Item 1. Financial Statements

See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

1

Table of Contents

See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

2

Table of Contents

See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

3

Table of Contents

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)

NOTE 1. ORGANIZATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION

     TEPPCO Partners, L.P. (the “Partnership”), a Delaware limited partnership, is a master limited partnership formed in March 1990. We operate through TE Products Pipeline Company, Limited Partnership (“TE Products”), TCTM, L.P. (“TCTM”) and TEPPCO Midstream Companies, L.P. (“TEPPCO Midstream”). Collectively, TE Products, TCTM and TEPPCO Midstream are referred to as the “Operating Partnerships.” Texas Eastern Products Pipeline Company, LLC (the “Company” or “General Partner”), a Delaware limited liability company, serves as our general partner. The General Partner is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Duke Energy Field Services (“DEFS”), a joint venture between Duke Energy Corporation (“Duke Energy”) and Phillips Petroleum Company (“Phillips”). Duke Energy holds an approximate 70% interest in DEFS, and Phillips holds the remaining 30%. The Company, as general partner, performs all management and operating functions required for us, except for the management and operations of certain of the TEPPCO Midstream assets. We have entered into agreements with DEFS in which DEFS manages certain of the TEPPCO Midstream assets on our behalf. We reimburse the General Partner for all reasonable direct and indirect expenses incurred in managing us.

     On July 26, 2001, the Company restructured its general partner ownership of the Operating Partnerships to cause them to be indirectly wholly-owned by us. TEPPCO GP, Inc. (“TEPPCO GP”), our subsidiary, succeeded the Company as general partner of the Operating Partnerships. All remaining partner interests in the Operating Partnerships not already owned by us were transferred to us. In exchange for this contribution, the Company’s interest as our general partner was increased to 2%. The increased percentage is the economic equivalent of the aggregate interest that the Company had prior to the restructuring through its combined interests in us and the Operating Partnerships. As a result, we hold a 99.999% limited partner interest in the Operating Partnerships and TEPPCO GP holds a 0.001% general partner interest. This reorganization was undertaken to simplify required financial reporting by the Operating Partnerships when the Operating Partnerships issue guarantees of our debt.

     As used in this Report, “we,” “us,” “our,” and the “Partnership” means TEPPCO Partners, L.P. and, where the context requires, includes our subsidiary operating partnerships.

     The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments that are, in the opinion of the management of the Company, of a normal and recurring nature and necessary for a fair statement of our financial position as of June 30, 2002, and the results of our operations and cash flows for the periods presented. The results of operations for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2002, are not necessarily indicative of results of our operations for the full year 2002. You should read the interim financial statements in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto presented in the TEPPCO Partners, L.P. Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended, for the year ended December 31, 2001. We have reclassified certain amounts from prior periods to conform with the current presentation.

     We operate and report in three business segments: transportation and storage of refined products, liquefied petroleum gases (“LPGs”) and petrochemicals (“Downstream Segment”); gathering, transportation, marketing and storage of crude oil; and distribution of lubrication oils and specialty chemicals (“Upstream Segment”); and gathering of natural gas, fractionation of natural gas liquids (“NGLs”) and transportation of NGLs (“Midstream Segment”). Our reportable segments offer different products and services and are managed separately because each requires different business strategies.

     Our interstate transportation operations, including rates charged to customers, are subject to regulations prescribed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”). We refer to refined products, LPGs, petrochemicals, crude oil, NGLs and natural gas in this Report, collectively, as “petroleum products” or “products.”

     Basic net income per Unit is computed by dividing net income, after deduction of the general partner’s interest, by the weighted average number of Limited Partner and Class B Units outstanding (a total of 45.5 million

4

Table of Contents

and 38.4 million Units for the six months ended June 30, 2002, and 2001, respectively, and 46.3 million and 38.9 million Units for the three months ended June 30, 2002, and 2001, respectively). The general partner’s percentage interest in net income is based on its percentage of cash distributions from Available Cash for each period (see Note 9. Quarterly Distributions of Available Cash). The general partner was allocated $12.9 million (representing 25.18%) and $13.2 million (representing 19.17%) of net income for the six months ended June 30, 2002, and 2001, respectively. The General Partner’s percentage interest in our net income increased for the six months ended June 30, 2002, compared to the corresponding period in 2001, as a result of the increase in the quarterly distribution to $0.60 per Unit with respect to the second quarter of 2002 from $0.525 per Unit with respect to the second quarter of 2001.

