UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

Form 10-Q

 

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

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2016

Or

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

For the transition period from           to

 

 

Azure Midstream Partners, LP

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

 

 

 

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  ☑    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  ☑     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.  See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

 

Indicate by a check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange

Act).  Yes  ◻   No  ☑

 

The registrant had the following number of units outstanding as of May 9, 2016:

 

 

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

 

AZURE MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP

INDEX TO QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q

For the Quarter Ended March 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GLOSSARY OF TERMS

 

The following are definitions of certain terms used in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (“Quarterly Report”):

 

Bbls: One stock tank barrel, or 42 U.S. gallons liquid volume, used in reference to oil or other liquid hydrocarbons.

 

Bbls/d: Stock tank barrel per day.

 

Bbls/hr: Stock tank barrel per hour.

 

Condensate: A natural gas liquid with a low vapor pressure, mainly composed of propane, butane, pentane and heavier hydrocarbon fractions.

 

Crude oil: A mixture of hydrocarbons that exists in liquid phase in underground reservoirs.

 

Dry gas: A natural gas primarily composed of methane and ethane where heavy hydrocarbons and water either do not exist or have been removed through processing.

 

End-user markets: The ultimate users and consumers of transported energy products.

 

EUR: Estimated ultimate recovery.

 

GPM: Gallons per Mcf.

 

Mcf: One thousand cubic feet.

 

MMBtu: One million British Thermal Units.

 

MMcf: One million cubic feet.

 

MMcf/d: One million cubic feet per day.

 

Natural gas liquids, or NGLs: The combination of ethane, propane, normal butane, isobutane and natural gasolines that when removed from natural gas become liquid under various levels of higher pressure and lower temperature.

 

Residue gas: The dry gas remaining after being processed or treated.

 

Tailgate: Refers to the point at which processed natural gas and natural gas liquids leave a processing facility for end-user markets.

 

Throughput: The volume of natural gas transported or passing through a pipeline, plant, terminal or other facility during a particular period.

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

 

We have made in this Quarterly Report and may from time to time otherwise make in other public filings, press releases and discussions by management, forward-looking statements concerning our operations, economic performance and financial condition. These statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology including “may,” “will,” “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “continue,” or other similar words. These statements discuss future expectations, contain projections of results of operations or financial condition or include other “forward-looking” information. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable, we can give no assurance that such expectations will be realized. These forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations include, but are not limited to, the following risks and uncertainties:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The risk factors and other factors noted throughout or incorporated by reference in this report could cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement.  Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.  Financial Statements.

 

AZURE MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(in thousands, except number of units)

 

 

See the accompanying notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements.

AZURE MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(in thousands, except unit and per unit data)

(unaudited)

 

 

See the accompanying notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

AZURE MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL AND

PARENT COMPANY NET INVESTMENT

(in thousands)

(unaudited)

 

 

 

 

See the accompanying notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

 

AZURE MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in thousands)

(unaudited)

 

See the accompanying notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

 

AZURE MIDSTREAM PARTNERS, LP

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

 

1. ORGANIZATION AND DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

 

General

 

In this Quarterly Report, the terms “Partnership”, “our”, “we”, “us” and “its” refer to Azure Midstream Partners, LP itself or Azure Midstream Partners, LP together with its consolidated subsidiaries, which includes the Azure System, as defined below, for all periods presented.

 

In this Quarterly Report the term “Legacy System” refers to the Legacy gathering system entities and assets, which has been deemed to be the predecessor of the Partnership for accounting and financial reporting purposes. The closing of the transactions described below under "”Sale of General Partner Interests and Contribution of the Legacy System"” (the “Transactions”) occurred on February 27, 2015, and was reflected in the condensed consolidated financial statements of the Partnership using, for accounting purposes, a date of convenience of February 28, 2015 (the “Transaction Date”). The effect of recording the Transactions as of the Transaction Date was not material to the information presented.

 

In this Quarterly Report the term “Azure System” refers to the operations of the Legacy System, together with the contribution of Azure ETG, LLC; a Delaware limited liability company (“Azure ETG”) that owns and operates the East Texas gathering system, (the “ETG System”), for periods beginning November 15, 2013, representing the period Azure Midstream Energy LLC (“AME”), a Delaware limited liability company that is wholly owned by Azure Midstream Holdings LLC a Delaware limited liability company, (collectively “Azure”), acquired 100% of the equity interests in the entities that own the Legacy System and the ETG System up to the Transaction Date.  Azure contributed the ETG System to the Partnership on August 6, 2015, effective as of July 1, 2015. This transaction was determined to be a transaction between entities under common control for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, we have recast the financial results of the Partnership to include the financial results of the ETG System for all periods presented.

 

Organization and Description of Business

 

Azure Midstream Partners, LP is a publicly traded Delaware master limited partnership that was formed by NuDevco Partners, LLC and its affiliates ("NuDevco") to develop, own, operate and acquire midstream energy assets. We currently offer natural gas gathering, compression, dehydration, treating, processing, and hydrocarbon dew-point control and transportation services to producers, marketers and third-party pipeline companies.

 

As of March  31, 2016, Azure owned and controlled: (i) our general partner, Azure Midstream Partners GP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, (the "General Partner"), through its ownership of a 1.93% general partner interest; (ii) 255,319 common units, representing 1.2% of our outstanding limited partner interests; and (iii) 90% of our IDR Units, as defined below. As of March 31, 2016, NuDevco owned: (i) 1,939,265 of our common units, representing an 8.9% limited partner interest; (ii) 8,724,545 of our subordinated units, representing a 40.0% limited partner interest; and (iii) 10% of our IDR Units, as defined below. As of March 31, 2016, the public owned 10,869,634 of our common units, representing a 49.9% limited partner interest. Azure, through its ownership of our General Partner, controls us and is responsible for managing our business and operations.

 

Going Concern Uncertainty

 

The Partnership’s liquidity outlook changed throughout 2015 and continuing through the first quarter of 2016, due to continued low commodity prices, which are expected to affect a number of companies in the oil and natural gas industries, including our customers.  Lower commodity prices have caused a significant reduction in drilling, completing

and connecting new wells, which has caused a reduction in our forecasted volumes.  These lower volumes have negatively impacted our operating cash flows.  The downturn in the market has also effected the Partnership’s ability to access the capital markets, which would have allowed the Partnership to facilitate growth or reduce debt.

 

As a result of these and other factors the Partnership’s ability to comply with financial covenants and ratios in its senior secured revolving credit facility (the "Credit Agreement") has adversely impacted the Partnership’s ability to continue as a going concern. Absent a waiver or amendment, failure to meet these covenants and ratios would have resulted in a default and, to the extent the applicable lenders so elect, an acceleration of the existing indebtedness, causing such debt of approximately $231.6 million to be immediately due and payable. Based upon our current estimates and expectations for commodity prices in 2016, we do not expect to remain in compliance with all of the restrictive covenants contained in our Credit Agreement throughout 2016 unless those requirements are waived or amended. The Partnership does not currently have adequate liquidity to repay all of its outstanding debt in full if such debt were accelerated.

 

The report of the Partnership’s independent registered public accounting firm that accompanies its 2015 audited consolidated financial statements contains an explanatory paragraph regarding the substantial doubt about the Partnership’s ability to continue as a going concern. The condensed consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of the going concern uncertainty. The Partnership’s Credit Agreement contains the requirement to deliver audited consolidated financial statements without a going concern or like qualification or exception. Consequently, the Partnership would have been in default under the Credit Agreement. Had we been unable to obtain a waiver or other suitable relief from the lenders under the Credit Agreement prior to the expiration of the 30 day grace period, an Event of Default (as defined in the Credit Agreement) would have resulted in the lenders holding a majority of the commitments under the Credit Agreement, accelerate the outstanding indebtedness, which would have made it immediately due and payable. On March 29, 2016, the Partnership entered into the Third Amendment to the Credit Agreement (as defined below). See Note 3 for further information regarding our ability to continue as a going concern.

