UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)



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

For the quarterly period ended September 30, ~~2016~~2017



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

Commission file number 1-11727

ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



Delaware		73-1493906
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

8111 Westchester Drive, Suite 600, Dallas, Texas 75225

(Address of principal executive offices) (zip code)

(214) 981-0700

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ý No ¨

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 ý No ¨

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes¨Noý

~~At November 4, 2016,~~Energy Transfer, LP meets the ~~registrant had 542,668,309 Common Units outstanding.~~conditions set forth in General Instructions H(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-Q and is therefore filing this Form 10-Q with the reduced disclosure format.

FORM 10-Q

ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP AND SUBSIDIARIES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

Forward-Looking Statements

Certain matters discussed in this report, excluding historical information, as well as some statements by Energy Transfer, ~~Partners, L.P.~~LP (the ~~“Partnership,”~~“Partnership” or ~~“ETP”~~“ETLP”) in periodic press releases and some oral statements of the Partnership’s officials during presentations about the Partnership, include forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are identified as any statement that does not relate strictly to historical or current facts. Statements using words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “intend,” “project,” “plan,” “expect,” “continue,” “estimate,” “goal,” “forecast,” “may,” “will” or similar expressions help identify forward-looking statements. Although the Partnership and its general partner believe such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions and current expectations and projections about future events, no assurance can be given that such assumptions, expectations, or projections will prove to be correct. Forward-looking statements are subject to a variety of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. If one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or if underlying assumptions prove incorrect, the Partnership’s actual results may vary materially from those anticipated, projected or expected, forecasted, estimated or expressed in forward-looking statements since many of the factors that determine these results are subject to uncertainties and risks that are difficult to predict and beyond management’s control. For additional discussion of risks, uncertainties and assumptions, see “Part I – Item 1A. Risk Factors” in the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, ~~2015~~2016 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February ~~29, 2016.~~24, 2017.

Definitions

The following is a list of certain acronyms and terms generally used in the energy industry and throughout this document:



	/d		per day

	AmeriGas		AmeriGas Partners, L.P.

	AOCI		accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)

	AROs		asset retirement obligations

	Bbls		barrels

	Btu		British thermal unit, an energy measurement used by gas companies to convert the volume of gas used to its heat equivalent, and thus calculate the actual energy used

	Capacity		capacity of a pipeline, processing plant or storage facility refers to the maximum capacity under normal operating conditions and, with respect to pipeline transportation capacity, is subject to multiple factors (including natural gas injections and withdrawals at various delivery points along the pipeline and the utilization of compression) which may reduce the throughput capacity from specified capacity levels

	Citrus		Citrus, LLC

	CrossCountry		CrossCountry Energy, LLC

	DOJ		U.S. Department of Justice

	ETC Compression		ETC Compression, LLC

	EPA		Environmental Protection Agency

	ETC FEP		ETC Fayetteville Express Pipeline, LLC

	ETC MEP		ETC Midcontinent Express Pipeline, L.L.C.

	ETC OLP		La Grange Acquisition, L.P., which conducts business under the assumed name of Energy Transfer Company

	ETC Tiger		ETC Tiger Pipeline, LLC

	ETE		Energy Transfer Equity, L.P., a publicly traded partnership and the owner of ETP LLC for the periods presented herein

	ET Interstate		Energy Transfer Interstate Holdings, LLC

	ET Rover		ET Rover Pipeline LLC

	~~ETP~~ETLP Credit Facility		~~ETP’s~~The Partnership’s $3.75 billion revolving credit facility

	ETP		Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. subsequent to the close of the merger of Sunoco Logistics Partners L.P. and Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.

Table of Contents



	ETP GP		Energy Transfer Partners GP, L.P., the general partner of ETP

	ETP Holdco		ETP Holdco Corporation

	ETP LLC		Energy Transfer Partners, L.L.C., the general partner of ETP GP

	Exchange Act		Securities Exchange Act of 1934

	FEP		Fayetteville Express Pipeline LLC

	FERC		Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

~~Table of Contents~~




	FGT		Florida Gas Transmission Company, LLC

	GAAP		accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America

	HPC		RIGS Haynesville Partnership Co. and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Regency Intrastate Gas LP

	IDRs		incentive distribution rights

	Lake Charles LNG		Lake Charles LNG Company, LLC (previously named Trunkline LNG Company, LLC), a subsidiary of ETE

	LIBOR		London Interbank Offered Rate

	~~LNG~~		~~liquefied natural gas~~

	~~Lone Star~~		~~Lone Star NGL LLC~~

	MEP		Midcontinent Express Pipeline LLC

	MMBtu		million British thermal units

	MMcf		million cubic feet

	MTBE		methyl tertiary butyl ether

	NGL		natural gas liquid, such as propane, butane and natural gasoline

	NYMEX		New York Mercantile Exchange

	OSHA		federal Occupational Safety and Health Act

	OTC		over-the-counter

	Panhandle		Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP and its subsidiaries

	PCBs		polychlorinated biphenyls

	PennTex		PennTex Midstream Partners, LP

	PES		Philadelphia Energy Solutions, a refining joint venture

	~~PHMSA~~		~~Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration~~

	Preferred Units		ETP Series A cumulative convertible preferred units

	Regency		Regency Energy Partners LP

	Retail Holdings		ETP Retail Holdings, LLC, a ~~joint venture between subsidiaries~~wholly-owned subsidiary of ~~ETC OLP and~~ Sunoco, Inc.

	Rover		Rover Pipeline LLC, a subsidiary of ETP

	Sea Robin		Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC, a subsidiary of Panhandle

	SEC		Securities and Exchange Commission

	~~Southern Union~~		~~Southern Union Company~~

	Sunoco Logistics		Sunoco Logistics Partners L.P.

	~~Sunoco LP~~		~~Sunoco LP (previously named Susser Petroleum Partners, LP)~~

	Transwestern		Transwestern Pipeline Company, LLC

	Trunkline		Trunkline Gas Company, LLC, a subsidiary of Panhandle

Adjusted EBITDA is a term used throughout this document, which we define as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, depletion, amortization and other non-cash items, such as non-cash compensation expense, gains and losses on disposals of assets, the allowance for equity funds used during construction, unrealized gains and losses on commodity risk management activities, non-cash impairment charges, losses on extinguishments of debt and other non-operating income or expense items. Unrealized gains and losses on commodity risk management activities include unrealized gains and losses on commodity derivatives and inventory fair value adjustments (excluding lower of cost or market adjustments). Adjusted EBITDA reflects amounts for less than wholly-owned subsidiaries based on 100% of the subsidiaries’ results of operations and for unconsolidated affiliates based on the Partnership’s proportionate ownership.

iii

Table of Contents

PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION

ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Dollars in millions)

(unaudited)


	September 30, 2016			December 31, 2015			September 30, 2017			December 31, 2016
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	377		$	527		$	281		$	360
Accounts receivable, net	2,668			2,118			1,351			3,002
Accounts receivable from related companies	144			268			798			209
Inventories	1,604			1,213			679			1,712
Income taxes receivable							151			128
Derivative assets	30			40			4			20
Other current assets	658			532			156			298
Total current assets	5,481			4,698			3,420			5,729

Property, plant and equipment	55,948			50,869			49,651			58,220
Accumulated depreciation and depletion	(6,866		)	(5,782		)	(7,281		)	(7,303		)
	49,082			45,087			42,370			50,917

Advances to and investments in unconsolidated affiliates	4,648			5,003			11,509			4,280
Non-current derivative assets	11			—
Other non-current assets, net	581			536			664			672
Intangible assets, net	3,985			4,421			3,910			4,696
Goodwill	4,139			5,428			2,294			3,897
Total assets	$	67,927		$	65,173		$	64,167		$	70,191

ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(Dollars in millions)

(unaudited)


	September 30, 2016			December 31, 2015		September 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	2,509		$	1,859	$	1,272	$	2,900
Accounts payable to related companies	19			25		314		43
Derivative liabilities	259			63		78		166
Accrued and other current liabilities	2,179			2,048		2,019		1,905
Current maturities of long-term debt	1,216			126		710		1,189
Total current liabilities	6,182			4,121		4,393		6,203

Long-term debt, less current maturities	29,182			28,553		25,987		31,741
Long-term notes payable – related companies	83			233
Long-term notes payable – related company						—		250
Non-current derivative liabilities	160			137		132		76
Deferred income taxes	4,438			4,082		4,237		4,394
Other non-current liabilities	919			968		969		952

Commitments and contingencies
Series A Preferred Units	33			33
Preferred Units						—		33
Redeemable noncontrolling interests	15			15		—		15

Equity:
General Partner	223			306
Limited Partners:
Common Unitholders	15,665			17,043
Class H Unitholder	3,478			3,469
Class I Unitholder	2			14
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)	(4		)	4
Total partners’ capital	19,364			20,836
Partner’s capital						25,025		18,634
Accumulated other comprehensive income						14		8
Total partner’s capital						25,039		18,642
Noncontrolling interest	7,551			6,195		3,410		7,885
Total equity	26,915			27,031		28,449		26,527
Total liabilities and equity	$	67,927		$	65,173	$	64,167	$	70,191

ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(Dollars in ~~millions, except per unit data)~~millions)

(unaudited)


	Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,						Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2016			2015			2016			2015			2017			2016			2017			2016
REVENUES:
Natural gas sales	$	1,069		$	960		2,602			2,893			$	1,098		$	1,069		$	3,132		$	2,602
NGL sales	1,249			961			3,339			2,930			1,737			1,249			4,762			3,339
Crude sales	1,649			1,859			4,572			6,747			3			1,649			3,074			4,572
Gathering, transportation and other fees	986			1,026			2,991			2,999			1,032			986			3,038			2,991
Refined product sales (see Note 2)	177			1,046			656			9,136
Other (see Note 2)	401			749			1,141			3,762
Refined product sales													—			177			626			656
Other													229			401			1,116			1,141
Total revenues	5,531			6,601			15,301			28,467			4,099			5,531			15,748			15,301
COSTS AND EXPENSES:
Cost of products sold (see Note 2)	3,931			4,942			10,529			22,792
Operating expenses (see Note 2)	388			518			1,110			1,763
Cost of products sold													2,568			3,844			10,739			10,280
Operating expenses													382			475			1,290			1,359
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	503			471			1,469			1,451			472			503			1,507			1,469
Selling, general and administrative (see Note 2)	71			94			226			389
Selling, general and administrative													87			71			284			226
Total costs and expenses	4,893			6,025			13,334			26,395			3,509			4,893			13,820			13,334
OPERATING INCOME	638			576			1,967			2,072			590			638			1,928			1,967
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE):
Interest expense, net	(345		)	(333		)	(981		)	(979		)	(334		)	(345		)	(993		)	(981		)
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates	65			214			260			388			206			65			302			260
Impairment of investment in an unconsolidated affiliate	(308		)	—			(308		)	—			—			(308		)	—			(308		)
Losses on extinguishments of debt	—			(10		)	—			(43		)
Losses on interest rate derivatives	(28		)	(64		)	(179		)	(14		)	(8		)	(28		)	(28		)	(179		)
Other, net	52			32			96			56			69			52			161			96
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAX EXPENSE (BENEFIT)	74			415			855			1,480			523			74			1,370			855
Income tax expense (benefit)	(64		)	22			(131		)	(20		)	(120		)	(64		)	9			(131		)
NET INCOME	138			393			986			1,500			643			138			1,361			986
Less: Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest	64			(24		)	231			182
Less: Net loss attributable to predecessor	—			—			—			(34		)
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest													106			64			235			231
NET INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO PARTNERS	74			417			755			1,352			$	537		$	74		$	1,126		$	755
General Partner’s interest in net income	220			277			740			779
Class H Unitholder’s interest in net income	93			66			257			184
Class I Unitholder’s interest in net income	2			15			6			80
Common Unitholders’ interest in net income (loss)	$	(241	)	$	59		$	(248	)	$	309
NET INCOME (LOSS) PER COMMON UNIT:
Basic	$	(0.49	)	$	0.11		$	(0.54	)	$	0.70
Diluted	$	(0.49	)	$	0.10		$	(0.54	)	$	0.68

ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(Dollars in millions)

(unaudited)


	Three Months Ended September 30,					Nine Months Ended September 30,						Three Months Ended September 30,				Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2016		2015			2016			2015			2017		2016		2017			2016
Net income	$	138	$	393		986			1,500			$	643	$	138	$	1,361		$	986
Other comprehensive income, net of tax:
Change in value of derivative instruments accounted for as cash flow hedges	—		—			—			1
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax:
Change in value of available-for-sale securities	—		(1		)	5			(1		)	2		—		5			5
Actuarial gain (loss) relating to pension and other postretirement benefit plans	—		—			(3		)	45			5		—		2			(3		)
Foreign currency translation adjustments	—		1			(1		)	(1		)	—		—		—			(1		)
Change in other comprehensive income from unconsolidated affiliates	2		—			(9		)	(2		)	—		2		(1		)	(9		)
	2		—			(8		)	42			7		2		6			(8		)
Comprehensive income	140		393			978			1,542			650		140		1,367			978
Less: Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest	64		(24		)	231			182
Less: Comprehensive loss attributable to predecessor	—		—			—			(34		)
Less: Comprehensive income attributable to noncontrolling interest												106		64		235			231
Comprehensive income attributable to partners	$	76	$	417		$	747		$	1,394		$	544	$	76	$	1,132		$	747

ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF EQUITY

FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, ~~2016~~2017

(Dollars in millions)

(unaudited)

Limited Partners
General Partner Common Units Class H Units Class I Units Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income Noncontrolling Interest Total
Balance, December 31, 2015 $ 306
$ 17,043
$ 3,469
$ 14
$ 4
$ 6,195
$ 27,031
Distributions to partners (823 ) (1,580 ) (248 ) (18 ) —
—
(2,669 )
Distributions to noncontrolling interest —
—
—
—
—
(334 ) (334 )
Units issued for cash —
794
—
—
—
—
794
Subsidiary units issued —
34
—
—
—
1,271
1,305
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest —
—
—
—
—
187
187
Sunoco, Inc. retail business to Sunoco LP transaction —
(405 ) —
—
—
—
(405 )
Other comprehensive income, net of tax —
—
—
—
(8 ) —
(8 )
Other, net —
27
—
—
—
1
28
Net income (loss) 740
(248 ) 257
6
—
231
986
Balance, September 30, 2016 $ 223
$ 15,665
$ 3,478
$ 2
$ (4 ) $ 7,551
$ 26,915



	Partner’s Capital			Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income		Noncontrolling Interest			Total
Balance, December 31, 2016	$	18,634		$	8	$	7,885		$	26,527
Distributions to partners	(889		)	—		—			(889		)
Distributions to noncontrolling interest	—			—		(292		)	(292		)
Units issued for cash	885			—		—			885
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interests	—			—		1,895			1,895
PennTex unit acquisition	(49		)	—		(231		)	(280		)
Sunoco Logistics Merger	4,033			—		(6,802		)	(2,769		)
Sale of Bakken Pipeline interest	1,260			—		740			2,000
Other comprehensive income, net of tax	—			6		—			6
Other, net	25			—		(20		)	5
Net income	1,126			—		235			1,361
Balance, September 30, 2017	$	25,025		$	14	$	3,410		$	28,449

ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(Dollars in millions)

(unaudited)


	Nine Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2016			2015			2017			2016
OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Net income	$	986		$	1,500		$	1,361		$	986
Reconciliation of net income to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	1,469			1,451			1,507			1,469
Deferred income taxes	(154		)	22			(1		)	(154		)
Amortization included in interest expense	(16		)	(30		)	(1		)	(16		)
Inventory valuation adjustments	(143		)	(16		)	(2		)	(143		)
Unit-based compensation expense	60			59			52			60
Losses on extinguishments of debt	—			43
Impairment of investment in an unconsolidated affiliate	308			—			—			308
Distributions on unvested awards	(19		)	(12		)	(20		)	(19		)
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates	(260		)	(388		)	(302		)	(260		)
Distributions from unconsolidated affiliates	292			263			636			292
Other non-cash	(230		)	23			(170		)	(230		)
Net change in operating assets and liabilities, net of effects of acquisition	172			(922		)	(337		)	172
Net cash provided by operating activities	2,465			1,993			2,723			2,465
INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Proceeds from Bakken Pipeline Transaction							2,000			—
Proceeds from the Sunoco, Inc. retail business to Sunoco LP transaction	2,200			—			—			2,200
Proceeds from Bakken Pipeline Transaction	—			980
Cash proceeds from the Susser Exchange Transaction	—			967
Proceeds from sale of noncontrolling interest	—			64
Cash paid for acquisition of a noncontrolling interest	—			(129		)
Cash transferred to ETE in connection with the Sunoco LP Exchange	—			(114		)
Cash paid for acquisition of PennTex noncontrolling interest							(280		)	—
Cash paid for all other acquisitions	(159		)	(475		)	(142		)	(159		)
Deconsolidation of Sunoco Logistics							(75		)	—
Capital expenditures, excluding allowance for equity funds used during construction	(5,787		)	(6,531		)	(5,268		)	(5,787		)
Contributions in aid of construction costs	44			27			18			44
Contributions to unconsolidated affiliates	(47		)	(75		)	(234		)	(47		)
Distributions from unconsolidated affiliates in excess of cumulative earnings	112			119			111			112
Proceeds from the sale of assets	6			20			31			6
Change in restricted cash	(8		)	10			—			(8		)
Other	(1		)	(14		)	(1		)	(1		)
Net cash used in investing activities	(3,640		)	(5,151		)	(3,840		)	(3,640		)
FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Proceeds from borrowings	13,073			14,808			16,608			13,073
Repayments of long-term debt	(11,308		)	(11,620		)	(15,864		)	(11,308		)
Cash received from affiliate notes	1,606			—
Cash paid on affiliate notes	(1,607		)	—
Cash paid to affiliate notes							(255		)	(1		)
Units issued for cash	794			1,030			885			794
Subsidiary units issued for cash	1,305			1,274			—			1,305
Predecessor units issued for cash	—			34
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest	187			583			907			187
Distributions to partners	(2,669		)	(2,253		)	(889		)	(2,669		)
Predecessor distributions to partners	—			(202		)
Distributions to noncontrolling interest	(334		)	(247		)	(292		)	(334		)
Redemption of Series A Preferred Units							(53		)	—
Debt issuance costs	(22		)	(54		)	(20		)	(22		)
Other							11			—
Net cash provided by financing activities	1,025			3,353			1,038			1,025
Increase in cash and cash equivalents	(150		)	195
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents							(79		)	(150		)
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period	527			663			360			527
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period	$	377		$	858		$	281		$	377

ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(Tabular dollar ~~and unit~~ amounts ~~except per unit data,~~ are in millions)

(unaudited)


1.	ORGANIZATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

Organization

Energy Transfer, LP is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.~~, a publicly traded Delaware master limited partnership,~~ Energy Transfer, LP and its subsidiaries ~~(collectively,~~are collectively referred to herein as the “Partnership,” “we,” “us,” “our” or ~~“ETP”~~“ETLP.”

In April 2017, Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. merged with a subsidiary of Sunoco Logistics Partners L.P. (the “Sunoco Logistics Merger”) ~~are managed by our general partner, ETP GP,~~, at which ~~is in turn managed by~~time it changed its ~~general partner, ETP LLC. ETE, a~~name from “Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.” to “Energy Transfer, LP” and Sunoco Logistics Partners L.P. changed its name to “Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.” Following the completion of the Sunoco Logistics Merger, ETLP has no remaining publicly traded ~~master limited partnership, owns ETP LLC.~~ units outstanding. Additionally, subsequent to the Sunoco Logistics Merger, ETLP deconsolidated Sunoco Logistics Partners L.P. For purposes of maintaining clarity, the following references are used herein:

References to “ETLP” refer to Energy Transfer, LP subsequent to the close of the merger;

References to “Sunoco Logistics” refer to the entity named Sunoco Logistics Partners L.P. prior to the close of the merger; and

References to “ETP” refer to the consolidated entity named Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. subsequent to the close of the merger.

The consolidated financial statements of the Partnership presented herein include our operating subsidiaries ~~described below.~~

~~Our~~(collectively, the “Operating Companies”), through which our activities are primarily conducted, ~~through our operating subsidiaries (collectively, the “Operating Companies”)~~ as follows:

ETC OLP, ~~a Texas limited partnership~~Regency and PennTex, which are primarily engaged in midstream and intrastate transportation and storage natural gas operations. ETC OLP ~~owns~~ and ~~operates,~~Regency own and operate, through ~~its~~their wholly and majority-owned subsidiaries, natural gas gathering systems, intrastate natural gas pipeline systems and gas processing plants and isare engaged in the business of purchasing, gathering, transporting, processing, and marketing natural gas and NGLs in the states of Texas, Louisiana, New Mexico, West Virginia, Denver and ~~West Virginia.~~Ohio.

ET Interstate, ~~a Delaware limited liability company~~ with revenues consisting primarily of fees earned from natural gas transportation services and operational gas sales. ET Interstate is the parent company of:

Transwestern, ~~a Delaware limited liability company~~ engaged in interstate transportation of natural gas. Transwestern’s revenues consist primarily of fees earned from natural gas transportation services and operational gas sales.

ETC FEP, ~~a Delaware limited liability company that~~which directly owns a 50% interest in FEP, which owns 100% of the Fayetteville Express interstate natural gas pipeline.

ETC Tiger, ~~a Delaware limited liability company~~ engaged in interstate transportation of natural gas.

CrossCountry, ~~a Delaware limited liability company that~~which indirectly owns a 50% interest in Citrus, which owns 100% of the FGT interstate natural gas pipeline.

ETC MEP, ~~a Delaware limited liability company that~~which directly owns a 50% interest in MEP.

ET Rover, which owns a 65% interest in Rover pipeline.

ETC Compression, LLC, ~~a Delaware limited liability company~~ engaged in natural gas compression services and related equipment sales.

ETP Holdco, ~~a Delaware limited liability company that~~which indirectly owns Panhandle and Sunoco, Inc. Panhandle owns and operates assets in the regulated and unregulated natural gas industry and is primarily engaged in the transportation and storage of natural gas in the United States. Sunoco, Inc. owned and operated retail marketing assets, which were contributed to Sunoco LP in March ~~2016, as discussed in Note 2.~~2016. Subsequent to this transaction, Sunoco Inc.’s assets primarily consist of its ownership in Retail Holdings, which owns noncontrolling interests in Sunoco LP and PES.

Subsequent to the Sunoco Logistics a publicly traded Delaware limited partnership that owns and operates a logistics business, consisting of a geographically diverse portfolio of complementary pipeline, terminalling, and acquisition and marketing assets which are used to facilitate the purchase and sale of crude oil, NGLs and refined products.

Effective July 1, 2015, ETE acquired 100% of the membership interests of Sunoco GP LLC, the general partner of Sunoco LP, and all of the IDRs of Sunoco LP from ETP, and in exchange, ETE transferred to ETP 21 million ETP common units. These operations were reported within the retail marketing segment. In connection with this transaction, the Partnership deconsolidated Sunoco LP, and its remainingMerger, ETLP holds an equity method investment in ~~Sunoco LP is accounted for under the equity method. Additionally, in March 2016~~ETP through ETP Holdco’s ownership of ETP Class E, Class G, and ~~as discussed in Note 2, ETP contributed to Sunoco LP its remaining 68.42% interest in Sunoco, LLC and 100% interest in the legacy Sunoco, Inc. retail business effective January 1, 2016.~~Class K units.

Our financial statements reflect the following reportable business segments:

•intrastate transportation and storage;

•interstate transportation and storage;

•~~midstream;~~

•~~liquids transportation and services;~~

Table of Contents

•~~investment in Sunoco Logistics;~~midstream;

•~~retail marketing;~~liquids transportation and services;

•investment in ETP; and

•all other.

Basis of Presentation

The unaudited financial information included in this Form 10-Q has been prepared on the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements included in ~~the Partnership’s~~Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, ~~2015.~~2016. In the opinion of the Partnership’s management, such financial information reflects all adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the financial position and the results of operations for such interim periods in accordance with GAAP. All intercompany items and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in annual consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP have been omitted pursuant to the rules and regulations of the SEC.

~~Certain~~For prior ~~period amounts~~periods reported herein, certain transactions related to the business of legacy Sunoco Logistics have been reclassified from cost of products sold to ~~conform to the current year presentation.~~operating expenses; these transactions include sales between operating subsidiaries and their marketing affiliates. These reclassifications had no impact on net income or total equity.

~~Merger with Regency.~~ On April 30, 2015, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Partnership merged with Regency, with Regency surviving as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Partnership (the “Regency Merger”). The Regency Merger was a combination of entities under common control; therefore, Regency’s assets and liabilities were not adjusted. The Partnership’s consolidated financial statements have been retrospectively adjusted to reflect consolidation of Regency for all prior periods subsequent to May 26, 2010 (the date ETE acquired Regency’s general partner).

Use of Estimates

The unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with GAAP, which includes the use of estimates and assumptions made by management that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, expenses and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities that exist at the date of the consolidated financial statements. Although these estimates are based on management’s available knowledge of current and expected future events, actual results could be different from those estimates.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

ASU 2014-09

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) (“(“ASU 2014-09”), which clarifies the principles for recognizing revenue based on the core principle that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. ~~In August 2015,~~The Partnership expects to adopt ASU 2014-09 in the ~~FASB deferred~~first quarter of 2018 and will apply the ~~effective~~cumulative catchup transition method, which requires recognition, upon the date of initial application, of the cumulative effect of the retrospective application of the standard.