     Diluted net income per Unit is similar to the computation of basic net income per Unit above, except that the denominator was increased to include the dilutive effect of outstanding Unit options by application of the treasury stock method. For the three months ended June 30, 2002, and 2001, the denominator was increased by 39,958 Units and 44,559 Units, respectively. For the six months ended June 30, 2002, and 2001, the denominator was increased by 45,036 Units and 36,021 Units, respectively.

NOTE 2. NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

     In June 2001, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 143, Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations . SFAS 143 requires us to record the fair value of an asset retirement obligation as a liability in the period in which we incur a legal obligation for the retirement of tangible long-lived assets. A corresponding asset is also recorded and depreciated over the life of the asset. After the initial measurement of the asset retirement obligation, the obligation will be adjusted at the end of each period to reflect the passage of time and changes in the estimated future cash flows underlying the obligation. We are required to adopt SFAS 143 effective January 1, 2003. We are currently evaluating the impact of adopting SFAS 143.

     In August 2001, the FASB issued SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets . SFAS 144 supercedes SFAS No. 121, Accounting for Long-Lived Assets and For Long-Lived Assets to be Disposed Of , but retains its fundamental provisions for reorganizing and measuring impairment losses on long-lived assets held for use and long-lived assets to be disposed of by sale. We adopted SFAS 144 effective January 1, 2002. The adoption of SFAS 144 did not have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

     In April 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 145, Rescission of FASB Statements No. 4, 44, and 64, Amendment of FASB Statement No. 13, and Technical Corrections . SFAS 145 eliminates the requirement to classify gains and losses from the extinguishment of indebtedness as extraordinary, requires certain lease modifications to be treated the same as a sale-leaseback transaction, and makes other non-substantive technical corrections to existing pronouncements. SFAS 145 is effective for fiscal years beginning after May 15, 2002, with earlier adoption encouraged. We are required to adopt SFAS 145 effective January 1, 2003. We do not believe that the adoption of SFAS 145 will have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

     In July 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 146, Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities . SFAS 146 addresses financial accounting and reporting for costs associated with exit or disposal activities and nullifies EITF Issue No. 94-3, Liability Recognition for Certain Employee Termination Benefits and Other Costs to Exit an Activity (including Certain Costs Incurred in a Restructuring) . SFAS 146 requires recognition of a liability for a cost associated with an exit or disposal activity when the liability is incurred, as opposed to when the entity commits to an exit plan under EITF No. 94-3. SFAS 146 is to be applied prospectively to

5

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

exit or disposal activities initiated after December 31, 2002. We do not believe that the adoption of SFAS 146 will have a material effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

NOTE 3. GOODWILL AND OTHER INTANGIBLE ASSETS

     In July 2001, the FASB issued SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets . SFAS 142 requires that goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite useful lives no longer be amortized, but instead tested for impairment at least annually. SFAS 142 requires that intangible assets with definite useful lives be amortized over their respective estimated useful lives.

     Beginning January 1, 2002, effective with the adoption of SFAS 142, we no longer record amortization expense related to goodwill or amortization expense related to the excess investment on our equity investment in Seaway (see Note 7. Equity Investments). Upon adoption of SFAS 142 on January 1, 2002, we had not yet begun to amortize our excess investment in Centennial Pipeline, LLC; therefore, no amortization expense has been recorded in any of the periods presented below related to this excess investment. The following table presents our results on a comparable basis, as if we had not recorded amortization expense of goodwill or amortization expense of our excess investment in Seaway for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2001 (in thousands, except per Unit amounts):

     Upon the adoption of SFAS 142, we were required to reassess the useful lives and residual values of all intangible assets acquired, and make necessary amortization period adjustments by the end of the first interim period after adoption. We completed this analysis during the first quarter of 2002, resulting in no change to the

6

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

amortization period for our intangible assets. We will continue to reassess the useful lives and residual values of all intangible assets on an annual basis.