 

Associated Energy Services, LP (“AES”) Contract Terminations

 

During the first quarter of 2016, AES was delinquent in paying amounts invoiced under its gathering and processing contracts, as well as its logistics contracts, with subsidiaries of the Partnership.  The contracts had provisions requiring AES to make payments based on minimum volume commitments (“MVCs”). AES caused its bank to issue a $15.0 million letter of credit to the administrative agent under the Credit Agreement to secure the amount of its obligations under its logistics contracts. On March 31, 2016, the Partnership’s General Partner executed a settlement agreement with AES and its parent, NuDevco, (the “AES Agreement”) to resolve these issues under the gathering and processing agreements and the logistics contracts.  The execution of the AES Agreement resulted in the following: (i) on April 1, 2016, AES instructed our administrative agent to draw down the full $15.0 million amount of the letter of credit, the proceeds of which were applied to pay down debt under our Credit Agreement; (ii) effective as of January 1, 2016 the gathering and processing agreement and the logistics contracts were terminated; (iii) effective April 1, 2016, NuDevco surrendered to the Partnership 8,724,545 subordinated units, 1,939,265 common units and 10 IDR Units of the Partnership held by NuDevco or its subsidiary; (iv) the parties released each other from other claims in respect of the terminated contracts; and (v) AES assigned all of its rights and interests in third-party contracts to Azure. The AES Agreement was subject to final approval from the lenders under the Credit Agreement. See Note 15 for information on the effect of the AES Agreement on ongoing operations. 

 

Amendment to Credit Agreement

 

On March 29, 2016, the Partnership entered into the third amendment to the Credit Agreement (“Third Amendment”).  The amendment waived the affirmative covenant that stated if the Partnership’s annual financial statements, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards, contained any going concern qualification an event of default would result, for the year ended December 31, 2015.  Additionally, the Third Amendment waived certain other events of default until June 30, 2016.  

 

Under the terms of the Third Amendment, we are still prohibited from declaring or paying any distributions to unitholders if a default or event of default exists. 

 

Suspension of Distribution

 

As a result of covenant restrictions contained in our Credit Agreement, the Partnership’s board of directors and management have suspended the distribution for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2016. The board of directors will continue to evaluate the Partnership’s ability to reinstate the distribution, although reinstatement of distributions is not expected in the near term absent substantial improvement in our operating performance and compliance with the terms of our Credit Agreement.

 

Sale of General Partner Interest and Contribution of the Legacy System

 

On February 27, 2015, we consummated a transaction agreement, (the “Transaction Agreement”) by and amongst us, Azure, our General Partner, NuDevco and Marlin IDR Holdings Inc, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of NuDevco (“IDRH”). The consummation of the Transaction Agreement resulted in Azure contributing the Legacy System to us, and Azure receiving $92.5 million in cash and acquiring 100% of the equity interests in our General Partner and 90% of our incentive distribution rights.

 

The Transaction Agreement occurred in the following steps:

 

 

 

 

 

The Legacy System consists of approximately 666 miles of high-and low-pressure gathering lines and serves approximately 100,000 dedicated acres within the Harrison, Panola and Rusk counties in Texas and Caddo parish in Louisiana and currently serves the Cotton Valley formation, the Haynesville shale formation and the shallower producing sands in the Travis Peak formation. The Legacy System has access to seven major downstream markets, three third-party processing plants and our Panola County processing plants.

 

Contribution of the ETG System

 

On August 6, 2015, the Partnership entered into a contribution agreement, (the “Contribution Agreement”) with AME, which is the sole member of the General Partner. Pursuant to the Contribution Agreement, AME contributed 100% of the outstanding membership interests in Azure ETG to the Partnership in exchange for the consideration described below, (the "ETG Contribution"). The closing of the transactions contemplated by the Contribution Agreement

occurred simultaneously with the execution of the Contribution Agreement. The Contribution Agreement contains customary representations and warranties, indemnification obligations and covenants by the parties, and provides that the ETG Contribution was effective on July 1, 2015.

 

The following transactions took place pursuant to the Contribution Agreement:

 

 

 

The ETG System includes approximately 255 miles of gathering pipelines, two treating plants, 5 MMcf/d of processing capacity and four interconnections with major interstate pipelines providing 1.75 Bcf per day of access to downstream markets. A total of 336,000 gross acres in thepresee Haynesville Shale and Bossier Shale formations are dedicated to the ETG System under 23 long-term producer contracts.

 

The Partnership financed the cash consideration portion of the ETG Contribution with an $80.0 million draw from its credit facility.

 

2.  SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

 

Basis of Presentation

 

Azure Midstream Partners, LP

 

The condensed consolidated financial statements give effect to the business combination, accounted for in accordance with the applicable reverse merger accounting guidance, the Transactions under the acquisition method of accounting and the Contribution Agreement, which was determined to be a transaction between entities under common control.

 

Azure acquired a controlling financial interest in us through the acquisition of our General Partner. As a result, the Legacy System was deemed to be the accounting acquirer of the Partnership because its parent company, Azure, obtained control of the Partnership through its control of the General Partner. Consequently, the Legacy System was deemed to be the predecessor of the Partnership for financial reporting purposes, and the historical financial statements of the Partnership were recast and reflect the Legacy System for all periods prior to the closing of the Transactions. The closing of the Transactions occurred on February 27, 2015, and are reflected in the condensed consolidated financial statements of the Partnership as of the Transaction Date. The recording of the Transactions as of the Transaction Date did not have a material effect to the condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

The Legacy System's assets and liabilities retained their historical carrying values. Additionally, the Partnership's assets acquired and liabilities assumed by the Legacy System in the business combination were recorded at their fair values measured as of the Transaction Date. The excess of the assumed purchase price of the Partnership over the estimated fair values of the Partnership's net assets acquired was recorded as goodwill. The assumed purchase price or enterprise value of the Partnership was determined using acceptable fair value methods, and was partially derived from the consideration Azure paid for the General Partner and 90 of the IDR Units. Additionally, because the Legacy System was reflected at Azure’s historical cost, the difference between the $162.5 million in consideration paid by the Partnership and Azure's historical carrying values, net book value, at the Transaction Date was recorded as an increase to partners’ capital in the amount of $51.7 million. The purchase price and fair values were prepared with the assistance of the Partnership's external fair value specialists and represent management's best estimate of the enterprise value and fair values of the Partnership.    

 

The ETG Contribution on August 6, 2015, effective July 1, 2015, was determined to be a transaction between entities under common control for financial reporting purposes. Because the ETG Contribution is considered to be a

transaction amongst entities under common control, the ETG System is reflected at Azure's historical cost and the difference between that historical cost and the purchase price was recorded as an adjustment to partners' capital in the amount of $6.8 million.  In addition, we have recast the financial results of the Partnership to include the financial results of the ETG System for all periods presented.

 

In preparing financial statements in accordance with GAAP, management makes informed judgments and estimates that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues, and expenses. Management evaluates its estimates and related assumptions regularly, utilizing historical experience and other methods considered reasonable under the particular circumstances. Changes in facts and circumstances or additional information may result in revised estimates and actual results may differ from these estimates. Effects on the business, financial condition and results of operations resulting from revisions to estimates are recognized when the facts that give rise to the revision become known. The information furnished herein reflects all normal recurring adjustments which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair presentation of the condensed consolidated financial statements. Operating results for the three months ended March  31, 2016 and 2015 are not necessarily indicative of the results which may be expected for the full year or for any interim period. The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Partnership and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.

