agreements with major oil and gas, petrochemical and chemical companies, which are located primarily in Texas and Louisiana, and perform pipeline construction management services, typically for cost plus a fixed fee, for these same customers as well as other energy companies in the United States. 
 
Equity Investments
 
We own a 34.6% equity interest in West Shore Pipe Line Company (“West Shore”).  West Shore owns an approximately 650-mile pipeline system that originates in the Chicago, Illinois area and extends north to Green Bay, Wisconsin and west and then north to Madison, Wisconsin.  The pipeline system transports refined petroleum and crude oil products to markets in northern Illinois and Wisconsin. The other equity holders of West Shore are affiliated with major oil and gas companies.  Since January 1, 2009, we have operated the West Shore pipeline system on behalf of West Shore.
 
We also own a 40% equity interest in Muskegon Pipeline LLC (“Muskegon”).  Marathon Pipeline LLC is the majority owner and operator of Muskegon.  Muskegon owns an approximately 170-mile pipeline that delivers petroleum products from Griffith, Indiana to Muskegon, Michigan.

Additionally, we own a 25% equity interest in Transport4, LLC (“Transport4”).  Transport4 provides an internet-based shipper information system that allows its customers, including shippers, suppliers and tankage partners to access nominations, schedules, tickets, inventories, invoices and bulletins over a secure internet connection.
 
We also own a 50% equity interest in South Portland Terminal LLC (“South Portland”), which owns a terminal in South Portland, Maine that has approximately 725,000 barrels of storage capacity.
 
Global Marine Terminals Segment
 
The Global Marine Terminals segment provides marine accessible bulk storage and blending services, rail and truck rack loading/unloading, along with petroleum processing services in the East Coast and Gulf Coast regions of the United States and in the Caribbean.  The segment has seven liquid petroleum product terminals located in The Bahamas, Puerto Rico and St. Lucia in the Caribbean and the New York Harbor and Corpus Christi, Texas in the United States.
 

7

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth terminal locations and storage capacity in barrels for terminals reported in the Global Marine Terminals segment (barrels in thousands):
Location 
Number of
Terminals
 
Storage
Capacity (1)
The Bahamas
1

 
26,113

Puerto Rico
1

 
4,624

New York Harbor
3

 
15,653

St. Lucia
1

 
10,261

Texas (2)
1

 
5,981

Total
7

 
62,632

_____________________________
(1)
This table represents total storage capacity as of December 31, 2015, of which approximately 8.8 million barrels are unavailable for contracting to third parties due to being out of service for maintenance, capital enhancements or used for internal purposes.
(2)
This represents the terminalling facility owned by Buckeye Texas Partners LLC (“Buckeye Texas”), which is 80% owned by us.
 
BORCO Facility
 
BORCO owns a terminalling facility located along the Northwest Providence Channel of Grand Bahama Island, which it uses to operate a fully integrated terminalling business, and offers customers storage, blending and ancillary services including, but not limited to, berthing, heating, transshipment, product treating and bunkering.  Ancillary services provided by BORCO facilitate customer activities within the tank farm and at the jetties.
 
BORCO’s terminalling facility includes more than 80 aboveground storage tanks, which store crude oil, fuel oil and refined petroleum products.  The existing marine infrastructure of BORCO’s terminalling facility consists of three deep-water jetties, which provide six deep-water berths and an inland dock with two berths that serve as the access points to the storage facilities and marine bunkering services.  Certain of these jetties are capable of handling both very large crude carriers and ultra large crude carriers.
 
We own the 500 acres of property on which the BORCO terminalling facility is located.  BORCO leases 330 acres of seabed on which the deep water jetties are located pursuant to a long-term agreement with The Bahamas government that runs through 2057.  BORCO also leases the land on which the inland dock is located pursuant to a long-term agreement with the Freeport Harbour Company that runs through 2067.

Yabucoa Terminal
 
The Yabucoa terminal sits on approximately 250 acres in the southeast of Puerto Rico and includes 44 storage tanks, which store gasoline, jet fuel, diesel, fuel oil and crude oil.  The facility provides terminalling services for the handling, blending and distribution of liquid petroleum products within the Puerto Rico market as well as residual fuel oil and petroleum distillate fuel for the local and regional Caribbean markets.  Access to the Yabucoa terminal is provided through one ship dock, which is leased from the Puerto Rico Ports Authority, two barge docks and an eight-bay truck rack.
 

8

Table of Contents

New York Harbor Terminals
 
The New York Harbor storage and marine terminals, which consist of our Perth Amboy, Port Reading and Raritan Bay terminals, have the ability to provide a link between our inland pipelines and terminals and our BORCO facility, enabling our customers to take advantage of BORCO’s deep water access and ability to aggregate product.  The Perth Amboy facility sits on approximately 250 acres on the Arthur Kill tidal strait in Perth Amboy, New Jersey — six miles from our Linden, New Jersey complex — and has water, pipeline, rail and truck access.  In 2014, we completed a high capacity pipeline connection between Perth Amboy and our Linden hub.  Furthermore, the Perth Amboy terminal includes 51 storage tanks, a dock, and three operational berths, each with articulated loading arms, allowing both ship and barge berthing.  The Port Reading terminal is located on 211 acres in Port Reading, New Jersey and includes 61 storage tanks, a deep-water dock and five operational berths, allowing for both ship and barge berthing.  In addition, the facility has bi-directional pipeline access, rail unloading capabilities, and a six-bay driver-operated truck loading rack.  The Raritan Bay terminal is located on 62 acres on the Raritan River in Perth Amboy, New Jersey, and includes 30 storage tanks, a barge dock and two operational berths.  The Raritan Bay facility also has bi-directional pipeline access and a six-bay driver-operated truck loading rack.  Additionally, the Port Reading and Raritan Bay terminals are NYMEX delivery locations for both gasoline and ultra low sulfur diesel. The Perth Amboy, Port Reading and Raritan Bay terminals have approximately 4 million, 6 million and 5 million barrels of liquid petroleum products storage capacity, respectively.  These terminals extend Buckeye’s connectivity in New York Harbor by offering diverse storage capabilities that include terminalling services for gasoline, blendstocks, distillate and fuel oil.
 
St. Lucia Terminal
 
The St. Lucia terminal sits on approximately 700 acres on Cul de Sac Bay in St. Lucia.  It has over 10 million barrels of crude oil and refined petroleum products storage capacity, has deep-water access capable of berthing very large crude carriers and serves the local market's refined product demand. The facility provides transshipment services for the handling, blending and distribution of crude oil from growing Latin American production to U.S. and global refining centers. Access to the St. Lucia terminal is provided through two ship docks and a truck rack.
 
Corpus Christi Facilities
 
In September 2014, we acquired an 80% interest in Buckeye Texas, which owns storage, petroleum processing and marine terminalling facilities that sit on approximately 730 acres along the Corpus Christi Ship Channel in Texas.  The Corpus Christi facilities have five vessel berths, including three deep-water docks, two 25,000 barrels per day condensate splitters, approximately 6.0 million barrels of liquid petroleum products storage capacity, including a refrigerated and compressed LPG storage complex, along with rail and truck loading/unloading capabilities. The platform also comprises three field gathering facilities with associated storage in the Eagle Ford play and pipeline connectivity that allows Buckeye Texas to move Eagle Ford play crude oil and condensate production directly to the terminalling complex in Corpus Christi. These assets form an integrated system with connectivity from the production in the field to the marine terminal infrastructure and the processing complex in Corpus Christi.

Merchant Services Segment
 
The Merchant Services segment is a wholesale distributor of refined petroleum products in the continental United States and in the Caribbean.  We increase the utilization of our existing pipeline and terminalling assets by marketing refined petroleum products in certain areas served by our pipelines and terminals.  The segment’s customers consist principally of product wholesalers and major commercial users of refined petroleum products including gasoline, propane, ethanol, biodiesel and petroleum distillates such as heating oil, diesel fuel and kerosene.  The segment also provides fuel oil supply and distribution services to third parties in the Caribbean.
 
The Merchant Services segment owns five terminals in Pennsylvania with aggregate storage capacity of approximately 1 million barrels, which are operated by the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment.  Each terminal is equipped with multiple storage tanks and automated truck loading equipment that is available 24 hours a day.  We also own the property on which the terminals are located.
 

9

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth the total gallons of refined petroleum products sold by the Merchant Services segment for the periods indicated (in millions of gallons):
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
Sales volumes
1,215.0

 
2,009.0

 
1,371.5

 
The Merchant Services segment’s operations are segregated into three categories based on the type of fuel delivered and the delivery method:
 
Wholesale — liquid fuels and propane gas are delivered to distributors and large commercial customers.  These customers take delivery of the products using truck loading equipment at storage facilities;
Wholesale Delivered — liquid fuels are delivered to commercial customers, construction companies, school districts and trucking companies through third-party carriers; or via vessel using our marine terminals.
Branded Gasoline — gasoline and on-highway diesel fuel are delivered through third-party trucking companies to independently owned retail gas stations under many leading gasoline brands.
 
The operations of the Merchant Services segment expose us to commodity price risk. The commodity price risk is managed by entering into derivative instruments to offset the effect of commodity price fluctuations on the segment’s inventory and fixed price contracts.  The fair value of our derivative instruments is recorded in our consolidated balance sheets, with the change in fair value recorded in earnings.  The derivative instruments the Merchant Services segment uses consist primarily of futures contracts traded on the NYMEX for the purposes of managing our market price risk from holding physical inventory and entering into physical fixed-price contracts.  A majority of the futures contracts executed are designated as fair value hedges of our refined petroleum inventory.  The changes in fair value of the hedging instruments and hedged items are both recognized in cost of product sales.  However, hedge accounting has not been elected for all of the Merchant Services segment’s derivative instruments.  Fixed-price purchase and sales contracts are generally economically hedged with financial instruments; however, these instruments are not designated in a hedge relationship.  In the cases in which hedge accounting has not been used for physical derivative contracts, changes in the fair values of the financial instruments, which are included in revenue and cost of product sales, generally are offset by changes in the values of the physical derivative contracts which are also derivative instruments whose changes in value are recognized in product sales or cost of product sales.  In addition, hedge accounting has not been elected for financial instruments that have been executed to economically hedge a portion of the Merchant Services segment’s refined petroleum products held in inventory.  The changes in value of the financial instruments that are economically hedging inventory are recognized in cost of product sales.

Discontinuation of Natural Gas Storage Segment
 
In December 2013, the Board of Directors of Buckeye GP (“the Board”) approved a plan to divest the natural gas storage facility and related assets that our former subsidiary, Lodi, owned and operated in Northern California.  We refer to this group of assets as our Natural Gas Storage disposal group.  We reported the results of operations as discontinued operations for all periods presented in these financial statements.  In December 2014, we completed the sale of our Natural Gas Storage disposal group for $102.6 million in cash, net of expenses and working capital adjustments of $2.4 million.  We reported the final working capital adjustments as discontinued operations in the first quarter of 2015. For additional information, see Notes 4 and 5 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
 
Competition and Customers
 
Competitive Strengths
 
We believe that we have the following competitive strengths:
 
We operate in a safe and environmentally responsible manner;
We own and operate high quality assets that are strategically located;
We have stable, long-term relationships with our customers;
We own relatively predictable and stable fee-based businesses with opportunistic revenue generating capabilities that support distribution growth; and
We maintain a conservative financial position with an investment-grade credit rating.
 

10

Table of Contents

Domestic Pipelines & Terminals Segment
 
Generally, pipelines are the lowest cost method for long-haul overland movement of liquid petroleum products.  Therefore, the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s most significant competitors for large volume shipments are other pipelines, some of which are owned or controlled by major integrated oil and gas companies.  Although it is unlikely that a pipeline system comparable in size and scope to the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s pipeline systems will be built in the foreseeable future, new pipelines (including pipeline segments that connect with existing pipeline systems) could be built to effectively compete with the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment in particular locations.

The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment competes with marine transportation in some areas.  Tankers and barges on the Great Lakes account for some of the volume to certain Michigan, Ohio and upstate New York locations during the approximately eight non-winter months of the year.  Barges are presently a competitive factor for deliveries to and within the New York City area, the Pittsburgh area and locations on the Ohio River, such as Cincinnati, Ohio and locations on the Mississippi River, such as St. Louis, Missouri.  Additionally, the South Portland and Bangor, Maine terminals, and the pipeline connecting these terminals, compete with regional barge-supplied terminals.
 
Trucks competitively deliver liquid petroleum products in a number of areas that the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment serves.  While their costs may not be competitive for longer hauls or large volume shipments, trucks compete effectively for smaller volumes in many local areas.  The availability of truck transportation places a significant competitive constraint on the ability of the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment to increase its tariff rates.
 
Privately arranged exchanges of liquid petroleum products between marketers in different locations are another form of competition.  Generally, such exchanges reduce both parties’ costs by eliminating or reducing transportation charges.  In addition, consolidation among refiners and marketers that has accelerated in recent years has altered distribution patterns, reducing demand for transportation services in some markets and increasing them in other markets.
 
The production and use of biofuels may be a competitive factor in that, to the extent the usage of biofuels increases, some alternative means of transport that compete with our pipelines may be able to provide transportation services for biofuels that our pipelines cannot because of safety or pipeline integrity issues.  In particular, railroads competitively deliver biofuels to a number of areas and, therefore, are a significant competitor of pipelines with respect to biofuels.  Biofuel usage may also create opportunities for additional pipeline transportation and blending opportunities, if such biofuels can be transported through our pipelines, although that potential cannot be quantified at present.
 
Distribution of liquid petroleum products depends to a large extent upon the location and capacity of refineries.  Because the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s business is largely driven by the consumption of fuel in its delivery areas and the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s pipelines have numerous source points, generally we do not believe that the expansion or shutdown of any particular refinery is likely, in most instances, to have a material effect on the business of the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment.  As discussed in “Item 1A, Risk Factors”, however, a significant decline in production at the Wood River refinery, Paulsboro refinery or Lima refinery, or a fundamental change in the primary sources or supply of petroleum products to a region, could materially impact the business of the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment.
 
The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment also generally competes with other terminals in the same geographic market.  Many competitive terminals are owned by major integrated oil and gas companies.  These major oil and gas companies may have the opportunity for product exchanges that are not available to the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s terminals.  While the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s terminal throughput fees are not regulated, they are subject to price competition from competitive terminals and alternate modes of transporting liquid petroleum products to end-users such as retail gasoline stations.
 
We also compete with independent pipeline companies, engineering firms, major integrated oil and gas companies and chemical companies to operate and maintain logistic assets for third-party owners.  In addition, in some instances it can be either more cost-effective or strategic for certain companies to operate and maintain their own pipelines as opposed to contracting with the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment for such services.  Numerous engineering and construction firms compete with the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment for construction management business.


11

Table of Contents

Global Marine Terminals Segment
 
Our Global Marine Terminals segment primarily competes with other marine terminals in the Caribbean, in New York Harbor and in the Gulf Coast.  Our terminalling facilities on Grand Bahama Island, The Bahamas and St. Lucia face competition from multiple proprietary or third-party terminal operators located elsewhere in the Caribbean region.  However, the geographical locations, deep drafts, storage capacity and ancillary service capabilities of our facilities provide certain advantages to our customers for handling and storing products for export to other locations within the Caribbean, North and South America, Europe, and Asia.  Internal transfer pricing of certain regional facilities and discounted incentive storage and handling rates at independent third-party facilities supported by quasi national oil companies adds competition for handling of remaining product demand in certain areas.

Our facility in Yabucoa, Puerto Rico faces competition for residual fuel oil storage as a result of the method by which the local utility company, a significant fuel oil user, sources fuel for their power generation needs.  Additionally, competition exists for clean products storage and throughput because of other third-party terminals on the island that have geographical advantages over the Yabucoa facility.
 
Our Perth Amboy, Port Reading, and Raritan Bay facilities, located in the New York Harbor, generally compete with pipelines and terminals owned by major oil and gas companies and major pipeline and terminal operators in the same geographic market as our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment (as discussed above).

Our Corpus Christi facility, owned by Buckeye Texas, does not currently compete for customers, as it is almost fully contracted to one customer under long-term take-or-pay arrangements.
 
Merchant Services Segment
 
The Merchant Services segment competes with major energy companies, their marketing affiliates and independent gatherers, investment banks that have established trading platforms, master limited partnerships with marketing businesses, and brokers and marketers of widely varying sizes, financial resources and experience.  Some of these competitors have capital resources greater than the Merchant Services segment, and control greater supplies of refined petroleum products.
 
Customers
 
For the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, no customer contributed 10% or more of our consolidated revenue.  In the Global Marine Terminals segment, storage revenue represented approximately 77% of BORCO’s total revenue for the year ended December 31, 2015.  Currently, BORCO has a limited number of long-term storage customers, consisting of major oil companies, energy companies, physical traders and one national oil company.  For the year ended December 31, 2015, approximately 26% and 61% of BORCO’s storage revenue was derived from the top one and the top three customers, respectively.  We expect BORCO to continue to derive substantially all of its total revenue from a small number of customers in the future.
 
Seasonality
 
The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s mix and volume of products transported and stored tends to vary seasonally.  Declines in demand for heating oil during the summer months are, to a certain extent, offset by increased demand for gasoline and jet fuel.  Overall, this segment’s business has been only moderately seasonal, with somewhat lower than average volumes being transported and stored during March, April and May and somewhat higher than average volumes being transported and stored in November, December and January.
 
The Merchant Services segment’s mix and volume of product sales tend to vary seasonally, with the fourth and first quarters’ volumes generally being higher than the second and third quarters, primarily due to the increased demand for home heating oil in the winter months.
 
The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals and Merchant Services segments both benefit from increased sales of heating oil and butane blending activities at our terminals during the winter months.  From mid-September through mid-March, we are able to blend butane into various grades of gasoline.
 
The Global Marine Terminals segment’s mix and volume of products stored does not vary significantly by season.


12

Table of Contents

Employees
 
Except as noted below, we are managed and operated by employees of Buckeye Pipe Line Services Company (“Services Company”).  We reimburse Services Company for the cost of providing employee services pursuant to a services agreement.  At December 31, 2015, Services Company had approximately 1,490 employees, approximately 310 of whom were represented by labor unions.  Additionally, at December 31, 2015, certain of our wholly owned subsidiaries had approximately 275 employees, approximately 160 of whom are employed at our BORCO facility.  We have never experienced any work stoppages or other significant labor problems. 

Regulation
 
General
 
We are subject to extensive laws and regulations and resulting regulatory oversight by numerous federal, state and local departments and agencies, many of which are authorized by statute to issue rules and regulations binding on the pipeline and natural gas storage industries, related businesses, and individual participants.  In some states, we are subject to the jurisdiction of public utility commissions and state corporation commissions, which have authority over, among other things, intrastate tariffs, the issuance of debt and equity securities, transfers of assets and safety.  The failure to comply with such laws and regulations can result in substantial penalties.  The regulatory burden on our operations increases our cost of doing business and, consequently, affects our profitability.  However, except for certain exemptions that apply to smaller companies, we do not believe that we are affected in a significantly different manner by these laws and regulations than are our competitors.
 
The following is a discussion of certain laws and regulations affecting us.  However, this discussion should not be relied upon as an exhaustive review of all regulatory considerations affecting our business and operations.
 
Rate Regulation
 
Overview BPLC, Wood River, BPL Transportation, Buckeye Linden Pipe Line Company LLC (“Buckeye Linden”) and NORCO operate pipelines subject to the regulatory jurisdiction of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) under the Interstate Commerce Act, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and the Department of Energy Organization Act.  FERC regulations require that interstate oil pipeline rates be posted publicly and that these rates be “just and reasonable” and not unduly discriminatory.  FERC regulations also enforce common carrier obligations and specify a uniform system of accounts, among certain other obligations.
 
