The Company is subject to regulation by various federal, state and local governmental agencies, including those specifically described below.

FERC has comprehensive jurisdiction over PEPL, Trunkline, Sea Robin and Southwest Gas. In accordance with the Natural Gas Act of 1938, FERC’s jurisdiction over natural gas companies encompasses, among other things, the acquisition, operation and disposition of assets and facilities, the services provided and rates charged.

FERC has authority to regulate rates and charges for transportation and storage of natural gas in interstate commerce. FERC also has authority over the construction and operation of pipeline and related facilities utilized in the transportation and sale of natural gas in interstate commerce, including the extension, enlargement or abandonment of service using such facilities. PEPL, Trunkline, Sea Robin, and Southwest Gas hold certificates of public convenience and necessity issued by FERC, authorizing them to operate the pipelines, facilities and properties now in operation and to transport and store natural gas in interstate commerce.

The Company is also subject to the Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act of 1968 and the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002, which regulate the safety of natural gas pipelines.

Effective January 2018, the 2017 Tax and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) changed several provisions of the federal tax code, including a reduction in the maximum corporate tax rate. On March 15, 2018, in a set of related proposals, the FERC addressed treatment of federal income tax allowances in regulated entity rates. The FERC issued a Revised Policy Statement on Treatment of Income Taxes (“Revised Policy Statement”) stating that it will no longer permit master limited partnerships to recover an income tax

The FERC also issued a Notice of Inquiry (“2017 Tax Law NOI”) on March 15, 2018, requesting comments on the effect of the Tax Act on FERC jurisdictional rates. The 2017 Tax Law NOI states that of particular interest to the FERC is whether, and if so how, the FERC should address changes relating to accumulated deferred income taxes and bonus depreciation. Comments in response to the 2017 Tax Law NOI were due on or before May 21, 2018. It is unknown at

In March 2019, following the decision of the D.C. Circuit in Emera Maine v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the FERC issued a Notice of Inquiry regarding its policy for determining return on equity (“ROE”). The FERC specifically sought information and stakeholder views to help the FERC explore whether, and if so how, it should modify its policies concerning the determination of ROE to be used in designing jurisdictional rates charged by public utilities. The FERC also expressly sought comment on whether any changes to its policies concerning public utility the ROEs should be applied to interstate natural gas and oil pipelines. Initial comments were due in June 2019, and reply comments were due in July 2019. The FERC has not taken any further action with respect to the Notice of Inquiry as of this time, and therefore we cannot predict what actions that the FERC will take,effect, if any, following receipt of responses tosuch development could have on our cost-of-service rates in the 2017 Tax Law NOI and any potential impacts from final rules or policy statements issued following the 2017 Tax Law NOI on the rates the Company can charge for FERC regulated transportation services.future.

IncludedAlso included in the March 15, 2018 proposals is a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NOPR”) proposing rules for implementation of the Revised Policy Statement and the corporate income tax rate reduction with respect to natural gas pipeline rates. On July 18, 2018, the FERC issued a Final Rule adopting procedures that are generally the same as proposed in the NOPR with a few clarifications and modifications. With limited exceptions, the Final Rule requires all FERC regulatedFERC-regulated natural gas pipelines that have cost-based rates for service to make a one-time Form No. 501-G filing providing certain financial information and to make an election on how to treat its existing rates. The Final Rule suggests that this information will allow the FERC and other stakeholders to evaluate the impacts of the Tax Act and the Revised Policy Statement on each individual pipeline’s rates. The Final Rule also requires that each FERC regulatedFERC-regulated natural gas pipeline select one of four options:options to address changes to the pipeline’s revenue requirements as a result of the tax reductions: file a limited Natural Gas Act (“NGA”) Section 4 filing reducing its rates only as required related to reflect the Tax Act and the Revised Policy Statement,reduced tax rates, commit to filing a general NGA Section 4 rate case in the near future, file a statement explaining why an adjustment to rates is not needed, or take no other action. For the limited NGA Section 4 option, the FERC clarified that, notwithstanding the Revised Policy Statement, a pipeline organized as a master limited partnership does not need to eliminate its income tax allowance but, instead, can reduce its rates to reflect the reduction in the maximum corporate tax rate. Trunkline and PEPLPanhandle filed their respective FERC Form No. 501-Gs on October 11, 2018. Southwest Gas filed its FERC Form No. 501-G on November 8, 2018. Pursuant to an option in the Final Rule, Sea Robin filed a general section 4 rate case on November 30, 2018 in lieu of filing a FERC Form 501-G which was due on December 6, 2018. 

By order issued January 16, 2019, the FERC initiated a review of PEPL’sPanhandle’s existing rates pursuant to Section 5 of the Natural Gas Act to determine whether the rates currently charged by PEPLPanhandle are just and reasonable and set the matter for hearing.  PEPL must filePanhandle filed a cost and revenue study on or before April 1, 2019. Panhandle filed a NGA Section 4 rate case on August 30, 2019. By order issued October 1, 2019, the Panhandle Section 5 and Section 4 cases were consolidated. An initial decision is expected to be issued in the first quarter of 2020. 2021.