 

Azure System

 

The operating results and the majority of the assets and liabilities of the Azure System were specifically identified based on the existing divisional organization of Azure. Certain assets, liabilities and expenses presented in the carve‑out statements of financial position and statements of operations prior to the contributions of the Legacy System and ETG System represent allocations and estimates of the costs of services incurred by Azure. These allocations and estimates were based on methodologies that management believes to be reasonable, and include items such as outstanding debt and related expenses associated with Azure's credit agreement and general and administrative expenses incurred by Azure on behalf of the Azure System.

 

Revenues were identified by contracts that are specifically identifiable to the Azure System. Depreciation and amortization are based upon assets specifically identified to the Azure System. Salaries, benefits and other general and administrative costs were allocated to the Azure System based on management’s use of a reasonable allocation methodology as such costs were historically not allocated to the Azure System. Azure’s direct investment in the Azure System is presented as parent company net investment in the condensed consolidated balance sheets and includes the accumulated net earnings and accumulated net contributions from Azure, including allocated long‑term debt, interest expense and general and administrative expenses.

 

Significant Accounting Policies

 

The following serves to update our significant accounting policies and to provide our significant accounting policies effective before and after the Transaction Date.

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents

 

Cash and cash equivalents consist of all unrestricted demand deposits and funds invested in highly liquid instruments with original maturities of three months or less. We periodically assess the financial condition of the institutions where these funds are held and believe that the credit risk is minimal.

 

The Azure System utilized Azure’s centralized processes and systems for cash management, payroll, purchasing and expenditures. As a result, cash generated by and cash received by the Azure System was deposited in and commingled with the general corporate funds of Azure and was not specifically allocated to the Azure System. The net results of these cash transactions between the Azure System and Azure are reflected in parent company net investment in the condensed consolidated balance sheets.

 

Accounts Receivable

 

Trade accounts receivable are recorded at the invoiced amount and do not bear interest. Trade accounts receivable arise from our natural gas sales, natural gas gathering, compression, dehydration, treating, processing, and hydrocarbon dew-point control and transportation services. Amounts collected on trade accounts receivable are included in net cash provided by operating activities in the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows. We had no allowance for doubtful accounts as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.

 

Concentration of Credit Risk

 

Financial instruments that potentially subject us to concentrations of credit risk are primarily accounts receivable. As of March 31, 2016,  two customers accounted for more than 10% of our accounts receivable, EOG Resources, Inc., which accounted for 27.9% and BP plc, which accounted for 20.1% of our accounts receivable.

 

We perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers’ financial condition. Declines in oil and natural gas prices have resulted in reductions in capital expenditure budgets of oil and natural gas exploration and development companies and could affect the financial condition of our customers.

 

Property, Plant and Equipment

 

Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation on property, plant and equipment is recorded on a straight-line basis for groups of property having similar economic characteristics over the estimated useful lives. Uncertainties that may impact these estimates include, but are not limited to, changes in laws and regulations relating to environmental matters, including air and water quality, restoration and abandonment requirements, economic conditions and supply, and demand in the area. When assets are placed into service, management makes estimates with respect to useful lives. However, subsequent events could cause a change in estimates, thereby affecting future depreciation amounts.

 

When items of property, plant and equipment are sold or otherwise disposed of, gains or losses are reported in the condensed consolidated statements of operations.

 

The Partnership capitalizes all construction-related direct labor and material costs, as well as indirect construction costs. Indirect construction costs include general engineering, insurance, taxes and the cost of funds used during construction. Capitalized interest is calculated by multiplying the Partnership’s monthly weighted average interest rate on outstanding debt by the amount of qualifying costs. After major construction projects are completed, the associated capitalized costs including interest are depreciated over the estimated useful life of the related asset. There was no capitalized interest recognized by the Partnership during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015. 

 

Costs, including complete asset replacements and enhancements or upgrades that increase the original efficiency, productivity or capacity of property, plant and equipment, are also capitalized. In addition, certain of the Partnership’s plant assets require periodic and scheduled maintenance, such as overhauls. The cost of these scheduled maintenance projects are capitalized and depreciated on a straight-line basis until the next planned maintenance, which generally occurs every five years.

 

Costs for planned integrity management projects are expensed in the period incurred. The costs of repairs, minor replacements and maintenance projects, which do not increase the original efficiency, productivity or capacity of property, plant and equipment, are expensed as incurred.

 

Impairment of Long‑Lived Assets

 

We evaluate our long-lived assets, which include finite-lived intangible assets, for impairment when events or circumstances indicate that their carrying values may not be recoverable. These events include, but are not limited to, market declines that are believed to be other than temporary, changes in the manner in which we intend to use a long-lived asset, decisions to sell an asset and adverse changes in the legal or business environment such as adverse actions by

regulators. If an event occurs, we evaluate the recoverability of our carrying value based on the long-lived asset's ability to generate future cash flows on an undiscounted basis. If the undiscounted cash flows are not sufficient to recover the long-lived asset's carrying value, or if we decide to sell a long-lived asset or group of assets, we adjust the carrying values of the asset downward, if necessary, to their estimated fair value. Our fair value estimates are generally based on assumptions market participants would use, including market data obtained through the sales process or an analysis of expected discounted cash flows. See Note 7.

 

Intangible Assets

 

We evaluate intangible assets for impairment upon a significant change in the operating environment or whenever circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. If an evaluation of the undiscounted cash flows indicates impairment, the asset is written down to its estimated fair value, which is generally based on discounted future cash flows.

 

As part of the AES Agreement executed on March 31, 2016, the gathering and processing agreement and the logistics contracts were terminated effective January 1, 2016.  Accordingly, the intangible assets which represented the existing customer relationship with AES were impaired.  The intangible assets were identified as part of the purchase price allocation to the Partnership's assets acquired by the Azure System.  The remaining balance of the intangible asset will be eliminated in the second quarter of 2016 as part of the assignment of common and subordinated units and IDR Units from NuDevco to the Partnership. See Note 7.

 

Goodwill

 

Goodwill represents consideration paid in excess of the fair value of the identifiable assets acquired in a business combination. We evaluate goodwill for impairment on an annual basis, and whenever events or changes indicate that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Goodwill is tested for impairment using a two-step quantitative test. The first step compares the fair value of the reporting unit to its carrying value, including goodwill. If the fair value of the reporting unit exceeds the carrying amount, the goodwill is not considered impaired. If the fair value of the reporting unit does not exceed the carrying amount of the reporting unit, the second step compares the implied fair value of goodwill to the carrying value of goodwill. If the carrying amount of goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of that goodwill, the excess of the carrying value over the implied value is recognized as an impairment in the statement of operations.

 

Deferred Financing Costs

 

Financing costs incurred in connection with the issuance of debt are capitalized and amortized as interest expense under the effective interest method over the term of the related debt. The unamortized balance of deferred financing costs is included within long-term debt, net of deferred borrowing costs within the condensed consolidated balance sheets. The Partnership had net deferred loan costs of $2.9 million and $3.3 million as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, these deferred loan costs will be amortized over the maturity period of the Credit Agreement. All deferred financing costs included within the Azure System’s consolidated balance sheets, up to the Transaction Date, are associated with the Azure Credit Agreement. See Note 8.

 

Segment Reporting

 

The Partnership's chief operating decision maker ("CODM") is the Chief Executive Officer of our General Partner. Our CODM evaluates the performance of our business by assessing our gathering and processing business segment and our logistics segment. Accordingly, the Partnership has two operating segments, gathering and processing and logistics, for financial reporting purposes.

 

AES was the sole customer of the crude oil logistics business.  As a result of the termination of these contracts on April 1, 2016, we currently have no customers for our crude oil logistics business.  If we are unable to secure additional customer contracts during the second quarter of 2016, the logistics segment may be reflected as a discontinued operation within our financial statements. 