     In connection with the transitional goodwill impairment evaluation required by SFAS 142, we were required to perform an assessment of whether there was an indication that goodwill was impaired as of the date of adoption. We accomplished this by identifying our reporting units and determining the carrying value of each reporting unit by assigning the assets and liabilities, including the existing goodwill and intangible assets, to those reporting units as of the date of adoption. We then determined the fair value of each reporting unit and compared it to the carrying value of the reporting unit. We completed this analysis during the second quarter of 2002, resulting in no transitional impairment loss. We will continue to compare the fair value of each reporting unit to the carrying value on an annual basis to determine if an impairment loss has occurred.

     At June 30, 2002, we had $16.9 million of unamortized goodwill and $58.2 million of excess investment in our equity investments (equity method goodwill). We completed an impairment analysis of the excess investment in our equity investments during the six months ended June 30, 2002, and we noted no indication of impairment. The excess investment is included in our equity investments account at June 30, 2002. The following table presents the carrying amount of goodwill and excess investments, at June 30, 2002, by business segment (in thousands):

     The following table reflects the components of amortized intangible assets, excluding goodwill (in thousands):

     Excluding goodwill, amortization expense on intangible assets was $4.7 million and $0.5 million for the three months ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively, and $9.3 million and $1.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, respectively.

7

Table of Contents

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

     The following table sets forth the estimated amortization expense on intangible assets for the years ending December 31 (in thousands):

NOTE 4. DERIVATIVE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

     We account for derivative financial instruments in accordance with SFAS No. 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and SFAS No. 138, Accounting for Certain Derivative Instruments and Certain Hedging Activities, an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133. These statements establish accounting and reporting standards requiring that derivative instruments (including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts) be recorded on the balance sheet at fair value as either assets or liabilities. The accounting for changes in the fair value of a derivative instrument depends on the intended use of the derivative and the resulting designation, which is established at the inception of a derivative. Special accounting for derivatives qualifying as fair value hedges allows a derivative’s gains and losses to offset related results on the hedged item in the statement of income. For derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges, changes in fair value, to the extent the hedge is effective, are recognized in other comprehensive income until the hedged item is recognized in earnings. Hedge effectiveness is measured at least quarterly based on the relative cumulative changes in fair value between the derivative contract and the hedged item over time. Any change in fair value resulting from ineffectiveness, as defined by SFAS 133, is recognized immediately in earnings.

     We have utilized and expect to continue to utilize derivative financial instruments with respect to a portion of our interest rate and fair value risks and our crude oil marketing activities, as each is explained below. The derivative financial instrument related to our interest rate risk is intended to reduce our exposure to increases in the benchmark interest rates underlying our variable rate revolving credit facility. The derivative financial instruments related to our fair value risks are intended to reduce our exposure to changes in the fair value of the fixed rate Senior Notes resulting from changes in interest rates. Our Upstream Segment uses derivative financial instruments to reduce our exposure to fluctuations in the market price of crude oil. At June 30, 2002, the Upstream Segment had no open positions on derivative financial contracts. By using derivative financial instruments to hedge exposures to changes in interest rates, fair value of fixed rate Senior Notes and crude oil prices, we are exposed to credit risk and market risk. Credit risk is the failure of the counterparty to perform under the terms of the derivative contract. When the fair value of a derivative contract is positive, the counterparty owes us, which creates credit risk for us. When the fair value of a derivative contract is negative, we owe the counterparty and, therefore, we do not possess credit risk. We minimize the credit risk in derivative instruments by entering into transactions with major financial institutions or commodities trading institutions. These derivative financial instruments generally take the form of swaps and forward contracts. Market risk is the adverse effect on the value of a financial instrument that results from a change in interest rates or commodity prices. We manage market risk associated with interest-rate and commodity-price contracts by establishing and monitoring parameters that limit the type and degree of market risk that may be undertaken.

     On July 31, 2000, we entered into a three-year interest rate swap agreement to hedge our exposure to increases in the benchmark interest rate underlying our variable rate revolving credit facilities. The term of the interest rate swap was extended to April 6, 2004, to match the maturity of the credit facilities. We have designated this swap agreement, which hedges exposure to variability in expected future cash flows attributed to changes in interest rates, as a cash flow hedge. The swap agreement is based on a notional amount of $250 million. Under the swap agreement, we pay a fixed rate of interest of 6.955% and receive a floating rate based on a three month U.S. Dollar LIBOR rate. Since this swap is designated as a cash flow hedge, the changes in fair value, to the extent the swap is effective, are recognized in other comprehensive income until the hedged interest costs are recognized in earnings. During the six months ended June 30, 2002, and 2001, we recognized $6.3 million and $2.2 million,

8

Table of Contents

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

respectively, in losses, included in interest expense, on the interest rate swap attributable to interest costs occurring in 2002 and 2001. During the quarter ended June 30, 2002, we measured the hedge effectiveness of this interest rate swap and noted that no gain or loss from ineffectiveness was required to be recognized. The fair value of the interest rate swap agreement was a loss of approximately $20 million and $20.3 million at June 30, 2002, and December 31, 2001, respectively. We anticipate that approximately $10.6 million of the fair value will be transferred into earnings over the next twelve months.

     On October 4, 2001, our TE Products subsidiary entered into an interest rate swap agreement to hedge its exposure to changes in the fair value of its fixed rate 7.51% Senior Notes due 2028. We have designated this swap agreement, which hedges exposure to changes in the fair value of the TE Products Senior Notes, as a fair value hedge. The swap agreement has a notional amount of $210 million and matures in January 2028 to match the principal and maturity of the TE Products Senior Notes. Under the swap agreement, TE Products pays a floating rate based on a three month U.S. Dollar LIBOR rate, plus a spread, and receives a fixed rate of interest of 7.51%. During the six months ended June 30, 2002, we recognized a gain of $3.6 million, recorded as a reduction of interest expense, on the interest rate swap. During the quarter ended June 30, 2002, we measured the hedge effectiveness of this interest rate swap and noted that no gain or loss from ineffectiveness was required to be recognized.

     On February 20, 2002, we entered into interest rate swap agreements to hedge our exposure to changes in the fair value of our fixed rate 7.625% Senior Notes due 2012. We have designated these swap agreements, which hedge exposure to changes in the fair value of the Senior Notes, as fair value hedges. The swap agreements have a combined notional amount of $500 million and mature in 2012 to match the principal and maturity of the Senior Notes. Under the swap agreements, we pay a floating rate based on a six month U.S. Dollar LIBOR rate, plus a spread, and receive a fixed rate of interest of 7.625%. During the six months ended June 30, 2002, we recognized a gain of $6.9 million, recorded as a reduction of interest expense, on the interest rate swaps. During the quarter ended June 30, 2002, we measured the hedge effectiveness of these interest rate swaps and noted that no gain or loss from ineffectiveness was required to be recognized.

NOTE 5. ACQUISITIONS

     On September 30, 2001, our subsidiaries completed the purchase of Jonah Gas Gathering Company (“Jonah”) from Alberta Energy Company for $359.8 million. The acquisition served as our entry into the natural gas gathering industry. We recognized goodwill in the purchase of approximately $2.8 million. We accounted for the acquisition under the purchase method of accounting. Accordingly, the results of the acquisition are included in the consolidated financial statements from September 30, 2001. We paid an additional $7.3 million on February 4, 2002, for final purchase adjustments related primarily to construction projects in progress at the time of closing. Under a contract arrangement on our behalf, DEFS operates and manages Jonah.

     The following table allocates the estimated fair value of the Jonah assets acquired on September 30, 2001, and includes the additional purchase adjustment paid in February 2002 (in thousands):

9

Table of Contents

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

     The value assigned to intangible assets relates to contracts with customers that are either for a fixed term or which dedicate total future lease production. We are amortizing the value assigned to intangible assets over the expected lives of the contracts (approximately 16 years) in proportion to the timing of expected contractual volumes.

     On March 1, 2002, we completed the purchase of the Chaparral NGL system (“Chaparral”) for $132 million from Diamond-Koch II, L.P. and Diamond-Koch III, L.P. We funded the purchase by a drawdown of our $475 million revolving credit facility (see Note 8. Debt). Chaparral is an NGL pipeline system that extends from West Texas and New Mexico to Mont Belvieu, Texas. The pipeline delivers NGLs to fractionators and to our existing storage in Mont Belvieu. Under a contractual arrangement, DEFS operates and manages these assets on our behalf. We accounted for the acquisition of the assets under the purchase method of accounting. We allocated the purchase price of $132 million to property, plant and equipment.

     On June 30, 2002, we completed the purchase of the Val Verde Gathering System (“Val Verde”) from Burlington Resources Gathering Inc., a subsidiary of Burlington Resources Inc., for $444.2 million, including acquisition costs of approximately $1.2 million. The Val Verde system gathers coal seam gas from the Fruitland Coal Formation of the San Juan Basin in New Mexico. The system is one of the largest coal seam gas gathering and treating facilities in the United States. Under a contractual arrangement, DEFS will operate and manage these assets on our behalf. We accounted for the acquisition under the purchase method of accounting. Accordingly, the results of the acquisition will be included in the consolidated financial statements from June 30, 2002.

     The following table allocates the estimated fair value of the Val Verde assets acquired on June 30, 2002 (in thousands):

     The purchase price allocation for the Val Verde acquisition is based on our best estimate using information currently available. We are in the process of completing the final purchase price allocation for the Val Verde acquisition. We have engaged an independent appraiser to assist us in the allocation of the purchase price paid for the Val Verde assets. Consequently, it is likely that the final purchase price allocation will be different from the purchase price allocation shown above. However, we do not currently anticipate that the difference will be material to our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

     The value assigned to intangible assets relates to fixed-term contracts with customers. We are amortizing the value assigned to intangible assets over the lives of the contracts (averaging approximately 10 years) in proportion to the expected contractual volumes.

     The following table presents our unaudited pro forma results as though the acquisitions of Jonah and Val Verde occurred at the beginning of 2001 (in thousands, except per Unit amounts). The pro forma results do not include operating efficiencies or revenue growth from historical results.

10

Table of Contents

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

     The costs of inventories did not exceed market values at June 30, 2002, and December 31, 2001.

NOTE 7. EQUITY INVESTMENTS

     The acquisition of the ARCO Pipe Line Company (“ARCO”) assets in July 2000 included ARCO’s 50-percent ownership interest in Seaway Crude Pipeline Company (“Seaway”), which owns a pipeline that carries mostly imported crude oil from a marine terminal at Freeport, Texas, to Cushing, Oklahoma, and from a marine terminal at Texas City, Texas, to refineries in the Texas City and Houston areas. Seaway is a partnership between TEPPCO Seaway, L.P. (“TEPPCO Seaway”), a subsidiary of TCTM, and Phillips. TCTM purchased the 50-percent ownership interest in Seaway on July 20, 2000, and transferred the investment to TEPPCO Seaway. The Seaway Crude Pipeline Company Partnership Agreement provides for varying participation ratios throughout the life of the Seaway partnership. From July 20, 2000, through May 2002, TEPPCO Seaway received 80% of revenue and expense of Seaway. From June 2002 through May 2006, TEPPCO Seaway receives 60% of revenue and expense of Seaway. Thereafter, the sharing ratio becomes 40% of revenue and expense to TEPPCO Seaway. For the year ended December 31, 2002, our portion of equity earnings on a pro-rated basis will average approximately 67%.

     In August 2000, TE Products entered into agreements with CMS Energy Corporation and Marathon Ashland Petroleum LLC to form Centennial Pipeline, LLC (“Centennial”). Centennial owns and operates an interstate refined petroleum products pipeline extending from the upper Texas Gulf Coast to Illinois. Each participant owns a one-third interest in Centennial. CMS Energy Corporation has announced that it is exploring the sale of certain of its assets, including its investment in Centennial. Through December 31, 2001, we contributed approximately $70 million for our investment in Centennial. During the six months ended June 30, 2002, we contributed approximately $7.7 million for our investment in Centennial. These amounts are included in the equity investment balance at June 30, 2002.