We are continuing the process of evaluating our revenue contracts by segment and fee type to determine the potential impact of adopting the new standard. At this point in our evaluation process, we have determined that the timing and/or amount of revenue that we recognize on certain contracts (as discussed below) may be impacted by the adoption of the new standard; however, we are still in the process of quantifying these impacts and cannot say whether or not they would be material to our financial statements.

We currently anticipate a change to revenues and costs associated with the accounting for noncash consideration in multiple of our reportable segments as well as the accounting for certain processing contracts in our midstream segment. We do not expect these changes in the accounting for noncash consideration or processing contracts to impact net income.

We are still evaluating the potential impact of the adoption of ASU 2014-09 ~~which is now effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that reporting period. Early adoption is permitted as~~to contributions in aid of ~~annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within those annual periods. ASU 2014-09 can be adopted either retrospectively~~construction costs (“CIAC”) arrangements and materiality of any related changes. While we do not expect any impacts to ~~each prior reporting period presented or as a cumulative-effect adjustment as~~net income from the application of the ~~date~~standard to other transactions, we have not concluded whether the application of ~~adoption. The Partnership is currently~~the standard to CIAC transactions could impact net income.

We continue to assess the impact of the disclosure requirements under the new standard and are evaluating the ~~impact, if any,~~manner in which we will disaggregate revenue into categories that ~~adopting this~~show how economic factors affect the nature, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows generated from contracts with customers. In addition, we are in the process of implementing appropriate changes to our business processes, systems and controls to support recognition and disclosure under the new ~~accounting~~standard. We continue to monitor additional authoritative or interpretive guidance related to the new standard ~~will have~~as it becomes

Table of Contents

available, as well as comparing our conclusions on specific interpretative issues to other peers in our ~~revenue recognition policies.~~industry, to the extent that such information is available to us.

~~In February 2015, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2015-02,~~ ~~Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis~~ (“ASU 2015-02”), which changed the requirements for consolidations analysis. Under ASU 2015-02, reporting entities are required to evaluate whether they should consolidate certain legal entities. The Partnership adopted this standard on January 1, 2016, and the adoption did not impact the Partnership’s financial position or results of operations.2016-02

In February 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-02,, Leases (Topic ~~842~~842)) (“ASU 2016-02”), which establishes the principles that lessees and lessors shall apply to report useful information to users of financial statements about the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from a lease. ASU 2016-02 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The Partnership is currently evaluating the impact ~~if any,~~ that adopting this new standard will have on the consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.

~~In March 2016,~~ASU 2016-09

On January 1, 2017, the ~~FASB issued~~Partnership adopted Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-09, Stock Compensation (Topic 718) (“ASU 2016-09”). The objective of the update is to reduce complexity in accounting standards. The areas for simplification in this update involve several aspects of the accounting for employee share-based payment transactions, including the income tax

~~Table of Contents~~

consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the Partnership’s consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.

ASU ~~2016-09~~2016-16

In October 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-16, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Intra-entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory (“ASU 2016-16”), which requires that entities recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset other than inventory when the transfer occurs. The amendments in this update do not change GAAP for the pre-tax effects of an intra-entity asset transfer under Topic 810, Consolidation, or for an intra-entity transfer of inventory. ASU 2016-16 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, ~~2016,~~2017, and interim periods within those annual periods. Early adoption is permitted. The Partnership is currently evaluating the impact that itadoption of this standard will have on the consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.


2.	~~ACQUISITIONS AND CONTRIBUTION TRANSACTIONS~~

~~Sunoco Retail to Sunoco LP~~

~~In March 2016, ETP contributed to Sunoco LP its remaining 68.42%~~ASU 2016-17

On January 1, 2017, the Partnership adopted Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-17, Consolidation (Topic 810): Interests Held Through Related Parties That Are Under Common Control (“ASU 2016-17”), which amends the consolidation guidance on how a reporting entity that is the single decision maker of a variable interest ~~in Sunoco, LLC and 100% interest~~entity (“VIE”) should treat indirect interests in the ~~legacy Sunoco, Inc. retail business for $2.23 billion. Sunoco LP paid $2.20 billion in cash, including~~entity held through related parties that are under common control with the reporting entity when determining whether it is the primary beneficiary of that VIE. Under the amendments, a ~~working capital adjustment, and issued 5.7 million Sunoco LP common units~~single decision maker is required to ~~Retail Holdings,~~include indirect interests on a ~~wholly-owned subsidiary~~proportionate basis consistent with indirect interests held through other related parties. The adoption of ~~the Partnership. The transaction was effective January 1, 2016. In connection with~~ this transaction, the Partnership deconsolidated the legacy Sunoco, Inc. retail business, including goodwill of $1.29 billion and intangible assets of $294 million. The results of Sunoco, LLC and the legacy Sunoco, Inc. retail business’ operationsstandard did not have ~~not been presented as discontinued operations and Sunoco, Inc.’s retail business assets and liabilities have not been presented as held for sale in~~an impact on the Partnership’s consolidated financial ~~statements.~~statements and related disclosures.

~~Following~~ASU 2017-04

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04 “Intangibles-Goodwill and other (Topic 350): Simplifying the test for goodwill impairment.” The amendments in this update remove the second step of the two-step test currently required by Topic 350. An entity will apply a one-step quantitative test and record the amount of goodwill impairment as the excess of a reporting unit’s carrying amount over its fair value, not to exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to the reporting unit. The new guidance does not amend the optional qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment. This ASU is ~~a summary~~effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. The Partnership expects that the adoption of ~~amounts reflected~~this standard will change its approach for ~~the prior~~measuring goodwill impairment; however, this standard requires prospective application and therefore will only impact periods ~~in ETP’s consolidated statements of operations related~~subsequent to ~~Sunoco, LLC and the legacy Sunoco, Inc. retail business, which operations are no longer consolidated~~adoption. The Partnership plans to apply this ASU for ~~the current periods in 2016:~~

Three Months Ended September 30, 2015 Nine Months Ended September 30, 2015
Revenues $ 1,363
$ 11,705
Cost of products sold 1,149
10,519
Operating expenses 149
701
Selling, general and administrative expenses 8
101

~~PennTex Acquisition~~

On November 1, 2016, ETP acquired certain interests in PennTex from various parties for total consideration of approximately $640 million in ETP units and cash. Through this transaction, ETP acquired a controlling financial interest in PennTex, whose assets complement ETP’s existing midstream footprintits annual goodwill impairment test in the ~~region.~~fourth quarter of 2017.

ASU 2017-12

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12 “Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities.” The ~~assets and liabilities assumed~~amendments in this ~~transaction will be recorded at fair value as~~update improve the financial reporting of hedging relationships to better portray the economic results of an entity’s risk management activities in its financial statements. In addition, the amendments in this update make certain targeted improvements to simplify the application of the ~~acquisition date,~~hedge accounting guidance in current GAAP. This ASU is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted. The Partnership is currently evaluating the ~~initial measurement of fair value is not yet complete.~~

~~Sunoco Logistics’ Vitol Acquisition~~

In November 2016, Sunoco Logistics completed an acquisition from Vitol, Inc. (“Vitol”) of an integrated crude oil business in West Texas for $760 million plus working capital. The acquisition provides Sunoco Logistics with an approximately 2 million barrel crude oil terminal in Midland, Texas, a crude oil gatheringimpact that adopting this new standard will have on the consolidated financial statements and ~~mainline pipeline system in the Midland Basin, including a significant acreage dedication from an investment-grade Permian producer, and crude oil inventories~~ related to Vitol's crude oil purchasing and marketing business in West Texas. The acquisition also included the purchase of a 50% interest in SunVit Pipeline LLC ("SunVit"), which increased Sunoco Logistics' overall ownership of SunVit to 100%. The assets and liabilities acquired will be recorded at fair value as of the acquisition date, and the initial fair value measurements are not yet complete.

~~Sunoco Logistics’ Permian Express Partners~~disclosures.

In November 2016, Sunoco Logistics announced its intent to form Permian Express Partners LLC ("PEP"), a strategic joint venture, with ExxonMobil Corp. Sunoco Logistics will contribute its Permian Express 1, Permian Express 2 and Permian Longview and Louisiana Access pipelines. ExxonMobil Corp will contribute its Longview to Louisiana and Pegasus pipelines; Hawkins gathering system; an idle pipeline in southern Oklahoma; and its Patoka, Illinois terminal. The closing of PEP will be subject to certain closing conditions, including regulatory approval, and is expected to be completed in the first quarter 2017. Upon closing, Sunoco Logistics' ownership percentage is expected to be approximately 85%. Sunoco Logistics will maintain a controlling financial and voting interest in PEP and will operate all of the assets contributed to the joint venture. As such, PEP will be reflected as a consolidated subsidiary of Sunoco Logistics.

Table of Contents


2.	ACQUISITIONS AND CONTRIBUTION TRANSACTIONS

Rover Contribution Agreement

In July 2017, ETP announced that it had entered into a contribution agreement with a fund managed by Blackstone Energy Partners and Blackstone Capital Partners (“Blackstone”), for the purchase by Blackstone of a 49.9% interest in the holding company that owns 65% of the Rover pipeline (“Rover Holdco”). The agreement with Blackstone required Blackstone to contribute, at closing, funds to reimburse ETP for its pro rata share of the Rover construction costs incurred by ETP through the closing date, along with the payment of additional amounts subject to certain adjustments. The transaction closed in October 2017. As a result of this closing, Rover Holdco is now owned 50.1% by ETP and 49.9% by Blackstone.

West Texas Gulf Pipe Line Contribution

In August 2017, certain wholly-owned subsidiaries of ETP contributed their equity ownership of West Texas Gulf Pipe Line (“WTG”) Company to ETP Holdco. This contribution is considered a transaction between commonly controlled entities and therefore no gain or loss was recognized as a result of the contribution. The months of May and June 2017 have been retrospectively restated to include WTG.


3.	CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS

Cash and cash equivalents include all cash on hand, demand deposits, and investments with original maturities of three months or less. We consider cash equivalents to include short-term, highly liquid investments that are readily convertible to known amounts of cash and that are subject to an insignificant risk of changes in value.

We place our cash deposits and temporary cash investments with high credit quality financial institutions. At times, our cash and cash equivalents may be uninsured or in deposit accounts that exceed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance limit.

The net change in operating assets and liabilities ~~net~~(net of effects of ~~acquisition,~~acquisitions and deconsolidations) included in cash flows from operating activities is comprised as follows:

Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015
Accounts receivable $ (595 ) $ 523
Accounts receivable from related companies 80
(467 )
Inventories (299 ) (239 )
Other current assets (135 ) (96 )
Other non-current assets, net (1 ) 116
Accounts payable 635
(988 )
Accounts payable to related companies 24
75
Accrued and other current liabilities 213
25
Other non-current liabilities 31
47
Derivative assets and liabilities, net 219
82
Net change in operating assets and liabilities, net of effects of acquisition $ 172
$ (922 )

~~Non-cash investing and financing activities are as follows:~~

Nine Months Ended
September 30,

2016 2015
NON-CASH INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Accrued capital expenditures $ 991
$ 963
Sunoco LP limited partner interest received in exchange for contribution of the Sunoco, Inc. retail business to Sunoco LP 194
—
Net gains from subsidiary common unit issuances 34
118
NON-CASH FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Contribution of property, plant and equipment from noncontrolling interest $ —
$ 34
Issuance of common units in connection with the Regency Merger —
9,250
Issuance of Class H Units in connection with the Bakken Pipeline Transaction —
1,946
Redemption of common units in connection with the Bakken Pipeline Transaction —
999
Redemption of common units in connection with the Sunoco LP Exchange —
52


4.	~~ADVANCES TO AND INVESTMENTS IN UNCONSOLIDATED AFFILIATES~~

~~MEP~~

~~The Partnership evaluated its investment in MEP for impairment as of September 30, 2016, based on FASB Accounting Standards Codification 323,~~ ~~Investments - Equity Method and Joint Ventures.~~ Based on commercial discussions with current and potential shippers on MEP regarding the outlook for long-term transportation contract rates, the Partnership concluded that the fair value of its investment was other than temporarily impaired, resulting in a non-cash impairment of $308 million,



	Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2017			2016
Accounts receivable	$	(547	)	$	(595	)
Accounts receivable from related companies	(580		)	80
Inventories	106			(299		)
Other current assets	76			(135		)
Other non-current assets, net	(58		)	(1		)
Accounts payable	305			635
Accounts payable to related companies	133			24
Accrued and other current liabilities	177			213
Other non-current liabilities	74			31
Derivative assets and liabilities, net	(23		)	219
Net change in operating assets and liabilities, net of effects of acquisitions and deconsolidations	$	(337	)	$	172

Table of Contents

~~which was recorded in the three months ended September 30, 2016. The carrying value of the Partnership’s investment in MEP~~Non-cash investing and financing activities are as ~~of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015 was $327 million and $660 million, respectively.~~follows:



	Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2017		2016
NON-CASH INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Accrued capital expenditures	$	1,098	$	991
Sunoco LP limited partner interest received in exchange for contribution of the Sunoco, Inc. retail business to Sunoco LP	—		194
Net gains from subsidiary common unit issuances	—		34
NON-CASH FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Contribution of property, plant and equipment from noncontrolling interest	$	988	$	—


5.4.	INVENTORIES

Inventories consisted of the following:


	September 30, 2016		December 31, 2015		September 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
Natural gas and NGLs	$	684	$	415	$	474	$	699
Crude oil	590		424		—		683
Refined products	114		104		—		113
Other	216		270
Spare parts and other					205		217
Total inventories	$	1,604	$	1,213	$	679	$	1,712

We utilize commodity derivatives to manage price volatility associated with our natural gas ~~inventories stored in our Bammel storage facility.~~inventory. Changes in fair value of designated hedged inventory are recorded in inventory on our consolidated balance sheets and cost of products sold in our consolidated statements of operations.


5.	ADVANCES TO AND INVESTMENTS IN UNCONSOLIDATED AFFILIATES

Upon the completion of the Sunoco Logistics Merger, the Partnership deconsolidated ETP (formerly Sunoco Logistics). The Partnership holds an equity method investment in ETP due to its ownership of ETP Class E, Class G and Class K units.

The Partnership previously had outstanding 8.9 million Class E Units, 90.7 million Class G Units and 101.5 million Class K Units, all of which were held by wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Partnership and were therefore eliminated in the Partnership’s consolidated financial statements. In connection with the Sunoco Logistics Merger, all of the Partnership’s outstanding Class E, Class G and Class K units were cancelled and converted into an equal number of newly created Class E, Class G and Class K units representing limited partner interests in ETP, with the same rights, preferences, privileges, duties and obligations as such classes had immediately prior to the Sunoco Logistics Merger, as described below. Consequently, the ETP Class E, Class G and Class K units are reflected as an equity method investment in ETP by the Partnership subsequent to the Sunoco Logistics Merger. The Partnership’s equity in earnings and cash distributions related to the Class E, Class G and Class K units is as follows: (i) the Class E Units are entitled to aggregate earnings allocation and cash distributions equal to 11.1% of the total amount of cash distributed to all Unitholders, including the Class E Unitholders, up to $1.41 per unit per year, (ii) the Class G Units are entitled to earnings allocation equal to ETPs income or loss excluding any income or loss generated by ETP Holdco or its consolidated subsidiaries and aggregate cash distributions equal to 26% of the total amount of cash generated by ETP and its subsidiaries, other than ETP Holdco, and available for distribution, up to a maximum of $3.75 per Class G Unit per year, and (iii) the Class K Units are entitled to aggregate earnings allocation and cash distribution of $0.67275 per Class K Unit prior to ETP making distributions of available cash to any class of units, excluding any cash available distributions or dividends or capital stock sales proceeds received by ETP from ETP Holdco. The investment in ETP has been recorded in the Partnership’s balance sheet at the historical carrying value as of the date of the Sunoco Logistics Merger.

Table of Contents

The following table presents aggregated selected income statement data for ETP and Citrus (on a 100% basis for all periods presented):



	Three Months Ended September 30,				Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2017		2016		2017		2016
ETP
Revenue	$	6,973	$	5,531	$	20,444	$	15,301
Operating income	825		638		2,211		1,967
Net income	761		138		1,417		986
Citrus
Revenue	$	225	$	223	$	634	$	628
Operating income	143		140		383		381
Net income	72		62		173		160

The Partnership has other equity method investments which were not, individually or in the aggregate, significant to our consolidated financial statements.


6.	FAIR VALUE MEASURES

Based on the estimated borrowing rates currently available to us and our subsidiaries for loans with similar terms and average maturities, the aggregate fair value and carrying amount of our consolidated debt obligations as of September 30, ~~2016~~2017 was ~~$31.38~~$28.09 billion and ~~$30.40~~$26.71 billion, respectively. As of December 31, ~~2015,~~2016, the aggregate fair value and carrying amount of our consolidated debt obligations was ~~$25.71~~$33.85 billion and ~~$28.68~~$32.93 billion, respectively. The fair value of our consolidated debt obligations is a Level 2 valuation based on the observable inputs used for similar liabilities.

We have commodity derivatives and interest rate derivatives ~~and embedded derivatives in the Preferred Units~~ that are accounted for as assets and liabilities at fair value in our consolidated balance sheets. We determine the fair value of our assets and liabilities subject to fair value measurement by using the highest possible “level” of inputs. Level 1 inputs are observable quotes in an active market for identical assets and liabilities. We consider the valuation of marketable securities and commodity derivatives transacted through a clearing broker with a published price from the appropriate exchange as a Level 1 valuation. Level 2 inputs are inputs observable for similar assets and liabilities. We consider OTC commodity derivatives entered into directly with third parties as a Level 2 valuation since the values of these derivatives are quoted on an exchange for similar transactions. Additionally, we consider our options transacted through our clearing broker as having Level 2 inputs due to the level of activity of these contracts on the exchange in which they trade. We consider the valuation of our interest rate derivatives as Level 2 as the primary input, the LIBOR curve, is based on quotes from an active exchange of Eurodollar futures for the same period as the future interest swap settlements. Level 3 inputs are unobservable. Derivatives related to the embedded derivatives in our preferred units are valued using a binomial lattice model. The market inputs utilized in the model include credit spread, probabilities of the occurrence of certain events, common unit price, dividend yield, and expected value, and are considered Level 3. During the nine months ended September 30, ~~2016,~~2017, no transfers were made between any levels within the fair value hierarchy.

1112

Table of Contents

The following tables summarize the gross fair value of our financial assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on a recurring basis as of September 30, ~~2016~~2017 and December 31, ~~2015~~2016 based on inputs used to derive their fair values:

Fair Value Measurements at
September 30, 2016
Fair Value Total Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Assets:
Interest rate derivatives $ 18
$ —
$ 18
$ —
Commodity derivatives:
Natural Gas:
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX 5
5
—
—
Swing Swaps IFERC 3
—
3
—
Fixed Swaps/Futures 24
24
—
—
Forward Physical Swaps 2
—
2
—
Power:
Forwards 6
—
6
—
Options – Puts 1
1
—
—
Natural Gas Liquids – Forwards/Swaps 85
85
—
—
Refined Products – Futures 7
7
—
—
Crude – Futures 8
8
—
—
Total commodity derivatives 141
130
11
—
Total assets $ 159
$ 130
$ 29
$ —
Liabilities:
Interest rate derivatives $ (375 ) $ —
$ (375 ) $ —
Embedded derivatives in the Preferred Units (1 ) —
—
(1 )
Commodity derivatives:
Natural Gas:
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX (5 ) (5 ) —
—
Swing Swaps IFERC (3 ) —
(3 ) —
Fixed Swaps/Futures (36 ) (36 ) —
—
Forward Physical Swaps (1 ) —
(1 ) —
Power:
Forwards (4 ) —
(4 ) —
Options – Calls (2 ) (2 ) —
—
Natural Gas Liquids – Forwards/Swaps (114 ) (114 ) —
—
Refined Products – Futures (16 ) (16 ) —
—
Crude – Futures (8 ) (8 ) —
—
Total commodity derivatives (189 ) (181 ) (8 ) —
Total liabilities $ (565 ) $ (181 ) $ (383 ) $ (1 )

~~Table of Contents~~

Fair Value Measurements at
December 31, 2015
Fair Value Total Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Assets:
Commodity derivatives:
Natural Gas:
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX $ 16
$ 16
$ —
$ —
Swing Swaps IFERC 10
2
8
—
Fixed Swaps/Futures 274
274
—
—
Forward Physical Swaps 4
—
4
—
Power:

Forwards 22
—
22
—
Futures 3
3
—
—
Options – Puts 1
1
—
—
Options – Calls 1
1
—
—
Natural Gas Liquids – Forwards/Swaps 99
99
—
—
Refined Products – Futures 9
9
—
—
Crude – Futures 9
9
—
—
Total commodity derivatives 448
414
34
—
Total assets $ 448
$ 414
$ 34
$ —
Liabilities:
Interest rate derivatives $ (171 ) $ —
$ (171 ) $ —
Embedded derivatives in the Preferred Units (5 ) —
—
(5 )
Commodity derivatives:
Natural Gas:
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX (16 ) (16 ) —
—
Swing Swaps IFERC (12 ) (2 ) (10 ) —
Fixed Swaps/Futures (203 ) (203 ) —
—
Power:

Forwards (22 ) —
(22 ) —
Futures (2 ) (2 ) —
—
Options – Puts (1 ) (1 ) —
—
Natural Gas Liquids – Forwards/Swaps (89 ) (89 ) —
—
Crude – Futures (5 ) (5 ) —
—
Total commodity derivatives (350 ) (318 ) (32 ) —
Total liabilities $ (526 ) $ (318 ) $ (203 ) $ (5 )

The following table presents a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances for our Level 3 financial instruments measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs for the nine months ended September 30, 2016.

Balance, December 31, 2015 $ (5 )
Net unrealized gains included in other income (expense) 4
Balance, September 30, 2016 $ (1 )


7.	~~NET INCOME (LOSS) PER LIMITED PARTNER UNIT~~

Net income for partners’ capital and statement of operations presentation purposes is allocated to the General Partner and Limited Partners in accordance with their respective partnership percentages, after giving effect to priority income allocations



				Fair Value Measurements at September 30, 2017
	Fair Value Total			Level 1			Level 2
Assets:
Commodity derivatives:
Natural Gas:
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX	$	16		$	16		$	—
Swing Swaps IFERC	2			—			2
Fixed Swaps/Futures	28			28			—
Forward Physical Swaps	3			—			3
Power:
Forwards	11			—			11
Futures	1			1			—
Options – Puts	1			1			—
Natural Gas Liquids – Forwards/Swaps	179			179			—
Crude – Futures	2			2			—
Total commodity derivatives	243			227			16
Total assets	$	243		$	227		$	16
Liabilities:
Interest rate derivatives	$	(210	)	$	—		$	(210	)
Commodity derivatives:
Natural Gas:
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX	(22		)	(22		)	—
Swing Swaps IFERC	(3		)	(1		)	(2		)
Fixed Swaps/Futures	(22		)	(22		)	—
Forward Physical Swaps	(1		)	—			(1		)
Power:
Forwards	(9		)	—			(9		)
Futures	(1		)	(1		)	—
Natural Gas Liquids – Forwards/Swaps	(213		)	(213		)	—
Crude – Futures	(1		)	(1		)	—
Total commodity derivatives	(272		)	(260		)	(12		)
Total liabilities	$	(482	)	$	(260	)	$	(222	)

Table of Contents

for incentive distributions, if any, to the General Partner, the holder of the IDRs pursuant to the Partnership Agreement, which are declared and paid following the close of each quarter. Earnings in excess of distributions are allocated to the General Partner and Limited Partners based on their respective ownership interests. Loss attributable to predecessor represents amounts allocated to the former Regency partners and have no impact on net income (loss) per unit for the periods prior to the Regency Merger.