Revenues and Cost of Natural Gas and NGLs

 

The Partnership’s revenues are derived primarily from natural gas processing and fees earned from its gathering and processing operations. Revenues from all services and activities are recognized by the Partnership using the following criteria: (i) persuasive evidence of an exchange arrangement exists; (ii) delivery has occurred or services have been rendered; (iii) the buyer’s price is fixed or determinable; and (iv) collection is reasonably assured. Utilizing these criteria, revenues are recognized when the commodity is delivered or services are rendered. Similarly, cost of natural gas and NGLs is recognized when the commodity is purchased or delivered.

 

The Partnership’s fee-based contracts provide for a fixed fee arrangement for one or more of the following midstream services: natural gas gathering, compression, dehydration, treating, processing and hydrocarbon dew-point control and transportation services to producers, third-party pipeline companies and marketers. Under these arrangements, the Partnership is paid a fixed fee based on the volume of the natural gas the Partnership gathers and processes, and recognizes revenues for its services in the month such services are performed. Substantially all of these fee-based agreements contain MVCs and annual inflation adjustments.

 

Under our commercial agreements that do not require us to deliver NGLs to the customer in kind, we provide NGL transportation services to our customers whereby we purchase the NGLs from the customer at an index price, less fractionation and transportation fees, and simultaneously sell the NGLs to third parties at the same index price, less fractionation fees. The revenue generated by these activities is offset by a corresponding cost of natural gas and NGLs that is recorded when we compensated the customer for its share of the NGLs.

 

Producers’ wells and other third-party gathering systems are connected to the Partnership’s gathering systems for delivery of natural gas to the Partnership’s processing and treating plants, where the natural gas is processed to extract NGLs and condensate or treated in order to satisfy downstream natural gas pipeline specifications. Under percentage of liquids (“POL”) arrangements, the Partnership retains a percentage of the liquids processed, and remits a portion back to the producer. Revenues are directly correlated to the commodity’s market value. POL contracts also include fee-based revenues for gathering and other midstream services. Under both fixed fee and POL arrangements, the counterparties’ share of NGLs, if not delivered as a commodity, is recorded as cost of natural gas and NGLs.

 

Under our keep-whole contracts, the Partnership is required to gather or purchase raw natural gas at current market rates. The volume of gas gathered or purchased is based on the measured volume at an agreed upon location, generally at the wellhead. The volume of gas redelivered or sold at the tailgate of the Partnership’s processing facility would be lower than the volume purchased at the wellhead primarily due to NGLs extracted through processing. The Partnership would make up or “keep the producer whole” for the condensate and NGL volumes through the delivery of or payment for a thermally equivalent volume of residue gas. The cost of these natural gas volumes is recorded as a cost of natural gas, NGLs and condensate revenue. The keep-whole contracts convey an economic benefit to the Partnership when the combined value of the individual NGLs is greater in the form of liquids than as a component of the natural gas stream; however, the Partnership is adversely affected when the value of the NGLs is lower as liquids than as a component of the natural gas stream. Certain contracts also included fee-based revenues for gathering and other midstream services. Cost of revenues were derived primarily from the purchase of natural gas, NGLs and condensates. There were no material costs categorized as cost of natural gas and NGLs sold directly identified with gathering, processing and other revenue.

 

The Legacy System’s primary revenue producing activities were the sales of natural gas and NGLs purchased from third parties, for which the Legacy System took title, and the sale of condensate liquids. Natural gas revenues were derived from transactions that were completed under contracts with limited commodity price exposure, and the Legacy System elected the normal purchases and normal sales exemption on all such transactions for accounting purposes. The Legacy System  received a market price per barrel on our revenue from natural gas condensate liquids. The Legacy System recognized the natural gas and condensate revenues and the associated purchases and expenses on a gross basis within its statement of operations. The cost of natural gas purchased from third parties was reported as a component of operating costs and expenses. Secondarily, the Legacy System  earned gathering services and other fee revenues from the transportation, gathering, compression and treating of natural gas. These gathering services and other fees are generally provided on a fixed fee basis per unit based on the volumes Mcf or heating content MMBtu of natural gas.

 

The ETG System has a natural gas gathering agreement with a customer that provides for a minimum revenue commitment (“MRC”). Under the MRC, our customer agrees to pay a minimum monetary amount over certain periods during the term of the MRC. The customer must make a deficiency payment to us at the end of the contract year if its actual revenues are less than its MRC for that year. The customer is entitled to utilize the deficiency payments to offset gathering fees in the following periods to the extent that such customer’s revenues in the following periods exceed its MRC for that period. This contract provision ranges for the entire duration of the gas gathering agreement, which is ten years. We record customer billings for obligations under the MRC, solely with respect to this natural gas gathering agreement, as deferred revenue when the customer has the right to utilize deficiency payments to offset gathering fees in subsequent periods. We recognize deferred revenue under this arrangement as revenue once all contingencies or potential performance obligations associated with the related revenues have either: (i) been satisfied through the gathering of future excess volumes of natural gas; or (ii) expired, or lapsed through the passage of time pursuant to the terms of the natural gas gathering agreement. We classify deferred revenue as noncurrent where the expiration of the customer’s right to utilize deficiency payments is greater than one year. As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, deferred revenue under the MRC agreement was $18.5 million and $11.6 million and is included within other long-term liabilities in the condensed consolidated balance sheets. No deferred revenue amounts under these arrangements were recognized as revenue during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015.

 

Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities

 

The Partnership's accounts payable and accrued liabilities as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, consist of obligations arising during the normal course of the Partnership's business operations which are expected to be settled within a period of twelve months.

 

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

 

Accounting guidance requires the disclosure of the fair value of all financial instruments that are not otherwise recorded at fair value in the financial statements. The carrying amount of long-term debt reported within the condensed consolidated balance sheets as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 approximates fair value, because of the variable rate nature of the long-term debt. The fair value of the debt is considered a Level 2 fair value measurement. The carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities reported within the condensed consolidated balance sheets approximate fair value due to the short-term nature of these items.

 

Transactions with Affiliates

 

In connection with the closing of the Transactions, we terminated our omnibus agreement, dated July 31, 2013, the (“Original Omnibus Agreement”), by and between NuDevco, the General Partner and us, together with the General Partner, the (“Partnership Parties”). NuDevco released each of the Partnership Parties, and each of the Partnership Parties released NuDevco, from any claims or liabilities arising from or under the terms of the Original Omnibus Agreement other than any obligations under the Transaction Agreement.

 

Also in connection with the Transactions, we entered into an omnibus agreement, the “New Omnibus Agreement” with the General Partner and Azure, pursuant to which, among other things, Azure has agreed to provide corporate, general and administrative services, the (“Services”), on behalf of the General Partner and for our benefit and we are obligated to reimburse Azure and its affiliates for costs and expenses incurred by Azure and its affiliates in providing the Services on our behalf.  The New Omnibus Agreement also provides us with a right of first offer on any proposed transfer of any assets owned by Azure or its subsidiaries.

 

Asset Retirement Obligations

 

Applicable accounting guidance requires us to evaluate whether any future asset retirement obligations exist as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, and whether the expected retirement date of the related costs of retirement can be estimated. We have concluded that our natural gas gathering system assets, which include pipelines and processing and treating facilities, have an indeterminate life because they are owned and will operate for an

indeterminate future period when properly maintained. A liability for these asset retirement obligations will be recorded only if and when a future retirement obligation with a determinable life is identified. The Partnership has not recognized any asset retirement obligations as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 because we have no current intention of discontinuing use of any significant assets in the long-term.

 

Environmental Expenditures

 

Our operations are subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment. Although we believe that we are in compliance with applicable environmental regulations, the risk of costs and liabilities are inherent in pipeline ownership and operation, and there can be no assurances that we will not incur significant costs and liabilities.