The generic oil pipeline regulations issued under the Energy Policy Act of 1992 rely primarily on an index methodology that allows a pipeline to change its rates in accordance with an index that the FERC believes reflects cost changes appropriate for application to pipeline rates.  In December 2015, the FERC amended its regulations to change the index to the Producer Price Index (“PPI”) - finished goods plus 1.23% effective July 1, 2016.   
 
The indexing methodology is used to establish rates on the pipelines owned by Wood River, BPL Transportation, Buckeye Linden and NORCO, and for certain rates charged by BPLC, and such rates are therefore subject to change annually according to the index. If the index is negative in a future period, we could be required to reduce the rates charged by Wood River, BPL Transportation, Buckeye Linden and NORCO, and certain rates charged by BPLC, if they exceed the new maximum allowable rate.  Shippers may file protests against the application of the index to the rates of an individual pipeline and may also file complaints against indexed rates as being unjust and unreasonable, subject to the FERC’s standards.
 
Under the FERC’s rules, as one alternative to indexed rates, a pipeline is allowed to charge market-based rates if the pipeline establishes that it does not possess significant market power in a particular market. BPLC charges market-based rates in its competitive markets and index-based rates in certain of its other markets.
 
Other types of rate regulation.  Laurel operates a pipeline in intrastate service across Pennsylvania, and its tariff rates are regulated by the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission.  Wood River operates a pipeline providing some intrastate services in Illinois, and tariff rates related to this pipeline are regulated by the Illinois Commerce Commission.
 

13

Table of Contents

Environmental Regulation
 
We are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment. Although we believe that our operations comply in all material respects with applicable environmental laws and regulations, risks of substantial liabilities are inherent in pipeline, terminalling and processing operations, and we may incur material environmental liabilities in the future. Moreover, it is possible that other developments, such as increasingly rigorous environmental laws, regulations and enforcement policies, and claims for damages to property or injuries to persons resulting from our operations, could result in substantial costs and liabilities to us.  See “Item 3, Legal Proceedings.”  The following is a summary of the significant current environmental laws and regulations to which our business operations are subject and for which compliance may require material capital expenditures or have a material adverse impact on our results of operations or financial position.
 
The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA”) amended certain provisions of the federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, commonly referred to as the Clean Water Act (“CWA”), and other statutes, as they pertain to the prevention of and response to petroleum product spills into navigable waters.  The OPA subjects owners of facilities to strict joint and several liability for all containment and clean-up costs and certain other damages arising from a spill. The CWA provides penalties for the discharge of petroleum products in reportable quantities and imposes substantial liability for the costs of removing a spill. State laws for the control of water pollution also provide varying civil and criminal penalties and liabilities in the case of releases of petroleum or its derivatives into surface waters or into the ground.
 
Contamination resulting from spills or releases of liquid petroleum products sometimes occurs in the petroleum pipeline, terminalling and processing industry. Our pipelines cross, and certain facilities are located near, numerous navigable rivers and streams.  Although we believe that we comply in all material respects with the spill prevention, control and countermeasure requirements of federal laws, any spill or other release of petroleum products into navigable waters may result in material costs and liabilities to us.
 
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), as amended, establishes a comprehensive program of regulation of “hazardous wastes.”  Hazardous waste generators, transporters, and owners or operators of hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities must comply with regulations designed to ensure detailed tracking, handling and monitoring of these wastes.  RCRA also regulates the disposal of certain non-hazardous wastes.  As a result of these regulations, certain wastes typically generated by pipeline, terminalling and processing operations are considered “hazardous wastes”, “special wastes” or regulated solid waste.  Hazardous wastes are subject to more rigorous and costly disposal requirements than are non-hazardous wastes.  Changes in any of the RCRA regulations could have a material adverse effect on our maintenance capital expenditures and operating expenses.

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”), also known as “Superfund,” governs the release or threat of release of a “hazardous substance.” Although CERCLA contains a “petroleum exclusion,” that provision generally applies only to unused product not contaminated by contact with other substances, and may exclude product recovered after a release, as well as contact water.  A release of a hazardous substance, whether on or off-site, may subject the generator of that substance or the owner of the property on which the release occurred to joint and several liability under CERCLA for the costs of clean-up and other remedial action.  Pipeline and facility maintenance and other activities in the ordinary course of our business generate “hazardous substances.”  As a result, to the extent a hazardous substance generated by us or our predecessors is released or was released or otherwise disposed of in the past, we may in the future be required to remediate the contaminated property. Governmental authorities such as the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), and in some instances third parties, are authorized under CERCLA to seek to recover remediation and other costs from responsible persons, without regard to fault or the legality of the original disposal.  In addition to our potential liability as a generator of a “hazardous substance,” to the extent that our property or right-of-way is affected by a release of hazardous substances such that it becomes part of a Superfund and other hazardous waste site, we may be responsible under CERCLA for all or part of the costs required to clean up that site, which could be material.
 
The Clean Air Act, amended by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (the “Amendments”), imposes controls on the emission of pollutants into the air.  The Amendments required states to develop facility-wide permitting programs to comply with a wide range of federal air pollution regulatory programs. States also have their own air pollution regulatory programs that impose permitting and control requirements in addition to the federal requirements. EPA has promulgated greenhouse gas (“GHG”) regulations and is otherwise increasing its scrutiny of the oil and gas industry.  It is possible that new or more stringent controls will be imposed on us through these programs which could have a material adverse effect on our maintenance capital expenditures and operating expenses.  In addition, certain states and regions have adopted or are considering various GHG regulations which may require controls separate from or in conjunction with federal programs.
 

14

Table of Contents

We are also subject to other environmental laws and regulations adopted by the various states, localities and territories in which we operate.  In certain instances, the regulatory standards adopted by the states and/or territories are more stringent than applicable federal laws.  In addition, our BORCO terminal in The Bahamas and our St. Lucia terminal are subject to the environmental regulatory programs applicable in those countries.  While these regulatory programs are today less stringent than in the United States, they have the potential to impose material liabilities on us, particularly in the event of a spill or other release, and if they are made more stringent in the future, we could be required to make significant capital expenditures to meet the new standards.
 
Pipeline and Terminal Maintenance and Safety Regulation
 
The pipelines we operate are subject to regulation by the U.S. Department of Transportation (“DOT”) and its agency, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (“PHMSA”), under the Pipeline Safety Act (“PSA”). The PSA and PHMSA implement regulations to govern the design, installation, testing, construction, operation, replacement and management of pipeline facilities and require any entity that owns or operates pipeline facilities to comply with applicable safety standards, to establish and maintain plans for inspection and maintenance and to comply with such plans and programs. Among other things, these programs include: integrity management requirements for pipelines located in high consequence areas, operator qualification program requirements, control room management plan, public awareness plan, and drug & alcohol plan requirements. Certain states in which we operate participate in oversight and inspection of intrastate and interstate pipeline facilities through certifications and agreements with PHMSA. For intrastate pipelines located in PHMSA certified states, the State may impose additional or more stringent pipeline safety regulations as long as they are compatible with minimum PHMSA standards.

We believe that we currently comply in all material respects with the pipeline safety laws and regulations. However, the industry, including us, will incur additional pipeline and tank integrity expenditures in the future, and we are likely to incur increased operating costs based on these and other government regulations.
 
The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty and Job Creation Act of 2011 (“PSA 2011”) was signed into law on January 3, 2012. PHMSA has completed certain of the studies and rulemaking mandated by PSA 2011. A number of mandates remain outstanding, however, that will either directly or potentially impact the oil and gas industry. These include studies and rules regarding, among other things, expansion of integrity management requirements, leak detection, automatic and remote shut off valves, incident notification, maximum operating pressure verification, and public awareness. PHMSA proposed rules regarding expansion of integrity management requirements and leak detection to liquid pipelines and incident notification, among other things, which would impact both gas (49 CFR Part 192) and liquid (49 CFR Part 195) regulations. Those rules are not yet final. PSA 2011 was up for reauthorization by Congress in late 2015 but such reauthorization is not yet final.
 
We are also subject to the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act (“OSHA”) and comparable state statutes.  We believe that our operations comply in all material respects with OSHA requirements, including general industry standards, record-keeping and the training and monitoring of occupational exposures.
 
We cannot predict whether or in what form any new legislation or regulatory requirements might be enacted or adopted or the costs of compliance. In general, any such new regulations could increase operating costs and impose additional capital expenditure requirements, but we do not presently expect that such costs or capital expenditure requirements would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
 
Environmental Hazards and Insurance
 
Our business involves a variety of risks, including the risk of natural disasters, adverse weather, fire, explosions, and equipment failures, any of which could lead to environmental hazards such as crude oil and petroleum product spills and other releases.  If any of these should occur, we could incur legal defense costs and environmental remediation costs, and could be required to pay amounts due to injury, loss of life, damage or destruction to property, natural resources and equipment, pollution or environmental damage, regulatory investigation and penalties and suspension of operations.
 

15

Table of Contents

We are covered by site pollution incident legal liability insurance policies with per incident and aggregate limits of $100.0 million, subject to a maximum self-insured retention of $5.0 million.  The policies include coverage for sudden and accidental or gradual releases at our listed sites, and also include a contractor’s pollution coverage endorsement.  The policies insure: (i) claims, remediation costs, and associated legal defense expenses for pollution conditions at, or migrating from, a covered location, and (ii) the transportation risks associated with moving waste from a covered location to any location for unloading or disposal.  The premises pollution liability policies contain exclusions, conditions, and limitations that could apply to a particular pollution claim, and may not cover all claims or liabilities we incur.  The insurance policies expire on May 1, 2017.
 
In addition to the site pollution incident legal liability insurance policies, we maintain casualty insurance policies that provide coverage for claims involving sudden and accidental releases with aggregate and per occurrence limits of $400 million.  Coverage under the casualty insurance is secondary to the site pollution incident legal liability policies for sudden and accidental releases.  The pollution coverage provided in the casualty insurance policies contains exclusions, definitions, conditions and limitations that could apply to a particular pollution claim, and may not cover all claims or liabilities we incur.  The insurance policies expire on May 1, 2016.

We generally are not entitled to seek indemnification from our contractual counterparties for any environmental damage caused by the release of products we store, throughput or transport for such counterparties. As discussed above, we maintain insurance policies that are designed to mitigate the risk that we may incur in connection with any such release of products from our facilities, and we believe that the policy limits under site pollution incident legal liability and casualty insurance policies are within the range that is customary for entities of our size that operate in our business segments and are appropriate for our business.
 
We attempt to reduce our exposure to third-party liability by requiring indemnification and access to third party insurance from our contractors or entities who require access to our facilities and our right-of-way. We have requirements for limits of insurance provided by third parties which we believe are in accordance with industry standards and proof of third-party insurance documentation is retained prior to commencement of work.
 
We have written plans for responding to emergencies along our pipeline systems and at our terminalling and processing facilities.  These plans, which describe the organization, responsibilities and actions for responding to emergencies, are reviewed annually and updated as necessary.  Our facilities are designed with product containment structures, and we maintain various additional crude oil containment and recovery equipment that would be deployed in the event of an emergency.  We are a member of ten oil spill cooperatives or mutual aid groups, and we maintain more than 50 contract relationships with United States Coast Guard certified spill response organizations, spill response contractors and remediation management consultants.  In 2013, we contracted with a third-party to provide enterprise-wide emergency spill response services for certain incidents, which includes the strategic staging of response equipment at our BORCO, Yabucoa and St. Lucia terminals.  This service contract provides access to over 100 additional local United States Coast Guard certified spill response organizations.  This further ensures access to spill response equipment (including boom, recovery pumps, response vehicles, response vessels and response trailers), monitoring and sampling equipment, personal protective equipment and technical expertise needed to respond to an emergency event.  We also perform spill response drills to review and exercise the response capabilities of our personnel, contractors and emergency management agencies.  Additionally, we have a Crisis Management Team within our organization to provide strategic direction, ensure availability of company resources and manage communications in the event of an emergency situation.
 
Available Information
 
We file annual, quarterly and current reports and other documents with the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.  The public can obtain any documents that we file with the SEC at www.sec.gov.  We also make available free of charge our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as soon as reasonably practicable after filing such materials with, or furnishing such materials to, the SEC, on or through our internet website, www.buckeye.com.  We are not including the information contained on our website as a part of, or incorporating it by reference into, this Report.
 
You can also find information about us at the offices of the NYSE, 20 Broad Street, New York, New York 10005 or at the NYSE’s internet website, www.nyse.com.


16

Table of Contents

Item 1A.    Risk Factors
 
There are many factors that may affect us and investments in us.  Security holders and potential investors in our securities should carefully consider the risk factors set forth below, as well as the discussion of other factors that could affect us or investments in us included elsewhere in this Report.  If one or more of these risks were to materialize, our business, financial position or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.  We are identifying these risk factors as important risk factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in any written or oral forward-looking statements made by us or on our behalf.
 
Risks Inherent in our Business
 
Changes in petroleum demand and distribution and weakness in the United States economy may adversely affect our business.
 
Demand for the services we provide depends upon the demand for the products we handle in the regions we serve and the supply of products in the regions connected to our pipelines or from which our customers source products handled by our terminals.  Prevailing economic conditions, refined petroleum product, fuel oil and crude oil price levels and weather affect the demand for liquid petroleum products.  Changes in transportation and travel patterns in the areas served by our pipelines also affect the demand for petroleum products because a substantial portion of the refined petroleum products transported by our pipelines and throughput at our terminals is ultimately used as fuel for motor vehicles and aircraft. If these factors result in a decline in demand for refined petroleum products, our business would be particularly susceptible to adverse effects because we operate without the benefit of either exclusive franchises from government entities or long-term contracts.
 
Recent increases in demand for the services we provide in the Caribbean have been driven by increases in crude oil production from Latin America, crude oil movements from South America to Asia, a forward market structure that incentivizes storage, and Latin America demand for clean petroleum products from the United States and Europe.  Changes in these and other global patterns of supply and demand for fuel oil, crude oil and clean petroleum products could affect the demand for the services we provide in the Caribbean and the prices we can charge for those services.
 
In recent years, the federal government has enacted renewable fuel or energy efficiency statutory mandates that may have the impact over time of reducing the demand for fuel oil or clean refined petroleum products, particularly with respect to gasoline, in certain markets.  Other legislative changes may similarly alter the expected demand and supply projections for refined petroleum products in ways that cannot be predicted.
 
Energy conservation, changing sources of supply, structural changes in the oil industry and new energy technologies also could adversely affect our business.  We cannot predict or control the effect of these factors on us.
 
Economic conditions worldwide have from time to time contributed to slowdowns in the oil and gas industry, as well as in the specific segments and markets in which we operate, resulting in reduced oil production, reduced supply or demand and increased price competition for our products and services.  In addition, economic conditions could result in a loss of customers in our operating segments because their access to the capital necessary to purchase services we provide is limited.  Our operating results may also be affected by uncertain or changing economic conditions in certain regions of the United States.  If global economic and market conditions (including volatility or sustained weakness in commodity markets) or economic conditions in the United States remain uncertain or persist, spread or deteriorate further, we may experience material impacts on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

A significant decline in production at certain refineries served by certain of our pipelines and terminals, or a fundamental change in the primary source of supply of petroleum products to a region, could materially reduce the volume of liquid petroleum products we transport and adversely impact our operating results.
 
Refineries that are the primary source of supply of product to our pipelines and terminals could partially or completely shut down their operations, temporarily or permanently, due to factors such as unscheduled maintenance, catastrophes, labor difficulties, environmental proceedings or other litigation, loss of significant downstream customers; or legislation or regulation that adversely impacts the economics of refinery operations.  For example, a significant decline in production at the Wood River refinery, Paulsboro refinery or Lima refinery could negatively impact the financial performance of such assets and adversely affect our business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
 

17

Table of Contents

In addition, if there is a fundamental shift in the primary source of supply of petroleum products to a region our pipelines serve and our pipeline infrastructure in the region is not well-suited to serve the new primary source, the performance of such assets could be negatively impacted, and adversely affect our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
 
Competition could adversely affect our operating results.
 
Generally, pipelines are the lowest cost method for long-haul overland movement of liquid petroleum products. Therefore, the most significant competitors for large volume shipments in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment are other existing pipelines, some of which are owned or controlled by major integrated oil and gas companies.  In addition, new pipelines (including pipeline segments that connect with existing pipeline systems) could be built to effectively compete with us in particular locations.
 
Our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment competes with marine transportation in some areas.  Tankers and barges on the Great Lakes account for some of the volume to certain Michigan, Ohio and upstate New York locations during the approximately eight non-winter months of the year.  Barges are presently a competitive factor for deliveries to the New York City area, the Pittsburgh area, Connecticut and locations on the Ohio River such as Cincinnati, Ohio and locations on the Mississippi River, such as St. Louis, Missouri.  Additionally, our South Portland and Bangor, Maine terminals are mainly supplied by overseas ships from Canada and Europe.
 
Trucks competitively deliver liquid petroleum products in a number of areas that we serve.  While their costs may not be competitive for longer hauls or large volume shipments, trucks compete effectively for incremental and marginal volumes in many areas that we serve.  The availability of truck transportation places a significant competitive constraint on our ability to increase our tariff rates.
 
Privately arranged exchanges of liquid petroleum products between marketers in different locations are another form of competition for our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment.  Generally, these exchanges reduce both parties’ costs by eliminating or reducing transportation charges.  In addition, consolidation among refiners and marketers, which has accelerated in recent years, has altered distribution patterns, reducing demand for transportation services in some markets and increasing them in other markets.
 
The Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment also generally competes with other terminals in the same geographic market.  Many competitive terminals are owned by major integrated oil and gas companies.  These major oil and gas companies may have the opportunity for product exchanges that are not available to the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s terminals.  While the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment’s terminal throughput fees are not regulated, they are subject to price competition from competitive terminals and alternate modes of delivering liquid petroleum products to end-users such as retail gasoline stations.
 
Our Global Marine Terminals segment primarily competes with other marine terminals in the Caribbean, in New York Harbor and in the Gulf Coast.  Many competitive terminals are owned by major energy companies, refiners and master limited partnerships.  Although the Global Marine Terminals segment’s storage fees are not regulated, the segment is subject to price competition from competitive terminals.  Our Global Marine Terminals segment also competes with alternatives to terminal storage of crude oil and refined petroleum products, such as floating storage and lightering, which could reduce demand for our Caribbean terminalling services.

Our Merchant Services segment buys and sells refined petroleum products in connection with its marketing activities, and must compete with major energy companies, their marketing affiliates, and independent brokers and marketers of widely varying sizes, financial resources and experience. Some of these companies have superior access to capital resources, which could affect our ability to effectively compete with them.
 
All of these competitive pressures could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
 

18

Table of Contents

Mergers among our customers and competitors could result in lower volumes being shipped on our pipelines and stored in our terminals, thereby reducing the amount of cash we generate.
 
Mergers between existing customers could provide strong economic incentives for the combined entities to utilize their existing pipeline and terminal systems instead of ours.  As a result, we could lose some or all of the volumes and associated revenues from these customers, and we could experience difficulty in replacing those lost volumes and revenues.  Because most of our operating costs are fixed, a reduction in volumes would result in not only a reduction of revenues, but also a decline in Adjusted EBITDA (see “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” in Item 7 for a discussion of Adjusted EBITDA, which is our primary measure of performance), net income and cash flow of a similar magnitude, which would reduce our ability to meet our financial obligations and pay cash distributions.
 
We are a holding company and depend entirely on cash flows from our operating subsidiaries to service our debt obligations and pay cash distributions to our unitholders.
 