~~A reconciliation of net income (loss) and weighted average units used in computing basic and diluted net income (loss) per unit is as follows:~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 2016 2015
Net income 138
393
986
1,500
Less: Income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest 64
(24 ) 231
182
Less: Loss attributable to predecessor —
—
—
(34 )
Net income, net of noncontrolling interest and predecessor income 74
417
755
1,352
General Partner’s interest in net income 220
277
740
779
Class H Unitholder’s interest in net income 93
66
257
184
Class I Unitholder’s interest in net income 2
15
6
80
Common Unitholders’ interest in net income (loss) (241 ) 59
(248 ) 309
Additional earnings allocated to General Partner (3 ) (3 ) (9 ) (7 )
Distributions on employee unit awards, net of allocation to General Partner (5 ) (4 ) (15 ) (11 )
Net income (loss) available to Common Unitholders $ (249 ) $ 52
$ (272 ) $ 291
Weighted average Common Units – basic ⁽¹⁾
507.4
485.0
499.8
415.1
Basic net income (loss) per Common Unit $ (0.49 ) $ 0.11
$ (0.54 ) $ 0.70

Net income (loss) available to Common Unitholders $ (249 ) $ 52
$ (272 ) $ 291
Income attributable to Preferred Units —
(4 ) —
(5 )
Diluted net income (loss) available to Common Unitholders $ (249 ) $ 48
$ (272 ) $ 286
Weighted average Common Units – basic ⁽¹⁾
507.4
485.0
499.8
415.1
Dilutive effect of unvested employee unit awards —
1.4
—
1.7
Dilutive effect of Preferred Units —
0.9
—
0.9
Weighted average Common Units – diluted ⁽¹⁾
507.4
487.3
499.8
417.7
Diluted net income (loss) per Common Unit $ (0.49 ) $ 0.10
$ (0.54 ) $ 0.68



				Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2016
	Fair Value Total			Level 1			Level 2			Level 3
Assets:
Commodity derivatives:
Natural Gas:
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX	$	14		$	14		$	—		$	—
Swing Swaps IFERC	2			—			2			—
Fixed Swaps/Futures	96			96			—			—
Forward Physical Swaps	1			—			1			—
Power:
Forwards	4			—			4			—
Futures	1			1			—			—
Options – Calls	1			1			—			—
Natural Gas Liquids – Forwards/Swaps	233			233			—			—
Refined Products – Futures	1			1			—			—
Crude – Futures	9			9			—			—
Total commodity derivatives	362			355			7			—
Total assets	$	362		$	355		$	7		$	—
Liabilities:
Interest rate derivatives	$	(193	)	$	—		$	(193	)	$	—
Embedded derivatives in Preferred Units	(1		)	—			—			(1		)
Commodity derivatives:
Natural Gas:
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX	(11		)	(11		)	—			—
Swing Swaps IFERC	(3		)	—			(3		)	—
Fixed Swaps/Futures	(149		)	(149		)	—			—
Power:
Forwards	(5		)	—			(5		)	—
Futures	(1		)	(1		)	—			—
Natural Gas Liquids – Forwards/Swaps	(273		)	(273		)	—			—
Refined Products – Futures	(17		)	(17		)	—			—
Crude – Futures	(13		)	(13		)	—			—
Total commodity derivatives	(472		)	(464		)	(8		)	—
Total liabilities	$	(666	)	$	(464	)	$	(201	)	$	(1	)

⁽¹⁾~~Excludes Common Units owned by the Partnership’s consolidated subsidiaries.~~

Based on the declared distribution rate of $1.055 per common unit, distributions to be paid for the three months ended September 30, 2016 are expected to be $876 million in total, which exceeds net income attributable to partners for the period by $802 million. The allocation of the distributions in excess of the net income is based on the proportionate ownership interests of the Limited Partners and General Partner. Based on this allocation approach, the distributions paid to the General Partner, including incentive distributions, further exceeded the net income for the three months ended September 30, 2016, and as a result, net losses were allocated to the Limited Partners for the period.

~~Table of Contents~~


8.7.	DEBT OBLIGATIONS

ETP Senior Notes Redemption

In October 2017, ETP redeemed all of the outstanding $500 million aggregate principal amount of ETLP’s 6.50% senior notes due July 2021 and all of the outstanding $700 million aggregate principal amount of ETLP’s 5.50% senior notes due April 2023. The aggregate amount paid to redeem these notes, including call premiums, was approximately $1.23 billion.

Credit Facilities and Commercial Paper

~~ETP~~ETLP Credit Facility

The ~~ETP~~ETLP Credit Facility allows for borrowings of up to $3.75 billion and ~~expires~~matures in November 2019. The indebtedness under the ~~ETP~~ETLP Credit Facility is unsecured, is not guaranteed by any of the Partnership’s subsidiaries and has equal rights to holders of our current and future unsecured debt. In September 2016, ~~the Partnership~~ETLP initiated a commercial paper program under

Table of Contents

the borrowing limits established by the $3.75 billion ~~ETP~~ETLP Credit Facility. As of September 30, ~~2016,~~2017, the ~~ETP~~ETLP Credit Facility had ~~$1.58~~$2.06 billion of outstanding borrowings, all of which ~~included $208 million of~~was commercial paper.

~~Sunoco Logistics~~Bakken Credit ~~Facilities~~

~~Sunoco Logistics maintains a $2.50 billion unsecured revolving credit agreement (the “Sunoco Logistics Credit Facility”), which matures in March 2020. The Sunoco Logistics Credit~~ Facility contains an accordion feature, under which the total aggregate commitment may be increased to $3.25 billion under certain conditions. As of September 30, 2016, the Sunoco Logistics Credit Facility had $622 million of outstanding borrowings, which included $140 million of commercial paper.

~~ETP Senior Notes~~

Subsequent to the Regency Merger in 2015, ETP assumed $3.80 billion total aggregate principal amount of Regency’s senior notes, which remained outstanding as of September 30, 2016. These notes were previously guaranteed by certain consolidated subsidiaries that had previously been consolidated by Regency. The subsidiary guarantees on all of these outstanding notes have been released.

~~Sunoco Logistics Senior Notes~~

~~Sunoco Logistics had $175 million of 6.125% senior notes which matured and were repaid in May 2016, using borrowings under the $2.50 billion Sunoco Logistics Credit Facility.~~

In July 2016, Sunoco Logistics issued $550 million aggregate principal amount of 3.90% senior notes due in July 2026. The net proceeds from this offering were used to repay outstanding credit facility borrowings and for general partnership purposes.

~~Bakken Financing~~

In August 2016, ~~ETP,~~Energy Transfer Partners, L.P., Sunoco Logistics and Phillips 66 ~~announced the completion of the~~completed project-level financing of the ~~Dakota Access Pipeline and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline projects (collectively, the “Bakken Pipeline”).~~Bakken Pipeline. The $2.50 billion credit facility ~~is anticipated to provide~~provides substantially all of the remaining capital necessary to complete the projects. As of September 30, ~~2016, $1.10~~2017, $2.50 billion was outstanding under this credit facility.

PennTex Revolving Credit Facility

PennTex previously maintained a $275 million revolving credit commitment (the “PennTex Revolving Credit Facility”). In August 2017, the PennTex Revolving Credit Facility was repaid and terminated.

Compliance with Our Covenants

We were in compliance with all requirements, tests, limitations, and covenants related to our credit agreements as of September 30, ~~2016.~~2017.


8.	PREFERRED UNITS

In January 2017, Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. repurchased all of its 1.9 million outstanding Preferred Units for cash in the aggregate amount of $53 million.


9.	EQUITY

~~ETP~~

~~The changes in outstanding common units during the nine months ended September 30, 2016 were as follows:~~



		~~Number of Units~~
~~Number of common units at December 31, 2015~~		~~505.6~~
~~Common units issued in connection with equity distribution agreements~~		~~19.5~~
~~Common units issued in connection with the distribution reinvestment plan~~		~~4.7~~
~~Number of common units at September 30, 2016~~		~~529.8~~

In July 2016, the Partnership entered into an equity distribution agreement with an aggregate offering price up to $1.50 billion. During the nine months ended September 30, 2016, the Partnership received proceeds of $646 million, net of $6 million

~~Table of Contents~~

commissions, from the issuance of common units pursuant to equity distribution agreements, which were used for general partnership purposes. As of September 30, 2016, $1.18 billion of the Partnership’s common units remained available to be issued under an equity distribution agreement.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2016, distributions of $148 million were reinvested under the distribution reinvestment plan. As of September 30, 2016, a total of 6.8 million common units remain available to be issued under the existing registration statement in connection with the ~~distribution reinvestment plan.~~

~~Sunoco Logistics~~

~~During the~~ ~~nine months endedSeptember 30, 2016~~, Sunoco Logistics ~~received proceeds~~Merger, the Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. Class H units were cancelled. The outstanding Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. Class E units, Class G units, Class I units and Class K units at the effective time of ~~$744 million, net~~the merger were converted into an equal number of ~~$8 million commissions~~newly created classes of Sunoco Logistics units, with the same rights, preferences, privileges, duties and ~~fees, from~~obligations as such classes of Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. units had immediately prior to the ~~issuance~~closing of the merger. Additionally, the outstanding Sunoco Logistics common units ~~pursuant to~~and Sunoco Logistics Class B units owned by Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. at the effective time of the merger were cancelled.

Common Units

Upon the completion of the Sunoco Logistics Merger, the Partnership’s equity distribution ~~agreements, which were used for general partnership purposes.~~

~~In September 2016, Sunoco Logistics completed a public offering of 21 million common units for proceeds of $560 million, net of $7 million in fees~~program, distribution reinvestment program and commissions to managers. The net proceeds from this offering were used to partially fund the acquisition from Vitol, which closed in November 2016. In October 2016, an additional 3.2 million common units were issued for proceeds of $84 million, net of fees and commissions to managers of $1 million, related to the exercise of an option in connection with the September 2016 offering.

~~As a result of Sunoco Logistics’ issuances of common units during the nine months ended September 30, 2016, the Partnership recognized increases in partners’ capital of $34 million.~~equity incentive plans have been terminated.

Bakken Equity Sale

~~On August 2, 2016,~~In February 2017, Bakken Holdings Company LLC, an entity in which ~~ETP~~ETLP indirectly owns a 60% membership interest and ~~Sunoco Logistics~~ETP indirectly owns a 40% membership interest, ~~agreed to sell~~sold a 49% interest in its wholly-owned subsidiary, Bakken Pipeline Investments LLC, to MarEn Bakken Company LLC, an entity jointly owned by Marathon Petroleum Corporation and Enbridge Energy Partners, L.P. for $2.00 billion in cash. ~~This transaction is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2016.~~ Bakken Pipeline Investments LLC indirectly owns a 75% interest in each of Dakota Access, LLC (“Dakota Access”) and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Company, LLC (“ETCO”). The remaining 25% of each of Dakota Access and ETCO is owned by wholly-owned subsidiaries of Phillips 66. ~~ETP will continue~~ETLP continues to consolidate Dakota Access and ETCO subsequent to this transaction.

~~Quarterly Distributions~~PennTex Tender Offer and Limited Call Right Exercise

In June 2017, ETP purchased all of ~~Available Cash~~

~~Following~~the outstanding PennTex common units not previously owned by ETP for $20.00 per common unit in cash. ETP now owns all of the economic interests of PennTex, and PennTex common units are ~~distributions declared and/~~no longer publicly traded or ~~paid by~~listed on the ~~Partnership subsequent to~~ NASDAQ.~~December 31, 2015~~:

Quarter Ended Record Date Payment Date Rate
December 31, 2015 February 8, 2016 February 16, 2016 $ 1.0550
March 31, 2016 May 6, 2016 May 16, 2016 1.0550
June 30, 2016 August 8, 2016 August 15, 2016 1.0550
September 30, 2016 November 7, 2016 November 14, 2016 1.0550

1615

Table of Contents

In July 2016, ETE agreed to relinquish an aggregate amount of $720 million in incentive distributions commencing with the quarter ended June 30, 2016 and ending with the quarter ending December 31, 2017, including a relinquishment of $85 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2016. In connection with the PennTex acquisition in November 2016, discussed in Note 2, ETE has agreed to a perpetual waiver of incentive distributions in the amount of $33 million annually.

ETE has also previously agreed to relinquish additional incentive distributions. In the aggregate, including relinquishment agreed to in July and November 2016, ETE has agreed to relinquish its right to the following amounts of incentive distributions in future periods, including distributions on Class I Units.

Total Year
2016 (remainder) $ 138
2017 626
2018 138
2019 128
Each year beyond 2019 33

~~Sunoco Logistics Quarterly Distributions of Available Cash~~

~~Following are distributions declared and/or paid by Sunoco Logistics subsequent to~~ ~~December 31, 2015~~:

Quarter Ended Record Date Payment Date Rate
December 31, 2015 February 8, 2016 February 12, 2016 $ 0.4790
March 31, 2016 May 9, 2016 May 13, 2016 0.4890
June 30, 2016 August 8, 2016 August 12, 2016 0.5000
September 30, 2016 November 9, 2016 November 14, 2016 0.5100

In connection with the acquisition from Vitol, Sunoco Logistics’ general partner executed an amendment to its partnership agreement in September 2016 which provides for a reduction to the incentive distributions paid by Sunoco Logistics. The reductions will total $60 million over a two-year period, recognized ratably over eight quarters, beginning with the third quarter 2016 cash distribution. The incentive distribution reduction will reduce the incentive distributions that ETP receives from Sunoco Logistics, as well as the amount of distributions that ETP pays on its Class H units.

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income ~~(Loss)~~

The following table presents the components of AOCI, net of tax:


	September 30, 2016			December 31, 2015			September 30, 2017			December 31, 2016
Available-for-sale securities	$	5		$	—		$	7		$	2
Foreign currency translation adjustment	(5		)	(4		)	(5		)	(5		)
Actuarial gain related to pensions and other postretirement benefits	5			8			9			7
Investments in unconsolidated affiliates, net	(9		)	—			3			4
Total AOCI, net of tax	$	(4	)	$	4		$	14		$	8


10.	INCOME TAXES

For the nine months ended September 30, 2017, the Partnership’s income tax expense included the impact of a one-time adjustment to deferred tax balances as a result of a change in apportionment and corresponding state tax rates resulting from the Sunoco Logistics Merger in April 2017, which resulted in incremental income tax expense of approximately $68 million during the period. In addition, for the three months ended September 30, 2017, the Partnership recognized a $154 million deferred tax gain resulting from internal restructuring among its subsidiaries that resulted in a change in tax status for one of the subsidiaries. The three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 also reflect increased income tax expense due to higher earnings among the Partnership’s consolidated corporate subsidiaries. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016, the Partnership’s income tax benefit primarily resulted from losses among the Partnership’s consolidated corporate subsidiaries.


11.	REGULATORY MATTERS, COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND ENVIRONMENTAL LIABILITIES

Contingent Residual Support Agreement – AmeriGas

In connection with the closing of the contribution of its propane operations in January 2012, ~~ETP~~ETLP (formerly Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.) agreed to provide contingent residual support of ~~$1.55~~$1.55 billion of intercompany borrowings made by AmeriGas and certain of its affiliates with maturities through 2022 from a finance subsidiary of AmeriGas that have maturity dates and repayment terms that mirror those of an equal principal amount of senior notes issued by this finance company subsidiary to ~~third party~~third-party purchasers. In ~~June~~ 2016, AmeriGas repurchased certain of its senior notes, which caused a reduction in the amount supported by ~~ETP~~ETLP under the contingent residual support agreement. AsIn February 2017, AmeriGas repurchased a portion of ~~September 30, 2016, ETP continued to provide~~its 7.00% senior notes. The remaining outstanding 7.00% senior notes were repurchased in May 2017, and ETLP no longer provides contingent residual support ~~of approximately $1 billion of borrowings.~~for any AmeriGas notes.

~~Table of Contents~~

~~ETP Retail Holdings~~ Guarantee of Sunoco LP Notes

In connection with previous transactions whereby Retail Holdings ~~has~~contributed assets to Sunoco LP, Retail Holdings provided a limited contingent guarantee of collection, but not of payment, to Sunoco LP with respect to (i) $800 million principal amount of 6.375% senior notes due 2023 issued by Sunoco LP, (ii) $800 million principal amount of 6.25% senior notes due 2021 issued by Sunoco LP and (iii) $2.035 billion aggregate principal for Sunoco LP’s term loan due 2019.

~~NGL Pipeline Regulation~~

~~We have~~ In December 2016, Retail Holdings contributed its interests in ~~NGL pipelines located in Texas and New Mexico. We commenced~~Sunoco LP, along with the ~~interstate transportation of NGLs in 2013, which is subject to the jurisdiction~~assignment of the ~~FERC under the Interstate Commerce Act (“ICA”) and the Energy Policy Act~~guarantee of 1992. Under the ICA, tariff rates must be just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory and pipelines may not confer any undue preference. The tariff rates established for interstate services were based on a negotiated agreement; however, the FERC’s rate-making methodologies may limit our abilitySunoco LP’s senior notes, to set rates based on our actual costs, may delay or limit the use of rates that reflect increased costs and may subject us to potentially burdensome and expensive operational, reporting and other requirements. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our business, revenues and cash flow.its subsidiary, ETC M-A Acquisition LLC.

FERC Audit

In March 2016, the FERC commenced an audit of Trunkline for the period from January 1, 2013 to present to evaluate Trunkline’s compliance with the requirements of its FERC gas tariff, the accounting regulations of the Uniform System of Accounts as prescribed by the FERC, and the FERC’s annual reporting requirements. The audit is ongoing.

Commitments

In the normal course of our business, we purchase, process and sell natural gas pursuant to long-term contracts and we enter into long-term transportation and storage agreements. Such contracts contain terms that are customary in the industry. We believe that the terms of these agreements are commercially reasonable and will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

Table of Contents

We have certain non-cancelable leases for property and equipment, which require fixed monthly rental payments and expire at various dates through ~~2058.~~2034. The table below reflects rental expense under these operating leases included in operating expenses in the accompanying statements of operations, which include contingent rentals, and rental expense recovered through related sublease rental income:

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 2016 2015
Rental expense⁽¹⁾
$ 19
$ 35
$ 58
$ 141
Less: Sublease rental income —
(3 ) —
(15 )
Rental expense, net $ 19
$ 32
$ 58
$ 126



	Three Months Ended September 30,				Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2017		2016		2017		2016
Rental expense	$	19	$	19	$	53	$	58


⁽¹⁾	~~Includes contingent rentals totaling $9 million and $19 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2015, respectively.~~

Our joint venture agreements require that we fund our proportionate share of capital contributions to our unconsolidated affiliates. Such contributions will depend upon our unconsolidated affiliates’ capital requirements, such as for funding capital projects or repayment of long-term obligations.

Litigation and Contingencies

We may, from time to time, be involved in litigation and claims arising out of our operations in the normal course of business. Natural gas and crude oil are flammable and combustible. Serious personal injury and significant property damage can arise in connection with their transportation, storage or use. In the ordinary course of business, we are sometimes threatened with or named as a defendant in various lawsuits seeking actual and punitive damages for product liability, personal injury and property damage. We maintain liability insurance with insurers in amounts and with coverage and deductibles management believes are reasonable and prudent, and which are generally accepted in the industry. However, there can be no assurance that the levels of insurance protection currently in effect will continue to be available at reasonable prices or that such levels will remain adequate to protect us from material expenses related to product liability, personal injury or property damage in the future.

Dakota Access Pipeline

On July 25, 2016, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”) issued permits to Dakota Access consistent with environmental and historic preservation statutes for the pipeline to make two crossings of the Missouri River in North Dakota, including a crossing of the Missouri River at Lake Oahe. After significant delay, the USACE also issued easements to allow the pipeline to cross land owned by the USACE adjacent to the Missouri River in two locations. Also in July, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (“SRST”) filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the USACE that challenged the legality of the permits issued for the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline across those waterways and claimed violations of the National Historic Preservation Act (“NHPA”). The SRST also sought a preliminary injunction to rescind the USACE permits while the case is pending. Dakota Access intervened in the case. The SRST soon added a request for an emergency TRO to stop construction on the pipeline project. On September 9, 2016, the Court denied SRST’s motion for a preliminary injunction, rendering the temporary restraining order (“TRO”) request moot.

After the September 9, 2016 ruling, the Department of the Army, the DOJ, and the Department of the Interior released a joint statement that the USACE would not grant the easement for the land adjacent to Lake Oahe until the Army completed a review to determine whether it was necessary to reconsider the USACE’s decision under various federal statutes relevant to the pipeline approval.

The SRST appealed the denial of the preliminary injunction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and filed an emergency motion in the U.S. District Court for an injunction pending the appeal, which was denied. The D.C. Circuit then denied the SRST’s application for an injunction pending appeal and later dismissed SRST’s appeal of the order denying the preliminary injunction motion. The SRST filed an amended complaint and added claims based on treaties between the tribes and the United States and statutes governing the use of government property.

In December 2016, the Department of the Army announced that, although its prior actions complied with the law, it intended to conduct further environmental review of the crossing at Lake Oahe. In February 2017, in response to a presidential memorandum, the Department of the Army decided that no further environmental review was necessary and delivered an easement to Dakota Access allowing the pipeline to cross Lake Oahe. Almost immediately, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe (“CRST”), which had intervened in the lawsuit in August 2016, moved for a preliminary injunction and TRO to block operation of the pipeline. These motions raised, for the first time, claims based on the religious rights of the Tribe. The district court denied the TRO and preliminary injunction, and the CRST appealed and requested an injunction pending appeal in the district court and the D.C. Circuit. Both courts denied the CRST’s request for an injunction pending appeal. Shortly thereafter, at CRST’s request, the D.C. Circuit dismissed CRST’s appeal.

1817

Table of Contents

The SRST and the CRST amended their complaints to incorporate religious freedom and other claims. In addition, the Oglala and Yankton Sioux tribes have filed related lawsuits to prevent construction of the Dakota Access pipeline project. These lawsuits have been consolidated into the action initiated by the SRST. Several individual members of the Tribes have also intervened in the lawsuit asserting claims that overlap with those brought by the four tribes.

On June 14, 2017, the Court ruled on SRST’s and CRST’s motions for partial summary judgment and the USACE’s cross-motions for partial summary judgment. The Court rejected the majority of the Tribes’ assertions and granted summary judgment on most claims in favor of the USACE and Dakota Access. In particular, the Court concluded that the USACE had not violated any trust duties owed to the Tribes and had generally complied with its obligations under the Clean Water Act, the Rivers and Harbors Act, the Mineral Leasing Act, the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) and other related statutes; however, the Court remanded to the USACE three discrete issues for further analysis and explanation of its prior determination under certain of these statutes. The Court ordered briefing to determine whether the pipeline should remain in operation during the pendency of the USACE’s review process or whether to vacate the existing permits. The USACE and Dakota Access opposed any shutdown of operations of the pipeline during this review process. On October 11, 2017, the Court issued an order allowing the pipeline to remain in operation during the pendency of the USACE’s review process. In early October 2017, USACE advised the Court that it expects to complete this additional work by April 2018. The Court has stayed consideration of any other claims until it fully resolves the remaining issues relating to its remand order.

While we believe that the pending lawsuits are unlikely to block operation of the pipeline, we cannot assure this outcome. We cannot determine when or how these lawsuits will be resolved or the impact they may have on the Dakota Access project.

Mont Belvieu Incident

On June 26, 2016, a hydrocarbon storage well located on another operator’s facility adjacent to Lone Star NGL Mont Belvieu’s (“Lone Star”) facilities in Mont Belvieu, Texas experienced an over-pressurization resulting in a subsurface release. The subsurface release ~~of hydrocarbons and water, and~~caused a ~~subsequent~~ fire ~~occurred~~ at Lone Star’s South ~~Terminal. All employees~~Terminal (CMB) and ~~contractors were accounted~~damage to Lone Star’s storage well operations at its South and North Terminals. Normal operations have resumed at the facilities with the exception of one of Lone Star’s storage wells. Lone Star is still quantifying the extent of its incurred and ongoing damages and has or will be seeking reimbursement for ~~and there were no injuries. The cause of the fire and evaluation of possible damages is currently under investigation.~~these losses.

MTBE Litigation

Sunoco, Inc. and/or Sunoco, Inc. (R&M), along with other refiners, manufacturers and sellers of gasoline, are defendants in lawsuits alleging MTBE contamination of groundwater. The plaintiffs, typically ~~include water purveyors and municipalities responsible for supplying drinking water and~~ governmental ~~authorities. The plaintiffs primarily~~authorities, assert product liability claims and additional claims including nuisance, trespass, negligence, violation of environmental laws, ~~and~~and/or deceptive business practices. The plaintiffs ~~in all of the cases~~ seek to recover compensatory damages, and in some cases also seek natural resource damages, injunctive relief, punitive damages, and attorneys’ fees.

As of September 30, ~~2016,~~2017, Sunoco, Inc. is a defendant in six cases, including cases initiated by the States of New Jersey, Vermont, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and two others by the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico with the more recent Puerto Rico action being a companion case alleging damages for additional sites beyond those at issue in the initial Puerto Rico action. Four of these cases are venued in a multidistrict litigation proceeding in a New York federal court. ~~The New Jersey, Puerto Rico, Vermont,~~

Sunoco, Inc. and ~~Pennsylvania cases assert natural resource damage claims.~~

~~Fact discovery has concluded~~Sunoco, Inc. (R&M) have reached a settlement with ~~respect to an initial set of 19 sites each that will be~~ the subject of the first trial phase in the New Jersey case and the initial Puerto Rico case. The initial set of 19 New Jersey trial sites are now pending before the United States District Judge for the DistrictState of New ~~Jersey,~~Jersey. The court approved the Hon. Freda L. Wolfson for the pre-trial and trial phases. Judge Wolfson then referred the case to United States Magistrate Judge for the District of New Jersey, the Hon. Lois H. Goodman. Judge Goodman conducted a status conference with all of the parties and inquired whether the parties will engage in a global mediation and instructed the parties to exchange possible mediator names. All parties agreed to participate in global settlement discussions in a global mediation forum before Hon. Garrett Brown (Ret.), a Judicial Arbitration Mediation Service mediator. The remaining portion of the New Jersey case remains in the multidistrict litigation. The first mediation session with Judge Brown is scheduled for November 2 through November 3, 2016. Consent Order on October 10, 2017.

It is reasonably possible that a loss may be ~~realized;~~realized in the remaining cases; however, we are unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued. ~~Management believes that an~~An adverse determination with respect to one or more of the MTBE cases could have a significant impact on results of operations during the period in which any ~~said~~such adverse determination occurs, but ~~does not believe that any~~ such an adverse determination likely would not have a material adverse effect on the Partnership’s consolidated financial position.