     We use the equity method of accounting to account for our investments in Seaway and Centennial. Summarized combined income statement data for Seaway and Centennial for the six months ended June 30, 2002, and 2001, is presented below (in thousands):

11

Table of Contents

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

     Summarized combined balance sheet data for Seaway and Centennial as of June 30, 2002, and December 31, 2001, is presented below (in thousands):

     Our investment in Seaway at June 30, 2002, and December 31, 2001, includes an excess net investment amount of $25.5 million. At June 30, 2002, our investment in Centennial includes an excess investment of $32.7 million. Excess investment is the amount by which our investment balance exceeds our proportionate share of the net assets of the investment. Prior to January 1, 2002, and the adoption of SFAS 142, we were amortizing the excess investment in Seaway using the straight-line method over 20 years.

NOTE 8. DEBT

Senior Notes

     On January 27, 1998, TE Products completed the issuance of $180 million principal amount of 6.45% Senior Notes due 2008, and $210 million principal amount of 7.51% Senior Notes due 2028 (collectively the “TE Products Senior Notes”). The 6.45% TE Products Senior Notes were issued at a discount and are being accreted to their face value over the term of the notes. The 6.45% TE Products Senior Notes due 2008 are not subject to redemption prior to January 15, 2008. The 7.51% TE Products Senior Notes due 2028, issued at par, may be redeemed at any time after January 15, 2008, at the option of TE Products, in whole or in part, at a premium.

     The TE Products Senior Notes do not have sinking fund requirements. Interest on the TE Products Senior Notes is payable semiannually in arrears on January 15 and July 15 of each year. The TE Products Senior Notes are unsecured obligations of TE Products and rank on a parity with all other unsecured and unsubordinated indebtedness of TE Products. The indenture governing the TE Products Senior Notes contains covenants, including, but not limited to, covenants limiting the creation of liens securing indebtedness and sale and leaseback transactions. However, the indenture does not limit our ability to incur additional indebtedness. As of June 30, 2002, TE Products was in compliance with the covenants of the TE Products Senior Notes.

     On February 20, 2002, we received $494.6 million in net proceeds from the issuance of $500 million principal amount of 7.625% Senior Notes due 2012. The 7.625% Senior Notes were issued at a discount and are being accreted to their face value over the term of the notes. We used the proceeds from the offering to reduce a portion of the outstanding balances of our credit facilities, including those issued in connection with the acquisition of Jonah. The Senior Notes may be redeemed at any time at our option with the payment of accrued interest and a

12

Table of Contents

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

make-whole premium determined by discounting remaining interest and principal payments using a discount rate equal to the rate of the United States Treasury securities of comparable remaining maturity plus 35 basis points. The indenture governing our 7.625% Senior Notes contains covenants, including, but not limited to, covenants limiting the creation of liens securing indebtedness and sale and leaseback transactions. However, the indenture does not limit our ability to incur additional indebtedness. As of June 30, 2002, we were in compliance with the covenants of these Senior Notes.

     We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to hedge our exposure to changes in the fair value on a portion of the Senior Notes discussed above. See Note 4. Derivative Financial Instruments.

Other Long Term Debt and Credit Facilities

     On July 14, 2000, we entered into a $475 million revolving credit facility (“Three Year Facility”) to finance the acquisition of the ARCO assets and to refinance existing bank credit facilities. On April 6, 2001, the Three Year Facility was amended to provide for revolving borrowings of up to $500 million including the issuance of letters of credit of up to $20 million. The term of the revised Three Year Facility was extended to April 6, 2004. The interest rate is based, at our option, on either the lender’s base rate plus a spread, or LIBOR plus a spread in effect at the time of the borrowings. The credit agreement for the Three Year Facility contains restrictive financial covenants that require us to maintain a minimum level of partners’ capital as well as maximum debt-to-EBITDA (earnings before interest expense, income tax expense and depreciation and amortization expense) and minimum fixed charge coverage ratios. On November 13, 2001, certain lenders under the agreement elected to withdraw from the facility, and the available borrowing capacity was reduced to $411 million. On February 20, 2002, we repaid $115.7 million of the then outstanding balance of the Three Year Facility with proceeds from the issuance of our 7.625% Senior Notes. On March 1, 2002, we borrowed $132 million under the Three Year Facility to finance the acquisition of Chaparral. On March 22, 2002, we repaid a portion of the Three Year Facility with proceeds we received from the issuance of additional Limited Partner Units. On March 27, 2002, the Three Year Facility was amended to increase the borrowing capacity to $500 million. To facilitate our financing of a portion of the purchase price of the Val Verde assets, on June 27, 2002, the Three Year Facility was amended to increase the maximum debt-to-EBITDA ratio covenant to allow us to incur additional indebtedness. We then drew down the existing capacity of the Three Year Facility. At June 30, 2002, $500 million was outstanding under the Three Year Facility at a weighted average interest rate of 3.5%. As of June 30, 2002, we were in compliance with the covenants contained in this credit agreement.