We are a holding company with no material operations, and, as a result, our ability to pay distributions to our unitholders and to service our debt obligations is dependent upon the earnings and cash flows of our operating subsidiaries.  If we do not receive distribution of earnings, loans or other payments from our operating subsidiaries, we will not be able to meet our debt service obligations or to make cash distributions to our unitholders.  Among other things, this would adversely affect the market price of our LP Units.  We are currently bound by the terms of our Credit Facility, which prohibit us from making distributions to our unitholders if a default under the Credit Facility exists at the time of the distribution or would result from the distribution.  Approval from the Central Bank of The Bahamas will be required before BORCO can make distributions to us.  Our operating subsidiaries may from time to time incur additional indebtedness under agreements that contain restrictions which could further limit each operating subsidiary’s ability to make distributions to us.

We may incur unknown and contingent liabilities from assets we have acquired.
 
Some of the assets we have acquired have been used for many years to distribute, store or transport petroleum products.  Releases from terminals or along pipeline rights-of-way may have occurred prior to our acquisition.  In addition, releases may have occurred in the past that have not yet been discovered, which could require costly future remediation.
 
We perform a certain level of diligence in connection with our acquisitions and attempt to ascertain the extent of liabilities that might be associated with an acquired facility, but there may be unknown and contingent liabilities related to our acquisitions of which we are unaware.
 
If a significant release or event occurred in the past at any of our acquired assets and we are responsible for all or a significant portion of the liability associated with such release or event, it could adversely affect our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.  We could be liable for unknown obligations relating to any of our acquired assets, for which indemnification or insurance is not available, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flow.

If we incorrectly predict the future results of acquired operations or assets, we may not realize all of the benefits we expect from an acquisitionWe may make dispositions on terms that are less favorable than we anticipated.
 
Part of our business strategy includes making acquisitions and, when appropriate, dispositions.  In evaluating acquisitions and dispositions, we prepare one or more financial cases based on a number of business, industry, economic, legal, regulatory, and other assumptions applicable to the proposed transaction.  Although we expect a reasonable basis will exist for those assumptions, the assumptions typically involve current estimates of future conditions.  Many assumptions are beyond our control and may not materialize.  Because of the uncertainty and risk of inaccuracy associated with these assumptions, including financial projections, we may not realize the full benefits we anticipate from an acquisition, or we may encounter unanticipated difficulties locating buyers and securing favorable terms for dispositions, each of which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flow.  Dispositions may also involve continued financial involvement in the divested business, such as through continuing minority equity ownership, guarantees, indemnities or other financial obligations.  Under these arrangements, performance by the divested businesses or other conditions outside of our control could adversely affect our future financial results.
 

19

Table of Contents

Potential future acquisitions and organic growth projects, if any, may affect our business by substantially increasing the level of our indebtedness and contingent liabilities and increasing the risks of our being unable to effectively complete and integrate these new operations.
 
From time to time, we evaluate and acquire assets and businesses that we believe complement our existing assets and businesses.  If we consummate any future acquisitions, our capitalization and results of operations may change significantly. We also routinely execute organic growth projects that complement our existing assets. Our decisions regarding new organic growth projects rely on numerous estimates, including predictions of future demand for our services, future supply shifts, crude oil and refined products production estimates, commodity price environments, economic conditions and potential changes in the financial condition of our customers. Our predictions of such factors could cause us to forego certain investments or to lose opportunities to competitors who make investments based on more aggressive predictions. Acquisitions and organic growth projects, including the integration of assets into our existing businesses, may require substantial capital.
 
Acquisitions and organic growth projects involve numerous risks, including difficulties in the assimilation of the assets and operations of the acquired businesses, inefficiencies and difficulties that arise because of unfamiliarity with new assets and the businesses associated with them and new geographic areas and the diversion of management’s attention from other business concerns.  Further, we may experience unanticipated delays in realizing the benefits of an acquisition or project or we may be unable to integrate certain assets to the extent such assets relate to a business for which we have no or limited experience.  Our failure to properly assess the levels of capital or time required to acquire or build and integrate these assets, or our failure to accurately predict the returns from these assets could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
 
Debt securities we issue are, and will continue to be, junior to claims of our operating subsidiaries’ creditors.
 
Our outstanding debt securities are structurally subordinated to the claims of our operating subsidiaries’ creditors. In addition, any debt securities we issue in the future will likewise be subordinated in the same manner.  Holders of the debt securities will not be creditors of our operating subsidiaries. Our claim to the assets of our operating subsidiaries derives from our own ownership interests in those operating subsidiaries. Claims of our operating subsidiaries’ creditors will generally have priority as to the assets of our operating subsidiaries over our own ownership interests and will therefore have priority over the holders of our debt, including our debt securities.
 
Limited access to the debt and equity markets could adversely affect our business.
 
Our ability to acquire assets or businesses or make other growth capital investments depends on whether we can access adequate financing. Changes in the debt and equity markets, including market disruptions, limited liquidity, and interest rate volatility, may limit our access to the capital markets, increase the cost of financing and adversely impact our ability to refinance maturing debt. Instability in the financial markets may increase our cost of capital while reducing the availability of funds, affecting our ability to raise capital. If access to the debt and equity markets were limited or not available, our ability to grow our business through acquisitions or other capital investments could be restricted, and it is not certain if other adequate financing options would be available to us on terms and conditions that are acceptable.  Any disruption could require us to take additional measures to conserve cash until the markets stabilize or until we can arrange alternative credit arrangements or other funding for our business needs.  Such measures could include reducing or delaying investment activities, reducing our operating expenses, limiting our distributions or reducing other uses of cash. Under such circumstances, we may be unable to execute our growth strategy or take advantage of other business opportunities, which could negatively impact our business.
 
Our rate structures are subject to regulation and change by FERC; required changes could be adverse.
 
BPLC, Wood River, BPL Transportation, Buckeye Linden and NORCO are interstate common carriers regulated by FERC under the Interstate Commerce Act, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 and the Department of Energy Organization Act.  FERC’s primary ratemaking methodology is indexing rates for inflation.  Where circumstances justify it, FERC permits pipelines to use one of three alternatives to index-based rates: market-based, cost-based, or settlement-based rates. A pipeline is allowed to charge (1) market-based rates if the pipeline establishes that it does not possess significant market power in a particular market, (2) cost-based rates if the pipeline establishes that its costs substantially exceed its indexed rates, and (3) settlement-based rates if the rates are agreed by all shippers receiving a service.


20

Table of Contents

The indexing methodology is used to establish rates on the pipelines owned by Wood River, BPL Transportation, Buckeye Linden and NORCO, and for certain rates charged by BPLC.  In December 2015, FERC amended its regulations to change the index to the Producer Price Index (“PPI”) — finished goods plus 1.23% effective July 1, 2016.  If the index were to be negative, we could be required to reduce the rates charged by Wood River, BPL Transportation, Buckeye Linden and NORCO, and certain rates charged by BPLC, if they exceed the new maximum allowable rate.  In addition, changes in the PPI might not fully reflect actual increases in the costs associated with these pipelines, thus potentially hampering our ability to recover our costs by relying on the index.  Where circumstances justify it, FERC permits pipelines to use one of three alternatives to indexing—pipelines may seek to use market-based, cost-based, or settlement-based rates.
 
In addition to the risks described above, at any time shippers on any of our FERC-regulated pipelines have the right to challenge the application of the index to a pipeline’s rates or the underlying rates themselves as being unjust and unreasonable, subject to the FERC’s cost-of-service standards or that market-based authority is no longer justified because we possess significant market power in a particular market.  Such shipper challenges may seek adjustments to our rates prospectively and, subject to limitations, for certain past periods.  If a significant shipper challenge were to result in an outcome that is unfavorable to us, our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows could be adversely impacted.

Climate change legislation or regulations restricting emissions of “greenhouse gases” or setting fuel economy or air quality standards could result in increased operating costs or reduced demand for the liquid petroleum products and other hydrocarbon products that we transport, store or otherwise handle in connection with our business.
 
In recent years, federal authorities such as the EPA and various state regulatory bodies have increasingly sought to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other “greenhouse gases” (“GHG”).  Such regulation has targeted emissions from large industrial sources, such as factories, refineries and other manufacturing facilities, and for increasingly large classes of motor vehicles.
 
While most of the currently effective regulations have not had a material effect on our operations, expansions of the existing regulations or any future laws or regulations that may be adopted to address GHG emissions could require us to incur additional costs to reduce emissions of GHG associated with our operations. The effect on our operations could include increased costs to operate and maintain our facilities, measure and report our emissions, install new emission controls on our facilities, acquire allowances to authorize our GHG emissions, pay any taxes related to our greenhouse gas emissions and administer and manage a GHG emissions program. While we may be able to include some or all of such increased costs in the rates we charge, such recovery of costs is uncertain and may depend on events beyond our control, including the outcome of future rate proceedings before the FERC and the provisions of any final regulations. In addition, laws or regulations regarding fuel economy, air quality or GHG gas emissions (for motor vehicles or otherwise) could include efficiency requirements or other methods of curbing carbon emissions that could adversely affect demand for the liquid petroleum products and other hydrocarbon products that we transport, store or otherwise handle in connection with our business. A significant decrease in demand for petroleum products would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
 
Environmental regulation may impose significant costs and liabilities on us.
 
We are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment. Risks of substantial environmental liabilities are inherent in our operations, and we cannot assure you that we will not incur material environmental liabilities.  Additionally, our costs could increase significantly, and we could face substantial liabilities, if, among other developments:
 
environmental laws, regulations and enforcement policies become more rigorous; or
claims for property damage or personal injury resulting from our operations are filed.
 
Existing or future state or federal government regulations relating to certain chemicals or additives in gasoline or diesel fuel could require capital expenditures or result in lower pipeline volumes and thereby adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows.
 
Changes made to governmental regulations governing the components of liquid petroleum products may necessitate changes to our pipelines and terminals which may require significant capital expenditures or result in lower pipeline volumes.  For instance, the increasing use of ethanol as a fuel additive, which is blended with gasoline at product terminals, may lead to reduced pipeline volumes and revenue which may not be totally offset by increased terminal blending fees we may receive at our terminals.


21

Table of Contents

DOT and state-level regulations may impose significant costs and liabilities on us.
 
Our pipeline operations are subject to regulation by the DOT and by some of the states in which we do business.  Certain states, particularly California, have been reviewing pipeline safety regulations and increasing inspections and audits.  These regulations require, among other things, that pipeline operators engage in a regular program of pipeline integrity testing to assess, evaluate, repair and validate the integrity of their pipelines, which, in the event of a leak or failure, could affect populated areas, unusually sensitive environmental areas or commercially navigable waterways.  In response to these regulations, we conduct pipeline integrity tests on an ongoing and regular basis.  Depending on the results of these integrity tests, we could incur significant and unexpected capital and operating expenditures, not accounted for in anticipated capital or operating budgets, in order to repair such pipelines to ensure their continued safe and reliable operation.  In addition, any new regulations that are the result of PSA 2011 or any subsequent PSA reauthorization laws or new DOT pipeline safety regulations may affect our operations.
 
Our BORCO and St. Lucia operations may be adversely affected by economic, political and regulatory developments.
 
BORCO’s terminalling facility and the St. Lucia terminal are located in The Bahamas and St. Lucia, respectively.  As a result, we are exposed to the risks of international operations, including political, economic and regulatory developments and changes in laws or policies affecting our terminalling operations, as well as changes in the policies of the United States affecting trade, taxation and investment in other countries.  Any such developments or changes could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and cash flow.
 
Compliance with laws and regulations that apply to our Caribbean operations increases the cost of doing business and could interfere with our ability to offer services or expose us to fines and penalties.  These numerous laws and regulations include the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and local laws prohibiting corrupt payments to government officials or agents.  Although policies designed to fully ensure compliance with these laws are in place, employees, contractors, or agents may violate the policies.  Any such violations could include prohibitions on our ability to offer services in the Caribbean and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial results and cash flow.
 
We may not be able to fully implement or capitalize upon planned organic growth projects.
 
We have a number of organic growth projects that involve the construction, expansion or modification of existing assets. Many of these projects involve numerous regulatory, environmental, commercial, economic, weather-related, political and legal uncertainties that are beyond our control, including the following:
 
As these projects are undertaken, required approvals, permits and licenses may not be obtained, may be delayed or may be obtained with conditions that materially alter the expected return associated with the underlying projects;
A depressed crude oil price environment may make it more difficult for producers and other customers to commit to long-term contracts that provide commercial support for certain organic growth projects.
Despite the fact that we will expend significant amounts of capital during the construction phase of these projects, revenues associated with these organic growth projects will not materialize until the projects have been completed and placed into commercial service, and the amount of revenue generated from these projects could be significantly lower than anticipated for a variety of reasons;
We may not be able to secure, or we may be significantly delayed in obtaining, all of the rights of way or other real property interests we need to complete such projects, or the costs we incur in order to obtain such rights of way or other interests may be greater than we anticipated;
We may construct pipelines, facilities or other assets in anticipation of market demand that dissipates or market growth that never materializes;
Due to unavailability or costs of materials, supplies, power, labor or equipment, the cost of completing these projects could turn out to be significantly higher than we budgeted and the time it takes to complete construction of these projects and place them into commercial service could be significantly longer than planned; and
The completion or success of our projects may depend on the completion or success of third-party facilities over which we have no control.

As a result of these uncertainties, the anticipated benefits associated with our capital projects may not be achieved. In turn, this could negatively impact our cash flow and our ability to make or increase cash distributions to our unitholders.
 

22

Table of Contents

Our results could be adversely affected by volatility in the price of refined petroleum products.
 
The Merchant Services segment buys and sells refined petroleum products in connection with its marketing activities.  If the values of refined petroleum products change in a direction or manner that we do not anticipate, we could experience financial losses from these activities.  Furthermore, when refined petroleum product prices decrease rapidly, we may be unable to promptly pass our additional costs to our customers, resulting in lower margins for us which could adversely affect our results of operations.  Factors that could cause significant increases or decreases in commodity prices include changes in supply due to production constraints, weather, governmental regulations, and changes in consumer demand.  It is our practice to maintain a position that is substantially balanced between commodity purchases, on the one hand, and expected commodity sales or future delivery obligations, on the other hand. Through these transactions, we seek to establish a margin for the commodity purchased by selling the same commodity for physical delivery to third-party users, such as wholesalers or retailers.  While our hedging policies are designed to minimize commodity price risk, some degree of exposure to unforeseen fluctuations in market conditions remains.  For example, any event that disrupts our anticipated physical supply could expose us to risk of loss resulting from price changes if we are required to obtain alternative supplies to cover these sales transactions.  In addition, we are also exposed to basis risk which is created when a commodity of a certain grade or location is purchased, sold, or exchanged for a like commodity at a different time or location.  For example, we use NYMEX traded products, which deliver in New York Harbor, to hedge our commodity risk associated with physical transactions that will be delivered at other locations, such as Macungie, Pennsylvania.  We are also susceptible to basis risk in our hedging activities that arises when a commodity, such as the purchase of heating oil at one location must be hedged against the New York Harbor ultra low sulfur diesel futures contract as a result of limitations within the financial markets for derivative products.
 
A substantial amount of the petroleum products handled by BORCO are exported from Venezuela, which exposes us to political risks.
 
A substantial portion of BORCO’s revenue relates to petroleum products exported from Venezuela.  This involvement with products exported from Venezuela exposes BORCO to significant risks, including potential political and economic instability and trade restrictions and economic embargoes imposed by the United States and other countries.
 
BORCO depends on a limited number of customers for substantially all of its revenue, and the loss of any of them could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flow.
 
Storage revenue represented 77% of BORCO’s total revenue for the year ended December 31, 2015. Currently, BORCO has a limited number of long-term storage customers, consisting of major oil companies, energy companies, physical traders and one national oil company.  For the year ended December 31, 2015, 26% and 61% of BORCO’s storage revenue was derived from the top one and the top three customers, in the aggregate, respectively.  We expect BORCO to continue to derive substantially all of its total revenue from a small number of customers in the future.  BORCO may be unsuccessful in renewing its storage contracts with its customers, and those customers may discontinue or reduce contracted storage from BORCO.  If any of BORCO’s customers, in particular its top three customers, significantly reduces its contracted storage with BORCO and if BORCO is unable to find other storage customers on terms substantially similar to the terms under BORCO’s existing storage contracts, our business, results of operations and cash flow could be adversely affected.

Terrorist attacks or other security threats could adversely affect our business.
 
Since the attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States government has issued warnings that energy assets, specifically our nation’s pipeline infrastructure, may be the future target of terrorist organizations.  In addition to the threat of terrorist attacks, we face various other security threats, including cyber security threats to gain unauthorized access to sensitive information or systems or to render data or systems unusable; threats to the safety of our employees; threats to the security of our facilities, such as terminals and pipelines, and infrastructure or third-party facilities and infrastructure.  These developments have subjected our operations to increased risks.


23

Table of Contents

Although we utilize various procedures and controls to monitor these threats and mitigate our exposure to security threats, there can be no assurance that these procedures and controls will be sufficient in preventing security threats from materializing. If any of these events were to materialize, they could lead to losses of sensitive information, critical infrastructure, personnel or capabilities, essential to our operations and could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.  Cyber security attacks in particular are evolving and include but are not limited to, malicious software, attempts to gain unauthorized access to, or otherwise disrupt, our pipeline control systems, attempts to gain unauthorized access to proprietary information, and other electronic security breaches that could lead to disruptions in critical systems, including our pipeline control systems, unauthorized release of confidential or otherwise protected information and corruption of data. These events could damage our reputation and lead to financial losses from remedial actions, business interruptions, and loss of business or potential liability.
 
During 2007, the Department of Homeland Security promulgated the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (“CFATS”) to regulate the security of facilities that handle certain chemicals.  We have submitted to the Department of Homeland Security certain required information concerning our facilities in compliance with CFATS and, as a result, several of our facilities have been determined to be initially tiered as “high risk” by the Department of Homeland Security.  Due to this determination, we are required to prepare a security vulnerability assessment and, in certain locations, develop and implement site security plans required by CFATS.  The Department of Homeland Security began a concerted effort to enforce and further define the CFATS program in 2013, which we expect to continue.  At this time, we do not believe that compliance with CFATS will have a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
 
In addition to CFATS, our domestic operations are also subject to other laws and regulations promulgated and enforced by other components of the Department of Homeland Security and the Department of Transportation, including TSA Pipeline Security Guidelines.  Our operations in The Bahamas and in St. Lucia are subject to similar security-related regulations.  We believe that we currently comply in all material respects with security-related laws and regulations.  However, this is an area of continued regulatory developments for our industry and as such, we may incur increased operating costs based on developments associated with these regulations and ongoing compliance.  At this time, we do not believe that future compliance with these requirements will have a material effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
 
We could be adversely affected by violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws.
 
Our international operations require us to comply with a number of U.S. and international laws and regulations, including those involving anti-bribery and anti-corruption.  For example, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar international laws and regulations prohibit improper payments to foreign officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business.  The scope and enforcement of anti-corruption laws and regulations may vary.
 
We operate in parts of the world that have experienced governmental corruption to some degree, and in certain circumstances, strict compliance with anti-bribery laws may conflict with local customs and practices.  Our compliance programs and internal control policies and procedures may not always protect us from reckless or negligent acts committed by our employees or agents.  Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could disrupt our business and result in a material adverse effect on our business and operations.

Derivative reform mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act and rules and regulations under the Dodd-Frank Act may have an adverse effect on our ability to use certain derivative instruments to reduce the effect of commodity price, interest rate and other risks associated with our business.
 
Congress adopted the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) in 2010.  Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act mandated significant changes to the over-the-counter derivative market and requires the Commodities Futures Trading Commission and the SEC and other regulators to promulgate rules and regulations establishing federal oversight and regulation of the over-the-counter derivative market.  Although as of December 31, 2015, the rules and regulations under the Dodd-Frank Act have not had an adverse effect on our ability to use certain derivative instruments to reduce the effect of commodity price, interest rate and other risks associated with our business, such rules and regulations in the future may have an adverse effect on our ability to do so.
 

