Quarterlytics / Communication Services / Golar LNG Partners LP

Golar LNG Partners LP

gmlp · NASDAQ Communication Services
Claim this profile
Ticker gmlp
Exchange NASDAQ
Sector Communication Services
Industry
Employees 1-10
← All annual reports
FY2012 Annual Report · Golar LNG Partners LP
Sign in to download
Loading PDF…
GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 1 of 169

20-F 1 gmlp-12312012x20f.htm 20-F 
Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 20-F

(Mark One)

(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR (g) OF THE 

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

OR

(cid:2)(cid:2)(cid:2)(cid:2)

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES 
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012

OR

(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES 

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from                      to

OR

(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1)(cid:1) SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES 

EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Date of event requiring this shell company report 

Commission file number 001- 35123

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Republic of the Marshall Islands

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

Par-la-Ville Place
14 Par-la-Ville Road
Hamilton, HM 08, Bermuda
(Address of principal executive offices)

Graham Robjohns
Par-la-Ville Place
14 Par-la-Ville Road
Hamilton, HM 08, Bermuda
Telephone:  +1 (441) 295-4705
Facsimile:  +1 (441) 295-3494
(Name, Telephone, E-mail and/or Facsimile number and Address of Company Contact Person)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 2 of 169

Title of each class
Common units representing limited partner interests

Name of each exchange on which registered
Nasdaq Global Market

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act: None

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period 
covered by the annual report.

36,246,149 Common Units representing limited partner interests
15,949,831 Subordinated Units representing limited partner interests

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

(cid:2) Yes   (cid:1) No

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to 
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

(cid:1) Yes   (cid:2) No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities 
Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such 
reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

(cid:2) Yes   (cid:1) No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every 
Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during 
the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).

(cid:2) Yes   (cid:1) No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See 
definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer (cid:2)

Accelerated filer (cid:1)

Non-accelerated filer (cid:1)

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

U.S. GAAP (cid:2)

International Financial Reporting Standards as issued
by the International Accounting Standards Board (cid:1)

Other (cid:1)

If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the 
registrant has elected to follow.

(cid:1) Item 17   (cid:1) Item 18

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the 
Exchange Act).

(cid:1) Yes   (cid:2) No

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 3 of 169

Table of Contents

Part I

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP

INDEX TO REPORT ON FORM 20-F

Item 1.
Item 2.
Item 3.
A.
B.
C.
D.
Item 4.
A.
B.
C.
D.

Item 4A.
Item 5.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Item 6.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Item 7.
A.
B.
C.
Item 8.
A.
B.
Item 9.
Item 10.

A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
Item 11.
Item 12.

Identity of Directors, Senior Management and Advisers
Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable
Key Information
Selected Financial Data
Capitalization and Indebtedness
Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds
Risk Factors
Information on the Partnership
History and Development of the Partnership
Business Overview
Organizational Structure
Property, Plants and Equipment
Unresolved Staff Comments
Operating and Financial Review and Prospects
Operating Results
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Research and Development
Trend Information
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations
Safe Harbor
Directors, Senior Management and Employees
Directors and Senior Management
Compensation
Board Practices
Employees
Unit Ownership
Major Unitholders and Related Party Transactions
Major Unitholders
Related Party Transactions
Interests of Experts and Counsel
Financial Information
Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information
Significant Changes
The Offer and Listing
Additional Information
Share Capital
Memorandum and Articles of Association
Material Contracts
Exchange Controls
Taxation
Dividends and Paying Agents
Statements by Experts
Documents on Display
Subsidiary Information
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Description of Securities Other than Equity Securities

Part II

Item 13.
Item 14. Material Modifications to the Rights of Security Holders and Use of Proceeds

Defaults, Dividend Arrearages and Delinquencies

1
1
1
1
1
4
4
4
28
28
29
57
57
57
58
65
71
86
86
86
87
87
87
87
90
91
92
92
92
92
92
99
99
99
102
102
103
103
103
103
104
105
110
110
110
111
111
112

113
113
113

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 4 of 169

Item 15.

Controls and Procedures

[Reserved]

Item 16.
Item 16A. Audit Committee Financial Expert
Item 16B. Code of Ethics
Item 16C. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
Item 16D. Exemptions from the Listing Standards for Audit Committees
Item 16E. Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers
Item 16F. Change in Registrants’ Certifying Accountant
Item 16G. Corporate Governance
Item 16H. Mine Safety Disclosure

Part III

Item 17.
Item 18.
Item 19.

Financial Statements
Financial Statements
Exhibits

SIGNATURES

113

114
114
114
114
115
115
115
115
116

117
117
117
117

119

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 5 of 169

Table of Contents

Presentation of Information in this Annual Report

This  Annual  Report  on  Form 20-F  for  the  year  ended  December 31,  2012,  or  the  Annual  Report,  should  be  read  in 
conjunction with  the  consolidated and  combined  financial statements  and accompanying notes  included  in this  report. Unless the 
context  otherwise  requires,  references  in  this  Annual  Report  to  “Golar  LNG  Partners  LP,”  “Golar  LNG  Partners,” the 
“Partnership,” “we,” “our,” “us” or similar terms refer to Golar LNG Partners LP, a Marshall Islands limited partnership, or any 
one or more of its subsidiaries, or to all of such entities, and, for periods prior to our initial public offering (or our IPO) on April 13, 
2011, our Combined Entity.  References to our “Combined Entity” refer to the subsidiaries of Golar LNG Limited that had interests 
in the vessels in our initial fleet prior to our initial public offering. References in this Annual Report to “our general partner” refer 
to  Golar  GP  LLC,  the  general  partner  of  the  Partnership.   References  in  this  Annual Report to  “Golar” refer,  depending  on  the 
context, to Golar LNG Limited (NasdaqGS: GLNG) and to any one or more of its direct and indirect subsidiaries, including Golar 
LNG Energy Limited or Golar Energy and to Golar Management Limited (or Golar Management).  References in this Annual Report 
to  Golar  Wilhelmsen  refer  to  Golar  Wilhelmsen  AS,  a  company  that  is  jointly  controlled  by  both  Golar  and  Wilhelmsen  Ship 
Management (Norway) AS.

References in this Annual Report to our “initial fleet” refer to the Golar Winter, the Golar Spirit, the Golar Mazo and the 
Methane  Princess,  all  of  which  were  contributed  to  us  at  or  prior  to  our  initial  public  offering.   References  to  our  “Dropdown 
Predecessor” refer  to  the  Golar  Freeze,  the  Nusantara  Regas  Satu  (or  the  NR  Satu)  and  the  Golar  Grand,  which  we  acquired 
subsequent to our initial public offering. In this Annual Report, we refer to the vessels in our initial fleet, the Dropdown Predecessor 
and the Golar Maria, collectively, as our "current fleet".

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward Looking Statements

This Annual Report contains certain forward-looking statements (as such term is defined in Section 21E of the Securities 
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act) concerning future events and our operations, performance and financial 
condition,  including,  in  particular,  the  likelihood  of  our  success  in  developing  and  expanding  our  business.   Statements  that  are 
predictive in nature, that depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, or that include words such as “expects,” “anticipates,”
“intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “estimates,” “projects,” “forecasts,” “will,” “may,” “potential,” “should,” and similar expressions are 
forward-looking  statements.   These  forward-looking  statements  reflect  management’s  current  views  only  as  of  the  date  of  this 
Annual Report and are not intended to give any assurance as to future results.  As a result, unitholders are cautioned not to rely on 
any forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking  statements  appear  in  a  number  of  places  in  this  Annual  Report  and  include  statements  with  respect  to, 

among other things:

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

FSRU and LNG market trends, including charter rates, factors affecting supply and demand, and opportunities for the 
profitable operations of FSRUs and LNG carriers;

our and Golar’s ability to retrofit vessels as FSRUs and the timing of the delivery and acceptance of any such retrofitted 
vessels by their respective charterers;

our ability to increase distributions and the amount of any such increase;

the  contributions  to  our  operating  results  of  the  LNG  carriers,  the  Golar  Grand  and  the  Golar  Maria,  which  we 
acquired in November 2012 and February 2013, respectively;

our ability to integrate and realize the expected benefits from acquisitions, including the acquisitions of the NR Satu, the 
Golar Grand and the Golar Maria;

our anticipated growth strategies;

the effect of the worldwide economic slowdown;

turmoil in the global financial markets;

fluctuations in currencies and interest rates;

general market conditions, including fluctuations in charter hire rates and vessel values;

changes in our operating expenses, including drydocking and insurance costs and bunker prices;

forecasts of our ability to make cash distributions on the units or any increases in our cash distributions;

our future financial condition or results of operations and our future revenues and expenses;

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 6 of 169

Table of Contents

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

the repayment of debt and settling of interest rate swaps;

our ability to make additional borrowings and to access debt and equity markets;

planned capital expenditures and availability of capital resources to fund capital expenditures;

the exercise of purchase options by our charterers;

our ability to maintain long-term relationships with major LNG traders;

our ability to leverage Golar’s relationships and reputation in the shipping industry;

our ability to purchase vessels from Golar in the future;

our  continued  ability  to  enter  into  long-term  time  charters,  including  charters  for  floating  storage  and  regasification 
projects;

our ability to maximize the use of our vessels, including the re-deployment or disposition of vessels no longer under 
long-term time charter;

timely purchases and deliveries of newbuilding vessels;

future purchase prices of newbuildings and secondhand vessels;

our ability to compete successfully for future chartering and newbuilding opportunities;

acceptance of a vessel by its charterer;

termination dates and extensions of charters;

the expected cost of, and our ability to comply with, governmental regulations, maritime self-regulatory organization 
standards, as well as standard regulations imposed by our charterers applicable to our business;

availability of skilled labor, vessel crews and management;

our general and administrative expenses and our fees and expenses payable under the fleet management agreements and 
the management and administrative services agreement;

the anticipated taxation of our partnership and distributions to our unitholders;

estimated future maintenance and replacement capital expenditures;

our ability to retain key employees;

customers’ increasing emphasis on environmental and safety concerns;

potential liability from any pending or future litigation;

potential disruption of shipping routes due to accidents, political events, piracy or acts by terrorists;

future sales of our common units in the public market;

our business strategy and other plans and objectives for future operations; and

other factors detailed in this Annual Report and from time to time in our periodic reports.

Forward-looking statements in this Annual Report are estimates reflecting the judgment of senior management and involve 
known  and  unknown  risks  and  uncertainties.   These  forward-looking  statements  are  based  upon  a  number  of  assumptions  and 
estimates that are inherently subject to significant uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are beyond our control.  Actual 
results  may  differ  materially  from  those  expressed  or  implied  by  such  forward-looking  statements.   Accordingly,  these  forward-
looking statements should be considered in light of various important factors, including those set forth in this Annual Report under 
the heading “Item 3—Key Information—Risk Factors.”

We do not intend to revise any forward-looking statements in order to reflect any change in our expectations or events or 
circumstances that may subsequently arise.  We make no prediction or statement about the performance of our common units.  The 
various disclosures included in this Annual Report and in our other filings made with the Securities and Exchange Commission (or 
the  SEC)  that  attempt  to  advise  interested  parties  of  the  risks  and  factors  that  may  affect  our  business,  prospects  and  results  of 
operations should be carefully reviewed and considered.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 7 of 169

Table of Contents

PART I

Item 1.

Identity of Directors, Senior Management and Advisers

Not applicable.

Item 2.

Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable

Not applicable.

Item 3.

Key Information

A. Selected Financial Data

The  following  table  presents,  in  each  case  for  the  periods  and  as  of  the  dates  indicated,  our  selected  consolidated  and 
combined financial and operating data, which includes, for  periods  prior to the  completion of our IPO, on April 13, 2011, certain 
subsidiaries of Golar that had interests in the vessels in our initial fleet, the Golar Winter, the Golar Spirit, the Methane Princess and 
the Golar Mazo.  The transfers and contributions of the subsidiaries that had interests in the vessels in our initial fleet were deemed 
to be  a reorganization of entities under common control.  As  a  result, these transactions  have  been  recorded  by the Partnership at 
Golar’s historical book values.

In October 2011 and July 2012, we acquired from Golar interests in subsidiaries that own and operate the FSRUs, the Golar 
Freeze and the NR Satu, respectively. In addition, in November 2012, we acquired from Golar interests in subsidiaries that lease and 
operate the LNG carrier, the  Golar Grand. These transactions  were  also deemed to be a reorganization of entities under  common 
control.  As  a  result,  our  financial  statements  have  been  retroactively  adjusted  to  include  the  results  of  these  vessels.  The  periods 
retroactively  adjusted  include  all  periods  that  we  and  these  vessels  were  under  the  common  control  of  Golar.  As  a  result,  the 
consolidated  and combined  statements of  operations  of Golar LNG  Partners  for  the  years  ended  December 31,  2012,  2011,  2010, 
2009  and  2008 reflect the  results of  operations of the Dropdown Predecessor, as  if we  had  acquired the vessels  that comprise the 
Dropdown Predecessor when they began operations under the ownership of Golar.

The consolidated and combined financial data of Golar LNG Partners as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 and for the years 
ended  December 31, 2012, 2011  and  2010 are derived  from  the  audited  consolidated  and  combined financial  statements  of  Golar 
LNG Partners, prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP, which are included elsewhere in this Annual Report.

The following financial data should be read in conjunction with “Item 5—Operating and Financial Review and Prospects”

and our historical consolidated and combined financial statements and the notes thereto included elsewhere in this Annual Report.

Our financial position, results of operations and cash flows could differ from those that would have resulted if we operated 
autonomously or as an entity independent of Golar in the periods prior to our IPO for which historical financial data are presented 
below, and such data may not be indicative of our future operating results or financial performance.

Statement of Operations Data:
Total operating revenues
Vessel operating expenses(1)
Voyage expenses(2)
Administrative expenses
Depreciation and amortization
Impairment of long-term assets
Gain on sale of long-term assets
Total operating expenses
Operating income

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

(in thousands except fleet data and per day data)

$

$

$

225,452
39,212
785
8,235
45,316
—
—

93,548
131,904

205,808
38,516
6,343
7,457
43,106
1,500
—

96,922
108,886

$

153,414
39,081
9,825
6,767
38,423
1,500
—

95,596
57,818

143,243
34,232
14,053
8,401
34,647
109
(430)

91,012
52,231

$

286,630
45,474
4,471
7,269
51,167
—
—

108,381
178,249

1

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 8 of 169

Table of Contents

Interest income
Interest expense
Other financial items, net
Income (loss) before income taxes and non-
controlling interest
Income taxes
Income (loss) before non-controlling interest
Net income attributable to non-controlling interest
Net income (loss) attributable to Golar LNG Partners 
owners

$

$

$

$

$

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

Year Ended December 31,

(in thousands except fleet data and per day data)

$

1,797
(38,090)

(5,389) $

$

1,640
(19,581)
(18,521) $

$

3,998
(20,300)
(27,855) $

9,038
(31,913)
15,939

$

$

136,567

(9,426) $

127,141
(10,723) $

95,442

(45) $

95,397
(9,863) $

64,729
(1,212) $
63,517
(9,250) $

50,882
(1,752) $
49,130
(9,012) $

32,689
(62,029)
(56,646)

(33,755)
637
(33,118)
(6,705)

116,418

$

85,534

$

54,267

$

40,118

$

(39,823)

Earnings (Loss) Per Unit (Basic and Diluted)
Common units
Subordinated units
General partner units
Cash dividends declared and paid per unit
Balance Sheet Data (at end of period):
Cash and cash equivalents
Restricted cash and short-term investments(3)
Long-term restricted cash(3)
Vessels and equipment, net
Vessels under capital lease, net(4)
Total assets
Current portion of long-term debt
Current portion of obligations under capital leases
Long-term debt
Long-term obligations under capital leases(4)
Non-controlling interest(5)
Owner’s and Dropdown Predecessor equity(6)
Partner’s capital
Cash Flow Data:
Net cash provided by operating activities
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
Fleet Data:
Number of vessels at end of period(7)
Average number of vessels during period(7)
Average age of vessels
Total calendar days for fleet
Total operating days for fleet(8)
Other Financial Data:
Average daily time charter equivalent earnings (TCE)
(9)
Average daily vessel operating expenses(10)

$

2.08
1.85
2.00
1.78

66,327
30,900
190,523
707,147
485,632
1,510,974
64,822
5,837
674,650
406,534
71,858
—
178,675

$

1.89
1.16
1.59
0.73

49,218
24,512
185,270
662,021
501,903
1,437,813
49,906
5,909
572,978
399,934
62,934
208,069
32,069

$

1.54
1.31
1.45
—

53,559
21,815
186,042
554,607
515,666
1,407,810
58,822
5,766
400,574
406,109
55,470
321,470
—

$

1.54
0.55
1.14
—

33,846
33,508
466,957
181,029
896,698
1,638,925
77,843
6,372
341,246
712,278
49,340
338,848
—

—
(1.16)
(0.47)
—

$

27,892
35,157
441,507
184,425
786,661
1,508,144
44,930
5,053
384,089
663,467
41,688
211,244
—

$

$

189,343
(78,798)
(93,436)

156,972
(102,881)
(58,431)

$

$

87,090
216,288
(283,666)

$

62,239
(123,141)
66,856

12,721
(65,865)
49,970

7
7
20
2,562
2,408

7
7
19
2,555
2,162

7
7
18
2,555
2,328

7
7
17
2,555
2,142

7
7
16
2,562
2,218

116,739
17,749

103,581
15,347

85,681
15,075

65,626
15,296

58,246
13,361

2

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 9 of 169

Table of Contents

(1) Vessel operating expenses are the direct costs associated with operating a vessel, including crew wages, vessel supplies, routine 

repairs, maintenance, insurance, lubricating oils and management fees.

(2) All of our vessels have been operated under time charters during the periods presented.  Under a time charter, the charterer pays 
substantially  all  of  the  vessel  voyage  expenses,  which  are  primarily  fuel  and  port  charges.   However,  we  may  incur  voyage 
related  expenses  when  positioning  or  repositioning  vessels  before  or  after  the  period  of  a  time  charter,  during  periods  of 
commercial waiting time or while off-hire during a period of drydocking.

(3) Restricted cash and short-term investments consist of bank deposits, which may only be used to settle the Golar Mazo, the Golar 
Freeze and the NR Satu loans or lease payments in respect of the Golar Spirit or the Golar Freeze (prior to December 2010), the 
Methane Princess and the Golar Grand.

(4) During  the  periods presented,  six  of our  vessels  were subject to  lease  financing  arrangements,  which  are  classified  as capital 
leases.   In  respect  of  four  of  these  leases,  we  borrowed  under  term  loans  and  deposited  the  proceeds  into  restricted  cash 
accounts.  Concurrently therewith, we entered into capital leases for the vessels, and the vessels were recorded as assets on our 
balance sheet.  These restricted cash deposits, plus the interest earned on the deposits, approximate the remaining amounts we 
owe  under  the  capital  lease  arrangements.   Where  movements  in  interest  rates  result  in  a  surplus,  this  is  released  to  working 
capital.  Similarly, where a deficit arises, this is funded through working capital.  In these instances, we consider payments under 
our capital leases to be funded through our restricted cash deposits, and our continuing obligation is the repayment of the term 
loans.   During  2010,  the  outstanding  lease  liabilities  on  three  of  the  vessels  were  repaid  from  the  associated  restricted  cash 
deposits.  Under U.S. GAAP, we record both the obligations under the capital leases and the term loans as liabilities, and both 
the restricted cash deposits and our vessels under capital leases as assets.  This accounting treatment has the effect of increasing 
both our assets and liabilities by the amount of restricted cash deposits relating to the corresponding capital lease obligations.  As 
of  December 31,  2012,  our  total assets included restricted  cash deposits of $195.9  million  with  respect to our lease financing 
arrangements and debt facilities. Accordingly, our lease and debt liabilities were gross of restricted cash deposits by the same 
amount.

(5) Non-controlling interest refers to a 40% interest in the Golar Mazo owned by Chinese Petroleum Corporation.
(6) Dropdown Predecessor equity refers to periods prior to the acquisition by the Partnership of the subsidiaries with interests in the 
vessels the Golar Freeze, the NR Satu and the Golar Grand (in October 2011, July 2012 and November 2012, respectively),
when these vessels were owned or leased and operated by Golar.

(7) In each of the periods presented, we held (or are deemed to have held) a 60% ownership interest in the Golar Mazo and a 100% 

interest in our six other vessels.

(8) The operating days for our fleet is the total number of days in a given period that the vessels were in our possession less the total 
number of days off-hire.  We define days off-hire as days lost to, among other things, operational deficiencies, drydocking for 
repairs,  maintenance  or  inspection,  equipment  breakdowns,  special  surveys  and  vessel  upgrades,  delays  due  to  accidents, 
crewing  strikes,  certain  vessel  detentions  or  similar  problems,  or  our  failure  to  maintain  the  vessel  in  compliance  with  its 
specifications and contractual standards or to provide the required crew, or during periods of commercial waiting time during 
which we do not earn charter hire.
(9) Non-GAAP Financial Measures

It is standard industry practice to measure the revenue performance of a vessel in terms of average daily TCE.  For time charters, 
this  is  calculated  by  dividing  total  operating  revenue  less  voyage  expenses  by  the  number  of  calendar  days  minus  days  for 
scheduled  off-hire.   Where  we  are  paid  a  fee  to  position  or  reposition  a  vessel  before  or  after  a  time  charter,  this  additional 
revenue, less voyage expenses, is included in the calculation of net time charter revenues.  The following table reconciles our 
total operating revenues to average daily TCE.