By order issued February 19, 2019, the FERC initiated a review of Southwest Gas’sGas’ existing rates pursuant to Section 5 of the Natural Gas Act to determine whether the rates currently charged by Southwest Gas are just and reasonable and set the matter for hearing.  Southwest Gas must filefiled a cost and revenue study on or before May 6, 2019.  On July 10, 2019, Southwest filed an Offer of Settlement in this Section 5 proceeding, which settlement was supported or not opposed by Commission Trial Staff and all active parties. The settlement was approved on October 29, 2019. There is not a material impact on revenue.

Sea Robin Pipeline Company filed a Section 4 rate case on November 30, 2018.  A procedural schedule was ordered with a hearing date in the 4th quarter of 2019.  Sea Robin Pipeline Company has reached a settlement of this proceeding, with a settlement filed July 22, 2019. The settlement was approved by the FERC by order dated October 17, 2019. There is directing that an initial decision be issued within 47 weeks of the date the cost and revenue study is due.not a material impact on revenue.

Even without action on the 2017 Tax Law NOI or as contemplated in the Final Rule, the FERC or our shippers may challenge the cost of service rates we charge. The FERC’s establishment of a just and reasonable rate is based on many components, and tax-related changes will affect two such components, the allowance for income taxes and the amount for accumulated deferred income taxes, while other pipeline costs also will continue to affect the FERC’s determination of just and reasonable cost of service rates. Although changes in these two tax related components may decrease, other components in the cost of service rate calculation may increase and result in a newly calculated cost of service rate that is the same as or greater than the prior cost of service rate. Moreover, we receive revenues from our pipelines based on a variety of rate structures, including cost of service rates, negotiated rates, discounted rates and market-based rates. Many of our interstate pipelines have negotiated market rates that were agreed to by customers in connection with long-term contracts entered into to support the construction of the pipelines. Other systems have a mix of tariff rate, discount rate, and negotiated rate agreements. We do not expect market-based rates, negotiated rates or discounted rates that are not tied to the cost of service rates to be materially affected by the Revised Policy Statement or any final regulations that may result from the March 15, 2018 proposals. The revenues we receive from natural gas transportation services we provide pursuant to cost of service based rates may decrease in the future as a result of the ultimate outcome of the NOI, the Final Rule, and the Revised Policy Statement, combined with the reduced corporate federal income tax rate established in the Tax Act. The extent of any revenue reduction related to our cost of service rates, if any, will depend on a detailed review of all of the Company’sETO’s cost of service components and the outcomes of any challenges to our rates by the FERC or our shippers.

The FERC issued a Notice of Inquiry on April 19, 2018 (“Pipeline Certification NOI”), thereby initiating a review of its policies on certification of natural gas pipelines, including an examination of its long-standing Policy Statement on Certification of New Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, issued in 1999, that is used to determine whether to grant certificates for new pipeline projects. We are unable to predict what, if any, changes may be proposed as a result of the Pipeline Certification NOI that will affect our natural gas pipeline business or when such proposals, if any, might become effective. Comments in response to the Pipeline Certification NOI were due on or before July 25, 2018. We do not expect that any change in this policy would affect us in a materially different manner than any other natural gas pipeline company operating in the United States.

For additional information regarding the Company’s regulation and rates, see “Item 1. Business – Environmental” and “Item 1A.  Risk Factors.”

The interstate pipeline and storage systems of the Company compete with those of other interstate and intrastate pipeline companies in the transportation and storage of natural gas. The principal elements of competition among pipelines are rates, terms of service, flexibility and reliability of service.

Natural gas competes with other forms of energy available to the Company’s customers and end-users, including electricity, coal and fuel oils.  The primary competitive factor is price. Changes in the availability or price of natural gas and other forms of energy, the level of business activity, conservation, legislation and governmental regulation, the capability to convert to alternate fuels and other factors, including weather and natural gas storage levels, affect the ongoing demand for natural gas in the areas served by the Company. In order to meet these challenges, the Company will need to adapt its marketing strategies, the types of transportation and storage services provided and its pricing and rates to address competitive forces. In addition, FERC may authorize the construction of new interstate pipelines that compete with the Company’s existing pipelines.

The Company is subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding water quality, hazardous and solid waste management, air quality control and other environmental matters. These laws and regulations require the Company to conduct its operations in a specified manner and to obtain and comply with a wide variety of environmental regulations, licenses, permits, inspections and other approvals. Failure to comply with environmental requirements may expose the Company to significant fines, penalties and/or interruptions in operations. The Company’s environmental policies and procedures are designed to achieve compliance with such laws and regulations. These evolving laws and regulations and claims for damages to property, employees, other persons and the environment resulting from current or past operations may result in significant expenditures and liabilities in the future. The Company engages in a process of updating and revising its procedures for the ongoing evaluation of its operations to identify potential environmental exposures and enhance compliance with regulatory requirements. For additional information concerning the impact of environmental regulation on the Company, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and Note 8 to our consolidated financial statements.

At December 31, 2018,2019, the Company had 505509 employees. Of these employees, 208206 were represented by the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial, and Service Workers International AFL-CIO, CLC. The current union contract expires on May 28, 2019.2022.

