COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Bankruptcy matters

On July 22, 2008 (the "Petition Date"), SemGroup, L.P. and certain subsidiaries filed petitions for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Also on July 22, 2008, SemGroup, L.P.'s Canadian subsidiaries filed for creditor protection in Canada. Later during 2008, certain other U.S. subsidiaries filed petitions for reorganization. While in bankruptcy, SemGroup, L.P. filed a plan of reorganization with the court, which was confirmed on October 28, 2009 (the "Plan of Reorganization"). The Plan of Reorganization determined, among other things, how pre-Petition Date obligations would be settled, the equity structure of the reorganized company upon emergence, and the financing arrangements upon emergence. SemGroup Corporation emerged from bankruptcy protection on November 30, 2009 (the "Emergence Date").

Claims reconciliation process

A large number of parties made claims against us for obligations alleged to have been incurred prior to our predecessor's bankruptcy filing. We have resolved or settled all of these outstanding claims and have made all required distributions. The Plan of Reorganization has therefore been fully administered.

On November 7, 2014, SemGroup Corporation and the other reorganized debtors moved for a final decree from the bankruptcy court closing the debtors’ bankruptcy cases. The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware granted the request and entered its Order Granting Motion of Remaining Debtors for Entry of Final Decree on December 18, 2014. Accordingly, the bankruptcy cases for SemCrude, L.P., Eaglwing, L.P., SemCanada II, L.P., SemCanada L.P., SemGas, L.P., SemGroup, L.P., SemMaterials, L.P., and SemStream, L.P. have been closed. As part of its decree, the Court retained jurisdiction over certain on-going adversary proceedings, but the debtors have estimated and paid the claims associated with these remaining adversaries, leaving the non-debtor parties to the adversaries to resolve their remaining claims amongst themselves.

On January 2, 2015, Bettina M. Whyte, the duly appointed Trustee of the SemGroup Litigation Trust (the “Litigation Trustee”), filed a notice of appeal of the Bankruptcy Court’s December 18, 2014 order closing the aforementioned bankruptcy cases. However, the Bankruptcy Court’s order of final decree was effective upon entry, and the appeal does not stay the effect of the order. The Litigation Trustee’s appeal to the United States District Court for the District of Delaware is currently pending and will be opposed by SemGroup Corporation and the other remaining reorganized debtors.

Dimmit County, TX claims

An employee of Rose Rock Midstream Field Services, LLC was involved in a tractor trailer accident on January 15, 2015 in Dimmit County, Texas. A second accident followed resulting in six fatalities and multiple injuries. At this time, the following lawsuits have been filed in either the District Court of Zavala County, Texas or the District Court of Dimmit County, Texas, Olga D. Rubio and Carlos Rubio, Individually and on Behalf of All Statutory Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of Carlos Rubio, Jr., Deceased vs. Rose Rock Midstream Field Services, LLC and Jesus T. Riojas; David Rodriguez and Maribel Rodriguez vs. Rose Rock Midstream Field Services, LLC and Jesus T. Riojas; David Rodriguez and Maribel Rodrigues, Plaintiffs and Alejandra Abigail Ortega, Individually and as next friend of K.A.P., a minor, and as Representative of the Estate of Eduardo Pena, and Julian Pena and Nelva G. Suifuentes Pena Intervenors vs. Rose Rock Midstream Field Services, LLC, Jesus Riojas, and Roberto Rivera; Derek Muhlenbruch vs. Rose Rock Midstream Field Services, LLC and Jesus T. Riojas; and Agustin Lara, Sr., Individually, and Elsa Zamarripa, Individually and As Representative of the Estate of Justin Lara, Deceased vs. Rose Rock Midstream Field Services, LLC and Jesus T. Riojas. It is anticipated that additional lawsuits will be brought on behalf of the other deceased and injured parties. We are currently working with counsel for the interested parties to investigate the accident, and no determination of liability has been made. We will continue to defend our position and believe that any liability that may arise from this incident will be covered by our insurance; however, we cannot predict the outcome.

