RISK FACTORS

Investing in our common units involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below with all of the other information included in this prospectus before deciding to invest in our common units. Limited partner interests are inherently different from the capital stock of a corporation, although many of the business risks to which we are subject are similar to those that would be faced by a corporation engaged in a similar business. If any of the following risks actually occur, they may materially harm our business and our financial condition and results of operations. In this event, we might not be able to pay distributions on our common units, the trading price of our common units could decline, and you could lose part or all of your investment .

Risks Related to Our Business

Hess currently accounts for substantially all of our revenues. If Hess changes its business strategy, is unable for any reason, including financial or other limitations, to satisfy its obligations under our commercial agreements, our revenues would decline and our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our unitholders could be materially and adversely affected.

For the year ended December 31, 2016, 100% of our revenues were attributable to our fee-based commercial agreements with Hess, including revenues from third-party volumes delivered under these agreements. Following this offering, we expect that we will continue to derive substantially all of our revenues under multiple commercial agreements with Hess and any event, whether in our areas of operation or elsewhere, that materially and adversely affects Hess’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows may adversely affect our ability to sustain or increase cash distributions to our unitholders. Accordingly, we are indirectly subject to the operational and business risks of Hess, the most significant of which include the following:

27

Table of Contents

Please read “Business—Our Commercial Agreements with Hess” for a detailed description of each of these commercial agreements.

We may not generate sufficient distributable cash flow to support the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution to our unitholders.

In order to support the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution of $         per unit per quarter, or $         per unit on an annualized basis, we must generate distributable cash flow of approximately $         million per quarter, or approximately $         million per year, based on the number of common units and subordinated units and the general partner interest to be outstanding immediately after completion of this offering. We may not generate sufficient distributable cash flow each quarter to support the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution. The amount of cash we can distribute on our units principally depends upon the amount of cash we generate from our operations, which will fluctuate from quarter to quarter based on, among other things:

In addition, the actual amount of distributable cash flow we generate will also depend on other factors, some of which are beyond our control, including:

For a description of additional restrictions and factors that may affect our ability to make cash distributions, please read “Cash Distribution Policy and Restrictions on Distributions.”

28

Table of Contents

On a pro forma basis, we would not have generated sufficient distributable cash flow to pay the aggregate annualized minimum quarterly distribution on all of our units for the year ended December 31, 2016, with a shortfall of approximately $         million for that period. We would have had shortfalls for                     of the four quarters during the year ended December 31, 2016.

We must generate approximately $         million of distributable cash flow to pay the aggregate minimum quarterly distributions for four quarters on all units that will be outstanding immediately following this offering. The amount of distributable cash flow that we generated during the year ended December 31, 2016 on a pro forma basis was approximately $56.3 million, which would have been sufficient to pay     % of the aggregate minimum quarterly distribution on all of our common units and the corresponding distributions on our general partner’s 2% interest, and     % of the aggregate minimum quarterly distributions on our subordinated units and the corresponding distributions on our general partner’s 2% interest for that period. On a pro forma basis, we would have had a shortfall for                     of the four quarters during the year ended December 31, 2016. Our ability to pay the minimum quarterly distribution is subject to various restrictions and other factors described in more detail under “Cash Distribution Policy and Restrictions on Distributions.” If we are not able to generate additional distributable cash flow in future periods, we may not be able to pay the full minimum quarterly distribution or any amount on our common or subordinated units and the corresponding distributions on our general partner’s 2% interest, in which event the market price of our common units may decline materially.

The assumptions underlying the forecast of distributable cash flow that we include in “ Cash Distribution Policy and Restrictions on Distributions ” are inherently uncertain and subject to significant business, economic, financial, regulatory and competitive risks that could cause our actual distributable cash flow to differ materially from our forecast.

The forecast of distributable cash flow set forth in “Cash Distribution Policy and Restrictions on Distributions” includes our forecast of our results of operations and distributable cash flow for the twelve months ending March 31, 2018. Our ability to pay the full minimum quarterly distribution in the forecast period is based on a number of assumptions that may not prove to be correct and that are discussed in “Cash Distribution Policy and Restrictions on Distributions.” Our financial forecast has been prepared by management, and we have neither received nor requested an opinion or report on it from our or any other independent auditor.

Hess may suspend, reduce or terminate its obligations under our commercial agreements in certain circumstances, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

Our commercial agreements with Hess include provisions that permit Hess to suspend or terminate its obligations under the applicable agreement if certain events occur. These events include our failure to perform or comply with a material warranty, covenant or obligation under the applicable commercial agreement following the expiration of a specified cure period. In addition, Hess may suspend or reduce its obligations under our commercial agreements if a force majeure event prevents us from performing required services under the applicable agreement. Hess has the ability to make such decisions notwithstanding the fact that they may significantly and adversely affect us. Any such reduction or suspension or termination of Hess’s obligations would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to our unitholders. Please read “Business—Our Commercial Agreements with Hess.”

29

Table of Contents

Because of the natural decline in production from existing wells in our areas of operation, our success depends, in part, on Hess and other producers replacing declining production and also on our ability to secure new sources of natural gas and crude oil. Any decrease in the volumes of natural gas or crude oil that we handle could adversely affect our business and operating results.

The natural gas and crude oil volumes that support our business depend on the level of production from natural gas and crude oil wells connected to our facilities, which may be less than expected and will naturally decline over time. As a result, our cash flows associated with these wells will also decline over time. In order to maintain or increase throughput levels at our facilities, Hess and other producers for which we currently or in the future may handle volumes at our facilities must replace declining production, or we must obtain new sources of natural gas and crude oil. The primary factors affecting our ability to obtain non-dedicated sources of natural gas and crude oil include (i) the level of successful drilling activity in our areas of operation, (ii) our ability to compete for volumes from successful new wells and (iii) our ability to compete successfully for volumes from sources connected to other pipelines.

We have no control over the level of drilling activity in our areas of operation, the amount of reserves associated with wells connected to our systems or the rate at which production from a well declines. In addition, we have no control over Hess or other producers or their drilling or production decisions, which are affected by, among other things:

Fluctuations in commodity prices can also greatly affect the development of crude oil and natural gas reserves. Drilling and production activity generally decreases as crude oil and natural gas prices decrease. Declines in crude oil and natural gas prices could have a negative impact on exploration, development and production activity, and if sustained, could lead to a material decrease in such activity. For example, as a result of the decline in crude oil prices beginning in late 2014, Hess reduced its rig count to two rigs in the Bakken by the end of 2016. Hess has recently announced that it plans to increase its rig count and operate six rigs in the Bakken by the end of 2017; however, total Bakken rig counts continue to fluctuate. Sustained reductions in exploration or production activity in our areas of operation could lead to reduced utilization of our assets.

Because of these and other factors, even if crude oil and natural gas reserves are known to exist in areas served by our assets, producers may choose not to develop those reserves. If reductions in drilling activity result in our inability to maintain the current levels of throughput on our systems, those reductions could reduce our revenues and cash flow and adversely affect our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Our success depends on our ability to attract and maintain customers in a limited number of geographic areas.

Substantially all of our assets are located in the Bakken, and we initially intend to focus our future capital expenditures largely on developing our business in that area. As a result, our financial

30

Table of Contents

condition, results of operations and cash flows are significantly dependent upon the demand for our services in that area. Due to our focus on the Bakken, an adverse development in crude oil or natural gas production from that area would have a significantly greater impact on our financial condition and results of operations than if we spread expenditures more evenly over a wider geographic area. For example, a change in the rules and regulations governing operations in or around the Bakken could cause Hess or other producers to reduce or cease drilling or to permanently or temporarily shut-in their production within the area, which could lead to a decrease in the volumes of natural gas and crude oil that we handle and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Seasonal weather conditions may adversely affect our customers’ ability to conduct drilling activities in some of the areas where we operate and our ability to operate our assets and to construct additional facilities.

Crude oil and natural gas operations in North Dakota are adversely affected by seasonal weather conditions. In the Bakken, drilling and other crude oil and natural gas activities can be adversely affected during the winter months. Severe winter weather conditions limit and may reduce or temporarily halt our customers’ ability to operate during such conditions, leading to the decrease in drilling activity and the potential shut-in of producing wells which the producers are unable to service. This could result in a decrease in the volumes of crude oil, natural gas and NGLs supplied to our assets. In addition, seasonal weather conditions during the winter months may adversely impact the operations of our assets and our ability to construct additional facilities, by causing temporary delays and shutdowns. These constraints and the resulting impacts could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Our operations and Hess’s Bakken production operations are subject to many risks and operational hazards, some of which may result in business interruptions and shutdowns of our or Hess’s operations and damages for which we may not be fully covered by insurance. If a significant accident or event occurs that results in a business interruption or shutdown for which we are not adequately insured, our operations and financial results could be materially and adversely affected.

Our operations are subject to all of the risks and operational hazards inherent in gathering, compressing, processing, fractionating, terminaling, storing, loading and transporting crude oil, natural gas and NGLs, including:

31

Table of Contents

These risks could result in substantial losses due to personal injury and/or loss of life, severe damage to and destruction of property and equipment and pollution or other environmental damage, as well as business interruptions or shutdowns of our facilities. Any such event or unplanned shutdown could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, Hess’s Bakken production operations, on which our operations are substantially dependent, are subject to similar operational hazards and risks inherent in producing crude oil and natural gas. A serious accident at our facilities or at Hess’s facilities could result in serious injury or death to our employees or contractors or those of Hess or its affiliates and could expose us to significant liability for personal injury claims and reputational risk. We have no control over the operations at Hess’s Bakken operations and their associated facilities.

We do not maintain insurance coverage against all potential losses and could suffer losses for uninsurable or uninsured risks or in amounts in excess of existing insurance coverage. We carry insurance coverage for certain property damage and third-party liabilities, which includes sudden and accidental pollution liabilities. We are also insured under certain of Hess’s and Hess Infrastructure Partners’ liability policies and are subject to Hess’s and Hess Infrastructure Partners’ policy limits under these policies. The occurrence of an event that is not fully covered by insurance or failure by one or more insurers to honor its coverage commitments for an insured event could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In May 2015, a crude oil unit train consisting of 107 CPC-1232 rail cars owned by our Predecessor derailed on a stretch of BNSF Railway near Heimdal, North Dakota. No injuries were reported in connection with the accident. The derailment also resulted in a release of crude oil that BNSF took the lead to remediate. The National Transportation Safety Board, or the NTSB, is investigating the cause of the accident, and that investigation is ongoing. Hess also conducted an independent safety review to identify any steps that can be taken to reduce the chances of a similar derailment in the future. Under our omnibus agreement, Hess Infrastructure Partners will indemnify us for any direct costs we incur relating to the derailment. We do not expect the accident to have a material impact on our business, financial condition and/or results of operations.

Additionally, although Hess Infrastructure Partners has agreed to indemnify us for certain environmental liabilities under the omnibus agreement, the indemnification is limited to $15 million (inclusive of any punitive, special, indirect or consequential damages) and may not be sufficient to cover any such liabilities that may arise. However, any costs we may incur as a result of the February 2013 Notice of Violation that Hess received from the North Dakota Department of Health will not be subject to the $15 million limit. Please read “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions—Agreements Governing the Transactions—Omnibus Agreement.”

If we are unable to make acquisitions on economically acceptable terms from Hess Infrastructure Partners or third parties, our future growth would be limited, and any acquisitions we may make may reduce, rather than increase, our cash flows and ability to make distributions to unitholders.

Part of our strategy to grow our business and increase our cash distributions per unit to unitholders is dependent on our ability to make acquisitions that result in an increase in distributable cash flow per unit. The acquisition component of our growth strategy is based, in large part, on our expectation of ongoing divestitures of midstream assets by industry participants, including Hess Infrastructure Partners. Hess Infrastructure Partners has provided us with a right of first offer to acquire its retained interests in our joint interest assets. The consummation and timing of any future acquisitions of these right of first offer assets will depend upon, among other things, Hess Infrastructure Partners’ willingness to offer these assets for sale, our ability to negotiate acceptable purchase agreements and commercial agreements with respect to the assets and our ability to obtain

32

Table of Contents

financing on acceptable terms, and we can offer no assurance that we will be able to successfully consummate any future acquisition of our right of first offer assets. For more information about our right of first offer, please read “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions—Agreements Governing the Transactions—Omnibus Agreement—Right of first offer.”

If we are unable to make acquisitions from Hess Infrastructure Partners or third parties, because (i) there is a material decrease in divestitures of midstream assets, (ii) we are unable to identify attractive acquisition candidates or negotiate acceptable purchase contracts, (iii) we are unable to obtain financing for these acquisitions on economically acceptable terms, (iv) we are outbid by competitors or (v) for any other reason, our future growth and ability to increase our cash distributions per unit will be limited. Furthermore, even if we do consummate acquisitions that we believe will be accretive, they may in fact result in a decrease in distributable cash flow per unit as a result of incorrect assumptions in our evaluation of such acquisitions or unforeseen consequences or other external events beyond our control. If we consummate any future acquisitions, unitholders will not have the opportunity to evaluate the economic, financial and other relevant information that we will consider in evaluating any such acquisitions.

We may not be able to significantly increase our third-party revenues due to competition and other factors, which could limit our ability to grow and extend our dependence on Hess.

Part of our growth strategy includes diversifying our customer base by identifying opportunities to offer services to third parties with our existing assets or by constructing or acquiring new assets independently from Hess. Our ability to increase our third-party revenues is subject to numerous factors beyond our control, including prevailing commodity prices, competition from third parties and the extent to which we lack available capacity when third-party customers require it. For example, the decline in crude oil prices beginning in late 2014 has caused producers to reduce exploration, development and production activities, which has resulted in a decrease in third-party volumes available to be handled by our assets. In addition, our natural gas and crude oil gathering systems and Tioga Gas Plant are subject to competition from existing and future third-party natural gas and crude oil gathering systems and natural gas processing and fractionation plants in the Bakken, while our terminals and crude oil rail cars compete with third-party terminals, pipelines and crude oil rail cars for available third-party volumes. To the extent that we have available capacity on our gathering systems or at our Tioga Gas Plant for third-party volumes, we may not be able to compete effectively with third-party gathering systems or processing plants for additional natural gas production in the area. To the extent that we have available capacity at our terminals or crude oil rail cars for third-party volumes, competition from other existing or future terminals or crude oil rail cars owned by third parties may limit our ability to utilize this available capacity.

We have historically provided midstream services to third parties on only a limited basis, and we can provide no assurance that we will be able to attract any material third-party service opportunities. Our efforts to attract new unaffiliated customers may be adversely affected by our relationship with Hess and our desire to provide services pursuant to fee-based contracts. Our potential customers may prefer to obtain services under other forms of contractual arrangements under which we would be required to assume direct commodity exposure.

The completion of capital projects by us may not result in revenue increases and will be subject to regulatory, environmental, political, legal and economic risks, which could adversely affect our operations and financial condition.

As part of our growth strategy, we intend to increase utilization of our existing asset base and increase revenue at our facilities by handling additional volumes of natural gas and crude oil resulting from the completion of various capital projects by us. For example, we are nearing the completion of

33

Table of Contents

construction and reconfiguration of facilities and pipelines in McKenzie and Williams Counties that are expected to increase our throughput capacity for crude oil and natural gas originating from south of the Missouri River and moving northward to our natural gas processing and crude oil and NGL logistics assets in Tioga and Ramberg, and in connection with the next planned turnaround of the Tioga Gas Plant in 2019, we are planning a debottlenecking project to increase the plant’s processing capacity to a maximum of 300 MMcf/d.

There are inherent risks associated with undertaking these and other capital projects, including numerous regulatory, environmental, political and legal uncertainties, most of which are beyond our control. If we undertake these projects, they may not be completed on schedule or at all or at the budgeted cost, or their completion may not result in the anticipated increase in volumes at our facilities, which could materially and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition and our ability in the future to make distributions to our unitholders.

Our industry is highly competitive, and increased competitive pressure could adversely affect our business and operating results.

We compete with other similarly sized midstream companies in our areas of operation. In addition, some of our competitors have assets in closer proximity to crude oil and natural gas supplies and have available idle capacity in existing assets that would not require new capital investments for use. Some of our competitors are large companies that have greater financial, managerial and other resources than we do. Our competitors may expand or construct gathering systems processing plants, terminals or storage facilities that would create additional competition for the services we provide to our customers. Our ability to renew or replace existing contracts with our customers at rates sufficient to maintain current revenue and cash flow could be adversely affected by the activities of our competitors and our customers. All of these competitive pressures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Our exposure to direct commodity price risk may increase in the future.

Following the closing of this offering, we expect that we will initially generate substantially all of our revenues under fee-based commercial agreements with Hess under which we are paid based on the volumes of crude oil, natural gas and NGLs that we handle and the ancillary services we provide, rather than the value of the commodities themselves. As a result, our operations and cash flows generally will have minimal direct exposure to commodity price risk. We may acquire or develop additional assets in the future or enter into transactions that have a greater exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices than our current operations. In addition, our efforts to negotiate contractual arrangements to minimize our direct exposure to commodity price risk in the future may not be successful. Increased exposure to the volatility of crude oil, natural gas and NGL prices in the future could have a material adverse effect on our revenues and cash flow and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

We do not own all of the land on which certain of the pipelines connecting our facilities are located, which could result in disruptions to our operations.

We do not own all of the land on which our pipelines are located, and we are, therefore, subject to the possibility of more onerous terms and increased costs to retain necessary land use if we do not have valid leases or rights-of-way or if such rights-of-way lapse or terminate. We obtain the rights to construct and operate our pipelines on land owned by third parties and governmental agencies, and some of our agreements may grant us those rights for only a specific period of time. Our loss of these rights, through our inability to renew right-of-way contracts or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

34

Table of Contents

We utilize contract operator services at certain of our assets, and we may face higher costs associated with terminal services in the future.

We utilize contract operator services at certain of our assets. For example, we utilize contract operator services at our Tioga Rail Terminal under a rail and transload services agreement with a third-party operator that may be terminated by us with 90 days’ notice. Under the terms of the agreement, third-party contract personnel supervised by Hess employees control, monitor, record and report on the operation of the Tioga Rail Terminal. Contract personnel also provide inspection, crude oil loading, railroad consulting, inventory management, repair, data reporting, general maintenance and technical support and safety compliance services. Under this agreement, we are liable for any losses resulting from actions of the third-party operator unless such losses result from the negligence of the third-party operator. If disputes arise over the operation of the terminal, or if the third-party operator fails to provide the services contracted under contract operator services agreements, our business, results of operation, and financial condition could be adversely affected. In September 2016, we extended the term of this agreement for three years and expanded services to include rail car qualification and maintenance management. Costs of these services under a negotiated renewal of the existing agreement or a similar agreement may increase relative to historical costs. Any such increased costs associated with terminal operation services will decrease the amount of cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

Restrictions in our revolving credit facility could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders and the value of our units.

We will be dependent upon the earnings and cash flow generated by our operations in order to meet any debt service obligations and to allow us to make cash distributions to our unitholders. On March 15, 2017, in connection with this offering, we entered into a new four-year, $300.0 million senior secured revolving credit facility, which contains various operating and financial restrictions and covenants. The operating and financial restrictions and covenants in our new revolving credit facility restricts, and any future financing agreements could similarly restrict, our ability to finance our future operations or capital needs or to expand or pursue our business activities, which may, in turn, limit our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

The provisions of our revolving credit facility could affect our ability to obtain future financing and pursue attractive business opportunities and our flexibility in planning for, and reacting to, changes in business conditions. In addition, a failure to comply with the provisions of our revolving credit facility would result in an event of default which would enable our lenders to declare the outstanding principal of that debt, together with accrued interest, to be immediately due and payable. If the payment of our debt is accelerated, defaults under our other debt instruments, if any, may be triggered, and our assets may be insufficient to repay such debt in full, and the holders of our units could experience a partial or total loss of their investment. Please read “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Capital Resources and Liquidity” for additional information about our revolving credit facility.

The level and terms of Hess’s and Hess Infrastructure Partners’ indebtedness and any reduction in Hess’s credit ratings could adversely affect our ability to grow our business and our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders. Our ability to obtain credit in the future may also be adversely affected by the credit ratings of Hess and Hess Infrastructure Partners.

Hess must devote a portion of its cash flows from operating activities to service its indebtedness, and therefore cash flows may not be available for use in pursuing its growth strategy. Furthermore, a

35

Table of Contents

higher level of indebtedness at Hess in the future would increase the risk that it may default on its obligations to us under our commercial agreements. As of December 31, 2016, Hess had total indebtedness (including indebtedness attributable to Hess Infrastructure Partners) of approximately $6.8 billion. In addition, the covenants in the agreements governing Hess Infrastructure Partners’ outstanding and future indebtedness may limit its ability to borrow additional funds for development and make certain investments and may also limit its ability to satisfy its funding obligations, if any, relating to our joint interest assets. Furthermore, if Hess Infrastructure Partners were to default under certain of its debt obligations, there is a risk that Hess Infrastructure Partners’ creditors would attempt to assert claims against our assets during the litigation of their claims against Hess Infrastructure Partners. The defense of any such claims could be costly and could materially impact our financial condition, even absent any adverse determination. If these claims were successful, our ability to meet our obligations to our creditors, make distributions and finance our operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Two of the three major credit rating agencies that rate Hess’s debt have assigned Hess an investment grade rating. If these credit ratings are lowered in the future, the interest rate and fees Hess pays on its credit facilities may increase. Hess Infrastructure Partners does not currently have any indebtedness rated by any credit rating agency. Although we will not have any indebtedness rated by any credit rating agency at the closing of this offering, we may have rated debt in the future. Credit rating agencies may consider Hess’s and Hess Infrastructure Partners’ debt ratings when assigning ours because of their ownership interest in us, the significant commercial relationships between Hess and us, and our reliance on commercial agreements with Hess for substantially all of our revenues. If one or more credit rating agencies were to downgrade the outstanding indebtedness of Hess, we could experience an increase in our borrowing costs or difficulty accessing the capital markets. Such a development could adversely affect our ability to grow our business and to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

Our assets and operations are subject to federal, state, and local laws and regulations relating to environmental protection and safety that could require us to make substantial expenditures.

Our assets and operations pose risks of environmental liability due to, for example, spills, leaks and discharges of substances to the environment. To address these and other risks, we are subject to stringent federal, state, and local laws and regulations relating to environmental protection and safety. Multiple governmental authorities, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, or EPA, and analogous state agencies, have the power to enforce compliance with these laws and regulations and the permits issued under them, oftentimes requiring difficult and costly response actions. These laws and regulations may impose numerous obligations that are applicable to our and our customer’s operations, including the acquisition of permits to conduct regulated activities, the incurrence of capital or operating expenditures to limit or prevent releases of materials from our or our customers’ operations, the imposition of specific standards addressing worker protection, and the imposition of substantial liabilities and remedial obligations for pollution or contamination resulting from our and our customer’s operations. Failure to comply with these laws, regulations and permits may result in joint and several, strict liability and the assessment of administrative, civil and criminal penalties, the imposition of remedial obligations, and the issuance of injunctions limiting or preventing some or all of our operations. Private parties may also have the right to pursue legal actions to enforce compliance, as well as to seek damages for non-compliance, with environmental laws and regulations or for personal injury or property damage. We may not be able to recover all or any of these costs from insurance. In addition, we may experience a delay in obtaining or be unable to obtain required permits, which may cause us to lose potential and current customers, interrupt operations, and limit growth and revenues, which in turn could affect our profitability.

36

Table of Contents

The handling of crude oil, natural gas and NGLs involves inherent risks of spills and releases from our facilities. We have contracted with various spill response service companies in the areas in which we gather, load, transport or store crude oil and NGLs; however, these companies may not be able to adequately contain a “worst case discharge” in all instances, and we cannot ensure that all of their services would be available at any given time.

If our assets become subject to FERC regulation, or if federal, state or local regulations or policies change, or if we fail to comply with such regulations, our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially and adversely affected.

We believe that our natural gas gathering and transportation operations are exempt from regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, under the Natural Gas Act, or the NGA. Section 1(b) of the NGA exempts natural gas gathering facilities from regulation by FERC under the NGA. Although FERC has not made any formal determinations with respect to all of our natural gas gathering facilities upstream of the Tioga Gas Plant, we believe that the natural gas pipelines in our gathering systems meet the traditional tests FERC has used to establish whether a pipeline is a gathering pipeline not subject to FERC jurisdiction. The distinction between FERC-regulated transmission services and federally unregulated gathering services, however, has been the subject of substantial litigation, and FERC determines whether facilities are gathering facilities on a case-by-case basis, so the classification and regulation of our gathering facilities may be subject to change based on future determinations by FERC, the courts, or Congress. If FERC were to consider the status of an individual facility and determine that the facility is not exempt from FERC regulation under the NGA, the rates for, and terms and conditions of, services provided by such facility would be subject to regulation by FERC under the NGA or the Natural Gas Policy Act, or the NGPA. Such regulation could decrease revenue, increase operating costs, and, depending upon the facility in question, could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. In addition, if any of our facilities were found to have provided services or otherwise operated in violation of the NGA or the NGPA, this could result in the imposition of administrative, civil or criminal penalties, as well as a requirement to disgorge charges collected for such services in excess of the rate established by FERC.

We believe that the crude oil and NGL pipelines in our gathering system are not subject to regulation by FERC under the Interstate Commerce Act because they do not provide interstate transportation. The distinction between FERC-regulated interstate crude or NGLs transportation is a case-by-case determination. If FERC were to determine that any of our crude oil or NGL pipelines were providing interstate transportation, we may be required to operate as a common carrier and the rates for, and terms and conditions of the transportation services provided by such pipelines would be subject to regulation by FERC under the ICA. Such FERC regulation could decrease revenue, increase operating costs, and, depending on the facility in question, could adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows. In addition, if any of our facilities were found to have provided services or otherwise operated in violation of the ICA, this could result in the imposition of administrative and criminal remedies and civil penalties.

State regulation of gathering facilities and intrastate transportation pipelines generally includes various safety, environmental and, in some circumstances, nondiscriminatory take and common purchaser requirements, as well as complaint-based rate regulation. Other state regulations may not directly apply to our business, but may nonetheless affect the availability of natural gas, crude oil and NGLs for purchase, compression and sale.

Moreover, FERC’s natural gas regulation indirectly impacts our businesses and the markets for products derived from these businesses. FERC’s policies, including its policies on open access transportation, gas quality, capacity release and market center promotion, indirectly affect intrastate natural gas markets.

37

Table of Contents

In addition, if we fail to comply with the NGA or NGPA, FERC rules, regulations and orders, we could be subject to substantial penalties and fines, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows. FERC has civil penalty authority under the NGA and NGPA to impose penalties for current violations of up to $1,193,970 per day for each violation and disgorgement of profits associated with any violation.

We may incur significant costs and liabilities as a result of pipeline integrity management program testing and any related pipeline repair or preventative or remedial measures.

The United States Department of Transportation, or DOT, through the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, or PHMSA, has adopted regulations requiring pipeline operators to develop integrity management programs for transportation pipelines located where a leak or rupture could do the most harm, in “high consequence areas.” The regulations require operators to:

The Pipeline Safety, Regulatory Certainty and Job Creation Act of 2011, or the 2011 Pipeline Safety Act, among other things, increased the maximum civil penalty for pipeline safety violations and directed the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate rules or standards relating to expanded integrity management requirements, automatic or remote-controlled valve use, excess flow valve use, leak detection system installation and testing to confirm the material strength of pipe operating above 30% of specified minimum yield strength in high consequence areas. Consistent with the 2011 Pipeline Safety Act, PHMSA finalized rules consistent with the signed act that increased the maximum administrative civil penalties for violations of the pipeline safety laws and regulations to $200,000 per violation per day, with a maximum of $2,000,000 for a related series of violations. Effective August 1, 2016, those maximum civil penalties were increased to $205,638 per violation per day, with a maximum of $2,056,380 for a series of violations, to account for inflation. Additionally, in May 2011, PHMSA published a final rule adding reporting obligations and integrity management standards to certain rural low-stress hazardous liquid pipelines that were not previously regulated in such manner. Should we fail to comply with DOT, PHMSA or comparable state regulations, we could be subject to substantial penalties and fines, which could impact our result of operations.

PHMSA regularly proposes revisions to existing regulations as well as new pipeline safety regulations. For example, in March 2015, PHMSA issued final rules applicable to natural gas and hazardous liquid (including crude oil and NGL) pipelines that, among other changes, impose new post-construction inspections, welding, gas component pressure testing requirements, as well as requirements for calculating pressure reductions for immediate repairs on liquid pipelines. In September 2015, PHMSA issued a rule indefinitely delaying the effective date for the portion of the rule addressing post-construction inspections. In October 2015, PHMSA issued a proposed rule for hazardous liquid pipelines that would significantly extend and expand the reach of certain PHMSA integrity management requirements (i.e., periodic assessments, leak detection and repairs), regardless of the pipeline’s proximity to a high consequence area. The proposal also mandated new reporting requirements for certain unregulated pipelines, including all gathering lines. In April 2016, pursuant to one of the requirements of the 2011 Pipeline Safety Act, PHMSA published a proposed rulemaking that would expand integrity management requirements and impose new pressure testing requirements on

38

Table of Contents

currently regulated gas transmission pipelines. The proposal would also significantly expand the regulation of gas gathering lines, subjecting previously unregulated pipelines to requirements regarding damage prevention, corrosion control, public education programs, maximum allowable operating pressure limits, and other requirements. PHMSA has not yet finalized such natural gas pipeline regulations. The scope and timing of such final natural gas pipeline regulations are uncertain at this time. On January 13, 2017, PHMSA issued a final rule amending its proposed hazardous liquid pipeline regulations, imposing stricter standards on operators for determining how to repair aging and high-risk infrastructure, and increasing the frequency of tests to assess the condition of pipelines. Under the final rule, the revised regulations are to take effect six months after the date of publication in the Federal Register. The final rule was not published in the Federal Register. On January 20, 2017, the Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff for the White House issued a memorandum to the heads of all federal executive departments and agencies instructing the agencies to withdraw regulations that have been sent to the Office of the Federal Register, but that have not yet been published, so that they can be reviewed and approved by the new administration. The memorandum permits agencies to seek an exception from the Director or Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget for certain health and safety regulations. It is not clear at this time whether PHMSA will seek such an exception, whether further amendments will be made to the hazardous liquid pipeline regulations, and/or when such hazardous liquid pipeline regulations will be implemented.

The adoption of these and other laws or regulations that apply more comprehensive or stringent safety standards could require us to install new or modified safety controls, pursue new capital projects, or conduct maintenance programs on an accelerated basis, all of which could require us to incur increased operational costs that could be significant. While we cannot predict the outcome of legislative or regulatory initiatives, such legislative and regulatory changes could have a material effect on our cash flow.

Changes in laws or standards affecting crude oil tank cars or the transportation of North American crude oil by rail could require retrofitting our existing car fleet and/or reduce volumes throughput at our facilities, and as a result our revenues could decline, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and ability to make distributions to unitholders.

Rail car derailments in Canada and the United States have led to increased regulatory scrutiny over the safety of transporting Bakken crude oil by rail. In the wake of derailments several years ago, the Federal Railroad Administration, or FRA, of the DOT, and the DOT’s PHMSA, issued several Safety Advisories and Emergency Orders directing offerors and rail carriers to take additional precautionary measures to enhance the safe shipment of bulk quantities of crude oil. In May 2015, DOT finalized its rail safety rule for “high hazard flammable trains,” which focused on safety improvements designed to prevent accidents, mitigate consequences in the event of an accident, and support emergency response. The new rule specified technical requirements for new tank cars, denominated DOT-117s, used for the transportation of crude oil by rail. Challenges to the final rule have already been filed in federal court and with DOT, including a challenge by railroad industry groups. Currently, all of the rail cars in our fleet are DOT-117 rail cars that meet the technical requirements of the final DOT rule, with the exception of electronically controlled pneumatic brakes that may be required to be added and, if applicable, can be added at a later date, prior to the regulation deadline, for a minimal cost. In the event that Logistics Opco exercises the option under the contribution agreement to require Hess Infrastructure Partners to contribute additional rail cars and those rail cars do not comply with the new rule, we could incur substantial maintenance costs in order to retrofit or upgrade such rail cars. In addition, the adoption of additional federal, state or local laws or regulations, including any new voluntary measures by the rail industry regarding rail car design or crude oil and liquid hydrocarbon rail transport activities, or efforts by local communities to restrict or limit rail traffic involving crude oil, could similarly affect our business by increasing compliance costs

39

Table of Contents

and decreasing demand for our services, which could adversely affect our financial position and cash flows. Moreover, any disruptions in the operations of railroads, including those due to shortages of rail cars, locomotives or labor, weather-related problems, flooding, drought, derailments, mechanical difficulties, strikes, lockouts or bottlenecks, or other force majeure events could adversely impact our customers’ ability to move their product and, as a result, could affect our business. For a detailed discussion of existing and proposed rail car regulations, please read “Business—Other Regulation—Rail Regulation.” For a discussion of our option to obtain additional rail cars from Hess Infrastructure Partners, please read “ Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions—Agreements Governing the Transactions—Contribution Agreement.”

Evolving environmental laws and regulations on crude oil stabilization could have an effect on our financial performance.

In December 2014, the North Dakota Industrial Commission, or NDIC, issued Order No. 25417, which requires producers in a Bakken, Bakken/Three Forks, Three Forks or Sanish pool, which the order refers to as the Bakken Petroleum System, effective April 1, 2015, to heat their produced fluids to a specified minimum temperature prior to separation in order to improve its marketability and facilitate its safe transportation. If producers cannot meet minimum heat treatment conditions, they must demonstrate that their crude oil has a vapor pressure no greater than 13.7 psi. The order also requires operators of transload rail facilities to notify the NDIC of any crude oil received from the Bakken Petroleum System that violates federal crude oil safety standards.

Given the volume of tight crude oil like Bakken crude that is currently shipped by rail, the U.S. Department of Energy, or DOE, tasked Sandia National Laboratories to study the properties of tight crude oils as they relate to potential combustion events in the rail transport environment. The Sandia Report, released in March 2015, concluded that there is a gap in relevant data and a lack of understanding of how crude oil properties influence the propensity for accidental ignition, combustion, or explosion. In its key findings, the Sandia Report noted that while it is likely that crude oil properties could be used to predict combustibility, the study released no objective data linking any known crude oil properties with the likelihood or severity of rail transport-related combustion events. In April 2015 the DOE announced an additional two-year study into how crude oil properties affect its combustibility in rail accidents. The second Sandia study is currently in Task 2, which is designed to determine what methods of sampling and analysis are suitable for characterizing the physical and chemical properties of crude oils with differing chemical and physical compositions.

On January 18, 2017, PHMSA published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (“ANPRM”) related to crude oil shipping. The ANPRM seeks comment on a range of questions associated with establishing a vapor pressure threshold for crude oil in transportation in order to evaluate the potential safety benefits of utilizing vapor pressure thresholds in the hazardous materials classification process. The ANPRM discusses potential restrictions on vapor pressure, briefly discusses the North Dakota conditioning regulations, and notes that prior PHMSA rulemakings deferred consideration of vapor pressure restrictions to a later date. The ANPRM could potentially be used as the basis for a future final rule on vapor pressure for crude by rail transportation.

Our commercial agreements with Hess contain product quality specification limits below the vapor pressure maximum. As noted above, the final rule requires offerors to develop and carry out sampling and testing programs for all unrefined petroleum-based products, including crude oil, and to certify that hazardous materials subject to the program are packaged in accordance with the test results, but does not require oil companies to process their products to make them less volatile before shipment. However, if new or more stringent federal, state or local legal restrictions relating to the quality specification of crude oil or to crude oil transportation are adopted in areas where Hess and our other customers operate, Hess and our other customers could incur potentially significant added costs to

40

Table of Contents

comply with such requirements and experience delays or curtailment in the pursuit of production or development activities, which could reduce demand for our midstream services.

Evolving environmental laws and regulations on climate change could adversely affect our financial performance.

Potential additional regulations regarding climate change could affect our operations. Currently, various federal and state legislative and regulatory bodies are considering measures to address greenhouse gas emissions. These measures include EPA programs that require the crude oil and natural gas industry to report and to control greenhouse gas emissions, and state actions to develop statewide or regional programs, each of which could impose reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. For example, in October 2015 the EPA finalized a rule to expand the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule to include emissions from gathering and boosting systems and blowdowns of natural gas transmission pipelines. These actions could result in increased (1) costs to operate and maintain our facilities, (2) capital expenditures to install new emission controls on our facilities and (3) costs to administer and manage any potential greenhouse gas emissions regulations or carbon trading or tax programs. These developments also could have an indirect adverse effect on our business if Hess’s Bakken operations are adversely affected due to increased regulation of Hess’s facilities or reduced demand for crude oil, natural gas and NGLs, and a direct adverse effect on our business from increased regulation of our facilities.

Further, in May 2016 the EPA finalized new regulations that for the first time established methane emission standards for new and modified oil and natural gas production and natural gas processing and transmission facilities. And in November 2016, the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) also finalized a rule to address methane emissions from crude oil and natural gas sources subject to BLM jurisdiction by limiting venting, flaring and leaking. These rules are subject to pending litigation. Congress continues to periodically consider legislation on greenhouse gas emissions, which may include a delay in the implementation of greenhouse gas regulations by EPA or a limitation on EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases, although the ultimate adoption and form of any federal legislation cannot presently be predicted. The impact of future regulatory and legislative developments, if adopted or enacted, including any cap-and-trade program, is likely to result in increased compliance costs, increased utility costs, additional operating restrictions on our business and an increase in the cost of products generally. Although such costs may impact our business directly or indirectly by impacting Hess’s facilities or operations, the extent and magnitude of that impact cannot be reliably or accurately estimated due to the present uncertainty regarding the additional measures and how they will be implemented.

In addition, in December 2015, over 190 countries, including the United States, reached an agreement to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions (“Paris Accord”). The Paris Accord entered into force in November 2016 after over 70 countries, including the United States, ratified the agreement or otherwise indicated their intent to be bound by the agreement. To the extent the United States and other countries implement this agreement or impose other climate change regulations on the oil and gas industry, it could have an adverse direct or indirect effect on our business.

Finally, many scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of greenhouse gas emissions in the earth’s atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant physical effects. To the extent any such effects were to occur, those effects any associated market changes could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and operations. Please read “Business—Environmental Regulation—Air Emissions and Climate Change.”

41

Table of Contents

We or Hess may be unable to obtain or renew permits or approvals necessary for our respective operations, which could inhibit our ability to do business and adversely affect our financial performance.

Our facilities and those of Hess that provide volumes to our facilities operate under a number of federal, state and local permits, licenses and approvals with terms and conditions containing a significant number of prescriptive limits and performance standards in order to operate. All of these permits, licenses, approval limits and standards require a significant amount of monitoring, record keeping and reporting in order to demonstrate compliance with the underlying permit, license, approval limit or standard. A decision by a government agency to deny or delay issuing a new or renewed material permit or approval, or to revoke or substantially modify an existing permit or approval, could have an adverse impact on Hess’s ability to produce crude oil and natural gas or on our ability to handle volumes of crude oil, natural gas or NGLs at our facilities. For example, if we are unable to satisfy all permit criteria applicable to expansion projects we have commenced at the Hawkeye Oil Facility and the Hawkeye Gas Facility, our ability to deliver volumes to the Ramberg Terminal Facility and the Tioga Gas Plant could be adversely affected. Additionally, noncompliance or incomplete documentation of our compliance status with respect to our existing permits or approvals may result in the imposition of fines, penalties and injunctive relief. Our ability to obtain or renew any material permit or approval, or comply with the terms of our existing permits or approvals, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Evolving environmental laws and regulations on hydraulic fracturing could have an effect on our financial performance.

We do not conduct hydraulic fracturing operations, but Hess’s and our other customers’ crude oil and natural gas production operations often require hydraulic fracturing as part of the completion process. Hydraulic fracturing is an important and common practice that is used to stimulate production of crude oil and/or natural gas from dense subsurface rock formations. The process is typically regulated by state agencies. However, federal agencies have also asserted regulatory authority over the process. Beginning in August 2012, the EPA adopted a series of rules that subject crude oil and natural gas production, processing, transmission and storage operations to regulation under the New Source Performance Standards and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants programs. In addition, Congress has in the past and may in the future consider legislation that gives the EPA direct authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Many states have already adopted laws and/or regulations that require disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, and are considering legal requirements that could impose more stringent permitting, disclosure and well construction requirements on crude oil and/or natural gas drilling activities. We do not believe current or future regulations will have a direct effect on our operations, but if new or more stringent federal, state or local legal restrictions relating to such drilling activities or to the hydraulic fracturing process are adopted in areas where Hess and our other customers operate, Hess and our other customers could incur potentially significant added costs to comply with such requirements and experience delays or curtailment in the pursuit of production or development activities, which could reduce demand for our midstream services.

Certain plant or animal species could be designated as endangered or threatened, which could limit our ability to expand some of our existing operations or limit our customers’ ability to develop new crude oil and natural gas wells.

The federal Endangered Species Act, or ESA, restricts activities that may affect endangered or threatened species or their habitats. Many states have analogous laws designed to protect endangered or threatened species. The designation of previously unidentified endangered or threatened species under such laws may affect our and our customers’ operations.

42

Table of Contents

Terrorist or cyber-attacks and threats, or escalation of military activity in response to these attacks, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Terrorist attacks and threats, cyber-attacks, escalation of military activity or acts of war may have significant effects on general economic conditions, fluctuations in consumer confidence and spending and market liquidity, each of which could materially and adversely affect our business. Strategic targets, such as energy-related assets and transportation assets, may be at greater risk of future terrorist attacks than other targets in the United States. We do not maintain specialized insurance for possible liability or loss resulting from a terrorist attack or cyber-attack on our assets that may shut down all or part of our business. It is possible that any of these occurrences, or a combination of them, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Computers and telecommunication systems have become an integral part of our business. We use these systems to analyze and store financial and operating data and to communicate within our company and with outside business partners. Cyber-attacks could compromise our computer and telecommunications systems and result in disruptions to our business operations, the loss or corruption of our data and proprietary information and communications interruptions. In addition, computers control oil and gas distribution systems globally and are necessary to deliver our production to market. A cyber-attack impacting these distribution systems, or the networks and infrastructure on which they rely, could damage critical production, distribution and/or storage assets, delay or prevent delivery to markets and make it difficult or impossible to accurately account for production and settle transactions. Our systems and procedures for protecting against such attacks and mitigating such risks may prove to be insufficient and such attacks could have an adverse impact on our business and operations.

If we fail to develop or maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to report our financial results timely and accurately or prevent fraud, which would likely have a negative impact on the market price of our common units.

Prior to this offering, we have not been required to file reports with the SEC. Upon the completion of this offering, we will become subject to the public reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. We prepare our financial statements in accordance with GAAP, but our internal accounting controls may not currently meet all standards applicable to companies with publicly traded securities. Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports, prevent fraud and to operate successfully as a publicly traded partnership. Our efforts to develop and maintain our internal controls may not be successful, and we may be unable to maintain effective controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future or to comply with our obligations under Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Section 404. For example, Section 404 will require us, among other things, to annually review and report on, and our independent registered public accounting firm to attest to, the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting.

Although we will be required to disclose changes made in our internal control and procedures on a quarterly basis, we will not be required to make our first annual assessment of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 until our annual report for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2018.

Any failure to develop, implement or maintain effective internal controls or to improve our internal controls could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. Given the difficulties inherent in the design and operation of internal controls over financial reporting, we can provide no assurance as to our, or our independent registered public accounting firm’s, conclusions about the effectiveness of our internal controls, and we may incur significant costs in our efforts to comply with Section 404. Ineffective internal controls will subject us to regulatory scrutiny and a loss of

43

Table of Contents

confidence in our reported financial information, which could have an adverse effect on our business and would likely have a material adverse effect on the trading price of our common units.

For as long as we are an emerging growth company, we will not be required to comply with certain disclosure requirements that apply to other public companies.

In April 2012, former President Obama signed the JOBS Act into law. For as long as we remain an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act, we may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to provide an auditor’s attestation report on management’s assessment of the effectiveness of our system of internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 and reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports. We will remain an emerging growth company for up to five years, although we will lose that status sooner if we have more than $1.0 billion of revenues in a fiscal year, have more than $700 million in market value of our limited partner interests held by non-affiliates, or issue more than $1.0 billion of non-convertible debt over a three-year period.

In addition, the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have irrevocably elected to “opt out” of this exemption and, therefore, will be subject to the same new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies.

To the extent that we rely on any of the exemptions available to emerging growth companies, you will receive less information about our executive compensation and internal control over financial reporting than issuers that are not emerging growth companies. If some investors find our common units to be less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common units and our trading price may be more volatile.

Risks Inherent in an Investment in Us

Our general partner and its affiliates, including our Sponsors, have conflicts of interest with us and limited fiduciary duties to us and our unitholders, and they may favor their own interests to our detriment and that of our unitholders. Additionally, we have no control over the business decisions and operations of our Sponsors, and none of our Sponsors is under any obligation to adopt a business strategy that favors us.

Following this offering, our Sponsors will directly own an aggregate     % limited partner interest in us (or     % if the underwriters’ option to purchase additional common units is exercised in full) and will own and control our general partner and its 2% general partner interest in us. Hess Infrastructure Partners will also retain a significant ownership interest in our joint interest assets following the closing of this offering. Although our general partner has a duty to manage us in a manner that is in the best interests of our partnership and our unitholders, our directors and officers also have a duty to manage our general partner in a manner that is in the best interests of its owner, Hess Infrastructure Partners, which is owned by our Sponsors. Conflicts of interest may arise between our Sponsors and their respective affiliates, including our general partner, on the one hand, and us and our unitholders, on the other hand. In resolving these conflicts, our general partner may favor its own interests and the interests of its affiliates, including our Sponsors, over the interests of our common unitholders. These conflicts include, among others, the following situations:

44

Table of Contents

45

Table of Contents

Under the terms of our partnership agreement, the doctrine of corporate opportunity, or any analogous doctrine, does not apply to our general partner or any of its affiliates, including our Sponsors, Hess Infrastructure Partners, our executive officers and directors. Any such person or entity that becomes aware of a potential transaction, agreement, arrangement or other matter that may be an opportunity for us will not have any duty to communicate or offer such opportunity to us. Any such person or entity will not be liable to us or to any limited partner for breach of any fiduciary duty or other duty by reason of the fact that such person or entity pursues or acquires such opportunity for itself, directs such opportunity to another person or entity or does not communicate such opportunity or information to us. This may create actual and potential conflicts of interest between us and affiliates of our general partner and result in less than favorable treatment of us and our unitholders. Please read “Conflicts of Interest and Duties.”

Our partnership agreement requires that we distribute all of our available cash, which could limit our ability to grow and make acquisitions.

Our partnership agreement requires that we distribute all of our available cash to our unitholders. As a result, we expect to rely primarily upon external financing sources, including borrowings under our revolving credit facility and the issuance of debt and equity securities, to fund our acquisitions and expansion capital expenditures. Therefore, to the extent we are unable to finance our growth externally, our cash distribution policy will significantly impair our ability to grow. In addition, because we will distribute all of our available cash, our growth may not be as fast as that of businesses that reinvest their available cash to expand ongoing operations. To the extent we issue additional units in connection with any acquisitions or expansion capital expenditures, the payment of distributions on those additional units may increase the risk that we will be unable to maintain or increase our per unit distribution level. There are no limitations in our partnership agreement on our ability to issue additional units, including units ranking senior to our common units as to distributions or in liquidation or that have special voting rights and other rights, and our unitholders will have no preemptive or other rights (solely as a result of their status as unitholders) to purchase any such additional units. The incurrence of additional commercial borrowings or other debt to finance our growth strategy would result in increased interest expense, which, in turn, may reduce the amount of cash that we have available to distribute to our unitholders.

Affiliates of our general partner, including our Sponsors, may compete with us, and neither our general partner nor its affiliates have any obligation to present business opportunities to us.

Neither our partnership agreement nor our omnibus agreement will prohibit our Sponsors or any other affiliates of our general partner from owning assets or engaging in businesses that compete directly or indirectly with us. Under the terms of our partnership agreement, the doctrine of corporate opportunity, or any analogous doctrine, will not apply to our general partner or any of its affiliates, including our Sponsors and our executive officers and directors. Any such entity that becomes aware of a potential transaction, agreement, arrangement or other matter that may be an opportunity for us will not have any duty to communicate or offer such opportunity to us. Consequently, our Sponsors and other affiliates of our general partner, including Hess Infrastructure Partners, may acquire, construct or dispose of additional midstream assets in the future without any obligation to offer us the opportunity to purchase any of those assets. As a result, competition from our Sponsors and other affiliates of our general partner could materially and adversely impact our results of operations and distributable cash flow.

46

Table of Contents

Our partnership agreement replaces our general partner’s fiduciary duties to holders of our common units with contractual standards governing its duties.

Delaware law provides that Delaware limited partnerships may, in their partnership agreements, expand, restrict or eliminate the fiduciary duties otherwise owed by the general partner to limited partners and the partnership, provided that partnership agreements may not eliminate the implied contractual covenant of good faith and fair dealing. As permitted by Delaware law, our partnership agreement contains provisions that eliminate the fiduciary standards to which our general partner would otherwise be held by state fiduciary duty law and replaces those duties with several different contractual standards. For example, our partnership agreement permits our general partner to make a number of decisions in its individual capacity, as opposed to in its capacity as our general partner, free of any duties to us and our unitholders other than the implied contractual covenant of good faith and fair dealing. This provision entitles our general partner to consider only the interests and factors that it desires and relieves it of any duty or obligation to give any consideration to any interest of, or factors affecting, us, our affiliates or our limited partners. By purchasing a common unit, a unitholder is treated as having consented to the provisions in our partnership agreement, including the provisions discussed above. Please read “Conflicts of Interest and Duties—Duties of the General Partner.”

Our partnership agreement restricts the remedies available to holders of our common and subordinated units for actions taken by our general partner that might otherwise constitute breaches of fiduciary duty.

Our partnership agreement contains provisions that restrict the remedies available to unitholders for actions taken by our general partner that might otherwise constitute breaches of fiduciary duty under state fiduciary duty law. For example, our partnership agreement:

In connection with a situation involving a transaction with an affiliate or a conflict of interest, our partnership agreement provides that any determination by our general partner must be made in good faith, and that our conflicts committee and board of directors are entitled to a presumption that they acted in good faith. In any proceeding brought by or on behalf of any limited partner or the partnership, the person bringing or prosecuting such proceeding will have the burden of overcoming such presumption. Please read “Conflicts of Interest and Duties.”

47

Table of Contents

If you are not an eligible holder, your common units may be subject to redemption.

We have adopted certain requirements regarding those investors who may own our common and subordinated units. Eligible holders are limited partners whose (a) federal income tax status is not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the rates that can be charged by us on assets that are subject to regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, or an analogous regulatory body and (b) nationality, citizenship or other related status would not create a substantial risk of cancellation or forfeiture of any property in which we have an interest, in each case as determined by our general partner with the advice of counsel. If you are not an eligible holder, in certain circumstances as set forth in our partnership agreement, your units may be redeemed by us. The redemption price will be paid in cash or by delivery of a promissory note, as determined by our general partner. Please read “Our Partnership Agreement—Redemption of Ineligible Holders.”

Cost reimbursements, which will be determined in our general partner’s sole discretion, and fees due to our general partner and its affiliates for services provided will be substantial and will reduce the amount of cash we have available for distribution to you.

Under our partnership agreement, we are required to reimburse our general partner and its affiliates for all costs and expenses that they incur on our behalf for managing and controlling our business and operations. Except to the extent specified under our omnibus agreement , our general partner determines the amount of these expenses. Under the terms of our omnibus agreement, we will be required to reimburse Hess for the provision of certain operational and administrative support services to us . Our general partner and its affiliates also may provide us other services for which we will be charged fees as determined by our general partner. The costs and expenses for which we are required to reimburse our general partner and its affiliates are not subject to any caps or other limits. Payments to our general partner and its affiliates will be substantial and will reduce the amount of cash we have available to distribute to unitholders.

Unitholders have very limited voting rights and, even if they are dissatisfied, they cannot initially remove our general partner without its consent.

Unlike the holders of common stock in a corporation, unitholders have only limited voting rights on matters affecting our business and, therefore, limited ability to influence management’s decisions regarding our business. For example, unlike holders of stock in a public corporation, unitholders will not have “say-on-pay” advisory voting rights. Unitholders did not elect our general partner or any of the members of our board of directors and will have no right to elect our general partner or any of the members of our board of directors on an annual or other continuing basis. Our board of directors is chosen by Hess Infrastructure Partners, which is controlled by our Sponsors. Furthermore, if the unitholders are dissatisfied with the performance of our general partner, they will have little ability to remove our general partner. As a result of these limitations, the price at which our common units will trade could be diminished because of the absence or reduction of a takeover premium in the trading price.

The unitholders will be unable initially to remove our general partner without its consent because our general partner and its affiliates will own sufficient units upon completion of the offering to be able to prevent its removal. In addition, our general partner may only be removed for cause. “Cause” is narrowly defined under our partnership agreement to mean that a court of competent jurisdiction has entered a final, non-appealable judgment finding the general partner liable for actual fraud or willful or wanton misconduct in its capacity as our general partner. Cause does not include most cases of charges of poor management of the business, so the removal of our general partner because of the unitholders’ dissatisfaction with our general partner’s performance in managing our partnership will most likely result in the termination of the subordination period. Even if cause for removal exists, the vote of the holders of at least 66 ² / ₃ % of all outstanding common units and subordinated units voting

48

Table of Contents

together as a single class is required to remove our general partner. At closing, excluding any common units purchased by our directors and executive officers and the directors and executive officers of Hess under our directed unit program, our Sponsors will collectively own     % of our total outstanding common units and subordinated units on an aggregate basis (or     % of our total outstanding common units and subordinated units on an aggregate basis if the underwriters’ option to purchase additional common units is exercised in full).

Furthermore, unitholders’ voting rights are further restricted by the partnership agreement provision providing that any units held by a person that owns 20% or more of any class of units then outstanding, other than our general partner, its affiliates, their transferees, and persons who acquired such units with the prior approval of our board of directors of our general partner, cannot vote on any matter.

Our partnership agreement also contains provisions limiting the ability of unitholders to call meetings or to acquire information about our operations, as well as other provisions limiting the unitholders’ ability to influence the manner or direction of management.

Our general partner interest or the control of our general partner may be transferred to a third party without unitholder consent.

Our general partner may transfer its general partner interest to a third party in a merger or in a sale of all or substantially all of its assets without the consent of the unitholders. Furthermore, there is no restriction in our partnership agreement on the ability of Hess Infrastructure Partners to transfer all of the partnership interests in our general partner, or all of the membership interests in Hess Midstream Partners GP LLC, the general partner of our general partner, to a third party. The new owner of our general partner or Hess Midstream Partners GP LLC would then be in a position to replace our board of directors and officers with its own choices. As a result, we could lose the provision of certain operational support and administrative services by Hess and its affiliates, our right of first offer to acquire our right of first offer assets from Hess Infrastructure Partners and our license to use certain Hess trademarks.

Our general partner may elect to convert the Partnership to a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes without unitholder consent.

Under our partnership agreement, if, in connection with the enactment of U.S. federal income tax legislation or a change in the official interpretation of existing U.S. federal income tax legislation by a governmental authority, our general partner determines that (i) the Partnership should no longer be characterized as a partnership for U.S. federal or applicable state and local income tax purposes or (ii) common units held by unitholders other than the general partner and its affiliates should be converted into or exchanged for interests in a newly formed entity taxed as a corporation or an entity taxable at the entity level for U.S. federal or applicable state and local income tax purposes whose sole asset is interests in the Partnership (“parent corporation”), then our general partner may, without unitholder approval, cause the Partnership to be treated as an entity taxable as a corporation or subject to entity-level taxation for U.S. federal or applicable state and local income tax purposes, whether by election of the Partnership or conversion of the Partnership or by any other means or methods, or cause the common units held by unitholders other than the general partner and its affiliates to be converted into or exchanged for interests in the parent corporation. Any such event may be taxable or nontaxable to our unitholders, depending on the form of the transaction. The tax liability, if any, of a unitholder as a result of such an event may vary depending on the unitholder’s particular situation and may vary from the tax liability of our general partner and each of our Sponsors. In addition, if our general partner causes an interest in the Partnership to be held by a parent corporation, our Sponsors may choose to retain their partnership interests in us rather than convert their partnership interests into parent corporation shares. Please read “Our Partnership Agreement—Election to be Treated as a Corporation.”

49

Table of Contents

We may issue an unlimited number of additional partnership interests without unitholder approval, which would dilute unitholder interests.

Under our partnership agreement, we may, at any time, issue an unlimited number of general partner interests or limited partner interests of any type without the approval of our unitholders and our unitholders will have no preemptive or other rights (solely as a result of their status as unitholders) to purchase any such general partner interests or limited partner interests. Further, there are no limitations in our partnership agreement on our ability to issue equity securities that rank equal or senior to our common units as to distributions or in liquidation or that have special voting rights and other rights. We have agreed that, for a period of 180 days from the date of this prospectus, we will not, without the prior written consent of Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, sell, transfer or otherwise dispose of any common units or any securities convertible or exchangeable for our common units, except under certain circumstances. Please read “Underwriting—Lock-Up Agreements.”

The issuance by us of additional common units or other equity securities of equal or senior rank will have the following effects:

The issuance by us of additional general partner interests may have the following effects, among others, if such general partner interests are issued to a person who is not an affiliate of Hess Infrastructure Partners:

Our Sponsors may sell units in the public or private markets, and such sales could have an adverse impact on the trading price of the common units.

After the completion of this offering, assuming that the underwriters do not exercise their option to purchase additional common units, our Sponsors will collectively hold                     common units and                     subordinated units. All of the subordinated units will convert into common units at the end of the subordination period and may convert earlier under certain circumstances. Additionally, we have agreed to provide our Sponsors with certain registration rights under applicable securities laws. Please read “Units Eligible for Future Sale” and “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions—Agreements Governing the Transactions.” The sale of these units in the public or private markets could have an adverse impact on the price of the common units or on any trading market that may develop.

50

Table of Contents

Our general partner’s discretion in establishing cash reserves may reduce the amount of cash we have available to distribute to unitholders.

Our partnership agreement requires our general partner to deduct from operating surplus the cash reserves that it determines are necessary to fund our future operating expenditures. In addition, our partnership agreement permits the general partner to reduce available cash by establishing cash reserves for the proper conduct of our business, to comply with applicable law or agreements to which we are a party, or to provide funds for future distributions to partners. Any cash reserves established by our general partner will affect the amount of cash we have available to distribute to unitholders.

Our general partner has a limited call right that may require you to sell your common units at an undesirable time or price.

If at any time our general partner and its affiliates own more than 80% of our then-outstanding common units, our general partner will have the right, but not the obligation, which it may assign to any of its affiliates or to us, to acquire all, but not less than all, of the common units held by unaffiliated persons at a price not less than their then-current market price. As a result, you may be required to sell your common units at an undesirable time or price and may not receive any return on your investment. You may also incur a tax liability upon a sale of your units. At the completion of this offering and assuming the underwriters’ option to purchase additional common units from us is not exercised, our general partner and its affiliates will own approximately     % of our common units (excluding any common units purchased by our directors and executive officers and the directors and executive officers of Hess under our directed unit program). At the end of the subordination period (which could occur as early as within the quarter ending                     , 2017), assuming no additional issuances of common units by us (other than upon the conversion of the subordinated units) and the underwriters’ option to purchase additional common units from us is not exercised, our general partner and its affiliates will own approximately     % of our outstanding common units (excluding any common units purchased by our directors and executive officers and the directors and executive officers of Hess under our directed unit program) and therefore would not be able to exercise the call right at that time. For additional information about our general partner’s call right, please read “Our Partnership Agreement—Limited Call Right.”

Unitholders may have to repay distributions that were wrongfully distributed to them.

Under certain circumstances, unitholders may have to repay amounts wrongfully distributed to them. Under Section 17-607 of the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, we may not make a distribution to you if the distribution would cause our liabilities to exceed the fair value of our assets. Delaware law provides that for a period of three years from the date of the impermissible distribution, limited partners who received the distribution and who knew at the time of the distribution that it violated Delaware law will be liable to the limited partnership for the distribution amount. Transferees of common units are liable for the obligations of the transferor to make contributions to the partnership that are known to the transferee at the time of the transfer and for unknown obligations if the liabilities could be determined from our partnership agreement. Liabilities to partners on account of their partnership interest and liabilities that are non-recourse to the partnership are not counted for purposes of determining whether a distribution is permitted.

51

Table of Contents

There is no existing market for our common units, and a trading market that will provide you with adequate liquidity may not develop. The price of our common units may fluctuate significantly, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for our common units. After this offering, there will be only                     publicly traded common units, assuming the underwriters’ option to purchase additional common units from us is not exercised. In addition, our Sponsors will collectively own                     common units and                     subordinated units, representing an aggregate     % limited partner interest in us (or     % if the underwriters’ option to purchase additional common units is exercised in full). We do not know the extent to which investor interest will lead to the development of an active trading market or how liquid that market might be. You may not be able to resell your common units at or above the initial public offering price. Additionally, the lack of liquidity may result in wide bid-ask spreads, contribute to significant fluctuations in the market price of the common units and limit the number of investors who are able to buy the common units.

The initial public offering price for the common units offered hereby will be determined by negotiations between us and the representatives of the underwriters and may not be indicative of the market price of the common units that will prevail in the trading market. The market price of our common units may decline below the initial public offering price.

Our general partner, or any transferee holding incentive distribution rights, may elect to cause us to issue common units to it in connection with a resetting of the target distribution levels related to its incentive distribution rights, without the approval of our conflicts committee or the holders of our common units. This could result in lower distributions to holders of our common units.

Our general partner has the right, at any time when there are no subordinated units outstanding and it has received distributions on its incentive distribution rights at the highest level to which it is entitled (48%, in addition to distributions paid on its 2% general partner interest) for each of the prior four consecutive fiscal quarters, to reset the initial target distribution levels at higher levels based on our distributions at the time of the exercise of the reset election. Following a reset election, the minimum quarterly distribution will be adjusted to equal the reset minimum quarterly distribution, and the target distribution levels will be reset to correspondingly higher levels based on percentage increases above the reset minimum quarterly distribution.

If our general partner elects to reset the target distribution levels, it will be entitled to receive a number of common units and to maintain its 2% general partner interest. The number of common units to be issued to our general partner will be equal to that number of common units that would have entitled their holder to an average aggregate quarterly cash distribution in the prior two quarters equal to the average of the distributions to our general partner on the incentive distribution rights in such two quarters. Our general partner will also be entitled to maintain its general partner’s interest in us at the level that existed immediately prior to the reset election. We anticipate that our general partner would exercise this reset right in order to facilitate acquisitions or internal growth projects that would not be sufficiently accretive to cash distributions per common unit without such conversion. It is possible, however, that our general partner could exercise this reset election at a time when it is experiencing, or expects to experience, declines in the cash distributions it receives related to its incentive distribution rights and may, therefore, desire to be issued common units rather than retain the right to receive distributions based on the initial target distribution levels. This risk could be elevated if our incentive distribution rights have been transferred to a third party. As a result, a reset election may cause our common unitholders to experience a reduction in the amount of cash distributions that they would have otherwise received had we not issued new common units in connection with resetting the target distribution levels. Additionally, our general partner has the right to transfer all or any portion of our

52

Table of Contents

incentive distribution rights at any time, and to the extent that one or more of the transferees collectively own a majority of the incentive distribution rights, such transferees shall have the same rights as the general partner relative to resetting target distributions if our general partner concurs that the tests for resetting target distributions have been fulfilled. Please read “Provisions of Our Partnership Agreement Relating to Cash Distributions—General Partner’s Right to Reset Incentive Distribution Levels.”

Increases in interest rates could adversely impact our unit price and our ability to issue additional equity, to incur debt to capture growth opportunities or for other purposes, or to make cash distributions at our intended levels.

If interest rates rise, the interest rates on future credit facilities and debt offerings could be higher than current levels, causing our financing costs to increase accordingly. As with other yield-oriented securities, our unit price is impacted by the level of our cash distributions and implied distribution yield. The distribution yield is often used by investors to compare and rank related yield-oriented securities for investment decision-making purposes. Therefore, changes in interest rates, either positive or negative, may affect the yield requirements of investors who invest in our units, and a rising interest rate environment could have an adverse impact on our unit price and our ability to issue additional equity, to incur debt to expand or for other purposes, or to make cash distributions at our intended levels.

The NYSE does not require a publicly traded limited partnership like us to comply with certain of its corporate governance requirements.

We have applied to list our common units on the NYSE. Because we will be a publicly traded limited partnership, the NYSE does not require us to have a majority of independent directors on our board of directors or to establish a compensation committee or a nominating and corporate governance committee. Additionally, any future issuance of additional common units or other securities, including to affiliates, will not be subject to the NYSE’s shareholder approval rules that apply to a corporation. Accordingly, unitholders will not have the same protections afforded to certain corporations that are subject to all of the NYSE corporate governance requirements. Please read “Management—Management of Hess Midstream Partners LP.”

Tax Risks

In addition to reading the following risk factors, you should read “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences” for a more complete discussion of the expected material federal income tax consequences of owning and disposing of common units.

Our tax treatment depends on our status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, as well as us not being subject to a material amount of entity-level taxation by individual states. If the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, were to treat us as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, or if we become subject to entity-level taxation for state tax purposes, our cash available for distribution to our unitholders would be substantially reduced.

The anticipated after-tax economic benefit of an investment in our common units depends largely on our being treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes.

Despite the fact that we are organized as a limited partnership under Delaware law, we will be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes unless we satisfy a “qualifying income” requirement. Based upon our current operations, we believe we satisfy the qualifying income requirement. Failing to meet the qualifying income requirement or a change in current law could cause us to be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject us to taxation as an entity.

53

Table of Contents

If we were treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, we would pay U.S. federal income tax on our taxable income at the corporate tax rate, which is currently a maximum of 35%. Distributions to you would generally be taxed again as corporate distributions, and no income, gains, losses or deductions would flow through to you. Because a tax would be imposed upon us as a corporation, our cash available for distribution to you would be substantially reduced. Therefore, treatment of us as a corporation would result in a material reduction in the anticipated cash flow and after-tax return to our unitholders, likely causing a substantial reduction in the value of our common units.

Our partnership agreement provides that if a law is enacted or existing law is modified or interpreted in a manner that subjects us to taxation as a corporation or otherwise subjects us to entity-level taxation for U.S. federal, state, local or foreign income tax purposes, the minimum quarterly distribution amount and the target distribution amounts may be adjusted to reflect the impact of that law or interpretation on us. At the state level, several states have been evaluating ways to subject partnerships to entity-level taxation through the imposition of state income, franchise or other forms of taxation. Specifically, we will initially own assets and conduct business in Minnesota and North Dakota, neither of which currently imposes an income, franchise tax or other similar form of taxation on partnerships. In addition, we transport crude oil by rail car through a number of states, but do not anticipate being subjected to material entity-level income, franchise or similar tax in those states under current law. In the future, we may expand our operations. Imposition of state, local or foreign taxes on us in these jurisdictions or other jurisdictions that we may expand to could substantially reduce our cash available for distribution to you.

The tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships or an investment in our units could be subject to potential legislative, judicial or administrative changes or differing interpretations, possibly applied on a retroactive basis.

The present U.S. federal income tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships, including us, or an investment in our common units may be modified by administrative, legislative or judicial changes or differing interpretations at any time. From time to time, members of Congress propose and consider substantive changes to the existing U.S. federal income tax laws that affect publicly traded partnerships. Although there is no current legislative proposal, a prior legislative proposal would have eliminated the qualifying income exception to the treatment of all publicly-traded partnerships as corporations upon which we rely for our treatment as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Any modification to the U.S. federal income tax laws may be applied retroactively and could make it more difficult or impossible for us to meet the exception for certain publicly traded partnerships to be treated as partnerships for U.S. federal income tax purposes. We are unable to predict whether any of these changes or other proposals will ultimately be enacted. Any similar or future changes could negatively impact the value of an investment in our common units.

In addition, on January 24, 2017, final regulations regarding which activities give rise to qualifying income within the meaning of Section 7704 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), were published in the Federal Register. We do not believe these final regulations affect our ability to be treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

54

Table of Contents

If the IRS were to contest the federal income tax positions we take, it may adversely impact the market for our common units, and the costs of any such contest would reduce cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

The IRS may adopt positions that differ from the conclusions of our counsel expressed in this prospectus or from the positions we take. It may be necessary to resort to administrative or court proceedings to sustain some or all of our counsel’s conclusions or the positions we take. A court may not agree with some or all of our counsel’s conclusions or positions we take. Any contest with the IRS may materially and adversely impact the market for our common units and the price at which they trade. Moreover, the costs of any contest between us and the IRS will result in a reduction in cash available for distribution to our unitholders and thus will be borne indirectly by our unitholders.

If the IRS makes audit adjustments to our income tax returns for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, it (and some states) may assess and collect any taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) resulting from such audit adjustment directly from us, in which case our cash available for distribution to our unitholders may be substantially reduced.

Pursuant to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, if the IRS makes audit adjustments to our income tax returns, it (and some states) may assess and collect any taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) resulting from such audit adjustment directly from us. Under our limited partnership agreement, our general partner is permitted to make elections under the new rules to either pay the taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) directly to the IRS or, if we are eligible, issue a revised Schedule K-1 to each unitholder with

respect to an audited and adjusted return. Although our general partner may elect to have our unitholders take such audit adjustment into account in accordance with their interests in us during the tax year under audit, there can be no assurance that such election will be practical, permissible or effective in all circumstances. As a result, our current unitholders may bear some or all of the tax liability resulting from such audit adjustment, even if such unitholders did not own units during the tax year under audit. If, as a result of any such audit adjustment, we are required to make payments of taxes, penalties , and interest, our cash available for distribution to our unitholders might be substantially reduced. These rules are not applicable for tax years beginning on or prior to December 31, 2017.

Even if our unitholders do not receive any cash distributions from us, they will be required to pay taxes on their share of our taxable income.

You will be required to pay federal income taxes and, in some cases, state and local income taxes on your share of our taxable income, whether or not you receive cash distributions from us. You may not receive cash distributions from us equal to your share of our taxable income or even equal to the actual tax due from you with respect to that income.

Tax gain or loss on disposition of our common units could be more or less than expected.

If you sell your common units, you will recognize gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and your tax basis in those common units. Because distributions in excess of your allocable share of our net taxable income decrease your tax basis in your common units, the amount, if any, of such prior excess distributions with respect to the units you sell will, in effect, become taxable income to you if you sell such units at a price greater than your tax basis in those units, even if the price you receive is less than your original cost. In addition, because the amount realized includes a unitholder’s share of our nonrecourse liabilities, if you sell your units, you may incur a tax liability in excess of the amount of cash you receive from the sale.

55

Table of Contents

A substantial portion of the amount realized from the sale of your units, whether or not representing gain, may be taxed as ordinary income to you due to potential recapture items, including depreciation recapture. Thus, you may recognize both ordinary income and capital loss from the sale of your units if the amount realized on a sale of your units is less than your adjusted basis in the units. Net capital loss may only offset capital gains and, in the case of individuals, up to $3,000 of ordinary income per year. In the taxable period in which you sell your units, you may recognize ordinary income from our allocations of income and gain to you prior to the sale and from recapture items that generally cannot be offset by any capital loss recognized upon the sale of units. Please read “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences—Disposition of Units—Recognition of Gain or Loss” for a further discussion of the foregoing.

Tax-exempt entities and non-U.S. persons face unique tax issues from owning our common units that may result in adverse tax consequences to them.

Investment in common units by tax-exempt entities, such as employee benefit plans and individual retirement accounts (known as IRAs), and non-U.S. persons raises issues unique to them. For example, virtually all of our income allocated to organizations that are exempt from federal income tax, including IRAs and other retirement plans, will be unrelated business taxable income and will be taxable to them. Allocations and/or distributions to non-U.S. persons will be subject to withholding taxes imposed at the highest effective tax rate applicable to such non-U.S. persons, and each non-U.S. person will be required to file U.S. federal tax returns and pay tax on its share of our taxable income. If you are a tax-exempt entity or a non-U.S. person, you should consult your tax advisor before investing in our common units.

We will treat each purchaser of common units as having the same tax benefits without regard to the actual common units purchased. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of the common units.

Because we cannot match transferors and transferees of common units and because of other reasons, we will adopt depreciation and amortization positions that may not conform to all aspects of existing Treasury Regulations. Our counsel is unable to opine as to the validity of such filing positions. A successful IRS challenge to those positions could adversely affect the amount of tax benefits available to you. It also could affect the timing of these tax benefits or the amount of gain from your sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of our common units or result in audit adjustments to your tax returns. Please read “Material U.S. Federal

Income Tax Consequences—Tax Consequences of Unit Ownership—Section 754 Election” for a further discussion of the effect of the depreciation and amortization positions we adopted.

We will prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our units each month based upon the ownership of our units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders.

We will prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our units each month based upon the ownership of our units on the first day of each month (the “Allocation Date”), instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred. Nevertheless, we will allocate certain deductions for depreciation of capital additions, gain, or loss realized on a sale or other disposition of our assets and, in the discretion of the general partner, any other extraordinary item of income, gain, loss or deduction based upon ownership on the Allocation Date. The U.S. Department of the Treasury has adopted final Treasury Regulations allowing a similar monthly simplifying convention, but such regulations do not specifically authorize all aspects of our

56

Table of Contents

proration method . Accordingly, our counsel is unable to opine as to the validity of this method. If the IRS were to challenge our proration method, we may be required to change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders. Please read “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences—Disposition of Units—Allocations Between Transferors and Transferees.”

A unitholder whose units are the subject of a securities loan (e.g., a loan to a “short seller” to cover a short sale of units) may be considered to have disposed of those units. If so, he would no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those units during the period of the loan and may recognize gain or loss from the disposition.

Because there are no specific rules governing the U.S. federal income tax consequence of loaning a partnership interest, a unitholder whose units are the subject of a securities loan may be considered to have disposed of the loaned units. In that case, the unitholder may no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those units during the period of the loan to the short seller and the unitholder may recognize gain or loss from such disposition. Moreover, during the period of the loan, any of our income, gain, loss or deduction with respect to those units may not be reportable by the unitholder and any cash distributions received by the unitholder as to those units could be fully taxable as ordinary income. Our counsel has not rendered an opinion regarding the treatment of a unitholder whose units are the subject of a securities loan; therefore, unitholders desiring to assure their status as partners and avoid the risk of gain recognition from a securities loan are urged to modify any applicable brokerage account agreements to prohibit their brokers from borrowing their units.

We have adopted certain valuation methodologies in determining a unitholder’s allocations of income, gain, loss and deduction. The IRS may challenge these methodologies or the resulting allocations, which could adversely affect the value of our common units.

In determining the items of income, gain, loss and deduction allocable to our unitholders, we must routinely determine the fair market value of our assets. Although we may, from time to time, consult with professional appraisers regarding valuation matters, we make many fair market value estimates using a methodology based on the market value of our common units as a means to measure the fair market value of our assets. The IRS may challenge these valuation methods and the resulting allocations of income, gain, loss and deduction.

A successful IRS challenge to these methods or allocations could adversely affect the timing or amount of taxable income or loss being allocated to our unitholders. It also could affect the amount of

gain from our unitholders’ sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of the common units or result in audit adjustments to our unitholders’ tax returns without the benefit of additional deductions.

The sale or exchange of 50% or more of our capital and profits interests during any twelve-month period will result in the termination of our partnership for federal income tax purposes.

We will be considered to have terminated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes if there is a sale or exchange of 50% or more of the total interests in our capital and profits within a 12-month period. Immediately following this offering, our Sponsors and our general partner will collectively own         % of the total interests in our capital and profits, assuming the underwriters do not exercise their option to purchase additional common units. Therefore, a transfer by our Sponsors and our general partner of all or a portion of their interests in us could, in conjunction with the trading of common units held by the public, result in a termination of our partnership for federal income tax purposes. For purposes of determining whether the 50% threshold has been met, multiple sales of the same interest will be counted only once.

57

Table of Contents

Our termination would, among other things, result in the closing of our taxable year for all unitholders, which would result in us filing two tax returns for one calendar year and could result in a significant deferral of depreciation deductions allowable in computing our taxable income. In the case of a unitholder reporting on a taxable year other than a calendar year, the closing of our taxable year may also result in more than twelve months of our taxable income or loss being includable in taxable income for the unitholder’s taxable year that includes our termination. Our termination would not affect our classification as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, but it would result in our being treated as a new partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes following the termination. If we were treated as a new partnership, we would be required to make new tax elections and could be subject to penalties if we were unable to determine that a termination occurred. The IRS has announced a relief procedure whereby if a publicly traded partnership that has technically terminated requests and the IRS grants special relief, among other things, the partnership may be permitted to provide only a single Schedule K-1 to unitholders for the two short tax periods included in the year in which the termination occurs. Please read “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Consequences—Disposition of Units—Constructive Termination” for a discussion of the consequences of our termination for federal income tax purposes.

Our unitholders will likely be subject to state and local taxes and income tax return filing requirements in jurisdictions where they do not live as a result of investing in our common units.

In addition to U.S. federal income taxes, our unitholders may be subject to other taxes, including foreign, state and local taxes, unincorporated business taxes and estate, inheritance or intangible taxes that are imposed by the various jurisdictions in which we conduct business or own property now or in the future, even if they do not live in any of those jurisdictions. We will initially own assets and conduct business in Minnesota and North Dakota, each of which currently imposes a personal income tax on individuals, corporations and other entities and requires us to report certain tax information for unitholders. In addition, we transport crude oil by rail car through a number of states, which may also seek to impose an income tax on individuals, corporations and other entities on income earned in those states and may require us to report certain tax information for unitholders.

As we make acquisitions or expand our business, we may own assets or conduct business in additional states that impose a personal income tax. It is each unitholder’s responsibility to file all U.S. federal, foreign, state and local tax returns. Further, our unitholders may be subject to penalties for failure to comply with those requirements. Our counsel has not rendered an opinion on the state or local tax consequences of an investment in our common units.

58

Table of Contents