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

Year Ended December 31,

Total operating revenues
Voyage expenses

Calendar days less scheduled off-hire days
Average daily TCE (in $)

$

$

$

286,630
(4,471)
282,159
2,417
116,739

$

$

$

$

$

(in thousands, except average daily TCE)
225,452
(785)
224,667
2,169
103,581

205,808
(6,343)
199,465
2,328
85,681

153,414
(9,825)
143,589
2,188
65,626

$

$

$

$

$

$

$

143,243
(14,053)
129,190
2,218
58,246

(10) We calculate average daily vessel operating expenses by dividing vessel operating expenses by the number of calendar days.

3

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 10 of 169

Table of Contents

B.            Capitalization and Indebtedness

Not applicable.

C.            Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds

 Not applicable.

D. Risk Factors

Some of the following risks relate principally to the industry in which we operate and to our business in general.  Other risks 
relate principally to the securities market and to ownership of our common units.  The occurrence of any of the events described in 
this  section  could  significantly  and  negatively  affect  our  business,  financial  condition,  operating  results  or  cash  available  for 
distributions or the trading price of our common units.

Risks Inherent in Our Business

We  will  be  required  to  make  substantial  capital  expenditures  to  expand  the  size  of  our  fleet.   Depending  on  whether  we 
finance  our  expenditures  through  cash  from  operations  or  by  issuing  debt  or  equity  securities,  our  ability  to  make  cash 
distributions may be diminished, our financial leverage could increase or our unitholders could be diluted.

We will be required to make substantial capital expenditures to expand the size of our fleet.  We may be required to make 
significant installment payments for retrofitting of LNG carriers to FSRUs and acquisitions of LNG carriers and FSRU’s.  We and 
Golar  regularly  evaluate  and  pursue  opportunities  to  provide  floating  LNG  storage  and  regasification  services  and  LNG 
transportation  for  new  or  expanding  LNG  projects.   If  we  choose  to  purchase  FSRUs  or  LNG  carriers  (either  from  Golar  or 
independently), we plan to finance the cost either through cash from operations, borrowings or debt or equity financings.

Use of  cash  from  operations to expand our fleet will  reduce  cash available  for  distribution  to  unitholders.  Our  ability  to 
obtain bank financing or to access the capital markets may be limited by our financial condition at the time of any such financing or 
offering as  well as by adverse market conditions resulting from,  among other things, general economic  conditions, changes  in the 
LNG  industry  and  contingencies  and  uncertainties  that  are  beyond  our  control.   Our  failure  to  obtain  the  funds  for  future  capital 
expenditures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and on our ability to 
make cash distributions.  Even if we are successful in obtaining necessary funds, the  terms of  any debt financings could limit our 
ability to pay cash distributions to unitholders.  In addition, incurring additional debt may significantly increase our interest expense 
and financial leverage, and issuing additional equity securities may result in significant unitholder dilution and would increase the 
aggregate amount of cash required to pay the minimum quarterly distribution to unitholders, which could  have a material adverse 
effect on our ability to make cash distributions.

We have no ability to borrow additional amounts under our revolving credit facility.  If we are unable to obtain additional 
financing,  we  may  be unable  to  meet  our  obligations  as  they  come  due,  enhance  our existing  business,  complete  acquisitions, 
respond to competitive pressures or otherwise execute our growth strategy.

Other than our $20 million undrawn sponsor credit facility with Golar and $20 million undrawn revolving facility under the 
NR  Satu  facility,  we  have  no  other  available  borrowing  capacity  as  of  April  30,  2013.   We  have  no  ability  to  borrow  additional 
amounts  under our Golar LNG  Partners revolving credit facility.  Therefore, we will  be  required  to  obtain additional financing  in 
order to fund the expansion of our fleet beyond its current size.

We plan to finance our future acquisitions through cash from operations, borrowings or debt or equity financings.  Use of 
cash  from  operations  to  expand  our  fleet  will  reduce  cash  available  for  distribution  to  unitholders.   Our  ability  to  obtain  bank 
financing or to access the capital markets may be limited by our financial condition at the time of any such financing or offering as 
well as by adverse market conditions resulting from, among other things, general economic conditions, changes in the LNG industry 
and contingencies and uncertainties that are beyond our control.  Our failure to obtain the funds for future capital expenditures could 
have  a  material  adverse  effect  on  our  business,  results  of  operations  and  financial  condition  and  our  ability  to  make  cash 
distributions.

4

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 11 of 169

Even if we are successful in obtaining necessary funds, the terms of any debt financings could limit our ability to pay cash 
distributions  to  unitholders.   In  addition,  incurring  additional  debt  may  increase  our  interest  expense  and  financial  leverage,  and 
issuing additional equity securities may result in unitholder dilution and would increase the aggregate amount of cash required to pay 
the  minimum  quarterly  distribution  to  unitholders,  which  could  have  a  material  adverse  effect  on  our  ability  to  make  cash 
distributions.

We  depend  on  Golar  and  certain  of  its  affiliates,  including  Golar  Management  and  Golar  Wilhelmsen,  to  assist  us  in 

operating and expanding our business and providing interim financing for certain vessel acquisitions.

Our ability to enter into new charters and expand our customer relationships will depend largely on our ability to leverage 
our  relationship  with  Golar  and  its  reputation  and  relationships  in  the  shipping  industry.   If  Golar  suffers  material  damage  to  its 
reputation or relationships, it may harm our ability to:

•

•

•

•

renew existing charters upon their expiration;

obtain new charters;

successfully interact with shipyards;

obtain financing on commercially acceptable terms;

• maintain access to capital under the sponsor credit facility; or

• maintain satisfactory relationships with suppliers and other third parties.

Golar  is  also  incurring  all  costs  for  the  construction  and  delivery  of  certain  newbuildings.  We  will  have  the  option  to 
purchase from Golar all of their newbuildings upon delivery of the newbuildings and entry into long term charters. If Golar fails to 
make construction payments for these newbuildings, we could lose the ability to purchase these vessels as a result of such default, 
which could harm our business and reduce our ability to make cash distributions.

In  addition,  each  vessel  in  our  fleet  is  subject  to  management  agreements  pursuant  to  which  certain  commercial  and 
technical  management  services  are  provided  by  certain  affiliates  of  Golar,  including  Golar  Management  and  Golar  Wilhelmsen.  
Pursuant  to  these  agreements,  these  entities  provide  significant  commercial  and  technical  management  services  for  our  fleet.   In 
addition, pursuant to a management and administrative services agreement between us and Golar Management, Golar Management 
provides us with significant management, administrative, financial and other support services.  Our operational success and ability to 
execute our growth strategy depends significantly upon the satisfactory performance of these services.  Our business will be harmed 
if our service providers fail to perform these services satisfactorily, if they cancel their agreements with us or if they stop providing 
these services to us.  Please read “Item 7—Major Unitholders and Related Party Transactions—Related Party Transactions.”

We  may  not  have  sufficient  cash  from  operations  following  the  establishment  of  cash  reserves  and  payment  of  fees  and 

expenses to enable us to pay the minimum quarterly distribution on our common units and subordinated units.

We  may  not  have  sufficient  cash  from  operations  to  pay  the  minimum  quarterly  distribution  of  $0.3850  per  unit  on  our 
common units and subordinated units.  The amount of cash we can distribute on our units principally depends upon the amount of 
cash  we  generate  from  our  operations,  which  may  fluctuate  from  quarter  to  quarter  based  on  the  risks  described  in  this  section, 
including, among other things:

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

the rates we obtain from our charters;

the level of our operating costs, such as the cost of crews and insurance;

the continued availability of natural gas production, liquefaction and regasification facilities;

demand for LNG;

supply of LNG carriers;

prevailing global and regional economic and political conditions;

currency exchange rate fluctuations; and

the  effect  of  governmental  regulations  and  maritime  self-regulatory  organization  standards  on  the  conduct  of  our 
business.

5

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 12 of 169

In addition, the actual amount of cash available for distribution to our unitholders will depend on other factors, including:

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

the  level  of  capital  expenditures  we  make,  including  for  maintaining  or  replacing  vessels,  building  new  vessels, 
acquiring existing vessels and complying with regulations;

the number  of unscheduled off-hire days for  our fleet  and the timing of, and number  of days required for, scheduled 
drydocking of our vessels;

our debt service requirements and restrictions on distributions contained in our debt instruments;

the level of debt we will incur to fund future acquisitions;

fluctuations in interest rates;

fluctuations in our working capital needs;

variable tax rates;

our ability to make, and the level of, working capital borrowings; and

the amount of any cash reserves established by our board of directors.

The amount of cash we generate from our operations may differ materially from our profit or loss for the period, which will 
be affected  by  non-cash  items.  As a result of this and the other factors mentioned above,  we may make cash distributions during 
periods when we record losses and may not make cash distributions during periods when we record net income.

We must make substantial capital expenditures to maintain and replace the operating capacity of our fleet, which will reduce 
our cash available for distribution.  In addition, each quarter we are required to deduct estimated maintenance and replacement 
capital expenditures from operating surplus, which may result in less cash available to unitholders than if actual maintenance 
and replacement capital expenditures were deducted.

We must make substantial capital expenditures to maintain and replace, over the long-term, the operating capacity of our 
fleet.   Maintenance  and  replacement  capital  expenditures  include  capital  expenditures  associated  with  drydocking  a  vessel, 
modifying  an  existing  vessel,  acquiring  a  new  vessel or  otherwise  replacing  current vessels  at  the  end  of  their  useful  lives  to  the 
extent  these  expenditures  are  incurred  to  maintain  or  replace  the  operating  capacity  of  our  fleet.   These  expenditures  could  vary 
significantly from period to period and could increase as a result of changes in:

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

the cost of labor and materials;

customer requirements;

fleet size;

the cost of replacement vessels;

length of charters;

governmental  regulations  and  maritime  self-regulatory  organization  standards  relating  to  safety,  security  or  the 
environment; and

competitive standards.

Our  partnership  agreement  requires  our  board  of  directors  to  deduct  estimated  maintenance  and  replacement  capital 
expenditures, instead of actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures, from operating surplus each quarter in an effort to 
reduce  fluctuations  in  operating  surplus  as  a  result  of  significant  variations  in  actual  maintenance  and  replacement  capital 
expenditures  each  quarter.   The  amount  of  estimated  maintenance  and  replacement  capital  expenditures  deducted  from  operating 
surplus is subject to review and change by our conflicts committee at least once a year.  In years when estimated maintenance and 
replacement  capital  expenditures  are  higher  than  actual  maintenance  and  replacement  capital  expenditures,  the  amount  of  cash 
available for distribution to unitholders will be lower than if actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures were deducted 
from  operating  surplus.   If  our  board  of  directors  underestimates  the  appropriate  level  of  estimated  maintenance  and  replacement 
capital  expenditures,  we  may  have  less  cash  available  for  distribution  in  periods  when  actual  capital  expenditures  exceed  our 
previous estimates.

6

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 13 of 169

Specifically,  we  have  agreed  to  make  certain  modifications  to  the  Golar  Winter  as  a  result  of  the  charterer's,  Petróleo 
Brasileiro S.A (or Petrobras), decision to relocate the Golar Winter, from Rio de Janeiro to Bahia.  We began the ordering of long 
lead items together in the first quarter of 2012 and the modification work is expected to be completed by the third quarter of 2013.  
We  currently  expect  the  cost  of  these  modifications  together  with  drydocking  costs  to  be  approximately  $25  million,  which  we 
expect to fund with a combination of cash and undrawn credit facilities.

We may be unable to make or realize expected benefits from acquisitions which could have an adverse effect on our expected 

plans for growth.

Our growth strategy includes selectively acquiring FSRUs and LNG carriers that are operating under long-term, stable cash 
flow generating time charters.  For instance, in 2012, we completed the acquisition of the NR Satu and the Golar Grand from Golar. 
In addition, we also completed the acquisition of the Golar Maria in February 2013. 

Any acquisition of a vessel or business may not be profitable to us at or after the time we acquire it and may not generate 
cash flow sufficient to justify  our  investment.   In  addition,  our  acquisition  growth  strategy exposes  us to risks that  may harm  our 
business, financial condition and operating results, including risks that we may:

•

•

•

•

•

•

fail to realize anticipated benefits, such as new customer relationships, cost-savings or cash flow enhancements;

be unable to hire, train or retain qualified shore and seafaring personnel to manage and operate our growing business 
and fleet;

decrease our liquidity by using a significant portion of our available cash or borrowing capacity to finance acquisitions;

significantly increase our interest expense or financial leverage if we incur additional debt to finance acquisitions;

incur or assume unanticipated liabilities, losses or costs associated with the business or vessels acquired; or

incur  other  significant  charges,  such  as  impairment  of  goodwill  or  other  intangible  assets,  asset  devaluation  or 
restructuring charges.

Unlike  newbuildings,  existing vessels typically do not carry  warranties  as  to  their condition.  While we  generally inspect 
existing vessels prior to purchase, such an inspection would normally not provide us with as much knowledge of a vessel’s condition 
as we would possess if it had been built for us and operated by us during its life.  Repairs and maintenance costs for existing vessels 
are difficult to predict and may be substantially higher than for vessels we have operated since they were built.  These costs could 
decrease our cash flow and reduce our liquidity and could have an adverse effect on our expected plans for growth.

The  required  drydocking  of  our  vessels  could  be  more  expensive  and  time  consuming  than  we  anticipate,  which  could 

adversely affect our cash available for distribution.

The drydocking of our vessels requires significant capital expenditures and results in loss of revenue while our vessels are 
off-hire.  Any significant increase in the number of days of off-hire due to such drydocking or in the costs of any repairs could have a 
material adverse effect on our ability to pay distributions to our unitholders.  Although we do not anticipate that more than one of our 
vessels  will  be  out  of  service  at  any  given  time,  we  may  underestimate  the  time  required  to  drydock  any  of  our  vessels  or 
unanticipated problems may arise.  If more than one of our vessels is required to be out of service at the same time, if a vessel is 
drydocked  longer  than  expected  or  if  the  cost  of  repairs  during  drydocking  is  greater  than  budgeted,  our  cash  available  for 
distribution could be adversely affected.

Our growth depends on continued growth in demand for LNG, FSRUs and LNG carriers.

Our growth strategy focuses on expansion in the floating storage and regasification sector and the LNG shipping sector.  
While global LNG demand has continued to rise, the rate of its growth has fluctuated due to several reasons, including the global 
economic crisis and the continued increase in natural gas production from unconventional sources in regions such as North America.  
Accordingly, our growth depends on  continued  growth  in world and  regional  demand for  LNG,  FSRUs and  LNG  carriers,  which 
could be negatively affected by a number of factors, including:

•

•

increases in the cost of natural gas derived from LNG relative to the cost of natural gas generally;

increases  in  the  production  levels  of  low-cost  natural  gas  in  domestic  natural  gas  consuming  markets,  which  could 
further depress prices for natural gas in those markets and make LNG uneconomical;

7

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 14 of 169

•

•

•

•

•

•

decreases in the cost, or increases in the demand for, conventional land-based regasification systems, which could occur 
if  providers  or  users  of  regasification  services  seek  greater  economies  of  scale  than  FSRUs  can  provide  or  if  the 
economic, regulatory or political challenges associated with land-based activities improve;

further development of, or decreases in the cost of, alternative technologies for vessel-based LNG regasification;

increases in the production of natural gas in areas linked by pipelines to consuming areas, the extension of existing, or 
the  development  of  new,  pipeline  systems  in  markets  we  may  serve,  or  the  conversion  of  existing  non-natural  gas 
pipelines to natural gas pipelines in those markets;

decreases in the consumption of natural gas due to increases in its price relative to other energy sources or other factors 
making consumption of natural gas less attractive;

availability of new, alternative energy sources, including compressed natural gas; and

negative  global  or  regional  economic  or  political  conditions,  particularly  in  LNG  consuming  regions,  which  could 
reduce energy consumption or its growth.

Reduced demand for LNG, FSRUs or LNG carriers would have a material adverse effect on our future growth and could 

harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We have only eight vessels in our fleet.  Any limitation on the availability or operation of those vessels could have a material 
adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition and could significantly reduce our ability to make 
distributions to our unitholders.

Our  current  fleet  consists  of  four  FSRUs  and  four  LNG  carriers.   If  any  of  our  FSRUs  or  LNG  carriers  are  unable  to 
generate revenues as a result of off-hire time, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

The charters relating to our FSRUs and LNG carriers permit the charterer to terminate the charter in the event that the vessel 
is off-hire for any extended period.  The charters also allow each charterer to terminate the charter upon the occurrence of specified 
defaults by us.  The termination of any of our charters could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and 
financial condition and could significantly reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders if we are unable to re-charter 
such  vessel  for  an  extended  period  of  time.   For  further  details  regarding  termination  of  our  charters,  please  read  “Item  4—
Information on the Partnership—Business Overview—FSRU Charters” and “—LNG Carrier Charters.”

We currently derive all of our revenue from five customers.  The loss of any of these customers would result in a significant 

loss of revenues and cash flow, if for an extended period of time, we are not able to re-charter a vessel to another customer.

We have derived, and believe that we will continue to derive, all of our revenues and cash flow from a limited number of 
customers.  For the year ended December 31, 2012, BG Group PLC (or BG Group) accounted for 23%, PT Pertamina (PERSERO) 
(or Pertamina) accounted for 13%, Dubai Supply Authority (or DUSUP) accounted for 17%, Petrobras accounted for 32% and PT 
Nusantara Regas (PTNR) accounted for 15% of our total revenues.  All of our charters have fixed terms, but might nevertheless be 
lost in the event of unanticipated developments such as a customer’s breach.

We could also lose a customer or the benefits of a charter if:

•

•

the customer fails to make charter payments because of its financial inability, disagreements with us or otherwise;

the customer exercises its right to terminate the charter in certain circumstances, such as:

•

•

•

•

•

loss of the vessel or damage to it beyond repair;

defaults of our obligations under the charter, including prolonged periods of off-hire;

in the event of war or hostilities that would significantly disrupt the free trade of the vessel;

requisition by any governmental authority; or

with respect  to the  Golar Spirit, the  Golar Winter  and the Golar  Freeze, upon six  months’ written notice at any 
time after the fifth anniversary of the commencement of the related charter upon payment of a termination fee; 

•

a  prolonged  force  majeure  event  affecting  the  customer,  including  damage  to  or  destruction  of  relevant  production 
facilities, war or political unrest prevents us from performing services for that customer.

8

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 15 of 169

If  we  lose  any  of  our  charters  and  are  unable  to  re-deploy  the  related  vessel  on  terms  as  favorable  to  us  as  our  current 
charters for an extended period of time, we will not receive any revenues from that vessel, but we may be required to pay expenses 
necessary to maintain the vessel in proper operating condition.  The loss of any of our customers, charters or vessels, or a decline in 
payments under any of our charters, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition 
and ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders, if we are not able to re-charter a vessel to another customer for an extended 
period of time.

Our debt levels may limit our flexibility in obtaining additional financing, pursuing other business opportunities and paying 

distributions to unitholders.

As of December 31, 2012, we had a total consolidated debt (including capitalized lease obligations, net of restricted cash, 
and including indebtedness outstanding under our credit facilities) of approximately $930.4 million. In addition, we have the ability 
to incur additional debt.  Our level of debt could have important consequences to us, including the following:

•

our ability to obtain additional financing, if necessary, for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions or other 
purposes may be limited or such financing may not be available on favorable terms;

• we will need a substantial portion of our cash flow to make principal and interest payments on our debt, reducing the 
funds that would otherwise be available for operations, future business opportunities and distributions to unitholders;

•

•

our debt level will make us more vulnerable than our competitors with less debt to competitive pressures or a downturn 
in our business or the economy generally; and

our debt level may limit our flexibility in responding to changing business and economic conditions.

Our ability to service our debt will depend upon, among other things, our future financial and operating performance, which 
will be affected by prevailing economic conditions and financial, business, regulatory and other factors, some of which are beyond 
our control.  If our operating results are not sufficient to service our current or future indebtedness, we will be forced to take actions 
such as reducing distributions, reducing or delaying our business activities, acquisitions, investments or capital expenditures, selling 
assets, restructuring or refinancing our debt, or seeking additional equity capital or bankruptcy protection.  We may not be able to 
effect any of these remedies on satisfactory terms, or at all.

Our financing arrangements are secured by our vessels and contain operating and financial restrictions and other covenants 

that may restrict our business and financing activities as well as our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.

The  operating  and  financial  restrictions  and  covenants  in  our  financing  arrangements,  including  the  Golar  LNG  Partners 
credit  facility,  the  Golar  Freeze  credit  facility,  the  Norwegian  bond  agreement,  our  lease  agreements  and  any  future  financing 
agreements,  could  adversely  affect  our  ability  to  finance  future  operations  or  capital  needs  or  to  engage,  expand  or  pursue  our 
business activities.   For  example,  subject  to certain exceptions, the  Golar LNG  Partners credit facility, which is  secured by a first 
priority charge over the Methane Princess and the Golar Spirit and a second priority charge over the Golar Mazo, requires the prior 
written consent of our lenders or otherwise restricts our and our subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things:

• merge or consolidate with any other person;

• make certain capital expenditures;

•

•

•

pay distributions to our unitholders;

terminate or materially amend certain of our charters;

enter into any other line of business;

• make any acquisitions;

•

•

•

incur additional indebtedness or grant any liens to secure any of our existing or future indebtedness;

enter into any sale-leaseback transactions; or

enter into any transactions with our affiliates.