The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones faced by the Company.  Additional risks and uncertainties that the Company is unaware of, or that it currently deems immaterial, may become important factors that affect it. If any of the following risks occurs, the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

As a result of macroeconomic challenges that may impact the economy of the United States and other parts of the world, the Company’s s may experience cash flow concerns. As a result, if customers’ operating and financial performance deteriorates, or if they are unable to make scheduled payments or obtain credit, customers may not be able to pay, or may delay payment of, accounts receivable owed to the Company. The Company’s credit procedures and policies may not be adequate to fully eliminate customer credit risk. In addition, in certain situations, the Company may assume certain additional credit risks for competitive reasons or otherwise. Any inability of the Company’s customers to pay for services could adversely affect the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The Company is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of ETO. ETO executives serve as the board of managers and as executive officers of the Company. Accordingly, ETO controls and directs all of the Company’s business affairs, decides all matters submitted for member approval and may unilaterally effect changes to its management team. In circumstances involving a conflict of interest between ETO, on the one hand, and the Company’s creditors, on the other hand, the Company can give no assurance that ETO would not exercise its power to control the Company in a manner that would benefit ETO to the detriment of the Company’s creditors.

Certain of our executive officers and directors are also officers and/or directors of ET and/or ETO. These relationships may create conflicts of interest regarding corporate opportunities and other matters. The resolution of any such conflicts may not always be in our or our creditors’ best interests. In addition, these overlapping executive officers and directors allocate their time among us

and ET and/or ETO. These officers and directors face potential conflicts regarding the allocation of their time, which may adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our affiliates and related parties are not prohibited from engaging in other businesses or activities, including those that might be in direct competition with us.

The Company’s operations are subject to all operating hazards and risks incident to handling, storing, transporting and providing customers with natural gas, including adverse weather conditions, explosions, pollution, release of toxic substances, fires and other hazards, each of which could result in damage to or destruction of its facilities or damage to persons and property. If any of these events were to occur, the Company could suffer substantial losses. Moreover, as a result, the Company has been, and likely will be, a defendant in legal proceedings and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. While the Company maintains insurance against many of these risks to the extent and in amounts that it believes are reasonable, the Company’s insurance coverages have significant deductibles and self-insurance levels, limits on maximum recovery, and do not cover all risks. There is also the risk that the coverages will change over time in light of increased premiums or changes in the terms of the insurance coverages that could result in the Company’s decision to either terminate certain coverages, increase deductibles and self-insurance levels, or decrease maximum recoveries. In addition, there is a risk that the insurers may default on their coverage obligations. As a result, the Company’s results of operations, cash flows or financial condition could be adversely affected if a significant event occurs that is not fully covered by insurance.

The United States government has issued warnings that energy assets, including the nation’s pipeline infrastructure, may be the future target of terrorist organizations. Some of our facilities are subject to standards and procedures required by the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards. We believe we are in compliance with all material requirements; however, such compliance may not prevent a terrorist attack from causing material damage to our facilities or pipelines. Any such terrorist attack on our facilities or pipelines, those of our customers, or in some cases, those of other pipelines could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The impact that terrorist attacks, such as the attacks of September 11, 2001, may have on the energy industry in general, and on the Company in particular, is not known at this time. Uncertainty surrounding military activity may affect the Company’s operations in unpredictable ways, including disruptions of fuel supplies and markets and the possibility that infrastructure facilities, including pipelines, gathering facilities and processing plants, could be direct targets of, or indirect casualties of, an act of terror or a retaliatory strike. The Company may have to incur significant additional costs in the future to safeguard its physical assets.

In the ordinary course of our business, we collect and store sensitive data, including intellectual property, our proprietary business information and that of our customers, suppliers and business partners, and personal identification information of our employees, in our data centers and on our networks. The secure processing, maintenance and transmission of this information is critical to our operations and business strategy. Despite our security measures, our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. Any such breach could compromise our networks and the information stored there could be accessed, publicly disclosed, lost or stolen. Any such access, disclosure or other loss of information could result in legal claims or proceedings, liability under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, regulatory penalties, disruption of our operations, damage to our reputation, and cause a loss of confidence in our products and services, which could adversely affect our business.

Our business is highly dependent on financial, accounting and other data processing systems and other communications and information systems, including our enterprise resource planning tools. We process a large number of transactions on a daily basis and rely upon the proper functioning of computer systems. If a key system was to fail or experience unscheduled downtime for any reason, even if only for a short period, our operations and financial results could be affected adversely. Our systems could be damaged or interrupted by a security breach, fire, flood, power loss, telecommunications failure or similar event. We have a formal disaster recovery plan in place, but this plan may not entirely prevent delays or other complications that could arise from an information systems failure. Our business interruption insurance may not compensate us adequately for losses that may occur.

In the ordinary course of our business, we collect and store sensitive data, including intellectual property, our proprietary business information and that of our customers, suppliers and business partners, and personally identifiable information of our employees, in our data centers and on our networks. The secure processing, maintenance and transmission of this information is critical to our operations and business strategy. Despite our security measures, our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable

Our information technology infrastructure is critical to the efficient operation of our business and essential to our ability to perform day-to-day operations. Breaches in our information technology infrastructure or physical facilities, or other disruptions, could result in damage to our assets, safety incidents, damage to the environment, potential liability or the loss of contracts, and have a material adverse effect on our operations, financial position and results of operations.