24

Table of Contents

The rulemaking process under the Dodd-Frank Act has not been completed, so it is not possible at this time to determine the full effect that the Dodd-Frank Act will have on our ability to continue to use the derivative products we currently utilize.  The rules and regulations under the Dodd-Frank Act may increase the costs of certain derivative products as a result of the imposition of capital, margin, clearing and exchange-trading requirements either on us or on our counterparties.  Any requirement to post more collateral to our counterparties in excess of what we currently post to collateralize our obligations may have a negative impact upon our liquidity.  Position limits may be imposed upon certain derivative transactions, which may further restrict our ability to utilize these products.  The effects of the rules and regulations under the Dodd-Frank Act may also reduce our ability to monetize or restructure our existing derivative contracts.  If, as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder, we reduce our use of certain derivatives, our results of operations may become more volatile and our cash flows may be less predictable, which could adversely affect our ability to plan for and fund capital expenditures or increase our distributions.  Any of these consequences could have a material adverse effect on us, our financial condition, and our results of operations.
 
Our business is exposed to customer credit risk, and we may not be able to fully protect ourselves against such risk.
 
Our businesses are subject to the risks of nonpayment and nonperformance by our customers.  We have in the past and expect to continue to undertake capital expenditures based on commitments, including take-or-pay commitments, from customers upon which we expect to realize a return. Nonperformance by our customers of those commitments or termination of those commitments resulting from our inability to timely meet our obligations could result in substantial losses to us. In addition, some of our customers, counterparties and suppliers may be highly leveraged and subject to their own operating and regulatory risks and, even if our credit review and analysis mechanisms work properly, we may experience financial losses in our dealings with such parties.  Volatility in commodity prices might have an impact on many of our customers, which in turn could have a negative impact on their ability to meet their obligations to us. We manage our exposure to credit risk through credit analysis and monitoring procedures, and sometimes collateral, such as letters of credit, prepayments, liens on customer assets and guarantees. However, these procedures and policies cannot fully eliminate customer credit risk, and to the extent our policies and procedures prove to be inadequate, it could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.
 
The marketing business in our Merchant Services segment enters into sales contracts pursuant to which customers agree to buy refined petroleum products from us at a fixed price on a future date.  If our customers have not hedged their exposure to reductions in refined petroleum product prices and there is a price drop, then they could have a significant loss upon settlement of their fixed-price contracts with us, which could increase the risk of their nonpayment or nonperformance.  In addition, we generally have entered into futures contracts to hedge our exposure under these fixed-price contracts to increases in refined petroleum product prices.  If price levels are lower at settlement than when we entered into these futures contracts, then we will be required to make payments upon the settlement thereof.  Ordinarily, this settlement payment is offset by the payment received from the customer pursuant to the associated fixed-price contract.  We are, however, required to make the settlement payment under the futures contract even if a fixed-price contract customer does not perform.  Nonperformance under fixed-price contracts by a significant number of our customers could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Our operations are subject to operational hazards and unforeseen interruptions for which we may not be insured or entitled to indemnification.
 
Our operations are subject to operational hazards and unforeseen interruptions such as natural disasters, adverse weather, accidents, fires, explosions, marine allisions, hazardous materials releases and other events beyond our control.  These events might result in a loss of equipment or life, injury, or extensive property or environmental damage, as well as an interruption in our operations.  Our operations are currently covered by property, casualty, workers’ compensation and environmental insurance policies.  In the future, however, we may not be able to maintain or obtain insurance of the type and amount desired at reasonable rates.  As a result of market conditions, premiums and deductibles for certain insurance policies have increased substantially, and could escalate further.  In some instances, certain insurance could become unavailable or available only for reduced amounts of coverage.  For example, insurance carriers are now requiring broad exclusions for losses due to war risk and terrorist acts.  Further, our environmental pollution coverage is subject to exclusions, conditions and limitations that could apply to a particular pollution claim or may not cover all claims or liabilities we incur. The contracts with our customers and other business partners involve risk-allocation and indemnification provisions. However, pursuant to these contracts we generally may not seek indemnification from a counterparty for liabilities, including those associated with the release of petroleum products, arising at a time in which we are in possession of the product owned by the counterparty.  If we were to incur a significant liability for which we were not fully insured, or insured at all, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation or cash flows.
 

25

Table of Contents

Our risk management policies cannot eliminate all commodity price risk and any noncompliance with our risk management policies could result in significant financial losses.
 
We follow risk management practices that are designed to minimize commodity price risk, credit risk and operational risk.  These practices and policies cannot, however, eliminate all price and price-related risks.  Additionally, noncompliance with such practices and policies by our employees or agents may create additional risk.  We cannot make any assurances that we will detect and prevent all violations of our risk management practices and policies, particularly if deception or other intentional misconduct is involved. Any violations of these practices or policies by our employees or agents could result in significant financial losses.
 
Hurricanes and other severe weather conditions, which may become more frequent as a result of climatic changes, could damage our facilities or disrupt our marine terminals or the operations of their customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial results and cash flow.
 
The operations of our facilities, in particular our marine terminals, could be impacted by severe weather conditions, including hurricanes.  Any such event could cause a serious business disruption or serious damage to our facilities, which could affect such facilities’ ability to provide services.  Additionally, such events could impact our facilities’ customers, and they may be unable to utilize our services.  In addition, many scientists believe that global climatic changes are occurring and are likely to lead to increased physical risks, including an increase in sea level, wetland and barrier island erosion, risks of flooding and changes in weather conditions, such as precipitation, average temperatures and extreme weather conditions or storms.  We own assets in communities that may be at risk from sea level rise, changes in weather conditions, storms and loss of the protection offered by coastal wetlands.  The portion of our assets that is located in these areas may be increasingly susceptible to storm damage that could be aggravated by wetland and barrier island erosion.  Existing weather-related risks and increased risks from additional future climate changes could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operation or cash flows.
 
Increases in interest rates could adversely affect our unit price and our business.
 
Interest rates on future debt offerings could be higher than current levels, causing our financing costs to increase accordingly.  An increase in interest rates could also cause a corresponding decline in demand for equity investments, in general, and in particular for yield-based equity investments such as our LP Units.  Lower demand for our LP Units for any reason, including competition from other more attractive investment opportunities, would likely cause the trading price of our LP Units to decline.  If we issue additional equity at a significantly lower price, material dilution to our existing unitholders could result.

Additionally, we use both fixed and variable rate debt, and we are exposed to market risk due to the floating interest rates on our credit facility.  From time to time we use interest rate derivatives to hedge interest obligations on specific debt.  In addition, interest rates on future debt offerings could be higher, causing our financing costs to increase accordingly.  Our results of operations, cash flows and financial position could be adversely affected by significant increases in interest rates above current levels.
 
Risks Relating to Partnership Structure
 
We may sell additional units, diluting existing interests of unitholders.
 
Our partnership agreement allows us to issue additional units and certain other equity securities without unitholder approval.  There is no limit on the total number of units and other equity securities we may issue.  We regularly issue additional units, through our at-the-market offering program and otherwise, and when we issue additional units or other equity securities, the proportionate partnership interest of our existing unitholders will decrease.  The issuance could negatively affect the amount of cash distributed to unitholders and the market price of the units.  Issuance of additional units will also diminish the relative voting strength of the previously outstanding LP Units.
 
Our partnership agreement limits the liability of our general partner and its directors and officers.
 
Our general partner and its directors and officers owe fiduciary duties to our unitholders.  Provisions of our partnership agreement and partnership agreements for each of our operating partnerships, however, contain language limiting the liability of the general partner and its directors and officers to the unitholders for actions or omissions taken in good faith which do not involve gross negligence or willful misconduct.  In addition, these partnership agreements grant broad rights of indemnification to the general partner and its directors, officers, employees and affiliates.

26

Table of Contents

 
Unitholders may not have limited liability in some circumstances.
 
The limitations on the liability of holders of limited partnership interests for the obligations of a limited partnership have not been clearly established in some states.  If it were determined that we had been conducting business in any state without compliance with the applicable limited partnership statute, or that the unitholders as a group took any action pursuant to our partnership agreement that constituted participation in the “control” of our business, then the unitholders could be held liable under some circumstances for our obligations to the same extent as a general partner.
 
Under applicable state law, our general partner has unlimited liability for our obligations, including our debts and environmental liabilities, if any, except for our contractual obligations that are expressly made without recourse to the general partner.
 
In addition, Section 17-607 of the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act provides that under some circumstances a unitholder may be liable to us for the amount of distributions paid to the unitholder for a period of three years from the date of the distribution.

Tax Risks to Unitholders
 
Our tax treatment depends on our status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, as well as our not being subject to a material amount of entity-level taxation by individual states.  If the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) were to treat us as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, or we become subject to entity-level taxation for state tax purposes, our cash available for distribution to you would be substantially reduced.
 
The anticipated after-tax economic benefit of an investment in our LP Units depends largely on our being treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes.
 
Despite the fact that we are organized as a limited partnership under Delaware law, we will be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes unless we satisfy a “qualifying income” requirement.  Based upon our current operations and the private letter rulings we have received with respect to certain aspects of our business, we believe we satisfy the qualifying income requirement.  Failing to meet the qualifying income requirement or a change in current law could cause us to be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject us to taxation.
 
If we were treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, we would pay U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income at the corporate tax rate, which is currently a maximum of 35%.  Distributions to you would generally be taxed again as corporate distributions, and no income, gains, losses or deductions would flow through to you.  Because a tax would be imposed upon us as a corporation, our cash available for distribution to you would be substantially reduced.  Therefore, treatment of us as a corporation would result in a material reduction in the anticipated cash flow and after-tax return to holders of our LP Units, likely causing a substantial reduction in the value of our LP Units.
 
At the state level, several states have been evaluating ways to subject partnerships to entity-level taxation through the imposition of state income, franchise or other forms of taxation.  If any state were to impose a tax upon us as an entity, the cash available for distribution to you would be reduced and the value of our LP Units could be negatively impacted.
 
The tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships or an investment in our LP Units could be subject to potential legislative, judicial or administrative changes and differing interpretations, possibly on a retroactive basis.
 
The present U.S. federal income tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships, including us, or an investment in our LP Units may be modified by administrative, legislative or judicial changes or differing interpretations at any time. For example, the Obama administration’s budget proposal for fiscal year 2017 recommended that certain publicly traded partnerships earning income from activities related to fossil fuels be taxed as corporations beginning in 2022. From time to time, members of Congress propose and consider similar substantive changes to the existing federal income tax laws that affect publicly traded partnerships. If successful, such proposals could eliminate 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.
 

27

Table of Contents

In addition, the Internal Revenue Service, on May 5, 2015, issued proposed regulations concerning which activities give rise to qualifying income within the meaning of Section 7704 of the Internal Revenue Code. We do not believe the proposed regulations affect our ability to qualify as a publicly traded partnership. However, finalized regulations could modify the amount of our gross income that we are able to treat as qualifying income for the purposes of the qualifying income requirement and modify or revoke existing private letter rulings, including ours.
 
Any modification to the U.S. 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 U.S. federal income tax purposes. We are unable to predict whether any of these changes or other proposals will ultimately be enacted. Any such changes could negatively impact the value of an investment in our LP Units.

If the IRS were to contest the federal income tax positions we take, it may adversely impact the market for our LP Units, and the costs of any such contest would reduce cash available for distribution to you. Recently enacted legislation alters the procedures for assessing and collecting taxes due for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, in a manner that could substantially reduce cash available for distribution to you.
 
We have not requested a ruling from the IRS with respect to our treatment as a partnership for federal income tax purposes.  The IRS may adopt positions that differ from the positions we take.  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 may materially and adversely impact the market for our LP Units and the price at which they trade.  Moreover, the costs of any contest between us and the IRS will result in a reduction in cash available for distribution to our unitholders and thus will be borne indirectly by our unitholders.

Recently enacted legislation, applicable to us for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017, alters the procedures for auditing large partnerships and also alters the procedures for assessing and collecting taxes due (including applicable penalties and interest) as a result of an audit. Under the new rules, unless we are eligible to, and do, elect to issue a revised Schedule K-1 to each of our partners with respect to an audited and adjusted return, the IRS may assess and collect taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) directly from us in the year in which the audit is completed. If we are required to pay taxes, penalties and interest as the result of audit adjustments, cash available for distribution to our unitholders may be substantially reduced. In addition, because payment would be due for the taxable year in which the audit is completed, unitholders during that taxable year would bear the expense of the adjustment even if they were not unitholders during the audited taxable year.
 
Even if you do not receive any cash distributions from us, you will be required to pay taxes on your share of our taxable income.
 
You will be required to pay federal income taxes and, in some cases, state and local income taxes, on your share of our taxable income, whether or not you receive cash distributions from us. 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, and our cash available for distribution would not increase.  Similarly, 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” being allocated to our unitholders as taxable income without any increase in our cash available for distribution. You may not receive cash distributions from us equal to your share of our taxable income or even equal to the actual tax due from you with respect to that income.
 
Tax gain or loss on disposition of our LP Units could be more or less than expected.
 
If you sell your LP Units, you will recognize a gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and your tax basis in those LP Units.  Because distributions in excess of your allocable share of our net taxable income decrease your tax basis in your LP Units, the amount, if any, of such prior excess distributions with respect to the LP Units you sell will, in effect, become taxable income to you if you sell such LP Units at a price greater than your tax basis in those LP Units, even if the price you receive is less than your original cost.  Furthermore, a substantial portion of the amount realized, whether or not representing a gain, may be taxed as ordinary income due to potential recapture items, including depreciation recapture.  In addition, because your amount realized includes your share of our nonrecourse liabilities, if you sell your LP Units, you may incur a tax liability in excess of the amount of cash you receive from the sale.


28

Table of Contents

A substantial portion of the amount realized from the sale of your units, whether or not representing gain, may be taxed as ordinary income to you due to potential recapture items, including depreciation recapture.  Thus, you may recognize both ordinary income and capital loss from the sale of your units if the amount realized on a sale of your units is less than your 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 you sell your units, you may recognize ordinary income from our allocations of income and gain to you prior to the sale and from recapture items that generally cannot be offset by any capital loss recognized upon the sale of units.
 
Tax-exempt entities and non-U.S. persons face unique tax issues from owning our LP Units that may result in adverse tax consequences to them.
 
Investment in LP Units by tax-exempt entities, such as employee benefit plans and individual retirement accounts (“IRAs”), and non-U.S. persons raises issues unique to them.  For example, virtually all of our income allocated to organizations that are exempt from federal income tax, including IRAs and other retirement plans, will be unrelated business taxable income and will be taxable to them.  Distributions to non-U.S. persons will be subject to withholding taxes imposed at the highest effective tax rate applicable to such non-U.S. persons, and each non-U.S. person will be required to file United States federal tax returns and pay tax on their share of our taxable income.  If you are a tax-exempt entity or a non-U.S. person, you should consult your tax advisor before investing in our LP Units.
 
We treat each purchaser of LP Units as having the same tax benefits without regard to the LP Units actually purchased.  The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of the LP Units.
 
Because we cannot match transferors and transferees of LP Units and because of other reasons, we have adopted depreciation and amortization positions that may not conform to all aspects of existing U.S. Treasury Regulations.  A successful IRS challenge to those positions 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 LP Units and could have a negative impact on the value of our LP Units or result in audit adjustments to your tax returns.

We prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our LP Units each month based upon the ownership of our LP Units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular LP 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 prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our LP Units each month based upon the ownership of our LP Units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular LP Unit is transferred.  The U.S. Department of the Treasury recently adopted final Treasury Regulations allowing a similar monthly simplifying convention for taxable years beginning on or after August 3, 2015. However, such regulations do not specifically authorize the use of the proration method we have adopted for our 2015 taxable year and may not specifically authorize all aspects of our proration method thereafter. 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 LP Units are the subject of a securities loan (e.g., a loan to a “short seller” to cover a short sale of LP Units) may be considered to have disposed of those LP Units.  If so, he would no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those LP Units during the period of the loan and could 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 LP Units are the subject of a securities loan may be considered to have disposed of the loaned LP Units.  In that case, the unitholder may no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those LP 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 LP Units may not be reportable by the unitholder and any cash distributions received by the unitholder as to those LP 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 modify any applicable brokerage account agreements to prohibit their brokers from borrowing their LP Units.
 

29

Table of Contents

The sale or exchange of 50% or more of our capital and profits interests during any twelve-month period will result in the termination of our partnership for federal income tax purposes.
 
We will be considered to have terminated for U.S. federal income tax purposes if there is a sale or exchange of 50% or more of the total interests in our capital and profits within a twelve-month period.  Our termination would, among other things, result in the closing of our taxable year for all unitholders, which would result in us filing two tax returns for one calendar year and could result in a significant deferral of depreciation deductions allowable in computing our taxable income.  In the case of a unitholder reporting on a taxable year other than a calendar year, the closing of our taxable year may also result in more than twelve months of our taxable income or loss being includable in taxable income for the unitholder’s taxable year that includes our termination. Our termination would not affect our classification as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, but it would result in our being treated as a new partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes following the termination.  If we were treated as a new partnership, we would be required to make new tax elections and could be subject to penalties if we were unable to determine that a termination occurred.  The IRS has announced a relief procedure whereby if a publicly traded partnership that has technically terminated requests and the IRS grants special relief, among other things, the partnership may be permitted to provide only a single Schedule K-1 to unitholders for the two short tax periods included in the year in which the termination occurs.

You will likely be subject to state and local taxes and income tax return filing requirements in jurisdictions where you do not live as a result of investing in our LP Units.
 
In addition to U.S. federal income taxes, you may be subject to other taxes, including non-U.S., 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 own property now or in the future, even if you do not live in any of those jurisdictions.  You will likely be required to file non-U.S., state and local income tax returns and pay state and local income taxes in some or all of these various jurisdictions.  Further, you may be subject to penalties for failure to comply with those requirements.  We own property and conduct business in a number of states in the United States.  Most of these states impose an income tax on individuals, corporations and other entities.  Additionally, we also own property and conduct business in Puerto Rico, The Bahamas and in St. Lucia.  Under current law, you are not required to file a tax return or pay taxes in Puerto Rico, The Bahamas and in St. Lucia.  As we make acquisitions or expand our business, we may own assets or conduct business in additional states or non-U.S. jurisdictions that impose a personal income tax.  It is a unitholder’s responsibility to file all non-U.S., federal, state and local tax returns.
 
We have a subsidiary that is treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes and subject to corporate-level income taxes.
 
We conduct a portion of our operations through a subsidiary that is a corporation for federal income tax purposes.  We may elect to conduct additional operations in corporate form in the future.  The corporate subsidiary will be subject to corporate-level tax, which will reduce the cash available for distribution to us and, in turn, to our unitholders.  If the IRS were to successfully assert that the corporate subsidiary has more tax liability than we anticipate or legislation was enacted that increased the corporate tax rate, our cash available for distribution would be further reduced.
 
Item 1B.    Unresolved Staff Comments
 
None.
 
Item 2.       Properties
 
We are managed primarily from two leased commercial business offices located in Breinigsville, Pennsylvania and Houston, Texas that are approximately 75,000 and 73,000 square feet in size, respectively.
 
In general, our pipelines are located on land owned by others pursuant to rights granted under easements, leases, licenses and permits from railroads, utilities, governmental entities and private parties.  Like other pipelines, certain of our rights are revocable at the election of the grantor or are subject to renewal at various intervals, and some require periodic payments.  We have not experienced any revocations or lapses of such rights which were material to our business or operations, and we have no reason to expect any such revocation or lapse in the foreseeable future. Most delivery points, gathering, pumping stations and terminalling facilities are located on land that we own.
 
See “Item 1, Business” for a description of the location and general character of our material property.
 