9

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 16 of 169

In addition, the Golar LNG Partners credit facility prohibits us from paying distributions to our unitholders if we are not in 
compliance  with  certain  financial  covenants  or  upon  the  occurrence  of  an  event  of  default.   The  agreements  governing  our  other 
financing arrangements, including  the sponsor  credit facility, the loan  facility with respect  to the Golar Mazo (or the  Mazo credit 
facility), the $108 million credit facility that we assumed in connection with our acquisition of the Golar Freeze (or the Golar Freeze 
Facility),  the  $175  million  NR  Satu  facility,  our  high-yield  bond  agreement  and  our  lease  agreements  also  contain  operating  and 
financial restrictions and covenants.  For more information, regarding our financial arrangements, please read “Item 5—Operating 
and Financial Review and Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Borrowing Activities—Long-Term  Debt” and “—Capital 
Lease Obligations.”

Our ability to comply with covenants and restrictions contained in our financing arrangements may be affected by events 
beyond  our  control,  including  prevailing  economic,  financial  and  industry  conditions.   If  market  or  other  economic  conditions 
deteriorate,  our  ability  to  comply  with  these  covenants  may  be  impaired.   If  restrictions,  covenants,  ratios  or  tests  in  our  debt 
instruments  are  breached,  a  significant  portion  of  the  obligations  may  become  immediately  due  and  payable,  and  the  lenders’
commitment to make further loans may terminate.  We may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient funds to make these accelerated 
payments.  In addition,  obligations  under  our  financing arrangements are  secured by  certain of our vessels and  guaranteed by  our 
subsidiaries holding the interests in our vessels, and if we are unable to repay debt under our financing arrangements, the lenders or 
lessors could seek to foreclose on those assets.

In April 2013, we received waivers relating to breach of covenants under the Golar LNG Partners credit facility and the 
Golar Freeze facility relating to change of control over the Partnership. The waiver relating to the Golar LNG Partners credit facility 
extends  to  January  1,  2014. The  waiver relating to the Golar  Freeze facility  is permanent. As  discussed in note  1 to our  financial 
statements, following the first annual general meeting of common unitholders on December 13, 2012, Golar ceased to control our 
board of directors as the majority of board members became electable by the common unitholders. Absent this waiver, we would not 
have been in compliance with this covenant as of December 31, 2012 as Golar no longer controls the appointment of the majority of 
the members of our board of directors. In connection with the grant of  such waiver, in order to avoid any such default that could 
occur in the future, the definition of a change of control contained in the Golar LNG Partners credit facility and the Golar Freeze 
facility are being amended. Please read “Item 13 — Defaults, dividend arrearages and delinquencies” for further detail.

Growth of the LNG market may be limited by many factors, including infrastructure constraints and community and political 

group resistance to new LNG infrastructure over concerns about the environment, safety and terrorism.

A  complete  LNG  project  includes  production,  liquefaction,  regasification,  storage  and  distribution  facilities  and  LNG 
carriers.  Existing LNG projects and infrastructure are limited, and new or expanded LNG projects are highly complex and capital 
intensive, with  new projects  often  costing  several  billion dollars.   Many factors  could  negatively affect continued development  of 
LNG infrastructure and related alternatives, including floating storage and regasification, or disrupt the supply of LNG, including:

•

•

•

•

•

•

increases  in  interest  rates  or  other events that  may affect the  availability  of  sufficient financing for  LNG projects  on 
commercially reasonable terms;

decreases in the price of LNG, which might decrease the expected returns relating to investments in LNG projects;

the inability of project owners or operators to obtain governmental approvals to construct or operate LNG facilities;

local community resistance to proposed or existing LNG facilities based on safety, environmental or security concerns;

any significant explosion, spill or similar incident involving an LNG facility, FSRU or LNG carrier; and

labor or political unrest affecting existing or proposed areas of LNG production and regasification.

We expect that, as a result of the factors discussed above, some of the proposals to expand existing or develop new LNG 
liquefaction and regasification facilities may be abandoned or significantly delayed.  If the LNG supply chain is disrupted or does not 
continue to grow, or if a significant LNG explosion, spill or similar incident occurs, it could have a material adverse effect on our 
business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to make cash distributions.

10

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 17 of 169

Our growth depends on our ability to expand relationships with existing customers and obtain new customers, for which we 

will face substantial competition.

One of our principal objectives is to enter into additional long-term, FSRU and LNG carrier time charters.  The process of 
obtaining  long-term  charters  for  FSRUs  and  LNG  carriers  is  highly  competitive  and  generally  involves  an  intensive  screening 
process and competitive bids, and often extends for several months.  We believe FSRU and LNG carrier time charters are awarded 
based upon bid price as well as a variety of factors relating to the vessel operator, including:

•

•

•

•

•

LNG shipping and FSRU experience, technical ability and reputation for operation of highly specialized vessels;

shipping industry relationships and reputation for customer service and safety;

quality and experience of seafaring crew;

financial stability and the ability to finance FSRUs and LNG carriers at competitive rates;

relationships with shipyards and construction management experience; and

• willingness to accept operational risks pursuant to the charter.

We  expect  substantial  competition  for  providing  floating  storage  and  regasification  services  and  marine  transportation 
services for potential LNG projects from a number of experienced companies, including state-sponsored entities and major energy 
companies.  Many of these competitors have significantly greater financial resources and larger and more versatile fleets than we do 
or Golar.  We anticipate that an increasing number of marine transportation companies—including many with strong reputations and 
extensive resources and experience—will enter the FSRU market and LNG transportation market.  This increased competition may 
cause greater price competition for time charters.  As a result of these factors, we may be unable to expand our relationships with 
existing customers  or  to  obtain  new  customers  on  a  profitable  basis,  if  at  all,  which  would  have a  material  adverse  effect  on  our 
business, results of operations and financial condition and our ability to make cash distributions.

We may have more difficulty entering into long-term time charters in the future if an active short-term or spot LNG shipping 

market continues to develop.

One of our principal strategies is to enter into  additional long-term FSRU and LNG  carrier  time charters of five years or 
more.   Most  shipping  requirements  for  new  LNG  projects  continue  to  be provided  on  a  long-term  basis,  though  the  level  of  spot 
voyages and short-term time charters of less than 12 months in duration has grown in the past few years.

If an active spot or short-term market continues to develop, we may have increased difficulty entering into long-term time 
charters upon expiration or early termination of our current charters or for any vessels that we acquire in the future, and, as a result, 
our cash flow may be less stable.  In addition, an active short-term or spot LNG market may require us to enter into charters based on 
changing market prices, as opposed to contracts based on a fixed rate, which could result in a decrease in our cash flow in periods 
when  the  market  price  for  shipping  LNG  is  depressed  or  insufficient  funds  are  available  to  cover  our  financing  costs  for  related 
vessels.

Hire rates for FSRUs and LNG carriers are not readily available and may fluctuate substantially.  If rates are lower when we 

are seeking a new charter, our earnings and ability to make distributions to our unitholders may decline.

Hire rates for FSRUs and LNG carriers are not readily available and may fluctuate over time as a result of changes in the 
supply-demand  balance  relating  to  current  and  future  FSRU  and  LNG  carrier  capacity.   This  supply-demand  relationship  largely 
depends on a number of factors outside our control.  The LNG market is closely connected to world natural gas prices and energy 
markets,  which  we  cannot  predict.   A  substantial  or  extended  decline  in  natural  gas  prices  could  adversely  affect  our  ability  to 
recharter our vessels at acceptable rates or to acquire and profitably operate new FSRUs or LNG carriers.  Our ability from time to 
time to charter or re-charter any vessel at attractive rates will depend on, among other things, the prevailing economic conditions in 
the LNG industry.  Hire rates for newbuilding FSRUs and LNG carriers are correlated with their purchase price.  Hire rates at a time 
when we may be seeking a new charter may be lower than the hire rates at which our vessels are currently chartered.  If rates are 
lower when we are seeking a new charter, our earnings and ability to make distributions to our unitholders may decline.

Vessel values may fluctuate substantially and, if these values are lower at a time when we are attempting to dispose of vessels, 

we may incur a loss.

Vessel values can fluctuate substantially over time due to a number of different factors, including:

11

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 18 of 169

•

•

•

•

•

prevailing economic conditions in the natural gas and energy markets;

a substantial or extended decline in demand for LNG;

increases in the supply of vessel capacity;

the size and age of a vessel; and

the  cost  of  retrofitting  or  modifying  existing  vessels,  as  a  result  of  technological  advances  in  vessel  design  or 
equipment, changes in applicable environmental or other regulations or standards, customer requirements or otherwise.

As our vessels age, the expenses associated with maintaining and operating them are expected to increase, which could have 
an  adverse  effect  on  our  business  and  operations  if  we  do  not  maintain  sufficient  cash  reserves  for  maintenance  and  replacement 
capital expenditures.  Moreover, the cost of a replacement vessel would be significant.

If a charter terminates, we may be unable to re-deploy the affected vessels at attractive rates and, rather than continue to 
incur costs to maintain and finance them, we may seek to dispose of them.  Our inability to dispose of vessels at a reasonable value 
could result in a loss on their sale and adversely affect our ability to purchase a replacement vessel, results of operations and financial 
condition and ability to make distributions to unitholders.

Our vessels may call on ports located in countries that are subject to restrictions imposed by the U.S. or other governments, 

which could adversely affect our business.

Although no vessels operated by us have called on ports located in countries subject to sanctions and embargoes imposed by 
the U.S. government and countries identified by the U.S. government as state sponsors of terrorism, such as Cuba, Iran, Sudan and 
Syria, in the future our vessels may call on ports in these countries from time to time on our charterers' instructions. None of our 
vessels made any port calls to Iran in 2012. The U.S. sanctions and embargo laws and regulations vary in their application, as they do 
not all apply to the same covered persons or proscribe the same activities, and such sanctions and embargo laws and regulations may 
be amended or strengthened over time. In 2010, the U.S. enacted the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions Accountability and Divestment 
Act, or CISADA, which expanded the scope of the Iran Sanctions Act. Among other things, CISADA expands the application of the 
prohibitions to companies such as ours and introduces limits on the ability of companies and persons to do business or trade with Iran 
when  such  activities  relate  to  the  investment,  supply  or  export  of  refined  petroleum  or  petroleum  products.  In  addition,  in  2012, 
President Obama signed Executive Order 13608 which prohibits foreign persons from violating or attempting to violate, or causing a 
violation of any sanctions in effect against Iran or facilitating any deceptive transactions for or on behalf of any person subject to 
U.S. sanctions. Any persons found to be in violation of Executive Order 13608 will be deemed a foreign sanctions evader and will be 
banned  from  all  contacts  with  the  United  States,  including  conducting  business  in  U.S.  dollars.  Also  in  2012,  President  Obama 
signed into law the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human Rights Act of 2012, or the Iran Threat Reduction Act, which created new 
sanctions  and  strengthened  existing  sanctions.  Among  other  things,  the  Iran  Threat  Reduction  Act  intensifies  existing  sanctions 
regarding the provision of goods, services, infrastructure or technology to Iran's petroleum or petrochemical sector. The Iran Threat 
Reduction Act also includes a provision requiring the President of the United States to impose five or more sanctions from Section 6
(a) of the Iran Sanctions Act, as amended, on a person the President determines is a controlling beneficial owner of, or otherwise 
owns, operates, or controls or insures a vessel that was used to transport crude oil from Iran to another country and (1) if the person is 
a controlling beneficial owner of the vessel, the person had actual knowledge the vessel was so used or (2) if the person otherwise 
owns, operates, or controls, or insures the vessel, the person knew or should have known the vessel was so used. Such a person could 
be subject to a variety of sanctions, including exclusion from U.S. capital markets, exclusion from financial transactions subject to 
U.S. jurisdiction, and exclusion of that person's vessels from U.S. ports for up to two years.

12

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 19 of 169

Although we believe that we have been in compliance with all applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations, and 
intend to maintain such compliance, there can be no assurance that we will be in compliance in the future, particularly as the scope of 
certain laws  may be unclear and may  be subject  to changing  interpretations. Any such  violation  could result  in fines, penalties or 
other sanctions that could severely impact our ability to access U.S. capital markets and conduct our business, and could result in 
some investors deciding, or being required, to divest their interest, or not to invest, in us. In addition, certain institutional investors 
may  have  investment  policies  or  restrictions  that  prevent  them  from  holding  securities  of  companies  that  have  contracts  with 
countries identified by the U.S. government as state sponsors of terrorism. The determination by these investors not to invest in, or to 
divest  from,  our  common  stock  may  adversely  affect  the  price  at  which  our  common  stock  trades. Moreover,  our  charterers  may 
violate applicable sanctions and embargo laws and regulations as a result of actions that do not involve us or our vessels, and those 
violations  could  in  turn  negatively  affect  our  reputation.  In  addition,  our  reputation  and  the  market  for  our  securities  may  be 
adversely  affected  if  we  engage  in  certain  other  activities,  such  as  entering  into  charters  with  individuals  or  entities  in  countries 
subject to U.S. sanctions and embargo laws that are not controlled by the governments of those countries, or engaging in operations 
associated with those countries pursuant to contracts with third parties that are unrelated to those countries or entities controlled by 
their governments. Investor perception of the value of our common units may be adversely affected by the consequences of war, the 
effects of terrorism, civil unrest and governmental actions in these and surrounding countries.

Our insurance may be insufficient to cover losses that may occur to our property or result from our operations.

The  operation  of  FSRUs  and  LNG  carriers  is  inherently  risky.   Although  we  carry  protection  and  indemnity  insurance 
consistent with industry standards, all risks may not be adequately insured against, and any particular claim may not be paid.  Any 
claims covered by insurance would be subject to deductibles, and since it is possible that a large number of claims may be brought, 
the  aggregate  amount  of  these  deductibles  could  be  material.   Certain  of  our  insurance  coverage  is  maintained  through  mutual 
protection and indemnity associations, and as a member of such associations we may be required to make additional payments over 
and above budgeted premiums if member claims exceed association reserves.

We may  be unable  to  procure  adequate insurance  coverage at commercially reasonable  rates  in  the future.  For  example, 
more  stringent  environmental  regulations  have  led  in  the  past  to  increased  costs  for,  and  in  the  future  may  result  in  the  lack  of 
availability  of,  insurance  against  risks  of  environmental  damage  or  pollution.   A  marine  disaster  could  exceed  our  insurance 
coverage, which could harm our business, financial condition and operating results.  Any uninsured or underinsured loss could harm 
our business and financial condition.  In addition, our insurance may be voidable by the insurers as a result of certain of our actions, 
such as our ships failing to maintain certification with applicable maritime self-regulatory organizations.

Changes in the insurance markets attributable to terrorist attacks or piracy may also make certain types of insurance more 
difficult for us to obtain.  In addition, upon renewal or expiration of our current policies, the insurance that may be available to us 
may be significantly more expensive than our existing coverage.

We may be subject to increased premium payments, or calls, if the value of our claim records, the claim records of our fleet 
managers,  and/or  the  claim  records  of  other  members  of  the  protection  and  indemnity  associations  through  which  we  receive 
insurance  coverage  for  tort  liability  (including  pollution-related  liability)  significantly  exceed  projected  claims.  In  addition,  our 
protection and indemnity associations may not have enough resources to cover claims made against them. Our payment of these calls 
could  result  in  significant  expense  to  us,  which  could  have  a  material  adverse  effect  on  our  business,  results  of  operations,  cash 
flows, financial condition and ability to pay distributions.

An increase in operating expenses or drydocking costs could materially and adversely affect our financial performance.

Our operating expenses and drydock capital expenditures depend on a variety of factors including crew costs, provisions, 
deck and engine stores and spares, lubricating oil, insurance, maintenance and repairs and shipyard costs, many of which are beyond 
our control and affect the entire shipping industry.  Also, while we do not bear the cost of fuel (bunkers) under our time charters, fuel 
is a significant expense in our operations when our vessels are, for example, moving to or from dry-dock or when off-hire.  The price 
and supply of fuel is unpredictable and fluctuates based on events outside our control, including geopolitical developments, supply 
and demand for oil and gas, actions by OPEC and other oil and gas producers, war and unrest in oil-producing countries and regions, 
regional  production  patterns  and  environmental  concerns.   These  may  increase  vessel  operating  and  drydocking  costs  further.   If 
costs continue to rise, they could materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

13

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 20 of 169

An increased shortage of qualified officers and crew could have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

LNG  carriers  and  FSRUs  require  a  technically  skilled  officer  staff  with  specialized  training.  Increases  in  our  historical 
vessel operating expenses have been attributable primarily to the rising costs of recruiting and retaining officers for our fleet. The 
pool of technically competent crew members has not grown very much during the past few years as the demand for crew members 
was hampered by the lack of newbuild orders during the period between 2008 to 2010. However, more recently the number of orders 
for  newbuild  LNG  carriers  and  FSRUs  has  grown  and  as  deliveries  of  these  new  vessels  start  to  materialize,  the  demand  for 
technically skilled  officers  and crew has been increasing,  which  has  led to a shortfall of such personnel. If  Golar  Management  or 
Golar Wilhelmsen are unable to employ technically skilled staff and crew, they will not be able to adequately staff our vessels.  A 
material decrease in the supply of technically skilled officers or an inability of Golar Management or Golar Wilhelmsen to attract and 
retain such qualified officers could impair our ability to operate or increase the cost of crewing our vessels, which would materially 
adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and significantly reduce our ability to make distributions 
to our unitholders.

In addition, the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter are employed by Petrobras in Brazil.  As a result, we are required to hire 
a certain portion of Brazilian personnel to crew these vessels in accordance with Brazilian law.  Also, the NR Satu is employed by 
PTNR in Indonesia. As a result, we are required to hire a certain portion of Indonesian personnel to crew these vessels in accordance 
with Indonesian law. Any inability to attract and retain qualified Brazilian and Indonesian crew members could adversely affect our 
business,  results  of  operations  and  financial  condition  and  could  significantly  reduce  our  ability  to  make  distributions  to  our 
unitholders. 

We may be unable to attract and retain key management personnel in the LNG industry, which may negatively impact the 

effectiveness of our management and our results of operation.

Our success depends to a significant extent upon the abilities and the efforts of our senior executives.  While we believe that 
we have an experienced management team, the loss or unavailability of one or more of our senior executives for any extended period 
of time could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Exposure to currency exchange rate fluctuations will result in fluctuations in our cash flows and operating results.

Historically our revenue has been generated in U.S. Dollars, but we incur capital, operating and administrative expenses in 
multiple currencies, including, among others, the Euro, the Brazilian Real, the Indonesian Rupiah and the British Pound.  If the U.S. 
Dollar weakens significantly, we would be required to convert more U.S. Dollars to other currencies to satisfy our obligations, which 
would cause us to have less cash available for distribution.  Under the charters and OSAs for the Golar Spirit and Golar Winter, we 
generate a portion of our revenues in Brazilian Reais.  We incur some operating expenses in Brazilian Reais but also have to convert 
Brazilian Reais into other currencies in order to pay the remaining operating expenses.  If the Brazilian Real weakens significantly, 
we  may  not  have  sufficient  Brazilian  Reais  to  convert  to  other  currencies  to  satisfy  our  obligations  in  respect  of  the  operating 
expenses  related  to  these  charters,  which  would  cause  us  to  have  less  cash  available  for  distribution.   In  addition,  although  the 
majority of our British Pound capital lease obligations are hedged by British Pound cash deposits securing the lease obligations or 
currency swaps, these are not perfect hedges.  Although it would not affect our cash flows, a significant strengthening of the U.S. 
Dollar could result in an increase in our financial expenses and could materially affect our financial results under U.S. GAAP.

Because we report our operating results in U.S. Dollars, changes in the value of the U.S. Dollar also result in fluctuations in 
our reported revenues and earnings.  In addition, under U.S. GAAP, all foreign currency-denominated monetary assets and liabilities 
such as cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, restricted cash, accounts payable, long-term debt and capital lease obligations 
are revalued and reported based on the prevailing exchange rate at the end of the reporting period.  This revaluation may cause us to 
report significant non-monetary foreign currency exchange gains and losses in certain periods.

14

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 21 of 169

Table of Contents

Three of our vessels are financed by UK tax leases.  In the event of any adverse tax changes or a successful challenge by the 
UK Revenue authorities with regard to the initial tax basis of the transactions or in the event of an early termination of a lease, 
we may be required to make additional payments to the UK vessel lessors, which could adversely affect our earnings and financial 
position.

Three  of  our  vessels  are  currently  financed  by  UK tax  leases.   In  the  event  of  any  adverse  tax  changes  to  legislation 
affecting the tax treatment of the leases for the UK vessel lessors or a successful challenge by the UK Revenue authorities to the tax 
assumptions on which the transactions were based, or in the event that we terminate one or more of our UK tax leases before their 
expiration, we would be required to return all or a portion of, or in certain circumstances significantly more than, the upfront cash 
benefits that we  have  received  or  that  have  accrued over time, together  with  fees that were financed in connection with  our  lease 
financing  transactions,  or  post  additional  security  or  make  additional  payments  to  the  UK vessel  lessors.   Golar  has  agreed  to 
indemnify us against these increased costs (with respect to the Methane Princess lease but not with respect to the Golar Winter lease 
or  the Golar Grand lease),  but any  default by  Golar would  not  limit  our  obligations under these  leases.  Any additional payments 
could  adversely  affect  our  earnings  and  financial  position.   For  more  information  on  the  UK tax  leases,  please  read  “Item  5—
Operating  and  Financial  Review  and  Prospects—Liquidity  and  Capital  Resources—Borrowing  Activities—Capital  Lease 
Obligations.”