Regency Merger Litigation

Following the January 26, 2015 announcement of the ~~Regency Merger,~~Regency-ETP merger (the “Regency Merger”), purported Regency unitholders filed lawsuits in state and federal courts in Dallas and Delaware asserting claims relating to the Regency Merger. All but one Regency Merger-related lawsuits have been ~~dismissed, although one lawsuit remains pending on appeal.~~dismissed. On June 10, 2015, Adrian Dieckman (“Dieckman”), a purported Regency unitholder, filed a class action complaint, ~~on behalf of Regency’s common unitholders~~Dieckman v. Regency GP LP, et al., C.A. No. 11130-CB, in the Court of Chancery of the State of ~~Delaware.~~ Delaware (the “Regency Merger Litigation”), on behalf of Regency’s common unitholders against Regency GP, LP; Regency GP LLC; ETE, ETP, ETP GP, and the members of Regency’s board of directors (the “Regency Litigation Defendants”).

Table of Contents

The ~~lawsuit~~Regency Merger litigation alleges that the Regency Merger breached the Regency partnership agreement because Regency’s conflicts committee was not properly formed, and the Regency Merger was not approved in good faith. ~~Defendants filed a motion to dismiss, and on~~On March 29, 2016, the Delaware ~~court granted Defendants’ motion and dismissed the lawsuit. On April 26, 2016, Dieckman filed his Notice of Appeal to the Supreme~~ Court of ~~Delaware. This appeal is styled Adrian~~Chancery granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the lawsuit in its entirety. Dieckman v. Regency GP LP, et al., No. 208, 2016, in the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware. Dieckman filed his Opening Brief on June 9, 2016, and Defendants’ filed their Answering Brief on July 29, 2016.appealed. On ~~August 31, 2016, Dieckman filed his Reply Brief. Oral argument is scheduled for November 16, 2016 before~~January 20, 2017, the Delaware Supreme ~~Court.~~Court reversed the judgment of the Court of Chancery. On May 5, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Amended Verified Class Action Complaint. The Regency Merger Litigation Defendants then filed Motions to Dismiss the Amended Complaint and a Motion to Stay Discovery on May 19, 2017. A hearing on these motions is currently set for January 9, 2018.

The Regency Merger Litigation Defendants cannot predict the outcome of the Regency Merger Litigation or any lawsuits that might be filed subsequent to the date of this filing; nor can the Regency Merger Litigation Defendants predict the amount of time and expense that will be required to resolve the Regency Merger Litigation. The Regency Litigation Defendants believe the Regency Merger Litigation is without merit and intend to vigorously defend against it and any others that may be filed in connection with the Regency Merger.

Enterprise Products Partners, L.P. and Enterprise Products Operating LLC Litigation

On January 27, 2014, a trial commenced between ~~ETP~~ETLP against Enterprise Products Partners, L.P. and Enterprise Products Operating LLC (collectively, “Enterprise”) and Enbridge (US) Inc. Trial resulted in a verdict in favor of ~~ETP~~ETLP against Enterprise that consisted of $319 million in compensatory damages and $595 million in disgorgement to ~~ETP.~~ETLP. The jury also found that ~~ETP~~ETLP owed Enterprise approximately $1 million under a reimbursement agreement. On July 29, 2014, the trial court entered a final judgment in favor of ~~ETP~~ETLP and awarded ~~ETP~~ETLP $536 million, consisting of compensatory damages, disgorgement, and pre-judgment interest. The trial court also ordered that ETP shall be entitled to recover post-judgment interest and costs of court and that Enterprise is not entitled to any net recovery on its counterclaims. Enterprise ~~has~~ filed a notice of appeal with the ~~Texas~~Court of Appeals. On July 18, 2017, the Court of Appeals issued its opinion and ~~briefing by Enterprise and ETP is complete. Oral argument was held on April 20, 2016. The~~

~~Table of Contents~~

reversed the trial court’s judgment. ETP’s motion for rehearing to the Court of Appeals ~~is taking~~was denied. ETP intends to file a petition for review with the ~~briefs under advisement.~~Texas Supreme Court.

Sunoco Logistics Merger Litigation

Seven purported Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. common unitholders (the “ETP Unitholder Plaintiffs”) separately filed seven putative unitholder class action lawsuits against ETP, ETP GP, ETP LLC, the members of the ETP Board, and ETE (the “ETP-SXL Defendants”) in connection with the announcement of the Sunoco Logistics Merger. Two of these lawsuits have been voluntarily dismissed. The five remaining lawsuits have been consolidated as In ~~accordance~~re Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. Shareholder Litig., C.A. No. 1:17-cv-00044-CCC, in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware (the “Sunoco Logistics Merger Litigation”).

The ETP Unitholder Plaintiffs allege causes of action challenging the merger and the proxy statement/prospectus filed in connection with ~~GAAP, no amounts related~~the Sunoco Logistics Merger (the “ETP-SXL Merger Proxy”).

The ETP Unitholder Plaintiffs seek rescission of the Sunoco Logistics Merger or rescissory damages for ETP unitholders, as well as an award of costs and attorneys’ fees.

The ETP-SXL Defendants cannot predict the outcome of the Sunoco Logistics Merger Litigation or any lawsuits that might be filed subsequent to the ~~original verdict or~~date of this filing, nor can the ~~July 29, 2014 final judgment~~ETP-SXL Defendants predict the amount of time and expense that will be ~~recorded in our financial statements until~~required to resolve the ~~appeal process~~Sunoco Logistics Merger Litigation. The ETP-SXL Defendants believe the Sunoco Logistics Merger Litigation is ~~completed.~~without merit and intend to defend vigorously against it and any other actions challenging the Sunoco Logistics Merger.

Other Litigation and Contingencies

We or our subsidiaries are a party to various legal proceedings and/or regulatory proceedings incidental to our businesses. For each of these matters, we evaluate the merits of the case, our exposure to the matter, possible legal or settlement strategies, the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome and the availability of insurance coverage. If we determine that an unfavorable outcome of a particular matter is probable and can be estimated, we accrue the contingent obligation, as well as any expected insurance recoverable amounts related to the contingency. As of September 30, ~~2016~~2017 and December 31, ~~2015,~~2016, accruals of approximately ~~$56~~$66 million and ~~$40~~$77 million, respectively, were reflected on our consolidated balance sheets related to these contingent obligations. As new information becomes available, our estimates may change. The impact of these changes may have a significant effect on our results of operations in a single period.

The outcome of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty and there can be no assurance that the outcome of a particular matter will not result in the payment of amounts that have not been accrued for the matter. Furthermore, we may revise accrual

Table of Contents

amounts prior to resolution of a particular contingency based on changes in facts and circumstances or changes in the expected outcome. Currently, we are not able to estimate possible losses or a range of possible losses in excess of amounts accrued.

The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (“Ohio EPA”) has alleged that various environmental violations have occurred during construction of the Rover pipeline project. The alleged violations include inadvertent returns of drilling muds and fluids at horizontal directional drilling (“HDD”) locations in Ohio that affected waters of the State, storm water control violations, improper disposal of spent drilling mud containing diesel fuel residuals, and open burning. The alleged violations occurred from April to July, 2017. The Ohio EPA has proposed penalties of approximately $2.3 million in connection with the alleged violations and is seeking certain corrective actions. ETP is working with Ohio EPA to resolve the matter. The timing or outcome of this matter cannot be reasonably determined at this time; however, we do not expect there to be a material impact to our results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

In addition, on May 10, 2017, the FERC prohibited Rover from conducting HDD activities at 27 sites in Ohio. On July 31, 2017, the FERC issued an independent third party assessment of what led to the release at the Tuscarawas River site and what Rover can do to prevent reoccurrence once the HDD suspension is lifted. Rover has notified the FERC of its intention to implement the suggestions in the assessment and to implement additional voluntary protocols. On September 18, 2017, the FERC authorized Rover to resume HDD activities at the Tuscarawas River site and nine other river crossing sites. On October 20, 2017, the FERC authorized Rover to resume HDD activities at two additional sites.

On July 17, 2017, the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (“WVDEP”) issued a Cease and Desist order requiring Rover, among other things, to cease any land development activity in Doddridge and Tyler Counties. Under the order, Rover had 20 days to submit a corrective action plan and schedule for agency review. The order followed several notices of violation WVDEP issued to Rover alleging stormwater non-compliance. Rover is complying with the order and has already addressed many of the stormwater control issues. On August 9, 2017, WVDEP lifted the Cease and Desist requirement.

No amounts have been recorded in our September 30, ~~2016~~2017 or December 31, ~~2015~~2016 consolidated balance sheets for contingencies and current litigation, other than amounts disclosed herein.

~~Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. New England Gas Company.~~

On July 7, 2011, the Massachusetts Attorney General (“AG”) filed a regulatory complaint with the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities (“MDPU”) against New England Gas Company with respect to certain environmental cost recoveries. The AG is seeking a refund to New England Gas Company customers for alleged “excessive and imprudently incurred costs” related to legal fees associated with Southern Union’s environmental response activities. In the complaint, the AG requests that the MDPU initiate an investigation into the New England Gas Company’s collection and reconciliation of recoverable environmental costs including: (i) the prudence of any and all legal fees, totaling approximately $19 million, that were charged by the Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman firm and passed through the recovery mechanism since 2005, the year when a partner in the firm, the Southern Union former Vice Chairman, President and Chief Operating Officer, joined Southern Union’s management team; (ii) the prudence of any and all legal fees that were charged by the Bishop, London & Dodds firm and passed through the recovery mechanism since 2005, the period during which a member of the firm served as Southern Union’s Chief Ethics Officer; and (iii) the propriety and allocation of certain legal fees charged that were passed through the recovery mechanism that the AG contends only qualify for a lesser, 50%, level of recovery. Southern Union has filed its answer denying the allegations and moved to dismiss the complaint, in part on a theory of collateral estoppel. The hearing officer has deferred consideration of Southern Union’s motion to dismiss. The AG’s motion to be reimbursed expert and consultant costs by Southern Union of up to $150,000 was granted. By tariff, these costs are recoverable through rates charged to New England Gas Company customers. The hearing officer previously stayed discovery pending resolution of a dispute concerning the applicability of attorney-client privilege to legal billing invoices. The MDPU issued an interlocutory order on June 24, 2013 that lifted the stay, and discovery has resumed. Panhandle (as successor to Southern Union) believes it has complied with all applicable requirements regarding its filings for cost recovery and has not recorded any accrued liability; however, Panhandle will continue to assess its potential exposure for such cost recoveries as the matter progresses.

~~Compliance Orders from the New Mexico Environmental Department~~

Regency received a Notice of Violation from the New Mexico Environmental Department on September 23, 2015 for allegations of violations of New Mexico air regulations related to Jal #3. The Partnership has accrued $250,000 related to the claims and will continue to assess its potential exposure to the allegations as the matter progresses.

~~Lone Star NGL Fractionators Notice of Enforcement~~

Lone Star NGL Fractionators received a Notice of Enforcement from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality on August 28, 2015 for allegations of violations of Texas air regulations related to its Mont Belvieu Gas Plant. The Partnership has accrued $50,000 related to this claim. As of September 2016, the Agreed Order is in the approval process with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and includes a $21,000 Supplemental Environmental Project.

Environmental Matters

Our operations are subject to extensive federal, tribal, state and local environmental and safety laws and regulations that require expenditures to ensure compliance, including related to air emissions and wastewater discharges, at operating facilities

~~Table of Contents~~

and for remediation at current and former facilities as well as waste disposal sites. ~~Although we believe~~Historically, our environmental compliance costs have not had a material adverse effect on our results of operations are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations, risks of additional costs and liabilities are inherent in the business of transporting, storing, gathering, treating, compressing, blending and processing natural gas, natural gas liquids and other products. As a result,but there can be no assurance that ~~significant~~such costs ~~and liabilities~~ will not be ~~incurred.~~material in the future or that such future compliance with existing, amended or new legal requirements will not have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results. Costs of planning, designing, constructing and operating pipelines, plants and other facilities must incorporate compliance with environmental laws and regulations and safety standards. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations may result in the assessment of administrative, civil and criminal penalties, the imposition of investigatory, remedial and corrective action obligations, the issuance of injunctions in affected areas and the filing of federally authorized citizen suits. Contingent losses related to all significant known environmental matters have been accrued and/or separately disclosed. However, we may revise accrual amounts prior to resolution of a particular contingency based on changes in facts and circumstances or changes in the expected outcome.

Environmental exposures and liabilities are difficult to assess and estimate due to unknown factors such as the magnitude of possible contamination, the timing and extent of remediation, the determination of our liability in proportion to other parties, improvements in cleanup technologies and the extent to which environmental laws and regulations may change in the future. Although environmental costs may have a significant impact on the results of operations for any single period, we believe that such costs will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position.

Based on information available at this time and reviews undertaken to identify potential exposure, we believe the amount reserved for environmental matters is adequate to cover the potential exposure for cleanup costs.

In February 2017, we received letters from the DOJ and Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality notifying Sunoco Pipeline L.P. (“SPLP”) and Mid-Valley Pipeline Company (“Mid-Valley”) that enforcement actions were being pursued for three crude oil releases: (a) an estimated 550 barrels released from the Colmesneil-to-Chester pipeline in Tyler County, Texas (“Colmesneil”) operated and owned by SPLP in February of 2013; (b) an estimated 4,509 barrels released from the Longview-to-Mayersville pipeline in Caddo Parish, Louisiana (a/k/a Milepost 51.5) operated by SPLP and owned by Mid-Valley in October of 2014; and (c) an estimated 40 barrels released from the Wakita 4-inch gathering line in Oklahoma operated and owned by SPLP in January of 2015. In May of this year, we presented to the DOJ, EPA and Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality a summary of the emergency response and remedial efforts taken by SPLP after the releases occurred as well as operational changes instituted by SPLP to reduce the likelihood of future releases. In July, we had a follow-up

Table of Contents

meeting with the DOJ, EPA and Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality during which the agencies presented their initial demand for civil penalties and injunctive relief. In short, the DOJ and EPA proposed federal penalties totaling $7 million for the three releases along with a demand for injunctive relief, and Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality proposed a state penalty of approximately $1 million to resolve the Caddo Parish release. Neither Texas nor Oklahoma state agencies have joined the penalty discussions at this point. We are currently working on a counteroffer to the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality.

Environmental Remediation

Our subsidiaries are responsible for environmental remediation at certain sites, including the following:

Certain of our interstate pipelines conduct soil and groundwater remediation related to contamination from past uses of PCBs. PCB assessments are ongoing and, in some cases, our subsidiaries could potentially be held responsible for contamination caused by other parties.

Certain gathering and processing systems are responsible for soil and groundwater remediation related to releases of hydrocarbons.

Currently operating Sunoco, Inc. retail sites previously contributed to Sunoco LP in January 2016.

Legacy sites related to Sunoco, Inc., that are subject to environmental assessments, ~~include~~including formerly owned terminals and other logistics assets, retail sites that Sunoco, Inc. no longer operates, closed and/or sold refineries and other formerly owned sites.

Sunoco, Inc. is potentially subject to joint and several liability for the costs of remediation at sites at which it has been identified as a potentially responsible party (“PRP”). As of September 30, ~~2016,~~2017, Sunoco, Inc. had been named as a PRP at approximately 5044 identified or potentially identifiable “Superfund” sites under federal and/or comparable state law. Sunoco, Inc. is usually one of a number of companies identified as a PRP at a site. Sunoco, Inc. has reviewed the nature and extent of its involvement at each site and other relevant circumstances and, based upon Sunoco, Inc.’s purported nexus to the sites, believes that its potential liability associated with such sites will not be significant.

To the extent estimable, expected remediation costs are included in the amounts recorded for environmental matters in our consolidated balance sheets. In some circumstances, future costs cannot be reasonably estimated because remediation activities are undertaken as claims are made by customers and former customers. To the extent that an environmental remediation obligation is recorded by a subsidiary that applies regulatory accounting policies, amounts that are expected to be recoverable through tariffs or rates are recorded as regulatory assets on our consolidated balance sheets.

The table below reflects the amounts of accrued liabilities recorded in our consolidated balance sheets related to environmental matters that are considered to be probable and reasonably estimable. Currently, we are not able to estimate possible losses or a range of possible losses in excess of amounts accrued. Except for matters discussed above, we do not have any material environmental matters assessed as reasonably possible that would require disclosure in our consolidated financial statements.


	September 30, 2016		December 31, 2015		September 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
Current	$	42	$	41	$	28	$	26
Non-current	279		326		275		283
Total environmental liabilities	$	321	$	367	$	303	$	309

~~Table of Contents~~

In 2013, we established a wholly-owned captive insurance company to bear certain risks associated with environmental obligations related to certain sites that are no longer operating. The premiums paid to the captive insurance company include estimates for environmental claims that have been incurred but not reported, based on an actuarially determined fully developed claims expense estimate. In such cases, we accrue losses attributable to unasserted claims based on the discounted estimates that are used to develop the premiums paid to the captive insurance company.

During the three months ended September 30, ~~2016~~2017 and ~~2015,~~2016, Sunoco, Inc. recorded ~~$10~~$4 million and $9$10 million, respectively, of expenditures related to environmental cleanup programs. During the nine months ended September 30, ~~2016~~2017 and ~~2015,~~2016, Sunoco, Inc. recorded ~~$24~~$14 million and ~~$27~~$24 million, respectively, of expenditures related to environmental cleanup programs.

On December 2, 2010, Sunoco, Inc. entered an Asset Sale and Purchase Agreement to sell the Toledo Refinery to Toledo Refining Company LLC (“TRC”) wherein Sunoco, Inc. retained certain liabilities associated with the ~~pre-Closing~~pre-closing time period. On January 2, 2013, USEPA issued a Finding of Violation (“FOV”) to TRC and, on September 30, 2013, EPA issued ~~an NOV/~~a Notice

Table of Contents

of Violation (“NOV”)/ FOV to TRC alleging Clean Air Act violations. To date, EPA has not issued an FOV or NOV/FOV to Sunoco, Inc. directly but some of EPA’s claims relate to the time period that Sunoco, Inc. operated the refinery. Specifically, EPA has claimed that the refinery flares were not operated in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practice for minimizing emissions and/or in conformance with their design, and that Sunoco, Inc. submitted semi-annual compliance reports in 2010 and 2011 to the EPA that failed to include all of the information required by the regulations. EPA has proposed penalties in excess of $200,000 to resolve the allegations and discussions continue between the parties. The timing or outcome of this matter cannot be reasonably determined at this time, however, we do not expect there to be a material impact to our results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

Our pipeline operations are subject to regulation by the U.S. Department of Transportation under the PHMSA, pursuant to which the PHMSA has established requirements relating to the design, installation, testing, construction, operation, replacement and management of pipeline facilities. Moreover, the PHMSA, through the Office of Pipeline Safety, has promulgated a rule requiring pipeline operators to develop integrity management programs to comprehensively evaluate their pipelines, and take measures to protect pipeline segments located in what the rule refers to as “high consequence areas.” Activities under these integrity management programs involve the performance of internal pipeline inspections, pressure testing or other effective means to assess the integrity of these regulated pipeline segments, and the regulations require prompt action to address integrity issues raised by the assessment and analysis. Integrity testing and assessment of all of these assets will continue, and the potential exists that results of such testing and assessment could cause us to incur future capital and operating expenditures for repairs or upgrades deemed necessary to ensure the continued safe and reliable operation of our pipelines; however, no estimate can be made at this time of the likely range of such expenditures.

In January 2012, Sunoco Logistics experienced a release on its products pipeline in Wellington, Ohio. In connection with this release, the PHMSA issued a Corrective Action Order under which Sunoco Logistics is obligated to follow specific requirements in the investigation of the release and the repair and reactivation of the pipeline. Sunoco Logistics also entered into an Order on Consent with the EPA regarding the environmental remediation of the release site. All requirements of the Order on Consent with the EPA have been fulfilled and the Order has been satisfied and closed. Sunoco Logistics has also received a "No Further Action" approval from the Ohio EPA for all soil and groundwater remediation requirements. In May 2016, Sunoco Logistics received a proposed penalty from the EPA and U.S. Department of Justice associated with this release, and continues to work with the involved parties to bring this matter to closure. The timing and outcome of this matter cannot be reasonably determined at this time. However, Sunoco Logistics does not expect there to be a material impact to its results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

In June 2016, the PHMSA issued Notices of Probable Violation ("NOPV") and a proposed compliance order (“PCO”) in connection with alleged violations on Sunoco Logistics’ Texas crude oil pipeline system. The proposed penalties are in excess of $100,000, and Sunoco Logistics is currently in discussions with PHMSA to resolve these matters. The timing or outcome of these matters cannot be reasonably determined at this time, however, Sunoco Logistics does not expect there to be a material impact to its results of operations, cash flows, or financial position.

In July 2016, the PHMSA issued a NOPV and PCO in connection with inspection and maintenance activities related to a 2013 incident on Sunoco Logistics' crude oil pipeline near Wortham, Texas. The proposed penalties are in excess of $100,000, and Sunoco Logistics is currently in discussions with PHMSA to resolve these matters. The timing or outcome of these matters cannot be reasonably determined at this time, however, Sunoco Logistics does not expect there to be a material impact to its results of operations, cash flows, or financial position.

Our operations are also subject to the requirements of ~~the~~ OSHA, and comparable state laws that regulate the protection of the health and safety of employees. In addition, OSHA’s hazardous communication standard requires that information be maintained about hazardous materials used or produced in our operations and that this information be provided to employees,

~~Table of Contents~~

state and local government authorities and citizens. We believe that our past costs for OSHA required activities, including general industry standards, record keeping requirements, and monitoring of occupational exposure to regulated substances have not had a material adverse effect on our results of operations but there is no assurance that such costs will not be material in the future.


~~11.~~12.	DERIVATIVE ASSETS AND LIABILITIES

Commodity Price Risk

We are exposed to market risks related to the volatility of commodity prices. To manage the impact of volatility from these prices, we utilize various exchange-traded and OTC commodity financial instrument contracts. These contracts consist primarily of futures, swaps and options and are recorded at fair value in our consolidated balance sheets.

We use futures and basis swaps, designated as fair value hedges, to hedge our natural gas inventory stored in our Bammel storage facility. At hedge inception, we lock in a margin by purchasing gas in the spot market or off peak season and entering into a financial contract. Changes in the spreads between the forward natural gas prices and the physical inventory spot price result in unrealized gains or losses until the underlying physical gas is withdrawn and the related designated derivatives are settled. Once the gas is withdrawn and the designated derivatives are settled, the previously unrealized gains or losses associated with these positions are realized.

We use futures, swaps and options to hedge the sales price of natural gas we retain for fees in our intrastate transportation and storage segment and operational gas sales on our interstate transportation and storage segment. These contracts are not designated as hedges for accounting purposes.

We use NGL and crude derivative swap contracts to hedge forecasted sales of NGL and condensate equity volumes we retain for fees in our midstream segment whereby our subsidiaries generally gather and process natural gas on behalf of producers, sell the resulting residue gas and NGL volumes at market prices and remit to producers an agreed upon percentage of the proceeds based on an index price for the residue gas and NGL. These contracts are not designated as hedges for accounting purposes.

We use derivatives in our liquids transportation and services segment to manage our storage facilities and the purchase and sale of purity NGL. These contracts are not designated as hedges for accounting purposes.

~~Sunoco Logistics utilizes~~We utilize swaps, futures and other derivative instruments to mitigate the risk associated with market movements in the price of refined products and NGLs. These contracts are not designated as hedges for accounting purposes.

We use futures and swaps to achieve ratable pricing of crude oil purchases, to convert certain expected refined product sales to fixed or floating prices, to lock in margins for certain refined products and to lock in the price of a portion of natural gas purchases or sales and transportation costs in our retail marketing segment. These contracts are not designated as hedges for accounting purposes.

We use financial commodity derivatives to take advantage of market opportunities in our trading activities which complement our transportation and storage segment’s operations and are netted in cost of products sold in our consolidated statements of operations. We also have trading and marketing activities related to power and natural gas in our all other segment which are also netted in cost of products sold. As a result of our trading activities and the use of derivative financial instruments in our transportation and storage segment, the degree of earnings volatility that can occur may be significant, favorably or unfavorably, from period to period. We attempt to manage this volatility through the use of daily position and profit and loss reports provided to our risk oversight committee, which includes members of senior management, and the limits and authorizations set forth in our commodity risk management policy.

2322

Table of Contents

The following table details our outstanding commodity-related derivatives:


	September 30, 2016			December 31, 2015			September 30, 2017			December 31, 2016
	Notional Volume		Maturity	Notional Volume		Maturity	Notional Volume		Maturity	Notional Volume		Maturity
Mark-to-Market Derivatives
(Trading)
Natural Gas (MMBtu):
Fixed Swaps/Futures	1,262,500		2016-2017	(602,500	)	2016-2017	1,297,500		2017-2018	(682,500	)	2017
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX⁽¹⁾	60,102,500		2016-2017	(31,240,000	)	2016-2017	(15,810,000	)	2017-2019	2,242,500		2017
Options – Puts							13,000,000		2018	—		—
Power (Megawatt):
Forwards	419,824		2016-2017	357,092		2016-2017	665,040		2017-2018	391,880		2017-2018
Futures	99,247		2016-2017	(109,791	)	2016	(213,840	)	2017-2018	109,564		2017-2018
Options – Puts	(536,400	)	2016	260,534		2016	(280,800	)	2017-2018	(50,400	)	2017
Options – Calls	1,080,400		2016-2017	1,300,647		2016	545,600		2017-2018	186,400		2017
Crude (Bbls):
Futures	(656,000	)	2016-2017	(591,000	)	2016-2017
Crude (Bbls) – Futures							(160,000	)	2017	(617,000	)	2017
(Non-Trading)
Natural Gas (MMBtu):
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX	4,762,500		2016-2017	(6,522,500	)	2016-2017	67,500		2017-2020	10,750,000		2017-2018
Swing Swaps IFERC	13,072,500		2016-2017	71,340,000		2016-2017	91,897,500		2017-2019	(5,662,500	)	2017
Fixed Swaps/Futures	(35,962,500	)	2016-2018	(14,380,000	)	2016-2018	(20,220,000	)	2017-2019	(52,652,500	)	2017-2019
Forward Physical Contracts	(6,834,328	)	2016-2017	21,922,484		2016-2017	(140,937,993	)	2017-2018	(22,492,489	)	2017
Natural Gas Liquid (Bbls) – Forwards/Swaps	(13,519,200	)	2016-2017	(8,146,800	)	2016-2018	(4,647,000	)	2017-2019	(5,786,627	)	2017
Refined Products (Bbls) – Futures	(1,970,000	)	2016-2017	(993,000	)	2016-2017	—		—	(2,240,000	)	2017
Corn (Bushels) – Futures	—		—	1,185,000		2016
Fair Value Hedging Derivatives
(Non-Trading)
Natural Gas (MMBtu):
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX	(30,620,000	)	2016-2017	(37,555,000	)	2016	(41,102,500	)	2017	(36,370,000	)	2017
Fixed Swaps/Futures	(30,620,000	)	2016-2017	(37,555,000	)	2016	(41,102,500	)	2017	(36,370,000	)	2017
Hedged Item – Inventory	30,620,000		2016-2017	37,555,000		2016	41,102,500		2017	36,370,000		2017


⁽¹⁾	Includes aggregate amounts for open positions related to Houston Ship Channel, Waha Hub, NGPL TexOk, West Louisiana Zone and Henry Hub locations.

Interest Rate Risk

We are exposed to market risk for changes in interest rates. To maintain a cost effective capital structure, we borrow funds using a mix of fixed rate debt and variable rate debt. We also manage our interest rate exposure by utilizing interest rate swaps to achieve a desired mix of fixed and variable rate debt. We also utilize forward starting interest rate swaps to lock in the rate on a portion of our anticipated debt issuances.

2423

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes our interest rate swaps outstanding, none of which were designated as hedges for accounting purposes:

Term
Type⁽¹⁾
Notional Amount Outstanding
September 30, 2016 December 31, 2015
July 2016⁽²⁾⁽⁴⁾
Forward-starting to pay a fixed rate of 3.80% and receive a floating rate $ —
$ 200
July 2017⁽³⁾⁽⁴⁾
Forward-starting to pay a fixed rate of 3.90% and receive a floating rate 500
300
July 2018⁽³⁾
Forward-starting to pay a fixed rate of 4.00% and receive a floating rate 200
200
December 2018 Pay a floating rate based on a 3-month LIBOR and receive a fixed rate of 1.53% 1,200
1,200
March 2019 Pay a floating rate based on a 3-month LIBOR and receive a fixed rate of 1.42% 300
300
July 2019⁽³⁾
Forward-starting to pay a fixed rate of 3.25% and receive a floating rate 200
200



Term	Type⁽¹⁾	Notional Amount Outstanding
Term	Type⁽¹⁾	September 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
July 2017⁽²⁾	Forward-starting to pay a fixed rate of 3.90% and receive a floating rate	$	—	$	500
July 2018⁽²⁾	Forward-starting to pay a fixed rate of 3.76% and receive a floating rate	300		200
July 2019⁽²⁾	Forward-starting to pay a fixed rate of 3.64% and receive a floating rate	300		200
July 2020⁽²⁾	Forward-starting to pay a fixed rate of 3.52% and receive a floating rate	400		—
December 2018	Pay a floating rate based on a 3-month LIBOR and receive a fixed rate of 1.53%	1,200		1,200
March 2019	Pay a floating rate based on a 3-month LIBOR and receive a fixed rate of 1.42%	300		300


⁽¹⁾	Floating rates are based on 3-month LIBOR.


⁽²⁾	~~Represents the effective date. These forward-starting swaps have terms of 10 and 30 years with a mandatory termination date the same as the effective date.~~


⁽³⁾	Represents the effective date. These forward-starting swaps have terms of 30 years with a mandatory termination date the same as the effective date.


⁽⁴⁾	ETP previously had outstanding forward starting interest rate swaps, which were scheduled to expire in July 2016, with a total notional value of $200 million. In June 2016, ETP extended the expiration of those swaps to July 2017.

Credit Risk

Credit risk refers to the risk that a counterparty may default on its contractual obligations resulting in a loss to the Partnership. Credit policies have been approved and implemented to govern the Partnership’s portfolio of counterparties with the objective of mitigating credit losses. These policies establish guidelines, controls and limits to manage credit risk within approved tolerances by mandating an appropriate evaluation of the financial condition of existing and potential counterparties, monitoring agency credit ratings, and by implementing credit practices that limit exposure according to the risk profiles of the counterparties. Furthermore, the Partnership may, at times, require collateral under certain circumstances to mitigate credit risk as necessary. The Partnership also uses industry standard commercial agreements which allow for the netting of exposures associated with transactions executed under a single commercial agreement. Additionally, we utilize master netting agreements to offset credit exposure across multiple commercial agreements with a single counterparty or affiliated group of counterparties.

The Partnership’s counterparties consist of a diverse portfolio of customers across the energy industry, including petrochemical companies, commercial and industrials, oil and gas producers, municipalities, gas and electric utilities, midstream companies and independent power generators. Our overall exposure may be affected positively or negatively by macroeconomic or regulatory changes that impact our counterparties to one extent or another. Currently, management does not anticipate a material adverse effect in our financial position or results of operations as a consequence of counterparty non-performance.

The Partnership has maintenance margin deposits with certain counterparties in the OTC market, primarily independent system operators, and with clearing brokers. Payments on margin deposits are required when the value of a derivative exceeds our pre-established credit limit with the counterparty. Margin deposits are returned to us on or about the settlement date for non-exchange traded derivatives, and we exchange margin calls on a daily basis for exchange traded transactions. Since the margin calls are made daily with the exchange brokers, the fair value of the financial derivative instruments are deemed current and netted in deposits paid to vendors within other current assets in the consolidated balance sheets.

For financial instruments, failure of a counterparty to perform on a contract could result in our inability to realize amounts that have been recorded on our consolidated balance sheets and recognized in net income or other comprehensive income.

2524

Table of Contents

Derivative Summary

The following table provides a summary of our derivative assets and liabilities:


	Fair Value of Derivative Instruments										Fair Value of Derivative Instruments
	Asset Derivatives				Liability Derivatives						Asset Derivatives				Liability Derivatives
	September 30, 2016		December 31, 2015		September 30, 2016			December 31, 2015			September 30, 2017		December 31, 2016		September 30, 2017			December 31, 2016
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments:
Commodity derivatives (margin deposits)	$	—	$	38	$	(2	)	$	(3	)	$	7	$	—	$	—		$	(4	)
	—		38		(2		)	(3		)
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments:
Commodity derivatives (margin deposits)	115		353		(141		)	(306		)	222		338		(262		)	(416		)
Commodity derivatives	26		57		(46		)	(41		)	14		24		(10		)	(52		)
Interest rate derivatives	18		—		(375		)	(171		)	—		—		(210		)	(193		)
Embedded derivatives in ETP Preferred Units	—		—		(1		)	(5		)
Embedded derivatives in Preferred Units											—		—		—			(1		)
	159		410		(563		)	(523		)	236		362		(482		)	(662		)
Total derivatives	$	159	$	448	$	(565	)	$	(526	)	$	243	$	362	$	(482	)	$	(666	)

The following table presents the fair value of our recognized derivative assets and liabilities on a gross basis and amounts offset on the consolidated balance sheets that are subject to enforceable master netting arrangements or similar arrangements:


			Asset Derivatives						Liability Derivatives								Asset Derivatives						Liability Derivatives
		Balance Sheet Location	September 30, 2016			December 31, 2015			September 30, 2016			December 31, 2015				Balance Sheet Location	September 30, 2017			December 31, 2016			September 30, 2017			December 31, 2016
Derivatives without offsetting agreements		Derivative assets (liabilities)	$	18		$	—		$	(376	)	$	(176	)		Derivative assets (liabilities)	$	—		$	—		$	(210	)	$	(194	)
Derivatives in offsetting agreements:	Derivatives in offsetting agreements:														Derivatives in offsetting agreements:
OTC contracts		Derivative assets (liabilities)	26			57			(46		)	(41		)		Derivative assets (liabilities)	14			24			(10		)	(52		)
Broker cleared derivative contracts		Other current assets	115			391			(143		)	(309		)		Other current assets	229			338			(262		)	(420		)
Total gross derivatives	Total gross derivatives		159			448			(565		)	(526		)	Total gross derivatives		243			362			(482		)	(666		)
Offsetting agreements:	Offsetting agreements:														Offsetting agreements:
Counterparty netting		Derivative assets (liabilities)	(3		)	(17		)	3			17				Derivative assets (liabilities)	(10		)	(4		)	10			4
Payments on margin deposit		Other current assets	(115		)	(309		)	115			309				Other current assets	(220		)	(338		)	220			338
Total net derivatives	Total net derivatives		$	41		$	122		$	(447	)	$	(200	)	Total net derivatives		$	13		$	20		$	(252	)	$	(324	)

We disclose the non-exchange traded financial derivative instruments as price risk management assets and liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets at fair value with amounts classified as either current or long-term depending on the anticipated settlement date.

2625

Table of Contents

The following tables summarize the amounts recognized with respect to our derivative financial instruments:


	Change in Value Recognized in OCI on Derivatives (Effective Portion)								Location of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivatives	Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Income Representing Hedge Ineffectiveness and Amount Excluded from the Assessment of Effectiveness
	Three Months Ended September 30,				Nine Months Ended September 30,					Three Months Ended September 30,					Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2016		2015		2016		2015			2017		2016			2017		2016
Derivatives in cash flow hedging relationships:
Derivatives in fair value hedging relationships (including hedged item):
Commodity derivatives	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	1	Cost of products sold	$	2	$	(9	)	$	4	$	8
Total	$	—	$	—	$	—	$	1		$	2	$	(9	)	$	4	$	8

Location of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivatives Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Income Representing Hedge Ineffectiveness and Amount Excluded from the Assessment of Effectiveness
Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 2016 2015
Derivatives in fair value hedging relationships (including hedged item):
Commodity derivatives Cost of products sold $ (9 ) $ (1 ) $ 8
$ 7
Total $ (9 ) $ (1 ) $ 8
$ 7


	Location of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivatives	Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivatives												Location of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivatives	Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Income on Derivatives
		Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,							Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,
		2016			2015			2016			2015				2017			2016			2017			2016
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments:
Commodity derivatives – Trading	Cost of products sold	$	(8	)	$	(2	)	$	(24	)	$	(10	)	Cost of products sold	$	(5	)	$	(8	)	$	21		$	(24	)
Commodity derivatives – Non-trading	Cost of products sold	(14		)	48			(57		)	—			Cost of products sold	(42		)	(14		)	(44		)	(57		)
Interest rate derivatives	Losses on interest rate derivatives	(28		)	(64		)	(179		)	(14		)	Losses on interest rate derivatives	(8		)	(28		)	(28		)	(179		)
Embedded derivatives	Other, net	8			6			4			10			Other, net	—			8			1			4
Total		$	(42	)	$	(12	)	$	(256	)	$	(14	)		$	(55	)	$	(42	)	$	(50	)	$	(256	)


~~12.~~13.	RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

~~ETE has~~In June 2017, the Partnership acquired all of the publicly held PennTex common units through a tender offer and exercise of a limited call right, as further discussed in Note 9.

We previously had agreements with ~~subsidiaries to provide or receive various management and general and administrative services.~~ ETE ~~pays us~~ to provide services on its behalf and on behalf of other subsidiaries of ETE, which ~~includes~~included the reimbursement of various operating and general and administrative expenses incurred by us on behalf of ETE and its subsidiaries. These agreements expired in 2016.

The Partnership also has related party transactions with several of its equity method investees. In addition to commercial transactions, these transactions include the provision of certain management services and leases of certain assets.

~~Table of Contents~~

The following table summarizes the affiliate revenues on our consolidated statements of operations:

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 2016 2015
Affiliated revenues $ 63
$ 94
$ 270
$ 300



	Three Months Ended September 30,				Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2017		2016		2017		2016
Affiliated revenues	$	179	$	63	$	344	$	270

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes the related company balances on our consolidated balance sheets:

September 30, 2016 December 31, 2015
Accounts receivable from related companies:
ETE $ 31
$ 110
Sunoco LP 26
3
PES 8
10
FGT 13
13
Lake Charles LNG 41
36
Trans-Pecos Pipeline, LLC 1
29
Comanche Trail Pipeline, LLC —
22
Other 24
45
Total accounts receivable from related companies: $ 144
$ 268

Accounts payable to related companies:
ETE $ 6
$ 1
Sunoco LP 10
5
FGT 1
1
Lake Charles LNG 2
3
Other —
15
Total accounts payable to related companies: $ 19
$ 25

~~The following table summarizes the related company balances on our consolidated balance sheets:~~



	September 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
Accounts receivable from related companies:
ETE	$	—	$	22
ETP	484		—
Sunoco LP	192		96
FGT	15		15
Other	107		76
Total accounts receivable from related companies:	$	798	$	209

Accounts payable to related companies:
ETP	$	136	$	—
Sunoco LP	178		20
Other	—		23
Total accounts payable to related companies:	$	314	$	43


	September 30, 2016			December 31, 2015			September 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
Long-term notes receivable (payable) – related companies:
Sunoco LP	$	49		$	(233	)	$	85	$	87
Phillips 66	(83		)	—			—		(250		)
Net long-term notes receivable (payable) – related companies	$	(34	)	$	(233	)	$	85	$	(163	)


~~13.~~14.	REPORTABLE SEGMENTS

Our financial statements ~~currently~~ reflect the following reportable segments, which conduct their business in the United States, as follows:

•intrastate transportation and storage;

•interstate transportation and storage;

•midstream;

•liquids transportation and services;

•investment in ~~Sunoco Logistics;~~ETP; and

•all other.

As discussed in Note 1, Sunoco Logistics changed its name to ETP upon the completion of the Sunoco Logistics Merger. Accordingly, the reportable segment previously named “Investment in Sunoco Logistics” has been renamed “Investment in ETP.” For periods prior to the Sunoco Logistics Merger, this reportable segment reflects the consolidated results of Sunoco Logistics. For periods subsequent to the Sunoco Logistics Merger, this segment reflects the investments in ETP’s Class E, Class G and Class K units that continue to be held by the Partnership’s subsidiaries, which are accounted for under the equity method.

The Partnership previously presented its retail ~~marketing;~~marketing business as a separate reportable segment. Due to the transfer of the general partner interest of Sunoco LP from ETLP to ETE in 2015 and completion of the dropdown of remaining Retail Marketing interests from ETLP to Sunoco LP in March 2016, all of the Partnership’s retail marketing business has been deconsolidated. The only remaining retail marketing assets are the limited partner units of Sunoco LP owned by the Partnership. As of September 30, 2017, the Partnership owned 43.5 million Sunoco LP common units, representing 43.7% of Sunoco LP’s total outstanding common units. This equity method investment in Sunoco LP has now been aggregated into the all other segment. Consequently, the retail marketing business that was previously consolidated has also been aggregated in the all other segment for all periods presented.

2827

Table of Contents

•~~all other.~~

Intersegment and intrasegment transactions are generally based on transactions made at market-related rates. Consolidated revenues and expenses reflect the elimination of all material intercompany transactions.

Revenues from our intrastate transportation and storage segment are primarily reflected in natural gas sales and gathering, transportation and other fees. Revenues from our interstate transportation and storage segment are primarily reflected in gathering, transportation and other fees. Revenues from our midstream segment are primarily reflected in natural gas sales, NGL sales and gathering, transportation and other fees. Revenues from our liquids transportation and services segment are primarily reflected in NGL sales and gathering, transportation and other fees. Revenues from our investment in ~~Sunoco Logistics~~ETP segment are primarily reflected in crude sales. Revenues from our ~~retail marketing~~all other segment are primarily reflected in ~~refined product sales.~~other.

We report Segment Adjusted EBITDA as a measure of segment performance. We define Segment Adjusted EBITDA as earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, depletion, amortization and other non-cash items, such as non-cash compensation expense, gains and losses on disposals of assets, the allowance for equity funds used during construction, unrealized gains and losses on commodity risk management activities, non-cash impairment charges, losses on extinguishments of debt and other non-operating income or expense items. Unrealized gains and losses on commodity risk management activities include unrealized gains and losses on commodity derivatives and inventory fair value adjustments (excluding lower of cost or market adjustments). Segment Adjusted EBITDA reflects amounts for unconsolidated affiliates based on the Partnership’s proportionate ownership.

~~Table of Contents~~

The following tables present financial information by segment:


	Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,						Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2016			2015			2016			2015			2017			2016			2017			2016
Revenues:
Intrastate transportation and storage:
Revenues from external customers	$	583		$	477		$	1,457		$	1,504		$	729		$	583		$	2,196		$	1,457
Intersegment revenues	175			115			400			243			44			175			146			400
	758			592			1,857			1,747			773			758			2,342			1,857
Interstate transportation and storage:
Revenues from external customers	231			245			714			755			220			231			652			714
Intersegment revenues	5			3			15			12			4			5			14			15
	236			248			729			767			224			236			666			729
Midstream:
Revenues from external customers	587			539			1,804			2,055			639			582			1,873			1,799
Intersegment revenues	756			840			1,961			1,715			1,128			761			3,144			1,966
	1,343			1,379			3,765			3,770			1,767			1,343			5,017			3,765
Liquids transportation and services:
Revenues from external customers	1,094			783			3,022			2,378			1,790			1,099			4,664			3,027
Intersegment revenues	113			75			214			143			22			113			203			214
	1,207			858			3,236			2,521			1,812			1,212			4,867			3,241
Investment in Sunoco Logistics:
Revenues from external customers	2,154			2,379			6,133			8,026
Intersegment revenues	35			27			101			155
	2,189			2,406			6,234			8,181
Retail marketing:
Investment in ETP:
Revenues from external customers	—			1,362			—			11,701			22			2,154			4,216			6,133
Intersegment revenues	—			1			—			4			—			35			44			101
	—			1,363			—			11,705			22			2,189			4,260			6,234
All other:
Revenues from external customers	882			816			2,171			2,048			699			882			2,147			2,171
Intersegment revenues	74			160			350			391			19			74			138			350
	956			976			2,521			2,439			718			956			2,285			2,521
Eliminations	(1,158		)	(1,221		)	(3,041		)	(2,663		)	(1,217		)	(1,163		)	(3,689		)	(3,046		)
Total revenues	$	5,531		$	6,601		$	15,301		$	28,467		$	4,099		$	5,531		$	15,748		$	15,301

3028

Table of Contents


	Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,						Three Months Ended September 30,						Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2016			2015			2016			2015			2017			2016			2017			2016
Segment Adjusted EBITDA:
Intrastate transportation and storage	$	133		$	127		$	461		$	421		$	163		$	133		$	480		$	461
Interstate transportation and storage	278			286			848			872			273			278			800			848
Midstream	314			315			875			977			356			314			1,088			875
Liquids transportation and services	240			195			687			518			449			240			1,032			687
Investment in Sunoco Logistics	312			289			906			836
Retail marketing	83			195			208			464
Investment in ETP													182			312			724			906
All other	30			93			187			266			153			113			366			395
Total	1,390			1,500			4,172			4,354			1,576			1,390			4,490			4,172
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	(503		)	(471		)	(1,469		)	(1,451		)	(472		)	(503		)	(1,507		)	(1,469		)
Interest expense, net	(345		)	(333		)	(981		)	(979		)	(334		)	(345		)	(993		)	(981		)
Losses on interest rate derivatives	(28		)	(64		)	(179		)	(14		)	(8		)	(28		)	(28		)	(179		)
Non-cash unit-based compensation expense	(22		)	(16		)	(60		)	(59		)	(15		)	(22		)	(52		)	(60		)
Unrealized gains (losses) on commodity risk management activities	(15		)	47			(96		)	(72		)	(69		)	(15		)	29			(96		)
Inventory valuation adjustments	37			(134		)	143			16			—			37			2			143
Losses on extinguishments of debt	—			(10		)	—			(43		)
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates	(240		)	(350		)	(711		)	(711		)	(430		)	(240		)	(1,016		)	(711		)
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates	65			214			260			388			206			65			302			260
Impairment of investment in an unconsolidated affiliate	(308		)	—			(308		)	—			—			(308		)	—			(308		)
Other, net	43			32			84			51			69			43			143			84
Income before income tax benefit	$	74		$	415		$	855		$	1,480
Income before income tax (expense) benefit													$	523		$	74		$	1,370		$	855


	September 30, 2016		December 31, 2015		September 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
Assets:
Intrastate transportation and storage	$	5,072	$	4,882	$	5,179	$	5,164
Interstate transportation and storage	11,379		11,345		12,194		10,833
Midstream	17,740		17,111		19,781		18,011
Liquids transportation and services	10,159		7,235		12,553		11,296
Investment in Sunoco Logistics	17,255		15,423
Retail marketing	1,568		3,218
Investment in ETP					8,368		18,819
All other	4,754		5,959		6,092		6,068
Total assets	$	67,927	$	65,173	$	64,167	$	70,191

3129

Table of Contents

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION

AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

(Tabular dollar ~~and unit~~ amounts ~~except per unit data,~~ are in millions)

The following is a discussion of our historical consolidated financial condition and results of operations, and should be read in conjunction with (i) our historical consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes thereto included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q; (ii) ~~our~~Energy Transfer Partners, L.P.’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, ~~2015~~2016 filed with the SEC on February ~~29, 2016~~;24, 2017; and (iii) our management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations included in our ~~2015~~2016 Form 10-K. This discussion includes forward-looking statements that are subject to risk and uncertainties. Actual results may differ substantially from the statements we make in this section due to a number of factors that are discussed in “Part I – Item 1A. Risk Factors” of ~~our~~the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, ~~2015~~.2016.

References to “we,” “us,” “our,” the “Partnership” and ~~“ETP”~~“ETLP” shall mean Energy Transfer, ~~Partners, L.P.~~LP and its subsidiaries. See Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements for information related to the entity’s recent name change.

OVERVIEW

The primary activities and operating subsidiaries through which we conduct those activities are as follows:

Natural gas operations, including the following:

natural gas midstream and intrastate transportation and storage; and

interstate natural gas transportation and storage through ET Interstate and Panhandle. ET Interstate is the parent company of Transwestern, ETC FEP, ETC Tiger, CrossCountry, ETC MEP and ET Rover. Panhandle is the parent company of the Trunkline and Sea Robin transmission systems.

~~Liquids operations, including~~Crude oil and NGLs transportation, and acquisition and marketing activities, as well as NGL ~~transportation,~~ storage and fractionation services.

~~Product and crude oil transportation, terminalling services and acquisition and marketing activities through Sunoco Logistics.~~

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

ETP Senior Notes Redemption

~~Sunoco Retail to Sunoco LP~~Rover Contribution Agreement

In ~~March 2016,~~July 2017, ETP ~~contributed to Sunoco LP its remaining 68.42% interest in Sunoco, LLC~~announced that it had entered into a contribution agreement with a fund managed by Blackstone Energy Partners and ~~100%~~Blackstone Capital Partners (“Blackstone”), for the purchase by Blackstone of a 49.9% interest in the ~~legacy Sunoco, Inc. retail business~~holding company that owns 65% of the Rover pipeline (“Rover Holdco”). The agreement with Blackstone required Blackstone to contribute, at closing, funds to reimburse ETP for ~~$2.23 billion. Sunoco LP paid $2.20 billion~~its pro rata share of the Rover construction costs incurred by ETP through the closing date, along with the payment of additional amounts subject to certain adjustments. The transaction closed in ~~cash, including~~October 2017. As a ~~working capital adjustment,~~result of this closing, Rover Holdco is now owned 50.1% by ETP and ~~issued 5.7 million Sunoco LP~~49.9% by Blackstone.

West Texas Gulf Pipe Line Contribution

PennTex Tender Offer and Limited Call Right Exercise

In June 2017, ETP purchased all of the outstanding PennTex common units ~~to Retail Holdings,~~not previously owned by ETP for $20.00 per common unit in cash. ETP now owns all of the economic interests of PennTex, and PennTex common units are no longer publicly traded or listed on the NASDAQ.

Sunoco Logistics Merger

In April 2017, Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. and Sunoco Logistics completed the merger transaction (the “Sunoco Logistics Merger”) in which Sunoco Logistics acquired Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. in a unit-for-unit transaction. Under the terms of the

Table of Contents

transaction, the unitholders received 1.5 common units of Sunoco Logistics for each Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. common unit they owned. Under the terms of the merger agreement, Sunoco Logistics’ general partner was merged with and into ETP GP, with ETP GP surviving as an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of the Partnership. The transaction was effective January 1, 2016. In connection with this transaction, the Partnership deconsolidated the legacy Sunoco, Inc. retail business, including goodwill of $1.29 billion and intangible assets of $294 million. The results of Sunoco, LLC and the legacy Sunoco, Inc. retail business’ operations have not been presented as discontinued operations and Sunoco, Inc.’s retail business assets and liabilities have not been presented as held for sale in the Partnership’s consolidated financial statements.

~~Bakken Financing~~

~~In August 2016, ETP, Sunoco Logistics and Phillips 66 announced~~ETE. As referenced above, following the completion of the project-level financing of the Dakota Access Pipeline and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline projects (collectively, the “Bakken Pipeline”). The $2.50 billion credit facility is anticipated to provide substantially all of the remaining capital necessary to complete the projects. As of September 30, 2016, $1.10 billion was outstanding under this credit facility.Sunoco Logistics Merger, ETLP deconsolidated Sunoco Logistics.

Bakken Equity Sale

~~PennTex Acquisition~~

~~On November 1,~~Results of Operations

Segment Adjusted EBITDA, as reported for each segment in the table below, is analyzed for each segment in the section below titled “Segment Operating Results.” Total Segment Adjusted EBITDA, as presented below, is equal to the consolidated measure of Adjusted EBITDA, which is a non- GAAP measure used by industry analysts, investors, lenders and rating agencies to assess the financial performance and the operating results of the Partnership’s fundamental business activities and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitution for net income, income from operations, cash flows from operating activities or other GAAP measures. Our definition of total or consolidated Adjusted EBITDA is consistent with the definition of Segment Adjusted EBITDA above.

Table of Contents

Consolidated Results



	Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2017			2016			Change
Segment Adjusted EBITDA:
Intrastate transportation and storage	$	480		$	461		$	19
Interstate transportation and storage	800			848			(48		)
Midstream	1,088			875			213
Liquids transportation and services	1,032			687			345
Investment in ETP	724			906			(182		)
All other	366			395			(29		)
Total	4,490			4,172			318
Depreciation, depletion and amortization	(1,507		)	(1,469		)	(38		)
Interest expense, net	(993		)	(981		)	(12		)
Losses on interest rate derivatives	(28		)	(179		)	151
Non-cash unit-based compensation expense	(52		)	(60		)	8
Unrealized gains (losses) on commodity risk management activities	29			(96		)	125
Inventory valuation adjustments	2			143			(141		)
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates	(1,016		)	(711		)	(305		)
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates	302			260			42
Impairment of investment in an unconsolidated affiliate	—			(308		)	308
Other, net	143			84			59
Income before income tax expense (benefit )	1,370			855			515
Income tax (expense) benefit	(9		)	131			(140		)
Net income	$	1,361		$	986		$	375

Upon the completion of the Sunoco Logistics Merger, the Partnership deconsolidated ETP (formerly Sunoco Logistics). The Investment in ETP segment for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 includes consolidated results of Sunoco Logistics through the merger date in April 2017 and the Partnership’s equity method Investment in ETP for May through September 2017 due to its ownership of ETP Class E, Class G and Class K units. The Investment in ETP segment for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 ~~ETP acquired certain interests~~represents consolidated results of Sunoco Logistics.

Segment Adjusted EBITDA. Segment Adjusted EBITDA increased for the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to the same period last year primarily due to the Midstream and Liquids Transportation and Services segments. The increase in ~~PennTex from various parties for total consideration~~the Midstream segment was primarily due to (i) higher realized crude, NGL and natural gas prices, which resulted in an increase of ~~approximately $640~~$113 million in ~~ETP units and cash. Through this transaction, ETP acquired~~non-fee based margin, (ii) a ~~controlling financial interest~~$38 million increase in ~~PennTex, whose assets complement ETP’s existing midstream footprint~~non-fee based margin due to volume increases in the ~~region.~~Permian, partially offset by declines in the South Texas, North Texas, and Mid-Continent/Panhandle regions, (iii) an increase of $36 million in fee-based margin due to minimum volume commitments in the South Texas region, as well as volume increases in the Permian and Northeast regions, partially offset by declines in South Texas, North Texas and the Mid-Continent/Panhandle regions, and (iv) an increase of $57 million in fee-based margin due to recent acquisitions, include PennTex. These increases in the Midstream segment were partially offset by an increase of $17 million in operating expenses primarily due to recent acquisitions and a $18 million increase in selling, general and administrative expenses due to impacts from capitalized overhead, shared services allocation and insurance allocation, as well as the impact of recent acquisitions. The ~~assets~~increase in the Liquids Transportation and ~~liabilities assumed~~Services segment is primarily due to the DAPL pipeline being placed in-service in ~~this transaction will be~~June 2017, an increase of $55 million in fractionation and refinery services margin, primarily due to higher NGL volumes from most major producing regions, and higher volumes on our NGL pipelines and fractionators. The increase in the Intrastate Transportation and Storage segment was primarily due to a $63 million increase in natural gas sales and other and a $10 million increase due to higher realized gains from pipeline optimization activity due to more favorable market conditions; these increases were offset by a $44 million decrease from renegotiated transportation contract resulting in lower billed volumes and an $11 million decrease in storage margin due to the impacts of market price changes on storage gas and financial derivatives. The decrease in the Interstate Transportation and Storage segment was primarily due to lack of customer demand driven by weak spreads and mild weather; in addition, contract restructuring resulted in a $17 million decrease in revenues on the Tiger pipeline. The decrease in the Investment in ETP segment was primarily due to

Table of Contents

~~recorded at fair value as~~the deconsolidation of ETP (formerly Sunoco Logistics) upon the closing of the ~~acquisition date, and the initial measurement of fair value is not yet complete.~~

~~Sunoco Logistics’ Vitol Acquisition~~

~~In November 2016,~~ Sunoco Logistics ~~completed an acquisition from Vitol, Inc. (“Vitol”) of an integrated crude oil business in West Texas for $760 million plus working capital.~~Merger. The ~~acquisition provides Sunoco Logistics with an approximately 2 million barrel crude oil terminal in Midland, Texas, a crude oil gathering and mainline pipeline system~~decrease in the ~~Midland Basin, including~~All Other segment was primarily due to a ~~significant acreage dedication from an investment-grade Permian producer, and crude oil inventories~~$66 million decrease related to ~~Vitol's crude oil purchasing~~the termination of management fees paid by ETE that ended in 2016 and ~~marketing business~~an increase of $39 million in ~~West Texas. The acquisition also included the purchase of~~transaction related expenses, partially offset by a ~~50% interest~~$35 million increase in SunVit Pipeline LLC ("SunVit"), which increased Sunoco Logistics' overall ownership of SunVit to 100%. The assets and liabilities acquired will be recorded at fair value as of the acquisition date, and the initial fair value measurements are not yet complete.

~~Sunoco Logistics’ Permian Express Partners~~

~~Table of Contents~~

~~Results of Operations~~

~~Consolidated Results~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Segment Adjusted EBITDA:

Intrastate transportation and storage $ 133
$ 127
$ 6
$ 461
$ 421
$ 40
Interstate transportation and storage 278
286
(8 ) 848
872
(24 )
Midstream 314
315
(1 ) 875
977
(102 )
Liquids transportation and services 240
195
45
687
518
169
Investment in Sunoco Logistics 312
289
23
906
836
70
Retail marketing 83
195
(112 ) 208
464
(256 )
All other 30
93
(63 ) 187
266
(79 )
Total 1,390
1,500
(110 ) 4,172
4,354
(182 )
Depreciation, depletion and amortization (503 ) (471 ) (32 ) (1,469 ) (1,451 ) (18 )
Interest expense, net (345 ) (333 ) (12 ) (981 ) (979 ) (2 )
Losses on extinguishments of debt —
(10 ) 10
—
(43 ) 43
Losses on interest rate derivatives (28 ) (64 ) 36
(179 ) (14 ) (165 )
Non-cash unit-based compensation expense (22 ) (16 ) (6 ) (60 ) (59 ) (1 )
Unrealized gains (losses) on commodity risk management activities (15 ) 47
(62 ) (96 ) (72 ) (24 )
Inventory valuation adjustments 37
(134 ) 171
143
16
127
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates (240 ) (350 ) 110
(711 ) (711 ) —
Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates 65
214
(149 ) 260
388
(128 )
Impairment of investment in an unconsolidated affiliate (308 ) —
(308 ) (308 ) —
(308 )
Other, net 43
32
11
84
51
33
Income before income tax (expense) benefit 74
415

(341 )
855
1,480
(625 )
Income tax (expense) benefit 64
(22 ) 86
131
20
111
Net income $ 138
$ 393
$ (255 ) $ 986
$ 1,500
$ (514 )

~~See the detailed discussion of Segment~~ Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates due to our investments in PES and ~~Segment Operating Results.~~Sunoco LP and a $15 million increase from commodity trading activities.

Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization. Depreciation, depletion and amortization expense increased for the ~~three and~~ nine months ended September 30, ~~2016~~2017 compared to the same ~~periods~~period last year primarily due to ~~increases~~additional depreciation from assets recently placed in service ~~partially~~and recent acquisitions, offset by ~~decreases of $28 million and $172 million, respectively, related~~reduction due to the deconsolidation of Sunoco ~~LLC and~~Logistics in connection with the ~~legacy~~ Sunoco ~~Inc. retail business.~~Logistics Merger.

Losses on Interest Rate Derivatives. Losses on interest rate derivatives during the ~~three and~~ nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016 ~~and 2015 were primarily attributable~~resulted from decreases in forward interest rates, which caused our forward-starting swaps to ~~the impact on our forward starting swap locks from the downward shift~~change in ~~the forward LIBOR curve.~~value.

Unrealized Gains (Losses) on Commodity Risk Management Activities. ~~See discussion of the unrealized~~Unrealized gains ~~(losses)~~and losses on commodity risk management activities include unrealized amounts that are included in ~~“Segment Operating Results” below.~~cost of products sold. These amounts are not included in Segment Adjusted EBITDA; therefore, the unrealized losses are subtracted and the unrealized gains are added back to reconcile from total Segment Adjusted EBITDA to net income. For the nine months ended September 30, 2017 compared to the same period last year, the change in unrealized gains and losses on commodity risk management activities primarily reflected the following:

in our intrastate transportation and other segment, $8 million related to our natural gas storage activities due to the movement in market price of the physical gas and financial derivatives used to hedge that gas, $4 million related to retained fuel sales and storage segment, $4 million related to natural gas sales and other;

in our midstream segment, $20 million related to non-fee based margin;

in our liquids transportation and services segment, $51 million related to liquids marketing activities; and

in our all other segment, $33 million related to natural gas marketing activities.

Inventory Valuation Adjustments. Inventory valuation reserve adjustments were recorded for ~~the inventory associated with Sunoco Logistics’~~ crude oil, NGLs and refined products inventories as a result of commodity price changes during the respective periods.

~~Table of Contents~~

The three and nine months ended September 30, 2015 also reflected inventory valuation reserve adjustments of $4 million and $60 million, respectively, related to our retail marketing operations prior to our deconsolidation of these operations.

Adjusted EBITDA Related to Unconsolidated Affiliates and Equity in Earnings of Unconsolidated Affiliates. See additional information in “Supplemental Information on Unconsolidated Affiliates” ~~and “Segment Operation Results”~~ below.

~~Impairment of Investment in an Unconsolidated Affiliate.~~ During the three months ended September 30, 2016, the Partnership impaired its investment in MEP and recorded a non-cash impairment loss of $308 million based on commercial discussions with current and potential shippers on MEP regarding the outlook for long-term transportation contract rates.

Other, net. Includes amortization of regulatory assets and other income and expense amounts.

Income Tax ~~(Expense) Benefit.~~Expense (Benefit). The Partnership’s income tax expense included the impact of a one-time adjustment to deferred tax balances as a result of a change in apportionment and corresponding state tax rates resulting from the Sunoco Logistics Merger in April 2017, which resulted in incremental income tax expense of approximately $68 million during the period. In addition, for the three months ended September 30, 2017, the Partnership recognized a $154 million deferred tax gain resulting from internal restructuring among its subsidiaries that resulted in a change in tax status for one of the subsidiaries. The three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 also reflect increased income tax expense due to higher earnings among the Partnership’s consolidated corporate subsidiaries. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016, ~~and 2015 compared to~~ the ~~same periods last year, the Partnership recorded lower income tax expense, or higher~~Partnership’s income tax benefit primarily ~~due to lower earnings~~resulted from losses among the Partnership’s consolidated corporate subsidiaries.

3533

Table of Contents

Supplemental Information on Unconsolidated Affiliates

The following table presents financial information related to unconsolidated affiliates:


	Three Months Ended September 30,									Nine Months Ended September 30,									Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2016			2015			Change			2016			2015			Change			2017			2016			Change
Equity in earnings (losses) of unconsolidated affiliates:
Citrus	$	31		$	29		$	2		$	80		$	77		$	3		$	86		$	80		$	6
FEP	12			14			(2		)	38			41			(3		)	39			38			1
PES	(26		)	39			(65		)	(25		)	77			(102		)	5			(25		)	30
MEP	9			10			(1		)	31			33			(2		)	29			31			(2		)
HPC	8			9			(1		)	23			24			(1		)	17			23			(6		)
AmeriGas	(2		)	(2		)	—			15			2			13
Sunoco, LLC	—			(13		)	13			—			(13		)	13
Sunoco LP	16			117			(101		)	54			117			(63		)	(89		)	54			(143		)
ETP																			176			—			176
Other	17			11			6			44			30			14			39			59			(20		)
Total equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates	$	65		$	214		$	(149	)	$	260		$	388		$	(128	)	$	302		$	260		$	42

Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates⁽¹⁾:
Citrus	$	90		$	88		$	2		$	251		$	242		$	9		$	262		$	251		$	11
FEP	19			19			—			56			56			—			55			56			(1		)
PES	(19		)	46			(65		)	2			102			(100		)	31			2			29
MEP	22			23			(1		)	69			71			(2		)	66			69			(3		)
HPC	15			16			(1		)	45			46			(1		)	40			45			(5		)
Sunoco, LLC	—			53			(53		)	—			53			(53		)
Sunoco LP	83			81			2			208			81			127			211			208			3
ETP																			282			—			282
Other	30			24			6			80			60			20			69			80			(11		)
Total Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates	$	240		$	350		$	(110	)	$	711		$	711		$	—		$	1,016		$	711		$	305

Distributions received from unconsolidated affiliates:
Citrus	$	50		$	65		$	(15	)	$	112		$	145		$	(33	)	$	113		$	112		$	1
FEP	17			19			(2		)	47			51			(4		)	28			47			(19		)
AmeriGas	3			2			1			9			8			1
PES	—			15			(15		)	—			36			(36		)
MEP	17			20			(3		)	56			60			(4		)	106			56			50
HPC	13			14			(1		)	38			41			(3		)	22			38			(16		)
Sunoco LP	36			—			36			102			—			102			108			102			6
ETP																			312			—			312
Other	13			21			(8		)	40			41			(1		)	58			49			9
Total distributions received from unconsolidated affiliates	$	149		$	156		$	(7	)	$	404		$	382		$	22		$	747		$	404		$	343


⁽¹⁾	These amounts represent our proportionate share of the Adjusted EBITDA of our unconsolidated affiliates and are based on our equity in earnings or losses of our unconsolidated affiliates adjusted for our proportionate share of the unconsolidated affiliates’ interest, depreciation, depletion, amortization, non-cash items and taxes.

~~Table of Contents~~

~~Segment Operating Results~~

We evaluate segment performance based on Segment Adjusted EBITDA, which we believe is an important performance measure of the core profitability of our operations. This measure represents the basis of our internal financial reporting and is one of the performance measures used by senior management in deciding how to allocate capital resources among business segments.

~~The tables below identify the components of Segment Adjusted EBITDA, which is calculated as follows:~~

~~Gross margin, operating expenses,~~ ~~and~~ ~~selling, general and administrative expenses. These amounts represent the amounts included in our consolidated financial statements that are attributable to each segment.~~

~~Unrealized gains or losses on commodity risk management activities~~ ~~and~~ ~~inventory valuation adjustments~~. These are the unrealized amounts that are included in cost of products sold to calculate gross margin. These amounts are not included in Segment Adjusted EBITDA; therefore, the unrealized losses are added back and the unrealized gains are subtracted to calculate the segment measure.

~~Non-cash compensation expense~~. These amounts represent the total non-cash compensation recorded in operating expenses and selling, general and administrative expenses. This expense is not included in Segment Adjusted EBITDA and therefore is added back to calculate the segment measure.

~~Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates. These amounts represent our proportionate share of the Adjusted EBITDA of our unconsolidated affiliates. Amounts reflected are calculated consistently with our definition of Adjusted EBITDA.~~

~~Intrastate Transportation and Storage~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Natural gas transported (MMBtu/d) 8,088,132
8,308,105
(219,973 ) 8,171,539
8,594,960
(423,421 )
Revenues $ 758
$ 592
$ 166
$ 1,857
$ 1,747
$ 110
Cost of products sold 586
428
158
1,332
1,227
105
Gross margin 172
164
8
525
520
5
Unrealized (gains) losses on commodity risk management activities (7 ) (4 ) (3 ) 24
(3 ) 27
Operating expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (43 ) (43 ) —
(117 ) (121 ) 4
Selling, general and administrative expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (5 ) (6 ) 1
(17 ) (21 ) 4
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates 15
16
(1 ) 45
46
(1 )
Other 1
—
1
1
—
1
Segment Adjusted EBITDA $ 133
$ 127
$ 6
$ 461
$ 421
$ 40

~~Volumes~~. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same periods last year, transported volumes decreased primarily due to lower production volumes, primarily in the Barnett Shale region, partially offset by increased volumes related to significant new long-term transportation contracts.

~~Table of Contents~~

~~Gross Margin.~~ ~~The components of our intrastate transportation and storage segment gross margin were as follows:~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Transportation fees $ 122
$ 123
$ (1 ) $ 381
$ 378
$ 3
Natural gas sales and other 26
21
5
81
72
9
Retained fuel revenues 14
16
(2 ) 34
46
(12 )
Storage margin, including fees 10
4
6
29
24
5
Total gross margin $ 172
$ 164
$ 8
$ 525
$ 520
$ 5

~~Segment Adjusted EBITDA.~~ For the three months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to our intrastate transportation and storage segment increased due to the net impacts of the following:

~~a decrease of $1 million in transportation fees due to lower throughput volumes;~~

an increase of $6 million in natural gas sales (excluding changes in unrealized losses of $1 million) and other primarily due to higher realized gains from the buying and selling of gas along our system;

~~a decrease of $2 million from the sale of retained fuel primarily due to lower throughput volumes;~~

an increase of $2 million in storage margin (excluding net changes in unrealized amounts of $4 million related to fair value inventory adjustments and unrealized gains and losses on derivatives), as discussed below; and

~~a decrease of $1 million in general and administrative expenses due to lower insurance costs, as well as lower allocated overhead costs due to shared services cost savings.~~

~~Segment Adjusted EBITDA.~~ For the nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to our intrastate transportation and storage segment increased due to the net impacts of the following:

~~an increase of $3 million in transportation fees despite lower throughput volumes, due to fees from renegotiated and newly initiated fixed fee contracts primarily on our Houston Pipeline system;~~

~~an increase of $14 million in natural gas sales (excluding changes in unrealized loss of $5 million) primarily due to higher realized gains from the buying and selling gas along our system;~~

a decrease of $9 million from the sale of retained fuel (excluding changes in unrealized losses of $3 million) primarily due to significantly lower market prices. The average spot price at the Houston Ship Channel location decreased 18% for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year;

an increase of $24 million in storage margin (excluding net changes in unrealized amounts of $19 million related to fair value inventory adjustments and unrealized gains and losses on derivatives), as discussed below;

~~a decrease of $4 million in operating expenses due to decreases in project related and office expenses; and~~

~~a decrease of $4 million in general and administrative expenses due to lower legal fees and insurance costs.~~

~~Table of Contents~~

~~Storage margin was comprised of the following:~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Withdrawals from storage natural gas inventory (MMBtu) 11,547,500
—
11,547,500
33,205,000
15,782,500
17,422,500
Realized margin on natural gas inventory transactions $ (3 ) $ (4 ) $ 1
$ 33
$ 8
$ 25
Fair value inventory adjustments (4 ) (16 ) 12
52
7
45
Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives 12
19
(7 ) (74 ) (10 ) (64 )
Margin recognized on natural gas inventory, including related derivatives 5
(1 ) 6
11
5
6
Revenues from fee-based storage 5
5
—
18
19
(1 )
Total storage margin $ 10
$ 4
$ 6
$ 29
$ 24
$ 5

~~The changes in storage margin were primarily driven by the timing of withdrawals and sales of natural gas from our Bammel storage cavern.~~

~~Interstate Transportation and Storage~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Natural gas transported (MMBtu/d) 5,385,679
5,903,285
(517,606 ) 5,527,607
6,187,218
(659,611 )
Natural gas sold (MMBtu/d) 19,478
19,171
307
19,398
16,894
2,504
Revenues $ 236
$ 248
$ (12 ) $ 729
$ 767
$ (38 )
Operating expenses, excluding non-cash compensation, amortization and accretion expenses (76 ) (78 ) 2
(223 ) (221 ) (2 )
Selling, general and administrative expenses, excluding non-cash compensation, amortization and accretion expenses (13 ) (14 ) 1
(36 ) (43 ) 7
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates 131
130
1
376
369
7
Other —
—
—
2
—
2
Segment Adjusted EBITDA $ 278
$ 286
$ (8 ) $ 848
$ 872
$ (24 )

~~Volumes.~~ For the three months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, transported volumes decreased 346,817 MMBtu/d on the Trunkline pipeline primarily due to lower utilization resulting from lower customer demand, a decrease of 115,926 MMBtu/d on the Sea Robin pipeline due to reduced supply as a result of producer system maintenance and overall lower production, and a decrease of 107,178 MMBtu/d on the Transwestern pipeline due to lower customer demand in the West and San Juan areas, partially offset by opportunities in the Texas Intrastate markets.

Transported volumes for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year decreased 491,518 MMBtu/d on the Trunkline pipeline due to the transfer of one of the pipelines at Trunkline which was repurposed from natural gas service to crude oil service and lower utilization resulting from lower customer demand, and a decrease of 78,843 MMBtu/d on the Sea Robin pipeline due to reduced supply as a result of producer system maintenance and overall lower production.

~~Segment Adjusted EBITDA.~~ For the three months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to our interstate transportation and storage segment decreased due to the net effect of the following:

a decrease of $9 million in revenues due to contract restructuring on the Tiger pipeline, a decrease of $6 million due to lower rates on the Panhandle, Trunkline and Transwestern pipelines due to weak spreads, and a decrease of $3 million on the Sea

~~Table of Contents~~

~~Robin pipeline due to declines in production and third party maintenance.~~These decreases were partially offset by higher reservation revenues on the Transwestern pipeline of $4 million from a growth project and higher parking revenues of $2 million, primarily on the Panhandle pipeline; partially offset by

~~a decrease of $2 million in operating expenses primarily due to lower maintenance projects and lower allocated costs; and~~

~~a decrease of $1 million in selling, general and administrative expenses primarily due to insurance proceeds received in 2016 and lower allocated costs.~~

~~Segment Adjusted EBITDA.~~ For the nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to our interstate transportation and storage segment decreased due to the net effects of the following:

a decrease of $17 million in revenues due to contract restructuring on the Tiger pipeline, a decrease of $14 million due to the transfer of one of the Trunkline pipelines which was repurposed from natural gas service to crude oil service, a decrease of $11 million due to the expiration of a transportation rate schedule on the Transwestern pipeline, a decrease of $10 million due to lower reservation revenues on the Panhandle and Trunkline pipelines from capacity sold at lower rates and lower sales of capacity in the Phoenix area on the Transwestern pipeline, and a decrease of $8 million on the Sea Robin pipeline due to declines in production and third party maintenance. These decreases were partially offset by higher reservation revenues on the Transwestern pipeline of $16 million from sales of capacity in the East and West, primarily associated with a growth project, and higher parking revenues of $8 million, primarily on the Panhandle and Trunkline pipelines; partially offset by

an increase of $2 million in overall operating expenses primarily due to the prior period credit and settlement of ad valorem taxes in 2015 of $5 million, partially offset by lower maintenance project costs of $2 million due to scope and level of activity; and

a decrease of $7 million in overall selling, general and administrative expenses primarily due to $4 million in lower allocated costs and $3 million associated with insurance proceeds and a refund of franchise taxes.

~~Midstream~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Gathered volumes (MMBtu/d) 9,675,003
10,384,106
(709,103 ) 9,853,502
9,957,494
(103,992 )
NGLs produced (Bbls/d) 420,877
413,426
7,451
440,124
393,480
46,644
Equity NGLs (Bbls/d) 34,341
26,296
8,045
31,847
28,175
3,672
Revenues $ 1,343
$ 1,379
$ (36 ) $ 3,765
$ 3,770
$ (5 )
Cost of products sold 867
915
(48 ) 2,415
2,423
(8 )
Gross margin 476
464
12
1,350
1,347
3
Unrealized losses on commodity risk management activities —
—
—
—
82
(82 )
Operating expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (153 ) (148 ) (5 ) (453 ) (433 ) (20 )
Selling, general and administrative expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (17 ) (9 ) (8 ) (42 ) (36 ) (6 )
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates 7
6
1
19
14
5
Other 1
2
(1 ) 1
3
(2 )
Segment Adjusted EBITDA $ 314
$ 315
$ (1 ) $ 875
$ 977
$ (102 )

~~Volumes.~~ Gathered volumes decreased during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same periods last year primarily due to declines in the South Texas, North Texas, and Mid-Continent/Panhandle regions. NGL production increased for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same periods last year due to increased gathering and processing capacities in the Permian and Cotton Valley regions, partially offset by declines in the South Texas, North Texas, and Mid-Continent/Panhandle regions.

~~Table of Contents~~

~~Gross Margin. The components of our midstream segment gross margin were as follows:~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Gathering and processing fee-based revenues $ 393
$ 418
$ (25 ) $ 1,177
$ 1,182
$ (5 )
Non fee-based contracts and processing 83
46
37
173
165
8
Total gross margin $ 476
$ 464
$ 12
$ 1,350
$ 1,347
$ 3

~~Segment Adjusted EBITDA.~~ ~~For the three months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to our midstream segment decreased due to the net effects of the following:~~

an increase of $27 million in non-fee based margin due to volume increases in the Permian region, partially offset by volume declines in the South Texas, North Texas, and Mid-Continent/Panhandle regions; and

~~an increase of $10 million in non-fee based margins due to higher crude oil and NGL prices; offset by~~

a decrease of $25 million in fee-based margin due to volume declines in the South Texas, North Texas, and Mid-Continent/Panhandle regions, partially offset by increased gathering and processing volumes in the Permian and Cotton Valley regions; and

an increase in general and administrative expenses of $8 million primarily due to an increase of $3 million in insurance allocation from corporate, a decrease of $3 million in capitalized overhead, and an increase of $2 million in legal expenses.

~~Segment Adjusted EBITDA.~~ ~~For the nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to our midstream segment decreased due to the net effects of the following:~~

~~a decrease of $14 million in non-fee based margins due to lower natural gas prices and a $18 million decrease in non-fee based margins due to lower crude oil and NGL prices;~~

a decrease of $5 million in fee-based margin due to volume declines in the South Texas, North Texas, and Mid-Continent/Panhandle regions, partially offset by increased gathering and processing volumes in the Permian and Cotton Valley regions;

~~a decrease in gross margin of $85 million due to lower benefit from settled derivatives used to hedge commodity margins; and~~

an increase in operating expenses of $20 million primarily due to the King Ranch acquisition in the second quarter of 2015 and assets recently placed in service in the Permian and Eagle Ford regions; partially offset by

an increase of $39 million in non-fee based margin due to volume increases in the Permian region, partially offset by volume declines in the South Texas, North Texas, and Mid-Continent/Panhandle regions.

~~Table of Contents~~

~~Liquids Transportation and Services~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Liquids transportation volumes (Bbls/d) 647,018
509,894
137,124
612,815
486,041
126,774
NGL fractionation volumes (Bbls/d) 338,237
228,695
109,542
349,986
231,161
118,825
Revenues $ 1,207
$ 858
$ 349
$ 3,236
$ 2,521
$ 715
Cost of products sold 927
615
312
2,438
1,882
556
Gross margin 280
243
37
798
639
159
Unrealized (gains) losses on commodity risk management activities 5
(4 ) 9
20
—
20
Operating expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (43 ) (40 ) (3 ) (121 ) (114 ) (7 )
Selling, general and administrative expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (2 ) (4 ) 2
(12 ) (12 ) —
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates —
—
—
2
5
(3 )
Segment Adjusted EBITDA $ 240
$ 195
$ 45
$ 687
$ 518
$ 169

~~Volumes.~~ For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same periods last year, NGL transportation volumes increased in all major producing regions, including the Permian, North Texas, Southeast Texas, Eagle Ford, and Louisiana. Our crude pipeline, originating in Nederland and delivering into Lake Charles, also began transporting volumes in April 2016, and transported approximately 69,000 Bbls/d and 42,000 Bbls/d during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016, respectively.

Average daily fractionated volumes increased for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same periods last year due to the ramp-up of our third 100,000 Bbls/d fractionator at Mont Belvieu, Texas, which was commissioned in late December 2015, as well as increased producer volumes, as mentioned above.

~~Gross Margin.~~ ~~The components of our liquids transportation and services segment gross margin were as follows:~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Transportation margin $ 124
$ 109
$ 15
$ 355
$ 289
$ 66
Processing and fractionation margin 103
76
27
296
217
79
Storage margin 50
41
9
148
124
24
Other margin 3
17
(14 ) (1 ) 9
(10 )
Total gross margin $ 280
$ 243
$ 37
$ 798
$ 639
$ 159

~~Segment Adjusted EBITDA.~~ For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to our liquids transportation and services segment increased due to the net impacts of the following:

~~increases in transportation fees of $15 million and $66 million, respectively, primarily due to higher volumes transported out of the Permian and North Texas regions;~~

increases of $27 million and$79 million, respectively, in processing and fractionation margin (excluding changes in unrealized gains of $1 million for the three month period and unrealized losses of $2 million for the nine month period) primarily due to the ramp-up of our third 100,000 Bbls/d fractionator at Mont Belvieu, Texas, along with higher producer volumes, primarily from West Texas. Additionally, the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 also reflect additional increases of $1 million and $19 million, respectively, from the commissioning of the Mariner South LPG export project during February 2015. Margin associated with our off-gas fractionator in Geismar, Louisiana decreased by $5 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 as NGL and olefin market prices decreased significantly for the comparable periods;

~~Table of Contents~~

increases in storage margin of $9 million and $24 million, respectively, partially due to an increase in demand for leased storage capacity as a result of favorable market conditions, which increased fee-based storage revenues by $2 million and $7 million, respectively. The remainder of the storage margin increases were primarily due to increases in throughput fees, as shuttle volumes increased for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 by 9% and 24%, respectively;

a decrease of $6 million and an increase of $8 million, respectively, in other margin (excluding increases in unrealized losses of $9 million and $18 million, respectively) primarily due to fluctuating optimization opportunities at our Mont Belvieu facility; and

~~increases in operating expenses of $3 million and $7 million, respectively, primarily due to increased costs associated with our third fractionator at Mont Belvieu.~~

~~Investment in Sunoco Logistics~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Revenues $ 2,189
$ 2,406
$ (217 ) $ 6,234
$ 8,181
$ (1,947 )
Cost of products sold 1,818
2,144
(326 ) 5,116
7,240
(2,124 )
Gross margin 371
262
109
1,118
941
177
Unrealized (gains) losses on commodity risk management activities 16
(31 ) 47
33
(9 ) 42
Operating expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (38 ) (40 ) 2
(90 ) (116 ) 26
Selling, general and administrative expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (25 ) (23 ) (2 ) (72 ) (68 ) (4 )
Inventory valuation adjustments (37 ) 103
(140 ) (143 ) 44
(187 )
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates 25
18
7
60
44
16
Segment Adjusted EBITDA $ 312
$ 289
$ 23
$ 906
$ 836
$ 70

~~Segment Adjusted EBITDA.~~ ~~For the three months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to Sunoco Logistics increased due to the following:~~

an increase of $11 million from Sunoco Logistics’ NGLs operations, primarily attributable to increased volumes and fees from Sunoco Logistics’ Mariner NGLs projects of $23 million, which includes Sunoco Logistics’ NGLs pipelines and Marcus Hook and Nederland facilities; and

an increase of $26 million from Sunoco Logistics’ refined products operations, primarily due to improved operating results from Sunoco Logistics’ refined products pipelines of $11 million, which benefited from higher volumes on Sunoco Logistics’ Allegheny Access pipeline, and higher results from Sunoco Logistics’ refined products acquisition and marketing activities of $10 million. Improved contributions from joint venture interests of $3 million and Sunoco Logistics’ refined products terminals of $2 million also contributed to the increase; offset by

a decrease of $14 million from Sunoco Logistics’ crude oil operations, primarily due to lower operating results from Sunoco Logistics’ crude oil acquisition and marketing activities of $38 million, which includes transportation and storage fees related to Sunoco Logistics’ crude oil pipelines and terminal facilities, resulting from lower crude oil differentials compared to the prior year period. This decrease was partially offset by improved results from Sunoco Logistics’ crude oil pipelines of $21 million which benefited from the Delaware Basin Extension and Permian Longview and Louisiana Extension pipelines that commenced operations in the third quarter 2016. Higher contributions from joint venture interests of $4 million also contributed to the offset.

~~For the nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same period last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to Sunoco Logistics increased due to the net impacts of the following:~~

an increase of $63 million from Sunoco Logistics’ refined products operations, primarily due to improved operating results from Sunoco Logistics’ refined products pipelines of $29 million, which benefited from higher volumes on Sunoco Logistics’ Allegheny Access pipeline, and higher results from Sunoco Logistics’ refined products acquisition and marketing activities

~~Table of Contents~~

of $20 million. Higher earnings attributable to Sunoco Logistics’ refined products terminals of $7 million and improved contributions from joint venture interests of $7 million also contributed to the increase;

an increase of $6 million from Sunoco Logistics’ NGLs operations, primarily due to increased volumes and fees from Sunoco Logistics’ Mariner NGLs projects of $73 million, which includes Sunoco Logistics’ NGLs pipelines and Marcus Hook and Nederland facilities. These factors were largely offset by lower operating results from Sunoco Logistics’ NGLs acquisition and marketing activities of $66 million; and

an increase of $1 million from Sunoco Logistics’ crude oil operations, primarily due to improved results from Sunoco Logistics’ crude oil pipelines of $116 million which benefited from the Permian Express 2 pipeline that commenced operations in third quarter 2015 and the Delaware Basin Extension and Permian Longview and Louisiana Extension pipelines that commenced operations in the third quarter 2016. Higher results from Sunoco Logistics’ crude oil terminals of $20 million, largely related to Sunoco Logistics’ Nederland facility, and improved contributions from joint venture interests of $9 million also contributed to the increase. These positive factors were largely offset by a decrease in operating results from Sunoco Logistics’ crude oil acquisition and marketing activities of $140 million, which includes transportation and storage fees related to Sunoco Logistics’ crude oil pipelines and terminal facilities, due to lower crude oil differentials and decreased volumes.

~~Retail Marketing~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Revenues $ —
$ 1,363
$ (1,363 ) $ —
$ 11,705
$ (11,705 )
Cost of products sold —
1,149
(1,149 ) —
10,519
(10,519 )
Gross margin —
214
(214 ) —
1,186
(1,186 )
Unrealized (gains) losses on commodity risk management activities —
(1 ) 1
—
2
(2 )
Operating expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense —
(149 ) 149
—
(701 ) 701
Selling, general and administrative expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense —
(8 ) 8
—
(99 ) 99
Inventory valuation adjustments —
4
(4 ) —
(60 ) 60
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates 83
135
(52 ) 208
136
72
Segment Adjusted EBITDA $ 83
$ 195
$ (112 ) $ 208
$ 464
$ (256 )

Due to the transfer of the general partnership interest of Sunoco LP from ETP to ETE in 2015 and completion of the dropdown of remaining Retail Marketing interests from ETP to Sunoco LP in March 2016, the Partnership’s retail marketing segment has been deconsolidated, and the segment results now reflect an equity method investment in limited partnership units of Sunoco LP. ~~As of September 30, 2016, the Partnership owns 43.5 million Sunoco LP common units, representing 45.6% of Sunoco LP’s total outstanding common units.~~

~~Table of Contents~~

~~All Other~~

Three Months Ended
September 30, Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015 Change 2016 2015 Change
Revenues $ 956
$ 976
$ (20 ) $ 2,521
$ 2,439
$ 82
Cost of products sold 877
855
22
2,263
2,107
156
Gross margin 79
121
(42 ) 258
332
(74 )
Unrealized (gains) losses on commodity risk management activities 1
(7 ) 8
19
—
19
Operating expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (20 ) (33 ) 13
(57 ) (79 ) 22
Selling, general and administrative expenses, excluding non-cash compensation expense (14 ) (33 ) 19
(60 ) (112 ) 52
Adjusted EBITDA related to unconsolidated affiliates (20 ) 47
(67 ) 1
103
(102 )
Other 23
23
—
71
71
—
Eliminations (19 ) (25 ) 6
(45 ) (49 ) 4
Segment Adjusted EBITDA $ 30
$ 93
$ (63 ) $ 187
$ 266
$ (79 )

~~Amounts reflected in our all other segment primarily include:~~

~~our natural gas marketing and compression operations;~~

~~a non-controlling interest in PES, comprising 33% of PES’ outstanding common units; and~~

~~our investment in Coal Handling, an entity that owns and operates end-user coal handling facilities.~~

For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to the same periods last year, Segment Adjusted EBITDA related to our all other segment decreased primarily due to decreases of $65 million and $102 million, respectively, in Adjusted EBITDA related to our investment in PES. The three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 also reflected lower gross margin of $42 million and $74 million, respectively, and lower operating expenses of $13 million and $22 million, respectively, primarily resulting from a decrease in revenue-generating horsepower and lower project revenue from our compression operations and unfavorable results from our natural resources operations, as reflected above, as well as lower selling, general and administrative expenses resulting from a decrease in transaction-related expenses.

~~LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES~~

~~Overview~~

Our ability to satisfy our obligations and pay distributions to our Unitholders will depend on our future performance, which will be subject to prevailing economic, financial, business and weather conditions, and other factors, many of which are beyond management’s control.

~~Table of Contents~~

~~We currently expect the following capital expenditures in 2016 to be within the following ranges:~~

Growth Maintenance
Low High Low High
Direct⁽¹⁾:

Intrastate transportation and storage⁽²⁾
$ 40
$ 50
$ 20
$ 25
Interstate transportation and storage⁽²⁾⁽³⁾
210
250
95
105
Midstream 1,225
1,275
100
110
Liquids transportation and services
NGL 875
900
20
25
Crude⁽²⁾⁽³⁾
300
325
—
—
All other (including eliminations) 90
100
40
45
Total direct capital expenditures $ 2,740
$ 2,900
$ 275
$ 310


⁽¹⁾	~~Direct capital expenditures exclude those funded by our publicly traded subsidiary.~~


⁽²⁾	~~Net of amounts forecasted to be financed at the asset level with non-recourse debt of approximately $1.17 billion.~~


⁽³⁾	~~Includes capital expenditures related to our proportionate ownership of the Bakken, Rover and Bayou Bridge pipeline projects.~~

~~We expect total direct growth capital expenditures of approximately $1.9 billion in 2017, net of amounts expected to be financed at the asset level.~~

The assets used in our natural gas and liquids operations, including pipelines, gathering systems and related facilities, are generally long-lived assets and do not require significant maintenance capital expenditures. Accordingly, we do not have any significant financial commitments for maintenance capital expenditures in our businesses. From time to time we experience increases in pipe costs due to a number of reasons, including but not limited to, delays from steel mills, limited selection of mills capable of producing large diameter pipe timely, higher steel prices and other factors beyond our control. However, we include these factors in our anticipated growth capital expenditures for each year.

We generally fund maintenance capital expenditures and distributions with cash flows from operating activities. We generally fund growth capital expenditures with proceeds of borrowings under credit facilities, long-term debt, the issuance of additional common units, dropdown proceeds or the monetization of non-core assets or a combination thereof.

~~Cash Flows~~

Our internally generated cash flows may change in the future due to a number of factors, some of which we cannot control. These include regulatory changes, the price for our products and services, the demand for such products and services, margin requirements resulting from significant changes in commodity prices, operational risks, the successful integration of our acquisitions, and other factors.

~~Operating Activities~~

Changes in cash flows from operating activities between periods primarily result from changes in earnings (as discussed in “Results of Operations” above), excluding the impacts of non-cash items and changes in operating assets and liabilities. Non-cash items include recurring non-cash expenses, such as depreciation, depletion and amortization expense and non-cash compensation expense. The increase in depreciation, depletion and amortization expense during the periods presented primarily resulted from construction and acquisitions of assets, while changes in non-cash unit-based compensation expense resulted from changes in the number of units granted and changes in the grant date fair value estimated for such grants. Cash flows from operating activities also differ from earnings as a result of non-cash charges that may not be recurring such as impairment charges and allowance for equity funds used during construction. The allowance for equity funds used during construction increases in periods when we have a significant amount of interstate pipeline construction in progress. Changes in operating assets and liabilities between periods result from factors such as the changes in the value of derivative assets and liabilities, timing of accounts receivable collection, payments on accounts payable, the timing of purchase and sales of inventories, and the timing of advances and deposits received from customers.

~~Nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to nine months ended September 30, 2015.~~ Cash provided by operating activities during 2016 was $2.47 billion compared to $1.99 billion for 2015 and net income was $986 million and $1.50 billion for 2016 and 2015, respectively. The difference between net income and cash provided by operating activities for the nine months

~~Table of Contents~~

~~ended September 30, 2016 primarily consisted of net changes in operating assets and liabilities of $172 million and non-cash items totaling $1.03 billion.~~

The non-cash activity in 2016 and 2015 consisted primarily of depreciation, depletion and amortization of $1.47 billion and $1.45 billion, respectively, non-cash compensation expense of $60 million and $59 million, respectively, and equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates of $260 million and $388 million, respectively. Non-cash activity in 2016 also included deferred income taxes of $154 million, impairment of investment in an unconsolidated affiliate of $308 million and inventory valuation adjustments of $143 million.

~~Cash paid for interest, net of interest capitalized, was $1.10 billion and $1.08 billion for the~~ ~~nine months ended September 30,~~ ~~2016 and 2015, respectively.~~

~~Capitalized interest was $148 million and $108 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, respectively.~~

~~Investing Activities~~

Cash flows from investing activities primarily consist of cash amounts paid in acquisitions, capital expenditures, cash distributions from our joint ventures, and cash proceeds from sales or contributions of assets or businesses. Changes in capital expenditures between periods primarily result from increases or decreases in our growth capital expenditures to fund our construction and expansion projects.

~~Nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to nine months ended September 30, 2015.~~ Cash provided by investing activities during 2016 was $3.64 billion compared to cash used in investing activities of $5.15 billion for 2015. Total capital expenditures (excluding the allowance for equity funds used during construction and net of contributions in aid of construction costs) for 2016 were $5.74 billion. This compares to total capital expenditures (excluding the allowance for equity funds used during construction and net of contributions in aid of construction costs) for 2015 of $6.50 billion. Additional detail related to our capital expenditures is provided in the table below. During 2016, we received $2.20 billion in cash related to the contribution of our Sunoco, Inc. retail business to Sunoco LP. During 2015, we received $980 million in cash related to the Bakken Pipeline Transaction and paid $604 million in cash for all other acquisitions.

~~The following is a summary of capital expenditures (net of contributions in aid of construction costs) for the nine months ended September 30, 2016:~~

Capital Expenditures Recorded During Period
Growth Maintenance Total
Direct⁽¹⁾:

Intrastate transportation and storage $ 34
$ 11
$ 45
Interstate transportation and storage⁽²⁾
138
55
193
Midstream 868
82
950
Liquids transportation and services⁽²⁾
1,460
14
1,474
All other (including eliminations) 66
32
98
Total direct capital expenditures 2,566
194
2,760
Indirect⁽¹⁾:

Investment in Sunoco Logistics 1,237
40
1,277
Total capital expenditures $ 3,803
$ 234
$ 4,037


⁽¹⁾	~~Indirect capital expenditures comprise those funded by our publicly traded subsidiary; all other capital expenditures are reflected as direct capital expenditures.~~


⁽²⁾	Includes capital expenditures related to the Bakken, Rover and Bayou Bridge pipeline projects, which includes $268 million related to Sunoco Logistics’ proportionate ownership in the Bakken and Bayou Bridge pipeline projects.

~~Financing Activities~~

Changes in cash flows from financing activities between periods primarily result from changes in the levels of borrowings and equity issuances, which are primarily used to fund our acquisitions and growth capital expenditures. Distributions to partners increased between the periods as a result of increases in the number of Common Units outstanding.

~~Table of Contents~~

~~Nine months ended September 30, 2016 compared to nine months ended September 30, 2015.~~ Cash used in financing activities during 2016 was $1.03 billion compared to cashed provided by financing activities of $3.35 billion for 2015. In 2016 and 2015, we received net proceeds from Common Unit offerings of $794 million and $1.03 billion, respectively. In 2016 and 2015, our subsidiaries received $1.31 billion and $1.27 billion, respectively, in net proceeds from the issuance of common units. During 2016, we had a net increase in our debt level of $1.76 billion compared to a net increase of $3.19 billion for 2015. We have paid distributions of $2.67 billion to our partners in 2016 compared to $2.25 billion in 2015. We have also paid distributions of $334 million to noncontrolling interests in 2016 compared to $247 million in 2015. In addition, we have received capital contributions of $187 million in cash from noncontrolling interests in 2016 compared to $583 million in 2015.

~~Description of Indebtedness~~

~~Our outstanding consolidated indebtedness was as follows:~~

September 30, 2016 December 31, 2015
ETP Senior Notes $ 19,439
$ 19,439
Transwestern Senior Notes 782
782
Panhandle Senior Notes 1,085
1,085
Sunoco, Inc. Senior Notes 465
465
Sunoco Logistics Senior Notes 5,350
4,975
Bakken Term Note 1,100
—
Revolving credit facilities and commercial paper:
ETP $3.75 billion Revolving Credit Facility due November 2019 ⁽¹⁾
1,584
1,362
Sunoco Logistics $2.50 billion Revolving Credit Facility due March 2020 ⁽²⁾
622
562
Other long-term debt 32
32
Unamortized premiums, net of discounts and fair value adjustments 126
158
Deferred debt issuance costs (187 ) (181 )
Total debt 30,398
28,679
Less: Current maturities of long-term debt 1,216
126
Long-term debt, less current maturities $ 29,182
$ 28,553

⁽¹⁾~~Includes $208 million of commercial paper outstanding at September 30, 2016.~~

⁽²⁾~~Includes $140 million of commercial paper product outstanding at September 30, 2016.~~

~~Credit Facilities and Commercial Paper~~

~~ETP Credit Facility~~ESTIMATES AND CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The ~~ETP Credit Facility allows for borrowings of up to $3.75 billion and expires in November 2019. The indebtedness under the ETP Credit Facility is unsecured, is~~Partnership’s critical accounting policies have not guaranteed by any of the Partnership’s subsidiaries and has equal rights to holders of our current and future unsecured debt. In September 2016, the Partnership initiated a commercial paper program under the borrowing limits established by the $3.75 billion ETP Credit Facility. As of September 30, 2016, the ETP Credit Facility had $1.58 billion of outstanding borrowings, which included $208 million of commercial paper.

~~Sunoco Logistics Credit Facilities~~

Sunoco Logistics maintains a $2.50 billion unsecured revolving credit agreement (the “Sunoco Logistics Credit Facility”), which matures in March 2020. The Sunoco Logistics Credit Facility contains an accordion feature, under which the total aggregate commitment may be increased to $3.25 billion under certain conditions. As of September 30, 2016, the Sunoco Logistics Credit Facility had $622 million of outstanding borrowings, which included $140 million of commercial paper.

~~Sunoco Logistics Senior Notes~~

~~Sunoco Logistics had $175 million of 6.125% senior notes which matured and were repaid in May 2016, using borrowings under the $2.50 billion Sunoco Logistics Credit Facility.~~

~~Table of Contents~~

~~Bakken Financing~~

In August 2016, ETP, Sunoco Logistics and Phillips 66 announced the completion of the project-level financing of the Dakota Access Pipeline and Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline projects (collectively, the “Bakken Pipeline”). The $2.50 billion credit facility is anticipated to provide substantially all of the remaining capital necessary to complete the projects. As of September 30, 2016, $1.10 billion was outstanding under this credit facility.

~~Covenants Related to Our Credit Agreements~~

~~We were in compliance with all requirements, tests, limitations, and covenants related to our credit agreements as of September 30, 2016.~~

~~CASH DISTRIBUTIONS~~

~~Cash Distributions Paid by ETP~~

We expect to use substantially all of our cash provided by operating and financing activities from the Operating Companies to provide distributions to our Unitholders. Under our Partnership Agreement, we will distribute to our partners within 45 days after the end of each calendar quarter, an amount equal to all of our Available Cash (as defined in our Partnership Agreement) for such quarter. Available Cash generally means, with respect to any quarter of the Partnership, all cash on hand at the end of such quarter less the amount of cash reserves established by the General Partner in its reasonable discretion that is necessary or appropriate to provide for future cash requirements. Our commitment to our Unitholders is to distribute the increase in our cash flow while maintaining prudent reserves for our operations.

~~Following are distributions declared and/or paid by us~~changed subsequent to ~~December 31, 2015~~:

~~The total amounts of distributions declared for the periods presented (all from Available Cash from our operating surplus and are shown~~those reported in ~~the period with respect to which they relate):~~

Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015
Common Units held by public⁽¹⁾
$ 1,607
$ 1,458
Common Units held by ETE 8
51
Class H Units held by ETE 263
186
General Partner interest held by ETE 24
23
Incentive distributions held by ETE 1,012
937
IDR relinquishments net of Class I Unit distributions (271 ) (83 )
Total distributions declared to the partners of ETP $ 2,643
$ 2,572


⁽¹⁾	~~Reflects the impact from Common Units issued in the Regency Merger.~~

~~Table of Contents~~

~~ETE has also previously agreed to relinquish additional incentive distributions. In the aggregate, including relinquishment agreed to in July and November 2016, ETE has agreed to relinquish~~ its ~~right to the following amounts of incentive distributions in future periods, including distributions on Class I Units.~~

Total Year
2016 (remainder) $ 138
2017 626
2018 138
2019 128
Each year beyond 2019 33

~~Cash Distributions Paid by Sunoco Logistics~~

~~Sunoco Logistics is required by its partnership agreement to distribute all cash on hand at the end of each quarter, less appropriate reserves determined by its general partner.~~

~~Following are distributions declared and/or paid by Sunoco Logistics subsequent to December 31, 2015:~~

The total amounts of Sunoco Logistics distributions declared for the periods presented were as follows (all from Available Cash from Sunoco Logistics’ operating surplus and are shown in the period with respect to which they relate):

Nine Months Ended
September 30,
2016 2015
Limited Partners:
Common units held by public $ 353
$ 245
Common units held by ETP 100
88
General Partner interest held by ETP 11
9
Incentive distributions held by ETP 289
198
IDR reduction (8 ) —
Total distributions declared $ 745
$ 540

~~Cash Distributions Paid by PennTex~~

~~PennTex is required by its partnership agreement to distribute a minimum quarterly distribution of $0.2750 per unit at the end of each quarter. For the three months ended~~ ~~September 30, 2016, PennTex declared a quarterly distribution of $0.2950 per unit to be paid on November 14, 2016 to unitholders of record as of November 7, 2016.~~

~~Table of Contents~~

~~ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK~~

~~The information contained in Item 3 updates, and should be read in conjunction with, information set forth in Part II, Item 7A in our~~ Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, ~~2015, in addition~~2016. The following information is provided to supplement the ~~accompanying notes and management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations presented in Items 1 and 2 of this Quarterly Report on~~ Form ~~10-Q. Our quantitative and qualitative~~10-K disclosures ~~about market risk are consistent with those discussed for the year ended December 31, 2015. Since~~ ~~December 31, 2015, there have been no material changes to our primary market risk exposures or how those exposures are managed.~~

~~Commodity Price Risk~~

~~The table below summarizes our commodity-related financial derivative instruments and fair values, including derivatives~~specifically related to ~~our consolidated subsidiaries, as well as~~impairment of long-lived assets and goodwill.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Goodwill. Long-lived assets are required to be tested for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the ~~effect of an assumed hypothetical 10% change in the underlying price~~carrying amount of the ~~commodity. Notional volumes are presented~~asset may not be recoverable. Goodwill and intangibles with indefinite lives must be tested for impairment annually or more frequently if events or changes in ~~MMBtu for natural gas, thousand megawatt for power, barrels for natural gas liquids, crude and refined products and bushels for corn. Dollar amounts are presented in millions.~~

September 30, 2016 December 31, 2015
Notional Volume Fair Value Asset (Liability) Effect of Hypothetical 10% Change Notional Volume Fair Value Asset (Liability) Effect of Hypothetical 10% Change
Mark-to-Market Derivatives
(Trading)
Natural Gas (MMBtu):
Fixed Swaps/Futures 1,262,500
$ —
$ —
(602,500 ) $ (1 ) $ —
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX⁽¹⁾
60,102,500
—
—
(31,240,000 ) (1 ) —
Power (Megawatt):
Forwards 419,824
2
1
357,092
—
2
Futures 99,247
—
—
(109,791 ) 2
—
Options – Puts (536,400 ) 1
—
260,534
—
—
Options – Calls 1,080,400
(2 ) 2
1,300,647
—
3
Crude (Bbls):
Futures (656,000 ) —
5
(591,000 ) 4
3
(Non-Trading)
Natural Gas (MMBtu):
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX 4,762,500
1
—
(6,522,500 ) —
—
Swing Swaps IFERC 13,072,500
—
2
71,340,000
(1 ) —
Fixed Swaps/Futures (35,962,500 ) —
11
(14,380,000 ) (1 ) 5
Forward Physical Contracts (6,834,328 ) 1
2
21,922,484
4
5
Natural Gas Liquid (Bbls) – Forwards/Swaps (13,519,200 ) (29 ) 42
(8,146,800 ) 10
13
Refined Products (Bbls) – Futures (1,970,000 ) (9 ) 20
(993,000 ) 9
5
Corn (Bushels) – Futures —
—
—
1,185,000
—
1
Fair Value Hedging Derivatives
(Non-Trading)
Natural Gas (MMBtu):
Basis Swaps IFERC/NYMEX (30,620,000 ) (1 ) —
(37,555,000 ) —
—
Fixed Swaps/Futures (30,620,000 ) (12 ) 10
(37,555,000 ) 73
9


⁽¹⁾circumstances indicate that the	~~Includes aggregate amounts for open positions related to Houston Ship Channel, Waha Hub, NGPL TexOk, West Louisiana Zone and Henry Hub locations.~~

The fair values of the commodity-related financial positions have been determined using independent third party prices, readily available market information and appropriate valuation techniques. Non-trading positions offset physical exposures to the cash

5134

Table of Contents

~~market; none of these offsetting physical exposures are included in~~related asset might be impaired. An impairment loss should be recognized only if the ~~above tables. Price-risk sensitivities were calculated by assuming a theoretical 10% change (increase or decrease) in price regardless of term or historical relationships between the contractual price~~carrying amount of the ~~instruments~~asset/goodwill is not recoverable and exceeds its fair value.

In order to test for recoverability when performing a quantitative impairment test, we must make estimates of projected cash flows related to the ~~underlying commodity price. Results~~asset, which include, but are ~~presented~~not limited to, assumptions about the use or disposition of the asset, estimated remaining life of the asset, and future expenditures necessary to maintain the asset’s existing service potential. In order to determine fair value, we make certain estimates and assumptions, including, among other things, changes in ~~absolute terms~~general economic conditions in regions in which our markets are located, the availability and ~~represent a potential gain or loss in net income or in other comprehensive income. In the event~~prices of ~~an actual 10% change in prompt month~~ natural gas, ~~prices,~~our ability to negotiate favorable sales agreements, the risks that natural gas exploration and production activities will not occur or be successful, our dependence on certain significant customers and producers of natural gas, and competition from other companies, including major energy producers. While we believe we have made reasonable assumptions to calculate the fair value, if future results are not consistent with our estimates, we could be exposed to future impairment losses that could be material to our results of operations.

The Partnership determined the fair value of ~~our total derivative portfolio may not change by 10% due to factors such as when~~its reporting units using a weighted combination of the ~~financial instrument settles~~discounted cash flow method and the ~~location to which the financial instrument is tied (i.e., basis swaps) and the relationship between prompt month and forward months.~~

~~Interest Rate Risk~~

~~As of~~ ~~September 30, 2016~~, we had $3.86 billion of floating rate debt outstanding. A hypothetical change of 100 basis points would result in a maximum potential change to interest expense of $39 million annually; however, our actual change in interest expense may be less in a given period due to interest rate floors included in our variable rate debt instruments. We manage a portion of our interest rate exposure by utilizing interest rate swaps, including forward-starting interest rate swaps to lock-in the rate on a portion of anticipated debt issuances.

~~The following table summarizes our interest rate swaps outstanding (dollars in millions), none of which are designated as hedges for accounting purposes:~~


⁽¹⁾	~~Floating rates are based on 3-month LIBOR.~~


⁽²⁾	~~Represents the effective date. These forward-starting swaps have terms of 10 and 30 years with a mandatory termination date the same as the effective date.~~


⁽³⁾	~~Represents the effective date. These forward-starting swaps have terms of 30 years with a mandatory termination date the same as the effective date.~~


⁽⁴⁾	ETP previously had outstanding forward starting interest rate swaps, which were scheduled to expire in July 2016, with a total notional value of $200 million. In June 2016, ETP extended the expiration of those swaps to July 2017.

~~A hypothetical change of 100 basis points in interest rates for these interest rate swaps would result in a net change in~~guideline company method. Determining the fair value of ~~interest rate derivatives~~a reporting unit requires judgment and ~~earnings (recognized~~the use of significant estimates and assumptions. Such estimates and assumptions include revenue growth rates, operating margins, weighted average costs of capital and future market conditions, among others. The Partnership believes the estimates and assumptions used in ~~gains~~our impairment assessments are reasonable and ~~losses~~based on ~~interest rate derivatives)~~available market information, but variations in any of ~~$253 million as of September 30, 2016. For~~ the ~~$1.50 billion of interest rate swaps whereby we pay a floating rate and receive a fixed rate, a hypothetical change of 100 basis points in interest rates would~~assumptions could result in ~~a net change in annual~~materially different calculations of fair value and determinations of whether or not an impairment is indicated. Under the discounted cash flow method, the Partnership determined fair value based on estimated future cash flows of ~~$43 million. For~~each reporting unit including estimates for capital expenditures, discounted to present value using the ~~forward-starting interest~~risk-adjusted industry rate, ~~swaps, a hypothetical change~~which reflect the overall level of ~~100 basis points in interest rates would not affect~~inherent risk of the reporting unit. Cash flow projections are derived from one year budgeted amounts and five year operating forecasts plus an estimate of later period cash flows, ~~until~~all of which are evaluated by management. Subsequent period cash flows are developed for each reporting unit using growth rates that management believes are reasonably likely to occur. Under the ~~swaps~~guideline company method, the Partnership determined the estimated fair value of each of our reporting units by applying valuation multiples of comparable publicly-traded companies to each reporting unit’s projected EBITDA and then averaging that estimate with similar historical calculations using a three year average. In addition, the Partnership estimated a reasonable control premium representing the incremental value that accrues to the majority owner from the opportunity to dictate the strategic and operational actions of the business.

One key assumption for the measurement of goodwill impairment is management’s estimate of future cash flows and EBITDA. These estimates are ~~settled.~~based on the annual budget for the upcoming year and forecasted amounts for multiple subsequent years. The annual budget process is typically completed near the annual goodwill impairment testing date, and management uses the most recent information for the annual impairment tests. The forecast is also subjected to a comprehensive update annually in conjunction with the annual budget process and is revised periodically to reflect new information and/or revised expectations. The estimates of future cash flows and EBITDA are subjective in nature and are subject to impacts from the business risks described in “Item 1A. Risk Factors.” Therefore, the actual results could differ significantly from the amounts used for goodwill impairment testing, and significant changes in fair value estimates could occur in a given period.

The goodwill impairments recorded by the Partnership during the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 represented all of the goodwill within the respective reporting units.

ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Item 3, Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk, has been omitted from this report pursuant to the reduced disclosure format permitted by General Instruction H to Form 10-Q.

ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We have established disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us, including our consolidated entities, in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms.

~~Table of Contents~~

Under the supervision and with the participation of senior management, including the Chief Executive Officer (“Principal Executive Officer”) and the Chief Financial Officer (“Principal Financial Officer”) of our General Partner, we evaluated our disclosure controls and procedures, as such term is defined under Rule 13a–15(e) promulgated under the Exchange Act. Based on this evaluation, the Principal Executive Officer and the Principal Financial Officer of our General Partner concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of September 30, ~~2016~~2017 to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the

Table of Contents

reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act (1) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and (2) is accumulated and communicated to management, including the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of our General Partner, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There have been no changes in our internal controls over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13(a)–15(f) or Rule 15d–15(f) of the Exchange Act) during the three months ended September 30, ~~2016~~2017 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.

~~Table of Contents~~

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

For information regarding legal proceedings, see ~~our~~the Partnership’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, ~~2015~~2016 and Note 1011 – Regulatory Matters, Commitments, Contingencies and Environmental Liabilities of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of Energy Transfer, ~~Partners, L.P.~~LP and Subsidiaries included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2017.

The EPA has brought a federal court action against SPLP and Mid-Valley for violations of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”). The United States’ complaint alleges that SPLP and Mid-Valley violated Sections 311(b)(7)(A) and 301(a) of the CWA when, during three separate releases, pipelines operated by SPLP and owned by SPLP or Mid-Valley Pipeline Company discharged oil. See 33 U.S.C. §§ 1311(a) and 1321(b)(7)(A). In particular, the three releases at issue occurred (1) on February 23, 2013, in Tyler County, Texas, when a reported 550 barrels of oil were discharged; (2) on October 13, 2014, in Caddo Parish, Louisiana, when a reported 4,509 barrels of oil were discharged; and (3) on January 20, 2015, in Grant County, Oklahoma, when a reported 40 barrels of oil were discharged. Potential fines from the DOJ are $7 million and from the State of Louisiana are approximately $1 million. The Partnership is currently in discussions to resolve these matters.

Mont Belvieu received a Notice of Enforcement (“NOE”) with an Agreed Order from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and has a pending settlement for $0.01 million. The NOE was for the two violations.

Energy Transfer Company Field Services, LLC received a settlement agreement and a stipulated final compliance order from the New Mexico Environmental Department (“NMED”) on October 12, 2017 for allegations of violations of New Mexico air regulations related to Jal #3 facilities. This order is a combination of Notice of Violation REG-0569-1402-R1 and Notice of Violation REG-0569-1601. The alleged violations occurred during the periods of March 24, 2014 through September 30, 2014 and September 1, 2016. through December 31, 2016. The settlement includes a civil penalty in the amount of $0.4 million and a supplement environmental project in the amount of $0.8 million.

Energy Transfer Company Field Services, LLC received a settlement offer from the NMED on June 6, 2017 for allegations of violations of New Mexico air regulations related to Jal #3 facilities. The alleged violation occurred during the period of January 1, 2017 through September 11, 2017. The NMED is offering to settle the violations with a civil penalty of $0.6 million.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

There have been no material changes from the risk factors described in Part I, Item 1A in ~~our~~the Partnership’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for ~~our~~the previous fiscal year ended December 31, 2015. The following risk factor, which was previously included in our Form 10-K, has been included herein along with additional quantitative information with respect to the Partnership’s revenues, in order to supplement the disclosures previously provided in the Form 10-K.

The profitability of certain activities in our natural gas gathering, processing, transportation and storage operations are largely dependent upon natural gas commodity prices, price spreads between two or more physical locations and market demand for natural gas and NGLs.

For a portion of the natural gas gathered on our systems, we purchase natural gas from producers at the wellhead and then gather and deliver the natural gas to pipelines where we typically resell the natural gas under various arrangements, including sales at index prices. Generally, the gross margins we realize under these arrangements decrease in periods of low natural gas prices.

~~We also enter into percent-of-proceeds arrangements, keep-whole arrangements, and processing fee agreements pursuant to which we agree to gather and process natural gas received from the producers.~~

Under percent-of-proceeds arrangements, we generally sell the residue gas and NGLs at market prices and remit to the producers an agreed upon percentage of the proceeds based on an index price. In other cases, instead of remitting cash payments to the producer, we deliver an agreed upon percentage of the residue gas and NGL volumes to the producer and sell the volumes we keep to third parties at market prices. Under these arrangements, our revenues and gross margins decline when natural gas prices and NGL prices decrease. Accordingly, a decrease in the price of natural gas or NGLs could have an adverse effect on our revenues and results of operations.

Under keep-whole arrangements, we generally sell the NGLs produced from our gathering and processing operations at market prices. Because the extraction of the NGLs from the natural gas during processing reduces the Btu content of the natural gas, we must either purchase natural gas at market prices for return to producers or make a cash payment to producers equal to the value of this natural gas. Under these arrangements, our gross margins generally decrease when the price of natural gas increases relative to the price of NGLs.

When we process the gas for a fee under processing fee agreements, we may guarantee recoveries to the producer. If recoveries are less than those guaranteed to the producer, we may suffer a loss by having to supply liquids or its cash equivalent to keep the producer whole.

We also receive fees and retain gas in kind from our natural gas transportation and storage customers. Our fuel retention fees and the value of gas that we retain in kind are directly affected by changes in natural gas prices. Decreases in natural gas prices tend to decrease our fuel retention fees and the value of retained gas.

In addition, we receive revenue from our off-gas processing and fractionating system in south Louisiana primarily through customer agreements that are a combination of keep-whole and percent-of-proceeds arrangements, as well as from transportation and fractionation fees. Consequently, a large portion of our off-gas processing and fractionation revenue is exposed to risks due to fluctuations in commodity prices. In addition, a decline in NGL prices could cause a decrease in demand for our off-gas processing and fractionation services and could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

For our midstream segment, we generally analyze gross margin based on fee-based margin (which includes revenues from processing fee arrangements) and non fee-based margin (which includes gross margin earned on percent-of-proceeds and keep-whole arrangements). For the nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015, gross margin from our midstream segment totaled $1.35 billion of which fee-based revenues constituted 87% and 88%, respectively, and non fee-based margin constituted 13% and 12%, respectively. For the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, gross margin from our midstream segment totaled $1.81 billion and $1.93 billion, respectively, of which fee-based revenues constituted 86% and 66%, respectively, and non fee-based margin constituted 14% and 34%, respectively. The amount of gross margin earned by our midstream segment from fee-based and non fee-based arrangements (individually and as a percentage of total revenues) will be impacted by the volumes associated with both types of arrangements, as well as commodity prices; therefore, the dollar amounts and the relative magnitude of gross2016.

~~Table of Contents~~

~~margin from fee-based and non fee-based arrangements in future periods may be significantly different from results reported in previous periods.~~

~~Protests and legal actions against our Dakota Access pipeline project have caused construction delays and may further delay the completion of the pipeline project.~~

During the summer of 2016, individuals affiliated with, or sympathetic to, the Standing Rock Sioux Native American tribe (the “SRST”) began gathering near a construction site on our Dakota Access pipeline project in North Dakota to protest the development of the pipeline project. Some of the protesters eventually trespassed on to the construction site, tampered with equipment, and disrupted construction activity at the site. At this time, we are working with the various authorities to mitigate this unlawful protest. Dakota Access has the necessary permits and approvals to perform all work on the pipeline project, other than a small area under dispute as described below. In response to the protests, Dakota Access filed a lawsuit in federal court in North Dakota to restrain protestors from disrupting construction and also requested a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) against the Chairman of the SRST and the protestors. The U.S. District Court granted Dakota Access’s request for a TRO, and the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the case and dissolve the TRO. The Court later granted the defendants’ motions to dissolve the TRO. Dakota Access filed a response to the defendant’s motion to dismiss, and the Court has yet to rule. At this time, we cannot determine how long the protest will continue, how the legal action will be resolved, or the impact both may have on construction time. Additional protests or legal actions may arise in connection with our Dakota Access project or other projects. Trespass on to construction sites or our physical facilities, or other disruptions, could result in further damage to our assets, safety incidents, potential liability or project delays.

In July 2016, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”) issued permits to Dakota Access consistent with environmental and historic preservation statutes for the pipeline to make two crossings of the Missouri River in North Dakota, including a crossing of the Missouri River at Lake Oahe. The USACE has also issued an easement to allow the crossing of land owned by the USACE adjacent to the Missouri River at one location, but has not issued an easement to allow the crossing of land owned by the USACE adjacent to Lake Oahe. The SRST filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against the USACE challenging the legality of the permits issued for the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline across those waterways and claiming violations of the National Historic Preservation Act (“NHPA”). The SRST also sought a preliminary injunction to rescind the USACE permits while the case is pending. Dakota Access’ moved to intervene in the case and that motion was granted by the Court. The SRST has also sought an emergency TRO to stop construction on the pipeline project. After a hearing on the TRO, the parties agreed to voluntarily stop construction in the relevant geographic area until the Court ruled on the preliminary injunction. Three days later, on September 9, 2016, the Court denied SRST’s motion for a preliminary injunction. After that decision, the Department of the Army, the Department of Justice, and the Department of the Interior released a joint statement stating that the USACE would not grant the easement for the land adjacent to Lake Oahe until the federal departments completed a review of the SRST’s claims in its lawsuit with respect to the USACE’s compliance with certain federal statutes in connection with its activities related to the granting of the permits. The SRST appealed the denial of the preliminary injunction to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and filed an emergency motion for an injunction pending the appeal to the U.S. District Court. The U.S. District Court denied SRST’s emergency motion for an injunction pending the appeal. The SRST filed an amended complaint and added claims based on treaties between the tribes and the United States and statues governing the use of government property. The appeal of the U.S. District Court’s September 9th denial of the SRST’s preliminary injunction is still pending.

~~In addition, the Cheyenne River Sioux and Yankton Sioux tribes have filed related lawsuits in an effort to prevent construction of the Dakota Access pipeline project.~~

While we believe that the review process by the federal departments has been completed and that the easement for the land adjacent to Lake Oahe will be granted in a timely manner, we cannot assure this outcome. Any significant delay in receiving this easement will delay the receipt of revenue from this project. In addition, any action or inaction by the federal departments may increase the cost of construction of the pipeline. We cannot determine when or how these lawsuits will be resolved or the impact they may have on the Dakota Access project.

5536

Table of Contents

ITEM 6. EXHIBITS

The exhibits listed below are filed or furnished, as indicated, as part of this report:



Exhibit Number		Description
~~2.1~~ 31.1*		Contribution Agreement, dated October 24, 2016 by and among Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. and NGP X US Holdings, LP, PennTex Midstream Partners, LLC, MRD Midstream LLC, WHR Midstream LLC and certain individual investors and managers named therein (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Registrant’s Form 8-K filed October 25, 2016).
2.2*		~~Membership Interest Purchase Agreement, dated as of August 2, 2016, by and between Bakken Holdings Company LLC and MarEn Bakken Company LLC.~~
~~3.1~~		Amendment No. 13 to the Second Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Energy Transfer Partners, L.P., dated July 27, 2016 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Registrant’s Form 8-K filed August 2, 2016).
~~10.1~~		Form of Commercial Paper Dealer Agreement between Energy Transfer Partners, L.P., as Issuer, and the Dealer party thereto (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the Registrant’s Form 8-K filed August 22, 2016).
31.1*		Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2*		Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.1**		Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.2**		Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
101.INS*		XBRL Instance Document
101.SCH*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
101.CAL*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
101.DEF*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
101.LAB*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
101.PRE*		XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document



*		Filed herewith.
**		Furnished herewith.

5637

Table of Contents

SIGNATURE

Pursuant to the requirements 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.



		ENERGY TRANSFER, ~~PARTNERS, L.P.~~LP

		By:	~~Energy Transfer Partners GP, L.P.,~~
			~~its General Partner~~

		~~By:~~	~~Energy Transfer Partners, L.L.C.,~~SXL Acquisition Sub LLC,
			its General Partner

Date:	November ~~9, 2016~~7, 2017	By:	/s/ A. Troy Sturrock
			A. Troy Sturrock
			Senior Vice President, Controller and Principal Accounting Officer (duly authorized to sign on behalf of the registrant)

5738



PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION

ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Unaudited)

Consolidated Balance Sheets	1

Consolidated Statements of Operations	3

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income	4

Consolidated Statement of Equity	5

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows	6

Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements	7

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS	3230

ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK	5135

ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES	5235

PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	5436

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS	5436

ITEM 6. EXHIBITS	5637

SIGNATURE	5738



				Limited Partners
	General Partner			Common Units			Class H Units			Class I Units			Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income			Noncontrolling Interest			Total
Balance, December 31, 2015	$	306		$	17,043		$	3,469		$	14		$	4		$	6,195		$	27,031
Distributions to partners	(823		)	(1,580		)	(248		)	(18		)	—			—			(2,669		)
Distributions to noncontrolling interest	—			—			—			—			—			(334		)	(334		)
Units issued for cash	—			794			—			—			—			—			794
Subsidiary units issued	—			34			—			—			—			1,271			1,305
Capital contributions from noncontrolling interest	—			—			—			—			—			187			187
Sunoco, Inc. retail business to Sunoco LP transaction	—			(405		)	—			—			—			—			(405		)
Other comprehensive income, net of tax	—			—			—			—			(8		)	—			(8		)
Other, net	—			27			—			—			—			1			28
Net income (loss)	740			(248		)	257			6			—			231			986
Balance, September 30, 2016	$	223		$	15,665		$	3,478		$	2		$	(4	)	$	7,551		$	26,915



	Three Months Ended September 30, 2015		Nine Months Ended September 30, 2015
Revenues	$	1,363	$	11,705
Cost of products sold	1,149		10,519
Operating expenses	149		701
Selling, general and administrative expenses	8		101



Balance, December 31, 2015	$	(5	)
Net unrealized gains included in other income (expense)	4
Balance, September 30, 2016	$	(1	)



Quarter Ended	Record Date	Payment Date	Rate
December 31, 2015	February 8, 2016	February 16, 2016	$	1.0550
March 31, 2016	May 6, 2016	May 16, 2016	1.0550
June 30, 2016	August 8, 2016	August 15, 2016	1.0550
September 30, 2016	November 7, 2016	November 14, 2016	1.0550



	Total Year
2016 (remainder)	$	138
2017	626
2018	138
2019	128
Each year beyond 2019	33



	Growth				Maintenance
	Low		High		Low		High
Direct⁽¹⁾:
Intrastate transportation and storage⁽²⁾	$	40	$	50	$	20	$	25
Interstate transportation and storage⁽²⁾⁽³⁾	210		250		95		105
Midstream	1,225		1,275		100		110
Liquids transportation and services
NGL	875		900		20		25
Crude⁽²⁾⁽³⁾	300		325		—		—
All other (including eliminations)	90		100		40		45
Total direct capital expenditures	$	2,740	$	2,900	$	275	$	310



	September 30, 2016			December 31, 2015
ETP Senior Notes	$	19,439		$	19,439
Transwestern Senior Notes	782			782
Panhandle Senior Notes	1,085			1,085
Sunoco, Inc. Senior Notes	465			465
Sunoco Logistics Senior Notes	5,350			4,975
Bakken Term Note	1,100			—
Revolving credit facilities and commercial paper:
ETP $3.75 billion Revolving Credit Facility due November 2019 ⁽¹⁾	1,584			1,362
Sunoco Logistics $2.50 billion Revolving Credit Facility due March 2020 ⁽²⁾	622			562
Other long-term debt	32			32
Unamortized premiums, net of discounts and fair value adjustments	126			158
Deferred debt issuance costs	(187		)	(181		)
Total debt	30,398			28,679
Less: Current maturities of long-term debt	1,216			126
Long-term debt, less current maturities	$	29,182		$	28,553

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

¨ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company

Emerging growth company