Third parties own most of the natural gas transported and stored through the pipeline systems operated by the Company. As a result, the volume of natural gas transported and stored depends on the actions of those third parties and is beyond the Company’s control. Further, other factors beyond the Company’s and those third parties’ control may unfavorably impact the Company’s ability to maintain or increase current transmission and storage rates, to renegotiate existing contracts as they expire or to remarket unsubscribed capacity. High utilization of contracted capacity by firm customers reduces capacity available for interruptible transportation and parking services.

The Company may expand the capacity of its existing pipeline and storage facilities by constructing additional facilities.  Construction of these facilities is subject to various regulatory, development and operational risks, including:

Any of these risks could prevent a project from proceeding, delay its completion or increase its anticipated costs. There is also the risk that a downturn in the economy and its potential negative impact on natural gas demand may result in either slower development in the Company’s expansion projects or adjustments in the contractual commitments supporting such projects. As a result, new facilities could be delayed or may not achieve the Company’s expected investment return, which may adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The ability of the Company to operate in certain geographic areas will depend on the Company’s success in maintaining existing rights-of-way and obtaining new rights-of-way. Securing additional rights-of-way is also critical to the Company’s ability to pursue expansion projects. The Company cannot assure that it will be able to acquire all of the necessary new rights-of-way or maintain access to existing rights-of-way upon the expiration of the current rights-of-way or that all of the rights-of-way will be obtainable in a timely fashion. The Company’s financial position could be adversely affected if the costs of new or extended rights-of-way materially increase or the Company is unable to obtain or extend the rights-of-way timely.

Laws, regulations and policies governing interstate natural gas pipeline rates could affect the ability of our interstate pipelines to establish rates, to charge rates that would cover future increases in its costs, or to continue to collect rates that cover current costs.

We are required to file tariff rates (also known as recourse rates) with the FERC that shippers may pay for interstate natural gas transportation services. We may also agree to discount these rates on a not unduly discriminatory basis or negotiate rates with shippers who elect not to pay the recourse rates. The FERC must approve or accept all rate filings for us to be allowed to charge such rates.

The FERC may review existing tariff rates on its own initiative or upon receipt of a complaint filed by a third party. The FERC may, on a prospective basis, order refunds of amounts collected if it finds the rates to have been shown not to be just and reasonable or to have been unduly discriminatory. The FERC has recently exercised this authority with respect to several other pipeline companies. If the FERC were to initiate a proceeding against us and find that our rates were not just and reasonable or unduly discriminatory, the maximum rates we are permitted to charge may be reduced and the reduction could have an adverse effect on our revenues and results of operations.

The costs of our interstate pipeline operations may increase and we may not be able to recover all of those costs due to FERC regulation of our rates. If we propose to change our tariff rates, our proposed rates may be challenged by the FERC or third parties, and the FERC may deny, modify or limit our proposed changes if we are unable to persuade the FERC that changes would result in just and reasonable rates that are not unduly discriminatory. We also may be limited by the terms of rate case settlement agreements or negotiated rate agreements with individual customers from seeking future rate increases, or we may be constrained by competitive factors from charging our tariff rates.

To the extent our costs increase in an amount greater than our revenues increase, or there is a lag between our cost increases and our ability to file for and obtain rate increases, our operating results would be negatively affected. Even if a rate increase is permitted by the FERC to become effective, the rate increase may not be adequate. We cannot guarantee that our interstate pipelines will be able to recover all of our costs through existing or future rates.

The ability of interstate pipelines held in tax-pass-through entities, like us, to include an allowance for income taxes as a cost-of-service element in their regulated rates has been subject to extensive litigation before the FERC and the courts for a number of years. Effective January 2018, the 2017 Tax and Jobs Act (the “Tax Act”) changed several provisions of the federal tax code, including a reduction in the maximum corporate tax rate. On March 15, 2018, in a set of related proposals, the FERC addressed treatment of federal income tax allowances in regulated entity rates. The FERC issued a Revised Policy Statement on Treatment of Income Taxes (“Revised Policy Statement”) stating that it will no longer permit master limited partnerships to recover an income tax allowance in their cost of service rates. The FERC issued the Revised Policy Statement in response to a remand from the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in United Airlines v. FERC, in which the court determined that the FERC had not justified its conclusion that a pipeline organized as a master limited partnership would not “double recover” its taxes under the current policy by both including an income-tax allowance in its cost of service and earning a return on equity calculated using the discounted cash flow methodology. On July 18, 2018, the FERC issued an order denying requests for rehearing and clarification of its Revised Policy Statement because it is non-binding policy and parties will have the opportunity to address the policy as applied in future cases. In the rehearing order, the FERC clarified that a pipeline organized as a master limited partnership will not be not be precluded in a future proceeding from arguing and providing evidentiary support that it is entitled to an income tax allowance and demonstrating that its recovery of an income tax allowance does not result in a double-recovery of investors’ income tax costs.