30

Table of Contents

We believe that we have sufficient title to our material assets and properties, possess all material authorizations and revocable consents from state and local governmental and regulatory authorities and have all other material rights necessary to conduct our business substantially in accordance with past practice.  Although in certain cases our title to assets and properties or our other rights, including our rights to occupy the land of others under easements, leases, licenses and permits, may be subject to encumbrances, restrictions and other imperfections, we do not expect any of such imperfections to materially detract from the value of such assets or properties or interfere materially with the conduct of our businesses.

Item 3.       Legal Proceedings
 
In the ordinary course of business, we are involved in various claims and legal proceedings, some of which are covered by insurance. We are generally unable to predict the timing or outcome of these claims and proceedings.  Based upon our evaluation of existing claims and proceedings and the probability of losses relating to such contingencies, we have accrued certain amounts relating to such claims and proceedings, none of which are considered material.
 
Pennsauken Allisions.  Our terminal located in Pennsauken, New Jersey suffered two allisions in the second half of 2014. The first occurred on August 5, 2014, when a vessel allided with our terminal’s “Ship Dock.” We immediately “arrested” the vessel and commenced litigation against its owner. Security for our claim was provided by the vessel owner’s insurers, in the amount of $19.0 million, reserving all of their defenses. The vessel owners soon stipulated to liability, so the only issue in dispute is the amount of Buckeye’s damages, which is now the subject of discovery. Reconstruction of the Ship Dock was completed in July 2015 and service has since resumed. The aggregate cost to reconstruct the dock was approximately $8.0 million. The second incident occurred on October 5, 2014, when a tug and barge struck and damaged the Pennsauken terminal’s “Barge Dock.” The tug and barge owners have commenced proceedings to limit their liability to $1.0 million and $5.0 million, respectively. We have filed claims in the limitation proceedings for the reconstruction of the Barge Dock and response costs, together amounting to approximately $7.0 million. We have suffered and continue to suffer loss-of-use damages as a result of the above allisions, as the two incidents together impacted the ability of vessels of a certain size and/or carrying certain products to call at the terminal. In order to mitigate these business losses, we made modifications to two other berths at a cost of $1.4 million. Recovery for both the mitigation costs and business losses is being sought jointly from all of the respective responsible parties. We are insured for loss of use, subject to a 30 day deductible. Our insurers have been involved in the recovery efforts. In 2015, we received insurance recoveries of $5.1 million related to the loss of use of our terminal, which we have recognized within “Transportation, storage and other services” in our consolidated statement of operations.

 BORCO Jetty.  On May 25, 2012, a ship, Cape Bari, allided with a jetty at our BORCO facility while berthing, causing damage to portions of the jetty.  Buckeye has insurance to cover this loss, subject to a $5.0 million deductible.  On May 26, 2012, we commenced legal proceedings in The Bahamas against the vessel’s owner and the vessel to obtain security for the cost of repairs and other losses incurred as a result of the incident.  Full security for our claim has been provided by the vessel owner’s insurers, reserving all of their defenses.  We also have notified the customer on whose behalf the vessel was at the BORCO facility that we intend to hold them responsible for all damages and losses resulting from the incident pursuant to the terms of an agreement between the parties.  Any disputes between us and our customer on this matter are subject to arbitration in New York, New York, and arbitration has commenced.
 
The vessel owner has claimed that it is entitled to limit its liability to $17.0 million, but we are contesting the right of the vessel owner to such limitation.  The Bahamas court of first instance denied the vessel owner the right to limit its liability for the incident, leaving the vessel owner responsible for all provable damages.  The vessel owner appealed, and The Bahamas Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the vessel owner may limit its liability.  Our application for leave to appeal the Court of Appeals’ decision to the Privy Council was granted, the hearing occurred on February 23, 2016 and we await that decision.  We can express no view on whether The Bahamas Court of Appeals decision ultimately will be affirmed or reversed.
 
We experienced no material interruption of service at the BORCO facility as a result of the incident, and the repairs and reconstruction of the damaged sections are complete.
 

31

Table of Contents

The aggregate cost to repair and reconstruct the damaged portions of the jetty and pursue recovery in court has been $23.0 million.  We recorded a loss on disposal due to the assets destroyed in the incident and other related costs incurred; however, since we believe recovery of our losses is probable, we recorded a corresponding receivable.  As of December 31, 2015, we had a $6.4 million receivable included in “Other non-current assets” in our consolidated balance sheet, representing claims for reimbursement of the deductible and other third-party expenses.  Additionally, we have received insurance reimbursements of $16.0 million, and to the extent the aggregate proceeds from the recovery of our losses is in excess of the carrying value of the destroyed assets or other costs incurred, we will recognize a gain when such proceeds are received and are not refundable.  Our insurers have paid most of the claim and are now parties in The Bahamas litigation.  As of December 31, 2015, no gain had been recognized; however, we recorded a $14.1 million deferred gain in “Accrued and other current liabilities” in our consolidated balance sheet, representing excess proceeds received over the loss on disposal and other costs incurred.
 
On May 12, 2014, the vessel owner filed a third-party complaint against BORCO and a BORCO subsidiary, Borco Towing Company Limited, alleging negligence by the pilots and tugs that assisted the Cape Bari berthing.  We have investigated these allegations and believe that we have defenses and intend to defend ourselves and pursue our claims against the vessel owner. BORCO and Borco Towing Company Limited are insured for the alleged liability, subject to an applicable deductible, and the liability insurers are participating in the defense.  The main proceeding and third-party actions have been consolidated and are expected to go to trial in May 2016.

Buckeye Texas Partners Contractor Dispute. Buckeye Texas Processing LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Buckeye Texas, is party to a contract with Ventech Engineers USA, LLC (“Ventech”). The contract required Ventech to design, supply, fabricate, and install two condensate splitters in Corpus Christi, Texas (the “Splitter Project”). Ventech’s primary subcontractor on the Splitter Project was Bay, Ltd. (“Bay”). Certain disputes arose on the Splitter Project relating to payment, delays, cost overruns, defective work, and other issues. On October 14, 2015, Bay filed a lawsuit in Harris County District Court against us and Ventech, claiming breach of contract, fraud, and other causes of action primarily premised on alleged non-payment of amounts due on the Splitter Project. We also believe that, if the matter is not resolved, Ventech may claim that it is also owed additional money for its work on the Splitter Project. We disagree with assertions that we owe Ventech and Bay additional amounts and, if resolution cannot be reached, we intend to pursue claims against Ventech and Bay relating to the delays, cost overruns, defective work, and other issues on the Splitter Project. In addition, Ventech provided a bond on the Splitter Project that may help to satisfy some of our losses. Our damages may exceed the damages claimed by Ventech and Bay. The parties have agreed to mediate to seek to resolve the disputes between them, and settlement discussions are ongoing.

FERC Proceedings
 
FERC Docket No. OR12-28-000 — Airlines Complaint against BPLC New York City Jet Fuel Rates. On September 20, 2012, a complaint was filed with FERC by Delta Air Lines, JetBlue Airways, United/Continental Air Lines, and US Airways challenging BPLC’s rates for transportation of jet fuel from New Jersey to three New York City airports. The complaint was not directed at BPLC’s rates for service to other destinations and did not involve pipeline systems and terminals owned by Buckeye’s other operating subsidiaries. The complaint challenges these jet fuel transportation rates as generating revenues in excess of costs and thus being “unjust and unreasonable” under the Interstate Commerce Act. On February 22, 2013, FERC issued an order setting the airline complaint in Docket (“Dkt.”) No. OR12-28-000 for hearing, but holding the hearing in abeyance and setting the dispute for settlement procedures before a settlement judge. On March 8, 2013, an order was issued consolidating, for settlement purposes, this complaint proceeding with the proceeding regarding BPLC’s application for market-based rates in the New York City market in Dkt. No. OR13-3-000 (discussed below), and settlement discussions under the supervision of the FERC settlement judge continued until April 1, 2014 when the FERC settlement judge reported that the parties had been unable to reach a settlement. As a result, the matter proceeded to hearing, which was concluded on April 1, 2015. As a result of developments in ongoing settlement talks regarding Dkt. Nos. OR12-28-000, OR13-3-000 (discussed below) and OR 14-41-000 (discussed below), we recorded an accrual and a corresponding reduction in revenue in the amount of $40.0 million in the year ended December 31, 2014 in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment.


32

Table of Contents

In parallel with the hearing in the OR12-28-000 proceeding, BPLC and the airlines continued to pursue settlement. On June 19, 2015, BPLC and the airlines submitted an Offer of Settlement at the FERC (the “Settlement”) to resolve the complaints in Dkt. Nos. OR12-28-000, et al. and OR14-41-000, as well as BPLC’s application in Dkt. No. OR13-3-000. Under the terms of the Settlement, BPLC agreed to reduce its jet fuel rates prospectively, to make settlement payments to the airlines, to install facilities to increase the flexibility and capacity of its system in shipping jet fuel to John F. Kennedy International Airport, and to resolve its application in Dkt. No. OR13-3-000 as described further below. As a result of submission of the Settlement, we recorded an additional accrual and corresponding reduction in revenue in the amount of $15.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2015 in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment, which, together with the previously recorded $40.0 million reduction in revenue, represented anticipated settlement payments and other expenses associated with the Settlement. On September 29, 2015, the FERC approved the Settlement without modification. On October 1, 2015, BPLC filed a tariff to implement the terms of the Settlement, including the agreed-upon reductions in jet fuel rates effective November 1, 2015 (the “Settlement Tariff”) in Dkt. No. IS16-7-000. On October 16, 2015, a jet fuel marketer and three airlines not parties to the Settlement protested the tariff, alleging that certain provisions of an incentive rate program provided for in the Settlement are unduly discriminatory (the “Protest”). On October 30, 2015, the FERC rejected the Protest on the merits and accepted the Settlement Tariff, permitting the reduced rates to go into effect on November 1, 2015. On October 29, 2015, the same jet fuel marketer and airlines sought late intervention and rehearing at the FERC to challenge FERC’s approval of the Settlement alleging, on a basis similar to the Protest, that certain provisions of the Settlement’s incentive rate program are unduly discriminatory. BPLC and the settling airlines responded that the Protest’s claims were invalid and untimely. On December 2, 2015, the FERC denied the late intervention request, which had the effect of barring the rehearing request. During the quarter ended December 31, 2015, we made payments of $52.8 million related to the Settlement.
 
FERC Docket No. OR14-41-000 — American Airlines Complaint against BPLC New York City Jet Fuel Rates.  On September 17, 2014, a complaint was filed with FERC by American Airlines raising claims similar to the Dkt. No. OR12-28-000 complaint (see above). As noted above, the Settlement to resolve this complaint was approved by the FERC on September 29, 2015.

FERC Docket No. OR13-3-000 — BPLC’s Market-Based Rate Application. On October 15, 2012, BPLC filed an application with FERC seeking authority to charge market-based rates for deliveries of liquid petroleum products to the New York City-area market (the “Application”).  In the Application, BPLC sought to charge market-based rates from its three origin points in northeastern New Jersey to its five destinations on its Long Island System, including deliveries of jet fuel to the Newark, LaGuardia, and JFK airports.  On December 14, 2012, Delta Air Lines, JetBlue Airways, United/Continental Air Lines, and US Airways filed a joint intervention and protest challenging the Application and requesting its rejection. Following further pleadings, on February 28, 2013, FERC set the Application for hearing but held the hearing in abeyance and set the dispute for settlement procedures before a settlement judge.  After unsuccessful settlement talks, litigation as to the Application proceeded separately from the complaint proceeding. Prior to the hearing, the airlines and BPLC reached an agreement in principle, and as noted above, submitted an Offer of Settlement to the FERC to resolve the airlines’ objections to the Application. Under the terms of the Settlement, BPLC agreed, inter alia, to withdraw the portions of the Application addressing transportation of jet fuel within the New York City market, including transportation of jet fuel to the three airports, while remaining free to pursue market-based rates for transportation of other refined petroleum products to other destinations within the New York City market. As noted above, the Settlement was approved by the FERC on September 29, 2015, and on October 5, 2015, BPLC filed a notice withdrawing the Application except as to the transportation of other refined petroleum products from Linden, New Jersey to Inwood and Long Island City, New York. On February 11, 2016, BPLC submitted a joint motion with  the support of FERC Trial Staff requesting that FERC waive the issuance of an initial decision, and instead issue an order addressing the revised application of BPLC, based on evidence submitted by Commission Trial Staff and BPLC, both of whose additional evidence found that BPLC lacked significant market power over the transportation of other refined petroleum products from Linden, New Jersey to Inwood and Long Island City, New York.  FERC has not yet issued an order in response to the filing submitted on February 11, 2016.

Environmental Proceedings

On January 19, 2016, Buckeye received a letter from the Environmental Enforcement Section of the Department of Justice discussing a possible consent decree in connection with pipeline releases of West Shore that occurred on December 14, 2010 near Lockport, Illinois and on August 27, 2012 near Palos Park, Illinois. The letter proposes a civil penalty of $2.3 million. Buckeye, as operator of West Shore, intends to seek a reduction in the amount of the proposed penalty in 2016. Buckeye is entitled to certain indemnifications by West Shore pursuant to an agreement between BPLC and West Shore, which we believe would result in West Shore indemnifying us for any penalties.


33

Table of Contents

On December 16, 2015, PHMSA issued to Buckeye a notice of probable violation (NOPV 1-2015-2021) relating to a July 2013 inspection of the Malvern, Booth and Macungie area pipelines. The NOPV includes 5 probable violations related to Buckeye’s Corrosion Control program inspections and implementation. Four of the five violations included proposed civil penalties totaling $0.3 million. Buckeye is currently reviewing the alleged violations.

In December 2014, Buckeye received a penalty from the Indiana Department of Environmental Management (“IDEM”) primarily in connection with air emissions control device operations outside of the parameters of the permit at our terminal in Hammond, Indiana. IDEM issued a final agreed order, and Buckeye paid $0.2 million in connection therewith in October 2015.

In November 2014, Buckeye received a notice of probable violation from the PHMSA in connection with certain recordkeeping and procedural issues related to our assets in the Linden, New Jersey area. Buckeye responded contesting certain of the violations and requesting a reduced penalty. PHMSA granted a slight penalty reduction, and in December 2015, Buckeye paid a penalty of approximately $0.2 million.

 
Item 4.       Mine Safety Disclosures
 
Not applicable.


34

Table of Contents

PART II
 
Item 5.                     Market for the Registrant’s Units, Related Unitholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Units
 
Our LP Units are listed and traded on the NYSE under the symbol “BPL.”  The high and low sales prices of our LP Units during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, as reported in the NYSE Composite Transactions, were as follows:
 
 
2015
 
2014
Quarter
 
High
 
Low
 
High
 
Low
First
 
$
78.30

 
$
69.52

 
$
75.83

 
$
69.19

Second
 
82.98

 
73.93

 
83.72

 
74.50

Third
 
76.56

 
52.91

 
84.91

 
75.26

Fourth
 
72.43

 
52.04

 
85.14

 
63.77

 
The following graph compares the total unitholder return performance of our LP Units with the performance of: (i) the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index (“S&P 500”) and (ii) the Alerian MLP Index.  The Alerian MLP Index is a composite of the 50 most prominent energy master limited partnerships that provides investors with a comprehensive benchmark for this asset class.  The graph assumes that $100 was invested in our LP Units and each comparison index beginning on December 31, 2010 and that all distributions or dividends were reinvested on a quarterly basis.
 
 
12/31/2010
 
12/31/2011
 
12/31/2012
 
12/31/2013
 
12/31/2014
 
12/31/2015
Buckeye Partners, L.P.
$
100.00

 
$
102.05

 
$
77.67

 
$
130.96

 
$
147.76

 
$
137.31

S&P 500
100.00

 
102.11

 
118.45

 
156.82

 
178.28

 
180.75

Alerian MLP Index
100.00

 
113.88

 
119.34

 
152.26

 
159.57

 
107.57


We have gathered tax information from our known unitholders and from brokers/nominees and, based on the information collected, we estimate our number of beneficial unitholders to be approximately 142,000 at December 31, 2015.
 

35

Table of Contents

Cash distributions paid to unitholders for the periods indicated were as follows:
 
 
 
 
Amount Per
Record Date
 
Payment Date
 
LP Unit
February 19, 2013
 
February 28, 2013
 

$1.0375

May 16, 2013
 
May 31, 2013
 

$1.0500

August 12, 2013
 
August 20, 2013
 

$1.0625

November 12, 2013
 
November 19, 2013
 

$1.0750

 
 
 
 
 

February 18, 2014
 
February 25, 2014
 

$1.0875

May 12, 2014
 
May 19, 2014
 

$1.1000

August 18, 2014
 
August 25, 2014
 

$1.1125

November 18, 2014
 
November 25, 2014
 

$1.1250

 
 
 
 
 

February 17, 2015
 
February 24, 2015
 

$1.1375

May 11, 2015
 
May 18, 2015
 

$1.1500

August 10, 2015
 
August 17, 2015
 

$1.1625

November 9, 2015
 
November 17, 2015
 

$1.1750

 
On February 12, 2016, we announced a quarterly distribution of $1.1875 per LP Unit that will be paid on March 1, 2016, to unitholders of record on February 23, 2016.  Based on the LP Units outstanding as of December 31, 2015, cash distributed to unitholders on March 1, 2016 will total $154.4 million.
 
We generally make quarterly cash distributions of substantially all of our available cash, generally defined as consolidated cash receipts less consolidated cash expenditures and such retentions for working capital, anticipated cash expenditures and contingencies as Buckeye GP deems appropriate.
 
We are a publicly traded MLP and are not subject to federal income tax.  Instead, unitholders are required to report their allocable share of our income, gain, loss and deduction, regardless of whether we make distributions.  We have made quarterly distribution payments since May 1987.
 
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
 
None.
 
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
 
None.


36

Table of Contents

Item 6.                     Selected Financial Data
 
The following tables present our selected consolidated financial data from our audited consolidated financial statements for the periods and at the dates indicated.  The tables should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and our accompanying notes thereto included in Item 8 of this Report (in thousands, except per unit amounts):
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
 
2012
 
2011
Income Statement Data:
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Revenue (1)
$
3,453,434

 
$
6,620,247

 
$
5,054,101

 
$
4,285,903

 
$
4,693,620

Operating income (1) (2)
604,116

 
495,347

 
478,041

 
344,536

 
365,845

Income from continuing operations (1) (2)
438,391

 
334,498

 
351,599

 
235,879

 
291,827

Earnings per unit - diluted from continuing operations
$
3.41

 
$
2.78

 
$
3.23

 
$
2.37

 
$
3.15

Cash distributions per LP Unit - declared
$
4.68

 
$
4.48

 
$
4.28

 
$
4.15

 
$
4.08

 
 
December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
 
2012
 
2011
Balance Sheet Data:
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Total assets (3) (4)
$
8,369,281

 
$
8,065,720

 
$
6,988,024

 
$
5,972,910

 
$
5,560,717

Long-term debt (4)
3,732,824

 
3,368,618

 
3,075,172

 
2,727,145

 
2,383,915

Total Buckeye Partners, L.P. capital
3,735,389

 
3,702,628

 
3,065,665

 
2,372,313

 
2,303,169

____________________________
(1)
The decrease in revenue for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to the year ended December 31, 2014 was primarily related to a decrease in sales volume and a decline of refined petroleum products prices in our Merchant Services segment. The decrease in sales volume was primarily related to more effective supply management. See “Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for further discussion.
(2)
During 2012, we recorded a $60.0 million asset impairment in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment (see Note 5 in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements).
(3)
Includes $181.7 million of assets held for sale as of December 31, 2013 relating to the Natural Gas Storage disposal group sold in December 2014. See Note 4 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion.
(4)
Certain reclassifications of debt issuance costs have been made to prior year amounts to conform to current year presentation. In connection with the retrospective application of new accounting guidance for debt issuance costs (see Note 2 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion), we reclassified $20.4 million, $17.5 million, $8.1 million and $9.7 million of debt issuance costs originally included in “Other non-current assets” as of each respective year ending December 31, 2014 through 2011 to “Long-term debt” as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of debt liability, consistent with debt discounts.


37

Table of Contents

Item 7.  Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
 
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and our accompanying notes thereto included in Item 8 of this Report.
 
Business Overview
 
We own and operate a diversified network of integrated assets providing midstream logistic solutions, primarily consisting of the transportation, storage and marketing of liquid petroleum products.  We are one of the largest independent liquid petroleum products pipeline operators in the United States in terms of volumes delivered, with approximately 6,000 miles of pipeline. We also use our service expertise to operate and/or maintain third-party pipelines and perform certain engineering and construction services for our customers. Additionally, we are one of the largest independent terminalling and storage operators in the United States in terms of capacity available for service. Our terminal network comprises more than 120 liquid petroleum products terminals with aggregate storage capacity of over 110 million barrels across our portfolio of pipelines, inland terminals and marine terminals located primarily in the East Coast and Gulf Coast regions of the United States and in the Caribbean.  Our network of marine terminals enables us to facilitate global flows of crude oil and refined petroleum products offering our customers connectivity between supply areas and market centers through some of the world’s most important bulk storage and blending hubs. Our flagship marine terminal in The Bahamas, BORCO, is one of the largest marine crude oil and refined petroleum products storage facilities in the world and provides an array of logistics and blending services for the global flow of petroleum products.  Our recent expansion into the Gulf Coast has added another regional hub with world-class marine terminalling, storage and processing capabilities. We are also a wholesale distributor of refined petroleum products in areas served by our pipelines and terminals. 

In December 2015, we realigned our reportable segments into three reportable segments as a result of changes in our organizational structure and renamed one of our reportable segments. Our three reportable segments are: Domestic Pipelines & Terminals (formerly known as Pipelines & Terminals), Global Marine Terminals and Merchant Services. We merged our previously reported Development & Logistics segment into the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment. See Note 25 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a more detailed discussion of our business segments. We have adjusted our prior period segment information to conform to current year presentation.

Our primary business objective is to provide stable and sustainable cash distributions to our unitholders, while maintaining a relatively low investment risk profile.  The key elements of our strategy are to: (i) operate in a safe and environmentally responsible manner; (ii) maximize utilization of our assets at the lowest cost per unit; (iii) maintain stable long-term customer relationships; (iv) optimize, expand and diversify our portfolio of energy assets through accretive acquisitions and organic growth projects; and (v) maintain a solid, conservative financial position and our investment-grade credit rating.
 
Overview of Operating Results
 
Net income attributable to our unitholders was $437.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which was an increase of $164.3 million, or 60.2%, from $273.0 million for the corresponding period in 2014.  Operating income was $604.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is an increase of $108.8 million, or 22.0%, from $495.3 million the corresponding period in 2014.  Our operating income results for the year ended December 31, 2015 include year-over-year improvement in each of our three segments despite mixed business conditions in a declining price environment.

Our Global Marine Terminals segment benefited from continued improvement in capacity utilization and higher rates on contract renewals. Our continued efforts to provide new service offerings and enhance our marine asset portfolio capabilities resulted in strong demand for our services. Internal growth capital investments also yielded additional capacity that our commercial teams were able to successfully contract. The development of structure in the crude oil and refined petroleum products markets additionally assisted in the year-over-year success in this segment. Our interest in Buckeye Texas acquired in September 2014 was also a key driver for the increase over prior year. In the fourth quarter of 2015, we completed the commissioning and start-up of our condensate splitters and liquid petroleum gas refrigerated storage, which are in service under long-term agreements with Trafigura Trading LLC (“Trafigura”). These increases in net income were partially offset by an increase in depreciation and amortization expense due to the Buckeye Texas assets.

Our Merchant Services segment benefited from the elimination of certain commercial strategies from 2014 and more effective supply management. In 2015, the contribution from rack sales was lower as a result of competition from local refineries and our focused efforts to reduce volumes due to our improved inventory management process. This segment continues to drive increased utilization of our pipeline and terminal assets.

38

Table of Contents


Our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment benefited from higher terminalling throughput volumes, particularly in refined petroleum products, and higher storage revenue from new contracts. Our investment in organic growth capital projects continues to drive customer activity to our terminals as we have enhanced our service offerings across our system. In 2015, pipeline transportation revenues increased year-over-year as a result of higher gasoline and jet fuel volumes, as well as the lower FERC litigation accruals recorded as a reduction of revenue. These increases were partially offset by lower product recoveries from our terminalling throughput activities, a decrease in average pipeline tariff rates, lower butane blending margins and increased operating expenses.

See the “Results of Operations” section below for further discussion and analysis of our operating segments.

Results of Operations
 
Consolidated Summary
 
Our summary operating results were as follows for the periods indicated (in thousands, except per unit amounts):
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
 
 
 
 
 
 
Revenue
$
3,453,434

 
$
6,620,247

 
$
5,054,101

Costs and expenses
2,849,318

 
6,124,900

 
4,576,060

Operating income
604,116

 
495,347

 
478,041

Earnings from equity investments
6,381

 
11,265

 
5,243

Interest and debt expense
(171,330
)
 
(171,235
)
 
(130,920
)
Other income (expense)
98

 
(428
)
 
295

Income from continuing operations before taxes
439,265

 
334,949

 
352,659

Income tax expense
(874
)
 
(451
)
 
(1,060
)
Income from continuing operations
438,391

 
334,498

 
351,599

Loss from discontinued operations (1)
(857
)
 
(59,641
)
 
(187,174
)
Net income
437,534

 
274,857

 
164,425

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(311
)
 
(1,903
)
 
(4,152
)
Net income attributable to Buckeye Partners, L.P.
$
437,223

 
$
272,954

 
$
160,273

Diluted earnings (loss) per unit attributable to Buckeye Partners, L.P.
 

 
 

 
 

Continuing operations
$
3.41

 
$
2.78

 
$
3.23

Discontinued operations
$
(0.01
)
 
$
(0.50
)
 
$
(1.74
)
_____________________________
(1)
Represents loss from the operations of our Natural Gas Storage disposal group.  See Note 4 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information.
 
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
 
Adjusted EBITDA is the primary measure used by our senior management, including our Chief Executive Officer, to: (i) evaluate our consolidated operating performance and the operating performance of our business segments; (ii) allocate resources and capital to business segments; (iii) evaluate the viability of proposed projects; and (iv) determine overall rates of return on alternative investment opportunities.  Distributable cash flow is another measure used by our senior management to provide a clearer picture of cash available for distribution to our unitholders.  Adjusted EBITDA and distributable cash flow eliminate: (i) non-cash expenses, including but not limited to, depreciation and amortization expense resulting from the significant capital investments we make in our businesses and from intangible assets recognized in business combinations; (ii) charges for obligations expected to be settled with the issuance of equity instruments; and (iii) items that are not indicative of our core operating performance results and business outlook.
 
We believe that investors benefit from having access to the same financial measures that we use and that these measures are useful to investors because they aid in comparing our operating performance with that of other companies with similar operations.  The Adjusted EBITDA and distributable cash flow data presented by us may not be comparable to similarly titled measures at other companies because these items may be defined differently by other companies.

39

Table of Contents


The following table presents Adjusted EBITDA from continuing operations by segment and on a consolidated basis, distributable cash flow and a reconciliation of income from continuing operations, which is the most comparable financial measure under generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), to Adjusted EBITDA and distributable cash flow for the periods indicated (in thousands):
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
Adjusted EBITDA from continuing operations:
 

 
 

 
 

Domestic Pipelines & Terminals
$
522,196

 
$
532,071

 
$
486,458

Global Marine Terminals
323,840

 
239,556

 
149,740

Merchant Services
22,026

 
(8,059
)
 
12,616

Adjusted EBITDA from continuing operations
$
868,062

 
$
763,568

 
$
648,814

 
 
 
 
 
 
Reconciliation of Income from continuing operations to Adjusted EBITDA from continuing operations and Distributable cash flow:
 

 
 

 
 

Income from continuing operations
$
438,391

 
$
334,498

 
$
351,599

Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests
(311
)
 
(1,903
)
 
(4,152
)
Income from continuing operations attributable to Buckeye Partners, L.P.
438,080

 
332,595

 
347,447

Add:            Interest and debt expense
171,330

 
171,235

 
130,920

Income tax expense
874

 
451

 
1,060

Depreciation and amortization (1)
221,278

 
196,443

 
147,591

Non-cash unit-based compensation expense
29,215

 
20,867

 
21,013

Acquisition and transition expense (2)
3,127

 
13,048

 
11,806

Litigation contingency accrual (3)
15,229

 
40,000

 

Less:           Amortization of unfavorable storage contracts (4)
(11,071
)
 
(11,071
)
 
(11,023
)
Adjusted EBITDA from continuing operations
868,062

 
763,568

 
648,814

Less:           Interest and debt expense, excluding amortization of deferred financing costs, debt discounts and other
(154,469
)
 
(156,728
)
 
(122,471
)
Income tax expense, excluding non-cash taxes
(1,536
)
 
(675
)
 
(717
)
Maintenance capital expenditures (5)
(99,617
)
 
(79,388
)
 
(71,476
)
Distributable cash flow from continuing operations
$
612,440

 
$
526,777

 
$
454,150

____________________________
(1)
Includes 100% of the depreciation and amortization expense of $49.3 million and $12.3 million for Buckeye Texas for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(2)
Acquisition and transition expense consists of transaction costs, costs for transitional employees, and other employee and third-party costs related to the integration of the acquired assets that are non-recurring in nature.
(3)
Represents reductions in revenue related to settlement of a FERC proceeding. See Note 6 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion.
(4)
Represents the amortization of the negative fair values allocated to certain unfavorable storage contracts acquired in connection with the BORCO acquisition.
(5)
Represents expenditures that maintain the operating, safety and/or earnings capacity of our existing assets.


40

Table of Contents

The following table presents product volumes and average tariff rates for the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment in barrels per day (“bpd”), percent of capacity utilization for the Global Marine Terminals segment and total volumes sold in gallons for the Merchant Services segment for the periods indicated:
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
 
 
 
 
 
 
Domestic Pipelines & Terminals (average bpd in thousands):
 

 
 

 
 

Pipelines:
 

 
 

 
 

Gasoline
735.9

 
702.8

 
717.8

Jet fuel
358.9

 
336.0

 
334.4

Middle distillates (1)
337.4

 
354.9

 
345.7

Other products (2)
28.5

 
36.6

 
28.5

Total pipelines throughput
1,460.7

 
1,430.3

 
1,426.4

Terminals:
 

 
 

 
 

Products throughput (3)
1,215.4

 
1,147.5

 
985.7

 
 
 
 
 
 
Pipeline Average Tariff (cents/bbl)
83.7

 
85.2

 
82.2

 
 
 
 
 
 
Global Marine Terminals (percent of capacity):
 
 
 
 
 
Average capacity utilization rate (4)
96
%
 
85
%
 
92
%
 
 
 
 
 
 
Merchant Services (in millions of gallons):
 

 
 

 
 

Sales volumes
1,215.0

 
2,009.0

 
1,371.5

_____________________________
(1)
Includes diesel fuel and heating oil.
(2)
Includes LPG, intermediate petroleum products and crude oil.
(3)
Includes throughput of two underground propane storage caverns previously reported in our Development & Logistics segment. We have adjusted our prior period throughput volumes to conform to current year presentation.
(4)
Represents the ratio of contracted capacity to capacity available to be contracted. Based on total capacity (i.e., including out of service capacity), average capacity utilization rates are approximately 85%, 74% and 88% for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
 
Year Ended December 31, 2015 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2014
 
Consolidated
 
Adjusted EBITDA was $868.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is an increase of $104.5 million, or 13.7%, from $763.6 million for the corresponding period in 2014.  The increase in Adjusted EBITDA was primarily related to increased storage revenue due to higher storage utilization and rates at our terminalling facilities and positive contributions from the Buckeye Texas assets in our Global Marine Terminals segment and elimination of certain commercial strategies from 2014 and more effective supply management in our Merchant Services segment. The increase in Adjusted EBITDA was partially offset by a decrease in revenue related to settlements and butane blending margins in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment. Settlement revenues decreased in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment due to lower product recoveries from our terminalling throughput activities and prior year volumetric pipeline settlement gains. In addition, butane blending activities in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment were negatively impacted due to the narrowed spread between butane and gasoline prices.

Revenue was $3,453.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is a decrease of $3,166.8 million, or 47.8%, from $6,620.2 million for the corresponding period in 2014.  The decrease in revenue was primarily related to the decrease in sales volume and a decline of refined petroleum product prices in our Merchant Services segment, as well as lower product recoveries from our terminalling throughput activities in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment. The decrease in revenue was partially offset by the revenue increase in our Global Marine Terminals segment primarily due to higher storage utilization and rates at our terminalling facilities and lower FERC litigation accruals recorded as a reduction in revenue in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment.

41

Table of Contents


Operating income was $604.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is an increase of $108.8 million, or 22.0%, from $495.3 million for the corresponding period in 2014.  The increase in operating income was primarily related to increased storage revenue due to higher storage utilization and rates at our terminalling facilities in the Global Marine Terminals segment and elimination of certain commercial strategies from 2014 and more effective supply management in our Merchant Services segment. The increase in operating income was partially offset by the decrease in revenue related to settlements and butane blending margins in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment, as well as an increase in depreciation and amortization expense primarily due to the Buckeye Texas assets in our Global Marine Terminals segment.

Distributable cash flow was $612.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is an increase of $85.7 million, or 16.3%, from $526.8 million as compared to the corresponding period in 2014.  The increase in distributable cash flow was primarily related to an increase of $104.5 million in Adjusted EBITDA as described above, partially offset by a $20.2 million increase in maintenance capital expenditures primarily resulting from increased tank integrity projects.
 
Adjusted EBITDA by Segment
 
Domestic Pipelines & Terminals. Adjusted EBITDA from the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment was $522.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is a decrease of $9.9 million, or 1.9%, from $532.1 million for the corresponding period in 2014.  The decrease in Adjusted EBITDA is due to a $19.2 million increase in operating expenses, which include higher payroll expense and legal fees related to certain FERC matters, and a $4.9 million decrease in earnings from equity investments primarily due to an increase in integrity spending, partially offset by a $14.2 million increase in revenues, excluding the accrual related to certain FERC litigation that was recorded as a reduction in revenue. The increase in revenues is comprised of a $26.3 million increase resulting from higher terminalling throughput volumes and higher storage revenue from new contracts, a $13.2 million increase in revenue from capital investments in internal growth and diversification initiatives, including diluent and crude oil handling services and a $9.5 million increase in revenue resulting from higher pipeline volumes. These increases were partially offset by a $26.8 million decrease in revenue related to lower product recoveries from our terminalling throughput activities, as well as the narrowed spread between butane and gasoline prices, and an $8.0 million decrease in revenue resulting from lower average pipeline tariff rates primarily due to a shift between intra-state and inter-state shipments.

Pipeline volumes increased by 2.1% due to stronger demand for jet fuel and gasoline resulting from growth capital projects placed into service mid-year 2014. Terminalling volumes increased by 5.9% due to higher demand for gasoline, distillates and jet fuel, new customer contracts and service offerings at select locations, including contributions from growth capital spending, which were partially offset by a decrease in crude-by-rail volumes.

Global Marine Terminals.  Adjusted EBITDA from the Global Marine Terminals segment was $323.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is an increase of $84.2 million, or 35.1%, from $239.6 million for the corresponding period in 2014.  The increase in Adjusted EBITDA is primarily due to a $58.4 million increase in storage and terminalling revenue as a result of greater customer utilization and higher service rates and a $39.7 million increase in the contribution from our joint venture interest in Buckeye Texas. The average capacity utilization of our marine storage assets was 96% for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is an increase from 85% in the corresponding period in 2014. The increase in storage revenue resulted from internal growth capital investments which increased available storage capacity and diversified our asset capabilities, as well as improved market conditions which were the result of the development of structure in the crude oil and refined petroleum products markets. This increase in Adjusted EBITDA is partially offset by a $7.5 million increase in operating expenses related to outside services for asset maintenance activities and incremental costs necessary to support the higher utilization of our facilities, as well as a $6.4 million decrease in ancillary revenues primarily due to higher product settlement gains in the prior year.

Merchant Services.  Adjusted EBITDA from the Merchant Services segment was $22.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is an improvement of $30.1 million from a loss of $8.1 million for the corresponding period in 2014.  The positive factors impacting Adjusted EBITDA were primarily related to the elimination of certain commercial strategies from 2014 and more effective supply management. The elimination of certain commercial strategies included liquidating our physical positions in markets less liquid than our core markets.

Adjusted EBITDA was positively impacted by a $3,349.9 million decrease in cost of product sales, which included a $2,113.9 million decrease due to 39.5% of lower volumes sold and a $1,236.0 million decrease in refined petroleum product cost due to a price decrease of $1.01 per gallon (average prices per gallon were $1.65 and $2.66 for the 2015 and 2014 periods, respectively) and a $1.1 million decrease in operating expenses, which primarily related to overhead and administrative costs.

42

Table of Contents


Adjusted EBITDA was negatively impacted by a $3,320.9 million decrease in revenue, which included a $2,117.8 million decrease due to 39.5% of lower volumes sold and a $1,203.1 million decrease in refined petroleum product sales due to a price decrease of $0.99 per gallon (average sales prices per gallon were $1.68 and $2.67 for the 2015 and 2014 periods, respectively).

Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013
 
Consolidated
 
Adjusted EBITDA was $763.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, which is an increase of $114.8 million, or 17.7%, from $648.8 million for the corresponding period in 2013. The increase in Adjusted EBITDA was primarily related to positive contribution from the assets acquired from Hess in December 2013 in the Global Marine Terminals and Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segments and benefit from growth capital spending in the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment. These increases in Adjusted EBITDA were partially offset by the loss in the Merchant Services segment as a result of weaker business conditions in the various refined petroleum markets in which we serve, and unfavorable results from implementing strategies in that segment during the second quarter of 2014 intended to increase the utilization of our physical assets, grow our marketing business and mitigate risk. These losses were attributed to: (i) costs associated with entering into new markets to grow our marketing business and support the optimization of our underlying physical assets; (ii) losses on the liquidation of physical positions in markets less liquid than in our core markets; (iii) losses resulting from the timing of activity intended to mitigate risk on gasoline and distillates for the summer driving season and upcoming heating season; and (iv) a significant decline in the value of ethanol which is carried in inventory to support our gasoline business.

Revenue was $6,620.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, which is an increase of $1,566.1 million, or 31.0%, from $5,054.1 million for the corresponding period in 2013. The increase in revenue was primarily related to increased product sales volumes in our Merchant Services segment, as well as the benefit of the terminals acquired from Hess in December 2013 in both our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals and Global Marine Terminals segments. These increases were partially offset by a litigation contingency accrual, recorded as a reduction in revenue, associated with FERC proceedings in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment.

Operating income was $495.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, which is an increase of $17.3 million, or 3.6%, from $478.0 million in the corresponding period in 2013. The increase in operating income was primarily related to the benefit of the terminals acquired from Hess in December 2013 in both our Global Marine Terminals and Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segments. These increases were partially offset by the increase in depreciation and amortization expense primarily due to the assets acquired from Hess in December 2013, assets acquired in the Buckeye Texas Partners Transaction in September 2014, the loss in the Merchant Services segment discussed above, as well as the litigation contingency accrual, recorded as a reduction in revenue, associated with FERC proceedings in our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment.

Distributable cash flow was $526.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, which is an increase of $72.6 million, or 16.0%, from $454.2 million for the corresponding period in 2013. The increase in distributable cash flow was primarily related to an increase of $114.8 million in Adjusted EBITDA as described above, partially offset by a $34.3 million increase in interest expense, excluding amortization of deferred financing costs, debt discounts and other, primarily resulting from the long-term debt issuances in 2013, including the debt issued to partially fund the assets acquired from Hess in December 2013 and a $7.9 million increase in maintenance capital expenditures.

Adjusted EBITDA by Segment

Domestic Pipelines & Terminals. Adjusted EBITDA from the Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment was $532.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, which was an increase of $45.6 million, or 9.4%, from $486.5 million for the corresponding period in 2013. The positive factors impacting Adjusted EBITDA were related to a $68.4 million increase in revenue resulting from an increase in terminalling throughput and storage contracts, including those associated with the assets acquired from Hess in December 2013, $33.4 million of incremental revenue from capital investments in internal growth and diversification initiatives, including butane blending capabilities, crude oil handling services and storage and throughput of other hydrocarbons, a $14.6 million increase in revenue due to increases in average pipeline tariff rates and longer-haul shipments, a $10.8 million increase in other revenue, including a favorable settlement related to certain pipeline transportation services, a $6.0 million increase in earnings from equity investments primarily due to a decrease in maintenance expense and a $2.4 million increase resulting from higher pipeline volumes.


43

Table of Contents

The negative factors impacting Adjusted EBITDA were an $81.6 million increase in operating expenses, primarily related to incremental costs necessary to operate the terminals acquired from Hess in December 2013 and outside services for asset-maintenance activities, and $8.4 million in less favorable settlement experience primarily related to high volumetric gains experienced in 2013 as well as, to a lesser extent, falling commodity prices in 2014.

Pipeline volumes slightly increased despite weaker gasoline shipments resulting from extreme weather conditions in early 2014. Overall terminalling volumes increased by 16.5% due to effective commercialization and integration of the terminals acquired from Hess in December 2013. Legacy terminalling volumes increased by 4.4% due to higher demand for gasoline, distillates and jet fuel and new customer contracts and service offerings at select locations, including the benefit of contributions from growth capital spending.

Global Marine Terminals. Adjusted EBITDA from the Global Marine Terminals segment was $239.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, which was an increase of $89.8 million, or 60.0%, from $149.7 million for the corresponding period in 2013. The positive factors impacting Adjusted EBITDA were a $103.5 million increase in storage and terminalling revenue primarily as a result of the assets acquired from Hess in December 2013 and a $32.8 million increase in revenue from ancillary services. Ancillary services include the berthing of ships at our jetties, heating services and settlement gains/losses. The increase in revenue was partially offset by a $46.5 million increase in operating expenses primarily related to incremental costs necessary to operate the assets acquired from Hess in December 2013.

Merchant Services. Adjusted EBITDA from the Merchant Services segment was a loss of $8.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, which was a decrease of $20.7 million from earnings of $12.6 million for the corresponding period in 2013. The loss experienced during the period is primarily attributed to losses in the second quarter described above, partially offset by strong domestic rack margins.

Adjusted EBITDA was positively impacted by a $1,368.0 million increase in revenue, which included a $1,854.9 million increase due to 46.5% of higher volumes sold, partially offset by a $486.9 million decrease in refined petroleum product sales due to a price decrease of $0.24 per gallon (average sales prices per gallon were $2.67 and $2.91 for the 2014 and 2013 periods, respectively).

Adjusted EBITDA was negatively impacted by a $1,383.0 million increase in cost of product sales, which included a $1,843.3 million increase due to 46.5% of higher volumes sold, offset by a $460.3 million decrease in refined petroleum product cost due to a price decrease of $0.23 per gallon (average cost prices per gallon were $2.66 and $2.89 for the 2014 and 2013 periods, respectively) and a $5.7 million increase in operating expenses.

General Outlook for 2016

We expect our year-over-year performance to improve in 2016 as a result of progress made in 2015 on the construction of our Buckeye Texas facility, additional capital investments made across our portfolio of assets and continued high utilization and increased rates for our storage capacity.

At Buckeye Texas, we completed the commissioning of our refrigerated and compressed LPG storage complex late in the third quarter of 2015 and brought our two condensate splitters into service late in the fourth quarter of 2015. These assets, combined with additional storage and dock capacity expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2016, are expected to generate incremental cash flows compared to 2015.

In addition, we invested in bringing new storage capacity on-line across our system, including the conversion of over 2 million barrels of fuel oil tanks into flexible service at our BORCO facility, the return to commercial service of 1.5 million barrels of capacity at our St. Lucia facility, and expansion of storage capacity at our Chicago Complex through the completion of a bi-directional pipeline connecting this important Midwestern hub to an additional terminal that had been previously underutilized. We also expanded our service capabilities in the New York Harbor by increasing gasoline blending capacity. We expect these investments to generate incremental cash flows in 2016 as we benefit from the full year impact.

We have begun construction on our Michigan-Ohio pipeline and terminal expansion project, which will allow us to offer expanded transportation service of refined petroleum products from points in Michigan and western Ohio to destinations in eastern Ohio and western Pennsylvania. We expect this project to be in operation in the fourth quarter of 2016, although the full run-rate will not be realized until 2017.


44

Table of Contents

Volumes across our pipeline systems are expected to be impacted by the strength in aviation fuel and gasoline, partially offset by weakness in distillates. Until the completion of our Michigan-Ohio expansion project, we expect to see downward pressure from the impact of changing product flows, primarily on our Central Pennsylvania system. Throughput volumes across our domestic terminals are expected to increase moderately from the completion of growth capital initiatives in the Midwest and increased customer demand in the Southeast.

Our Merchant Services segment continues to benefit from inventory risk management activities and asset optimization. We expect that our inventory risk management strategy will drive more stable results and allow us to seize opportunities to lock in contango value, when presented, in 2016.

Our results in 2015 reflect the benefit of our diversified asset base with limited exposure to commodity prices. The impact of lower commodity prices in 2016 could negatively impact the value we realize on our settlement revenues and butane blending margins; however, our storage assets could benefit from the strong demand for storage as liquid petroleum product inventories are at elevated levels. Overall, we believe our diversified portfolio of assets is well positioned for the current market environment.

We believe that we have sufficient liquidity available on our $1.5 billion revolving Credit Facility, as well as the ability to utilize our at-the-market equity issuance program to meet our expected capital needs for 2016. Under current market conditions, we believe that we could raise additional capital in both the debt and equity markets on acceptable terms to fund appropriate asset or business acquisitions.

We will continue to evaluate opportunities throughout 2016 to acquire or construct assets that are complementary to our businesses and support our long-term growth strategy and will determine the appropriate financing structure on acceptable terms for any opportunity we pursue.

The forward-looking statements contained in this “General Outlook for 2016” speak only as of the date hereof.  Although the expectations in the forward-looking statements are based on our current beliefs and expectations, caution should be taken not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements because such statements speak only as of the date hereof.  Except as required by federal and state securities laws, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or any other reason.  All such forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this Report, including under the captions “Risk Factors” and “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and elsewhere in this Report and in our future periodic reports filed with the SEC.  In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the forward-looking events discussed in this “General Outlook for 2016” may not occur.

Liquidity and Capital Resources
 
            General
 
                        Our primary cash requirements, in addition to normal operating expenses and debt service, are for working capital, capital expenditures, business acquisitions and distributions to unitholders.  Our principal sources of liquidity are cash from operations, borrowings under our $1.5 billion revolving Credit Facility and proceeds from the issuance of our LP Units.  We will, from time to time, issue debt securities to permanently finance amounts borrowed under our Credit Facility.  The BMSC entities fund their working capital needs principally from their own operations and their portion of our Credit Facility.  Our financial policy has been to fund maintenance capital expenditures with cash from continuing operations.  Expansion and cost reduction capital expenditures, along with acquisitions, have typically been funded from external sources including our Credit Facility, as well as debt and equity offerings.  Our goal has been to fund at least half of these expenditures with proceeds from equity offerings in order to maintain our investment-grade credit rating.  Based on current market conditions, we believe our borrowing capacity under our Credit Facility, cash flows from continuing operations and access to debt and equity markets, if necessary, will be sufficient to fund our primary cash requirements, including our expansion plans over the next 12 months.
 
            Current Liquidity
 
As of December 31, 2015, we had $47.2 million of working capital and $1,027.5 million of availability under our Credit Facility. We are limited to $933.1 million of additional borrowing capacity by the financial covenants under our Credit Facility, except for borrowings that are used to refinance other debt.
 

45

Table of Contents

Capital Structuring Transactions
 
As part of our ongoing efforts to maintain a capital structure that is closely aligned with the cash-generating potential of our asset-based business, we may explore additional sources of external liquidity, including public or private debt or equity issuances.  Matters to be considered will include cash interest expense and maturity profile, all to be balanced with maintaining adequate liquidity.  We have a universal shelf registration statement that does not place any dollar limits on the amount of debt and equity securities that we may issue thereunder and a traditional shelf registration statement on file with the SEC under which we may issue equity securities with a value, as of December 31, 2015, not to exceed $836.5 million.  The timing of any transaction may be impacted by events, such as strategic growth opportunities, legal judgments or regulatory or environmental requirements.  The receptiveness of the capital markets to an offering of debt or equity securities cannot be assured and may be negatively impacted by, among other things, our long-term business prospects and other factors beyond our control, including market conditions.
 
In addition, we periodically evaluate engaging in strategic transactions as a source of capital or may consider divesting non-core assets where our evaluation suggests such a transaction is in the best interest of our business.

Capital Allocation
 
We continually review our investment options with respect to our capital resources that are not distributed to our unitholders or used to pay down our debt and seek to invest these capital resources in various projects and activities based on their return on investment.  Potential investments could include, among others: add-on or other enhancement projects associated with our current assets; greenfield or brownfield development projects; and merger and acquisition activities.
 
Debt
 
At December 31, 2015, we had the following debt obligations (in thousands):
5.125% Notes due July 1, 2017
$
125,000

6.050% Notes due January 15, 2018
300,000

2.650% Notes due November 15, 2018
400,000

5.500% Notes due August 15, 2019
275,000

4.875% Notes due February 1, 2021
650,000

4.150% Notes due July 1, 2023
500,000

4.350% Notes due October 15, 2024
300,000

6.750% Notes due August 15, 2033
150,000

5.850% Notes due November 15, 2043
400,000

5.600% Notes due October 15, 2044
300,000

Credit Facility due September 30, 2020
472,488

Total debt
$
3,872,488

 
In December 2015, Buckeye and its indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries, BMSC, as borrowers, exercised their option to extend our existing Credit Facility by one year to September 30, 2020, resulting in a remaining option to extend the term for one additional year.  At December 31, 2015, Buckeye and BMSC collectively had $472.5 million outstanding under the Credit Facility, of which $111.5 million, attributable to BMSC, was classified as current liabilities in our consolidated balance sheet, as related funds were used to finance current working capital needs.  See Note 14 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.
 
Equity
 
During the year ended December 31, 2015, we sold 2.2 million LP Units in aggregate under the Equity Distribution Agreements, received $161.5 million in net proceeds after deducting commissions and other related expenses, and paid $1.6 million of compensation in aggregate to the agents under the Equity Distribution Agreements.
 

46

Table of Contents

Cash Flows from Operating, Investing and Financing Activities
 
The following table summarizes our cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities for the periods indicated (in thousands):
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
Cash provided by (used in):
 

 
 

 
 

Operating activities
$
710,192

 
$
599,642

 
$
385,494

Investing activities
(614,894
)
 
(1,191,497
)
 
(1,204,678
)
Financing activities
(98,625
)
 
595,113

 
817,358

 
            Operating Activities
 
                        2015 Net cash provided by operating activities was $710.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, primarily related to $437.5 million of net income, $221.3 million of depreciation and amortization, $53.7 million in other non-cash items and a $56.8 million decrease in working capital, partially offset by $52.8 million in litigation settlement payments.
 
                        2014. Net cash provided by operating activities was $599.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, primarily related to $274.9 million of net income and $196.4 million of depreciation and amortization, a $71.3 million decrease in accounts receivables, and a $70.1 million decrease in inventory, partially offset by a $51.5 million settlement to terminate the interest rate swap agreements related to the forecasted refinancing of the 5.300% Notes.
 
                        2013.  Net cash provided by operating activities was $385.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, primarily related to $164.4 million of net income and $155.2 million of depreciation and amortization, partially offset by a $62.0 million settlement to terminate the interest rate swap agreements related to the 4.150% Notes, a $69.7 million increase in accounts receivables and an increase in interest and debt expense.
 
Future Operating Cash Flows.  Our future operating cash flows will vary based on a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control, including demand for our services, the cost of commodities, the effectiveness of our strategy, legal environmental and regulatory requirements and our ability to capture value associated with commodity price volatility.
           
            Investing Activities
 
                        2015.  Net cash used in investing activities of $614.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 primarily related to $594.5 million of capital expenditures, $21.4 million in escrow deposits, partially offset by $10.3 million of proceeds from the sale and disposition of assets, primarily due to the disposition of an ammonia pipeline in Texas.
 
                        2014.  Net cash used in investing activities of $1,191.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily related to $472.1 million of capital expenditures and $824.7 million of acquisition costs, primarily related to the Buckeye Texas Partners Transaction, partially offset by $103.4 million cash proceeds from the sale of our Natural Gas Storage disposal group.
 
                        2013.  Net cash used in investing activities of $1,204.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 primarily related to $361.4 million of capital expenditures and $856.4 million related to the Hess Terminals Acquisition.
 
                        See below for a discussion of capital spending.  For further discussion on our acquisitions, see Note 3 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
 

47

Table of Contents

                        We have capital expenditures, which we define as “maintenance capital expenditures,” in order to maintain and enhance the safety and integrity of our pipelines, terminals, storage and processing facilities and related assets, and “expansion and cost reduction capital expenditures” to expand the reach or capacity of those assets, to improve the efficiency of our operations and to pursue new business opportunities.  Capital expenditures, excluding non-cash changes in accruals for capital expenditures, were as follows for the periods indicated (in thousands):
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
Maintenance capital expenditures (1)
$
99,617

 
$
80,141

 
$
71,595

Expansion and cost reduction (2) (3)
494,903

 
392,008

 
289,850

Total capital expenditures, net
$
594,520

 
$
472,149

 
$
361,445

_____________________________
(1)
Includes maintenance capital expenditures related to the Natural Gas Storage disposal group of $0.8 million and $0.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
(2)
Includes expansion and cost reduction capital expenditures related to the Natural Gas Storage disposal group of $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2013.
(3)
Amounts exclude accruals for capital expenditures. Expansion and cost reduction amounts including accruals for capital expenditures were $516.5 million and $340.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
 
Capital expenditures increased for the year ended December 31, 2015, as compared to the corresponding period in 2014 primarily due to increases in expansion and cost reduction capital expenditures.  Our expansion and cost reduction capital expenditures were $494.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is an increase of $102.9 million, or 26.2%, from $392.0 million for the corresponding period in 2014.  Year-to-year fluctuations in our expansion and cost reduction capital expenditures are primarily driven by spending on our major organic growth capital projects.  Our most significant organic growth capital expenditures for the year ended December 31, 2015 included cost reduction and revenue generating projects related to enhancements across our portfolio of terminalling assets, butane blending capabilities, completion of rail unloading facilities, crude oil storage/transportation/processing and a pipeline integrity enhancement program that improved the operational efficiencies in our pipeline systems, and the significant completion of a deep-water, marine terminal, two condensate splitters, an LPG storage complex and three crude oil and condensate gathering facilities in South Texas.  The build-out of the facilities in South Texas was funded through additional partnership contributions by us and Trafigura based on our respective ownership interests in Buckeye Texas. Our maintenance capital expenditures were $99.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2015, which is an increase of $19.5 million, or 24.3%, from $80.1 million for the corresponding period in 2014.  Year-to-year fluctuations in our maintenance capital expenditures are primarily driven by the timing and cost of asset integrity and facility infrastructure projects.  Our most significant maintenance capital expenditures for the year ended December 31, 2015 included truck rack upgrades, pump replacements and pipeline and tank integrity work necessary to maintain the operating capacity and equipment reliability of our existing infrastructure, as well as to address environmental regulations.

Capital expenditures increased for the year ended December 31, 2014, as compared to the corresponding period in 2013 primarily due to increases in expansion and cost reduction capital expenditures.  Our expansion and cost reduction capital expenditures were $392.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, which is an increase of $102.2 million, or 35.2%, from $289.9 million for the corresponding period in 2013.  Year-to-year fluctuations in our expansion and cost reduction capital expenditures are primarily driven by spending on our major organic growth capital projects.  Our most significant organic growth capital expenditures for the year ended December 31, 2014 included cost reduction and revenue generating projects related to storage tank enhancements across our portfolio of terminalling assets, butane blending capabilities, completion of rail unloading facilities, crude oil storage/transportation and a pipeline integrity enhancement program that improved the operational efficiencies in our pipeline systems.  Our maintenance capital expenditures were $80.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2014, which is an increase of $8.5 million, or 11.9%, from $71.6 million for the corresponding period in 2013.  Year-to-year fluctuations in our maintenance capital expenditures are primarily driven by the timing and cost of pipeline integrity and similar projects.  Our most significant maintenance capital expenditures for the year ended December 31, 2014 included truck rack infrastructure upgrades, pump replacements and pipeline and tank integrity work necessary to maintain the operating capacity and equipment reliability of our existing infrastructure, as well as to address environmental regulations.
 

48

Table of Contents

We estimate our capital expenditures for the period indicated as follows (in thousands):
 
2016
 
Low
 
High
Domestic Pipelines & Terminals:
 

 
 

Maintenance capital expenditures
$
75,000

 
$
85,000

Expansion and cost reduction
185,000

 
215,000

Total capital expenditures
$
260,000

 
$
300,000

 
 
 
 
Global Marine Terminals:
 

 
 

Maintenance capital expenditures
$
25,000

 
$
35,000

Expansion and cost reduction
140,000

 
160,000

Total capital expenditures (1)
$
165,000

 
$
195,000

 
 
 
 
Overall:
 

 
 

Maintenance capital expenditures
$
100,000

 
$
120,000

Expansion and cost reduction
325,000

 
375,000

Total capital expenditures
$
425,000

 
$
495,000

_____________________________
(1)
Includes 100% of Buckeye Texas Partners related capital expenditures.
 
Estimated maintenance capital expenditures include replacement of tank floors and tank roofs, pipeline integrity, marine dock structure upgrades and upgrades to station and terminalling equipment, field instrumentation and cathodic protection systems. Estimated major expansion and cost reduction expenditures include the capacity expansion of our pipeline system and terminalling capacity in the Midwest, LPG storage/loading facility in Western Pennsylvania, various tank construction and conversion projects in our Global Marine Terminals and Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segments, as well as an expansion between facilities in the New York Harbor.

Financing Activities
 
2015.  Net cash flows used in financing activities of $98.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2015 primarily related to $591.0 million of cash distributions paid to unitholders ($4.625 per LP Unit), partially offset by $306.5 million of net borrowings under the Credit Facility and $161.5 million of net proceeds from the issuance of 2.2 million LP Units under the Equity Distribution Agreements.
 
2014.  Net cash flows provided by financing activities of $595.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 primarily related to $899.7 million of net proceeds from the issuance of an aggregate 11.8 million LP Units, and $599.1 million of proceeds from the issuance of the 4.350% and 5.600% Notes due October 15, 2024 and October 15, 2044, respectively, partially offset by $527.2 million of cash distributions paid to our unitholders ($4.425 per LP Unit), $275.0 million related to the repayment of the 5.300% Notes and $89.0 million of net repayments under the Credit Facility.
 
2013.  Net cash flows provided by financing activities of $817.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 primarily related to $1.3 billion of proceeds from the issuance of the 4.150%, 2.650% and 5.850% Notes due July 1, 2023, November 15, 2018 and November 15, 2043, respectively, $903.0 million of net proceeds from the issuance of an aggregate 16.0 million LP Units, partially offset by $616.2 million of net repayments under the Credit Facility, $428.8 million of cash distributions paid to our unitholders ($4.225 per LP Unit) and $300.0 million related to the repayment of the 4.625% Notes.
 
For further discussion on our equity offerings, see Note 22 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
 

49

Table of Contents

Contractual Obligations
 
The following table summarizes our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2015 (in thousands):
 
Payments Due by Period
 
Total
 
Less than 1
year
 
1-3 years
 
3-5 years
 
More than 5
years
Long-term debt (1)
$
3,761,000

 
$

 
$
825,000

 
$
636,000

 
$
2,300,000

Interest payments (2)
1,934,988

 
177,899

 
327,344

 
262,571

 
1,167,174

Operating leases:
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Office space and other
20,340

 
3,885

 
7,116

 
5,935

 
3,404

Equipment (3)
4,996

 
4,010

 
986

 

 

Land leases (4)
101,855

 
2,398

 
4,796

 
4,796

 
89,865

Purchase obligations (5)
161,600

 
161,600

 

 

 

Total contractual obligations
$
5,984,779

 
$
349,792

 
$
1,165,242

 
$
909,302

 
$
3,560,443

_____________________________
(1)
Includes long-term debt portion borrowed under our Credit Facility.  See Note 14 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding our debt obligations.
(2)
Includes amounts due on our notes and amounts and commitment fees due on our Credit Facility.  The interest amount calculated on the Credit Facility is based on the assumption that the amount outstanding and the interest rate charged both remain at their current levels.
(3)
Includes leases for tugboats and a barge in our Global Marine Terminals segment.
(4)
Includes leases for properties in connection with both the jetty and inland dock operations in our Global Marine Terminals segment.
(5)
Includes short-term purchase obligations for products and services with third-party suppliers and payment obligations relating to capital projects.  The prices that we are obligated to pay under these contracts approximate current market prices.
 
For the year ended December 31, 2016, our rights-of-way payments are expected to be $7.2 million, which include an estimated amount for annual escalation.

In addition, our obligations related to our pension and postretirement benefit plans are discussed in Note 19 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

Employee Stock Ownership Plan
 
Services Company provides the Employee Stock Ownership Plan (“ESOP”) to the majority of its employees hired before September 16, 2004.  Employees hired by Services Company after September 15, 2004 and certain employees covered by a union multiemployer pension plan do not participate in the ESOP.  The ESOP owns all of the outstanding common stock of Services Company.
 
The ESOP was frozen with respect to benefits effective March 27, 2011 (the “Freeze Date”).  No Services Company contributions have been or will be made on behalf of current participants in the ESOP on and after the Freeze Date.  Even though contributions under the ESOP are no longer being made, each eligible participant’s ESOP account will continue to be credited with its share of any stock dividends or other stock distributions associated with Services Company stock.
 
All Services Company stock has been allocated to ESOP participants.  See Note 19 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
 
At December 31, 2015 and 2014, we had no off-balance sheet debt or arrangements.


50

Table of Contents

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
 
The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires our management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses during the reporting period and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements.  Estimates and assumptions about future events and their effects cannot be made with certainty.  Estimates may change as new events occur, when additional information becomes available and if our operating environment changes.  Actual results could differ from our estimates.  See Note 2 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for our significant accounting policies. The following describes significant estimates and assumptions affecting the application of these policies:
 
Basis of Presentation and Principles of Consolidation
 
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of our subsidiaries controlled by us and variable interest entities (“VIEs”), of which we are the primary beneficiary. A VIE is required to be consolidated by its primary beneficiary which is generally defined as the party who has (i) the power to direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance, and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits that could potentially be significant to the VIE.  We evaluate our relationships with our VIEs on an ongoing basis to determine whether we continue to be the primary beneficiary.  Third party or affiliate ownership interests in our consolidated VIEs are presented as noncontrolling interests.  All intercompany transactions are eliminated in consolidation.

In February 2015, the FASB issued guidance changing the criteria for reporting entities that are required to evaluate whether they should consolidate certain legal entities. All legal entities are subject to reevaluation under the revised consolidation model. Specifically, the amendments modify the evaluation of whether limited partnerships and similar legal entities are variable interest entities or voting interest entities, while also eliminating the presumption that a general partner should consolidate a limited partnership. We adopted this guidance on January 1, 2015. Our adoption did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements as there were no changes to the entities consolidated as a result of the adoption of this guidance.

Upon adoption of this guidance, we concluded that Buckeye Texas and Sabina Pipeline are VIEs of which we are the primary beneficiary. In making this conclusion, we evaluated the legal form of the VIEs and the activities that significantly impact the economics of the VIEs, including our role to perform all services reasonably required to operate and maintain the assets of the VIEs.

Business Combinations
 
We allocate the total purchase price of a business combination to the assets acquired and the liabilities assumed based on their estimated fair values at the acquisition date, with the excess purchase price recorded as goodwill. An income, market or cost valuation method may be utilized to estimate the fair value of the assets acquired or liabilities assumed in a business combination.  The income valuation method represents the present value of future cash flows over the life of the asset using: (i) discrete financial forecasts, which rely on management’s estimates of revenue and operating expenses; (ii) long-term growth rates; and (iii) appropriate discount rates.  The market valuation method uses prices paid for a reasonably similar asset by other purchasers in the market, with adjustments relating to any differences between the assets.  The cost valuation method is based on the replacement cost of a comparable asset at prices at the time of the acquisition reduced for depreciation of the asset.
 
Valuation of Goodwill
 
Goodwill represents the excess of purchase price over fair value of net assets acquired. Our goodwill amounts are assessed for impairment: (i) on an annual basis each year; or (ii) on an interim basis if circumstances indicate it is more likely than not the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying value. In the fourth quarter of 2015, we changed the date of our annual goodwill impairment test for all reporting units from January 1st to October 31st. The change is preferable as it better aligns our goodwill impairment testing procedures with our annual budget process and alleviates resource constraints in connection with the year-end closing and financial reporting process. Due to significant judgments and estimates that are utilized in a goodwill impairment analysis, we determined it was impracticable to objectively determine operating and valuation estimates as of each October 31st for periods prior to October 31, 2015. As a result, we prospectively applied the change in the annual impairment test date to October 31, 2015. The change in accounting principle does not delay, accelerate, or avoid an impairment charge.
 

51

Table of Contents

For our annual goodwill impairment test as of October 31, 2015, we performed quantitative assessments to determine the fair value of each of our reporting units.  The estimate of the fair value of the reporting unit is determined using a combination of an expected present value of future cash flows and a market multiple valuation method.  The present value of future cash flows is estimated using: (i) discrete financial forecasts, which rely on management’s estimates of revenue and operating expenses; (ii) long-term growth rates; and (iii) an appropriate discount rate.  The market multiple valuation method uses appropriate market multiples from comparable companies on the reporting unit’s earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization.  We evaluate industry and market conditions for purposes of weighting the income and market valuation approach.  Based on such calculations, each reporting unit’s fair value was in excess of its carrying value.  We did not record any goodwill impairment charges during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 or 2013.
 
Valuation of Long-Lived Assets and Equity Method Investments
 
We assess the recoverability of our long-lived assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable.  If events or circumstances are identified, the carrying amount of the asset is compared to the estimated discounted future cash flows to determine if an impairment exists. Estimates of undiscounted future cash flows include: (i) discrete financial forecasts, which rely on management’s estimates of revenue and operating expenses; (ii) long-term growth rates; and (iii) estimates of useful lives of the assets.  The identification of impairment indicators and the estimates of future undiscounted cash flows are highly subjective and are based on numerous assumptions about future operations and market conditions.

In December 2013, the Board approved a plan to divest the natural gas storage facility and related assets that our former subsidiary, Lodi, owned and operated in Northern California.  We refer to this group of assets as our Natural Gas Storage disposal group.  The estimated fair value less costs to sell was determined to be less than its carrying value, which resulted in the recognition of a non-cash asset impairment charge of $169.0 million, which included the write-down of long-lived assets.  In July 2014, we signed a purchase and sale agreement to sell our Natural Gas Storage disposal group.  As a result of the execution of the purchase and sale agreement, subsequent changes in the carrying value of the net assets and the completed sale in December 2014, we recorded additional non-cash asset impairment charges of $23.4 million during the year ended December 31, 2014.  We recorded these asset impairment charges within “Loss from discontinued operations” on our consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.  See Notes 4 and 5 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion.
 
We evaluate equity method investments for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that there is an “other than temporary” loss in value of the investment.  Estimates of future cash flows include: (i) discrete financial forecasts, which rely on management’s estimates of revenue and operating expenses; (ii) long-term growth rates; and (iii) probabilities assigned to different cash flow scenarios.  There were no impairments of our equity investments during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 or 2013.
 
Reserves for Environmental Matters
 
We record environmental liabilities at a specific site when environmental assessments occur or remediation efforts are probable, and the costs can be reasonably estimated based upon past experience, discussion with operating personnel, advice of outside engineering and consulting firms, discussion with legal counsel, or current facts and circumstances.  The estimates related to environmental matters are uncertain because: (i) estimated future expenditures are subject to cost fluctuations and change in estimated remediation period; (ii) unanticipated liabilities may arise; and (iii) changes in federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations may significantly change the extent of remediation.
 

52

Table of Contents

Valuation of Derivatives
 
We are exposed to financial market risks, including changes in interest rates and commodity prices, in the course of our normal business operations.  We use derivative instruments to manage these risks.
 
Our Merchant Services segment primarily uses exchange-traded refined petroleum product futures contracts to manage the risk of market price volatility on its refined petroleum product inventories and its physical derivative contracts which we designated as fair value hedges with changes in fair value of both the futures contracts and physical inventory reflected in earnings.  Our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment uses exchange-traded refined petroleum contracts to hedge certain expected future transactions which we designated as cash flow hedges with the effective portion of the hedge reported in other comprehensive income and reclassified into earnings when the expected future transaction affects earnings. Our Merchant Services segment entered into these contracts on behalf of our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals segment. In both cases, any gains or losses incurred on the derivative instrument that are not effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows of the hedged item are recognized immediately in earnings. Physical forward contracts and futures contracts that have not been designated in a hedge relationship are marked-to-market.

Futures contracts are valued using quoted market prices obtained from the New York Mercantile Exchange. Physical derivative contracts are valued using market approaches based on observable market data inputs, including published commodity pricing data, which is verified against other available market data, and market interest rate and volatility data, and are net of credit value adjustments.

The fixed-price and index purchase contracts are typically executed with credit worthy counterparties and are short-term in nature, thus evaluated for credit risk in the same manner as the fixed-price sales contracts.  However, because the fixed-price sales contracts are privately negotiated with customers of the Merchant Services segment who are generally smaller, private companies that may not have established credit ratings, the determination of an adjustment to fair value to reflect counterparty credit risk (a “credit valuation adjustment”) requires significant management judgment.
 
Each customer is evaluated for performance under the terms and conditions of their contracts; therefore, we evaluate: (i) the historical payment patterns of the customer; (ii) the current outstanding receivables balances for each customer and contract; and (iii) the level of performance of each customer with respect to volumes called for in the contract.  We then evaluated the specific risks and expected outcomes of nonpayment or nonperformance by each customer and contract.  We continue to monitor and evaluate performance and collections with respect to these fixed-price contracts.

Item 7A.  Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
 
Market Risk — Trading Instruments
 
We have no trading derivative instruments.
 
Market Risk — Non-Trading Instruments
 
We are exposed to financial market risks, including changes in commodity prices and interest rates.  The primary factors affecting our market risk and the fair value of our derivative portfolio at any point in time are the volume of open derivative positions, changing refined petroleum commodity prices, and prevailing interest rates for our interest rate swaps.  We are also susceptible to basis risk created when we enter into financial hedges that are priced at a certain location, but the sales or exchanges of the underlying commodity are at another location where prices and price changes might differ from the prices and price changes at the location upon which the hedging instrument is based.  Since prices for refined petroleum products and interest rates are volatile, there may be material changes in the fair value of our derivatives over time, driven both by price volatility and the changes in volume of open derivative transactions.
 

53

Table of Contents

The following is a summary of changes in fair value of our derivative instruments for the periods indicated (in thousands):
Fair value of contracts outstanding at January 1, 2015
$
67,686

Items recognized or settled during the period
(108,227
)
Fair value attributable to new deals
10,188

Change in fair value attributable to price movements
108,605

Change in fair value attributable to non-performance risk
(123
)
Fair value of contracts outstanding at December 31, 2015
$
78,129

  
Commodity Price Risk
 
Our Merchant Services segment primarily uses exchange-traded refined petroleum product futures contracts to manage the risk of market price volatility on its refined petroleum product inventories and its physical derivative contracts.  During 2015, our Merchant Services segment entered into exchange-traded refined petroleum product futures contracts on behalf of our Domestic Pipelines & Terminals to manage the risk of market price volatility on the narrowing gasoline-to-butane pricing spreads associated with our butane blending activities managed by a third party. Based on a hypothetical 10% movement in the underlying quoted market prices of the futures contracts and observable market data from third-party pricing publications for physical derivative contracts related to designated hedged refined petroleum products inventories outstanding and physical derivative contracts at December 31, 2015, the estimated fair value would be as follows (in thousands):
Scenario
 
Resulting
Classification
 
Fair Value
Fair value assuming no change in underlying commodity prices (as is)
 
Asset
 
$
252,618

Fair value assuming 10% increase in underlying commodity prices
 
Asset
 
$
259,936

Fair value assuming 10% decrease in underlying commodity prices
 
Asset
 
$
245,300


Interest Rate Risk
 
From time to time, we utilize forward-starting interest rate swaps to hedge the variability of the forecasted interest payments on anticipated debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate until the expected debt is issued.  When entering into interest rate swap transactions, we are exposed to both credit risk and market risk.  We manage our credit risk by entering into swap transactions only with major financial institutions with investment-grade credit ratings.  We are subject to credit risk when the change in fair value of the swap instruments is positive and the counterparty may fail to perform under the terms of the contract.  We are subject to market risk with respect to changes in the underlying benchmark interest rate that impact the fair value of swaps.  We manage our market risk by aligning the swap instrument with the existing underlying debt obligation or a specified expected debt issuance generally associated with the maturity of an existing debt obligation.
 
Our practice with respect to derivative transactions related to interest rate risk has been to have each transaction in connection with non-routine borrowings authorized by the Board.  In February 2009, the Board adopted an interest rate hedging policy which permits us to enter into certain short-term interest rate swap agreements to manage our interest rate and cash flow risks associated with a credit facility.  In addition, in July 2009 and May 2010, the Board authorized us to enter into certain transactions, such as forward-starting interest rate swaps, to manage our interest rate and cash flow risks related to certain expected debt issuances associated with the maturity of existing debt obligations.
 
See Note 17 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for additional discussion related to derivative instruments and hedging activities.
 
At December 31, 2015, we had total fixed-rate debt obligations under various public notes at an aggregate carrying value of $3,372 million.  Based on a hypothetical 1% movement in the underlying interest rates at December 31, 2015, the estimated fair value of these debt obligations would be as follows (in millions):
Scenario
 
Fair Value of
Fixed-Rate Debt
Fair value assuming no change in underlying interest rates (as is)
 
$
3,057.9

Fair value assuming 1% increase in underlying interest rates
 
$
2,893.8

Fair value assuming 1% decrease in underlying interest rates
 
$
3,242.1

 

54

Table of Contents

At December 31, 2015, our variable-rate obligations were $472.5 million under the Credit Facility. Based on the balance outstanding at December 31, 2015, we estimate that a 1% increase or decrease in interest rates would increase or decrease annual interest expense by $4.7 million.
 
Foreign Currency Risk
 
Puerto Rico is a commonwealth country under the U.S., and thus uses the U.S. dollar as its official currency.  BORCO’s functional currency is the U.S. dollar and it is equivalent in value to the Bahamian dollar.  St. Lucia is a sovereign island country in the Caribbean and its official currency is the Eastern Caribbean dollar, which is pegged to the U.S. dollar and has remained fixed for many years.  The functional currency for our operations in St. Lucia is the U.S. dollar.  Foreign exchange gains and losses arising from transactions denominated in a currency other than the U.S. dollar relate to a nominal amount of supply purchases and are included in “Other income (expense)” within our consolidated statements of operations.  The effects of foreign currency transactions were not considered to be material for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013.


55

Table of Contents

Item 8.       Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
 
 
Page
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


56

Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
 
Management of Buckeye GP LLC, as general partner of Buckeye Partners, L.P. (“Buckeye”), is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting of Buckeye. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute, assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.  A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
 
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.  Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
 
Management evaluated the internal control over financial reporting of Buckeye as of December 31, 2015.  In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) (“COSO”).  As a result of this assessment and based on the criteria in the COSO framework, management has concluded that, as of December 31, 2015, the internal control over financial reporting of Buckeye was effective.
 
Buckeye’s independent registered public accounting firm, Deloitte & Touche LLP, has audited the internal control over financial reporting of Buckeye.  Their opinion on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Buckeye appears herein.
 
/s/ CLARK C. SMITH
/s/ KEITH E. ST.CLAIR
Clark C. Smith
Keith E. St.Clair
Chief Executive Officer, President and
Executive Vice President and
Chairman of the Board
Chief Financial Officer
 
 
February 25, 2016
 


57

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
To the Board of Directors of Buckeye GP LLC and the
Partners of Buckeye Partners, L.P.
 
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of Buckeye Partners, L.P. and subsidiaries (“Buckeye”) as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.  Buckeye’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on Buckeye’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
 
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.  Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
 
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, the company’s principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and effected by the company’s board of directors, management, and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.  A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
 
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including the possibility of collusion or improper management override of controls, material misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.  Also, projections of any evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
 
In our opinion, Buckeye maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on the criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
 
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2015 of Buckeye and our report dated February 25, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.
 
/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
 
Houston, Texas
February 25, 2016

58

Table of Contents

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
To the Board of Directors of Buckeye GP LLC and the
Partners of Buckeye Partners, L.P.
 
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Buckeye Partners, L.P. and subsidiaries (“Buckeye”) as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, cash flows, and partners’ capital for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2015.  These financial statements are the responsibility of Buckeye’s management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the financial statements based on our audits.
 
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.  We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
 
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Buckeye as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2015, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
 
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Buckeye’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on the criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 25, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion on Buckeye’s internal control over financial reporting.
 
/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
 
Houston, Texas
February 25, 2016

59

Table of Contents

BUCKEYE PARTNERS, L.P.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except per unit amounts)
 
 
Year Ended December 31,
 
2015
 
2014
 
2013
Revenue:
 

 
 

 
 

Product sales
$
2,028,323

 
$
5,348,532

 
$
3,966,247

Transportation, storage and other services
1,425,111

 
1,271,715

 
1,087,854

Total revenue
3,453,434

 
6,620,247

 
5,054,101

 
 
 
 
 
 
Costs and expenses:
 

 
 

 
 

Cost of product sales
1,965,844

 
5,311,552

 
3,944,448

Operating expenses
573,368

 
537,705

 
413,577

Depreciation and amortization
221,278

 
196,443

 
147,591

General and administrative
88,828

 
79,200

 
70,444

Total costs and expenses
2,849,318

 
6,124,900

 
4,576,060

Operating income
604,116

 
495,347

 
478,041

 
 
 
 
 
 
Other income (expense):
 

 
 

 
 

Earnings from equity investments
6,381

 
11,265

 
5,243

Interest and debt expense
(171,330
)
 
(171,235
)
 
(130,920
)
Other income (expense)
98

 
(428
)
 
295

Total other expense, net
(164,851
)
 
(160,398
)
 
(125,382
)
 
 
 
 
 
 
Income from continuing operations before taxes
439,265

 
334,949

 
352,659

Income tax expense
(874