 

Environmental expenditures related to operations that generate current or future revenues are expensed or capitalized, as appropriate. Liabilities are recorded when the necessity for environmental remediation or other potential environmental liabilities become probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated. Management is not aware of any contingent liabilities that currently exist with respect to environmental matters.

 

Commitments and Contingencies

 

Liabilities for loss contingencies arising from claims, assessments, litigation, fines, penalties and other sources are recorded when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. Legal costs incurred in connection with loss contingencies are expensed as incurred. Recoveries of environmental remediation costs from third parties that are probable of realization are separately recorded as assets, and are not offset against the related environmental liability.

 

Accruals for estimated losses from environmental remediation obligations generally are recognized no later than completion of the remedial feasibility study. Such accruals are adjusted as further information develops or circumstances change. Costs of expected future expenditures for environment remediation obligations are not discounted to their present value.

 

Income Taxes

 

The Partnership and its condensed consolidated subsidiaries are not taxable entities for U.S. federal income tax purposes or for the majority of states that impose an income tax. Generally, income taxes are not levied at the entity level, but rather on the individual partners of the Partnership. The Partnership is subject to the Revised Texas Franchise Tax (“Texas Margin Tax”). The Texas Margin Tax is computed on modified gross margin, and is recorded as income tax expense in the condensed consolidated statements of operations. In June 2013, the State of Texas enacted certain changes to the Texas Margin Tax which lowered the tax rate and expanded the scope of depreciation deductions. The Partnership does not do business in any other state where a similar tax is applied. As of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, the Partnership had a non-current liability of $0.7 million and $1.1 million for deferred taxes.

 

Parent Company Net Investment

 

Parent company net investment represents the accumulated net earnings of the operations and the accumulated net contributions from Azure. Net contributions for the period January 1, 2015 to February 28, 2015 for the Legacy System and the period from January 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015 for the ETG System, were primarily comprised of intercompany operations and maintenance expense, cash clearing and other financing activities, and debt and general and administrative costs allocations to the Azure System. The parent company net investment was eliminated upon the contributions of the Legacy System and ETG System to the Partnership. 

 

Net Income (Loss) Per Unit

 

Net income (loss) per unit is presented for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and the period from March 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015 as this is the period in which the Partnership's results of operations are included within net

loss. The Azure System from the period January 1, 2015 up to the Transaction Date had no units and therefore net loss per unit is not presented for periods in which net loss consists only of the Azure System.

 

Subsequent Events

 

Subsequent events have been evaluated through the date these financial statements are issued. Any material subsequent events that occurred prior to such date have been properly recognized or disclosed in the condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

 

Accounting standard‑setting organizations frequently issue new or revised accounting rules and pronouncements. We regularly review new accounting rules and pronouncements to determine their impact, if any, on our financial statements.

 

In April 2015, the FASB issued a pronouncement that specifies how to calculate historical earnings per unit for a master limited partnership with retrospectively adjusted financial statements subsequent to a drop-down acquisition. The amendments specify that for purposes of calculating historical earnings per unit under the two-class method, the earnings or losses of a transferred business before the date of a drop-down acquisition are to be allocated entirely to the general partner. In that circumstance, the previously reported earnings per unit of the limited partners would not change as a result of the dropdown acquisition. Qualitative disclosures about how the rights to the earnings or losses differ before and after the drop-down acquisition occurs for purposes of computing earnings per unit under the two-class method are also required. This standard will become effective beginning in 2016; however, we have elected to early adopt this standard in this report and have retrospectively adjusted our prior period balances related to this standard in this report. See Note 5.

 

In February 2016, the FASB issued a pronouncement amending disclosure and presentation requirements for lessees and lessors to better reflect the recognition of assets and liabilities that arise from leases. The pronouncement states that a lessee should recognize a liability to make lease payments and a right-of-use asset representing its right to use the underlying asset for the lease term on the face of the balance sheet. When measuring assets and liabilities arising from a lease, a lessee (and a lessor) should include payments to be made in optional periods only if the lessee is reasonably certain to exercise an option to extend the lease or not to exercise an option to terminate the lease. Similarly, optional payments to purchase the underlying asset should be included in the measurement of lease assets and lease liabilities only if the lessee is reasonably certain to exercise that purchase option. In addition, also consistent with the previous leases guidance, a lessee (and a lessor) should exclude most variable lease payments in measuring lease assets and lease liabilities, other than those that depend on an index or a rate or are in substance fixed payments. This standard will become effective beginning in 2019.

 

In September 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") issued a new accounting standard, which eliminates the requirement for an acquirer to retrospectively adjust the financial statements for measurement-period adjustments that occur in periods after a business combination is consummated. The standard is effective for public business entities for annual periods, including interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2015. The update was implemented on January 1, 2016.

 

In April 2015, the FASB issued a new accounting standard that simplifies the presentation of debt issuance costs. The amended guidance requires that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented within the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. The Partnership adopted the guidance effective January 1, 2016. The standard only affected the presentation of the Partnership's condensed consolidated balance sheet and does not affect any of the Partnership's other financial statements.

 

In May 2014, the FASB and International Accounting Standards Board jointly issued a comprehensive new revenue recognition standard that will supersede nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards. The standard’s core principle is that a company will recognize revenue

when it transfers 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 and services. The Partnership will be required to adopt this standard beginning in the first quarter of 2018. The adoption could have a significant impact on the condensed consolidated financial statements, however management is currently unable to quantify the impact.

 

There are currently no other recent accounting pronouncements that have been issued that we believe will materially affect our condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

3. GOING CONCERN

 

The precipitous decline in oil and natural gas prices during 2015 and into 2016 has had a significant adverse impact on our business, and has impacted the Partnership’s ability to comply with financial covenants and ratios in its Credit Agreement.  Based upon our current estimates and expectations for commodity prices in 2016, we do not expect to remain in compliance with all of the restrictive covenants contained in the Credit Agreement throughout 2016 unless those requirements are waived or amended. Absent a waiver or amendment, failure to meet these covenants and ratios would result in a default and, to the extent the applicable lenders so elect, an acceleration of the existing indebtedness, causing such debt of approximately $231.6 million to be immediately due and payable.  As part of the AES Agreement discussed in Note 1, on April 1, 2016, the proceeds from the $15.0 million letter of credit were applied to pay down debt under our Credit Agreement resulting in a balance of $216.6 million. The Partnership does not currently have adequate liquidity to repay all of its outstanding debt in full if such debt were accelerated.

 

The Credit Agreement requires us to deliver audited, consolidated financial statements without a “going concern” or like qualification or exception. On March 29, 2016, the Partnership entered into the Third Amendment. Pursuant to the Third Amendment, we have received an agreement from our lenders that the default resulting from non-compliance with our financial covenants and ratios has been waived as it relates to the 2015 consolidated financial statements.

 

Pursuant to the Third Amendment to the Credit Agreement, certain other events of default have been waived until June 30, 2016. Notwithstanding the effects of these waivers, it is unlikely that we can comply with the leverage covenant currently contained in the Credit Agreement during the next twelve months. If we cannot obtain from our lenders a waiver of such potential breach or an amendment of the leverage covenant, our breach would constitute an event of default that could result in an acceleration of substantially all of our outstanding indebtedness. We would not have sufficient capital to satisfy these obligations.

 

While the Third Amendment offers a temporary solution to the defaults under the Credit Agreement, the Partnership still seeks a long-term solution to its liquidity and covenants under the Credit Agreement.

 

The significant risks and uncertainties described above raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. The condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis of accounting, which contemplates continuity of operations, realization of assets, and satisfaction of liabilities and commitments in the normal course of business. The condensed consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of the going concern uncertainty.