Included in the March 15, 2018 proposals is a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“NOPR”) proposing rules for implementation of the Revised Policy Statement and the corporate income tax rate reduction with respect to natural gas pipeline rates. On July 18, 2018, the FERC issued a Final Rule (Order No. 849) adopting procedures that are generally the same as proposed in the NOPR with a few clarifications and modifications. With limited exceptions, the Final Rule requires all FERC regulated natural gas pipelines

that have cost-based rates for service to make a one-time Form No. 501-G filing providing certain financial information and to make an election on how to treat its existing rates. The Final Rule suggests that this information will allow the FERC and other stakeholders to evaluate the impacts of the Tax Act and the Revised Policy Statement on each individual pipeline’s rates. The Final Rule also requires that each FERC regulated natural gas pipeline select one of four options: file a limited Natural Gas Act (“NGA”) Section 4 filing reducing its rates only as required related to the Tax Act and the Revised Policy Statement, commit to filing a general NGA Section 4 rate case in the near future, file a statement explaining why an adjustment to rates is not needed, or take no other action. For the limited NGA Section 4 option, the FERC clarified that, notwithstanding the Revised Policy Statement, a pipeline organized as a master limited partnership does not need to eliminate its income tax allowance but, instead, can reduce its rates to reflect the reduction in the maximum corporate tax rate. Trunkline and PEPL filed their respective FERC Form No. 501-

In addition to rate oversight, the FERC’s regulatory authority extends to many other aspects of the business and operations of our interstate pipelines, including:

Compliance with these requirements can be costly and burdensome. In addition, we cannot guarantee that the FERC will authorize tariff changes and other activities we might propose and do so in a timely manner and free from potentially burdensome conditions. Future changes to laws, regulations, policies and interpretations thereof in these and other applicable areas may impair our access to capital markets or may impair the ability of our interstate pipelines to compete for business, may impair their ability to recover costs or may increase the cost and burden of operation.

The current FERC Chairman announced in December 2017 that FERC will review its policies on certification of natural gas pipelines, including an examination of its long-standing Policy Statement on Certification of New Interstate Natural Gas Pipeline Facilities, issued in 1999, that is used to determine whether to grant certificates for new pipeline projects. We are unable to predict what, if any, changes may be proposed that will affect our natural gas pipeline business or when such proposals, if any, might become effective. We do not expect that any change in this policy would affect us in a materially different manner than any other similarly sized natural gas pipeline company operating in the United States.

Pursuant to authority under the NGPSA and HLPSA, PHMSA has established a series of rules requiring pipeline operators to develop and implement integrity management programs for natural gas transmission and hazardous liquid pipelines that, in the event of a pipeline leak or rupture, could affect high consequence areas, or HCAs, which are areas where a release could have the most significant adverse consequences, including high population areas, certain drinking water sources, and unusually sensitive ecological areas. These regulations require operators of covered pipelines to:

In addition, states have adopted regulations similar to existing PHMSA regulations for intrastate gathering and transmission lines. At this time, we cannot predict the ultimate cost of compliance with applicable pipeline integrity management regulations, as the cost will vary significantly depending on the number and extent of any repairs found to be necessary as a result of the pipeline integrity testing. We will continue our pipeline integrity testing programs to assess and maintain the integrity of our pipelines. The results of these tests could cause us to incur significant and unanticipated capital and operating expenditures for repairs or upgrades deemed necessary to ensure the continued safe and reliable operation of our pipelines. Any changes to pipeline safety laws by Congress and regulations by PHMSA that result in more stringent or costly safety standards could have a significant adverse effect

The positions taken by the tax return filings of the Company’s parent company require significant judgment, use of estimates, and the interpretation and application of complex tax laws. Significant judgment is also required in assessing the timing and amounts of deductible and taxable items. Despite management’s belief that the tax return positions are fully supportable, certain positions may be challenged successfully by federal, state and local jurisdictions.

The Company is subject to extensive federal, state and local laws and regulations regulating the environmental aspects of its business (including air emissions), which are complex, change from time to time and have tended to become increasingly strict. These laws and regulations have necessitated, and in the future may necessitate, increased capital expenditures and operating costs. In addition, certain environmental laws may result in liability without regard to fault concerning contamination at a broad range of properties, including currently or formerly owned, leased or operated properties and properties where the Company disposed of, or arranged for the disposal of, waste.

The Company is currently monitoring or remediating contamination at several of its facilities and at waste disposal sites pursuant to environmental laws and regulations and indemnification agreements. The Company cannot predict with certainty the sites for which it may be responsible, the amount of resulting cleanup obligations that may be imposed on it or the amount and timing of future expenditures related to environmental remediation because of the difficulty of estimating cleanup costs and the uncertainty of payment by other potentially responsible parties, or PRPs.parties.

Costs and obligations also can arise from claims for toxic torts and natural resource damages or from releases of hazardous materials on other properties as a result of ongoing operations or disposal of waste. Compliance with amended, new or more stringently enforced existing environmental requirements, or the future discovery of contamination, may require material unbudgeted expenditures. These costs or expenditures could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows, particularly if such costs or expenditures are not fully recoverable from insurance or through the rates charged to customers or if they exceed any amounts that have been reserved.

