Energy Transfer 2015 Annual Report Download - page 36

Table of Contents
and strict controls regarding the discharge of regulated substances into state waters or waters of the United States. The Clean Water Act and comparable state
laws can impose substantial administrative, civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance including spills and other non-authorized discharges. The OPA
subjects owners of covered facilities to strict joint and potentially unlimited liability for removal costs and other consequences of a release of oil, where the
release is into navigable waters, along shorelines or in the exclusive economic zone of the United States. Spill prevention control and countermeasure
requirements of the Clean Water Act and some state laws require that containment dikes and similar structures be installed to help prevent the impact on
navigable waters in the event of a release. The PHMSA, the EPA, or various state regulatory agencies, has approved our oil spill emergency response plans
that one to be used in the event of a spill incident.
In addition, some states maintain groundwater protection programs that require permits for discharges or operations that may impact groundwater conditions.
Our management believes that compliance with existing permits and compliance with foreseeable new permit requirements will not have a material adverse
effect on our results of operations, financial position or expected cash flows.
 The Endangered Species Act, as amended, restricts activities that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitat.
Similar protections are offered to migratory birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. We may operate in areas that are currently designated as a habitat for
endangered or threatened species or where the discovery of previously unidentified endangered species, or the designation of additional species as
endangered or threatened may occur in which event such one or more developments could cause us to incur additional costs, to develop habitat conservation
plans, to become subject to expansion or operating restrictions, or bans in the affected areas. Moreover, such designation of previously unprotected species as
threatened or endangered in areas where our oil and natural gas exploration and production customers operate could cause our customers to incur increased
costs arising from species protection measures and could result in delays or limitations in our customers’ performance of operations, which could reduce
demand for our services.
 Based on findings made by the EPA that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases present an endangerment to
public health and the environment, the EPA has adopted regulations under existing provisions of the federal Clean Air Act that, among other things, establish
Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”) and Title V permitting reviews for greenhouse gas emissions from certain large stationary sources that already
are potential major sources of certain principal, or criteria, pollutant emissions. Facilities required to obtain PSD permits for their greenhouse gas emissions
will be required to also reduce those emissions according to “best available control technology” standards for greenhouse gases, which are typically
developed by the states. Any regulatory or permitting obligation that limits emissions of greenhouse gases could require us to incur costs to reduce or
sequester emissions of greenhouse gases associated with our operations and also could adversely affect demand for the natural gas and other hydrocarbon
products that we transport, process, or otherwise handle in connection with our services.
In addition, the EPA adopted regulations requiring the annual reporting of greenhouse gas emissions from certain petroleum and natural gas sources in the
United States, including onshore oil and natural gas production, processing, transmission, storage and distribution facilities. On October 22, 2015, the EPA
published a final rule that expands the petroleum and natural gas system sources for which annual greenhouse gas emissions reporting is currently required to
include greenhouse gas emissions reporting beginning in the 2016 reporting year for certain onshore gathering and boosting systems consisting primarily of
gathering pipelines, compressors and process equipment used to perform natural gas compression, dehydration and acid gas removal. We are monitoring
greenhouse gas emissions from certain of our facilities pursuant to applicable greenhouse emissions reporting requirements, and management does not
believe that the costs of these monitoring and reporting requirements will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
Various pieces of legislation to reduce emissions of, or to create cap and trade programs for, greenhouse gases have been proposed by the U.S. Congress over
the past several years, but no proposal has yet passed. Numerous states have already taken legal measures to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, primarily
through the planned development of greenhouse gas emission inventories and/or regional greenhouse gas cap and trade programs. The passage of legislation
that limits emissions of greenhouse gases from our equipment and operations could require us to incur costs to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions from our
own operations, and it could also adversely affect demand for our transportation, storage and processing services by reducing demand for oil, natural gas and
NGLs. For example, in August 2015, the EPA announced proposed rules, expected to be finalized in 2016, that would establish new controls for methane
emissions from certain new, modified or reconstructed equipment and processes in the oil and natural gas source category, including oil and natural gas
production and natural gas processing and transmission facilities as part of an overall effort to reduce methane emissions by up to 45 percent from 2012
levels in 2025. On an international level, the United States is one of almost 200 nations that agreed in December 2015 to an international climate change
agreement in Paris, France that calls for countries to set their own GHG emissions targets and be transparent about the measures each country will use to
achieve its GHG emissions targets. Although it is not possible at this time to predict how new methane restrictions would impact our business or how or when
the United State might impose restrictions on greenhouse gases as a result of the international agreement agreed to in Paris, any new legal requirements that
impose more stringent requirements on the emission
30