     We have entered into an interest rate swap agreement to hedge our exposure to increases in interest rates on the Three Year Facility discussed above. See Note 4. Derivative Financial Instruments.

Short Term Credit Facilities

     On April 6, 2001, we entered into a 364-day, $200 million revolving credit agreement (“Short-term Revolver”). The interest rate is based, at our option, on either the lender’s base rate plus a spread, or LIBOR plus a spread in effect at the time of the borrowings. The credit agreement contains restrictive financial covenants that require us to maintain a minimum level of partners’ capital as well as maximum debt-to-EBITDA and minimum fixed charge coverage ratios. On March 27, 2002, the Short-term Revolver was extended for an additional period of 364 days, ending in April 2003. To facilitate our financing of a portion of the purchase price of the Val Verde assets, on June 27, 2002, the Short-term Revolver was amended to increase the maximum debt-to-EBITDA ratio covenant to allow us to incur additional indebtedness. We then drew down $72 million under the Short-term Revolver. At June 30, 2002, $72 million was outstanding under the Short-term Revolver at an interest rate of 3.5%. As of June 30, 2002, we were in compliance with the covenants contained in this credit agreement.

13

Table of Contents

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

     On September 28, 2001, we entered into a $400 million credit facility with SunTrust Bank (“Bridge Facility”). We borrowed $360 million under the Bridge Facility to acquire the Jonah assets (see Note 5. Acquisitions). The Bridge Facility was payable in June 2002. During the fourth quarter of 2001, we repaid $160 million of the outstanding principal from proceeds received from the issuance of Limited Partner Units in November 2001. On February 5, 2002, we drew down an additional $15 million under the Bridge Facility. On February 20, 2002, we repaid the outstanding balance of the Bridge Facility of $215 million, with proceeds from the issuance of the 7.625% Senior Notes and canceled the facility.

     On June 27, 2002, we entered into a $200 million six-month term loan with SunTrust Bank (“Six-Month Term Loan”). We borrowed $200 million under the Six-Month Term Loan to acquire the Val Verde assets (see Note 5. Acquisitions). The Six-Month Term Loan is payable in December 2002. The interest rate is based, at our option, on either the lender’s base rate plus a spread, or LIBOR plus a spread in effect at the time of the borrowings. The credit agreement contains restrictive financial covenants that require us to maintain a minimum level of partners’ capital as well as maximum debt-to-EBITDA and minimum fixed charge coverage ratios. At June 30, 2002, $200 million was outstanding under the Six-Month Term Loan at an interest rate of 3.3%. As of June 30, 2002, we were in compliance with the covenants contained in this credit agreement.

     On July 11, 2002, we issued 3 million Limited Partner Units at $30.15 per Unit in an underwritten public offering. The net proceeds from the offering totaled $86.6 million and were used to reduce borrowings under our Six-Month Term Loan. In accordance with SFAS No. 6, Classification of Short-term Obligations Expected to be Refinanced, the amount repaid on July 11, 2002, $86.6 million, is classified as long-term debt at June 30, 2002.

     The following table summarizes the principal outstanding under our credit facilities as of June 30, 2002, and December 31, 2001 (in thousands):

14

Table of Contents

TEPPCO PARTNERS, L.P.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued)
(Unaudited)

NOTE 9. QUARTERLY DISTRIBUTIONS OF AVAILABLE CASH