 

The Partnership is currently in discussions with various stakeholders and is pursuing or considering a number of actions including: (i) obtaining additional sources of capital from asset sales, private issuances of equity or equity-linked securities, debt for equity swaps, or any combination thereof; (ii) obtaining waivers or amendments from its lenders; and (iii) continuing to minimize its capital expenditures, reduce costs and maximize cash flows from operations. There can be no assurance that sufficient liquidity can be obtained from one or more of these actions or that these actions can be consummated within the period needed.

 

4.  PARTNERSHIP EQUITY AND DISTRIBUTIONS

 

Outstanding Units

 

As of March 31, 2016, our general partner interests consisted of 429,365 general partner units. As of March 31, 2016, the Partnership had common units outstanding of 13,064,218 and subordinated units outstanding of 8,724,545. Azure owned 100% of the interest in our General Partner, representing a 1.9% general partner interest, 255,319 common units representing a 1.2% limited partner interest and 90% of our IDR Units. As of March 31, 2016, NuDevco owned: (i) 1,939,265 of our outstanding common units, representing an 8.9% limited partner interest; (ii) all of our subordinated units, representing a 40.0% limited partner interest; and (iii) 10% of our IDR Units. As of March 31, 2016, the public owned 10,869,634 of our common units, representing a 49.9% limited partner interest. 

 

As a result of the AES Agreement, effective April 1, 2016, NuDevco surrendered to the Partnership 8,724,545 subordinated units, 1,939,265 common units and 10 IDR Units of the Partnership held by NuDevco or its subsidiary leaving 11,124,953 common units outstanding.

 

Distributable Cash and Distributions

 

The Partnership Agreement, which was amended and restated for the second time on February 27, 2015 for, among other things, the Transactions, requires that within 45 days after the end of each quarter, we distribute all of our available cash to unitholders of record on the applicable record date, as determined by our General Partner. We intend to make at least the minimum quarterly distribution of $0.35 per unit, or $1.40 per unit on an annual basis, to holders of our common and subordinated units, to the extent we have sufficient cash from our operations after the establishment of cash reserves and the payment of costs and expenses, including reimbursement of expenses to our General Partner and its affiliates.

 

On February 1, 2016, the Partnership announced a temporary suspension of the distributions for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2015. In addition, we have also suspended the distributions for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2016, primarily due to liquidity constraints contained in the Third Amendment. Should the distributions be reinstated, the common unitholders will be entitled to receive the minimum quarterly distribution of $0.35 per unit in arrears for each quarter as to which the distributions were suspended.  Payment of any such amount in arrears will be subject to board of directors approval and compliance with the terms of our Partnership Agreement and the agreements governing our indebtedness. Our ability to pay distributions also is reliant on our ability to comply with restrictions contained in the agreements governing our debt. However, there is no guarantee that we will pay the minimum quarterly distribution on our units in any quarter.

 

The Partnership declared the following cash distributions to its unitholders of record for the periods presented:

 

 

General Partner Interest

 

As of March  31, 2016, Azure owned 100% of our general partner interest. If we issue additional units, our General Partner has the right, but not the obligation, to contribute a proportionate amount of capital to us in order to maintain its general partner interest. The general partner interest, and the percentage of our cash distributions to which our General Partner is entitled from such interest, will be proportionately reduced if we issue additional units in the future (other than the issuance of common units upon conversion of outstanding subordinated units or the issuance of common units upon a reset of the incentive distribution rights) and our General Partner does not contribute a proportionate amount of capital to the Partnership in order to maintain its general partner interest. As of March 31, 2016, the general partner interest was the equivalent of 1.9%. This is a result of our General Partner electing not to make a contribution in connection with the previous issuances of common units related to the vesting of awards under the Marlin Midstream Partners, LP 2013 Long-Term Incentive Plan (“LTIP”) (See Note 12), or in connection with the issuance of 255,319 common units to Azure in connection with the contribution of Azure ETG.

 

Incentive Distribution Rights

 

As of March 31, 2016, Azure owned 90 of our IDR Units and NuDevco owned 10 of our IDR Units. The IDR Units entitle the holder to receive an increasing percentage, 13%, 23% and 48%, of quarterly distributions of available cash from operating surplus after the minimum quarterly distribution and certain target distribution levels have been achieved. The target distribution levels are defined within the Partnership Agreement as: (i) the First Target Distribution of $0.4025 per unit per quarter; (ii) the Second Target Distribution of $0.4375 per unit per quarter; and (iii) the Third Target Distribution of $0.5250 per unit per quarter. The maximum distribution of 48% does not include any distributions that our General Partner, Azure or NuDevco may receive on common, subordinated or general partner units that they own.

 

As discussed above, NuDevco surrendered to the Partnership 10 IDR Units effective April 1, 2016.

 

Common Units

 

Our common units represent limited partner interests in us. The holders of our common units are entitled to participate in distributions and are entitled to exercise the rights and privileges available to limited partners under our Partnership Agreement. Our Partnership Agreement provides that, during the Subordination Period, as defined in the Partnership Agreement, the common units have the right to receive distributions of available cash from operating surplus each quarter in an amount that is at least equal to $0.35 per common unit before any distributions of available cash from operating surplus may be made on the subordinated units.

 

As previously disclosed, the Partnership temporarily suspended distributions for the fourth quarter of 2015 and first quarter of 2016.  Should the distributions be reinstated, the common unitholders will be entitled to receive the minimum quarterly distribution of $0.35 per unit in arrears for each quarter as to which the distributions were suspended prior to distributions being made in respect of IDR Units or any junior securities. Payment of any such amount in arrears will be subject to board of directors approval and compliance with the terms of our Partnership Agreement and the agreements governing our indebtedness.

 

Subordinated Units

 

Our subordinated units represent limited partner interests in us and convert to common units at the end of the Subordination Period, as defined within the Partnership Agreement. The principal difference between our common units and our subordinated units is that in any quarter during the Subordination Period, holders of the subordinated units are not entitled to receive any distribution of available cash until the common units have received the minimum quarterly distribution plus any arrearages in the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution from prior quarters. Subordinated units do not accrue arrearages.

 

5. NET INCOME (LOSS) PER UNIT

 

The Partnership's condensed consolidated statements of operations were recast to reflect the Azure System for periods prior to March 1, 2015 in accordance with applicable accounting and financial reporting guidance. The Azure System had no units outstanding prior to the Transaction Date. Therefore, net income per unit for the three months ended March 31, 2015 is presented for the period March 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015, which is the period the Partnership's results of operations are included within these condensed consolidated financial statements and the period in which the Partnership's units were reflected as outstanding within these condensed consolidated financial statements. 

 

The Partnership’s net income (loss) for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and the period March 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015 is allocated to the General Partner and our limited partners in accordance with their respective ownership percentages and, when applicable, giving effect to the IDR Units. The ETG System's net losses of $3.1 million have been allocated to the General Partner for the period January 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015 as this period preceded the contribution date of August 6, 2015. Basic and diluted net income (loss) per unit is calculated by dividing the partner’s interest in net income (loss) by the weighted average number of units outstanding during the period. There were no units or awards issued or outstanding during the three months ended March 31, 2016 and the period March 1, 2015 to March  31, 2015 that would be considered dilutive to the net income (loss) per unit calculation, and, therefore, basic and diluted net income (loss) per unit are the same for the periods presented.

 

For the three months ended March 31, 2016, net loss was allocated to the unvested phantom unit awards granted to our executive officers and certain employees for the earnings per unit calculation. Relevant accounting guidance requires unvested unit-based payments that entitle employees to receive non-forfeitable distributions are considered participating securities for earnings per unit calculations.  

 

The following table illustrates the Partnership’s calculation of net income (loss) per unit for common and subordinated units for the periods presented:

 

 

______________________________

(1) As of April 1, 2015 the outstanding common units were 11,124,953 per the terms of the AES Agreement. See Note 15.