The economic downturn may affect our customers’ ability to charter our vessels and pay for our services and may adversely 

affect our business and results of operations.

The economic downturn in the global financial markets may lead to a decline in our customers’ operations or ability to pay 
for our  services, which could result in decreased demand for our vessels  and services.   Our customers’ inability  to pay could also 
result in their default on our current charters.  The decline in the amount of services requested by our customers or their default on 
our charters with them could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.  We cannot 
determine whether the difficult conditions in the economy and the financial markets will improve or worsen in the near future.

We  currently  operate  primarily  outside  the  United  States,  which  could  expose  us  to  political,  governmental  and  economic 

instability that could harm our operations.

Because  most  of our operations are currently conducted outside of  the United  States, they  may be affected by  economic, 
political and governmental conditions in the countries where we are engaged in business or where our vessels are registered.  Any 
disruption  caused  by  these  factors  could  harm  our  business.   In  particular,  we  derive  a  substantial  portion  of  our  revenues  from 
shipping LNG from politically unstable regions.  Past political conflicts in these regions, particularly in the Arabian Gulf, Brazil and 
Indonesia, have included attacks on ships, mining of waterways and other efforts to disrupt shipping in the area.  In addition to acts 
of terrorism, vessels trading in these and other regions have also been subject, in limited instances, to piracy.  Future hostilities or 
other political instability in the Arabian Gulf, Brazil and Indonesia where we operate or may operate could have a material adverse 
effect  on  the  growth  of  our  business,  results  of  operations  and  financial  condition  and  our  ability  to  make  cash  distributions.   In 
addition, tariffs, trade embargoes and other economic sanctions by Brazil, the United States or other countries against countries in the 
Middle East, Southeast Asia or elsewhere as a result of terrorist attacks, hostilities or otherwise may limit trading activities with those 
countries, which could also harm our business and ability to make cash distributions.

We may not be able to redeploy our FSRUs on terms as favorable as our current FSRU charter arrangements or at all.

The market for FSRUs is growing rapidly but is relatively small in comparison to the LNG carrier market. In the event that 
any of the applicable charters are terminated, we may be unable to recharter the Golar Spirit, the Golar Winter, the Golar Freeze or 
the NR Satu, as FSRUs for an extended period of time.  While we may be able to employ these vessels as traditional LNG carriers, 
the hire rates and/or other charter terms may not be as favorable to us as our charters on the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter with 
Petrobras, the charter on the Golar Freeze with DUSUP and the charter on the NR Satu with PTNR if we acquire additional FSRUs 
and they are not, as a result of contract termination or otherwise, subject to a long-term profitable contract, we may be required to bid 
for projects at unattractive rates in order to reduce our losses relating to the vessels.

Due to our lack of diversification, adverse developments in our LNG transportation or storage and regasification businesses 

could reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

We rely exclusively on the cash flow generated from our FSRUs and LNG carriers.  Due to our lack of diversification, an 
adverse development in the LNG transportation industry or the LNG storage and regasification industry could have a significantly 
greater impact on our financial condition and results of operations than if we maintained more diverse assets or lines of businesses.

15

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 22 of 169

Table of Contents

The shareholders’ agreement with Chinese Petroleum Corporation with respect to the Golar Mazo contains provisions that 
may limit our ability to sell or transfer our interest in the Golar Mazo, which could have a material adverse effect on our cash 
flows and affect our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

We have a 60% interest in the joint venture that owns the Golar Mazo, which enables us to control the joint venture subject 
to certain negative controls held by Chinese Petroleum Corporation (or CPC), who holds the remaining 40% interest in the Golar 
Mazo.   Under  the  shareholders’ agreement,  no  party  may  sell,  assign,  mortgage,  or  otherwise  transfer  its  rights,  interests  or 
obligations under the agreement without the prior written consent of the other party.  If we determine that the sale or transfer of our 
interest in the Golar Mazo is in our best interest, we must provide CPC notice of our intent to sell or transfer our interest and grant 
CPC a right of first refusal to purchase our interest.  If CPC does not accept the offer within 60 days after we notify CPC, we will be 
free to sell or transfer our interest to a third party.  Any delay in the sale or transfer of our interest in the Golar Mazo or restrictions in 
our  ability  to  manage  the  joint  venture  could  have  a  material  adverse  effect  on  our  cash  flows  and  affect  our  ability  to  make 
distributions to our unitholders.

PTNR has the right to purchase the NR Satu at any time after the first anniversary of the commencement date of its charter 
at a price that must be agreed upon between us and PTNR. In addition, PTNR has the option to extend the charter at a rate lower 
than the existing hire rate. The exercise of either of these options could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow and our 
ability to make distributions to our unitholders. 

PTNR has the right to purchase the NR Satu at any time after the first anniversary of the commencement date of its charter 
at a price that must be agreed upon between us and PTNR. If PTNR exercises its purchase option, it would reduce the size of our 
fleet and we may be unable to identify or acquire a suitable replacement vessel with the proceeds of the option exercise. Even if we 
find a suitable replacement vessel, the hire rate of such vessel may be lower than the hire rate for the NR Satu under its charter. In 
addition, if PTNR exercises its option to extend the NR Satu charter, the total hire rate will be reduced by approximately 11.6% per 
day for any day in the extension period falling in 2023, with a further 7.0% reduction for any day in the extension period falling in 
2024 and 2025. The exercise of either of these options could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, cash flows 
and ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

We may be subject to litigation that, if not resolved in our favor and not sufficiently insured against, could have a material 

adverse effect on us.

We  may  be,  from  time  to  time,  involved  in  various  litigation  matters.  These  matters  may  include,  among  other  things, 
contract  disputes,  personal  injury  claims,  environmental  claims  or  proceedings,  asbestos  and  other  toxic  tort  claims,  employment 
matters, governmental claims for taxes or duties and other litigation that arises in the ordinary course of our business. Although we 
intend  to defend  these  matters  vigorously,  we cannot  predict with  certainty  the  outcome  or  effect  of  any  claim or  other  litigation 
matter, and the ultimate outcome of any litigation or the potential costs to resolve them may have a material adverse effect on us. 
Insurance may not be applicable or sufficient in all cases and/or insurers may not remain solvent, which may have a material adverse 
effect on our financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Industry

The  operation  of  FSRUs  and  LNG  carriers  is  inherently  risky,  and  an  incident  involving  significant  loss  of  life  or 

environmental consequences affecting any of our vessels could harm our reputation and business.

Our vessels and their cargoes are at risk of being damaged or lost because of events such as:

• marine disasters;

•

•

•

piracy;

environmental accidents;

bad weather;

• mechanical failures;

•

•

grounding, fire, explosions and collisions;

human error; and

• war and terrorism.

16

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 23 of 169

Table of Contents

An accident involving any of our vessels could result in any of the following:

•

•

•

•

•

•

death or injury to persons, loss of property or environmental damage;

delays in the delivery of cargo;

loss of revenues from or termination of charter contracts;

governmental fines, penalties or restrictions on conducting business;

higher insurance rates; and

damage to our reputation and customer relationships generally.

Any of these results could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.  If our 
vessels suffer damage, they may need to be repaired.  The costs of vessel repairs are unpredictable and can be substantial.  We may 
have to pay repair costs that our insurance policies do not cover.  The loss of earnings while these vessels are being repaired, as well 
as the actual cost of these repairs, would decrease our results of operations.  If any of our vessels is involved in an accident with the 
potential risk of environmental consequences, the resulting media coverage could have a material adverse effect on our business, our 
results  of  operations  and  cash  flows,  weaken  our  financial  condition  and  negatively  affect  our  ability  to  make  distributions  to 
unitholders.

A renewal of the global financial crisis could negatively impact our business.

Although there are signs that the economic recession has abated in some countries, there is still considerable instability in 
the world economy and in the  economies of countries such as Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy and Cyprus that could  initiate a new 
economic downturn and  result in a  tightening in the credit  markets,  a low  level  of  liquidity in financial markets, and  volatility  in 
credit and equity markets.  A renewal of the financial crisis that affected the banking system and the financial markets over the past 
three years may negatively impact our business and financial condition in ways that we cannot predict.  In addition, the uncertainty 
about current and future global economic conditions caused by a renewed financial crisis may cause our customers and governments 
to defer projects in response to tighter credit, decreased cash availability and declining customer confidence which may negatively 
impact the demand for our services.  A tightening of the credit markets may further negatively impact our operations by affecting the 
solvency of our suppliers or customers which could lead to disruptions in delivery of supplies such as equipment for conversions, 
cost increases for supplies, accelerated payments to suppliers, customer bad debts or reduced revenues.

Terrorist attacks, piracy, increased hostilities or war could lead to further economic instability, increased costs and disruption 

of our business.

Terrorist attacks and the continuing response of the United States and others to these attacks, as well as the threat of future 
terrorist  attacks,  continue  to  cause  uncertainty  in  the  world’s  financial  markets  and  may  affect  our  business,  operating  results, 
financial condition, ability  to raise capital  and  future growth.  These uncertainties could also adversely affect our  ability to  obtain 
additional financing on terms acceptable to us or at all.  In the past, political conflicts have also resulted in attacks on vessels, mining 
of waterways and other efforts to disrupt international shipping, particularly in the Arabian Gulf region.  Acts of terrorism and piracy 
have also affected vessels trading in regions such as the South China Sea and the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Somalia.  Any of 
these occurrences could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to pay 
distributions.

In addition, LNG facilities, shipyards, vessels (including FSRUs and conventional LNG carriers), pipelines and gas fields 
could be targets of future terrorist attacks or piracy.  Terrorist attacks, war or other events beyond our control that adversely affect the 
production, storage, transportation or regasification of LNG to be shipped or processed by us could entitle our customers to terminate 
our charters, which would harm our cash flow and our business.  Concern that LNG facilities may be targeted for attack by terrorists 
has contributed to significant community and environmental resistance to the construction of a number of LNG facilities, primarily in 
North America.  If a terrorist incident involving an LNG facility, FSRU or LNG carrier did occur, the incident may adversely affect 
construction  of  additional  LNG  facilities  or  FSRUs  or  the  temporary  or  permanent  closing  of  various  LNG  facilities  or  FSRUs 
currently in operation.

17

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 24 of 169

Table of Contents

The LNG transportation, storage and regasification industry is subject to substantial environmental and other regulations, 

compliance with which may significantly limit our operations or increase our expenses.

Our operations are materially affected by extensive and changing international, national and local environmental protection 
laws,  regulations,  treaties,  conventions  and  standards  in  force  in  international  waters,  the  jurisdictional  waters  of  the  countries  in 
which our vessels operate, as well as the countries of our vessels’ registration, including those relating to equipping and operating 
FSRUs and LNG carriers, providing security and minimizing the potential for impacts to the environment from their operations.  We 
have incurred, and expect to continue to incur, substantial expenses in complying with these laws and regulations, including expenses 
for vessel modifications and changes in operating procedures.  Additional laws and regulations may be adopted that could limit our 
ability to do business or further increase costs, which could harm our business.  In addition, failure to comply with applicable laws 
and regulations may result in administrative and civil penalties, criminal sanctions or the suspension or termination of operations.  
We may become subject to additional laws and regulations if we enter new markets or trades.

These  requirements  can  affect  the  resale  value  or  useful  lives  of  our  vessels,  require  a  reduction  in  cargo  capacity,  ship 
modifications or operational changes or restrictions, lead to decreased availability of insurance coverage for environmental matters or 
result in the denial of access to certain jurisdictional waters or ports, or detention in certain ports.

We may be unable to obtain, maintain, and/or renew permits necessary for our operations or experience delays in obtaining 

such permits, which could have a material effect on our operations.

The design, construction and operation of FSRUs and interconnecting pipelines and the transportation of LNG are subject to 
governmental approvals and permits. The permitting rules, and the interpretations of those rules, are complex, change frequently and 
are often subject to discretionary interpretations by regulators, all of which may make compliance more difficult or impractical, and 
may  increase  the  length  of  time  it  takes  to  receive  regulatory  approval  for  offshore  LNG  operations.   In  the  future,  the  relevant 
regulatory  authorities  may  take  actions  to  prohibit  the  access  of  FSRUs  or  LNG  carriers  to  various  ports  or  adopt  new  rules  and 
regulations applicable to FSRUs and LNG carriers that will increase the time needed to obtain necessary environmental permits.  We 
cannot assure unitholders that such changes would not have a material effect on our operations.

Our vessels operating in international waters now or, in the future, will be subject to various federal, state and local laws and 

regulations relating to protection of the environment.

Our  vessels  traveling  in  international  waters  are  subject  to  various  existing  regulations  published  by  the  International 
Maritime  Organization  (or  the  IMO)  as  well  as  marine  pollution  and  prevention  requirements  imposed  by  the  International 
Convention  for  the  Prevention  of  Pollution  from  Ships.   In  addition,  our  LNG  vessels  may  become  subject  to  the  International 
Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by 
Sea, as amended by the April 2010 Protocol to the HNS Convention (or the 2010 HNS Convention), if it is entered into force.  In 
addition,  national  laws  generally  provide  for  a  LNG  carrier  or  offshore  LNG  facility  owner  or  operator  to  bear  strict  liability  for 
pollution, subject to a right to limit liability under applicable national or international regimes for limitation of liability.  However, 
some jurisdictions are not a party to an international regime limiting maritime pollution liability, and, therefore, a vessel owner’s or 
operator’s rights to limit liability for maritime pollution in such jurisdictions may be uncertain.

Please  read  “Item  4  Information  on  the  Partnership—Business  Overview—Environmental  and  Other  Regulations—

International Maritime Regulations of LNG Vessels” and “Other Regulation” below for a more detailed discussion on these topics.

Our  vessels  operating  in  U.S.  waters  now  or,  in  the  future,  will  be  subject  to  various  federal,  state  and  local  laws  and 

regulations relating to protection of the environment.

Our  vessels  operating  in  U.S.  waters  now  or,  in  the  future,  will  be  subject  to  various  federal,  state  and  local  laws  and 
regulations relating  to  protection  of  the  environment, including  the  Oil  Pollution Act of 1990  (OPA 90),  the  U.S. Comprehensive 
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Clean Water Act, and the Clean Air Act.  In some cases, 
these laws and regulations require us to obtain governmental permits and authorizations before we may conduct certain activities.  
These  environmental  laws  and  regulations  may  impose  substantial  penalties  for  noncompliance  and  substantial  liabilities  for 
pollution.  Failure to comply with these laws and regulations may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties.  As with 
the industry generally, our operations will entail risks in these areas, and compliance with these laws and regulations, which may be 
subject to frequent revisions and reinterpretation, may increase our overall cost of business.

Please read “Item  4  Information on  the  Partnership—Business  Overview—Environmental  and Other  Regulations- United 

States Environmental Regulation of LNG Vessels” below for a more detailed discussion of the regulations applicable to our vessels.

18

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 25 of 169

Table of Contents

Further  changes  to  existing  environmental legislation  that  is  applicable  to  international  and  national  maritime  trade  may 

have an adverse effect on our business.

We  believe  that  the  heightened  environmental,  quality  and  security  concerns  of  insurance  underwriters,  regulators  and 
charterers will  generally lead to additional regulatory requirements, including  enhanced risk assessment and security  requirements 
and greater inspection and safety requirements on all LNG carriers in the marine transportation markets and offshore LNG terminals.  
These requirements are likely to add incremental costs to our operations and the failure to comply with these requirements may affect 
the ability of our vessels to obtain and, possibly, collect on insurance or to obtain the required certificates for entry into the different 
ports where we operate.

Further  legislation,  or  amendments  to  existing  legislation,  applicable  to  international  and  national  maritime  trade  are 
expected  over  the  coming  years  in  areas  such  as  ship  recycling,  sewage  systems,  emission  control  (including  emissions  of 
greenhouse gases), ballast treatment and handling, etc.  The United States has recently enacted legislation and regulations that require 
more stringent controls of air and water emissions from ocean-going vessels.  Such legislation or regulations may require additional 
capital  expenditures  or  operating  expenses  (such  as  increased  costs  for  low-sulfur  fuel)  in  order  for  us  to  maintain  our  vessels’
compliance with international and/or national regulations.

Climate change and greenhouse gas restrictions may adversely impact our operations and markets.

Due to concern over the risk of climate change, a number of countries and the IMO have adopted, or are considering the 
adoption  of,  regulatory  frameworks  to  reduce  greenhouse  gas  emission  from  vessel  emissions.   These  regulatory  measures  may 
include, among others, adoption of cap and trade regimes, carbon taxes, increased efficiency standards, and incentives or mandates 
for renewable energy.  Also, a treaty may be adopted in the future that includes restrictions on shipping emissions.  Compliance with 
changes in  laws  and regulations  relating  to climate  change  could  increase  our  costs  of  operating  and maintaining our  vessels  and 
could require us to make significant financial expenditures that we cannot predict with certainty at this time.

Adverse  effects  upon  the  oil  and  gas  industry  relating  to  climate  change,  including  growing  public  concern  about  the 
environmental impact of climate change, may also have an affect on demand for our services.  For example, increased regulation of 
greenhouse gases or other concerns relating to climate change may reduce the demand for oil and gas in the future or create greater 
incentives  for  use  of  alternative  energy  sources.   Any  long-term  material  adverse  effect  on  the  oil  and  gas  industry  could  have  a 
significant financial and operational adverse impact on our business that we cannot predict with certainty at this time.

Please  read  “Item  4  Information  on  the  Partnership—Business  Overview—Environmental  and  Other  Regulations—

Regulation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions” below for a more detailed discussion.

Maritime claimants could arrest our vessels, which could interrupt our cash flow.

If  we  are  in  default  on  some  kinds  of  obligations,  such  as  those  to  our  lenders,  crew  members,  suppliers  of  goods  and 
services to our vessels or shippers of cargo, these parties may be entitled to a maritime lien against one or more of our vessels.  In 
many  jurisdictions,  a  maritime  lien  holder  may  enforce  its  lien  by  arresting  a  vessel  through  foreclosure  proceedings.   In  a  few 
jurisdictions, claimants could try to assert “sister ship” liability against one vessel in our fleet for claims relating to another of our 
vessels.  The arrest or attachment of one or more of our vessels could interrupt our cash flow and require us to pay to have the arrest 
lifted.   Under  some  of  our  present  charters,  if  the  vessel  is  arrested  or  detained  (for  as  few  as  14  days  in  the  case  of  one  of  our 
charters)  as  a  result  of  a  claim  against  us,  we  may  be  in default of  our  charter  and  the  charterer  may  terminate  the  charter.   This 
would negatively impact our revenues and reduce our cash available for distribution to unitholders.

Compliance  with  safety  and  other  vessel  requirements  imposed  by  classification  societies  may  be  very  costly  and  may 

adversely affect our business.

The hull and machinery of every large, oceangoing commercial vessel must be classed by a classification society authorized 
by its country of registry.  The classification society certifies that a vessel is safe and seaworthy in accordance with the applicable 
rules and regulations of the country of registry of the vessel and the Safety of Life at Sea Convention. The Golar Mazo is certified by 
Lloyds Register, and the Methane Princess, the Golar Spirit, the Golar Winter, the Golar Freeze, the NR Satu and the Golar Grand
are each certified by Det Norske Veritas.

19

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 26 of 169

As part of the certification process, a vessel must undergo annual surveys, intermediate surveys and special surveys.  In lieu 
of  a  special  survey,  a  vessel’s  machinery  may  be  on  a  continuous  survey  cycle,  under  which  the  machinery  would  be  surveyed 
periodically over a five-year period.  Each of the vessels in our existing fleet is on a planned maintenance system approval, and as 
such  the  classification  society  attends  onboard  once  every  year  to  verify  that  the  maintenance  of  the  equipment  onboard  is  done 
correctly.   Each  of  the  vessels  in  our  existing  fleet  is  required  to  be  qualified  within  its  respective  classification  society  for 
drydocking  once  every  five  years  subject  to  an  intermediate  underwater  survey  done  using  an  approved  diving  company  in  the 
presence of a surveyor from the classification society.

If any vessel does not maintain its class or fails any annual survey, intermediate survey or special survey, the vessel will be 
unable to trade between ports and will be unemployable.  We would lose revenue while the vessel was off-hire and incur costs of 
compliance.  This would negatively impact our revenues and reduce our cash available for distribution to unitholders.

Risks Inherent in an Investment in Us

Golar and its affiliates may compete with us.

Pursuant  to  the  omnibus  agreement,  Golar  and  its  affiliates  (other  than  us,  our  general  partner  and  our  subsidiaries) 
generally agreed not to acquire, own, operate or charter certain FSRUs and LNG carriers operating under charters of five years or 
more.  The omnibus agreement, however, contains significant exceptions that may allow Golar and its affiliates to compete with us, 
which  could  harm  our  business.   Please  read  “Item  7—Major  Unitholders  and  Related  Party  Transactions—Related  Party 
Transactions—Omnibus Agreement—Noncompetition.”

Unitholders have limited voting rights, and our partnership agreement restricts the voting rights of the unitholders owning 

more than 4.9% of our common units.