Blueknight claim

Blueknight Energy Partners, L.P. ("Blueknight"), which was formerly a subsidiary of SemGroup, together with other entities related to Blueknight, entered into a Shared Services Agreement on April 7, 2009, with SemCrude, L.P., now known as Rose Rock Midstream Crude, L.P. ("SemCrude") and SemManagement, L.L.C. (which are currently subsidiaries of SemGroup). The services provided by SemCrude to Blueknight under this agreement included assisting Blueknight with movement of crude oil belonging to Blueknight’s customers and with the operation of Blueknight’s Oklahoma pipeline system and its Cushing, Oklahoma terminal. Under the subsequent amendments to the agreements beginning in May 2010, certain of these services were phased out, and Blueknight began to perform all services necessary for the movement of its crude oil and the operation of its Cushing terminal without SemCrude’s assistance.

In a letter dated August 18, 2011, Blueknight claimed that SemCrude owes Blueknight approximately 141,000 barrels of crude oil. We responded to Blueknight’s letter denying their charges and requesting documentation from Blueknight of its claim. On February 14, 2012, after months of interaction between the parties through which Blueknight was requested to substantiate its claim, Blueknight filed suit against SemCrude and other related companies in the District Court of Oklahoma County, Oklahoma. On May 1, 2012, the case was transferred to Tulsa County, Oklahoma. On July 2, 2012, the Tulsa County District Court appointed a Special Master to review terminal operations accounting records and determine whether 141,000 barrels of crude oil owned by Blueknight is missing after three months of operations in April through June, 2010. On June 11, 2013, the Special Master’s Report was filed with the District Court finding a shortage in Blueknight’s Cushing terminal and Oklahoma pipeline system of 148,000 barrels. However, after a review of all records created during that three month time period, the Special Master was unable to determine how the shortage might have occurred and was unable to determine the ownership of the potential shortage.

We are currently seeking discovery in the District Court of documentation and testimony on the potential cause and the impact, if any, of the shortage found by the Special Master. We believe Blueknight’s causes of action to be without merit and will continue to defend our position; however, we cannot predict the outcome.

Environmental

We may from time to time experience leaks of petroleum products from our facilities and, as a result of which, we may incur remediation obligations or property damage claims. In addition, we are subject to numerous environmental regulations. Failure to comply with these regulations could result in the assessment of fines or penalties by regulatory authorities.

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment ("the KDHE") initiated discussions during our bankruptcy proceeding regarding six of our sites in Kansas (five owned by Crude and one owned by SemGas) that KDHE believes, based on their historical use, may have soil or groundwater contamination in excess of state standards. KDHE sought our agreement to undertake assessments of these sites to determine whether they are contaminated. We reached an agreement with KDHE on this matter and entered into a Consent Agreement and Final Order with KDHE to conduct environmental assessments on the sites and to pay KDHE’s costs associated with their oversight of this matter. We have conducted Phase II investigations at all sites. Four of the sites have limited amounts of soil contamination that will be excavated and/or remediated on site. Four of the sites appeared to have ground water contamination requiring further delineation and/or ongoing monitoring. Work plans have been submitted to, and approved by, the KDHE. One site was closed and we anticipate closure in 2015 for three of the remaining five sites. We do not anticipate any penalties or fines for these historical sites.

Other matters

We are party to various other claims, legal actions, and complaints arising in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of our management, the ultimate resolution of these claims, legal actions, and complaints, after consideration of amounts accrued, insurance coverage, and other arrangements, will not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, the outcome of such matters is inherently uncertain, and estimates of our consolidated liabilities may change materially as circumstances develop.

Asset retirement obligations

We will be required to incur significant removal and restoration costs when we retire our natural gas gathering and processing facilities in Canada. We have recorded a liability associated with these obligations, which is reported within other noncurrent liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets. The following table summarizes the changes in this liability from December 31, 2011 through December 31, 2014 (in thousands):



Balance, December 31, 2011	$	35,886
Accretion	4,554
Payments made	(1,169		)
Currency translation adjustments	834
Balance, December 31, 2012	40,105
Accretion	4,752
Payments made	(808		)
Currency translation adjustments	(2,864		)
Balance, December 31, 2013	41,185
Accretion	4,807
Payments made	(514		)
Currency translation adjustments	(3,524		)
Balance, December 31, 2014	$	41,954

The December 31, 2014 liability was calculated using the $93.4 million cost we estimate we would incur to retire these facilities, discounted based on our risk-adjusted cost of borrowing and the estimated timing of remediation.

The calculation of the liability for an asset retirement obligation requires the use of significant estimates, including those related to the length of time before the assets will be retired, cost inflation over the assumed life of the assets, actual remediation activities to be required, and the rate at which such obligations should be discounted. Future changes in these estimates could result in material changes in the value of the recorded liability. In addition, future changes in laws or regulations could require us to record additional asset retirement obligations. The $93.4 million estimated cost represents only our proportionate share of the obligations associated with these facilities. An additional $37.7 million of estimated costs are attributable to third-party owners’ proportionate share of the obligations. If an owner fails to perform on its obligations, the other owners (including SemGroup) could be obligated to bear that party’s share of the remediation costs.

Our other segments may also be subject to removal and restoration costs upon retirement of their facilities. However, we are unable to predict when, or if, our pipelines, storage tanks and other facilities would become completely obsolete and require decommissioning. Accordingly, we have not recorded a liability or corresponding asset, as both the amount and timing of such potential future costs are indeterminable.

Operating leases

We have entered into operating lease agreements for office space, office equipment, land and trucks. Future minimum payments required under operating leases that have initial or remaining non-cancellable lease terms in excess of one year at December 31, 2014 are as follows (in thousands):



For year ending:
December 31, 2015	$	9,464
December 31, 2016	9,181
December 31, 2017	6,737
December 31, 2018	2,997
December 31, 2019	1,826
Thereafter	6,967
Total future minimum lease payments	$	37,172

We recorded lease and rental expenses of $16.2 million, $11.4 million and $8.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Purchase and sale commitments

We routinely enter into agreements to purchase and sell petroleum products at specified future dates. We account for these commitments as normal purchases and sales, and therefore we do not record assets or liabilities related to these agreements until the product is purchased or sold. At December 31, 2014, such commitments included the following (in thousands):



	Volume (barrels)	Value
Fixed price purchases	13,648	$	1,141,694
Fixed price sales	13,612	$	1,152,966
Floating price purchases	7,187	$	373,539
Floating price sales	10,719	$	445,655

Certain of the commitments shown in the table above relate to agreements to purchase product from a counterparty and to sell a similar amount of product (in a different location) to the same counterparty. Many of the commitments shown in the table above are cancellable by either party, as long as notice is given within the time frame specified in the agreement (generally 30 to 120 days).

Our SemGas segment has a take or pay contractual obligation related to the fractionation of natural gas liquids. This obligation continues through June 2023, subsequent to the extension of the agreement in the second quarter of 2013. At December 31, 2014, approximately $25.8 thousand was due under the contract. The approximate amount of future obligation is as follows (in thousands):



For year ending:
December 31, 2015	$	10,199
December 31, 2016	11,804
December 31, 2017	11,938
December 31, 2018	10,060
December 31, 2019	9,121
Thereafter	24,391
Total expected future payments	$	77,513

SemGas further has a take or pay contractual obligation related to pipeline transportation. This obligation began in April 2014 and continues through October 2015. The amount of future obligation is approximately $2.6 million. SemGas also enters into contracts under which we are responsible for marketing the majority of the gas and natural gas liquids produced by the counterparties to the agreements. The majority of SemGas’ revenues were generated from such contracts.

Capital contribution requirements

See Note 5 for commitments related to the White Cliffs expansion project.