 

 

 

6. ACQUISITIONS

 

Effective as of the Transaction Date, Azure contributed the Legacy System to the Partnership in exchange for aggregate consideration of $162.5 million, which was paid to Azure in the form of: (i) $99.5 million in cash; and (ii) the

issuance of 90 of our IDR Units. The cash portion of the contribution was funded through borrowings under the Partnership's Credit Agreement (see Note 8).  

 

The Legacy System  has been deemed to be the accounting acquirer of the Partnership in the business combination because its parent company, Azure, obtained control of the Partnership through the indirect control of the General Partner. Consequently, the Legacy System’s assets and liabilities retained their historical carrying values. The Partnership's assets acquired and liabilities assumed by the Legacy System  have been recorded at their fair values measured as of the Transaction Date. The excess of the assumed purchase price over the estimated fair values of the Partnership's net assets acquired were recorded as goodwill. The assumed purchase price and fair value of the Partnership has been determined by using a combination of an income, market and cost valuation methodology and considered the evaluation of comparable company transactions, the Partnership's discounted future cash flows, the fair value of the Partnership's common units as of the Transaction Date and the consideration paid by Azure for the general partner interest and IDR Units. The purchase price allocation has been prepared based on a valuation report prepared with the assistance of the Partnership’s fair value specialists and represents management’s best estimate of the enterprise and fair values of the Partnership.

 

The property, plant and equipment of the Legacy System has been reflected at its historical net carrying value, which is greater than the consideration paid for the business. The excess of the historical carrying value over the consideration paid was $51.7 million and is reflected as an increase to Partners' Capital in the condensed consolidated statement of partners' capital and parent company net investment. Additionally, the Partnership did not assume certain liabilities of the Legacy System as part of the Contribution, and, as a result, the amount of such liabilities not assumed is considered a deemed contribution within the statement of partners' capital.  

 

The Partnership incurred $2.6 million in transaction related expenses prior to the Transaction Date as a result of the Transactions. These transaction related expenses were recognized by the Partnership when incurred in the periods prior to the Transaction Date, and therefore are not included within the results of operations presented within the condensed consolidated financial statements for the three months ended March 31, 2015.

 

The following tables summarize the assumed purchase price, fair value and the allocation to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of February 28, 2015 (in thousands):

 

 

The allocation of the assumed purchase price is as follows (in thousands):

 

 

Goodwill recognized from the business combination primarily related to the value attributed to additional growth opportunities, synergies and operating leverage within the Partnership's areas of operation. Goodwill was allocated to our gathering and processing segment and our logistics segment. Goodwill was fully impaired in September 2015. The assumed purchase price and fair values have been prepared with the assistance of our external fair value specialists, and represent management's best estimate of the enterprise value and fair values of the Partnership as of this date.

 

Unaudited Pro Forma Financial Information

 

The following unaudited pro forma financial information for the three months ended March 31, 2015, gives effect to the Transactions as if they had occurred on January 1, 2015. The unaudited pro forma financial information has been included for comparative purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of the results that might have occurred had the Transactions taken place on the dates indicated and is not intended to be a projection of future events. The pro forma adjustments for the periods presented consist of: (i) adjustments to combine the Azure System and the Partnership's historical results of operations for the periods; (ii) adjustments to interest expense to remove the previously recognized interest expense and include the interest expense associated with our Credit Agreement (see Note 8); and (iii) adjustments to depreciation and amortization expense attributable to adjustments recorded as a result of the purchase price allocation to the Partnership's assets and liabilities. 

 

The following table presents the unaudited pro forma revenues, net loss and basic and diluted per unit information:

 

 

Contribution of the ETG System

 

On August 6, 2015, in connection with the execution of the Contribution Agreement, Azure contributed the ETG System to the Partnership in consideration for $80.0 million in cash and the issuance of 255,319 common units. In connection with the Contribution Agreement, we entered into a Gas Gathering Agreement with TGG. The Contribution Agreement contains customary representations and warranties, indemnification obligations and covenants by the parties, and provides that the Partnership’s acquisition of the ETG System was effective on July 1, 2015.

 

The contribution of the ETG System by Azure to the Partnership was determined to be a transaction between entities under common control for financial reporting purposes. Because the contribution of the ETG System is considered to be a transaction amongst entities under common control, the ETG System is reflected at Azure's historical cost and the difference between that historical cost and the purchase price is recorded as an adjustment to partners' capital.

 

The assets acquired and liabilities assumed of the ETG System have been reflected at their historical net carrying value, which is less than the consideration paid for the business. The excess of the consideration paid over the historical carrying value was $6.8 million and is reflected as a decrease to Partners' Capital in the condensed consolidated statement of partners' capital. Additionally, the Partnership did not assume certain liabilities of the ETG System as part of the Contribution Agreement and, as a result, the amount of such liabilities not assumed is considered a deemed contribution within the condensed consolidated statement of partners' capital.  

 

The Partnership incurred $0.7 million in transaction related expenses associated with the contribution of the ETG System for the year ended December 31, 2015.

 

The following table summarizes the excess of consideration over the historical net carrying value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed and net decrease to the statement of partners' capital at August 6, 2015 (in thousands):

 

 

Gas Gathering Agreement

 

Pursuant to the terms of the Gas Gathering Agreement, the Partnership has agreed to provide gathering services to TGG on a priority basis for quantities of gas designated by TGG. AME, which is the sole member of the General Partner, has guaranteed TGG's obligations under the Gas Gathering Agreement.

 

7. PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS

 

Property, plant and equipment, net

 

Property, plant and equipment, net is comprised of the following as of each period presented:

 

 

With the recent decline in commodity prices negatively affecting the level of natural gas and crude oil production as well as the terms of the AES Agreement, we concluded that a triggering event had occurred which required a test for impairment of our assets. The fair value of our long-lived assets was below the carrying value for our gathering and processing assets.  As a result, we recorded an impairment of $78.3 million to adjust the processing assets to their net realizable value in the three months ended March 31, 2016.

 

The net realizable value for the processing assets was determined based upon third party valuations and recent market transactions which are considered Level 2 and Level 3 inputs in accordance with the accounting guidance.

 

Depreciation expense was $4.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and $2.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2015.

 

Intangible assets, net

 

As part of the AES Agreement executed on March 31, 2016, the gathering and processing agreement and the logistics contracts were terminated effective January 1, 2016.  Accordingly, the intangible assets which represented the existing customer relationship with AES were impaired.  The intangible assets were identified as part of the purchase price allocation to the Partnership's assets acquired by the Azure System.

 

The Partnership recorded an intangible asset impairment of $29.2 million during the three months ended March 31, 2016.  The remaining balance of the intangible asset will be eliminated in the second quarter of 2016 as part of the assignment of common and subordinated units and IDR Units from NuDevco to the Partnership.

 

The intangible impairment recorded in the three months ended March 31, 2016 was calculated based upon the fair value of the NuDevco units that were surrendered on April 1, 2016.  The fair value of the common shares were determined based upon the unit price as of March 31, 2016 which is considered a Level 1 input.  The fair values of the subordinated units and IDR Units were derived from the common unit price as of March 31, 2016 and was determined using the purchase price valuation performed in connection with the Transactions which is considered a Level 2 input.

 

The amortization expense associated with the customer contracts and customer relationships intangible assets, which is included within depreciation and amortization expense within the statement of operations was $1.6 million and $0.5 million for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015. 

 

 

 

8. LONG-TERM DEBT

 

Long-term debt, net of deferred borrowing costs consists of the following:

 

 

Credit Agreement

 

On February 27, 2015, we entered into the Credit Agreement with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as administrative agent, Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated and SG Americas Securities, LLC, collectively, (the “Lenders”). On October 26, 2015, the Partnership entered into the second amendment to the Credit Agreement, (the “Second Amendment”). On March 29, 2016, the Partnership entered into the Third Amendment.