The EPA has determined that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases present an endangerment to public health and the environment because emissions of such gases are, according to the EPA, contributing to warming of the earth’s

atmosphere and other climatic changes. Based on these findings, the EPA has adopted rules under the Clean Air Act that, among other things, establish Potential for Significant Deterioration (“PSD”) construction and Title V operating permit reviews for greenhouse gas emissions from certain large stationary sources that already are potential major sources of certain principal, or criteria, pollutant emissions, which reviews could require securing PSD permits at covered facilities emitting greenhouse gases and meeting “best available control technology” standards for those greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, the EPA has adopted rules requiring the monitoring and annual reporting of greenhouse gas emissions from specified onshore and offshore production facilities and onshore processing, transmission and storage facilities in the United States, which includes certain of our operations. In October 2015, the EPA published a final rule that expands the petroleum and natural gas system sources for which annual

The federal Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (“BOEM”) and the federal Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (“BSEE”), each agencies of the United States Department of the Interior, have imposed more stringent permitting procedures and regulatory safety and performance requirements for new wells to be drilled in federal waters. Compliance with these more stringent regulatory requirements and with existing environmental and oil spill regulations, together with any uncertainties or inconsistencies in decisions and rulings by governmental agencies, delays in the processing and approval of drilling permits or exploration, development, oil spill-response and decommissioning plans, and possible additional regulatory initiatives could result in difficult and more costly actions and adversely affect or delay new drilling and ongoing development efforts.

In addition, new regulatory initiatives may be adopted or enforced by the BOEM or the BSEE in the future that could result in additional costs, delays, restrictions, or obligations with respect to oil and natural gas exploration and production operations conducted offshore by certain of our customers. For example, in April 2016, the BOEM published a proposed rule that would update existing air-emissions requirements relating to offshore oil and natural-gas activity on federal Outer Continental Shelf waters. However, in May 2017, Order 3350 was issued by the Department of the Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, directing the BOEM to reconsider a number of regulatory initiatives governing oil and gas exploration in offshore waters, including, among other things, a cessation of all activities to promulgate the April 2016 proposed rulemaking (“Order 3350”). In an unrelated legal initiative, BOEM issued a Notice to Lessees and Operators (“NTL #2016-N01”) that became effective in September 2016 and imposes more stringent requirements relating to the provision of financial assurance to satisfy decommissioning obligations. Together with a recent re-assessment by BSEE in 2016 in how it determines the amount of financial assurance required, the revised BOEM-administered offshore financial assurance program that is currently being implemented is expected to result in increased amounts of financial assurance being required of operators on the OCS, which amounts may be significant. However, as directed under Order 3350, the BOEM has delayed implementation of NTL #2016-N01 so that it may reconsider this regulatory initiative and, currently, this NTL’s implementation timeline has been extended indefinitely beyond June 30, 2017, except in certain circumstances where there is a substantial risk of nonperformance of the interest holder’s decommissioning liabilities. The April 2016 proposed rule and NTL #2016-N01, should they be finalized and/or implemented, as well as any new rules, regulations, or legal initiatives could delay or disrupt our customers operations, increase the risk of expired leases due to the time required to develop new technology, result in increased supplemental bonding and costs, limit activities in certain areas, or cause our customers’ to incur penalties, or shut-in production or lease cancellation. Also, if material spill events were to occur in the future, the United States or other countries could elect to issue directives to temporarily cease drilling activities offshore and, in any event, may from time to time issue further safety and environmental laws and regulations regarding offshore oil and gas exploration and development. The overall costs imposed on our customers to implement and complete any such spill response activities or any decommissioning obligations could exceed estimated accruals, insurance limits, or supplemental bonding amounts, which could result in the incurrence of additional costs to complete. We cannot predict with any certainty the full impact of any new laws or regulations on our customers’ drilling operations or on the cost or availability of insurance to cover some or all of the risks associated with such operations. The occurrence of any one or more of these developments could result in decreased demand for our services, which could have a material adverse effect on our business as well as our financial position, results of operation and liquidity.

Goodwill is recorded when the purchase price of a business exceeds the fair value of the tangible and separately measurable intangible net assets. Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States require us to test goodwill for impairment on an annual basis or when events or circumstances occur, indicating that goodwill might be impaired. Long-lived assets such as intangible assets with finite useful lives are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. If we determine that any of our goodwill or intangible assets were impaired, we would be required to take an immediate charge to earnings with a correlative effect on partners’ capital and balance sheet leverage as measured by debt to total capitalization.

As of December 31, 2018, 2082019, 206 of the Company’s 505509 employees were represented by collective bargaining units under collective bargaining agreements. Any future work stoppage could, depending on the affected operations and the length of the work stoppage, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

The Company provides postretirement healthcare benefits to certain of its employees. The costs of providing postretirement health care benefits and related funding requirements are subject to changes in postretirement fund values and fluctuating actuarial assumptions that may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s future financial results. In addition, the passage of the Health Care Reform Act of 2010 has increased the cost of health care benefits for its employees. While certain of the costs incurred in providing such postretirement healthcare benefits are recovered through the rates charged by the Company’s regulated businesses, the Company may not recover all of its costs and those rates are generally not immediately responsive to current market conditions or funding requirements. Additionally, if the current cost recovery mechanisms are changed or eliminated, the impact of these benefits on operating results could significantly increase.

