Attached files
file | filename |
---|---|
EX-32 - EX-32 - TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC | c62424exv32.htm |
EX-3.1 - EX-3.1 - TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC | c62424exv3w1.htm |
EX-2.1 - EX-2.1 - TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC | c62424exv2w1.htm |
EX-31.2 - EX-31.2 - TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC | c62424exv31w2.htm |
EX-31.1 - EX-31.1 - TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC | c62424exv31w1.htm |
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
(Mark One)
þ | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010
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 1-7584
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization) |
74-1079400 (IRS Employer Identification No.) |
|
2800 Post Oak Blvd., Houston, Texas (Address of principal executive offices) |
77056 (Zip Code) |
(713) 215-2000
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
None
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
(Registrants Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
None
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 o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or
Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation
S-K (§229.405) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrants
knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of
this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. þ
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 definition of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer, and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check One):
Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer o | Non-accelerated filer þ
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Act). Yes o No þ
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
None
None
The registrant meets the conditions set forth in General Instruction (I)(1)(a) and (b) of Form
10-K and is therefore filing this Form 10-K with the reduced disclosure format.
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
FORM 10-K
FORM 10-K
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1 | PAGE | |||||||
4 | ||||||||
9 | ||||||||
28 | ||||||||
28 | ||||||||
28 | ||||||||
28 | ||||||||
29 | ||||||||
29 | ||||||||
34 | ||||||||
35 | ||||||||
67 | ||||||||
67 | ||||||||
68 | ||||||||
69 | ||||||||
69 | ||||||||
69 | ||||||||
69 | ||||||||
69 | ||||||||
70 | ||||||||
EX-2.1 | ||||||||
EX-3.1 | ||||||||
EX-31.1 | ||||||||
EX-31.2 | ||||||||
EX-32 |
2
Table of Contents
DEFINITIONS
We use the following gas measurements in this report:
Mcf means thousand cubic feet.
MMcf means million cubic feet.
Bcf means billion cubic feet.
Tcf means trillion cubic feet.
Mcf/d means thousand cubic feet per day.
MMcf/d means million cubic feet per day.
Bcf/d means billion cubic feet per day.
MMBtu means million British Thermal Units.
TBtu means trillion British Thermal Units.
Dt means dekatherm.
Mdt means thousand dekatherms.
Mdt/d means thousand dekatherms per day.
MMdt means million dekatherms.
3
Table of Contents
PART 1
Item 1. Business
In this report, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (Transco) is at times referred to
in the first person as we, us or our.
At December 31, 2010, Transco is owned by Williams Partners L.P. (WPZ), a publicly traded
Delaware limited partnership, which is consolidated by The Williams Companies, Inc. (Williams), and
Williams holds an approximate 75 percent interest in WPZ, comprised of an approximate 73 percent
limited partner interest and all of WPZs 2 percent general partner interest.
GENERAL
We are an interstate natural gas transmission company that owns a natural gas pipeline system
extending from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and the Gulf of Mexico through Alabama, Georgia, South
Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and New Jersey to the New York City
metropolitan area. We also hold a minority interest in Cardinal Pipeline Company, LLC (Cardinal),
an intrastate natural gas pipeline located in North Carolina. Our principal business is the
interstate transportation of natural gas which the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
regulates.
At December 31, 2010, our system had a mainline delivery capacity of approximately 4.9 MMdt of
gas per day from production areas to our primary markets. Using our Leidy Line along with
market-area storage and transportation capacity, we can deliver an additional 3.9 MMdt of gas per
day for a system-wide delivery capacity total of approximately 8.8 MMdt of gas per day. The system
is comprised of approximately 10,000 miles of mainline and branch transmission pipelines, 45
compressor stations, four underground storage fields and one liquefied natural gas (LNG) storage
facility. Compression facilities at sea level rated capacity total approximately 1.5 million
horsepower.
We have natural gas storage capacity in four underground storage fields located on or near our
pipeline system and/or market areas, and we operate two of these storage fields. We also have
storage capacity in an LNG storage facility that we own and operate. The total usable gas storage
capacity available to us and our customers in such underground storage fields and LNG storage
facility and through storage service contracts is approximately 200 Bcf of gas. At December 31,
2010, our customers had stored in our facilities approximately 154
Bcf of gas. In
addition, through wholly-owned subsidiaries we operate and own a 35 percent interest in Pine Needle
LNG Company, LLC (Pine Needle) an LNG storage facility with 4 Bcf of storage capacity. Storage
capacity permits our customers to inject gas into storage during the summer and off-peak periods
for delivery during peak winter demand periods.
MARKETS AND TRANSPORTATION
Our natural gas pipeline system serves customers in Texas and 11 southeast and Atlantic
seaboard states including major metropolitan areas in Georgia, North Carolina, Washington, D.C.,
New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
4
Table of Contents
Our major customers are public utilities and municipalities that provide service to
residential, commercial, industrial and electric generation end users. Shippers on our pipeline
system include public utilities, municipalities, intrastate pipelines, direct industrial users,
electrical generators, gas marketers and producers. Our two largest customers in 2010 were Public
Service Enterprise Group and National Grid, which accounted for approximately 11.0 percent and 9.7
percent, respectively, of our total operating revenues. Our firm transportation agreements are
generally long-term agreements with various expiration dates and account for the major portion of
our business. Additionally, we offer interruptible transportation services under shorter-term
agreements.
Our facilities are divided into eight rate zones. Five are located in the production area and
three are located in the market area. Long-haul transportation is gas that is received in one of
the production-area zones and delivered in a market-area zone. Market-area transportation is gas
that is both received and delivered within market-area zones. Productionarea transportation is
gas that is both received and delivered within productionarea zones.
PIPELINE PROJECTS
The pipeline projects listed below were either completed during 2010 or are significant future
pipeline projects for which we have customer commitments.
Mobile Bay South Expansion Project
The Mobile Bay South Expansion Project involved the addition of compression at our Station 85
in Choctaw County, Alabama to allow us to provide firm transportation service southbound on the
Mobile Bay line from Station 85 to various delivery points. In May 2009 we received approval from
the FERC. The capital cost of the project was approximately $32 million. The project was placed
into service in May 2010 and increased capacity by 254 Mdt/d.
Mobile Bay South II Expansion Project
The Mobile Bay South II Expansion Project involves the addition of compression at our Station
85 in Choctaw County, Alabama and modifications to existing facilities at our Station 83 in Mobile
County, Alabama to allow us to provide additional firm transportation service southbound on the
Mobile Bay line from Station 85 to various delivery points. In July 2010 we received approval from
the FERC. The capital cost of the project is estimated to be approximately $35 million, and it
will increase capacity by 380 Mdt/d. We plan to place the project into service by May 2011.
85 North Expansion Project
The 85 North Expansion Project involves an expansion of our existing natural gas transmission
system from Station 85 in Choctaw County, Alabama to various delivery points as far north as North
Carolina. In September 2009 we received approval from the FERC. The capital cost of the project
is estimated to be approximately $236 million, and it will increase capacity by 309 Mdt/d. The
first phase, for 90 Mdt/d, was placed into service in July 2010, and the second phase is expected
to be placed into service in May 2011.
5
Table of Contents
Pascagoula Expansion Project
The Pascagoula Expansion Project involves the construction of a new pipeline to be jointly
owned with Florida Gas Transmission connecting our existing Mobile Bay Lateral to the outlet
pipeline of a proposed LNG import terminal in Mississippi. In July 2010 we received approval from
the FERC. Our share of the capital cost of the project is estimated to be approximately $32
million. We plan to place the project into service in September 2011, and our share of its
capacity will be 467 Mdt/d.
Mid-South Expansion Project
The Mid-South Expansion Project involves an expansion of our mainline from Station 85 in
Choctaw County, Alabama to markets as far downstream as North Carolina. In October 2010 we filed
an application with the FERC. The capital cost of the project is estimated to be approximately
$219 million. We plan to place the project into service in phases in September 2012 and June 2013,
and it will increase capacity by 225 Mdt/d.
Mid-Atlantic Connector Project
The Mid-Atlantic Connector Project involves an expansion of our mainline from an existing
interconnection with East Tennessee Natural Gas in North Carolina to markets as far downstream as
Maryland. In November 2010 we filed an application with the FERC. The capital cost of the project
is estimated to be approximately $55 million. We plan to place the project into service in
November 2012, and it will increase capacity by 142 Mdt/d.
Rockaway Delivery Lateral Project
The Rockaway Delivery Lateral Project involves the construction of a three-mile offshore
lateral to National Grids distribution system in New York. We anticipate filing an application
with the FERC in the fourth quarter of 2011. The capital cost of the project is estimated to be
approximately $159 million. We plan to place the project into service as early as November 2013,
and its capacity will be 647 Mdt/d.
Northeast Connector Project
The Northeast Connector Project involves an expansion of our existing natural gas transmission
system from southeastern Pennsylvania to the proposed Rockaway Delivery Lateral. We anticipate
filing an application with the FERC in the fourth quarter of 2011. The capital cost of the project
is estimated to be approximately $38 million. We plan to place the project into service as early
as November 2013, and it will increase capacity by 100 Mdt/d.
Northeast Supply Link Project
The Northeast Supply Link Project involves an expansion of our existing natural gas
transmission system from the Marcellus Shale production region on the Leidy Line to various
delivery points in Zone 6. We anticipate filing an application with the FERC in the fourth quarter
of 2011. The capital cost of the project is estimated to be approximately $341 million. We plan
to place the project into service in November 2013, and it will increase capacity by 250 Mdt/d.
6
Table of Contents
RATE MATTERS
Our transportation rates are established through the FERC ratemaking process. Key
determinants in the ratemaking process are (1) costs of providing service, including depreciation
expense, (2) allowed rate of return, including the equity component of the capital structure and
related income taxes, and (3) contract and volume throughput assumptions. The allowed rate of
return is determined in each rate case. Rate design and the allocation of costs between the
reservation and commodity rates also impact profitability. As a result of these proceedings,
certain revenues may be collected subject to refund. We record estimates of rate refund
liabilities considering our and third-party regulatory proceedings, advice of counsel and other
risks.
Since September 1, 1992, we have designed our rates using the straight fixed-variable (SFV)
method of rate design. Under the SFV method of rate design, substantially all fixed costs,
including return on equity and income taxes, are included in a reservation charge to customers and
all variable costs are recovered through a commodity charge to customers. While the use of SFV
rate design limits our opportunity to earn incremental revenues through increased throughput, it
also limits our risk associated with fluctuations in throughput.
On March 1, 2001, we submitted to the FERC a general rate filing (Docket No. RP01-245) to
recover increased costs. On September 16, 2010, the FERC issued an order resolving the one
remaining issue in this proceeding. The rates were effective from September 1, 2001 to March 1,
2007.
On August 31, 2006, we submitted to the FERC a general rate filing (Docket No. RP06-569)
designed to recover increased costs. The rates became effective March 1, 2007, subject to refund
and the outcome of a hearing. All issues in this proceeding except one have been resolved by
settlement.
The one issue reserved for litigation or further settlement relates to our proposal to change
the design of the rates for service under one of our storage rate schedules, which was implemented
subject to refund on March 1, 2007. A hearing on that issue was held before a FERC Administrative
Law Judge (ALJ) in July 2008. In November 2008, the ALJ issued an initial decision in which he
determined that Transcos proposed incremental rate design is unjust and unreasonable. On January
21, 2010, the FERC reversed the ALJs initial decision, and approved our proposed incremental rate
design. Two parties have requested rehearing of the FERCs order. If the FERC were to reverse
their opinion on rehearing, we believe any refunds would not be material to our results of
operations.
REGULATION
FERC Regulation
Our interstate transmission and storage activities are subject to regulation by FERC under the
Natural Gas Act of 1938 (NGA), as amended, and under the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA), as
amended, and as such, our rates and charges for the transportation of natural gas in interstate
commerce, the extension, enlargement or abandonment of jurisdictional facilities, and accounting,
among other things, are subject to regulation. We hold certificates of public convenience and
necessity issued by the FERC authorizing ownership and operation of pipelines, facilities and
properties under the NGA. The FERCs Standards of Conduct govern the
7
Table of Contents
relationship between natural gas transmission providers and marketing function employees as defined
by the rule. The standards of conduct are intended to prevent natural gas transmission providers
from preferentially benefiting gas marketing functions by requiring the employees of a transmission
provider that perform transmission functions to function independently from gas marketing employees
and by restricting the information that transmission providers may provide to gas marketing
employees. Under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, the FERC is authorized to impose civil penalties
of up to $1 million per day for each violation of its rules.
Environmental
We are subject to the National Environmental Policy Act and federal, state and local laws and
regulations relating to environmental quality control. Management believes that capital
expenditures and operation and maintenance expenses required to meet applicable environmental
standards and regulations are generally recoverable in rates. For these reasons, management
believes that compliance with applicable environmental requirements is not likely to have a
material effect upon our competitive position or earnings. (See Note 2 of Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements.)
Safety and Maintenance
Pipeline Integrity Regulations We are also subject to the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of
1968, as amended by Title I of the Pipeline Safety Act of 1979, and the Pipeline Safety Improvement
Act of 2002 which regulate safety requirements in the design, construction, operation and
maintenance of interstate gas transmission facilities.
We have developed an Integrity Management Plan that we believe meets the United States
Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) final
rule that was issued pursuant to the requirements of the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002.
The rule requires gas pipeline operators to develop an integrity management program for
transmission pipelines that could affect high consequence areas in the event of pipeline failure.
The Integrity Management Program includes a baseline assessment plan along with periodic
reassessments to be completed within required timeframes. In meeting the integrity regulations, we
have identified high consequence areas and developed our baseline assessment plan. We are on
schedule to complete the required assessments within required timeframes. Currently, we estimate
that the cost to complete the required initial assessments over the period of 2011 through 2012 and
associated remediation will be primarily capital in nature and range between $80 million and $110
million. Ongoing periodic reassessments and initial assessments of any new high consequence areas
will be completed within the timeframes required by the rule. Management considers the costs
associated with compliance with the rule to be prudent costs incurred in the ordinary course of
business and, therefore, recoverable through our rates.
EMPLOYEES
Transco has no employees. Operations, management and certain administrative services are
provided by Transco Pipeline Services LLC (TPS), a Williams affiliate. As of January 31, 2011, TPS
had 1,353 employees.
8
Table of Contents
TRANSACTIONS WITH AFFILIATES
We engage in transactions with WPZ, Williams and other Williams subsidiaries. (See Note 1
and Note 8 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.)
Item 1A. RISK FACTORS
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND CAUTIONARY STATEMENT FOR
PURPOSES OF THE SAFE HARBOR PROVISIONS OF
THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995
PURPOSES OF THE SAFE HARBOR PROVISIONS OF
THE PRIVATE SECURITIES LITIGATION REFORM ACT OF 1995
Certain matters contained in this report include forward-looking statements within the
meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These forward-looking statements relate to anticipated financial
performance, managements plans and objectives for future operations, business prospects, outcome
of regulatory proceedings, market conditions and other matters. We make these forward-looking
statements in reliance on the safe harbor protections provided under the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995.
All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included in this report that
address activities, events or developments that we expect, believe or anticipate will exist or may
occur in the future, are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements can be identified
by various forms of words such as anticipates, believes, seeks, could, may, should,
continues, estimates, expects, forecasts, intends, might, goals, objectives,
targets, planned, potential, projects, scheduled, will or other similar expressions.
These statements are based on managements beliefs and assumptions and on information currently
available to management and include, among others, statements regarding:
| Amounts and nature of future capital expenditures; | ||
| Expansion and growth of our business and operations; | ||
| Financial condition and liquidity; | ||
| Business strategy; | ||
| Cash flow from operations or results of operations; | ||
| Rate case filings; and | ||
| Natural gas prices and demand. |
Forward-looking statements are based on numerous assumptions, uncertainties, and risks that
could cause future events or results to be materially different from those stated or implied in
this report. Many of the factors that will determine these results are beyond our ability to
control or predict. Specific factors that could cause actual results to differ from results
contemplated by the forward-looking statements include, among others, the following:
9
Table of Contents
| Availability of supplies (including the uncertainties inherent in assessing and estimating future natural gas reserves), market demand, volatility of prices, and the availability and cost of capital; | ||
| Inflation, interest rates, and general economic conditions (including future disruptions and volatility in the global credit markets and the impact of these events on our customers and suppliers); | ||
| The strength and financial resources of our competitors; | ||
| Development of alternative energy sources; | ||
| The impact of operational and development hazards; | ||
| Costs of, changes in, or the results of laws, government regulations (including climate change legislation), environmental liabilities, litigation, and rate proceedings; | ||
| Our allocated costs for defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans sponsored by our affiliates; | ||
| Changes in maintenance and construction costs; | ||
| Changes in the current geopolitical situation; | ||
| Our exposure to the credit risks of our customers; | ||
| Risks related to strategy and financing, including restrictions stemming from our debt agreements, future changes in our credit ratings, and the availability and cost of credit; | ||
| Risks associated with future weather conditions; | ||
| Acts of terrorism; and | ||
| Additional risks described in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). |
Given the uncertainties and risk factors that could cause our actual results to differ
materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement, we caution investors not to
unduly rely on our forward-looking statements. We disclaim any obligations to and do not intend to
update the above list or to announce publicly the result of any revisions to any of the
forward-looking statements to reflect future events or developments.
In addition to causing our actual results to differ, the factors listed above and referred to
below may cause our intentions to change from those statements of intention set forth in this
report. Such changes in our intentions may also cause our results to differ. We may change our
intentions, at any time and without notice, based upon changes in such factors, our assumptions, or
otherwise.
Because forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, we caution that there are
important factors, in addition to those listed above, that may cause actual results to differ
materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements. These factors are described in
the following section.
10
Table of Contents
RISK FACTORS
You should carefully consider the following risk factors in addition to the other information
in this report. Each of these factors could adversely affect our business, operating results, and
financial condition as well as adversely affect the value of an investment in our securities.
Risks Inherent to Our Industry and Business
Our natural gas transportation and storage activities involve numerous risks that might result in
accidents and other operating risks and hazards.
Our operations are subject to all the risks and hazards typically associated with the
transportation and storage of natural gas. These operating risks include, but are not limited to:
| fires, blowouts, cratering, and explosions; | ||
| uncontrolled releases of natural gas; | ||
| pollution and other environmental risks; | ||
| natural disasters; | ||
| aging infrastructure and mechanical problems; | ||
| damages to pipelines and pipeline blockages; | ||
| operator error; | ||
| damage inadvertently caused by third party activity, such as operation of construction equipment; and | ||
| terrorist attacks or threatened attacks on our facilities or those of other energy companies. |
These risks could result in loss of human life, personal injuries, significant damage to
property, environmental pollution, impairment of our operations and substantial losses to us. In
accordance with customary industry practice, we maintain insurance against some, but not all of
these risks and losses, and only at levels we believe to be appropriate. The location of certain
segments of our pipeline in or near populated areas, including residential areas, commercial
business centers and industrial sites, could increase the level of damages resulting from these
risks. In spite of our precautions taken, an event such as those described above could cause
considerable harm to people or property and could have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition and results of operations, particularly if the event is not fully covered by insurance.
Accidents or other operating risks could further result in loss of service available to our
customers. Such circumstances, including those arising from maintenance and repair activities,
could result in service interruptions on segments of our pipeline infrastructure. Potential
customer impacts arising from service interruptions on segments of our pipeline infrastructure
could include limitations on the pipelines ability to satisfy customer requirements, obligations
to provide reservation charge credits to customers in times of constrained capacity, and
solicitation of existing customers by others for potential new pipeline projects that would compete
directly
11
Table of Contents
with existing services. Such circumstances could adversely impact our ability to meet
contractual obligations and retain customers, with a resulting negative impact on our business,
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Increased competition from alternative natural gas transportation and storage options and
alternative fuel sources could have a significant financial impact on us.
We compete primarily with other interstate pipelines and storage facilities in the
transportation and storage of natural gas. Some of our competitors may have greater financial
resources and access to greater supplies of natural gas than we do. Some of these competitors may
expand or construct transportation and storage systems that would create additional competition for
natural gas supplies or the services we provide to our customers. Moreover, WPZ and its other
affiliates, including Williams, may not be limited in their ability to compete with us. Further,
natural gas also competes with other forms of energy available to our customers, including
electricity, coal, fuel oils, and other alternative energy sources.
The principal elements of competition among natural gas transportation and storage assets are
rates, terms of service, access to natural gas supplies, flexibility, and reliability. FERCs
policies promoting competition in natural gas markets are having the effect of increasing the
natural gas transportation and storage options for our traditional customer base. Similarly, a
highly-liquid competitive commodity market in natural gas and increasingly competitive markets for
natural gas services, including competitive secondary markets in pipeline capacity, have developed.
As a result, pipeline capacity is being used more efficiently, and peaking and storage services
are increasingly effective substitutes for annual pipeline capacity. As a result, we could
experience some turnback of firm capacity as the primary terms of existing agreements expire. If
we are unable to remarket this capacity or can remarket it only at substantially discounted rates
compared to previous contracts, we or our remaining customers may have to bear the costs associated
with the turned back capacity. Increased competition could reduce the amount of transportation or
storage capacity contracted on our system or, in cases where we do not have long-term fixed rate
contracts, could force us to lower our transportation or storage rates. Competition could
intensify the negative impact of factors that significantly decrease demand for natural gas or
increase the price of natural gas in the markets served by our pipeline system, such as competing
or alternative forms of energy, a regional or national recession or other adverse economic
conditions, weather, higher fuel costs and taxes, or other governmental or regulatory actions that
directly or indirectly increase the price of natural gas or limit the use of natural gas. Our
ability to renew or replace existing contracts at rates sufficient to maintain current revenues and
cash flows could be adversely affected by the activities of our competitors. All of these
competitive pressures could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows.
Certain of our services are subject to long-term, fixed-price contracts that are not subject to
adjustment, even if our cost to perform such services exceeds the revenues received from such
contracts.
We provide some services pursuant to long-term, fixed-price contracts. It is possible that
costs to perform services under such contracts will exceed the revenues we collect for our
services. Although most of the services are priced at cost-based rates that are subject to
adjustment in rate cases, under FERC policy, a regulated service provider and a customer may
mutually agree to sign a contract for service at a negotiated rate that may be above or below
FERC regulated cost-based rate for that service. These negotiated rate contracts are not
12
Table of Contents
generally subject to adjustment for increased costs that could be produced by inflation or
other factors relating to the specific facilities being used to perform the services.
We may not be able to maintain or replace expiring natural gas transportation and storage contracts
at favorable rates or on a long-term basis.
Our primary exposure to market risk occurs at the time the terms of existing transportation
and storage contracts expire and are subject to termination. Upon expiration of the terms, we may
not be able to extend contracts with existing customers or obtain replacement contracts at
favorable rates or on a long-term basis.
The extension or replacement of existing contracts depends on a number of factors beyond our
control, including:
| the level of existing and new competition to deliver natural gas to our markets; | ||
| the growth in demand for natural gas in our markets; | ||
| whether the market will continue to support long-term firm contracts; | ||
| whether our business strategy continues to be successful; | ||
| the level of competition for natural gas supplies in the production basins serving us; and | ||
| the effects of state regulation on customer contracting practices. |
Any failure to extend or replace a significant portion of our existing contracts may have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Competitive pressures could lead to decreases in the volume of natural gas contracted or
transported through our pipeline system.
Although most of our pipeline systems current capacity is fully contracted, FERC has taken
certain actions to strengthen market forces in the natural gas pipeline industry that have led to
increased competition throughout the industry. In a number of key markets, interstate pipelines
are now facing competitive pressure from other major pipeline systems, enabling local distribution
companies and end users to choose a transmission provider based on considerations other than
location. Other entities could construct new pipelines or expand existing pipelines that could
potentially serve the same markets as our pipeline system. Any such new pipelines could offer
transportation services that are more desirable to shippers because of locations, facilities, or
other factors. These new pipelines could charge rates or provide service to locations that would
result in greater net profit for shippers and producers and thereby force us to lower the rates
charged for service on our pipeline in order to extend our existing transportation service
agreements or to attract new customers. We are aware of proposals by competitors to expand
pipeline capacity in certain markets we also serve which, if the proposed projects proceed, could
increase the competitive pressure upon us. There can be no assurance that we will be able to
compete successfully against current and future competitors and any failure to do so could have a
material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
13
Table of Contents
Any significant decrease in supplies of natural gas in our areas of operation could adversely
affect our business and operating results.
Our business is dependent on the continued availability of natural gas production and
reserves. The development of the additional natural gas reserves requires significant capital
expenditures by others for exploration and development drilling and the installation of production,
gathering, storage, transportation and other facilities that permit natural gas to be produced and
delivered to our pipeline system. Low prices for natural gas, regulatory limitations, including
environmental regulations, or the lack of available capital for these projects could adversely
affect the development and production of additional reserves, as well as gathering, storage,
pipeline transportation, and import and export of natural gas supplies, adversely impacting our
ability to fill the capacities of our transportation facilities.
Production from existing wells and natural gas supply basins with access to our pipeline will
naturally decline over time. The amount of natural gas reserves underlying these wells may also be
less than anticipated, and the rate at which production from these reserves declines may be greater
than anticipated. Additionally, the competition for natural gas supplies to serve other markets
could reduce the amount of natural gas supply for our customers. Accordingly, to maintain or
increase the contracted capacity or the volume of natural gas transported on our pipeline and cash
flows associated with the transportation of natural gas, our customers must compete with others to
obtain adequate supplies of natural gas. In addition, if natural gas prices in the supply basins
connected to our pipeline systems are higher than prices in other natural gas producing regions,
our ability to compete with other transporters may be negatively impacted on a short-term basis, as
well as with respect to our long-term recontracting activities.
If new supplies of natural gas are not obtained to replace the natural decline in volumes from
existing supply basins, if natural gas supplies are diverted to serve other markets, if
development in new supply basins where we do not have significant gathering or pipeline systems
reduces demand for our services or if environmental regulators restrict new natural gas drilling,
the overall volume of natural gas transported and stored on our system would decline, which could
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Decreases in demand for natural gas could adversely affect our business.
Demand for our transportation services depends on the ability and willingness of shippers with
access to our facilities to satisfy their demand by deliveries through our system. Any decrease in
this demand could adversely affect our business. Demand for natural gas is also affected by
weather, future industrial and economic conditions, fuel conservation measures, alternative fuel
requirements, governmental regulation, or technological advances in fuel economy and energy
generation devices, all of which are matters beyond our control. Additionally, in some cases, new
LNG import facilities built near our markets could result in less demand for our transmission
facilities.
Significant prolonged changes in natural gas prices could affect supply and demand and cause a
reduction in or termination of our long-term transportation and storage contracts or throughput on
our system.
Higher natural gas prices over the long term could result in a decline in the demand for
natural gas and, therefore, in our long-term transportation and storage contracts or throughput on
our system. Also, lower natural gas prices over the long term could result in a decline in the
14
Table of Contents
production of natural gas resulting in reduced contracts or throughput on our system. As a result,
significant prolonged changes in natural gas prices could have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.
Our costs of maintaining or repairing our facilities may exceed our expectations and the FERC or
competition in our markets may not allow us to recover such costs in the rates we charge for our
services.
We could experience unexpected leaks or ruptures on our gas pipeline system, or be required by
regulatory authorities to undertake modifications to our systems that could result in a material
adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations if the costs of
maintaining or repairing our facilities exceed current expectations and the FERC or competition in
our markets do not allow us to recover such costs in the rates we charge for our service.
Our business is subject to complex government regulations. The operation of our business might be
adversely affected by changes in these regulations or in their interpretation or implementation, or
the introduction of new laws or regulations applicable to our business or our customers.
Existing regulations might be revised or reinterpreted, new laws and regulations might be
adopted or become applicable to us, our facilities or our customers, and future changes in laws and
regulations could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of
operations. For example, several ruptures on third party pipelines have occurred recently. In
response, various legislative and regulatory reforms associated with pipeline safety and integrity
have been proposed, including reforms that would require increased periodic inspections,
installation of additional valves and other equipment operated by us and subjecting additional
pipelines (including gathering facilities) to more stringent regulation. Such reforms, if adopted
could significantly increase our costs.
We are subject to risks associated with climate change.
There is a belief that emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) may be linked to climate change.
Climate change and the costs that may be associated with its impacts and the regulation of GHGs
have the potential to affect our business in many ways, including negatively impacting the costs we
incur in providing our products and services, the demand for and consumption of our products and
services (due to change in both costs and weather patterns), and the economic health of the regions
in which we operate, all of which can create financial risks.
Our operations are subject to governmental laws and regulations relating to the protection of the
environment, which may expose us to significant costs and liabilities and could exceed our current
expectations.
The risk of substantial environmental costs and liabilities is inherent in natural gas
transportation and storage operations, and we may incur substantial environmental costs and
liabilities in the performance of these types of operations. Our operations are subject to
extensive federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations governing environmental
protection, the discharge of materials into the environment, and the security of chemical and
industrial facilities. These laws include:
15
Table of Contents
| Clean Air Act (CAA), and analogous state laws, which impose obligations related to air emissions; | ||
| Clean Water Act (CWA), and analogous state laws, which regulate discharge of wastewaters from our facilities to state and federal waters; | ||
| Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), and analogous state laws, which regulate the cleanup of hazardous substances that may have been released at properties currently or previously owned or operated by us or locations to which we have sent wastes for disposal; and | ||
| Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and analogous state laws, which impose requirements for the handling and discharge of solid and hazardous waste from our facilities. |
Various governmental authorities, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
analogous state agencies and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, have the power to enforce
compliance with these laws and regulations and the permits issued under them, oftentimes requiring
difficult and costly actions. Failure to comply with these laws, regulations, and permits may
result in the assessment of administrative, civil, and criminal penalties, the imposition of
remedial obligations, the imposition of stricter conditions on or revocation of permits, and the
issuance of injunctions limiting or preventing some or all of our operations.
There is inherent risk of the incurrence of environmental costs and liabilities in our
business, some of which may be material, due to our handling of the products we transport and
store, air emissions related to our operations, historical industry operations, waste disposal
practices, and the prior use of flow meters containing mercury. Joint and several, strict
liability may be incurred without regard to fault under certain environmental laws and regulations,
including CERCLA, RCRA and analogous state laws, for the remediation of contaminated areas and in
connection with spills or releases of natural gas and wastes on, under, or from our properties and
facilities. Private parties, including the owners of properties through which our pipeline passes
and facilities where our wastes are taken for reclamation or disposal, may have the right to pursue
legal actions to enforce compliance as well as to seek damages for non-compliance with
environmental laws and regulations or for personal injury or property damage arising from our
operations. Some sites we operate are located near current or former third-party hydrocarbon
storage and processing operations, and there is a risk that contamination has migrated from those
sites to ours. In addition, increasingly strict laws, regulations and enforcement policies could
materially increase our compliance costs and the cost of any remediation that may become necessary.
Our insurance may not cover all environmental risks and costs or may not provide sufficient
coverage if an environmental claim is made against us.
Our business may be adversely affected by increased costs due to stricter pollution control
requirements or liabilities resulting from non-compliance with required operating or other
regulatory permits. Also, we might not be able to obtain or maintain from time to time all
required environmental regulatory approvals for our operations. If there is a delay in obtaining
any required environmental regulatory approvals, or if we fail to obtain and comply with them, the
operation of our facilities could be prevented or become subject to additional costs resulting in
potentially material adverse consequences to our business, financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows. We are also generally responsible for all liabilities associated with
16
Table of Contents
the environmental condition of our facilities and assets, whether acquired or developed, regardless
of when the liabilities arose and whether they are known or unknown.
In addition, legislative and regulatory responses related to GHGs and climate change create
the potential for financial risk. The U.S. Congress and certain states have for some time been
considering various forms of legislation related to GHG emissions. There have also been
international efforts seeking legally binding reductions in emissions of GHGs. In addition,
increased public awareness and concern may result in more state, regional, and/or federal
requirements to reduce or mitigate GHG emissions.
Numerous states have announced or adopted programs to stabilize and reduce GHGs. In addition,
on December 7, 2009, the EPA issued a final determination that six GHGs are a threat to public
safety and welfare. This determination could lead to the direct regulation of GHG emissions in our
industry under the EPAs interpretation of its authority and obligations under the CAA. The recent
actions of the EPA and the passage of any federal or state climate change laws or regulations could
result in increased costs to (i) operate and maintain our facilities, (ii) install new emission
controls on our facilities, and (iii) administer and manage any GHG emissions program. If we are
unable to recover or pass through a significant level of our costs related to complying with
climate change regulatory requirements imposed on us, it could have a material adverse effect on
our results of operations. To the extent financial markets view climate change and GHG emissions
as a financial risk, this could negatively impact our cost of and access to capital.
Certain environmental and other groups have suggested that additional laws and regulations may
be needed to more closely regulate the hydraulic fracturing process commonly used in natural gas
production. Legislation to further regulate hydraulic fracturing has been proposed in Congress and
the U.S. Department of Interior has announced plans to formalize obligations for disclosure of
chemicals associated with hydraulic fracturing on federal lands. In addition, some state and local
authorities have considered or formalized new rules related to hydraulic fracturing and enacted
moratoria on such activities. We cannot predict whether any additional federal, state or local
legislation or regulation will be enacted in this area and if so, what its provisions would be. If
additional levels of reporting, regulation and permitting were required, natural gas supplies and
prices could be impacted and our operations could be adversely affected.
We make assumptions and develop expectations about possible expenditures related to
environmental conditions based on current laws and regulations and current interpretations of those
laws and regulations. If the interpretation of laws or regulations, or the laws and regulations
themselves, change, our assumptions may change, and any new capital costs incurred to comply with
such changes may not be recoverable under our regulatory rate structure or our customer contracts.
In addition, new environmental laws and regulations might adversely affect our activities,
including storage and transportation, as well as waste management and air emissions. For instance,
federal and state agencies could impose additional safety requirements, any of which could affect
our profitability.
We depend on certain key customers for a significant portion of our revenues. The loss of any of
these key customers or the loss of any contracted volumes could result in a decline in our
business.
We rely on a limited number of customers for a significant portion of our revenues. Although
some of these customers are subject to long-term contracts, we may be unable to
17
Table of Contents
negotiate extensions or replacements of these contracts on favorable terms, if at all. For the year ended
December 31, 2010, our two largest customers were Public Service Enterprise Group and National
Grid. These customers accounted for approximately 11.0 percent and 9.7 percent, respectively, of
our operating revenues for the year ended December 31, 2010. The loss of all, or even a portion
of, the revenues from contracted volumes supplied by these customers, as a result of competition,
creditworthiness, inability to negotiate extensions or replacements of contracts or otherwise,
could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition,
and cash flows, unless we are able to acquire comparable volumes from other sources.
We are exposed to the credit risk of our customers, and our credit risk management may not be
adequate to protect against such risk.
We are subject to the risk of loss resulting from nonpayment and/or nonperformance by our
customers in the ordinary course of our business. Generally, our customers are rated investment
grade, are otherwise considered creditworthy, or are required to make pre-payments or provide
security to satisfy credit concerns. However, our credit procedures and policies may not be
adequate to fully eliminate customer credit risk. We cannot predict to what extent our business
would be impacted by deteriorating conditions in the economy, including declines in our customers
creditworthiness. If we fail to adequately assess the creditworthiness of existing or future
customers, unanticipated deterioration in their creditworthiness and any resulting increase in
nonpayment and/or nonperformance by them could cause us to write down or write off doubtful
accounts. Such write-downs or write-offs could negatively affect our operating results for the
period in which they occur, and, if significant, could have a material adverse effect on our
business, results of operations, cash flows, and financial condition.
The failure of counterparties to perform their contractual obligations could adversely affect our
operating results and financial condition.
Despite performing credit analysis prior to extending credit, we are exposed to the credit
risk of our contractual counterparties in the ordinary course of business even though we monitor
these situations and attempt to take appropriate measures to protect ourselves. In addition to
credit risk, counterparties to our commercial agreements, such as transportation and storage
agreements, may fail to perform their other contractual obligations. A failure of counterparties to
perform their contractual obligations could cause us to write down or write off doubtful accounts,
which could materially adversely affect our operating results and financial condition.
If third-party pipelines and other facilities interconnected to our pipeline and facilities become
unavailable to transport natural gas, our revenues could be adversely affected.
We depend upon third-party pipelines and other facilities that provide delivery options to and
from our pipeline and storage facilities for the benefit of our customers. Because we do not own
these third-party pipelines or facilities, their continuing operation is not within our control.
If these pipelines or other facilities were to become temporarily or permanently unavailable for
any reason, or if throughput were reduced because of testing, line repair, damage to pipelines or
facilities, reduced operating pressures, lack of capacity, increased credit requirements or rates
charged by such pipelines or facilities or other causes, we and our customers would have reduced
capacity to transport, store or deliver natural gas to end use markets, thereby reducing our
revenues. Any temporary or permanent interruption at any key pipeline interconnect causing a
material reduction in volumes transported on our pipeline or stored at our facilities could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
18
Table of Contents
We do not own all of the land on which our pipeline and facilities are located, which could disrupt
our operations.
We do not own all of the land on which our pipeline and facilities have been constructed. As
such, we are subject to the possibility of increased costs to retain necessary land use. In those
instances in which we do not own the land on which our facilities are located, we obtain the rights
to construct and operate our pipeline on land owned by third parties and governmental agencies for
a specific period of time. Our loss of any of these rights, through our inability to renew
right-of-way contracts or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results
of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.
We do not insure against all potential losses and could be seriously harmed by unexpected
liabilities or by the inability of our insurers to satisfy our claims.
We are not fully insured against all risks inherent to our business, including environmental
accidents. We do not maintain insurance in the type and amount to cover all possible risks of
loss.
We currently maintain excess liability insurance with limits of $610 million per occurrence
and in the annual aggregate with a $2 million per occurrence deductible. This insurance covers us,
our subsidiaries, and certain of our affiliates for legal and contractual liabilities arising out
of bodily injury or property damage, including resulting loss of use to third parties. This excess
liability insurance includes coverage for sudden and accidental pollution liability for full
limits, with the first $135 million of insurance also providing gradual pollution liability
coverage for natural gas and natural gas liquids operations.
Although we maintain property insurance on property we own, lease, or are responsible to
insure, the policy may not cover the full replacement cost of all damaged assets or the entire
amount of business interruption loss we may experience. In addition, certain perils may be
excluded from coverage or sub-limited. We may not be able to maintain or obtain insurance of the
type and amount we desire at reasonable rates. We may elect to self insure a portion of our risks.
We do not insure our onshore underground pipelines for physical damage, except at certain
locations such as river crossings and compressor stations. Only certain offshore key-assets are
covered for property damage and the resulting business interruption when loss is due to a named
windstorm event and coverage for loss caused by a named windstorm is significantly sub-limited.
All of our insurance is subject to deductibles. If a significant accident or event occurs for
which we are not fully insured it could adversely affect our operations and financial condition.
In addition, any insurance company that provides coverage to us may experience negative
developments that could impair their ability to pay any of our claims. As a result, we could be
exposed to greater losses than anticipated and may have to obtain replacement insurance, if
available, at a greater cost.
The occurrence of any risks not fully covered by insurance could have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, and our ability
to repay our debt.
19
Table of Contents
Execution of our capital projects subjects us to construction risks, increases in labor costs and
materials, and other risks that may adversely affect financial results.
Our growth may be dependent upon the construction of new transportation and storage facilities
as well as the expansion of existing facilities. Construction or expansion of these facilities is
subject to various regulatory, development and operational risks, including:
| the ability to obtain necessary approvals and permits by regulatory agencies on a timely basis and on acceptable terms; | ||
| the availability of skilled labor, equipment, and materials to complete expansion projects; | ||
| potential changes in federal, state and local statutes and regulations, including environmental requirements, that prevent a project from proceeding or increase the anticipated cost of the project; | ||
| impediments on our ability to acquire rights-of-way or land rights on a timely basis and on acceptable terms; | ||
| the ability to construct projects within estimated costs, including the risk of cost overruns resulting from inflation or increased costs of equipment, materials, labor or other factors beyond our control, that may be material; and | ||
| the ability to access capital markets to fund construction projects. |
Any of these risks could prevent a project from proceeding, delay its completion or increase
its anticipated costs. As a result, new facilities may not achieve expected investment return,
which could adversely affect our results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
Potential changes in accounting standards might cause us to revise our financial results and
disclosures in the future, which might change the way analysts measure our business or financial
performance.
Regulators and legislators continue to take a renewed look at accounting practices, financial
disclosures, and companies relationships with their independent public accounting firms. It
remains unclear what new laws or regulations will be adopted, and we cannot predict the ultimate
impact that any such new laws or regulations could have. In addition, the Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB), the SEC or FERC could enact new accounting standards or FERC orders that
might impact how we are required to record revenues, expenses, assets, and liabilities. Any
significant change in accounting standards or disclosure requirements could have a material adverse
effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
We do not operate all of our assets. This reliance on others to operate our assets and to provide
other services could adversely affect our business and operating results.
Williams and other third parties operate certain of our assets. We have a limited ability to
control these operations and the associated costs. The success of these operations is therefore
dependent upon a number of factors that are outside our control, including the competence and
financial resources of the operators.
20
Table of Contents
We rely on Williams for certain services necessary for us to be able to conduct our business.
Williams may outsource some or all of these services to third parties, and a failure of all or part
of Williams relationships with its outsourcing providers could lead to delays in or interruptions
of these services. Our reliance on Williams and others as operators and on Williams outsourcing
relationships, and our limited ability to control certain costs could have a material adverse
effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
Risks Related to Strategy and Financing
Restrictions in our debt agreements and our leverage may affect our future financial and operating
flexibility.
Our total outstanding long-term debt (including current portion) as of December 31, 2010, was
$1,280.0 million.
Our debt service obligations and restrictive covenants in our new credit facility entered into
as part of Williams restructuring (New Credit Facility) and the indentures governing our senior
unsecured notes could have important consequences. For example, they could:
| Make it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to our senior unsecured notes and our other indebtedness, which could in turn result in an event of default on such other indebtedness or our outstanding notes; | ||
| Impair our ability to obtain additional financing in the future for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, or other purposes; | ||
| Diminish our ability to withstand a continued or future downturn in our business or the economy generally; | ||
| Require us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to debt service payments, thereby reducing the availability of cash for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions, general corporate purposes, or other purposes; | ||
| Limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate; and | ||
| Place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors that have proportionately less debt. |
Our ability to repay, extend or refinance our existing debt obligations and to obtain future
credit will depend primarily on our operating performance, which will be affected by general
economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory, business and other factors, many of
which are beyond our control. Our ability to refinance existing debt obligations or obtain future
credit will also depend upon the current conditions in the credit markets and the availability of
credit generally. If we are unable to meet our debt service obligations, we could be forced to
restructure or refinance our indebtedness, seek additional equity capital, or sell assets. We may
be unable to obtain financing or sell assets on satisfactory terms, or at all.
21
Table of Contents
We are not prohibited under our indentures from incurring additional indebtedness. Our
incurrence of significant additional indebtedness would exacerbate the negative consequences
mentioned above, and could adversely affect our ability to repay our senior notes.
Our debt agreements and Williams and WPZs public indentures contain financial and operating
restrictions that may limit our access to credit and affect our ability to operate our business.
In addition, our ability to obtain credit in the future will be affected by Williams and WPZs
credit ratings.
Our public indentures contain various covenants that, among other things, limit our ability to
grant certain liens to support indebtedness, merge, or sell substantially all of our assets. In
addition, our New Credit Facility contains certain financial covenants and restrictions on our
ability and our subsidiaries ability to incur indebtedness, to consolidate or allow any material
change in the nature of our business, enter into certain affiliate transactions, and make certain
distributions during an event of default. These covenants could adversely affect our ability to
finance our future operations or capital needs or engage in, expand or pursue our business
activities and prevent us from engaging in certain transactions that might otherwise be considered
beneficial to us. Our ability to comply with these covenants may be affected by events beyond our
control, including prevailing economic, financial and industry conditions. If market or other
economic conditions deteriorate, our current assumptions about future economic conditions turn out
to be incorrect or unexpected events occur, our ability to comply with these covenants may be
significantly impaired.
Williams and WPZs public indentures contain covenants that restrict their and our ability to
incur liens to support indebtedness. These covenants could adversely affect our ability to finance
our future operations or capital needs or engage in, expand or pursue our business activities and
prevent us from engaging in certain transactions that might otherwise be considered beneficial to
us. Williams and WPZs ability to comply with the covenants contained in their respective debt
instruments may be affected by events beyond our and their control, including prevailing economic,
financial and industry conditions. If market or other economic conditions deteriorate, Williams
or WPZs ability to comply with these covenants may be negatively impacted.
Our failure to comply with the covenants in our debt agreements could result in events of
default. Upon the occurrence of such an event of default, the lenders could elect to declare all
amounts outstanding under a particular facility to be immediately due and payable and terminate all
commitments, if any, to extend further credit. Certain payment defaults or an acceleration under
our public indentures or other material indebtedness could cause a cross-default or
cross-acceleration of our New Credit Facility. Such a cross-default or cross-acceleration could
have a wider impact on our liquidity than might otherwise arise from a default or acceleration of a
single debt instrument. If an event of default occurs, or if our New Credit Facility
cross-defaults, and the lenders under the affected debt agreements accelerate the maturity of any
loans or other debt outstanding to us, we may not have sufficient liquidity to repay amounts
outstanding under such debt agreements. For more information regarding our debt agreements, please
read Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
OperationsCapital Resources and Liquidity.
Substantially all of Williams and WPZs operations are conducted through their respective
subsidiaries. Williams and WPZs cash flows are substantially derived from loans, dividends and
distributions paid to them by their respective subsidiaries. Williams and WPZs cash flows are
typically utilized to service debt and pay dividends or distributions on their equity, with the
22
Table of Contents
balance, if any, reinvested in their respective subsidiaries as loans or contributions to capital.
Due to our relationship with Williams and WPZ, our ability to obtain credit will be affected by
Williams and WPZs credit ratings. If Williams or WPZ were to experience deterioration in their
respective credit standing or financial condition, our access to credit and our ratings could be
adversely affected. Any future downgrading of a Williams or WPZ credit rating would likely also
result in a downgrading of our credit rating. A downgrading of a Williams or WPZ credit rating
could limit our ability to obtain financing in the future upon favorable terms, if at all.
Future disruptions in the global credit markets may make debt markets less accessible, create a
shortage in the availability of credit and lead to credit market volatility.
In 2008, global credit markets experienced a shortage in overall liquidity and a resulting
disruption in the availability of credit. Future disruptions in the global financial marketplace,
including the bankruptcy or restructuring of financial institutions, could make debt markets
inaccessible and adversely affect the availability of credit already arranged and the availability
and cost of credit in the future. We have availability under the New Credit Facility, but our
ability to borrow under that facility could be impaired if one or more of our lenders fails to
honor its contractual obligation to lend to us.
Adverse economic conditions could negatively affect our results of operations.
A slowdown in the economy has the potential to negatively impact our business in many ways.
Included among these potential negative impacts are reduced demand and lower prices for our
products and services, increased difficulty in collecting amounts owed to us by our customers and a
reduction in our credit ratings (either due to tighter rating standards or the negative impacts
described above), which could result in reducing our access to credit markets, raising the cost of
such access or requiring us, WPZ, or Williams to provide additional collateral to third parties.
A downgrade of our credit ratings could impact our liquidity, access to capital and our costs of
doing business, and independent third parties determine our credit ratings outside of our control.
A downgrade of our credit rating might increase our cost of borrowing and could cause us to
post collateral with third parties, negatively impacting our available liquidity. Our ability to
access capital markets could also be limited by a downgrade of our credit rating and other
disruptions. Such disruptions could include:
| economic downturns; | ||
| deteriorating capital market conditions; | ||
| declining market prices for natural gas; | ||
| terrorist attacks or threatened attacks on our facilities or those of other energy companies; | ||
| the overall health of the energy industry, including the bankruptcy or insolvency of other companies. |
23
Table of Contents
Credit rating agencies perform independent analysis when assigning credit ratings. The
analysis includes a number of criteria including, but not limited to, business composition, market
and operational risks, as well as various financial tests. Credit rating agencies continue to
review the criteria for industry sectors and various debt ratings and may make changes to those
criteria from time to time. Credit ratings are not recommendations to buy, sell or hold
investments in the rated entity. Ratings are subject to revision or withdrawal at any time by the
ratings agencies and no assurance can be given that we will maintain our current credit ratings.
Williams can exercise substantial control over our distribution policy and our business and
operations and may do so in a manner that is adverse to our interests.
As of December 31, 2010, we are a wholly-owned subsidiary of WPZ, approximately 75 percent of
whose limited and general partnership interests are owned by Williams. WPZ exercises substantial
control over our business and operations and makes determinations with respect to, among other
things, the following:
| payment of distributions and repayment of advances; | ||
| decisions on financings and our capital raising activities; | ||
| mergers or other business combinations; and | ||
| acquisition or disposition of assets. |
WPZ could decide to increase distributions or advances to our member consistent with existing
debt covenants. This could adversely affect our liquidity.
Risks Related to Regulations That Affect Our Industry
Our natural gas transportation and storage operations are subject to regulation by FERC, which
could have an adverse impact on our ability to establish transportation and storage rates that
would allow us to recover the full cost of operating our pipeline, including a reasonable rate of
return.
Our interstate natural gas transportation and storage operations are subject to federal,
state, and local regulatory authorities. Specifically, our interstate pipeline transportation and
storage services and related assets are subject to regulation by FERC. The federal regulation
extends to such matters as:
| transportation of natural gas in interstate commerce; | ||
| rates, operating terms, and conditions of service, including initiation and discontinuation of services; | ||
| the types of services we may offer to our customers; | ||
| certification and construction of new facilities; | ||
| acquisition, extension, disposition, or abandonment of facilities; |
24
Table of Contents
| accounts and records; | ||
| depreciation and amortization policies; | ||
| relationships with affiliated companies who are involved in marketing functions of the natural gas business; and | ||
| market manipulation in connection with interstate sales, purchases, or transportation of natural gas. |
Under the Natural Gas Act (NGA), FERC has authority to regulate providers of natural gas
pipeline transportation and storage services in interstate commerce, and such providers may only
charge rates that have been determined to be just and reasonable by FERC. In addition, FERC
prohibits providers from unduly preferring or unreasonably discriminating against any person with
respect to pipeline rates or terms and conditions of service.
Regulatory actions in these areas can affect our business in many ways, including decreasing
tariff rates and revenues, decreasing volumes in our pipelines, increasing our costs and otherwise
altering the profitability of our business.
Unlike other interstate pipelines that own facilities in the offshore Gulf of Mexico, we
charge our transportation customers a separate fee to access our offshore facilities. The separate
charge is referred to as an IT feeder charge. The IT feeder rate is charged only when gas is
actually transported on the facilities and typically it is paid by producers or marketers. Because
the IT feeder rate is typically paid by producers and marketers, it generally results in netback
prices to producers that are slightly lower than the netbacks realized by producers transporting on
other interstate pipelines. This rate design disparity can result in producers bypassing our
offshore facilities in favor of alternative transportation facilities.
The rates, terms and conditions for our interstate pipeline and storage services are set forth
in our FERC-approved tariff. Pursuant to the terms of our most recent rate settlement agreement,
we must file a new rate case no later than August 31, 2012. Any successful complaint or protest
against our rates could have an adverse impact on our revenues associated with providing
transportation and storage services.
We could be subject to penalties and fines if we fail to comply with FERC regulations.
Our transportation and storage operations are regulated by FERC. Should we fail to comply
with all applicable FERC administered statutes, rules, regulations, and orders, we could be subject
to substantial penalties and fines. Under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, FERC has civil penalty
authority under the NGA to impose penalties for current violations of up to $1,000,000 per day for
each violation. Any material penalties or fines imposed by FERC could have a material adverse
impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.
The outcome of future rate cases to set the rates we can charge customers on our pipeline might
result in rates that lower our return on the capital that we have invested in our pipeline.
There is a risk that rates set by FERC in our future rate cases will be inadequate to recover
increases in operating costs or to sustain an adequate return on capital investments. There is
also
25
Table of Contents
the risk that higher rates will cause our customers to look for alternative ways to transport
their natural gas.
The outcome of future rate cases will determine the amount of income taxes that we will be allowed
to recover.
In May 2005, the FERC issued a statement of general policy permitting a pipeline to include in
its cost-of-service computations an income tax allowance provided that an entity or individual has
an actual or potential income tax liability on income from the pipelines public utility assets.
The extent to which owners of pipelines have such actual or potential income tax liability will be
reviewed by FERC on a case-by-case basis in rate cases where the amounts of the allowances will be
established.
Legal and regulatory proceedings and investigations relating to the energy industry have adversely
affected our business and may continue to do so.
Public and regulatory scrutiny of the energy industry has resulted in increased regulation
being either proposed or implemented. Such scrutiny has also resulted in various inquiries,
investigations and court proceedings. Both the shippers on our pipeline and regulators have rights
to challenge the rates we charge under certain circumstances. Any successful challenge could
materially affect our results of operations.
Certain inquiries, investigations and court proceedings are ongoing. Adverse effects may
continue as a result of the uncertainty of these ongoing inquiries and proceedings, or additional
inquiries and proceedings by federal or state regulatory agencies or private plaintiffs. In
addition, we cannot predict the outcome of any of these inquiries or whether these inquiries will
lead to additional legal proceedings against us, civil or criminal fines or penalties, or other
regulatory action, including legislation, which might be materially adverse to the operation of our
business and our revenues and net income or increase our operating costs in other ways. Current
legal proceedings or other matters against us including environmental matters, suits, regulatory
appeals and similar matters might result in adverse decisions against us. The result of such
adverse decisions, either individually or in the aggregate, could be material and may not be
covered fully or at all by insurance.
Risks Related to Employees, Outsourcing of Non-Core Support Activities, and Technology.
Institutional knowledge residing with current employees nearing retirement eligibility might not be
adequately preserved.
In our business, institutional knowledge resides with employees who have many years of
service. As these employees reach retirement age, Williams may not be able to replace them with
employees of comparable knowledge and experience. In addition, Williams may not be able to retain
or recruit other qualified individuals, and Williams efforts at knowledge transfer could be
inadequate. If knowledge transfer, recruiting and retention efforts are inadequate, access to
significant amounts of internal historical knowledge and expertise could become unavailable to us.
26
Table of Contents
Failure of or disruptions to our outsourcing relationships might negatively impact our ability to
conduct our business.
Some studies indicate a high failure rate of outsourcing relationships. Although Williams has
taken steps to build a cooperative and mutually beneficial relationship with its outsourcing
providers and to closely monitor their performance, a deterioration in the timeliness or quality of
the services performed by the outsourcing providers or a failure of all or part of these
relationships could lead to loss of institutional knowledge and interruption of services necessary
for us to be able to conduct our business. The expiration of such agreements or the transition of
services between providers could lead to similar losses of institutional knowledge or disruptions.
Certain of our accounting, information technology, application development, and help desk
services are currently provided by Williams outsourcing provider from service centers outside of
the United States. The economic and political conditions in certain countries from which Williams
outsourcing providers may provide services to us present similar risks of business operations
located outside of the United States, including risks of interruption of business, war,
expropriation, nationalization, renegotiation, trade sanctions or nullification of existing
contracts and changes in law or tax policy, that are greater than in the United States.
Our allocation from Williams for costs for its defined benefit pension plans and other
postretirement benefit plans are affected by factors beyond our and Williams control.
As we have no employees, employees of Williams and its affiliates provide services to us. As
a result, we are allocated a portion of Williams costs in defined benefit pension plans covering
substantially all of Williams or its affiliates employees providing services to us, as well as a
portion of the costs of other postretirement benefit plans covering certain eligible participants
providing services to us. The timing and amount of our allocations under the defined benefit
pension plans depend upon a number of factors Williams controls, including changes to pension plan
benefits, as well as factors outside of Williams control, such as asset returns, interest rates
and changes in pension laws. Changes to these and other factors that can significantly increase
our allocations could have a significant adverse effect on our financial condition and results of
operations.
Risks Related to Weather, Other Natural Phenomena and Business Disruption
Our assets and operations can be affected by weather and other natural phenomena.
Our assets and operations can be adversely affected by hurricanes, floods, earthquakes,
landslides, tornadoes and other natural phenomena and weather conditions, including extreme
temperatures, making it more difficult for us to realize the historic rates of return associated
with these assets and operations. Insurance may be inadequate, and in some instances, we have been
unable to obtain insurance on commercially reasonable terms or insurance has not been available at
all. A significant disruption in operations or a significant liability for which we were not fully
insured could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial
condition.
Our customers energy needs vary with weather conditions. To the extent weather conditions
are affected by climate change or demand is impacted by regulations associated with climate change,
customers energy use could increase or decrease depending on the duration and magnitude of the
changes, leading either to increased investment or decreased revenues.
27
Table of Contents
Acts of terrorism could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows.
Our assets and the assets of our customers and others may be targets of terrorist activities
that could disrupt our business or cause significant harm to our operations, such as full or
partial disruption to our ability to transport natural gas. Acts of terrorism as well as events
occurring in response to or in connection with acts of terrorism could cause environmental
repercussions that could result in a significant decrease in revenues or significant reconstruction
or remediation costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition,
results of operations, and cash flows.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None.
Item 2. Properties
Our gas pipeline facilities are generally owned in fee. However, a substantial portion of
such facilities are constructed and maintained pursuant to rights-of-way, easements, permits,
licenses or consents on and across real property owned by others. Compressor stations, with
appurtenant facilities, are located in whole or in part either on lands owned or on sites held
under leases or permits issued or approved by public authorities. The storage facilities are
either owned or contracted for under long-term leases or easements. We lease our company offices
in Houston, Texas.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
The information called for by this item is provided in Item 8. Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 2. Contingent Liabilities
and Commitments.
PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of
Equity Securities
At December 31, 2009, we were an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Williams. At December
31, 2010, we are an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of WPZ, and Williams holds an approximate 75
percent interest in WPZ, comprised of an approximate 73 percent limited partner interest and all of
WPZs 2 percent general partner interest.
On January 29, 2010, our Management Committee authorized and we paid a $50 million cash
distribution. In association with Williams restructuring of its gas pipeline and domestic
midstream businesses, our Management Committee authorized a cash distribution of approximately
$153.8 million on January 31, 2010, which we paid on February 16, 2010. On October 29, 2010, we
paid a $130 million cash distribution.
On October 29, 2010, we received a $75 million capital contribution from Williams Partners
Operating LLC.
28
Table of Contents
During 2009, our Management Committee authorized, and we paid, cash distributions of $145
million.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
Since we meet the conditions set forth in General Instruction (I)(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K,
this information is omitted.
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
General
The following discussion and analysis of critical accounting estimates, results of operations
and capital resources and liquidity should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and
notes thereto included within Item 8.
Critical Accounting Estimates
Our financial statements reflect the selection and application of accounting policies that
require management to make significant estimates and assumptions. We believe that the following
are the most critical judgment areas in the application of accounting policies that currently
affect our financial condition and results of operations.
Regulatory Accounting
We are regulated by the FERC. The Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 980,
Regulated Operations (Topic 980) provides that rate-regulated public utilities account for and
report regulatory assets and liabilities consistent with the economic effect of the way in which
regulators establish rates if the rates established are designed to recover the costs of providing
the regulated service and if the competitive environment makes it probable that such rates can be
charged and collected. Accounting for businesses that are regulated and apply the provisions of
Topic 980 can differ from the accounting requirements for non-regulated businesses. Transactions
that are recorded differently as a result of regulatory accounting requirements include the
capitalization of an equity return component on regulated capital projects, capitalization of other
project costs, retirements of general plant assets, employee related benefits, environmental costs,
negative salvage, asset retirement obligations and other costs and taxes included in, or expected
to be included in, future rates. As a rate-regulated entity, our management has determined that it
is appropriate to apply the accounting prescribed by Topic 980 and, accordingly, the accompanying
consolidated financial statements include the effects of the types of transactions described above
that result from regulatory accounting requirements. Managements assessment of the probability of
recovery or pass through of regulatory assets and liabilities requires judgment and interpretation
of laws and regulatory commission orders. If, for any reason, we cease to meet the criteria for
application of regulatory accounting treatment for all or part of our operations, the regulatory
assets and liabilities related to those portions ceasing to meet such criteria would be eliminated
from the Balance Sheet and included in the Statement of Income for the period in which the
discontinuance of regulatory accounting treatment occurs. The aggregate amounts of regulatory
assets reflected in the Balance Sheet are $247.4 million and $272.7 million at December 31, 2010
and 2009, respectively. The aggregate amounts of
29
Table of Contents
regulatory liabilities reflected in the Balance
Sheet are $117.8 million and $75.9 million at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. A summary
of regulatory assets and liabilities is included in Note 10 of Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Contingent liabilities
We record liabilities for estimated loss contingencies when we assess that a loss is probable
and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Revisions to contingent liabilities are
reflected in income in the period in which new or different facts or information become known or
circumstances change that affect the previous assumptions with respect to the likelihood or amount
of loss. Liabilities for contingent losses are based upon our assumptions and estimates, and
advice of legal counsel or other third parties regarding the probable outcomes of the matter. As
new developments occur or more information becomes available, our assumptions and estimates of
these liabilities may change. Changes in our assumptions and estimates or outcomes different from
our current assumptions and estimates could materially affect future results of operations for any
particular quarterly or annual period.
Results of Operations
Analysis of Financial Results
This analysis discusses financial results of our operations for the years 2010 and 2009.
Variances due to changes in natural gas prices and transportation volumes have little impact on
revenues, because under our rate design methodology, the majority of overall cost of service is
recovered through firm capacity reservation charges in our transportation rates.
2010 COMPARED TO 2009
Operating Income and Net Income Operating income for 2010 was $339.5 million compared to
$335.3 million for 2009. Net income for 2010 was $270.8 million compared to $280.4 million for
2009. The increase in Operating income of $4.2 million (1.3 percent) was due primarily to higher
Natural gas transportation revenues, partially offset by a decrease in Other revenues and an
increase in operating costs and expenses as discussed below. The decrease in Net income of $9.6
million (3.4 percent) was mostly attributable to higher net deductions in Other (Income) and Other
Deductions, partially offset by the increase in Operating income.
Sales Revenues We make jurisdictional merchant gas sales pursuant to a blanket sales
certificate issued by the FERC.
Through an agency agreement, Williams Gas Marketing, Inc. (WGM) manages our long-term purchase
agreements and our remaining jurisdictional merchant gas sales, which excludes our cash out sales
in settlement of gas imbalances. The long-term purchase agreements managed by WGM remain in our
name, as do the corresponding sales of such purchased gas. Therefore, we continue to record
natural gas sales revenues and the related accounts receivable and cost of natural gas sales and
the related accounts payable for the jurisdictional merchant sales that are managed by WGM. WGM
receives all margins associated with jurisdictional merchant gas sales business and, as our agent,
assumes all market and credit risk associated with our jurisdictional merchant gas sales.
Consequently, our merchant gas sales service has no impact on our operating income or results of
operations.
30
Table of Contents
In addition to our merchant gas sales, we also have cash out sales, which settle gas
imbalances with shippers. In the course of providing transportation services to customers, we may
receive different quantities of gas from shippers than the quantities delivered on behalf of those
shippers. Additionally, we transport gas on various pipeline systems, which may deliver different
quantities of gas on our behalf than the quantities of gas received from us. These transactions
result in gas transportation and exchange imbalance receivables and payables. Our tariff includes
a method whereby the majority of transportation imbalances are settled on a monthly basis through
cash out sales or purchases. The cash out sales have no impact on our operating income or results
of operations.
Operating Revenues: Natural gas sales increased $2.6 million (2.7 percent) to $99.3 million
for 2010 when compared to 2009. These sales were offset in our costs of natural gas sold and
therefore had no impact on our operating income or results of operations.
Transportation Revenues Operating Revenues: Natural gas transportation for 2010 was $930.7
million compared to $891.8 million for 2009. The $38.9 million (4.4 percent) increase was
primarily due to higher transportation reservation revenues of $31.7 million, ($22.3 million from
Phase II of our Sentinel expansion placed in service in November 2009, $5.9 million from Mobile Bay
South placed in service in May 2010 and $3.5 million from Phase I of our 85 North expansion placed
in service in July 2010), and $18.8 million higher revenues which recover electric power and
certain other costs. Electric power and certain other costs are recovered from customers through
transportation rates resulting in no net impact on our operating income or results of operations.
These increases were partially offset by a decrease of $8.6 million from lower commodity revenues
resulting from lower IT Feeder revenue due to displacement of volumes as a result of new
interconnects and declining production attached to our IT Feeder laterals.
Storage Revenues Operating Revenues: Natural gas storage for 2010 were comparable to 2009.
Other Revenues Operating Revenues: Other decreased $20.6 million (80.2 percent) to $5.1
million for 2010, when compared to 2009, primarily due to a $19.5 million decrease in revenues from
the Park and Loan Service. The Park and Loan Service has decreased as a result of lower gas
volumes parked and/or loaned by customers in 2010 due to unfavorable pricing conditions in the
market.
Operating Costs and Expenses Excluding the Cost of natural gas sales which is directly offset
in revenues, our operating expenses were approximately $15.9 million (2.2 percent) higher than
2009. This increase was primarily attributable to:
| An increase in Cost of natural gas transportation of $15.2 million (89.4 percent) primarily resulting from a $15.3 million increase due to higher electric power costs in 2010 and a $2.5 million gas loss at our Eminence storage facility in 2010, partially offset by a $1.4 million decrease due to lower gas supply expense resulting from a settlement of an imbalance recorded in 2009 and $1.0 million lower fuel expenses in 2010 resulting from less favorable pricing differentials between cost recoveries at spot prices and expenses recognized at weighted average prices in 2009. Electric power costs are recovered from customers through transportation rates resulting in no net impact on our operating income or results of operations; |
31
Table of Contents
| An increase in Taxes other than income taxes of $10.3 million (28.8 percent) primarily resulting from state franchise tax refunds for prior years recorded in 2009, and; | ||
| An increase in Depreciation and amortization costs of $5.8 million (2.4 percent) primarily resulting from an increase in the depreciation base due to additional plant placed in-service. | ||
| Partially offset by a decrease in Operation and maintenance expense of $10.0 million (4.0 percent), primarily resulting from a decrease in labor related costs, primarily lower incentive compensation costs and pension costs; and | ||
| A decrease in Administrative and general expense of $6.8 million (4.1 percent), primarily resulting from a decrease in labor related costs, primarily lower incentive compensation costs and pension costs and lower corporate overhead charges. |
Other (Income) and Other Deductions Other (income) and other deductions in 2010 were $68.3
million compared to $55.2 million in 2009. The $13.1 million increase (23.7 percent) was primarily
due to lower Interest income affiliates of $16.9 million due to overall lower average advances to
affiliates in 2010 as compared to the same period in 2009 and a lower interest rate on the note
advance to WPZ, partially offset by a decrease in Miscellaneous other income, net of $4.2 million,
primarily due to lower non-operating reimbursement gross-up in 2010.
Eminence Storage Field Leak
On December 26, 2010, we detected a leak in one of the seven underground natural gas storage
caverns at our Eminence Storage Field in Covington County, Mississippi. Since that time, we have
reduced the pressure in the cavern by safely venting and flaring gas. Due to the leak at this
cavern and damage to the well at an adjacent cavern, both caverns are out of service. To date, the
event has not affected our performance of our obligations under our service agreements with our
customers.
As a result of these occurrences, we have determined that these two caverns cannot be returned
to service. Therefore, we intend to file an application seeking authorization from the FERC to
abandon those caverns. We estimate the cost to abandon these caverns will be approximately $31
million, which is expected to be spent in 2011.
In the Fourth Quarter of 2010, we recorded a charge of $4.5 million related to this event. Of
this, $2.5 million represents an estimate of gas lost net of insurance recovery, and $2.0 million
related to costs to ensure the safety of the surrounding environment net of insurance recovery.
We will also incur additional maintenance costs in 2011 related to this event, which we
estimate to be in the range of $10 to $15 million. However, these estimates are subject to change as work progresses and additional
information becomes known.
Effects of Inflation
We generally have experienced increased costs due to the effect of inflation on the cost of
labor, materials and supplies, and property, plant and equipment. A portion of the increased labor
and materials and supplies cost can directly affect income through increased operation and
32
Table of Contents
maintenance expenses. The cumulative impact of inflation over a number of years has resulted
in increased costs for current replacement of productive facilities. The majority of our property,
plant and equipment and material and supplies inventory is subject to ratemaking treatment, and
under current FERC practices, recovery is limited to historical costs. We believe that we will be
allowed to recover and earn a return based on increased actual costs incurred when existing
facilities are replaced. Cost based regulation along with competition and other market factors
limit our ability to price services or products based upon inflations effect on costs.
CAPITAL RESOURCES AND LIQUIDITY
Method of Financing
We fund our capital requirements with cash flows from operating activities, equity
contributions from WPZ, collection of advances to WPZ, accessing capital markets, and, if required,
borrowings under the credit agreement described below and advances from WPZ.
We may raise capital through private debt offerings, as well as offerings registered pursuant
to offering-specific registration statements. Interest rates, market conditions, and industry
conditions will affect amounts raised, if any, in the capital markets. We anticipate that we will
be able to access public and private markets on terms commensurate with our credit ratings to
finance our capital requirements, and we expect to do so in 2011.
Prior to Williams restructuring of its business, we participated in Williams unsecured $1.5
billion revolving credit facility (Credit Facility) with a maturity date of May 1, 2012. As part
of the restructuring, we were removed as borrowers under the Credit Facility and on February 17,
2010, we entered into a new $1.75 billion three-year senior unsecured revolving credit facility
(New Credit Facility) with WPZ and Northwest Pipeline GP (Northwest), as co-borrowers, and Citibank
N.A., as administrative agent, and certain other lenders named therein. The full amount of the New
Credit Facility is available to WPZ, and may be increased by up to an additional $250 million. We
may borrow up to $400 million under the New Credit Facility to the extent not otherwise utilized by
WPZ and Northwest. At December 31, 2010, the full $400 million under the New Credit Facility was
available. See Note 3 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the
New Credit Facility.
Through a wholly-owned subsidiary, we hold a 35 percent interest in Pine Needle. In March
1998 Pine Needle executed an interest rate swap agreement (March 1998 swap) with a bank, which
swapped floating rate debt into 6.58 percent fixed rate debt. In August 2010, Pine Needle settled
the March 1998 swap and executed a new interest rate swap agreement (August 2010 swap) which
swapped floating rate debt into 4.175 percent fixed rate debt. The March 1998 swap and the August
2010 swap qualify as cash flow hedge transactions under the accounting and reporting standards
established by ASC Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging. As such, our equity interest in the changes
in fair value of Pine Needles hedge is recognized in other comprehensive income. For the years
ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, our cumulative equity interest on Pine Needles hedge was a $0.2
million unrealized gain and a $0.7 million unrealized loss, respectively. The August 2010 interest
rate swap is settled quarterly and terminates in August 2015.
33
Table of Contents
Capital Expenditures
We categorize our capital expenditures as either maintenance capital expenditures or expansion
capital expenditures. Maintenance capital expenditures are those expenditures required to maintain
the existing operating capacity and service capability of our assets, including replacement of
system components and equipment that are worn, obsolete, completing their useful life, or necessary
to remain in compliance with environmental laws and regulations. Expansion capital expenditures
improve the service capability of existing assets, extend useful lives, increase transmission or
storage capacities from existing levels, reduce costs or enhance revenues. We anticipate 2011
capital expenditures will be between $510 million to $560 million. Of this total, $440 million to
$490 million is considered nondiscretionary due to legal, regulatory, and/or contractual
requirements.
Property, plant and equipment additions were $377 million, $303 million and $206 million for
2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The $74 million increase in 2010 compared to 2009 is primarily
related to the maintenance of existing facilities, including pipeline safety expenditures, and
expansion projects, primarily the 85 North and Mid South projects.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
At December 31, 2010, our debt portfolio included only fixed rate issues. The following table
provides information about our long-term debt, including current maturities, as of December 31,
2010. The table presents principal cash flows and weighted-average interest rates by expected
maturity dates.
December 31, 2010 | Expected Maturity Date | |||||||||||||||
2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | |||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt: |
||||||||||||||||
Fixed rate |
$ | 300 | $ | 325 | $ | | $ | | ||||||||
Interest rate |
7.26 | % | 7.03 | % | 6.53 | % | 6.53 | % | ||||||||
December 31, 2010 | Expected Maturity Date | |||||||||||||||
2015 | Thereafter | Total | Fair Value | |||||||||||||
(Dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
Long term debt |
||||||||||||||||
Fixed rate |
$ | | $ | 658 | $ | 1,283 | $ | 1,433 | ||||||||
Interest rate |
6.53 | % | 6.98 | % |
34
Table of Contents
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Page | ||||
36 | ||||
37 | ||||
38 | ||||
39-40 | ||||
41 | ||||
42 | ||||
43-44 | ||||
45-65 |
35
Table of Contents
MANAGEMENTS ANNUAL REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER
FINANCIAL REPORTING
FINANCIAL REPORTING
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over
financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a 15(f) and 15d 15(f) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934). Our internal controls over financial reporting are designed to provide
reasonable assurance to our management regarding the preparation and fair presentation of financial
statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Our
internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain
to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the
transactions and dispositions of our assets; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance
with authorization of our management; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention
or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a
material effect on our financial statements.
All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations including
the possibility of human error and the circumvention or overriding of controls. Therefore, even
those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to
financial statement preparation and presentation.
Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Senior Vice
President and our Vice President and Treasurer, we assessed the effectiveness of our internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on the criteria set forth by the
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control
Integrated Framework. Based on our assessment, we concluded that, as of December 31, 2010, our
internal control over financial reporting was effective.
This
annual report does not include a report of the companys registered public
accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. A report by the companys registered public accounting firm
is not required pursuant to rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the company to provide
only managements report in
this annual report.
36
Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Management Committee of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line
Company, LLC as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income,
comprehensive income, owners equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period
ended December 31, 2010. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in the
Index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements
and schedule 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. We were not engaged to perform an audit of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial
reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but
not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Companys internal control
over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management,
and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial position of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC at
December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule,
when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in
all material respects the information set forth therein.
/S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP |
Houston, Texas
February 24, 2011
February 24, 2011
37
Table of Contents
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME
(Thousands of Dollars)
(Thousands of Dollars)
Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Operating Revenues: |
||||||||||||
Natural gas sales |
$ | 99,346 | $ | 96,713 | $ | 150,056 | ||||||
Natural gas transportation |
930,704 | 891,841 | 897,569 | |||||||||
Natural gas storage |
146,820 | 144,978 | 145,711 | |||||||||
Other |
5,125 | 25,741 | 7,876 | |||||||||
Total operating revenues |
1,181,995 | 1,159,273 | 1,201,212 | |||||||||
Operating Costs and Expenses: |
||||||||||||
Cost of natural gas sales |
99,346 | 96,682 | 150,129 | |||||||||
Cost of natural gas transportation |
32,231 | 16,959 | 7,043 | |||||||||
Operation and maintenance |
239,643 | 249,625 | 232,390 | |||||||||
Administrative and general |
158,006 | 164,831 | 153,271 | |||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
252,049 | 246,247 | 233,516 | |||||||||
Taxes other than income taxes |
46,064 | 35,809 | 46,221 | |||||||||
Other (income) expense, net |
15,189 | 13,816 | (14,882 | ) | ||||||||
Total operating costs and expenses |
842,528 | 823,969 | 807,688 | |||||||||
Operating Income |
339,467 | 335,304 | 393,524 | |||||||||
Other (Income) and Other Deductions: |
||||||||||||
Interest
expense - affiliate |
353 | 387 | 437 | |||||||||
- other |
94,620 | 93,993 | 95,802 | |||||||||
Interest
income - affiliates |
(2,231 | ) | (19,090 | ) | (21,967 | ) | ||||||
- other |
(882 | ) | (1,185 | ) | (631 | ) | ||||||
Allowance for equity and borrowed funds used
during construction (AFUDC) |
(12,349 | ) | (11,982 | ) | (6,324 | ) | ||||||
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates |
(5,805 | ) | (5,757 | ) | (6,064 | ) | ||||||
Miscellaneous other income, net |
(5,375 | ) | (1,171 | ) | (5,908 | ) | ||||||
Total other (income) and other deductions |
68,331 | 55,195 | 55,345 | |||||||||
Income before Income Taxes |
271,136 | 280,109 | 338,179 | |||||||||
(Benefit) Provision for Income Taxes |
360 | (248 | ) | (960,706 | ) | |||||||
Net Income |
$ | 270,776 | $ | 280,357 | $ | 1,298,885 | ||||||
See accompanying notes.
38
Table of Contents
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Thousands of Dollars)
(Thousands of Dollars)
December 31, | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
Current Assets: |
||||||||
Cash |
$ | 148 | $ | 108 | ||||
Receivables: |
||||||||
Trade less allowance of $406 ($413 in 2009) |
96,699 | 98,794 | ||||||
Affiliates |
4,921 | 5,132 | ||||||
Advances to affiliate |
108,838 | | ||||||
Other |
13,735 | 18,354 | ||||||
Transportation and exchange gas receivables |
2,417 | 7,250 | ||||||
Inventories: |
||||||||
Gas in storage, at LIFO |
8,767 | 6,802 | ||||||
Gas in storage, at original cost |
802 | 794 | ||||||
Gas available for customer nomination, at average cost |
43,631 | 196 | ||||||
Materials and supplies, at lower of average cost or market |
32,225 | 31,372 | ||||||
Regulatory assets |
48,444 | 75,016 | ||||||
Other |
13,132 | 11,792 | ||||||
Total current assets |
373,759 | 255,610 | ||||||
Investments, at cost plus equity in undistributed earnings |
43,753 | 45,488 | ||||||
Property, Plant and Equipment: |
||||||||
Natural gas transmission plant |
7,674,366 | 7,354,805 | ||||||
Less - Accumulated depreciation and amortization |
2,650,133 | 2,474,680 | ||||||
Total property, plant and equipment, net |
5,024,233 | 4,880,125 | ||||||
Other Assets: |
||||||||
Regulatory assets |
198,921 | 197,676 | ||||||
Other |
59,223 | 42,884 | ||||||
Total other assets |
258,144 | 240,560 | ||||||
$ | 5,699,889 | $ | 5,421,783 | |||||
(continued)
39
Table of Contents
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Thousands of Dollars)
(Thousands of Dollars)
December 31, | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
LIABILITIES AND OWNERS EQUITY |
||||||||
Current Liabilities: |
||||||||
Payables: |
||||||||
Trade |
$ | 73,121 | $ | 70,400 | ||||
Affiliates |
18,769 | 24,409 | ||||||
Cash overdrafts |
19,526 | 18,380 | ||||||
Transportation and exchange gas payables |
1,646 | 1,434 | ||||||
Accrued liabilities: |
||||||||
State income and other taxes |
9,052 | 766 | ||||||
Interest |
26,061 | 26,061 | ||||||
Regulatory liabilities |
2,253 | 3,852 | ||||||
Employee benefits |
| 32,599 | ||||||
Customer advances |
24,976 | 35,637 | ||||||
Other |
56,783 | 17,311 | ||||||
Reserve for rate refunds |
| 564 | ||||||
Current maturities of long-term debt |
299,932 | | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
532,119 | 231,413 | ||||||
Long-Term Debt |
980,018 | 1,278,770 | ||||||
Other Long-Term Liabilities: |
||||||||
Asset retirement obligations |
220,644 | 229,401 | ||||||
Regulatory liabilities |
115,563 | 72,021 | ||||||
Accrued employee benefits |
| 6,476 | ||||||
Other |
6,785 | 9,145 | ||||||
Total other long-term liabilities |
342,992 | 317,043 | ||||||
Contingent liabilities and commitments (Note 2) |
||||||||
Owners Equity: |
||||||||
Members capital |
1,727,434 | 1,652,434 | ||||||
Loans to parent |
| (237,526 | ) | |||||
Retained earnings |
2,117,153 | 2,180,367 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) |
173 | (718 | ) | |||||
Total owners equity |
3,844,760 | 3,594,557 | ||||||
$ | 5,699,889 | $ | 5,421,783 | |||||
See accompanying notes.
40
Table of Contents
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OWNERS EQUITY
(Thousands of Dollars)
(Thousands of Dollars)
Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Common Stock: |
||||||||||||
Balance at beginning and end of period |
$ | | $ | | $ | | ||||||
Premium on Capital Stock and Other Paid-in Capital: |
||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of period |
| | 1,652,430 | |||||||||
Conversion to LLC |
| | (1,652,430 | ) | ||||||||
Balance at end of period |
| | | |||||||||
Owners capital: |
||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of period |
1,652,434 | 1,652,430 | | |||||||||
Contribution |
75,000 | 4 | | |||||||||
Conversion to LLC |
| | 1,652,430 | |||||||||
Balance at end of period |
1,727,434 | 1,652,434 | 1,652,430 | |||||||||
Loans to Parent: |
||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of period |
(237,526 | ) | (42,206 | ) | (30,690 | ) | ||||||
Loans to parent, net |
237,526 | (195,320 | ) | (11,516 | ) | |||||||
Balance at end of period |
| (237,526 | ) | (42,206 | ) | |||||||
Retained Earnings: |
||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of period |
2,180,367 | 2,045,010 | 966,125 | |||||||||
Add (deduct): |
||||||||||||
Net income |
270,776 | 280,357 | 1,298,885 | |||||||||
Cash dividends and distributions |
(333,990 | ) | (145,000 | ) | (220,000 | ) | ||||||
Balance at end of period |
2,117,153 | 2,180,367 | 2,045,010 | |||||||||
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss): |
||||||||||||
Balance at beginning of period |
(718 | ) | (1,087 | ) | (399 | ) | ||||||
Interest Rate Hedge: |
||||||||||||
Add (deduct): |
||||||||||||
Net gain (loss), net of tax of $169 in 2008 |
891 | 369 | (259 | ) | ||||||||
Elimination of deferred income taxes |
| | (429 | ) | ||||||||
Balance at end of period |
173 | (718 | ) | (1,087 | ) | |||||||
Total Owners Equity |
$ | 3,844,760 | $ | 3,594,557 | $ | 3,654,147 | ||||||
See accompanying notes.
41
Table of Contents
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(Thousands of Dollars)
(Thousands of Dollars)
Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Net Income |
$ | 270,776 | $ | 280,357 | $ | 1,298,885 | ||||||
Equity interest in unrealized gain
(loss) on interest rate hedge, net
taxes of $169 in 2008 |
891 | 369 | (259 | ) | ||||||||
Elimination of deferred income taxes |
| | (429 | ) | ||||||||
Total Comprehensive Income |
$ | 271,667 | $ | 280,726 | $ | 1,298,197 | ||||||
See accompanying notes.
42
Table of Contents
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
(Thousands of Dollars)
(Thousands of Dollars)
Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Cash flows from operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 270,776 | $ | 280,357 | $ | 1,298,885 | ||||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
252,131 | 247,543 | 235,106 | |||||||||
Deferred income taxes |
| | (998,382 | ) | ||||||||
(Gain)/loss on sale of property, plant and equipment |
| (2 | ) | (11,905 | ) | |||||||
Allowance for equity funds used during construction
(Equity AFUDC) |
(8,539 | ) | (7,835 | ) | (4,374 | ) | ||||||
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
||||||||||||
Receivables - affiliates |
1,702 | (3,192 | ) | 2,880 | ||||||||
- other |
6,714 | (25,759 | ) | 29,615 | ||||||||
Transportation and exchange gas receivable |
4,833 | 3,399 | 75 | |||||||||
Inventories |
(46,261 | ) | 36,667 | (32,771 | ) | |||||||
Payables
- affiliates |
(23,485 | ) | (7,461 | ) | (2,971 | ) | ||||||
- other |
15,888 | (51,868 | ) | (111,154 | ) | |||||||
Transportation and exchange gas payable |
212 | (1,417 | ) | (4,394 | ) | |||||||
Accrued liabilities |
405 | (24,587 | ) | (57,096 | ) | |||||||
Reserve for rate refunds |
(564 | ) | (13,798 | ) | 60,902 | |||||||
Other, net |
42,661 | 28,812 | (76,129 | ) | ||||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
516,473 | 460,859 | 328,287 | |||||||||
Cash flows from financing activities: |
||||||||||||
Additions to long-term debt |
| | 424,332 | |||||||||
Retirement of long-term debt |
| | (350,000 | ) | ||||||||
Debt issue costs |
| | (2,100 | ) | ||||||||
Cash dividends and distributions |
(333,791 | ) | (145,000 | ) | (220,000 | ) | ||||||
Change in cash overdrafts |
1,146 | 4,101 | 2,056 | |||||||||
Capital contribution from parent |
75,000 | | | |||||||||
Net cash used in financing activities |
(257,645 | ) | (140,899 | ) | (145,712 | ) | ||||||
(continued)
43
Table of Contents
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
(Thousands of Dollars)
(Thousands of Dollars)
Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Cash flows from investing activities: |
||||||||||||
Property, plant and equipment additions, net of
equity AFUDC* |
(376,502 | ) | (303,458 | ) | (205,717 | ) | ||||||
Disposal of property, plant and equipment, net |
6,969 | (12,391 | ) | 10,875 | ||||||||
Advances to affiliates, net |
126,999 | 189 | 27,666 | |||||||||
Advances to others, net |
229 | 282 | 270 | |||||||||
Purchase of ARO trust investments |
(46,952 | ) | (45,604 | ) | (31,056 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from sale of ARO trust investments |
31,001 | 40,713 | 14,143 | |||||||||
Other, net |
(532 | ) | (11 | ) | 1,553 | |||||||
Net cash used in investing activities |
(258,788 | ) | (320,280 | ) | (182,266 | ) | ||||||
Net increase (decrease) in cash |
40 | (320 | ) | 309 | ||||||||
Cash at beginning of period |
108 | 428 | 119 | |||||||||
Cash at end of period |
$ | 148 | $ | 108 | $ | 428 | ||||||
* Increase to property, plant and equipment |
$ | (352,674 | ) | $ | (328,190 | ) | $ | (203,575 | ) | |||
Changes in related accounts payable and accrued
liabilities |
(23,828 | ) | 24,732 | (2,142 | ) | |||||||
Property, plant and equipment additions, net of equity AFUDC |
$ | (376,502 | ) | $ | (303,458 | ) | $ | (205,717 | ) | |||
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information: |
||||||||||||
Cash paid during the year for: |
||||||||||||
Interest (exclusive of amount capitalized) |
$ | 89,342 | $ | 89,150 | $ | 99,073 | ||||||
Income taxes paid |
31 | 21,457 | 79,002 | |||||||||
Income tax refunds received |
| (455 | ) | (570 | ) | |||||||
Supplemental disclosures of significant non-cash
transactions: |
||||||||||||
Loans to parent reclassified to equity |
| (195,320 | ) | (11,516 | ) |
See accompanying notes.
44
Table of Contents
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Corporate Structure and Control
In this report, Transco (which includes Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC and unless
the context otherwise requires, all of our majority-owned subsidiaries) is at times referred to in
the first person as we, us or our.
At December 31, 2010, Transco is owned by Williams Partners L.P. (WPZ), a publicly traded
Delaware limited partnership, which is consolidated by The Williams Companies, Inc. (Williams), and
Williams holds an approximate 75 percent interest in WPZ, comprised of an approximate 73 percent
limited partner interest and all of WPZs 2 percent general partner interest.
Nature of Operations
We are an interstate natural gas transmission company that owns a natural gas pipeline system
extending from Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi and the Gulf of Mexico through Alabama, Georgia, South
Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania and New Jersey to the New York City
metropolitan area. The system serves customers in Texas and the 11 southeast and Atlantic seaboard
states mentioned above, including major metropolitan areas in Georgia, Washington D.C., North
Carolina, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.
Regulatory Accounting
We are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The Accounting Standards
Codification (ASC) Regulated Operations (Topic 980), provides that rate-regulated public utilities
account for and report regulatory assets and liabilities consistent with the economic effect of the
way in which regulators establish rates if the rates established are designed to recover the costs
of providing the regulated service and if the competitive environment makes it probable that such
rates can be charged and collected. Accounting for businesses that are regulated and apply the
provisions of Topic 980 can differ from the accounting requirements for non-regulated businesses.
Transactions that are recorded differently as a result of regulatory accounting requirements
include the capitalization of an equity return component on regulated capital projects,
capitalization of other project costs, retirements of general plant assets, employee related
benefits, environmental costs, negative salvage, asset retirement obligations, and other costs and
taxes included in, or expected to be included in, future rates. As a rate-regulated entity, our
management has determined that it is appropriate to apply the accounting prescribed by Topic 980
and, accordingly, the accompanying consolidated financial statements include the effects of the
types of transactions described above that result from regulatory accounting requirements.
Basis of Presentation
Williams acquisition of Transco Energy Company and its subsidiaries, including us, in 1995
was accounted for using the purchase method of accounting. Accordingly, an allocation of the
purchase price was assigned to our assets and liabilities based on their estimated fair values.
The
45
Table of Contents
purchase price allocation to us primarily consisted of a $1.5 billion allocation to property, plant
and equipment and adjustments to deferred taxes based upon the book basis of the net assets
recorded as a result of the acquisition. The amount allocated to property, plant and equipment is
being depreciated on a straight-line basis over 40 years, the estimated useful lives of these
assets at the date of acquisition, at approximately $36 million per year. At December 31, 2010,
the remaining property, plant and equipment allocation was approximately $0.9 billion. Current
FERC policy does not permit us to recover through rates amounts in excess of original cost.
Prior to Williams restructuring in February 2010, we were a participant in Williams cash
management program whereby we made advances to and received advances from Williams. The advances
were represented by demand notes. The interest rate on these intercompany demand notes was based
upon the weighted average cost of Williams debt outstanding at the end of each quarter. In
accordance with Williams restructuring of its business, our participation in the Williams cash
management program terminated on February 28, 2010. On January 31, 2010, our Management Committee
authorized a cash distribution which included the amount of our outstanding advances and associated
interest receivable which was paid February 16, 2010. Accordingly, the note advance balance and
related interest outstanding on December 31, 2009 were reflected as a reduction of our owners
equity as the advances were not available to us as working capital.
Subsequent to Williams restructuring, we became a participant in WPZs cash management
program on March 1, 2010. We make advances to and receive advances from WPZ. The advances are
represented by demand notes. The interest rate on these intercompany demand notes is based upon
the daily overnight investment rate paid on WPZs excess cash at the end of each month.
Through an agency agreement, Williams Gas Marketing, Inc. (WGM), our affiliate, manages our
remaining jurisdictional merchant gas sales, which excludes our cash out sales in settlement of gas
imbalances. The long-term purchase agreements managed by WGM remain in our name, as do the
corresponding sales of such purchased gas. Therefore, we continue to record natural gas sales
revenues and the related accounts receivable and cost of natural gas sales and the related accounts
payable for the jurisdictional merchant sales that are managed by WGM. WGM receives all margins
associated with jurisdictional merchant gas sales business and assumes all market and credit risk
associated with our jurisdictional merchant gas sales. Consequently, our merchant gas sales
service has no impact on our operating income or results of operations.
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include our accounts and the accounts of the
subsidiaries we control. Companies in which we and our subsidiaries own 20 percent to 50 percent
of the voting common stock or otherwise exercise significant influence over operating and financial
policies of the company are accounted for under the equity method. The equity method investments
as of December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 consist of Cardinal Pipeline Company, LLC (Cardinal)
with ownership interest of approximately 45 percent and Pine Needle LNG Company, LLC (Pine Needle)
with ownership interest of 35 percent. We received distributions associated with our equity method
investments totaling $8.4 million, $1.4 million, and $5.9 million in 2010, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. In addition, distributions totaling $3.7 million were received by Williams Gas
Pipeline Company, LLC (WGP) during the first nine months of 2009 in which it owned the equity
method investments.
46
Table of Contents
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles (GAAP) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts
reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could
differ from those estimates. Estimates and assumptions which, in the opinion of management, are
significant to the underlying amounts included in the financial statements and for which it would
be reasonably possible that future events or information could change those estimates include: 1)
revenues subject to refund; 2) litigation-related contingencies; 3) environmental remediation
obligations; 4) impairment assessments of long-lived assets; 5) depreciation; and 6) asset
retirement obligations.
Revenue Recognition
Revenues for transportation of gas under long-term firm agreements are recognized considering
separately the reservation and commodity charges. Reservation revenues are recognized monthly over
the term of the agreement regardless of the volume of natural gas transported. Commodity revenues
from both firm and interruptible transportation are recognized in the period transportation
services are provided based on volumes of natural gas physically delivered at the agreed upon
delivery point. Revenues for the storage of gas under firm agreements are recognized considering
separately the reservation, capacity, and injection and withdrawal charges. Reservation and
capacity revenues are recognized monthly over the term of the agreement regardless of the volume of
storage service actually utilized. Injection and withdrawal revenues are recognized in the period
when volumes of natural gas are physically injected into or withdrawn from storage.
In the course of providing transportation services to customers, we may receive different
quantities of gas from shippers than the quantities delivered on behalf of those shippers. The
resulting imbalances are primarily settled through the purchase and sale of gas with our customers
under terms provided for in our FERC tariff. Revenue is recognized from the sale of gas upon
settlement of the transportation and exchange imbalances (See Gas imbalances in this Note).
As a result of the ratemaking process, certain revenues collected by us may be subject to
possible refunds upon the issuance of final orders by the FERC in pending rate proceedings. We
record estimates of rate refund liabilities considering our and other third-party regulatory
proceedings, advice of counsel and other risks.
Environmental Matters
We are subject to federal, state, and local environmental laws and regulations. Environmental
expenditures are expensed or capitalized depending on their economic benefit and potential for rate
recovery. We believe that any expenditures required to meet applicable environmental laws and
regulations are prudently incurred in the ordinary course of business and such expenditures would
be permitted to be recovered through rates.
Property, Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment is recorded at cost. The carrying values of these assets are
also based on estimates, assumptions and judgments relative to capitalized costs, useful lives and
salvage values. These estimates, assumptions and judgments reflect FERC regulations, as well
47
Table of Contents
as historical experience and expectations regarding future industry conditions and operations.
Gains or losses from the ordinary sale or retirement of property, plant and equipment are credited
or charged to accumulated depreciation; certain other gains or losses are recorded in operating
income.
We provide for depreciation using the straight-line method at FERC prescribed rates, including
negative salvage (cost of removal) for transmission facilities, production and gathering facilities
and LNG storage facilities. Depreciation of general plant is provided on a group basis at
straight-line rates. Included in our depreciation rates is a negative salvage component that we
currently collect in rates. Depreciation rates used for major regulated gas plant facilities at
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
Category of Property | ||||
Gathering facilities |
0.01% - 0.91 | % | ||
Storage facilities |
0.40% - 3.30 | % | ||
Onshore transmission facilities |
0.69% - 5.00 | % | ||
Offshore transmission facilities |
0.01% - 1.00 | % |
We record an asset and a liability equal to the present value of each expected future
asset retirement obligation (ARO). Measurements of asset retirement obligations include, as a
component of future expected costs, an estimate of the price that a third party would demand, and
could expect to receive, for bearing the uncertainties inherent in the obligations, sometimes
referred to as a market-risk premium. The ARO asset is depreciated in a manner consistent with the
expected timing of the future abandonment of the underlying physical assets. We measure changes in the liability due to passage
of time by applying an interest method of allocation. The depreciation of the ARO asset and
accretion of the ARO liability are recognized as an increase to a regulatory asset, as management
expects to recover such amounts in future rates. The regulatory asset is amortized commensurate
with our collection of these costs in rates.
Impairment of Long-lived Assets
We evaluate the long lived assets of identifiable business activities for impairment when
events or changes in circumstances indicate, in our managements judgment, that the carrying value
of such assets may not be recoverable. When an indicator of impairment has occurred we compare our
managements estimate of undiscounted future cash flows attributable to the assets to the carrying
value of the assets to determine whether an impairment has occurred. We apply a
probability-weighted approach to consider the likelihood of different cash flow assumptions and
possible outcomes including selling in the near term or holding for the remaining estimated useful
life. If an impairment of the carrying value has occurred, we determine the amount of the
impairment recognized in the financial statements by estimating the fair value of the assets and
recording a loss for the amount that the carrying value exceeds the estimated fair value.
For assets identified to be disposed of in the future and considered held for sale in
accordance with the ASC Property, Plant, and Equipment (Topic 360), we compare the carrying value
to the estimated fair value less the cost to sell to determine if recognition of an impairment is
required. Until the assets are disposed of, the estimated fair value, which includes estimated
cash flows from operations until the assumed date of sale, is recalculated when related events or
circumstances change. We had no impairments during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008.
48
Table of Contents
Judgments and assumptions are inherent in our managements estimate of undiscounted future
cash flows used to determine recoverability of an asset and the estimate of an assets fair value
used to calculate the amount of impairment to recognize. The use of alternate judgments and/or
assumptions could result in the recognition of different levels of impairment charges in the
financial statements.
Accounting for Repair and Maintenance Costs
We account for repair and maintenance costs under the guidance of FERC regulations. The FERC
identifies installation, construction and replacement costs that are to be capitalized. All other
costs are expensed as incurred.
Allowance for Funds during Construction
Allowance for funds used during construction (AFUDC) represents the estimated cost of borrowed
and equity funds applicable to utility plant in process of construction and are included as a cost
of property, plant and equipment because it constitutes an actual cost of construction under
established regulatory practices. The FERC has prescribed a formula to be used in computing
separate allowances for borrowed and equity AFUDC. The allowance for borrowed funds used during
construction was $3.8 million, $4.2 million and $2.0 million, for 2010, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. The allowance for equity funds was $8.5 million, $7.8 million, and $4.4 million, for
2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Accounting for Income Taxes
Williams and its wholly-owned subsidiaries file a consolidated federal income tax return. It
is Williams policy to charge or credit its taxable subsidiaries with an amount equivalent to their
federal income tax expense or benefit computed as if each subsidiary had filed a separate return.
Prior to Williams restructuring of its business on February 17, 2010, we were an indirectly
wholly-owned subsidiary of Williams. We converted from a corporation to a limited liability
company on December 31, 2008.
We use the assets and liability method of accounting for income taxes, as required by the ASC
Income Taxes (Topic 740), which requires, among other things, provisions for all temporary
differences between the financial basis and the tax basis in our assets and liabilities and
adjustments to the existing deferred tax balances for changes in tax rates. Following our
conversion from a corporation to a limited liability company on December 31, 2008, we are no longer
subject to income tax, except for the Texas Gross Margin tax. (See Note 6 of Notes to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.)
Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Receivables
Accounts receivable are stated at the historical carrying amount net of reserves or
write-offs. Our credit risk exposure in the event of nonperformance by the other parties is
limited to the face value of the receivables. We perform ongoing credit evaluations of our
customers financial condition and require collateral from our customers, if necessary. Due to our
customer base, we have not historically experienced recurring credit losses in connection with our
receivables. Receivables determined to be uncollectible are reserved or written off in the period
of determination.
49
Table of Contents
Gas Imbalances
In the course of providing transportation services to customers, we may receive different
quantities of gas from shippers than the quantities delivered on behalf of those shippers.
Additionally, we transport gas on various pipeline systems which may deliver different quantities
of gas on behalf of us than the quantities of gas received from us. These transactions result in
gas transportation and exchange imbalance receivables and payables which are recovered or repaid in
cash or through the receipt or delivery of gas in the future and are recorded in the accompanying
Consolidated Balance Sheet. Settlement of imbalances requires agreement between the pipelines and
shippers as to allocations of volumes to specific transportation contracts and timing of delivery
of gas based on operational conditions. Our tariff includes a method whereby most transportation
imbalances are settled on a monthly basis. Each month a portion of the imbalances are not
identified to specific parties and remain unsettled. These are generally identified to specific
parties and settled in subsequent periods. We believe that amounts that remain unidentified to
specific parties and unsettled at year end are valid balances that will be settled with no material
adverse effect upon our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Management has
implemented a policy of continuing to carry any unidentified transportation and exchange imbalances
on the books for a three-year period. At the end of the three year period a final assessment will
be made of their continued validity. Absent a valid reason for maintaining the imbalance, any
remaining balance will be recognized in income. Certain imbalances are being recovered or repaid
in cash or through the receipt or delivery of gas upon agreement of the parties as to the
allocation of the gas volumes, and as permitted by pipeline operating conditions. These imbalances
have been classified as current assets and current liabilities at December 31, 2010 and 2009. We
utilize the average cost method of accounting for gas imbalances.
Deferred Cash Out
Most transportation imbalances are settled in cash on a monthly basis (cash out). We are
required by our tariff to refund revenues received from the cash out of transportation imbalances
in excess of costs incurred during the annual August through July reporting period. Revenues
received in excess of costs incurred are deferred until refunded in accordance with the tariff.
Gas Inventory
We utilize the last-in, first-out (LIFO) method of accounting for inventory gas in storage.
If inventories valued using the LIFO cost method were valued at current replacement cost, the
amounts would decrease by $2.2 million at December 31, 2010 and $1.1 million at December 31, 2009.
The basis for determining current cost at the end of each year is the December monthly average gas
price delivered to pipelines in Texas and Louisiana. We utilize the average cost method of
accounting for gas available for customer nomination. Liquefied natural gas in storage is valued
at original cost.
Reserves for Inventory Obsolescence
We perform an annual review of Materials and Supplies inventories, including a quarterly
analysis of parts that may no longer be useful due to planned replacements of compressor engines
and other components on our system. Based on this assessment, we record a reserve for the value of
the inventory which can no longer be used for maintenance and repairs on our pipeline. There was a
minimal reserve at December 31, 2010 and at December 31, 2009.
50
Table of Contents
Cash Flows from Operating Activities and Cash Equivalents
We use the indirect method to report cash flows from operating activities, which requires
adjustments to net income to reconcile to net cash flows provided by operating activities. We
include short-term, highly-liquid investments that have an original maturity of three months or
less as cash equivalents.
Certain reclassifications from non-operating income to operating income, related to oil and
gas royalties of $1.7 million for 2009 have been made to the 2009 period to conform to the 2010
presentation.
2. CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND COMMITMENTS
Rate Matters
On March 1, 2001, we submitted to the FERC a general rate filing (Docket No. RP01-245) to
recover increased costs. On September 16, 2010, the FERC issued an order resolving the one
remaining issue in this proceeding. The rates were effective from September 1, 2001 to March 1,
2007.
On August 31, 2006, we submitted to the FERC a general rate filing (Docket No. RP06-569)
designed to recover increased costs. The rates became effective March 1, 2007, subject to refund
and the outcome of a hearing. All issues in this proceeding except one have been resolved by
settlement.
The one issue reserved for litigation or further settlement relates to our proposal to change
the design of the rates for service under one of our storage rate schedules, which was implemented
subject to refund on March 1, 2007. A hearing on that issue was held before a FERC Administrative
Law Judge (ALJ) in July 2008. In November 2008, the ALJ issued an initial decision in which he
determined that our proposed incremental rate design is unjust and unreasonable. On January 21,
2010, the FERC reversed the ALJs initial decision, and approved our proposed incremental rate
design. Two parties have requested rehearing of the FERCs order. If the FERC were to reverse
their opinion on rehearing, we believe any refunds would not be material to our results of
operations.
Environmental Matters
Since 1989, we have had studies underway to test some of our facilities for the presence of
toxic and hazardous substances to determine to what extent, if any, remediation may be necessary.
We have responded to data requests from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state
agencies regarding such potential contamination of certain of our sites. On the basis of the
findings to date, we estimate that environmental assessment and remediation costs under various
federal and state statutes will total approximately $7 million to $9 million (including both
expense and capital expenditures), measured on an undiscounted basis, and will be spent over the
next four to six years. This estimate depends on a number of assumptions concerning the scope of
remediation that will be required at certain locations and the cost of the remedial measures. We
are conducting environmental assessments and implementing a variety of remedial measures that may
result in increases or decreases in the total estimated costs. At December 31, 2010, we had a
balance of approximately $3.8 million for the expense portion of these estimated costs recorded in
current liabilities ($0.8 million) and other long-term liabilities ($3.0 million) in the
accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. At December 31, 2009, we had
51
Table of Contents
a balance of approximately $4.7 million for the expense portion of these estimated costs recorded
in current liabilities ($0.8 million) and other long-term liabilities ($3.9 million) in the
accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Although we discontinued the use of lubricating oils containing polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs) in the 1970s, we have discovered residual PCB contamination in equipment and soils at
certain gas compressor station sites. We have worked closely with the EPA and state regulatory
authorities regarding PCB issues, and we have a program to assess and remediate such conditions
where they exist. In addition, we commenced negotiations with certain environmental authorities
and other parties concerning investigative and remedial actions relative to potential mercury
contamination at certain gas metering sites. All such costs are included in the $7 million to $9
million range discussed above.
We have been identified as a potentially responsible party (PRP) at various Superfund and
state waste disposal sites. Based on present volumetric estimates and other factors, our estimated
aggregate exposure for remediation of these sites is less than $0.5 million. The estimated
remediation costs for all of these sites are included in the $7 million to $9 million range
discussed above. Liability under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (and applicable state law) can be joint and several with other PRPs. Although
volumetric allocation is a factor in assessing liability, it is not necessarily determinative;
thus, the ultimate liability could be substantially greater than the amounts described above.
We are also subject to the Federal Clean Air Act (Act) and to the Federal Clean Air Act
Amendments of 1990 (1990 Amendments), which added significantly to the existing requirements
established by the Act. Pursuant to requirements of the 1990 Amendments and EPA rules designed to
mitigate the migration of ground-level ozone (NOx), we are planning installation of air pollution
controls on existing sources at certain facilities in order to reduce NOx emissions. For many of
these facilities, we are developing more cost effective and innovative compressor engine control
designs.
In March 2008, the EPA promulgated a new, lower National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS)
for ground-level ozone. Within two years, the EPA was expected to designate new eight-hour ozone
non-attainment areas. However, in September 2009, the EPA announced it would reconsider the 2008
NAAQS for ground level ozone to ensure that the standards were clearly grounded in science and were
protective of both public health and the environment. As a result, the EPA delayed designation of
new eight-hour ozone non-attainment areas under the 2008 standards until the reconsideration is
complete. In January 2010, the EPA proposed to further reduce the ground-level ozone NAAQS from
the March 2008 levels. The EPA currently anticipates finalization of the new ground-level ozone
standard in the third quarter of 2011. Designation of new eight-hour ozone non-attainment areas are
expected to result in additional federal and state regulatory actions that will likely impact our
operations and increase the cost of additions to property, plant and equipment. We are unable at
this time to estimate the cost of additions that may be required to meet this new regulation.
Additionally, in August 2010, the EPA promulgated National Emission Standards for hazardous
air pollutants (NESHAP) regulations that will impact our operations. The emission control
additions required to comply with the hazardous air pollutant regulations are estimated to include
costs in the range of $25 million to $30 million through 2013, the compliance date.
Furthermore, the EPA promulgated the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Mandatory Reporting Rule on October
30, 2009, which requires facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more carbon
52
Table of Contents
dioxide (CO2) equivalent per year from stationary fossil-fuel combustion sources to
report GHG emissions to the EPA annually beginning March 31, 2011 for calendar year 2010. On
November 30, 2010, the EPA issued additional regulations that expand the scope of the Mandatory
Reporting Rule to include fugitive and vented greenhouse gas emissions effective January 1, 2011.
Facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more CO2 equivalent per year from stationary
fossil-fuel combustion and fugitive/vented sources combined will be required to report GHG
combustion and fugitive/vented emissions to the EPA annually beginning March 31, 2012 for calendar
year 2011. Compliance with this reporting obligation is estimated to cost $7 million to $9 million
over the next four to five years.
In February 2010, the EPA promulgated a final rule establishing a new one-hour nitrogen
dioxide (NO2) NAAQS. The effective date of the new NO2 standard was April
12, 2010. This new standard is subject to numerous challenges in the federal court. We are unable
at this time to estimate the cost of additions that may be required to meet this new regulation.
We consider prudently incurred environmental assessment and remediation costs and the costs
associated with compliance with environmental standards to be recoverable through rates. To date,
we have been permitted recovery of environmental costs, and it is our intent to continue seeking
recovery of such costs through future rate filings. As a result, these estimated costs of
environmental assessment and remediation, less amounts collected, have been recorded as regulatory
assets in Current Assets, in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. We had no environmental
related regulatory assets at December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2009, we had recorded
approximately $0.6 million of environmental related regulatory assets.
By letter dated September 20, 2007, the EPA required us to provide information regarding
natural gas compressor stations in the states of Mississippi and Alabama as part of the EPAs
investigation of our compliance with the Act. By January 2008, we responded with the requested
information. By Notices of Violation (NOVs) dated March 28, 2008, the EPA found us to be in
violation of the requirements of the Act with respect to these compressor stations. We met with
the EPA in May 2008 to discuss the allegations contained in the NOVs; in June 2008, we submitted to
the EPA a written response denying the allegations. In July 2009, the EPA requested additional
information pertaining to these compressor stations; in August 2009, we submitted the requested
information. In August, 2010, the EPA requested, and we provided, similar information for a
compressor station in Maryland.
Safety Matters
Pipeline Integrity Regulations We have developed an Integrity Management Plan that we believe
meets the United States Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA) final rule that was issued pursuant to the requirements of the Pipeline
Safety Improvement Act of 2002. The rule requires gas pipeline operators to develop an integrity
management program for transmission pipelines that could affect high consequence areas in the event
of pipeline failure. The Integrity Management Program includes a baseline assessment plan along
with periodic reassessments to be completed within required timeframes. In meeting the integrity
regulations, we have identified high consequence areas and developed our baseline assessment plan.
We are on schedule to complete the required assessments within required timeframes. Currently, we
estimate that the cost to complete the required initial assessments over the period of 2011 through
2012 and associated remediation will be primarily capital in nature and range between $80 million
and $110 million. Ongoing periodic reassessments and initial assessments of any new high
consequence areas will be completed within the timeframes required by the rule. Management
considers the costs associated with
53
Table of Contents
compliance with the rule to be prudent costs incurred in the ordinary course of business and,
therefore, recoverable through our rates.
Appomattox, Virginia Pipeline Rupture On September 14, 2008, we experienced a rupture of our
30-inch diameter mainline B pipeline near Appomattox, Virginia. The rupture resulted in an
explosion and fire which caused several minor injuries and property damage to several nearby
residences. On September 25, 2008, PHMSA issued a Corrective Action Order (CAO) which required
that we operate three of our mainlines in a portion of Virginia at reduced operating pressure and
prescribed various remedial actions. After completion of some of the remedial actions PHMSA
approved our requests to restore the affected pipelines to normal operating pressure. By letter
dated April 29, 2010, PHMSA confirmed that the remaining remedial actions should be completed by
December 31, 2010. This deadline was subsequently extended by PHMSA to September 30, 2011. In
2009, PHMSA proposed, and we paid, a $1.0 million civil penalty related to this matter.
Other Matters
Various other proceedings are pending against us incidental to our operations.
Summary
Litigation, arbitration, regulatory matters, environmental matters and safety matters are
subject to inherent uncertainties. Were an unfavorable ruling to occur, there exists the
possibility of a material adverse impact on the results of operations in the period in which the
ruling occurs. Management, including internal counsel, currently believes that the ultimate
resolution of the foregoing matters, taken as a whole and after consideration of amounts accrued,
insurance coverage, recovery from customers or other indemnification arrangements will not have a
material adverse effect upon our future liquidity or financial position.
Other Commitments
Commitments for construction and gas purchases We have commitments for construction and
acquisition of property, plant and equipment of approximately $103 million at December 31, 2010.