 

We immediately borrowed $180.8 million under the Credit Agreement, of which $99.5 million was used in connection with the Contribution, $63.0 million was used in connection with the Redemption, $15.0 million was used to repay the outstanding balance as of February 27, 2015 under our existing senior secured revolving credit facility and $3.2 million was used to pay fees and expenses associated with the Credit Agreement. Prior to entering into the Second Amendment, the borrowing capacity under the Credit Agreement was $250.0 million.

 

Borrowings under the Credit Agreement bear interest at: (i) the LIBOR Rate, as defined in the Credit Agreement, plus an applicable margin of 3.25% to 4.25%; or (ii) the Base Rate, as defined in the Credit Agreement plus an applicable margin of 2.25% to 3.25%, in each case, based on the Consolidated Total Leverage Ratio,as defined in the Credit Agreement.

 

All of the Partnership's domestic restricted subsidiaries guarantee our obligations under the Credit Agreement, and all such obligations are secured by a security interest in substantially all of our assets, in each case, subject to certain customary exceptions. The Credit Agreement contains affirmative and negative covenants customary for credit facilities of its size and nature that, among other things, limit or restrict our ability and the ability of our subsidiaries to: (i) incur additional debt; (ii) grant certain liens; (iii) make certain investments; (iv) engage in certain mergers or consolidations; (v) dispose of certain assets; (vi) enter into certain types of transactions with affiliates; and (vii) make distributions, with certain exceptions, including the distribution of Available Cash, as defined in the Partnership Agreement, if no default or event of default exists.

 

As of March 31, 2016, we had outstanding borrowings under the Credit Agreement of $231.6 million. For the three months ended March 31, 2016 interest expense associated with the Credit Agreement was $2.6 million. For the period March 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015 interest expense associated with the Credit Agreement was $0.6 million. We had net deferred loan costs of $2.9 million and $3.3 million as of March 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 in connection with the Credit Agreement. These financing costs were classified within long-term debt, net of deferred borrowing costs in the condensed consolidated balance sheets and will be amortized to interest expense and related charges over the maturity period of the Credit Agreement.

 

As part of the AES Agreement discussed in Note 1, on April 1, 2016, the proceeds from the $15.0 million letter of credit were applied to pay down debt under our Credit Agreement resulting in a balance of $216.6 million.

 

Amendments to the Credit Agreement

 

As a result of the decline in commodity prices and associated decline in upstream oil and gas drilling activity, we experienced a decline in the growth in volume of natural gas we gather and process for our customers. These collective events affected our operating results adversely and resulted in the need to amend our Credit Agreement.

 

In October 2015, the Partnership entered into the Second Amendment, and the first amendment to the security agreement. Among other things, the Partnership agreed to reduce the borrowing capacity under the Credit Agreement to $238.0 million in exchange for more favorable financial condition covenants, including amending our maximum permitted consolidated leverage ratio. 

 

Our maximum permitted consolidated leverage ratio as a result of the Second Amendment was superseded by the Third Amendment and waived as an event of default until June 30, 2016. 

 

Under the terms of the Second Amendment, we are prohibited from declaring or paying any distribution to unitholders if a default or event of default exists. In addition, under the Second Amendment, future distributions are contingent upon the maintenance of certain leverage ratios, as detailed in the Second Amendment. There is a reasonable possibility that the Partnership will be unable to comply with the financial covenants over the next four quarters. As part of its balance sheet management, the Partnership is evaluating several alternatives to bolster its capital and liquidity position, including but not limited to asset sales and issuances of equity. The ability to comply with the financial covenants and to pay distributions will depend upon the Partnership’s ability to reduce debt, increase its liquidity, or increase its Adjusted EBITDA due to a rebound in commodity prices and a related increase in drilling activity by the producers supplying its volumes.

 

We incurred $0.7 million in fees associated with the Second Amendment.

 

In March 2016, the Partnership entered into the Third Amendment.  The amendment waived the affirmative covenant that stated if the Partnership’s annual financial statements, prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting standards, contained any going concern qualification an event of default would result, for the year ended December 31, 2015.  Additionally, the Third Amendment waived certain other events of default until June 30, 2016. 

 

Based upon our current estimates and expectations for commodity prices in 2016, we do not expect to remain in compliance with all of the restrictive covenants contained in its Credit Agreement throughout 2016 unless those

requirements are waived or amended. The Partnership does not currently have adequate liquidity to repay all of its outstanding debt in full if such debt were accelerated.

 

Under the terms of the Third Amendment, we are still prohibited from declaring or paying any distributions to unitholders if a default or event of default exists. 

 

Azure Credit Agreements

 

On November 15, 2013, Azure closed on a $550.0 million Senior Secured Term Loan B (the "TLB") maturing November 15, 2018, and a $50.0 million Senior Secured Revolving Credit Facility, the ("Revolver") and collectively with the TLB, the ("Azure Credit Agreement"), with a maturity of November 15, 2017. Borrowings under the Azure Credit Agreement were unconditionally guaranteed, jointly and severally, by all of the Azure subsidiaries and are collateralized by first priority liens on substantially all of existing and subsequently acquired assets and equity. The Azure Credit Agreement weighted average interest rate for the period from January 1, 2015 to February 28, 2015 was 6.50%.

 

Azure System Long-term Debt and Related Expense Allocations

 

The Azure Credit Agreement served as the sole borrowing agreement applicable for the Azure System from the period November 15, 2013 up to the Transaction Date. In addition, substantially all of Azure’s subsidiaries, including the Azure System, served as guarantors and pledger's with respect to the Azure Credit Agreement. The Azure System’s long-term debt and related expense balances for the period from January 1, 2015 to February 28, 2015 represent an allocation of its proportionate share of the Azure consolidated long-term debt presented in accordance with applicable accounting guidance. The allocation of long-term debt and related expense is based on the Azure System’s proportional carrying value of assets as a percentage of total assets financed by the Azure Credit Agreement.

 

In connection with entering into the Azure Credit Agreement, Azure incurred financing costs, which were deferred and amortized over the maturity period of the Azure Credit Agreement. These deferred financing costs have also been allocated to the Azure System’s balance sheet, included within other non-current assets, as of December 31, 2015. The Azure System's interest expense allocation has also been calculated using a similar allocation methodology as long-term debt.

 

The weighted average long-term debt allocated to the Azure System for the period January 1, 2015 to February 28, 2015 was $192.0 million. The weighted average long-term debt allocated to the Partnership for the Azure ETG System was $55.1 million for the period March 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015. The interest expense allocated to the Azure System for the period January 1, 2015 to February 28, 2015 was $2.3 million of which $0.3 million was associated with the allocation of deferred financing cost amortization expense. The interest expense allocated to the Partnership for the Azure ETG System was $0.4 million for the period March 1, 2015 to March 31, 2015, of which $0.1 million was associated with the allocation of deferred financing cost amortization expense. 

 

The allocation of long-term debt and related expenses to the Azure System were in accordance with applicable accounting guidance, and the long-term debt and related expenses were not assumed by the Partnership as part of the Contribution. As a result, the allocation of long-term debt and related expenses is only applicable for the Azure System historical periods presented.

 

9.  SEGMENT INFORMATION

 

As of March 31, 2016, the Partnership had two operating segments gathering and processing and logistics. These segments were identified based on the differing products and services, regulatory environment, and expertise required for their respective operations. The Partnership's CODM is the Chief Executive Officer of our General Partner.

 

Beginning in the second quarter of 2016, we will evaluate our segment reporting as a result of the AES contract terminations.

 

The financial information for our operating segments has been presented for the three months ended March 31, 2016 and 2015 and as of March 31, 2016 and 2015.

 

The following table presents financial information by segment for the three months ended March 31, 2016:

 

 

 

The following table presents financial information by segment for the three months ended March 31, 2015: