Commitments and Contingencies | (15) Commitments and Contingencies (a) Severance and Change in Control Agreements Certain members of our management are parties to severance and change of control agreements with EnLink Midstream Operating, LP. The severance and change in control agreements provide those individuals with severance payments in certain circumstances and prohibit such individuals from, among other things, competing with the General Partner or its affiliates during his or her employment. In addition, the severance and change of control agreements prohibit subject individuals from, among other things, disclosing confidential information about the General Partner or its affiliates or interfering with a client or customer of the General Partner or its affiliates, in each case during his or her employment and for certain periods (including indefinite periods) following the termination of such person’s employment. (b) Environmental Issues The operation of pipelines, plants and other facilities for the gathering, processing, transmitting, fractionating, storing or disposing of natural gas, NGLs, crude oil, condensate, brine and other products is subject to stringent and complex laws and regulations pertaining to health, safety and the environment. As an owner, partner or operator of these facilities, we must comply with United States laws and regulations at the federal, state and local levels that relate to air and water quality, hazardous and solid waste management and disposal, oil spill prevention, climate change, endangered species and other environmental matters. The cost of planning, designing, constructing and operating pipelines, plants, and other facilities must incorporate compliance with environmental laws and regulations and safety standards. Federal, state, or local administrative decisions, developments in the federal or state court systems, or other governmental or judicial actions may influence the interpretation and enforcement of environmental laws and regulations and may thereby increase compliance costs. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations may trigger a variety of administrative, civil and potentially criminal enforcement measures, including citizen suits, which can include the assessment of monetary penalties, the imposition of remedial requirements and the issuance of injunctions or restrictions on operation. Management believes that, based on currently known information, compliance with these laws and regulations will not have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. However, we cannot provide assurance that future events, such as changes in existing laws, regulations, or enforcement policies, the promulgation of new laws or regulations, or the discovery or development of new factual circumstances will not cause us to incur material costs. Environmental regulations have historically become more stringent over time and, thus, there can be no assurance as to the amount or timing of future expenditures for environmental compliance or remediation. In the second quarter of 2017, we reached a settlement agreement with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency with respect to the previously disclosed notices of violation (“NOVs”) relating to certain of our ORV operations that were previously operated by a joint venture partner. The settlement payment is not material to our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. On July 29, 2016, after concluding a multi-year internal environmental compliance assessment of our Louisiana operations, we commenced discussions with the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (“LDEQ”) relating to: (a) a global settlement to resolve environmental noncompliance discovered or investigated during our assessment involving several of our Louisiana facilities and (b) notices of potential violation and NOVs received from the LDEQ. We have taken appropriate measures to resolve all instances of noncompliance, and we continue to work with the LDEQ with respect to the proposed global settlement, which we believe will not include any fines or penalties that would be material to our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. Lastly, we continue to await a ruling from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration regarding the notice of potential violation discussed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 . As part of our ongoing environmental and regulatory compliance efforts, we discovered instances of non-compliance with certain environmental regulations at one of our north Texas plants and self-reported these matters to the Texas Commission on Environment Quality (“TCEQ”). In May 2017, we received a proposed “Agreed Order” from the TCEQ relating to the resolution of these instances of noncompliance. We subsequently met with the TCEQ to discuss our objections to certain terms of the proposed Agreed Order. We have been granted an extension of time for the resolutions of the matter while the TCEQ reconsiders the terms of the proposed Agreed Order. We do not believe that any fines or penalties would be material to our results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. (c) Litigation Contingencies We are involved in various litigation and administrative proceedings arising in the normal course of business. In the opinion of management, any liabilities that may result from these claims would not individually or in the aggregate have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. In July 2013, the Board of Commissioners for the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority for New Orleans and surrounding areas filed a lawsuit against approximately 100 energy companies, seeking, among other relief, restoration of wetlands allegedly lost due to historic industry operations in those areas. The suit was filed in Louisiana state court in New Orleans but was removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. The amount of damages is unspecified. Our subsidiary, EnLink LIG, LLC, is one of the named defendants as the owner of pipelines in the area. On February 13, 2015, the court granted defendants’ joint motion to dismiss and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims with prejudice. Plaintiffs appealed the matter to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. On March 3, 2017, the Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims. On March 17, 2017, the plaintiff filed a petition for rehearing. On April 12, 2017, the Court of Appeals denied the plaintiffs petition for rehearing. On July 11, 2017, Plaintiffs filed a petition for appeal with the United States Supreme Court. We intend to continue vigorously defending the case. The success of the plaintiffs’ appeal as well as our costs and legal exposure, if any, related to the lawsuit are not currently determinable. We own and operate a high-pressure pipeline and underground natural gas and NGL storage reservoirs and associated facilities near Bayou Corne, Louisiana. In August 2012, a large sinkhole formed in the vicinity of this pipeline and underground storage reservoirs, resulting in damage to certain of our facilities. In order to recover our losses from responsible parties, we sued the operator of a failed cavern in the area, and its insurers, seeking recovery for these losses, as well as other parties we alleged contributed to the formation of the sinkhole. We also filed a claim with our insurers, which our insurers denied. We disputed the denial and sued our insurers. We have reached settlements regarding the entirety of our claims in both lawsuits. In August 2014, we received a partial settlement with respect to our claims in the amount of $6.1 million . We secured additional settlement payments in aggregate amounts of $17.5 million and $8.5 million in March 2017 and June 2017, respectively, which resulted in the recognition of “Gain on litigation settlement” on the consolidated statements of operations of $8.5 million and $26.0 million for the three and six months ended June 30, 2017 , respectively. In June 2014, a group of landowners in Assumption Parish, Louisiana added our subsidiary, EnLink Processing Services, LLC, as a defendant in a pending lawsuit in the 23rd Judicial Court, Assumption Parish, Louisiana they had filed against other defendants relating to claims arising from the Bayou Corne Sinkhole. Plaintiffs alleged that EnLink Processing Services, LLC’s negligence contributed to the formation of the sinkhole. The amount of damages was unspecified. EnLink Processing Services, LLC reached a settlement with the plaintiffs in February 2017, funded by EnLink Processing Services, LLC’s insurance carriers. The plaintiffs’ claims against EnLink Processing Services, LLC were dismissed with prejudice in March 2017. |