Unlike the holders of common stock in a corporation, holders of common units have only limited voting rights on matters 
affecting  our business.  We  will  hold  a meeting  of  the  limited  partners  every  year  to  elect  one  or  more members  of  our  board  of 
directors and to vote on any other matters that are properly brought before the meeting.  Common unitholders will be entitled to elect 
only four of the seven members of our board of directors.  The elected directors will be elected on a staggered basis and will serve for 
three  year  terms.  Our  general  partner  in  its sole  discretion  will  appoint  the  remaining  three directors and  set the terms for  which 
those directors will serve.  The 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.  Unitholders will have no right to elect our general partner, and our general partner may not be removed 
except by a vote of the holders of at least 662/3% of the outstanding common units and subordinated units, including any common 
units or subordinated units owned by our general partner and its affiliates, voting together as a single class.

Our  partnership  agreement  further  restricts  unitholders’ voting  rights  by  providing  that  if  any  person  or  group  owns 
beneficially more than 4.9% of any class of units then outstanding, any such units owned by that person or group in excess of 4.9% 
may  not  be  voted  on  any  matter  and  will  not  be  considered  to  be  outstanding  when  sending  notices  of  a  meeting  of  unitholders, 
calculating  required  votes  (except  for  purposes  of  nominating  a  person  for  election  to  our  board),  determining  the  presence  of  a 
quorum  or  for  other  similar  purposes,  unless  required  by  law.   The  voting  rights  of  any  such  unitholders  in  excess  of  4.9%  will 
effectively be redistributed pro rata among the other common unitholders holding less than 4.9% of the voting power of all classes of 
units entitled to vote.  Our general partner, its affiliates and persons who acquired common units with the prior approval of our board 
of directors will not be subject to this 4.9% limitation except with respect to voting their common units in the election of the elected 
directors.

Our general partner and its other affiliates own a significant interest in us and have conflicts of interest and limited fiduciary 

and contractual duties, which may permit them to favor their own interests to the detriment of our unitholders.

Golar owns a 49.9% limited partner interest in us and owns and controls our general partner.  All of our officers and certain 
of our directors are directors and/or officers of Golar or its affiliates and, as such, they have fiduciary duties to Golar that may cause 
them to pursue business strategies that disproportionately benefit Golar or which otherwise are not in the best interests of us or our 
unitholders.  Conflicts of interest may arise between Golar and its affiliates (including our general partner) on the one hand, and us 
and  our  unitholders,  on  the  other  hand.   As  a  result  of  these  conflicts,  our  general  partner  and  its  affiliates  may  favor  their  own 
interests over the interests of our unitholders.  These conflicts include, among others, the following situations:

•

neither  our  partnership  agreement  nor  any  other  agreement  requires  our  general  partner  or  Golar  or  its  affiliates  to 
pursue a business strategy that favors us or utilizes our assets, and Golar’s officers and directors have a fiduciary duty 
to make decisions in the best interests of the shareholders of Golar, which may be contrary to our interests;

20

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 27 of 169

•

•

•

•

•

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.  Specifically, our general partner will be considered to be acting in its 
individual capacity if it exercises its call right, pre-emptive rights, registration rights or right to make a determination to 
receive common units in exchange for resetting the target distribution levels related to the incentive distribution rights, 
consents or withholds consent to any merger or consolidation of the partnership, appoints any directors or votes for the 
election of any director, votes or refrains from voting on amendments to our partnership agreement that require a vote 
of  the  outstanding  units,  voluntarily  withdraws  from  the  partnership,  transfers  (to  the  extent  permitted  under  our 
partnership agreement) or refrains from transferring its units, general partner interest or incentive distribution rights or 
votes upon the dissolution of the partnership;

our general partner and our directors have limited their liabilities and reduced their fiduciary duties under the laws of 
the  Marshall  Islands,  while  also  restricting  the  remedies  available  to  our  unitholders,  and,  as  a  result  of  purchasing 
common  units,  unitholders  are  treated  as  having  agreed  to  the  modified  standard  of  fiduciary  duties  and  to  certain 
actions that may be taken by our general partner and our directors, all as set forth in the partnership agreement;

our general partner is entitled to reimbursement of all reasonable costs incurred by it and its affiliates for our benefit;

our partnership agreement does not restrict us from paying our general partner or its affiliates for any services rendered 
to us on terms that are fair and reasonable or entering into additional contractual arrangements with any of these entities 
on our behalf;

our general partner may exercise its right to call and purchase our common units if it and its affiliates own more than 
80% of our common units; and our general partner is not obligated to obtain a fairness opinion regarding the value of 
the common units to be repurchased by it upon the exercise of its limited call right.

Although  a  majority  of  our  directors are  elected  by common  unitholders,  our  general  partner  will  likely  have  substantial 

influence on decisions made by our board of directors.

Our officers face conflicts in the allocation of their time to our business.

Our officers, all but one of whom are directors or officers of Golar Management and perform executive officer functions for 
us  pursuant  to  the  management  and  administrative  services  agreement,  are  not  required  to  work  full-time  on  our  affairs  and  also 
perform services for affiliates of our general partner, including Golar.  The affiliates of our general partner, including Golar, conduct 
substantial  businesses  and  activities  of  their  own  in  which  we  have  no  economic  interest.   As  a  result,  there  could  be  material 
competition for the time and effort of our officers who also provide services to our general partner’s affiliates, which could have a 
material  adverse  effect  on  our  business,  results  of  operations  and  financial  condition.   Please  read  “Item  6—Directors,  Senior 
Management and Employees.”

Our partnership agreement limits our general partner’s and our directors’ fiduciary duties to our unitholders and restricts 

the remedies available to unitholders for actions taken by our general partner or our directors.

Our partnership agreement provides that our general partner will delegate to our board of directors the authority to oversee 
and  direct  our  operations,  management  and  policies  on  an  exclusive  basis,  and  such  delegation  will  be  binding  on  any  successor 
general partner of the partnership.  Our partnership agreement also contains provisions that reduce the standards to which our general 
partner and directors would otherwise be held by Marshall Islands law.  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.   Where  our  partnership  agreement  permits,  our  general  partner  may  consider  only  the  interests  and 
factors that it desires, and in such cases it has no fiduciary duty or obligation to give any consideration to any interest 
of,  or factors affecting,  us,  our affiliates  or  our unitholders.   Decisions  made  by our  general  partner  in  its  individual 
capacity will be made by its sole owner, Golar.  Specifically, pursuant to our partnership agreement, our general partner 
will  be  considered  to  be  acting  in  its  individual  capacity  if  it  exercises  its  right  to  make  a  determination  to  receive 
common units in exchange for resetting the target distribution levels related to the incentive distribution rights (or the 
IDRs), call right, pre-emptive rights or registration rights, consents or withholds consent to any merger or consolidation 
of  the  partnership,  appoints  any  directors  or  votes  for  the  election  of  any  director,  votes  or  refrains  from  voting  on 
amendments to our partnership agreement that require a vote of the outstanding units, voluntarily withdraws from the 
partnership, transfers (to the extent permitted under our partnership agreement) or refrains from transferring its units, 
general partner interest or IDRs or votes upon the dissolution of the partnership;

•

provides  that  our  general  partner  and  our  directors  are  entitled  to  make  other  decisions  in  “good  faith” if  they 
reasonably believe that the decision is in our best interests;

21

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 28 of 169

•

•

generally  provides  that  affiliated  transactions  and  resolutions  of  conflicts  of  interest  not  approved  by  the  conflicts 
committee of our board of directors and not involving a vote of unitholders must be on terms no less favorable to us 
than those generally being provided to or available from unrelated third parties or be “fair and reasonable” to us and 
that, in determining whether a transaction or resolution is “fair and reasonable,” our board of directors may consider the 
totality  of  the  relationships  between  the  parties  involved,  including  other  transactions  that  may  be  particularly 
advantageous or beneficial to us; and

provides that neither our general partner nor our officers or our directors will be liable for monetary damages to us, our 
limited  partners  or  assignees  for  any  acts  or  omissions  unless  there  has  been  a  final  and  non-appealable  judgment 
entered by a court of competent jurisdiction determining that our general partner or directors or its officers or directors 
or those other persons engaged in actual fraud or willful misconduct.

In  order  to  become  a  limited  partner  of  our  partnership,  a  common  unitholder  is  required  to  agree  to  be  bound  by  the 

provisions in the partnership agreement, including the provisions discussed above.

Fees and cost reimbursements, which Golar Management determines for services provided to us, are substantial, are payable 

regardless of our profitability and reduce our cash available for distribution to our unitholders.

Pursuant  to  the  fleet  management  agreements,  we  pay  fees  for  services  provided  to  us  and  our  subsidiaries  by  Golar 
Management  (a  subsidiary  of  Golar)  and  certain  other  affiliates  of  Golar,  including  Golar  Wilhelmsen,  and  we  reimburse  these 
entities  for  all  expenses  they  incur  on  our  behalf.   These  fees  and  expenses  include  all  costs  and  expenses  incurred  in  providing 
certain commercial and technical management services to our subsidiaries.

In  addition,  pursuant  to  a  management  and  administrative  services  agreement  Golar  Management  provides  us  with 
significant management,  administrative, financial and  other  support services.  We reimburse Golar Management  for its reasonable 
costs  and  expenses  incurred  in  connection  with  the  provision  of  these  services.   In  addition,  we  pay  Golar  Management  a 
management fee equal to 5% of its costs and expenses incurred in connection with providing services to us.

For a description of the fleet management agreements and the management and administrative services agreement, please 
read  “Item  7—Major  Unitholders  and  Related  Party  Transactions.” Fees  and  expenses  payable  pursuant  to the  fleet  management 
agreements  and  the  management  and  administrative  services  agreement  are  payable  without  regard  to  our  financial  condition  or 
results  of  operations.   The  payment  of  fees  to  and  the  reimbursement  of  expenses  of  Golar  Management,  Golar  Wilhelmsen  and 
certain other affiliates of Golar could adversely affect our ability to pay cash distributions to our unitholders.

Our partnership agreement contains provisions that may have the effect of discouraging a person or group from attempting 
to remove our current management or our general partner, and even if public unitholders are dissatisfied, they will be unable to 
remove  our  general  partner  without  Golar’s  consent,  unless  Golar’s  ownership  interest  in  us  is  decreased;  all  of  which  could 
diminish the trading price of our common units.

Our partnership agreement contains provisions that may have the effect of discouraging a person or group from attempting 

to remove our current management or our general partner.

•

The unitholders will be unable initially to remove our general partner without its consent because our general partner 
and its affiliates own sufficient units to be able to prevent its removal.  The vote of the holders of at least 662/3% of all 
outstanding common and subordinated units voting together as a single class is required to remove the general partner.  
Golar currently owns 49.9% of the outstanding common and subordinated units.

22

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 29 of 169

•

•

•

If our general partner is removed without “cause” during the subordination period and units held by our general partner 
and  Golar  are  not  voted  in  favor  of  that  removal,  all  remaining  subordinated  units  will  automatically  convert  into 
common units, any existing arrearages on the common units will be extinguished, and our general partner will have the 
right to convert its general partner interest and its IDRs (and Golar will have the right to convert its IDRs) into common 
units or to receive cash in exchange for those interests based on the fair market value of those interests at the time.  A 
removal  of  our  general  partner  under  these  circumstances  would  adversely  affect  the  common  units  by  prematurely 
eliminating  their  distribution  and  liquidation  preference  over  the  subordinated  units,  which  would  otherwise  have 
continued until we had met certain distribution and performance tests.  Any conversion of the general partner interest or 
IDRs  would be  dilutive to  existing unitholders.  Furthermore,  any  cash  payment  in  lieu of  such  conversion  could  be 
prohibitively expensive.  “Cause” is narrowly defined to mean that a court of competent jurisdiction has entered a final, 
non-appealable  judgment  finding  our  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  business  decisions,  such  as 
charges of poor management of our business by the directors appointed by our general partner, so the removal of our 
general partner because of the unitholders’ dissatisfaction with the general partner’s decisions in this regard would most 
likely result in the termination of the subordination period.

Common unitholders will be entitled to elect only four of the seven members of our board of directors.  Our general 
partner in its sole discretion will appoint the remaining three directors.

Election of the four directors elected by unitholders is staggered, meaning that the members of only one of three classes 
of our elected directors will be selected each year.  In addition, the directors appointed by our general partner will serve 
for terms determined by our general partner.

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

• Unitholders’ voting rights are further restricted by the partnership agreement provision providing that if any person or 
group owns beneficially more than 4.9% of any class of units then outstanding, any such units owned by that person or 
group in excess of 4.9% may not be voted on any matter and will not be considered to be outstanding when sending 
notices of a meeting of unitholders, calculating required votes (except for purposes of nominating a person for election 
to our board), determining the presence of a quorum or for other similar purposes, unless required by law.  The voting 
rights  of  any  such  unitholders  in  excess  of  4.9%  will  effectively  be  redistributed  pro  rata  among  the  other  common 
unitholders holding less than 4.9% of the voting power of all classes of units entitled to vote.  Our general partner, its 
affiliates and persons who acquired common units with the prior approval of our board of directors will not be subject 
to this 4.9% limitation except with respect to voting their common units in the election of the elected directors.

•

There are no restrictions in our partnership agreement on our ability to issue equity securities.

The effect of these provisions may be to diminish the price at which the common units will trade.

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.   In  addition,  our  partnership  agreement  does  not  restrict  the  ability  of  the 
members of our general partner from transferring their respective membership interests in our general partner to a third party.

Substantial future sales of our common units in the public market could cause the price of our common units to fall.

We have granted registration rights to Golar and certain of its affiliates.  These unitholders have the right, subject to some 
conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering any of our common, subordinated or other equity securities owned by 
them  or  to  include  those  securities  in  registration  statements  that  we  may file  for  ourselves  or  other  unitholders.   As  of  April  30, 
2013,  Golar  owns  12,238,096  common  units  and  15,949,831  subordinated  units  and  100%  of  the  IDRs  (directly  and  through  its 
ownership of our general partner).  Following their registration and sale under the applicable registration statement, those securities 
will become freely tradable.  By exercising their registration rights and selling a large number of common units or other securities, 
these unitholders could cause the price of our common units to decline.

23

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 30 of 169

Our general partner, as the holder of a majority of the IDRs, may elect to cause us to issue additional common units to it and 
Golar in connection with a resetting of the target distribution levels related to our general partner’s and Golar’s IDRs without the 
approval of the conflicts committee of our board of directors or holders of our common units and subordinated units.  This may 
result in lower distributions to holders of our common units in certain situations.

Our general partner, as the initial holder of a majority of the IDRs, has the right, at a time when there are no subordinated 
units  outstanding  and  our  general  partner  and  Golar  have  received  incentive  distributions  at  the  highest  level  to  which  they  are 
entitled (48%) for each of the prior four consecutive fiscal quarters, to reset the initial cash target distribution levels at higher levels 
based  on  the  distribution  at  the  time  of  the  exercise  of  the  reset  election.   Following  a  reset  election  by  our  general  partner,  the 
minimum quarterly distribution amount will be reset to an amount equal to the average cash distribution amount per common unit for 
the  two  fiscal  quarters  immediately  preceding  the  reset  election  (such  amount  is  referred  to  as  the  “reset  minimum  quarterly 
distribution”), and the target distribution levels will be reset to correspondingly higher levels based on the same percentage increases 
above the reset minimum quarterly distribution amount.

In  connection  with  resetting  these  target  distribution  levels,  our  general  partner  and  Golar  will  be  entitled  to  receive  a 
number of common units equal to that number of common units whose aggregate quarterly cash distributions equaled the average of 
the distributions to our general partner and Golar on the IDRs in the prior two quarters.  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;  however,  it  is  possible  that  our  general  partner  could  exercise  this  reset 
election at a time when it is experiencing, or may be expected to experience, declines in the cash distributions it receives related to its 
IDRs and may therefore desire to be issued our common units, rather than retain the right to receive incentive distributions based on 
the initial  target  distribution  levels.   As  a result,  a  reset election  may  cause  our  common unitholders to  experience dilution  in the 
amount  of  cash  distributions  that  they  would  have  otherwise  received  had  we  not  issued  additional  common  units  to  our  general 
partner in connection with resetting the target distribution levels related to our general partner’s and Golar’s IDRs.

We  may  issue  additional  equity  securities,  including  securities  senior  to  the  common  units,  without  the  approval  of  our 

unitholders, which would dilute our current unitholders’ ownership interests.

We may, without the approval of our unitholders, issue an unlimited number of additional units or other equity securities.  
In addition, we may issue an unlimited number of units that are senior to the common units in right of distribution, liquidation and 
voting.   The  issuance  by us  of  additional  common units  or  other  equity  securities  of  equal  or  senior rank will  have  the  following 
effects:

•

•

•

•

•

our unitholders’ proportionate ownership interest in us will decrease;

the amount of cash available for distribution on each unit may decrease;

because a lower percentage of total outstanding units will be subordinated units, the risk that a shortfall in the payment 
of the minimum quarterly distribution will be borne by our common unitholders will increase;

the relative voting strength of each previously outstanding unit may be diminished; and

the market price of the common units may decline.

Upon  the  expiration  of  the  subordination  period,  the  subordinated  units  will  convert  into  common  units  and  will  then 

participate pro rata with other common units in distributions of available cash.

During the subordination period, which we define elsewhere in this Annual Report, the common units will have the right to 
receive distributions of available cash from operating surplus in an amount equal to the minimum quarterly distribution of $0.3850 
per unit, plus any arrearages in the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the common units from prior quarters, before 
any  distributions  of available  cash from operating surplus  may be  made on the subordinated units.  Distribution  arrearages  do not 
accrue on the subordinated units.  The purpose of the subordinated units is to increase the likelihood that during the subordination 
period  there  will  be  available  cash  from  operating  surplus  to  be  distributed  on  the  common  units.   Upon  the  expiration  of  the 
subordination period, the subordinated units  will convert into common units and will then participate pro rata with other common 
units in distributions of available cash.  See “Item 8—Financial Information—Our Cash Distribution Policy.”

24

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 31 of 169

Table of Contents

In  establishing  cash  reserves,  our  board  of  directors  may  reduce  the  amount  of  cash  available  for  distribution  to  our 

unitholders.

Our partnership agreement requires our general partner to deduct from operating surplus cash reserves that it determines are 
necessary to fund our future operating expenditures.  These reserves also will affect the amount of cash available for distribution to 
our unitholders.  Our board of directors may establish reserves for distributions on the subordinated units, but only if those reserves 
will  not  prevent  us  from  distributing  the  full  minimum  quarterly  distribution,  plus  any  arrearages,  on  the  common  units  for  the 
following four quarters.  As described above in “—Risks Inherent in Our Business—We must make substantial capital expenditures 
to maintain and replace the operating capacity of our fleet, which will reduce our cash available for distribution.  In addition, each 
quarter we are required to deduct estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures from operating surplus, which may 
result  in  less  cash  available  to  unitholders  than  if  actual  maintenance  and  replacement  capital  expenditures  were  deducted,” our 
partnership  agreement  requires  our  board  of  directors  each  quarter  to  deduct  from  operating  surplus  estimated  maintenance  and 
replacement capital  expenditures, as opposed  to  actual  maintenance and  replacement capital  expenditures, which could  reduce the 
amount of available cash for distribution.  The amount of estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures deducted from 
operating surplus is subject to review and change by our board of directors at least once a year, provided that any change must be 
approved by the conflicts committee of our board of directors.

Our general partner has a limited call right that may require unitholders to sell their common units at an undesirable time or 

price.

If at any time our general partner and its affiliates own more than 80% of the common units, our general partner will have 
the right, which it may assign to any of its affiliates or to us, but not the obligation, to acquire all, but not less than all, of the common 
units held by unaffiliated persons at a price not less than the then-current market price of our common units.  Our general partner is 
not obligated to obtain a fairness opinion regarding the value of the common units to be repurchased by it upon the exercise of this 
limited call right.  As a result, unitholders may be required to sell their common units at an undesirable time or price and may not 
receive any return on their investment.  Unitholders may also incur a tax liability upon a sale of units.

Golar,  which  owns  and  controls  our  general  partner,  currently  owns  30.2%  of  our  common  units.   At  the  end  of  the 
subordination  period,  assuming  we  do  not  issue  any  additional  common  units  and  the  conversion  of  our  subordinated  units  into 
common units, Golar will own 49.9% of our common units.

Unitholders may not have limited liability if a court finds that unitholder action constitutes control of our business.

As a limited partner in a partnership organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands, a unitholder could be held liable for 
our  obligations  to  the  same  extent  as  a  general  partner  if  a  unitholder  participates  in  the  “control” of  our  business.   Our  general 
partner generally has unlimited liability for the obligations of the partnership, such as its debts and environmental liabilities, except 
for those contractual obligations of the partnership that are expressly made without recourse to our general partner.  In addition, the 
limitations on the liability of holders of limited partner  interests  for the obligations  of  a limited  partnership  have  not been clearly 
established in some jurisdictions in which we do business.

We can borrow money to pay distributions, which would reduce the amount of credit available to operate our business.

Our  partnership  agreement  allows  us  to  make  working  capital  borrowings  to  pay  distributions.   Accordingly,  if  we  have 
available borrowing capacity, we can make distributions on all our units even though cash generated by our operations may not be 
sufficient to pay such distributions.  Any working capital borrowings by us to make distributions will reduce the amount of working 
capital borrowings we can make for operating our business.  For more information, please read “Item 5—Operating and Financial 
Review and Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

Increases in interest rates may cause the market price of our common units to decline.

An  increase  in  interest  rates  may  cause  a  corresponding  decline  in  demand  for  equity  investments  in  general,  and  in 
particular for yield-based equity investments such as our common units.  Any such increase in interest rates or reduction in demand 
for  our  common  units  resulting  from  other  relatively  more  attractive  investment  opportunities  may  cause  the  trading  price  of  our 
common units to decline.

25

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 32 of 169

Table of Contents

Unitholders may have liability to repay distributions.

Under some circumstances, unitholders may have to repay amounts wrongfully returned or distributed to them.  Under the 
Marshall  Islands  Limited  Partnership  Act  (or  the  Marshall  Islands  Act),  we  may  not  make  a  distribution  to  unitholders  if  the 
distribution would cause our liabilities to exceed the fair value of our assets.  Marshall Islands 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 Marshall Islands law will be liable to the limited partnership for the distribution amount.  Assignees who 
become  substituted  limited partners  are liable  for  the  obligations of  the  assignor  to make  contributions  to  the partnership  that  are 
known to the assignee at the time it became a limited partner and for unknown obligations if the liabilities could be determined from 
the 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.

We have been organized as a limited partnership under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, which does not have 

a well developed body of partnership law.

Our partnership affairs are governed by our partnership agreement and by the Marshall Islands Act.  The provisions of the 
Marshall Islands Act resemble provisions of the  limited partnership laws of  a  number  of states in  the United  States, most notably 
Delaware.   The  Marshall  Islands  Act  also  provides  that  it  is  to  be  applied  and  construed  to  make  it  uniform  with  the  Delaware 
Revised  Uniform  Partnership  Act  and,  so  long  as  it  does  not  conflict  with  the  Marshall  Islands  Act  or  decisions  of  the  Marshall 
Islands courts, interpreted according to the non-statutory law (or case law) of the State of Delaware.  There have been, however, few, 
if any,  court cases in the Marshall Islands interpreting the Marshall Islands Act,  in contrast  to  Delaware,  which has  a fairly  well-
developed  body  of case  law  interpreting  its  limited  partnership statute.   Accordingly,  we  cannot  predict whether Marshall  Islands 
courts  would  reach  the  same  conclusions as  the  courts  in  Delaware.   For example,  the  rights  of  our unitholders  and the  fiduciary 
responsibilities  of  our  general  partner  under  Marshall  Islands  law  are  not  as  clearly  established  as  under  judicial  precedent  in 
existence in Delaware.  As a result, unitholders may have more difficulty in protecting their interests in the face of actions by our 
general partner and its officers and directors than would unitholders of a similarly organized limited partnership in the United States.

Because we are organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands, it may be difficult to serve us with legal process or enforce 

judgments against us, our directors or our management.

We are organized under the laws of the Marshall Islands, and substantially all of our assets are located outside of the United 
States.  In addition, our general partner is a Marshall Islands limited liability company, and our directors and officers generally are or 
will be non-residents of the United States, and all or a substantial portion of the assets of these non-residents are located outside the 
United States.  As a result, it may be difficult or impossible for a unitholder to bring an action against us or against these individuals 
in  the  United  States  if  such  unitholder  believes  that  its  rights  have  been  infringed  under  securities  laws  or  otherwise.   Even  if  a 
unitholder is successful in bringing an action of this kind, the laws of the Marshall Islands and of other jurisdictions may prevent or 
restrict such unitholder from enforcing a judgment against our assets or the assets of our general partner or our directors or officers.

Tax Risks

In addition to the following risk factors, read “Item 4—Information on the Partnership—Taxation of the Partnership,” “Item 
10—Additional  Information—Taxation—Material  U.S.  Federal  Income  Tax  Considerations” and  “—Non-United  States  Tax 
Considerations” for  a  more  complete  discussion  of  the  expected  material  U.S.  federal  and  non-U.S.  income  tax  considerations 
relating  to  us  and  the  ownership  and  disposition  of  our  common  units.  Read  “Item  3—Key  Information—Risk  Factors—Risks 
Inherent in Our Business” for a discussion on risks relating to UK tax leases.

26

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 33 of 169

Table of Contents

U.S. tax authorities could treat us as a “passive foreign investment company,” which would have adverse U.S. federal income 

tax consequences to U.S. unitholders.

A  non-U.S.  entity  treated  as  a  corporation  for  U.S.  federal  income  tax  purposes  will  be  treated  as  a  “passive  foreign 
investment  company” (or  PFIC)  for  U.S.  federal  income  tax  purposes  if  at  least  75.0%  of  its  gross  income  for  any  taxable  year 
consists of “passive income” or at least 50.0% of the average value of its assets produce, or are held for the production of, “passive 
income.” For purposes of these tests, “passive income” includes dividends, interest, gains from the sale or exchange of investment 
property, and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties that are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active 
conduct of  a  trade  or  business.  For  purposes  of  these  tests,  income  derived  from  the  performance of  services  does  not  constitute 
“passive income.” U.S. shareholders of a PFIC are subject to a disadvantageous U.S. federal income tax regime with respect to the 
income derived by the PFIC, the distributions they receive from the PFIC, and the gain, if any, they derive from the sale or other 
disposition of their interests in the PFIC.

Based on our current and projected method of operation, we believe that we were not a PFIC for any taxable year, and we 
expect that we will not be treated as a PFIC for any future taxable year.  We believe that more than 25.0% of our gross income for 
each taxable year was or will be nonpassive income and more than 50.0% of the average value of our assets for each such year was 
or will be held for the production of such nonpassive income.  This belief is based on certain valuations and projections regarding our 
assets, income and charters, and its validity is conditioned on the accuracy of such representations and projections. While we believe 
such valuations and projections to be accurate, the shipping market is volatile and no assurance can be given that they will continue 
to be accurate at any time in the future.

Moreover, there are legal uncertainties involved in determining whether the income derived from time-chartering activities 
constitutes rental income or income derived from the performance of services. In Tidewater Inc. v. United States, 565 F.3d 299 (5th 
Cir. 2009), the Fifth Circuit held that income derived from certain time-chartering activities should be treated as rental income rather 
than services income for purposes of a provision of the Code relating to foreign sales corporations. In that case, the Fifth Circuit did 
not address the definition of passive income or the PFIC rules; however, the reasoning of the case could have implications as to how 
the income from a time charter would be classified under such rules. If the reasoning of this case were extended to the PFIC context, 
the  gross  income  we  derive  or  are  deemed  to  derive  from  our  time-chartering activities  may  be  treated  as  rental  income,  and  we 
would likely be treated as a PFIC. In published guidance, the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, stated that it disagreed with the holding 
in Tidewater, and specified that time charters similar to those at issue in the case should be treated as service contracts. We have not 
sought, and we do not expect to seek, an IRS ruling on the treatment of income generated from our time-chartering activities. As a 
result,  the  IRS or  a court  could  disagree  with  our  position. No  assurance can be  given  that this  result will  not occur. In  addition, 
although  we  intend  to  conduct  our  affairs  in  a  manner  to  avoid  being  classified  as  a  PFIC  with  respect  to  each  taxable  year,  we 
cannot assure unitholders that the nature of our operations will not change in the future and that we will not become a PFIC in any 
taxable year.  If the IRS were to find that we are or have been a PFIC for any taxable year (and regardless of whether we remain a 
PFIC  for  subsequent  taxable  years),  our  U.S.  unitholders  would  face  adverse  U.S.  federal  income  tax  consequences.   Please  read 
“Item 10—Additional  Information—Taxation—Material U.S. Federal Income  Tax Considerations—U.S. Federal  Income  Taxation 
of  U.S.  Holders—PFIC  Status  and  Significant  Tax  Consequences” for  a  more  detailed  discussion  of  the  U.S.  federal  income  tax 
consequences to U.S. unitholders if we are treated as a PFIC.

We may have to pay tax on U.S. source income, which would reduce our cash flow.

Under the Code, 50.0% of the gross shipping income of a vessel owning or chartering corporation, such as ourselves, that is 
attributable to transportation that either begins or ends, but that does not both begin and end, in the United States is characterized as 
U.S.  source  gross  shipping  income.   U.S.  source  gross  shipping  income  generally  is  subject  to  a  4.0%  U.S.  federal  income  tax 
without  allowance  for  deduction  unless  the  corporation  qualifies  for  exemption  from  tax  under  Section  883  of  the  Code  and  the 
regulations promulgated thereunder.

We believe that we and each of our subsidiaries engaged in transportation will qualify for the Section 883 tax exemption for 
the  foreseeable  future,  and  we  will  take  this  position  for  U.S.  federal  income  tax  return  reporting  purposes.   However,  there  are 
factual circumstances, including some that may be beyond our control, that could cause us to lose the benefit of this tax exemption.  
In  addition,  our  position  that  we  qualify  for  this  exemption  is  based  upon  legal  authorities  that  do  not  expressly  contemplate  an 
organizational structure such as ours; specifically, although we have elected to be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax 
purposes, we are organized as a limited partnership under Marshall Islands law.  Therefore, we can give no assurance that the IRS 
will not take a different position regarding our qualification, or the qualification of any of our subsidiaries, for the Section 883 tax 
exemption.

27

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 34 of 169

Table of Contents

If we or our subsidiaries are not entitled to this exemption under Section 883 for any taxable year, we or our subsidiaries 
generally would be subject to a 4.0% U.S. federal gross income tax on our U.S. source gross shipping income for such year.  Our 
failure to qualify for the exemption under Section 883 could have a negative effect on our business and would result in decreased 
earnings available for distribution to our unitholders.  The vessels in our fleet do not currently engage, and we do not expect that they 
will in the future engage, in transportation that begins and ends in the United States, and we do not currently anticipate providing any 
regasification or storage services within the territorial seas of the United States. If, notwithstanding this expectation, our subsidiaries 
earn income in the future from transportation that begins and ends in the United States, that income would not be exempt from U.S. 
federal income tax under the U.S.-Norway Tax Treaty or Section 883 of the Code and would be subject to a 35% net income tax in 
the United States. Please read “Item 4—Information on the Partnership—Taxation of the Partnership—The Section 883 Exemption”
for a  more  detailed discussion  of the rules  relating  to qualification  for  the  exemption under Section  883 and  the  consequences  of 
failing to qualify for such an exemption.

Unitholders may be subject to income tax in one or more non-U.S. jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, as a result of 
owning our common units if, under the laws of any such jurisdiction, we are considered to be carrying on business there.  Such 
laws may require unitholders to file a tax return with, and pay taxes to, those jurisdictions.

We intend to conduct  our  affairs and cause  or influence  each of  our  subsidiaries to  operate its business in a manner  that 
minimizes income taxes imposed upon us and our subsidiaries and that may be imposed upon a unitholder as a result of owning our 
common  units.   However,  because  we  are  organized  as  a  partnership,  there  is  a  risk  in  some  jurisdictions,  including  the  United 
Kingdom, that our activities or the activities of our subsidiaries may be attributed to our unitholders for tax purposes if, under the 
laws of such jurisdiction, we are considered to be carrying on business there.  If a unitholder is subject to tax in any such jurisdiction, 
such unitholder  may  be  required  to  file  a tax  return  with, and  to  pay  tax  in, that jurisdiction  based on  such  unitholder’s  allocable 
share  of  our  income.   We  may be  required to  reduce  distributions  to  a  unitholders  on  account of  any  tax  withholding  obligations 
imposed upon us by that jurisdiction in respect of such allocation to such unitholder.  The United States may not allow a tax credit 
for any foreign income taxes that a unitholder directly or indirectly incurs by virtue of an investment in us.

We believe we can conduct our affairs in a manner that does not result in our unitholders being considered to be carrying on 
business in the United Kingdom solely as a consequence of  the acquisition, ownership, disposition  or redemption of our common 
units.   However,  the  question  of  whether  either  we  or  any  of  our  subsidiaries  will  be  treated  as  carrying  on  business  in  any 
jurisdiction, including  the United Kingdom, will  be  largely  a  question  of  fact  to  be determined through an  analysis of contractual 
arrangements, including the fleet management agreements that our  subsidiaries have  entered into  with Golar Management, certain 
other subsidiaries of Golar and certain third-party vessel managers and the management and administrative service agreement that we 
have entered into with Golar Management, as well as through an analysis of the manner in which we conduct business or operations, 
all of which may change over time.  Furthermore, the laws of the United Kingdom or any other jurisdiction may also change, which 
could cause that jurisdiction’s taxing authorities to determine that we are carrying on business in such jurisdiction and that we or our 
unitholders are subject to its taxation laws.  In addition to the potential for taxation of our unitholders, any additional taxes imposed 
on us or any of our subsidiaries will reduce our cash available for distribution.

Item 4.

Information on the Partnership

A. History and Development of the Partnership

We are a publicly traded limited partnership formed initially as a wholly owned subsidiary of Golar LNG Limited (Nasdaq: 
GLNG), a leading independent owner and operator of Floating Storage Regasification Units (or FSRUs) and LNG carriers, to own 
and operate FSRUs and LNG carriers under long-term charters. As of April 30, 2013, we have a fleet of four FSRUs and four LNG 
carriers.

Upon  our  formation,  Golar  contributed  to  us  a  100%  interest  in  certain  subsidiaries  which  owned  a  60%  interest  in  the 
Golar  Mazo  and  which  leased  the Golar  Spirit  and  the  Methane  Princess.   In  April 2011,  we  completed  our  IPO  of  13.8  million 
common units.  In connection with our IPO, Golar transferred to us a 100% interest in the subsidiary which leases the Golar Winter
and the legal title to the Golar Spirit.    

In October 2011, we completed the acquisition of 100% interests in subsidiaries that own and operate the FSRU, the Golar 
Freeze  from  Golar  for  a  purchase  price  of  $330.0  million  for  the  vessel  plus  $9.0  million  of  working  capital  adjustments  less 
assumed bank debt of $108.0 million.

28

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 35 of 169

Table of Contents

In  July  2012,  we  acquired  from  Golar  interests  in  the  companies  that  own  and  operate  the  NR  Satu,  which  is  currently 
operating under a time charter that expires in 2022 with PTNR, for a purchase price of approximately $385.0 million for the vessel 
plus working capital adjustments of $3.0 million. In addition, in November 2012, we acquired from Golar interests in the companies 
that lease and operate the Golar Grand, which is currently operating under a time charter that expires in 2015 with BG Group for a 
purchase  price  of  $265.0  million  for  the  vessel  plus  working  capital  adjustments  of  $2.6  million  less  the  assumed  capital  lease 
obligations of $90.8 million. In February 2013, we acquired from Golar interests in the company that owns and operates the LNG 
carrier, the Golar Maria, which is currently operating under a time charter with LNG Shipping, a subsidiary of Eni S.p.A that expires 
in  December  2017,  for  a  purchase  price  of  approximately  $215.0  million  less  the  assumed  debt  of  $89.5  million.  See  “Item  5. 
Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” for a description of our acquisitions of the Golar Freeze, the NR Satu and the Golar 
Grand and the financing arrangements related thereto.     

In this Annual Report, we refer to the four vessels that were contributed to us in connection with our formation and our IPO 
as  our  initial fleet.  In this  Annual Report,  the  Golar Freeze,  the  NR  Satu and  the  Golar  Grand  are  referred  to  collectively  as  the 
Dropdown Predecessor. We refer to the vessels in our initial fleet, the Dropdown Predecessor and the Golar Maria, collectively, as 
our current fleet.  

We were formed on September 24, 2007 under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands and maintain our principal 
executive  headquarters  at  Par-La-Ville  Place,  14  Par-la-Ville  Road,  Hamilton,  HM08,  Bermuda.  Our  telephone  number  at  that 
address  is  +1  (441)  295-4705.  Our  principal  administrative  offices  are  located  at  13th Floor,  One  America  Square,  17 Crosswall, 
London EC3N 2LB, United Kingdom.

B. Business Overview

General

Our business is to own and operate FSRUs and LNG carriers under long-term time charters (which we define as charters 
with terms of five or more years).  Our primary business objective is to increase quarterly distributions per unit over time by growing 
our business through accretive acquisitions of FSRUs and LNG carriers and by chartering our vessels pursuant to long-term charters 
with high quality customers that generate long-term stable cash flows.  The vessels in our current fleet are chartered to BG Group, 
Pertamina, Petrobras, Dubai Supply Authority, PTNR and LNG Shipping SpA (a subsidiary of ENI) under long-term time charters 
that had an average remaining term of 7 years as of March 31, 2013. Since our IPO in April 2011, we have increased our quarterly 
distribution from $0.385 per unit paid on a prorated basis for the period from the closing of our IPO through June 30, 2011, to $0.50 
per unit for the quarter ended December 31, 2012.

We  intend  to  leverage  the  relationships,  expertise  and  reputation  of  Golar,  a  leading  independent  owner  and  operator  of 
FSRUs and LNG carriers, to pursue potential growth opportunities and to attract and retain high-quality, creditworthy customers.  As 
of April 30, 2013, Golar owned our 2.0% general partner interest, all of our IDRs and a 49.9% limited partner interest in us.  Golar 
intends to utilize us as its primary growth vehicle to pursue the acquisition of long-term stable cash flow generating FSRUs and LNG 
carriers.

Business Strategies

Our primary business objective is to increase quarterly distributions per unit over time by executing the following strategies:

•

•

Pursue  strategic  and  accretive  acquisitions  of  FSRUs  and  LNG  carriers.  We  believe  our  affiliation  with  Golar 
positions  us  to  pursue  a  broader  array  of  growth  opportunities,  including  strategic  and  accretive  acquisitions  from 
Golar, with Golar or from third parties.

Compete  for  long-term  charter  contracts  for  FSRUs  and  LNG  carriers  when  attractive  opportunities  arise.   We 
intend to participate in competitive tender processes and engage in negotiated transactions with potential charterers for 
both FSRUs and LNG carriers when attractive opportunities arise by leveraging the strength of the industry expertise of 
Golar and the Fredriksen Group, as well as our publicly traded partnership status.

• Manage  our  fleet  and  our  customer  relationships  to  provide  a  stable  base  of  cash  flows  and  superior  operating 
performance.  We intend to manage the stability of cash flows in our fleet by actively seeking the extension or renewal 
of  existing  charters,  entering  into  new  long-term  charters  with  current  customers  and  identifying  potential  business 
opportunities with new high-quality charterers.

29

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 36 of 169

Table of Contents

We  can  provide  no  assurance,  however,  that  we  will  be  able  to  implement  our  business  strategies  described  above.   For 

further discussion of the risks that we face, please read “Item 3—Key Information—Risk Factors”.

The Natural Gas Industry

Predominately used to generate electricity and as a heating source, natural gas is one of the “big three” fossil fuels that make 
up  the  vast  majority  of  world  energy  consumption.   As  a  cleaner  burning  fuel  than  both  oil  and  coal,  natural  gas  has  become  an 
increasingly attractive fuel source in the last decade.  As more emphasis is placed on reducing carbon emissions, Organization for 
Economic Cooperation and Development (or OECD) nations have come to view natural gas as a way of reducing their environmental 
footprint, particularly for electricity where natural gas-fired facilities have been gradually replacing oil, coal and older natural gas-
fired  plants.  More  recently,  China  has  indicated  a  strong  desire  to  address  air  quality  issues  that  have  arisen  following  a  rapid 
expansion in the use of coal fired power plants. Gas fired electricity generation is expected to feature prominently in their efforts to 
address environmental issues.

Natural gas is an abundant fuel source, with the EIA estimating that, as of January 1, 2011,  worldwide proved natural gas 
reserves were 6,675 Tcf (189,014 bcm).  Almost three-quarters of the world's natural gas reserves are located in the Middle East and 
Eurasia.  Russia, Iran and Qatar accounted for 54% of the world's natural gas reserves as of January 1, 2011, and the United States is 
the fifth largest holder of natural gas reserves at 4.1% of the world's reserves.  Despite some uncertainty around a few high profile 
liquefaction projects, Australian exports of natural gas are forecast to triple between 2008 and 2020 and continue growing thereafter.  
More recently, sizeable new discoveries are being made on the east coast of Africa in countries including Mozambique, Tanzania and 
Kenya.

     The  EIA  predicts  a  substantial  increase  in  the  production  of  “unconventional” natural  gas,  including  tight  gas,  shale  gas  and 
coalbed methane.  Although reserves of unconventional natural gas are unknown, the EIA predicts a substantial increase in natural 
gas supplies from unconventional formations in the future, especially from the United States but also from Canada, France, Poland, 
Turkey,  Ukraine,  South  Africa,  Morocco,  Chile,  Mexico,  China,  Australia,  Libya,  Algeria,  Argentina  and  Brazil.   Shale  gas 
production has been particularly prolific increasing by over 5 billion cubic feet (or Bcf) per day since the beginning of 2007.  This 
increase  largely  results  from  recent  advances  in  horizontal  drilling  and  hydraulic  fracturing  technologies,  especially  in  the  U.S.  
These technologies have made  it possible  to exploit the  U.S.’s  vast shale gas resources.  Continually rising estimates of  shale gas 
resources  have  helped  to  increase  estimates  of  the  total  U.S.  natural  gas  reserves  by  almost  50%  over  the  past  decade.   The  EIA 
expects shale gas to comprise 47% of U.S. natural gas production in 2035.

The reduced rate of growth in LNG demand in the U.S. is expected to be at least partly offset by increased demand for LNG 

in other nations, especially non-OECD countries.

Liquefied Natural Gas

Overview

The need to transport natural gas over long distances across oceans led to the development of the international LNG trade.  
The first shipments were made on a trial basis in 1959 between the United States and the United Kingdom, while 1964 saw the start 
of  the  first  commercial-scale  LNG  project  to  ship  LNG  from  Algeria  to  the  United  Kingdom.   LNG  shipping  provides  a  cost-
effective and safe means for transporting natural gas overseas. The LNG is transported overseas in specially built tanks on double-
hulled  ships  to  a  receiving  terminal,  where  it  is  offloaded  and  stored  in  heavily  insulated  tanks.   In  regasification  facilities  at  the 
receiving terminal, the LNG is returned to its gaseous state (or regasified) and then carried by pipeline for distribution to natural gas 
customers.

The LNG supply chain involves the following components:

Gas  Field  Production  and  Pipeline:   Natural  gas  is  produced  and  transported  via  pipeline  to  natural  gas  liquefaction 

facilities located along the coast of the producing country.

Liquefaction Plant and Storage:  Natural gas is cooled to a temperature of minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit, transforming the 
gas into a liquid, which reduces its volume to approximately 1/600th of its volume in a gaseous state.  The reduced volume facilitates 
economical  storage  and transportation by  ship  over  long  distances,  enabling  countries with limited natural  gas reserves  or limited 
access to long-distance transmission pipelines to meet their demand for natural gas.

Shipping:   LNG  is  loaded  onto  specially  designed,  double-hulled  LNG  carriers  and  transported  overseas  from  the 

liquefaction facility to the receiving terminal.

30

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 37 of 169

Table of Contents

Regasification:  At the regasification facility (either onshore or aboard specialized LNG carriers), the LNG is returned to its 

gaseous state, or regasified.

Storage,  Distribution  and  Marketing:   Once  regasified,  the  natural  gas  is  stored  in  specially  designed  facilities  or 

transported to natural gas consumers and end-use markets via pipelines.

According to Wood Mackenzie, LNG liquefaction capacity was 175 million tonnes per annum in 2007, this increased to 242 
million  tonnes  per  annum  by  2011.  The  International  Group  of  Liquefied  Natural  Gas  Importers  note  that  liquefaction  volumes 
dropped  for  the  first  time  in  30  years  in  2012  to  around  236  million  tonnes,  due  to  an  unusually  large  number  of  unscheduled 
production interruptions.  Wood Mackenzie has, however, indicated that liquefaction capacity is expected to resume its growth path 
over the coming years reaching 286 million tonnes by 2016 and 346 million tonnes by 2018.

The LNG Carrier Fleet

As of the end of March 2013, the world LNG carrier fleet consisted of 379 LNG carriers (including 14 FSRUs, 15 vessels 
with a capacity less than  18,000m3 and 5 vessels currently in lay-up).  By the end of March 2013, there  were orders for 114 new 
LNG carriers (including 9 FSRUs, 4 small vessels with a capacity of less than 18,000m3 and 2 production units), with the bulk of 
ordered vessels scheduled for delivery in 2013 and 2014.

While  there  are  a  number  of  different  types  of  LNG  vessels  and  “containment  systems”,  there  are  two  dominant 

containment systems in use today:

•

•

The Moss system was developed in the 1970s and uses free standing insulated spherical tanks supported at the equator 
by a continuous cylindrical skirt.  In this system, the tank and the hull of the vessel are two separate structures.

The Membrane system uses insulation built directly into the hull of the vessel, along with a membrane covering inside 
the tanks to maintain their integrity.  In this system, the ship’s hull directly supports the pressure of the LNG cargo.

Of the vessels currently trading and on order, approximately 71% employ the membrane containment system, 24% employ 
the Moss system and the remaining 5% employ other systems.  Of the newbuilds, vessels on order that have employed the membrane 
containment system, have done so primarily because it most efficiently utilizes the entire volume of a ship’s hull. The construction 
period for an LNG carrier is approximately 28-34 months.

Propulsion  systems  also  differ.  Historically  most  ships  were  built  with  steam  turbine  propulsion  whereas  most  current 
newbuilds have been ordered with more efficient tri-fuel diesel electric engines. Most LNG carriers can use the natural boil off of gas 
from LNG to power the vessel.

Seasonality

Historically,  LNG  trade,  and  therefore  charter  rates,  increased  in  the  winter  months  and  eased  in  the  summer  months  as 
demand for LNG in the Northern Hemisphere rose in colder weather and fell in warmer weather.  The tanker industry in general has 
become  less  dependent  on  the  seasonal  transport  of  LNG  than  a  decade  ago  as  new  uses  for  LNG  have  developed,  spreading 
consumption more evenly over the year.  There is a higher seasonal demand during the summer months due to energy requirements 
for  air  conditioning  in  some  markets  and  a  pronounced  higher  seasonal  demand  during  the  winter  months  for  heating  in  other 
markets.

Floating LNG Regasification

Floating LNG Storage and Regasification Vessels

Floating  LNG  regasification  vessels  are  commonly  known  as  FSRUs.  The  FSRU  regasification  process  involves  the 
vaporization of LNG and injection of the resultant natural gas directly into a pipeline. In order to regasify LNG, FSRUs are equipped 
with  vaporizer  systems  that  can  operate  in  the  open-loop  mode,  the  closed-loop  mode  or  in  both  modes.  In  the  open-loop  mode, 
seawater  is  pumped  through  the  system  to  provide  the  heat  necessary  to  convert  the  LNG  to  the  vapor  phase.  In  the  closed-loop 
system, a natural gas-fired boiler is used to heat water circulated in a closed-loop through the vaporizer and a steam heater to convert 
the LNG to the vapor phase. In general, FSRUs can be divided into four subcategories:

31

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 38 of 169

Table of Contents

•

•

•

•

FSRUs that are permanently located offshore;

FSRUs that are permanently near shore and attached to a jetty (with LNG transfer being either directly ship to ship or 
over a jetty);

shuttle carriers that regasify and discharge their cargos offshore (sometimes referred to as energy bridge); and

shuttle carriers that regasify and discharge their cargos alongside.

Golar’s  and  the  Partnership’s  business  model  to  date  has  been  focused  on  FSRUs  that  are  permanently  offshore  or  near 

shore and provide continuous regasification service.

Demand for Floating LNG Regasification Facilities

The long-term outlook for global natural gas supply and demand has stimulated growth in LNG production and trade, which 
is  expected  to  drive  a  necessary  expansion  of  regasification  infrastructure.  While  worldwide  regasification  exceeds  worldwide 
liquefaction capacity, a large portion of the existing global regasification capacity is concentrated in a few markets such as Japan, 
Korea and the U.S. Gulf Coast. There remains a significant demand for regasification infrastructure in growing economies in Asia, 
Middle-East and Central/South America. We believe that the advantages of FSRUs compared to onshore facilities make them highly 
competitive in these markets. In the Middle East, Caribbean and South America almost all new regasification projects use FSRUs. 
FSRUs are also beginning to penetrate Asian markets, led by Golar's NR Satu in Jakarta, Indonesia and a variety of projects in India.

Floating  LNG  regasification  projects  first  emerged  as  a  solution  to  the  difficulties  and  protracted  process  of  obtaining 
permits to build shore-based LNG reception facilities (especially along the North American coasts). Due to their offshore location, 
floating facilities are less likely than onshore facilities to be met with resistance in local communities, which is especially important 
in the case of a facility that is intended to serve a highly populated area where there is a high demand for natural gas. As a result, it is 
typically easier and faster for FSRUs to obtain necessary permits than for comparable onshore facilities. More recently, cost and time 
have  become  the  main  drivers  behind  the  growing  interest  in  the  various  types  of  floating  LNG  regasification  projects.  FSRU 
projects  can  typically  be  completed  in  less  time  (2  to  3  years  compared  to  4  or  more  years  for  land  based  projects)  and  at  a 
significantly lower cost (10 to 50% less) than land based alternatives.

In addition, FSRUs offer a more flexible solution than land based terminals. They can be used as LNG carriers to pick up 
cargoes and can be easily and quickly redeployed as demand conditions change. A floating regasification vessel can load, store and 
regasify LNG before delivering the natural gas to market. It can be operated partially as a conventional trading ship that transports 
and regasifies its own cargo, or as a mother-ship that processes supplies received by way of ship-to-ship transfers. FSRUs can also be 
moved  to  (and  operated  at) a  different  location  if  required,  which  is  particularly beneficial  in  markets  where demand for LNG  is 
seasonal. Additionally, FSRUs offer quicker access to LNG supply for markets that lack onshore regasification infrastructure.  The 
FSRU  can  be  a  substitute  for  a  land  based  terminal  and  remain  a  fixed  and  permanent  facility  over  the  long  term  but  can  also 
complement  land  based  regasification  by  providing  storage  and  regasification  to  a  market  while  the  longer  lead  time  land  based 
terminal is being constructed.

Floating LNG Regasification Vessel Fleet Size and Ownership

Compared to onshore terminals, the floating LNG regasification industry is fairly young. There are only a limited number of 
companies,  including  Golar  as  well  as  Exmar,  Excelerate  Energy,  and  Hoegh  LNG  that  are  operating  FSRU  terminals  for  LNG 
importers around the world. In this regard, Golar was the first company to enter into an agreement for the long-term employment of 
an FSRU based on the conversion of an existing LNG carrier.

As of February 2013, there are 14 FSRUs in existence with an additional 9 FSRUs under construction.

FSRUs  can  have  some  potential  disadvantages.  While  FSRUs  can  have  comparable  ability  to  offload  cargo  from  LNG 
carriers relative to land based terminals, land based terminals typically have greater storage capacity which can facilitate faster cargo 
offload in a situation when storage tanks are partially full. Land based terminals are also potentially better suited for large gas send 
out capacity requirements in excess of the capacity of the largest FSRUs. However, even these disadvantages can be mitigated by 
adding a Floating Storage Unit (FSU) or another FSRU to create more storage and regasification capacity. Recently, the market has 
begun to see FSRU projects under development that involve more than one regasification and storage vessel.

32

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 39 of 169

Table of Contents

Competition — LNG Carriers and FSRUs

While the majority of the existing world LNG carrier fleet is employed on long-term charters, there is competition for the 
employment  of  vessels  whose  charters  are  expiring  and  for  the  employment  of  vessels  which  are  not  dedicated  to  a  long-term 
contract.  Competition for mid- and long-term LNG charters is based primarily on price, vessel availability, size, age and condition 
of  the  vessel,  relationships  with  LNG  carrier  users  and  the  quality,  LNG  experience  and  reputation  of  the  operator.   In  addition, 
vessels may operate in the emerging LNG carrier spot market that covers short-term charters of one year or less. Since late 2010, 
market developments have seen a considerable tightening in the supply/demand balance leading to a sharp increase in employment 
and hire rates. In the first quarter of 2013, short-term charter rates have decreased somewhat but are still well above 2010 levels.

Together  with  Golar  we  believe  that  we  are  one  of  the  world’s  largest  independent  LNG  carrier  and  FSRU  owner  and 
operators. We compete with other independent shipping companies who also own and operate LNG carriers.  While there are some 
barriers to entry, including the cost of an LNG carrier and expertise, new entrants have entered the market over the last five years.

In addition to independent LNG operators, some of the major oil and gas producers, including Royal Dutch Shell, BP, and 
BG own LNG carriers and have in the recent past contracted for the construction of new LNG carriers.  National gas and shipping 
companies also have large fleets of LNG vessels that have expanded and will likely continue to expand.  These include Malaysian 
International  Shipping  Company,  or  MISC,  National  Gas  Shipping  Company  located  in  Abu  Dhabi  and  Qatar  Gas  Transport 
Company, or Nakilat.

FSRUs are in an early stage of their commercial development and thus there is less competition in that market than in the 
more  mature  commercial  market  of  LNG  carriers.   As  such,  there  are  only  a  limited  number  of  FSRU  owners  and  operators  in 
addition to us, primarily made up of Excelerate Energy, Hoegh LNG, Exmar, Teekay LNG and MISC Berhad.

Our Fleet and Customers

Our current fleet consists of:

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

the Golar Spirit, an FSRU retrofitted in 2007 from an LNG carrier built in 1981 that is currently operating under a time 
charter that expires in 2018 with Petrobras, the majority state-owned oil and gas company of Brazil;

the Golar Winter, an FSRU retrofitted in 2008 from an LNG carrier built in 2004 that is currently operating under a 
time charter that expires in 2024 with Petrobras;

the Golar Freeze, an FSRU retrofitted in 2010 from an LNG carrier built in 1977 that is currently operating under a 
time charter that expires in 2020 with DUSUP, the exclusive purchaser of natural gas in Dubai;

the NR Satu, an FSRU retrofitted in 2012 from an LNG carrier built in 1977 that is currently operating under a time 
charter that expires in 2022 with PTNR, a joint venture company that is 60% owned by Pertamina and 40% owned by 
PT Perusahaan Gas Negara, an unaffiliated Indonesian company engaged in the transport and distribution of natural gas 
in Indonesia;

the Methane Princess, an LNG carrier built in 2003 that is currently operating under a time charter that expires in 2024 
with BG Group; 

the Golar Grand, an LNG carrier built in 2006 that is currently operating under a time charter that expires in 2015 with 
BG Group. We have an option to require Golar to charter in the vessel at a lower charter rate after the expiry of the time 
charter with BG Group to 2017 if BG Group does not exercise their option to extend their time charter;

the Golar Mazo, an LNG carrier built in 2000 that is currently operating under a time charter that expires in 2017 with 
Pertamina,  the  state-owned  oil  and  gas  company  of  Indonesia.  We  own  a  60%  interest  in  this  vessel  and  Chinese 
Petroleum Corporation owns the remaining 40%; and

the Golar Maria, an LNG carrier built in 2006 that is currently operating under a time charter that expires in 2017 with 
LNG Shipping S.p.A., a subsidiary of Eni S.p.A. We acquired the Golar Maria in February 2013.

We intend  to  leverage our  relationship  with  Golar  to  make  additional accretive  acquisitions  of  FSRUs  and  LNG  carriers 

with long-term charters from Golar and third parties.  

33

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 40 of 169

Table of Contents

FSRUs

The following table provides information about the four FSRUs in our current fleet. Unless otherwise indicated, we hold a 

100% economic interest in the vessels.

FSRU Vessel

Golar Spirit

Golar Winter

Golar Freeze

NR Satu

Total Capacity

Capacity
(cbm)

128,000

138,000

125,000

(2)

125,000

516,000

Offtake
Capacity
(Bcf/d)

Year of
Delivery

Post-Retrofit
Charter
Commencement

Charterer

Charter
Expiration

1981

2004

1977

1977

July 2008

Petrobras

September 2009

Petrobras

May 2010

May 2012

DUSUP

PTNR

2018

2024

2020

2022

0.25

0.50

0.48

0.50

1.73

Charter
Extension
Option
Periods

Three years plus 
two years

none
Terms extending 
up to 2025(1)

2025

__________________________________________ 
(1) DUSUP has the option to extend the charter for two extension periods of two years and two years.  DUSUP has an option to extend the initial 

term or either of the extension periods by one year.

(2) We hold all of the voting stock and control all of the economic interests in PTGI, the company that owns and operates the NR Satu, pursuant to 
a Shareholder's Agreement with the other shareholder  of PTGI, PT  Pesona. PT Pesona  holds  the remaining  51%  interest  in  the  issued share 
capital of PTGI.

Golar Spirit.  The Golar Spirit utilizes a closed-loop regasification system.  The Golar Spirit is operating under a 10-year 
time charter to Petrobras,  which  is  the  largest energy company  in  Brazil  with  an integrated  structure  consisting of oil  and oil  by-
product exploration, production, refining, marketing, and transportation.

Petrobras  currently  operates  the Golar Spirit in northeastern  Brazil  at  the port  of  Pecem,  where  it is moored at a jetty in 
sheltered waters behind a breakwater, delivering regasified LNG through a hard arm connection directly into a pipeline that services 
base load power generating assets.  The Golar Spirit has the ability to operate as a traditional LNG carrier.

The Golar Spirit was built in 1981.  Given that the Golar Spirit is principally operated in a stationary location and given the 
non-corrosive nature of LNG, we believe that its useful post-retrofit service life will be extended by ten years in excess of its initial 
40-year useful life.

Golar Winter.  The Golar Winter was delivered to Golar LNG in 2004. The Golar Winter is currently operating under a 10-
year  time  charter  to  Petrobras.   In  January 2012,  we  agreed  to  make  certain  modifications  to  the  Golar  Winter  in  return  for  an 
increase in the charter rate and an extension in the contract term by five years.

The Golar Winter utilizes a regasification system able to operate in both open- and closed-loop modes.  From the time that it 
commenced service as an FSRU, the Golar Winter was operated at an island jetty in Guanabara Bay outside Rio de Janeiro where it 
was moored at a jetty in sheltered waters behind a breakwater, delivering regasified LNG through a hard arm connection directly into 
a pipeline that services base load power generating assets.  In January 2012, Petrobras elected to move the Golar Winter from Rio de 
Janeiro to Bahia, requiring certain modifications, including the addition of LNG loading arms.  The Partnership has agreed to make 
these modifications in return for an increase in the charter rate and an extension in the contract term by 5 years. The Golar Winter is 
employed by Petrobras as an FSRU to service peak load power requirements.

Golar  Freeze.   The  Golar  Freeze  was  delivered  to  Golar  in  1977  and  Golar  operated  the  vessel  as  an  LNG  carrier  until 
commencement of its retrofitting.  The Golar Freeze completed its retrofitting in May 2010 and is currently operating as an FSRU 
under a time charter with DUSUP, the exclusive purchaser of natural gas in Dubai, that expires in 2020.

The  Golar  Freeze  is  permanently  moored  alongside  a  purpose  built  jetty  within  the  existing  Jebel  Ali  port.   The  Golar 

Freeze is capable of storing and delivering regasified LNG to DUSUP for further delivery into the Dubai gas network.

The Golar Freeze was built in 1977.  Given that the Golar Freeze is principally operated in a stationary location and given 
the non-corrosive nature of LNG,  we believe that its useful post-retrofit service  life will be extended by ten years in excess of its 
initial 40-year useful life.

34

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 41 of 169

Table of Contents

NR Satu.  The NR Satu was delivered to Golar in 1977. Golar operated the NR Satu as an LNG carrier prior to its retrofitting 
into an FSRU.  The NR Satu completed its retrofitting in April 2012. Its time charter with PTNR commenced in May 2012 and the 
initial period will expire in 2022. The NR Satu is permanently moored alongside a purpose built mooring facility. Given that the NR 
Satu is principally operated in a stationary location and given the non-corrosive nature of LNG, we believe that its useful post-retrofit 
service life will be 20 years. 

LNG Carriers

The following table provides additional information about the four LNG carriers in our current fleet. Unless otherwise 

indicated, we hold a 100% economic interest in the vessels.

LNG Carrier

Golar Mazo

Methane Princess

Golar Grand

Golar Maria 

Total Capacity

Capacity
(cbm)

Year of
Delivery

(1)

135,000

138,000

145,700

(3)

145,700

564,400

2000

2003

2006

2006

Charterer

Pertamina

BG Group

BG Group

Eni S.p.A.

Current
Charter
Expiration

2017

2024

2015

2017

(2)

Charter Extension
Option Periods

Five years plus five years

Five years plus five years

2018

n/a

____________________________________
(1) Chinese Petroleum Corporation holds the remaining 40% interest in the Golar Mazo.
(2)

In the event BG Group does not exercise their option to extend its charter on the Golar Grand beyond 2015, we have an option to require 
Golar to charter the vessel through to October 2017.

(3) We acquired the Golar Maria in February 2013.

As of March 31, 2013, our LNG carriers had an average age of 9 years, compared to the world LNG carrier fleet average 
age of approximately 11 years.  LNG carriers are generally expected to have a lifespan of approximately 40 years.  The Golar Mazo
has a Moss containment system, while the Methane Princess, Golar Grand and Golar Maria have membrane-type cargo containment 
systems.  Our charterers are able to use our LNG carriers worldwide or to sublet the vessels to third parties.

Golar Mazo.  The Golar Mazo is currently chartered to Pertamina.  Founded in 1960, Pertamina is the state-owned oil and 

gas company in Indonesia and one of the world’s largest producers and exporters of LNG.

Methane  Princess.   The  Methane  Princess  is  currently  chartered  to  BG  Group.   BG  Group  engages  in  exploration  and 
production of gas and oil reserves, export, shipping and import of LNG, pipeline transmission and distribution of gas, and various 
gas-powered  electricity  generation  projects.   BG  Group  operates  in  23  countries  on  five  continents.   BG  Group  operates  in  the 
Atlantic  Basin,  with  liquefaction  and/or  regasification  activities  on  stream  or  in  development  in  Chile,  Egypt,  Italy,  Nigeria,  the 
United Kingdom and the United States.

Golar Grand. The Golar Grand is under a medium-term charter with BG Group with an initial term expiring in 2015. In the 
event BG Group  does  not  exercise its  option to extend  the  initial  term  by  an additional three  years,  we have an  option to require 
Golar to charter-in the vessel until October 2017 at approximately 75% of the hire rate that would have been payable by BG Group.

Golar  Maria.  The  Golar  Maria  is  currently  chartered  to  LNG  Shipping  S.p.A.  LNG  Shipping  S.p.A. is  a  wholly-owned 
subsidiary of Eni S.p.A., an integrated energy company operating in the sectors of oil and gas exploration & production, international 
gas transportation and marketing, power generation, refining and marketing, chemicals and oilfield services. Eni is partly owned by 
the Italian government and operates in 90 countries worldwide.