We have commitments for gas purchases of approximately $36 million at December 31, 2010. See Note
1 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for our discussion of our agency agreement with
WGM.
54
Table of Contents
3. DEBT, FINANCING ARRANGEMENTS AND LEASES
Long-Term Debt
At December 31, 2010 and 2009, long-term debt issues were outstanding as follows (in
thousands):
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Debentures: |
||||||||
7.08% due 2026 |
$ | 7,500 | $ | 7,500 | ||||
7.25% due 2026 |
200,000 | 200,000 | ||||||
Total debentures |
207,500 | 207,500 | ||||||
Notes: |
||||||||
7% due 2011 |
300,000 | 300,000 | ||||||
8.875% due 2012 |
325,000 | 325,000 | ||||||
6.4% due 2016 |
200,000 | 200,000 | ||||||
6.05% due 2018 |
250,000 | 250,000 | ||||||
Total notes |
1,075,000 | 1,075,000 | ||||||
Total long-term debt issues |
1,282,500 | 1,282,500 | ||||||
Unamortized debt premium and discount |
(2,482 | ) | (3,730 | ) | ||||
Current maturities |
(300,000 | ) | | |||||
Total long-term debt, less current maturities |
$ | 980,018 | $ | 1,278,770 | ||||
Aggregate minimum maturities (face value) applicable to long-term debt outstanding at
December 31, 2010, for the next five years, are as follows (in thousands):
2011: |
7% Notes | $ | 300,000 | |||||
2012: |
8.875% Notes | $ | 325,000 |
There are no maturities applicable to long-term debt outstanding for the years 2013, 2014
and 2015.
No property is pledged as collateral under any of our long-term debt issues.
Restrictive Debt Covenants
At December 31, 2010, none of our debt instruments restrict the amount of distributions to our
parent. Our debt agreements contain restrictions on our ability to incur secured debt beyond
certain levels.
Revolving Credit and Letter of Credit Facility
Prior to Williams restructuring of its business, we participated in Williams unsecured $1.5
billion revolving credit facility (Credit Facility) with a maturity date of May 1, 2012. As part
of the restructuring, we were removed as borrowers under the Credit Facility and on February 17,
2010, we entered into a new $1.75 billion three-year senior unsecured revolving credit facility
(New Credit Facility) with WPZ and Northwest Pipeline GP (Northwest), as co-borrowers, and
55
Table of Contents
Citibank N.A., as administrative agent, and certain other lenders named therein. The full amount
of the New Credit Facility is available to WPZ, and may be increased by up to an additional $250
million. We may borrow up to $400 million under the New Credit Facility to the extent not
otherwise utilized by WPZ and Northwest. At December 31, 2010, the full $400 million under the New
Credit Facility was available.
Interest on borrowings under the New Credit Facility is payable at rates per annum equal to,
at the option of the borrower: (1) a fluctuating base rate equal to Citibank, N.A.s adjusted base
rate plus the applicable margin, or (2) a periodic fixed rate equal to LIBOR plus the applicable
margin. The adjusted base rate will be the highest of (i) the federal funds rate plus 0.5 percent,
(ii) Citibank N.A.s publicly announced base rate, and (iii) one-month LIBOR plus 1.0 percent. WPZ
pays a commitment fee (currently 0.5 percent) based on the unused portion of the New Credit
Facility. The application margin and the commitment fee are determined by reference to a pricing
schedule based on a borrowers senior unsecured debt ratings.
The New Credit Facility contains various covenants that limit, among other things, the
borrowers and its respective subsidiaries ability to incur indebtedness, grant certain liens
supporting indebtedness, merge or consolidate, sell all or substantially all of its assets, enter
into certain affiliate transactions, make certain distributions during an event of default, and
allow any material change in the nature of their business.
Under the New Credit Facility, WPZ is required to maintain a ratio of debt to Earnings Before
Income Taxes, Interest, Depreciation and Amortization (EBITDA) (each as defined in the New Credit
Facility, with EBITDA measured on a rolling four-quarter basis) of no greater than 5.00 to 1.00 for
itself and its consolidated subsidiaries. For us and our consolidated subsidiaries, the ratio of
debt to capitalization (defined as net worth plus debt) is not permitted to be greater than 55
percent. Each of the above ratios is tested at the end of each fiscal quarter (with the first full
year measured on an annualized basis). At December 31, 2010, we are in compliance with these
covenants.
The New Credit Facility includes customary events of default. If an event of default with
respect to a borrower occurs under the New Credit Facility, the lenders will be able to terminate
the commitments for all borrowers and accelerate the maturity of the loans of the defaulting
borrower under the New Credit Facility and exercise other rights and remedies.
Lease Obligations
On October 23, 2003, we entered into a lease agreement for space in the Williams Tower in
Houston, Texas (Williams Tower). The lease term ran through March 31, 2014.
On January 6, 2011, we entered into an amendment to our current lease agreement that extends
the lease through March 31, 2021 and added additional space effective April 2011, which was
previously subleased from an affiliate.
56
Table of Contents
The future minimum lease payments under our various operating leases, including the Williams
Tower leases are as follows (in thousands):
Operating Leases | ||||||||||||
Williams Tower | Other Leases | Total | ||||||||||
2011 |
$ | 7,678 | $ | 179 | $ | 7,857 | ||||||
2012 |
7,978 | 131 | 8,109 | |||||||||
2013 |
7,972 | 119 | 8,091 | |||||||||
2014 |
8,087 | 122 | 8,209 | |||||||||
2015 |
8,126 | | 8,126 | |||||||||
Thereafter |
42,661 | | 42,661 | |||||||||
Total net minimum obligations |
$ | 82,502 | $ | 551 | $ | 83,053 | ||||||
Our lease expense was $9.3 million in 2010, $9.8 million in 2009, and $9.1 million in
2008.
4. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
We are entitled to collect in rates the amounts necessary to fund our asset retirement
obligations (ARO). We deposit monthly, into an external trust account, the revenues specifically
designated for ARO. We established the ARO trust account (ARO Trust) on June 30, 2008. The ARO
Trust carries a moderate risk portfolio. We measure the financial instruments held in our ARO
Trust at fair value. However, in accordance with ASC Topic 980, Regulated Operations, both
realized and unrealized gains and losses of the ARO Trust are recorded as regulatory assets or
liabilities.
The fair value hierarchy prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value, giving the highest
priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1
measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). We classify
fair value balances based on the observability of those inputs. The three levels of the fair value
hierarchy are as follows:
| Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that we have the ability to access. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis. Our Level 1 consists of financial instruments in our ARO Trust totaling $40.4 million and $22.0 million at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. These financial instruments include the following (in millions): |
December 31, | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Money market funds |
$ | 1.6 | $ | 0.2 | ||||
U.S. equity funds |
17.4 | 10.5 | ||||||
International equity funds |
6.0 | 3.0 | ||||||
Municipal bond funds |
15.4 | 8.3 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 40.4 | $ | 22.0 | ||||
| Level 2 Inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets included in Level 1, that are either directly or indirectly observable. These inputs are either directly observable in |
57
Table of Contents
the marketplace or indirectly observable through corroboration with market data for substantially the full contractual term of the asset or liability being measured. We do not have any Level 2 measurements. | |||
| Level 3 Includes inputs that are not observable for which there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability being measured. These inputs reflect managements best estimate of the assumptions market participants would use in determining fair value. We do not have any Level 3 measurements. |
Reclassifications of fair value between Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 of the fair value
hierarchy, if applicable, are made at the end of each quarter. No transfers in or out of Level 1
and Level 2 occurred during the periods ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.
5. BENEFIT PLANS
Certain of the benefit costs charged to us by Williams associated with employees who directly
support us are described below. Additionally, allocated corporate expenses from Williams to us
also include amounts related to these same employee benefits, which are not included in the amounts
presented below.
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans
Williams has noncontributory defined benefit pension plans that provide pension benefits for
its eligible employees. Pension expense charged to us by Williams was $16.7 million, $20.3 million
and $5.2 million for 2010, 2009, and 2008, respectively.
Williams provides certain retiree health care and life insurance benefits for eligible
participants that generally were employed by Williams on or before December 31, 1991 or December
31, 1995, if they were employees or retirees of Transco Energy Company and its subsidiaries. We
recognized other postretirement benefit income of $4.5 million for 2010 and other postretirement
benefit expense of $3.3 million and $3.6 million for 2009 and 2008, respectively.
We have been allowed by rate case settlements to collect or refund in future rates any
differences between the actuarially determined costs and amounts currently being recovered in rates
related to other postretirement benefits. Any differences between the annual actuarially
determined cost and amounts currently being recovered in rates are recorded as an adjustment to
revenues or expense and collected or refunded through future rate adjustments. The amounts of
postretirement benefits costs deferred as a regulatory liability at December 31, 2010 and 2009 are
$14.0 million and $4.7 million, respectively, and are expected to be refunded through future rates.
The amounts of postretirement benefits costs deferred as regulatory assets at December 31, 2010
and 2009 are $6.8 million and $7.9 million, respectively, and are currently being recovered over a
ten year period beginning March 1, 2007.
Defined Contribution Plan
Williams charged us compensation expense of $6.7 million in 2010 and 2009, and $6.3 million in
2008 for Williams company matching contributions to this plan.
58
Table of Contents
Employee Stock-Based Compensation Plan Information
The Williams Companies, Inc. 2007 Incentive Plan, as amended and restated on February 23,
2010, (Plan) was approved by stockholders on May 20, 2010. The Plan provides for Williams common
stock based awards to both employees and nonmanagement directors. The Plan permits the granting of
various types of awards including, but not limited to, restricted stock units and stock options.
Awards may be granted for no consideration other than prior and future services or based on certain
financial performance targets achieved.
Williams currently bills us directly for compensation expense related to stock-based
compensation awards based on the fair value of the options. We are also billed for our
proportionate share of both WGPs and Williams stock-based compensation expense through various
allocation processes.
Total stock-based compensation expense, included in administrative and general expenses, for
the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $3.1 million, $3.2 million and $2.4 million,
respectively, excluding amounts allocated from WGP and Williams.
Business Restructuring
In connection with Williams restructuring, all of our employees were transferred to another
Williams affiliate effective as of February 16, 2010. This affiliate provides the personnel to
perform the services previously conducted by our employees and charges us for these services
according to a new service agreement. (See Note 8.)
59
Table of Contents
6. INCOME TAXES
Following is a summary of the provision (benefit) for income taxes for 2010, 2009 and 2008 (in
thousands):
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Current: |
||||||||||||
Federal |
$ | | $ | | $ | 36,286 | ||||||
State |
360 | (248 | ) | 1,390 | ||||||||
360 | (248 | ) | 37,676 | |||||||||
Deferred: |
||||||||||||
Federal |
| | (867,400 | ) | ||||||||
State |
| | (130,982 | ) | ||||||||
| | (998,382 | ) | |||||||||
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
$ | 360 | $ | (248 | ) | $ | (960,706 | ) | ||||
Following is a reconciliation of the provision (benefit) for income taxes at
the federal statutory rate to the provision (benefit) for income taxes (in thousands):
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Provision at statutory rate |
$ | 94,898 | $ | 98,038 | $ | 118,362 | ||||||
Increases (decreases) in taxes resulting from: |
| |||||||||||
Income from operations not taxed as a LLC |
(94,898 | ) | (98,038 | ) | | |||||||
State income taxes (net of federal benefit) |
360 | (248 | ) | 7,703 | ||||||||
Conversion from corporation to LLC |
| | (1,086,771 | ) | ||||||||
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
$ | 360 | $ | (248 | ) | $ | (960,706 | ) | ||||
Following our conversion on December 31, 2008 to a single member limited liability
company, for which an election was made to be treated as a disregarded entity, we are no longer
subject to income tax, except for the Texas Gross Margin tax. Subsequent to the conversion, all
deferred income taxes were eliminated.
In 2010, the state income taxes reflect a current provision for the Texas Gross Margin tax.
We have no deferred income tax liabilities or deferred tax assets at December 31, 2010, or
2009.
Total interest and penalties recognized as a component of income tax expense were
insignificant in 2010, 2009, and 2008.
60
Table of Contents
7. FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The carrying amount and estimated fair values of our financial instruments as of December 31,
2010 and 2009 are as follows (in thousands):
Carrying Amount | Fair Value | |||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||
Financial assets: |
||||||||||||||||
Cash |
$ | 148 | $ | 108 | $ | 148 | $ | 108 | ||||||||
Short-term financial assets |
108,838 | | 108,838 | | ||||||||||||
ARO Trust Investments |
40,413 | 21,977 | 40,413 | 21,977 | ||||||||||||
Long-term financial assets |
144 | 373 | 144 | 373 | ||||||||||||
Financial liabilities: |
||||||||||||||||
Long-term debt, including
current portion |
1,279,950 | 1,278,770 | 1,432,866 | 1,417,300 |
For cash and short-term financial assets (third-party notes receivable and advances to
affiliates) that have variable interest rates, the carrying amount is a reasonable estimate of fair
value due to the short maturity of those instruments. For long-term financial assets (long-term
receivables), the carrying amount is a reasonable estimate of fair value because the interest rate
is a variable rate.
The fair value of our publicly traded long-term debt is valued using year-end traded bond
market prices. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, 100 percent of long-term debt was publicly traded.
As a participant in WPZs cash management program, we make advances to and receive advances from
WPZ. Advances are stated at the historical carrying amounts. At December 31, 2010, the advances
due us by WPZ totaled $108.8 million and are reflected in current assets. Prior to Williams
restructuring in February 2010, we were a participant in Williams cash management program whereby
we made advances to and received advances from Williams. At December 31, 2009, the advances due us
by Williams totaled $186.1 million and are reflected as a reduction of owners equity. Advances to
affiliates are due on demand. However, in accordance with the restructuring of Williams business
in February 2010, our Management Committee authorized a distribution which included an amount
equivalent to our advance balance and related interest outstanding. Accordingly, our advance
balance and related interest receivable at December 31, 2009 were reflected as a reduction of
owners equity as the advances were not be available to us as working capital.
8. TRANSACTIONS WITH MAJOR CUSTOMERS AND AFFILIATES
Major Customers
In 2010, operating revenues received from Public Service Enterprise Group, National Grid, and
Piedmont Natural Gas Company, our three major customers, were $130.0 million, $115.1 million, and
$85.6 million, respectively. In 2009, operating revenues received from National Grid, Public
Service Enterprise Group, and Piedmont Natural Gas Company, our three major
customers, were $120.3 million, $111.4 million, and $78.4 million, respectively. In 2008,
operating revenues received from Public Service Enterprise Group, National Grid and Piedmont
61
Table of Contents
Natural Gas Company, our three major customers, were $132.3 million, $120.4 million, and $81.8
million, respectively.
Affiliates
Prior to Williams restructuring in February 2010, we were a participant in Williams cash
management program, whereby we made advances to and received advances from Williams. The interest
rate on these intercompany demand notes was based upon the weighted average cost of Williams debt
outstanding at the end of each quarter. In accordance with Williams restructuring of its
business, our participation in the Williams cash management program terminated on February 28,
2010. We received interest income from advances to Williams of $2.2 million, $19.1 million, and
$22.0 million during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Subsequent to Williams restructuring in February 2010, we became a participant in WPZs cash
management program, and we make advances to and receive advances from WPZ. At December 31, 2010,
the advances due us by WPZ totaled approximately $108.8 million. The advances are represented by
demand notes. The interest rate on these intercompany demand notes is based upon the daily
overnight investment rate paid on WPZs excess cash at the end of each month. At December 31, 2010,
the interest rate was 0.06 percent. The interest income from these advances to WPZ was minimal
during 2010.
Included in our operating revenues for 2010, 2009 and 2008 are revenues received from
affiliates of $23.4 million, $21.9 million, and $35.8 million, respectively. The rates charged to
provide sales and services to affiliates are the same as those that are charged to
similarly-situated nonaffiliated customers.
Through an agency agreement with us, WGM manages our jurisdictional merchant gas sales. The
agency fees billed by WGM for 2008 through 2010 were not significant.
Included in our cost of sales for 2010, 2009 and 2008 is purchased gas cost from affiliates,
excluding the agency fees discussed above, of $4.8 million, $5.2 million, and $14.3 million,
respectively. All gas purchases are made at market or contract prices.
We have long-term gas purchase contracts containing variable prices that are currently in the
range of estimated market prices. Our estimated purchase commitments under such gas purchase
contracts are not material to our total gas purchases. Furthermore, through the agency agreement
with us, WGM has assumed management of our merchant sales service and, as our agent, is at risk for
any above-spot-market gas costs that it may incur.
Williams has a policy of charging subsidiary companies for management services provided by the
parent company and other affiliated companies. Included in our administrative and general expenses
for 2010, 2009 and 2008 were $54.7 million, $53.3 million, and $46.5 million, respectively, for
such corporate expenses charged by Williams and other affiliated companies. Management considers
the cost of these services to be reasonable.
Pursuant to an operating agreement, we serve as contract operator on certain Williams Field
Services (WFS) facilities. Transco recorded reductions in operating expenses for services provided
to and reimbursed by WFS of $8.7 million, $9.1 million, and $7.8 million in 2010, 2009 and 2008
respectively, under terms of the operating agreement. Pursuant to construction agreements, Transco
received pre-payments from WFS of $8.1 million for the modification of
62
Table of Contents
the
North Markham lateral and tie-in to WFS, and $5.4 million for construction of the Lower Demunds
meter station.
We made equity distributions of $334 million, $145 million and $55 million during 2010, 2009
and the fourth quarter of 2008, respectively. We declared and paid cash dividends of $165
million during the first three quarters of 2008.
In October 2010, Williams Partners Operating, LLC made a $75 million contribution to us to
fund a portion of our expenditures for additions to property, plant and equipment.
As part of Williams restructuring of its business, effective as of February 16, 2010, all of
our former employees were transferred to our affiliate, Transco Pipeline Services LLC (TPS), a
Delaware limited liability company. On February 17, 2010, we entered into an administrative
services agreement pursuant to which TPS will provide personnel, facilities, goods and equipment
not otherwise provided by us that are necessary to operate our business. In return, we will
reimburse TPS for all direct and indirect expenses it incurs or payments it makes (including
salary, bonus, incentive compensation and benefits) in connection with these services.
9. ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS
We record an asset and a liability equal to the present value of each expected future ARO.
The ARO asset is depreciated in a manner consistent with the expected timing of the future abandonment of the underlying physical assets. We measure changes in the liability due to passage of time by applying an interest rate to the liability balance. This amount is recognized as an increase in the carrying amount of the liability and is offset
by a regulatory asset. The regulatory asset is being recovered through our rates, and is being amortized to expense consistent with the amounts collected in rates.
The asset retirement obligation at December 31, 2010 and 2009 was $251.6 million and $229.4
million, respectively. During 2010 and 2009, our overall asset retirement obligation changed as
follows (in thousands):
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Beginning balance |
$ | 229,401 | $ | 229,360 | ||||
Accretion |
16,542 | 16,148 | ||||||
New obligations |
53 | 317 | ||||||
Changes in estimates of existing obligations (1) |
15,747 | (6,592 | ) | |||||
Property dispositions |
(10,099 | ) | (9,832 | ) | ||||
Ending balance |
$ | 251,644 | $ | 229,401 | ||||
(1) Changes in estimates of existing obligations are primarily due to the annual review process which considers various factors including inflation rates, current estimates for removal cost, discount rates and the estimated remaining life of the assets. The net downward revision in 2010 includes an offsetting increase of $31 million related to changes in the timing and method of abandonment on certain of our natural gas storage caverns that were associated with a recent leak. |
At
December 31, 2010, we had a balance of $31.0 million related to ARO
recorded in Current Accrued Liabilities-Other.
At December 31, 2009, the current portion of our ARO liability was not material.
The accrued obligations relate to underground storage caverns, offshore platforms, pipelines,
and gas transmission facilities. At the end of the useful life of each respective asset, we are
legally obligated to plug storage caverns and remove any related surface equipment, to dismantle
offshore platforms, to cap certain gathering pipelines at the wellhead connection and remove any
related surface equipment, and to remove certain components of gas transmission facilities from the
ground.
63
Table of Contents
We are entitled to collect in rates the amounts necessary to fund our ARO. All funds received
for such retirements shall be deposited into an external trust account dedicated to funding our
ARO. On June 30, 2008, we deposited the initial funding of $11.2 million, which included an
adjustment for the total spending on ARO requirements as of May 31, 2008. We have an annual
funding obligation of approximately $16.7 million, with installments to be deposited monthly.
10. REGULATORY ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
The regulatory assets and regulatory liabilities resulting from our application of the
provisions of ASC Topic 980, Regulated Operations, included in the accompanying Consolidated
Balance Sheet at December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 are as follows (in millions):
Regulatory Assets | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Grossed-up deferred taxes on equity funds
used
during construction |
$ | 87.8 | $ | 89.9 | ||||
Asset retirement obligations |
101.3 | 95.9 | ||||||
Deferred taxes |
11.3 | 12.4 | ||||||
Postretirement benefits other than pension |
6.8 | 7.9 | ||||||
Fuel cost |
33.2 | 66.0 | ||||||
Electric power cost |
6.9 | | ||||||
Other |
0.1 | 0.6 | ||||||
Total Regulatory Assets |
$ | 247.4 | $ | 272.7 | ||||
Regulatory Liabilities | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||
Negative salvage |
$ | 100.0 | $ | 66.7 | ||||
Deferred cash out |
1.8 | 2.2 | ||||||
Electric power cost |
| 1.6 | ||||||
Postretirement benefits other than pension |
14.0 | 4.7 | ||||||
Other |
2.0 | 0.7 | ||||||
Total Regulatory Liabilities |
$ | 117.8 | $ | 75.9 | ||||
The significant regulatory assets and liabilities include:
Grossed-up deferred taxes on equity funds used during construction: Regulatory asset balance
established to offset the deferred tax for the equity component of the allowance for funds used
during the construction of long-lived assets. Taxes on capitalized funds used during construction
and the offsetting deferred income taxes are included in the rate base and are recovered over the
depreciable lives of the long-lived asset to which they relate.
Asset Retirement Obligations: We record an asset and a liability equal to the present value of each expected future ARO.
The ARO asset is depreciated in a manner consistent with the expected timing of the future abandonment of the underlying physical assets. We measure changes in the liability due to passage of time by applying an interest rate to the liability balance. This amount is recognized as an increase in the carrying amount of the liability and is offset
by a regulatory asset. The regulatory asset is being recovered through our rates, and is being amortized to expense consistent with the amounts collected in rates.
Deferred Taxes: Regulatory asset balance was established as a result of an increase to rate base
deferred taxes due to an increase to the effective state income tax rate. The regulatory asset is
64
Table of Contents
being collected from rate payers over the remaining depreciable lives of the long-lived asset to
which they relate.
Postretirement benefits: We recover the actuarially determined cost of postretirement benefits
through rates that are set through periodic general rate filings. Any differences between the
annual actuarially determined cost and amounts currently being recovered in rates are recorded as
regulatory assets or liabilities and collected or refunded through future rate adjustments. These
amounts are not included in the rate base.
Fuel cost: This amount represents the difference between the gas retained from our customers and
the gas consumed in operations. These amounts are not included in the rate base but are expected to
be recovered/refunded in subsequent annual fuel tracker filing periods.
Electric power cost: This amount represents the difference between the electric power costs
recovered from our customers and the electric power costs incurred in operations. These amounts are
not included in the rate base but are expected to be recovered/refunded in subsequent annual
electric power tracker filing periods.
Negative Salvage: Our rates include
a component designed to recover certain future retirement costs for which we are not
required to record an asset retirement obligation. We record a regulatory liability
representing the cumulative residual amount of recoveries net of expenditures associated with these retirement costs.
Deferred cash out: This amount represents the deferral of gains or losses on the purchases and
sales of gas imbalances with shippers. These amounts are not included in the rate base but are
expected to be recovered/refunded in subsequent annual cash out filing periods.
65
Table of Contents
Summarized quarterly financial data are as follows (in thousands):
2010 | First (1) | Second (2) | Third | Fourth (3) | ||||||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 301,049 | $ | 276,681 | $ | 305,063 | $ | 299,202 | ||||||||
Operating expenses |
206,414 | 198,897 | 217,791 | 219,426 | ||||||||||||
Operating income |
94,635 | 77,784 | 87,272 | 79,776 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense |
23,547 | 23,733 | 23,751 | 23,942 | ||||||||||||
Other (income) and deductions, net |
(5,035 | ) | (4,726 | ) | (10,119 | ) | (6,762 | ) | ||||||||
Income before income taxes |
76,123 | 58,777 | 73,640 | 62,596 | ||||||||||||
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
129 | 105 | 169 | (43 | ) | |||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 75,994 | $ | 58,672 | $ | 73,471 | $ | 62,639 | ||||||||
2009 | First (4) | Second (5) | Third (6) | Fourth (7) | ||||||||||||
Operating revenues |
$ | 290,179 | $ | 313,254 | $ | 273,554 | $ | 282,286 | ||||||||
Operating expenses |
195,716 | 229,212 | 198,947 | 200,094 | ||||||||||||
Operating income |
94,463 | 84,042 | 74,607 | 82,192 | ||||||||||||
Interest expense |
23,489 | 23,549 | 23,633 | 23,709 | ||||||||||||
Other (income) and deductions, net |
(9,440 | ) | (9,713 | ) | (11,121 | ) | (8,911 | ) | ||||||||
Income before income taxes |
80,414 | 70,206 | 62,095 | 67,394 | ||||||||||||
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
| | | (248 | ) | |||||||||||
Net income |
$ | 80,414 | $ | 70,206 | $ | 62,095 | $ | 67,642 | ||||||||
(1) Includes a $5.0 million increase to income before income taxes resulting from a gain on the
sale of base gas from the Hester storage facility and a $0.8 million reclassification from
non-operating income to operating income related to oil and gas royalties.
(2) Includes a $2.6 million increase to income before income taxes resulting from a gain on the
sale of base gas from the Hester storage facility and a $1.2 million decrease to operating expenses
resulting from an accrued obligation associated with an unclaimed property audit.
(3) Includes a $1.1 million decrease to operating expenses resulting from an insurance
reimbursement for a pipeline rupture near Appomattox, Virginia and a $4.5 million increase to
operating expenses resulting from a gas leak at our Eminence storage facility.
(4) Includes a $0.4 million reclassification from non-operating income to operating income related
to oil and gas royalties.
(5) Includes a $0.5 million reclassification from non-operating income to operating income related
to oil and gas royalties.
(6) Includes a $0.4 million reclassification from non-operating income to operating income related
to oil and gas royalties
(7) Includes a $10.5 million decrease to operating expenses resulting from state franchise tax
reductions and a $2.5 million increase to operating expenses resulting from an accrued obligation
associated with an unclaimed property audit and a $0.3 million reclassification from non-operating
income to operating income related to oil and gas royalties.
66
Table of Contents
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC
SCHEDULE II VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
(In thousands)
SCHEDULE II VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
(In thousands)
ADDITIONS | ||||||||||||||||||||
Charged to | ||||||||||||||||||||
Beginning | Costs and | Ending | ||||||||||||||||||
Description | Balance | Expenses | Other | Deductions | Balances | |||||||||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2010: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Reserve for refunds |
$ | 564 | $ | | $ | (64 | ) | $ | | $ | 500 | |||||||||
Reserve for doubtful receivables |
413 | | | (7 | ) | 406 | ||||||||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2009: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Reserve for refunds |
14,362 | | (12,542 | ) | (1,256 | ) | 564 | |||||||||||||
Reserve for doubtful receivables |
424 | | | (11 | ) | 413 | ||||||||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2008: |
||||||||||||||||||||
Reserve for refunds |
98,035 | | 61,387 | (145,060 | )(1) | 14,362 | ||||||||||||||
Reserve for doubtful receivables |
462 | | | (38 | ) | 424 |
(1) | Rate refunds were paid in the Third Quarter of 2008. |
Item 9. Changes In and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
Item 9A. Control and Procedures
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management, including our Senior Vice President and our Vice President and Treasurer, does
not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a15(e) and
15d15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act) (Disclosure Controls) will prevent all errors and all
fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable,
not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Further, the design of a
control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of
controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in all
control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues
and instances of fraud, if any, within the company have been detected. These inherent limitations
include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can
occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the
individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of
the control. The design of any system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions
about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed
in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Because of the inherent
limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and
not be detected. We monitor our Disclosure Controls and make modifications as necessary; our intent
in this regard is that the Disclosure Controls will be modified as systems change and conditions
warrant.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
An evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our Disclosure Controls was
performed as of the end of the period covered by this report. This evaluation was performed
67
Table of Contents
under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Senior Vice
President and our Vice President and Treasurer. Based upon that evaluation, our Senior Vice
President and our Vice President and Treasurer concluded that these Disclosure Controls are
effective at a reasonable assurance level.
Managements Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
See report set forth in Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
Changes in Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting
There have been no changes during the fourth quarter of 2010 that have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, our Internal Controls over financial reporting.
Item 9B. Other information
None
68
Table of Contents
PART III
Since we meet the conditions set forth in General Instruction (I)(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K,
the information required by Items 10, 11, 12, and 13, is omitted.
Items 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services
Fees for professional services provided by our independent registered public accounting firm
in each of the last two fiscal years in each of the following categories are (in thousands):
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Audit Fees |
$ | 1,784 | $ | 1,950 | ||||
Audit-Related Fees |
| | ||||||
Tax Fees |
| | ||||||
All Other Fees |
| | ||||||
Total Fees |
$ | 1,784 | $ | 1,950 | ||||
Fees for audit services include fees associated with the annual audit, the reviews for
our quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, the reviews for other SEC filings and accounting consultation.
As a wholly owned subsidiary of WPZ, we do not have a separate audit committee. The policies
and procedures for pre-approving audit and non-audit services of the Audit Committee of the Board
of Directors of WPZs general partner have been set forth in WPZs 2010 annual report on Form 10-K,
which is available on the SECs website at
http://www.sec.gov and on WPZs website at
http://www.williamslp.com under the heading Investors-SEC Filings.
69
Table of Contents
PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
Page | ||||
Reference to | ||||
2010 10-K | ||||
A. Index |
||||
1. Financial Statements: |
||||
36 | ||||
37 | ||||
38 | ||||
39-40 | ||||
41 | ||||
42 | ||||
43-44 | ||||
45-65 | ||||
2. Financial Statement Schedules: |
||||
66 | ||||
67 | ||||
The following schedules are omitted because of the absence of the
conditions under which they are required: |
||||
I, III, IV, and V. |
70
Table of Contents
3. Exhibits:
Exhibit No. | Description | |
2.1* | Certificate of Conversion dated December 22, 2008 and effective December 31, 2008. |
|
3.1* | Certificate of Formation dated December 22, 2008 and effective December 31, 2008. |
|
3.2 | Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line
Company, LLC dated February 17, 2010 (filed as Exhibit 3.2 to our Form 10-Q filed
October 28, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
4.1 | Senior Indenture dated July 15, 1996 between Transco and Citibank, N.A., as
Trusted (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Form S-3 filed April 2, 1996 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
4.2 | Indenture dated August 27, 2001 between Transco and Citibank, N.A., as Trustee
(filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Form S-4 filed November 8, 2001 and incorporated
herein by reference). |
|
4.3 | Indenture dated July 3, 2002 between Transco and Citibank, N.A., as Trustee
(filed as Exhibit 4.1 to The Williams Companies, Inc.s, No. 1-4174, Form 10-Q
filed on August 14, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
4.4 | Indenture dated April 11, 2006 between Transco and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., as
Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Form 8-K filed April 11, 2006 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
4.5 | Indenture, dated as of May 22, 2008 between Transco and The Bank of New York
Trust Company, N.A., as Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Form 8-K filed May
23, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.1 | Credit Agreement, dated May 1, 2006, among The Williams Companies, Inc.,
Northwest Pipeline Corporation, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, and
Williams Partners L.P., as Borrowers, and Citibank, N.A., as Administrative Agent
(filed as Exhibit 10.1 to The Williams Companies, Inc.s, No.1-4174, Form 8-K,
filed May 1, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.2 | Amendment Agreement, dated May 9, 2007, among The Williams Companies, Inc.,
Williams Partners L.P., Northwest Pipeline Corporation, Transcontinental Gas Pipe
Line Corporation, certain banks, financial institutions and other institutional
lenders and Citibank, N.A., as administrative agent (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to The
Williams Companies, Inc.s, No. 1-4174, Form 8-K filed May 15, 2007 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.3 | Amendment Agreement, dated November 21, 2007, among The Williams Companies, Inc.,
Williams Partners L.P., Northwest Pipeline Corporation, Transcontinental Gas Pipe
Line Corporation, certain banks, financial institutions and other institutional
lenders and Citibank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to The
Williams Companies, Inc.s, No. 1-4174, Form 8-K filed November 28, 2007 and
incorporated herein by reference). |
|
10.4 | Credit Agreement, dated as of February 17, 2010, by and among Williams Partners
L.P., Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC, Northwest Pipeline GP, the
lenders party thereto and Citibank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (filed as
Exhibit 10.5 to Williams Partners L.P.s, No. 1-32599, Form 8-K, filed on
February 22, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
71
Table of Contents
10.5 | Administrative Services Agreement, dated as of February 17,
2010, by and between Transco Pipeline Services LLC and
Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (filed as Exhibit
10.3 to Williams Partners L.P.s, No. 1-32599, Form 8-K, filed
on February 22, 2010 (File No. 001-32599 and incorporated
herein by reference). |
|
31.1* | Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Rules
13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) promulgated under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Item 601(b)(31) of
Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
31.2* | Certification of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Rules
13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) promulgated under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Item 601(b)(31) of
Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
32 ** | Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal
Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002. |
* | Filed herewith. |
** | Furnished herewith. |
72
Table of Contents
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.
TRANSCONTINENTAL GAS PIPE LINE COMPANY, LLC | ||||
(Registrant) | ||||
By: | /s/ Jeffrey P. Heinrichs | |||
Jeffrey P. Heinrichs | ||||
Controller and Assistant Treasurer |
Date: February 24, 2011
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated:
Signature | Title | |
/s/ RANDALL L. BARNARD
|
Management Committee Member and Senior Vice
President (Principal Executive Officer) |
|
/s/ RICHARD D. RODEKOHR
|
Vice President and Treasurer (Principal Financial Officer) |
|
/s/ JEFFREY P. HEINRICHS
|
Controller and Assistant Treasurer (Principal Accounting Officer) |
|
/s/ FRANK J. FERAZZI
|
Management Committee Member and Vice President |
Date: February 24, 2011
73
Table of Contents
INDEX OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit No. | Description | |
2.1* | Certificate of Conversion dated December 22, 2008 and effective December 31, 2008. | |
3.1* | Certificate of Formation dated December 22, 2008 and effective December 31, 2008. | |
3.2 | Amended and Restated Operating Agreement of Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC dated February 17, 2010 (filed as Exhibit 3.2 to our Form 10-Q filed October 28, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
4.1 | Senior Indenture dated July 15, 1996 between Transco and Citibank, N.A., as Trusted (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Form S-3 filed April 2, 1996 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
4.2 | Indenture dated August 27, 2001 between Transco and Citibank, N.A., as Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Form S-4 filed November 8, 2001 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
4.3 | Indenture dated July 3, 2002 between Transco and Citibank, N.A., as Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to The Williams Companies, Inc.s, No. 1-4174, Form 10-Q filed on August 14, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
4.4 | Indenture dated April 11, 2006 between Transco and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Form 8-K filed April 11, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
4.5 | Indenture, dated as of May 22, 2008 between Transco and The Bank of New York Trust Company, N.A., as Trustee (filed as Exhibit 4.1 to our Form 8-K filed May 23, 2008 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
10.1 | Credit Agreement, dated May 1, 2006, among The Williams Companies, Inc., Northwest Pipeline Corporation, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, and Williams Partners L.P., as Borrowers, and Citibank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to The Williams Companies, Inc.s, No.1-4174, Form 8-K, filed May 1, 2006 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
10.2 | Amendment Agreement, dated May 9, 2007, among The Williams Companies, Inc., Williams Partners L.P., Northwest Pipeline Corporation, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, certain banks, financial institutions and other institutional lenders and Citibank, N.A., as administrative agent (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to The Williams Companies, Inc.s, No. 1-4174, Form 8-K filed May 15, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
10.3 | Amendment Agreement, dated November 21, 2007, among The Williams Companies, Inc., Williams Partners L.P., Northwest Pipeline Corporation, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation, certain banks, financial institutions and other institutional lenders and Citibank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (filed as Exhibit 10.1 to The Williams Companies, Inc.s, No. 1-4174, Form 8-K filed November 28, 2007 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
10.4 | Credit Agreement, dated as of February 17, 2010, by and among Williams Partners L.P., Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC, Northwest Pipeline GP, the lenders party thereto and Citibank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (filed as Exhibit 10.5 to Williams Partners L.P.s, No. 1-32599, Form 8-K, filed on February 22, 2010 and incorporated herein by reference). |
74
Table of Contents
10.5 | Administrative Services Agreement, dated as of February 17, 2010, by and between Transco Pipeline Services LLC and Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Company, LLC (filed as Exhibit 10.3 to Williams Partners L.P.s, No. 1-32599, Form 8-K, filed on February 22, 2010 (File No. 001-32599 and incorporated herein by reference). | |
31.1* | Certification of Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
31.2* | Certification of Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Item 601(b)(31) of Regulation S-K, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
32 ** | Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
* | Filed herewith. |
** | Furnished herewith. |
75