The Company’s transportation and storage business is subject to regulation by federal, state and local regulatory authorities. FERC, the United States Department of Transportation and various state and local regulatory agencies regulate the interstate pipeline business. In particular, FERC has authority to regulate rates charged by the Company for the transportation and storage of natural gas in interstate commerce. FERC also has authority over the construction, acquisition, operation and disposition of these pipeline and storage assets.

The Company’s rates and operations are subject to extensive regulation by federal regulators as well as the actions of Congress and state legislatures and, in some respects, state regulators. The Company cannot predict or control what effect future actions of regulatory agencies may have on its business or its access to the capital markets. Furthermore, the nature and degree of regulation of natural gas companies has changed significantly during the past several decades and there is no assurance that further substantial changes will not occur or that existing policies and rules will not be applied in a new or different manner. Should new and more stringent regulatory requirements be imposed, the Company’s business could be unfavorably impacted and the Company could be subject to additional costs that could adversely affect its financial condition or results of operations if these costs are not ultimately recovered through rates.

The Company’s transportation and storage business is also influenced by fluctuations in costs, including operating costs such as insurance, postretirement and other benefit costs, wages, outside contractor services costs, asset retirement obligations for certain assets and other operating costs. The profitability of regulated operations depends on the business’ ability to collect such increased costs as a part of the rates charged to its customers. To the extent that such operating costs increase in an amount greater than that for which revenue is received, or for which rate recovery is allowed, this differential could impact operating results. The lag between an increase in costs and the ability of the Company to file to obtain rate relief from FERC to recover those increased costs can have a direct negative impact on operating results. As with any request for an increase in rates in a regulatory filing, once granted, the rate increase may not be adequate. In addition, FERC may prevent the business from passing along certain costs in the form of higher rates. Competition may prevent the recovery of increased costs even if allowed in rates.

FERC may also exercise its Section 5 authority to initiate proceedings to review rates that it believes may not be just and reasonable.  FERC has recently exercised this authority with respect to several other pipeline companies. If FERC were to initiate a Section 5 proceeding against the Company and find that the Company’s rates at that time were not just and reasonable due to a lower rate base, reduced or disallowed operating costs, or other factors, the applicable maximum rates the Company is allowed to charge

customers could be reduced and the reduction could potentially have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

A rate reduction is also a possible outcome with any Section 4 rate case proceeding for the regulated entities of the Company, including any rate case proceeding required to be filed as a result of a prior rate case settlement. A regulated entity’s rate base, upon which a rate of return is allowed in the derivation of maximum rates, is primarily determined by a combination of accumulated capital investments, accumulated regulatory basis depreciation, and accumulated deferred income taxes. Such rate base can decline due to capital investments being less than depreciation over a period of time, or due to accelerated tax depreciation in excess of regulatory basis depreciation. By order issued January 16, 2019, the FERC initiated a review of PEPL’sPanhandle’s existing rates pursuant to Section 5 of the Natural Gas Act to determine whether the rates currently charged by PEPLPanhandle are just and reasonable and set the

The interstate pipeline and storage business of the Company competes with those of other interstate and intrastate pipeline companies in the transportation and storage of natural gas. The principal elements of competition among pipelines are rates, terms of service and the flexibility and reliability of service. Natural gas competes with other forms of energy available to the Company’s customers and end-users, including electricity, coal and fuel oils. The primary competitive factor is price. Changes in the availability or price of natural gas and other forms of energy, the level of business activity, conservation, legislation and governmental regulations, the capability to convert to alternate fuels and other factors, including weather and natural gas storage levels, affect the demand for natural gas in the areas served by the Company.

Numerous operational risks are associated with the operation of a complex pipeline system. These include adverse weather conditions, accidents, the breakdown or failure of equipment or processes, the performance of pipeline facilities below expected levels of capacity and efficiency, the collision of equipment with pipeline facilities (such as may occur if a third party were to perform excavation or construction work near the facilities) and other catastrophic events beyond the Company’s control. In particular, the Company’s pipeline system, especially those portions that are located offshore, may be subject to adverse weather conditions, including hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, extreme temperatures and other natural phenomena, making it more difficult for the Company to realize the historic rates of return associated with these assets and operations. A casualty occurrence might result in injury or loss of life, extensive property damage or environmental damage. Insurance proceeds may not be adequate to cover all liabilities or expenses incurred or revenues lost.

If natural gas prices in the supply basins connected to the pipeline systems of the Company are not competitive with prices in other natural gas producing regions able to serve the Company’s customers, the volume of natural gas transported by the Company may be negatively impacted. Natural gas prices can also affect customer demand for the various services provided by the Company.

Historically, a small number of customers has accounted for a large portion of the Company’s revenue. The loss of any one or more of these customers could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

The amount of revenue generated by the Company ultimately depends upon its access to reserves of available natural gas. As the reserves available through the supply basins connected to the Company’s system naturally decline, a decrease in development or production activity could cause a decrease in the volume of natural gas available for transmission. If production from these natural

gas reserves is substantially reduced and not replaced with other sources of natural gas, such as new wells or interconnections with other pipelines, and certain of the Company’s assets are consequently not utilized, the Company may have to accelerate the recognition and settlement of asset retirement obligations. Investments by third parties in the development of new natural gas reserves or other sources of natural gas in proximity to the Company’s facilities depend on many factors beyond the Company’s control. Revenue reductions or the acceleration of asset retirement obligations resulting from the decline of natural gas reserves and the lack of new sources of natural gas may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The pipeline revenues of the Company are generated under natural gas transportation contracts that expire periodically and must be replaced. Although the Company will actively pursue the renegotiation, extension and/or replacement of all of its contracts, it cannot assure that it will be able to extend or replace these contracts when they expire or that the terms of any renegotiated contracts will be as favorable as the existing contracts. If the Company is unable to renew, extend or replace these contracts, or if the Company renews them on less favorable terms, it may suffer a material reduction in revenues and earnings.

These factors are not necessarily all of the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in any of the Company’s forward-looking statements. Other factors could also have material adverse effects on the Company’s future results. In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, the events described in forward-looking statements might not occur or might occur to a different extent or at a different time than the Company has described. The Company undertakes no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required by law.

See “Item 1. Business” for information concerning the general location and characteristics of the important physical properties and assets of the Company.

The Company and certain of its affiliates are occasionally parties to lawsuits and administrative proceedings incidental to their businesses involving, for example, claims for personal injury and property damage, contractual matters, various tax matters, and rates and licensing. The Company and its affiliates are also subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the environment, as described in “Item 1. Business – Regulation.” Several of these companies have been named parties to various

actions involving environmental issues. Based on the Company’s current knowledge and subject to future legal and factual developments, the Company’s management believes that it is unlikely that these actions, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. For additional information regarding various pending administrative and judicial proceedings involving regulatory, environmental and other legal matters, reference is made to Note 8 to our consolidated financial statements. Also see “Item 1A. Risk Factors.”

Not applicable.

Item 6, Selected Financial Data, has been omitted from this report pursuant to the reduced disclosure format permitted by General Instruction I to Form 10-K.

The Company’s business is conducted through both short- and long-term contracts with customers. Shorter-term contracts, both firm and interruptible, tend to have a greater impact on the volatility of revenues. Short-term and long-term contracts are affected by changes in market conditions and competition with other pipelines, changing supply sources and volatility in natural gas prices and basis differentials. Demand for natural gas transmission services on the Company’s pipeline system is seasonal, with the highest throughput and a higher portion of annual total operating revenues occurring in the traditional winter heating season, which occurs during the first and fourth calendar quarters. Since the majority of the Company’s revenues are related to firm capacity reservation charges, which customers pay whether they utilize their contracted capacity or not, volumes transported do not have as significant an impact on revenues over the short-term. However, longer-term demand for capacity may be affected by changes in the customers’ actual and anticipated utilization of their contracted capacity and other factors. For additional information concerning the Company’s related risk factors and the weighted average remaining lives of firm transportation and storage contracts, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and “Item 1. Business,” respectively.

The Company’s regulated transportation and storage businesses can file (or be required to file) for changes in their rates, which are subject to approval by FERC. Although a significant portion of the Company’s contracts are discounted or negotiated rate contracts, changes in rates and other tariff provisions resulting from regulatory proceedings have the potential to impact negatively the Company’s results of operations and financial condition. For information related to the status of current rate filings, see “Item 1.  Business – Regulation.”

The following is a discussion of the significant items and variances impacting the Company’s net income during the periods presented above:

The ETO Audit Committee is responsible for the oversight of our accounting, reporting and financial practices, pursuant to the charter of the ETO Audit Committee. The ETO Audit Committee has the responsibility to select, appoint, engage, oversee, retain, evaluate and terminate our external auditors; pre-approve all audit and non-audit services to be provided, consistent with all applicable laws, to us by our external auditors; and establish the fees and other compensation to be paid to our external auditors. The ETO Audit Committee also oversees and directs our internal auditing program and reviews our internal controls.

The ETO Audit Committee has adopted a policy for the pre-approval of audit and permitted non-audit services provided by our principal independent accountants. The policy requires that all services provided by Grant Thornton LLP including audit services, audit-related services, tax services and other services, must be pre-approved by the ETO Audit Committee. All fees paid or expected to be paid to Grant Thornton LLP for fiscal years 20182019 and 20172018 were pre-approved by the ETO Audit Committee in accordance with this policy.

The ETO Audit Committee reviews the external auditors’ proposed scope and approach as well as the performance of the external auditors. It also has direct responsibility for and sole authority to resolve any disagreements between our management and our external auditors regarding financial reporting, regularly reviews with the external auditors any problems or difficulties the auditors encountered in the course of their audit work, and, at least annually, uses its reasonable efforts to obtain and review a report from the external auditors addressing the following (among other items):

INDEX TO EXHIBITS

The exhibits listed on the following Exhibit Index are filed as part of this report. Exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K, but which are not listed below, are not applicable.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.