FSRU Charters

We provide the services of each of the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter to Petrobras under separate Time Charter Parties 
(or TCP) and Operation and Services Agreements (or OSAs).  The TCPs and OSAs are interdependent and when combined have the 
same effect as the time charters for our LNG carriers.  The services of the Golar Freeze are provided to DUSUP under a TCP.  The 
services of the NR Satu are provided to PTNR under a TCP.

35

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 42 of 169

Table of Contents

The  Golar  Spirit,  Golar  Winter, Golar  Freeze  and  NR  Satu  charters  feature  hire  and  off-hire  provisions  similar  to  those 
provisions  in  the  charters  for  our  LNG  carriers.   The  Golar  Spirit  and  Golar  Winter  charters  also  contained  provisions  giving 
Petrobras  the  option  to  purchase  the  vessels  from  us  under  certain  circumstances.   Following  our  agreement  to  make  certain 
modifications  to  the  Golar  Winter  in  January  2012,  Petrobras’ option  to  purchase  the  Golar  Spirit  and  Golar  Winter  have  been 
cancelled.  The NR  Satu  charter  contains  a provision  that  allows PTNR  to  purchase  the  vessel  subject  to agreeing the  commercial 
terms. The Golar Spirit, Golar Winter, Golar Freeze and NR Satu charters have additional requirements that the vessels are able to 
receive LNG from another LNG carrier within a specified time and then to discharge regasified LNG at a specified pressure and flow 
rate.  The following discussion describes the material terms of the Golar Spirit, Golar Winter, Golar Freeze and NR Satu charters.

Initial Term; Extensions

The  Golar  Spirit  charter  commenced  upon  acceptance  by  Petrobras  in  July  2008.   The  charter  has  an  initial  term  of  10 
years.  Petrobras has the option to extend the charter for two extension periods of three years and two years.  Six months’ notice is 
required if any extension option is to be exercised by Petrobras.  If Petrobras exercises its option to extend the Golar Spirit charter 
beyond its initial term, the hire rate will be reduced by approximately 5.0%.

The Golar Winter charter commenced upon acceptance by Petrobras in September 2009.  The charter had an initial term of 
ten years.  Petrobras is planning to move the Golar Winter from its present site in Rio de Janeiro to Bahia and as a consequence the 
vessel will require certain modifications including the addition of LNG loading arms. We have agreed to make these modifications in 
return for an increase in the charter rate and a 5-year extension to the contract term. The vessel is due to be delivered at its new site in 
the third quarter of 2013 at which point the new charter rate will commence.

The  Golar  Freeze  charter  commenced  upon  acceptance  by  DUSUP  in  May 2010.   The  charter  has  an  initial  term  of  ten 
years.  Under the Golar Freeze charter, DUSUP has the option to extend the charter for two extension periods of two years each and 
has the option to increase the length of the initial term or one of the extension periods by one year.  Six months’ notice is required if 
an  extension  option  is  to  be  exercised  by  DUSUP.   If  DUSUP  exercises  its  option to  extend  the  Golar  Freeze  charter  beyond  its 
initial term, the fixed component of the hire rate will be reduced by approximately 64.4%.  See “— Hire Rate.”

The NR Satu charter commenced upon acceptance by PTNR in May 2012. The charter has an initial term of approximately 
eleven years.  Under the NR Satu charter, PTNR has the option to extend the charter to 2025 by giving notice before the expiry of the 
initial term. 

Hire Rate

Under the TCP for the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter, hire is payable monthly, in advance in U.S. Dollars.  The TCP 
provides for the capital cost component of the charter, which relates to the cost of the vessel’s purchase and is structured to meet that 
cost and provide a return on investor capital.  The TCP also provides for all drydocking and insurance-related costs.  The hire amount 
payable under the TCP was established between the parties at the time the charter was entered into and will be increased based on a 
specified cost-of-living index on a bi-annual basis.

Under the OSA for the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter, hire is payable monthly in advance in Brazilian Reais.  The hire 
payable  under  the  OSA  covers  the  operating  cost  component  of  the  charter  and  covers  all  vessel  operating  expenses,  other  than 
drydocking and insurance.  The hire amount payable under the OSA was established between the parties at the time the charter was 
entered into  and will be increased  based on  a specified mix of cost-of-living and U.S. Dollar foreign exchange  rate  indices on  an 
annual basis.

Under the Golar Freeze charter, hire is  payable  monthly,  in advance in U.S. Dollars.  The hire payable under the charter 
consists of two components, a fixed charter hire rate and an operating cost element.  The fixed rate component will remain constant 
for the duration of the initial term of ten years.  If DUSUP exercises its option to extend the charter beyond its initial term, the fixed 
hire rate component for any such extension term will be reduced by approximately 64.4% from the initial hire rate.  The operating 
cost component includes all vessel operating expenses, except drydocking and certain insurance costs.  The operating cost element is 
reset each year in order to take cost movements into account. 

36

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 43 of 169

Table of Contents

Under the NR Satu charter, hire is payable monthly, in advance in U.S. Dollars.  The hire payable under the charter consists 
of three components: the capital element (comprised of the vessel capital element and mooring capital element), an operating cost 
element and the tax element.  The capital component will remain constant for the duration of the initial term of approximately eleven 
years. If PTNR exercises its option to extend the charter beyond its initial term, the capital element will decrease by 11.6% in 2023 
representing the decrease in the mooring capital element, then by a further 7% in 2024 and 2025. The operating cost element includes 
all vessel operating expenses, except drydocking and certain insurance costs.  The operating cost element is reset each year in order 
to  take  cost  movements  into  account.  The  tax  element  shall  be  adjusted  only  when  there  is  any  change  in  Indonesian  Tax  Laws 
(including any changes in interpretation or implementation thereof) or any treaty to which Indonesia is party or the invalidity of any 
tax assumptions used in determining the tax element.

The hire rate payable for the Golar Spirit, the Golar Winter, the Golar Freeze and the NR Satu may be reduced if they do 

not perform to certain of their specifications, such as specified rates of regasification.

Expenses

Under  the  Golar  Spirit,  Golar  Freeze, Golar  Winter  and  NR  Satu  charters,  the  vessel  owner  is  responsible  for  FSRU 
operating  expenses,  which  include  crewing,  repairs  and  maintenance,  insurance,  stores,  lube  oils  and  communication  expenses  as 
well as periodic drydocking costs.  The vessel owner is also directly responsible for providing all of these items and services.  The 
charterer generally pays the voyage expenses, which include all expenses relating to particular voyages, including any bunker fuel 
expenses, LNG boil-off, port fees, cargo loading and unloading expenses, canal tolls, agency fees and commissions. The charterer is 
responsible  for  providing,  maintaining,  repairing  and  operating  certain  facilities  at  the  unloading  port  such  as  sufficient  mooring 
infrastructure for LNG ships to be berthed alongside and a high pressure send-out pipeline.

Off-hire

The vessel owner is responsible for all costs when the FSRU is off-hire.  Prolonged off-hire may lead to termination of the 
time charter.  A vessel generally will be deemed off-hire if there is a specified time it is unavailable for use by the customer due to 
the factors described above under “—LNG Carrier Charters—Off-hire”. Under the OSAs for the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter, 
an off-hire allowance is provided for a certain number of hours of scheduled off-hire per year.  Under the Golar Freeze charter, the 
vessel owner is allowed a certain number of days to carry out periodic drydocking during which time the vessel will not be offhire. 
Under the NR Satu charter, an off-hire allowance is provided for a certain number of hours of scheduled off-hire per year.

Ship Management and Maintenance

Under the Golar Spirit, the Golar Winter, the Golar Freeze and NR Satu charters, the vessel owner is responsible for the 
technical  management  of  the  vessels,  including  engagement  and  provision  of  qualified  crews,  maintaining  the  vessel,  arranging 
supply of  stores  and  equipment,  periodic  drydocking,  cleaning and  painting  and  ensuring  compliance  with  applicable  regulations, 
including licensing  and  certification requirements.   Golar  Management  and Golar  Wilhelmsen  provide  these management services 
under the fleet management agreements. 

We are focused on operating and maintaining our vessels to the highest safety and industry standards and at the same time 
maximizing  revenue  from  each  vessel.   It  is  our  policy  to  have  our  crews  perform  planned  maintenance  on  our  vessels  while  in 
operation, to reduce time required for repairs during drydocking.  This reduces the overall off-hire period required for dockings and 
repairs.  We believe that the additional revenue earned from reduced off-hire periods outweighs the expense of the additional crew 
members or sub-contractors.

During their retrofitting, the FSRUs, except for the NR Satu, were prepared for five years in service between drydockings. 
This is in line with the policy adopted by the industry for new LNG carriers.  The NR Satu was prepared so it could remain in service 
for  the  duration  of  its  charter  with  PTNR,  including  option  periods,  before  its  first  drydocking  as  a  FSRU.  The  Golar  Spirit,  the 
Golar Winter, the Golar Freeze and the NR Satu will benefit from the significantly reduced loads and wear and tear associated with 
remaining in sheltered waters for the majority of the terms of their charters.

37

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 44 of 169

Table of Contents

Termination

The Golar Spirit and Golar Winter charters will terminate automatically, or immediately upon receipt of written notice from 
Petrobras upon loss of the relevant vessel.  In addition, the vessel owner is generally entitled to suspend performance (but with the 
continuing  accrual  to  the  vessel  owner’s  benefit  of  hire  payments  and  default  interest)  and/or  terminate  the  charter  if  Petrobras 
defaults in its payment obligations under the applicable charter.  Under the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter charters, either party 
may  also  terminate  the  charter  for  force  majeure  after  a  continuous  and  specified  period  or  in  the  event  that  war  or  hostilities 
materially and adversely affect the operations of the applicable vessel.  Additionally, either party may elect to terminate either of the 
charters upon the occurrence of specified events of default.  Petrobras will have the right to terminate the Golar Spirit and the Golar 
Winter  charters  in  the  event  of  requisition  by  any  governmental  authority.   Petrobras  has  the  right  to  terminate  the  charters  for 
continuing off-hire reasons.  Petrobras also has the right to terminate the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter charters, after the fifth 
and tenth anniversary, respectively, of the commencement of the applicable charter without fault upon payment of a termination fee 
specified in the relevant charter.  Six months’ notice is required if Petrobras wishes to exercise its right to no fault termination under 
either of the charters.

Under  the  Golar  Freeze  charter,  DUSUP  may  terminate  the  agreement  immediately,  upon  giving  written  notice  to  the 
owner, in the event of the loss of the vessel or in the event that the vessel is off-hire for a specified extended period.  The charterer 
may  terminate  the  agreement  where  force  majeure  circumstances  result  in  minimal  receipt  of  gas  or  minimal  regasification 
conditions  that  continue  uninterrupted  for  a  specified  period,  upon  written  notice  to  the  owner.   In  addition,  either  party  may 
terminate  the  charter  in  the  event  that  war  or  hostilities  continue  for  a  specified  period  of  time  and  are  likely  to  materially  and 
adversely affect the  operations of the vessel.  Additionally,  either  party may  elect  to  terminate the charter  upon the occurrence  of 
specified events of default, after written notice.  The charterer will have the right to terminate the Golar Freeze charter in the event of 
requisition  by  any  governmental  authority.   The  charterer  also  has  the  right  to  terminate  the  charter  without  fault  after  the  fifth 
anniversary of the commencement of the charter and by giving six months prior written notice and payment of a compensatory fee.  
We may terminate the agreement with immediate effect in the event that the charterer is in default of its payment obligations under 
the agreement after the owner has furnished notice of default to the charterer.

Under the NR Satu charter, PTNR may terminate the agreement immediately, upon giving written notice to the owner, in the 
event of the loss of the vessel or in the event that the vessel is off-hire for a specified extended period.  The charterer may terminate 
the agreement where force majeure circumstances result in minimal receipt of gas or minimal regasification conditions that continue 
uninterrupted for a specified period, upon written notice to the owner.  In addition, either party may terminate the charter in the event 
that war or hostilities continue for a specified period of time and are likely to materially and adversely affect the operations of the 
vessel.  Additionally, either party may elect to terminate the charter upon the occurrence of specified events of default, after written 
notice.  The charterer will have the right to terminate the NR Satu charter in the event of requisition by any governmental authority.  
We may terminate the agreement with immediate effect in the event that the charterer is in default of its payment obligations under 
the agreement after the owner has furnished notice of default to the charterer.

A termination of any of our FSRU charters could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and 
financial  condition  and  could  significantly  reduce  our  ability to  make distributions to  our  unitholders.  However,  in  the  event of  a 
contract termination of any of our FSRU charters, we believe, based on current market conditions, that we would likely be able to re-
charter any of our FSRU vessels at rates not significantly dissimilar to the charter rates under our existing FSRU charters without a 
significant impact to our net cash flow. We cannot guarantee this outcome.

LNG Carrier Charters

We provide the LNG marine transportation services of the Golar Mazo under a time charter with Pertamina, the Methane 
Princess and Golar Grand under time charters with BG Group and the Golar Maria under a time charter with LNG Shipping SpA.  
A time charter is a contract for the use of the vessel for a fixed period of time at a specified daily rate.  Under a time charter, the 
vessel owner provides crewing and other services related to the vessel’s operation, the cost of which is included in the daily rate, and 
the customer is responsible for substantially all of the vessel voyage costs (including fuel, port and canal fees and LNG boil-off).  
The following discussion describes the material terms of our LNG carrier time charters.

Initial Term; Extensions

Golar  Mazo.   The  initial  term  of  the  charter  with  Pertamina  began  upon  delivery  of  the  vessel  in  January 2000  and  will 
terminate during the fourth quarter of 2017.  Pertamina has the option to extend the charter of the Golar Mazo for up to 10 years by 
exercising the right to extend for one or two additional five-year periods.  Pertamina must provide two years’ notice of any decision 
to extend.  In addition, Pertamina has the right to one additional short-term extension of two to 12 months following either the initial 
period of the charter or an extension period upon 90 days’ notice.

38

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 45 of 169

Table of Contents

Methane Princess.  The initial term of the Methane Princess charter with BG Group commenced in 2004 and will terminate 
during the first quarter of 2024.  This charter is subject to an outstanding option on the part of BG Group to extend the charter for one 
or two five-year periods by providing 12 months’ notice prior to the end of each period.  The Methane Princess charter provides that 
if BG Group exercises its option to extend the charter beyond its initial term, the hire rate for the extension period or periods will be 
reduced by approximately 28%.

Golar Grand. The initial term of the Golar Grand charter with BG Group commenced in March 2012 and will terminate in 
the first quarter of 2015. BG Group has the option to extend the charter of the Golar Grand for an additional three years. BG Group 
must provide twelve months' notice of any decision to extend. Under the terms of the option agreement with Golar that we entered 
into upon our acquisition of the Golar Grand in November 2012, Golar has granted us an option to require Golar to enter into a new 
time charter with Golar as charterer until October 2017 if BG Group does not renew or extend the charter after the initial term.

Golar  Maria.  The  term  of  the  Golar  Maria  charter  with  LNG  Shipping  S.p.A.  commenced  in  December  2012  and  will 

terminate at the end of 2017. 

Hire Rate

“Hire rate” refers to the basic payment from the customer for use of the vessel.

Golar  Mazo.   The  hire  rate  is  payable  monthly  in  advance  in  U.S.  Dollars  as  specified  in  the  charter  and  includes  three 
general components:  the owner’s cost component, the operating cost component and the additional cost component.  The owner’s 
cost  component  provides  for  ownership  costs  (including  construction  financing)  and  all  remunerations  due  to  owner  under  the 
charter.   The  operating  cost  component  provides  for  the  annual  operating  costs  of  the  vessel  and  is  subject  to  annual  adjustment 
based  on  actual  costs.   The  additional  cost  component  is  comprised  of  reimbursement  for  certain  costs  associated  with  certain 
modifications, improvements, alterations or replacements that are required pursuant to the charter, requested by Pertamina, or that are 
estimated to cost more than $2 million and related to any financing we obtain at the request of Pertamina.  Pertamina also pays hire 
for the vessel during scheduled drydockings up to a certain number of days in each three-year period, which number is intended to 
correspond to the number of days that the Golar Mazo is expected to be off-hire for an ordinary, regularly scheduled drydocking.

Methane Princess.  The hire rate is payable monthly, in advance in U.S. Dollars as specified in the charter.  The hire rate 
includes two components:  a capital cost component and an operating cost component.  The capital cost component relates to the cost 
of the vessel’s purchase and is structured to meet that cost and to provide a profit on the services we provide as well as a return on 
invested capital.  The operating cost component is intended to compensate us for operating the vessel and to cover related expenses.  
The amount of the operating cost component was established between the parties at the beginning of the charter and increases at a 
fixed  percentage  per  annum  to  reflect  inflation,  except  for  insurance,  which  is  covered  at  cost.   The  hire  rate  for  the  Methane 
Princess does not include an additional cost component, and, accordingly, additional costs related to modifications, improvements, 
alterations or replacements that are not covered by the operating cost component will be allocated at the time such costs are incurred 
among us and BG Group pursuant to negotiations between us and BG Group.  As a result, we may be responsible for a portion of any 
such additional costs.

Golar Grand and Golar Maria. The hire rate is payable monthly, in advance in U.S. Dollars as specified in the charter.  The 

hire rate is a single fixed daily amount for the duration of the charter.  

The hire rates for each of our LNG carriers may be reduced if the vessel does not perform to certain of its specifications or if 
we  are  in  breach  of  any  of  our  representations  and  warranties  in  the  charter.   Historically,  we  have  had  no  instances  of  hire  rate 
reductions.

Expenses

Under  our  LNG  carrier  charters,  we  are  responsible  for  vessel  operating  expenses,  which  include  crewing,  repairs  and 
maintenance, insurance, stores, lube oils and communication expenses and the cost of providing all of these items and services.  The 
customer generally pays the voyage expenses, which include all expenses relating to particular voyages, including any bunker fuel 
expenses, LNG boil-off, port fees, cargo loading and unloading expenses, canal tolls, agency fees and commissions.  A majority of 
the vessel operating  expenses  we incur  with respect to  our  operation of the  Golar  Mazo are  charged to Pertamina on a cost  pass-
through basis, as described above.

39

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 46 of 169

Table of Contents

Off-hire

When the vessel is “off-hire”—or not available for service—the customer generally is not required to pay the hire rate and 

we are responsible for all costs.  Prolonged off-hire may lead to vessel substitution or termination of the time charter.

A vessel generally will be deemed off-hire if there is a specified time it is not available for the customer’s use due to, among 

other things:

•

•

operational  deficiencies,  drydocking for repairs,  maintenance  or inspection, equipment  breakdowns,  or  delays due  to 
accidents, crewing strikes, certain vessel detentions or similar problems; or

our  failure  to  maintain  the  vessel  in  compliance  with  its  specifications  and  contractual  standards  or  to  provide  the 
required crew.

The Golar Mazo will not be considered to be off-hire for scheduled drydockings for a certain number of days in each three-
year period, and therefore we will continue to receive the hire rate under the Golar Mazo charter during such period.  The number of 
days during  which  the Golar Mazo will not be considered to  be off-hire is  intended  to  correspond to the number of days that the 
Golar Mazo is expected to be off-hire for an ordinary, regularly scheduled drydocking.

Vessels  are  drydocked at  least  once  during  a  five-year  class  cycle for inspection  of the  underwater  parts and  for  general 

repairs.

Ship Management and Maintenance

Under  the  charters,  we  are  responsible  for  the  technical  management  of  our  LNG  carriers,  including  engagement  and 
provision of qualified  crews,  maintaining the vessel, arranging supply of stores and equipment, periodic drydocking, cleaning and 
painting and ensuring compliance with applicable regulations, including licensing and certification requirements.  Golar Management 
and  certain  other  affiliates  of  Golar  provide  these  management  services  to  the  vessels  in  our  fleet  through  fleet  management 
agreements with our vessel owning subsidiaries.  Golar Wilhelmsen, a jointly controlled company that is jointly owned by Golar and 
Wilhelmsen  Ship  Management  (Norway)  AS,  provides  certain  technical  management  services  to  our  vessels  through  agreements 
with Golar Management.

We are focused on operating and maintaining our LNG carriers to the highest safety and industry standards and at the same 
time maximizing revenue from each vessel.  It is our policy to have our crews perform planned maintenance on our vessels while 
underway, to reduce time required for repairs during drydocking.  This will reduce the overall off-hire period required for dockings 
and repairs.  Since we generally do not earn hire from a vessel while it is in drydock (except in the case of the Golar Mazo, whose 
charter provides for an allowance for any regularly scheduled drydocking in a three-year period, provided that, subsequent to every 
two drydockings, the parties will meet to determine the allowance period for each of the two subsequent drydockings), we believe 
that  the  additional  revenue  earned  from  reduced  off-hire  periods  outweighs  the  expense  of  the  additional  crewmembers  or 
subcontractors.

Termination

Each charter party has certain termination rights which include, among other things, the automatic termination of the LNG 
carrier charter upon loss of the vessel.  Additionally, either party may elect to terminate the charter upon the occurrence of specified 
defaults or requisition by any governmental authority.  In addition, we are generally entitled to suspend performance (but with the 
continuing  accrual  to  our  benefit  of  hire  payments  and  default  interest)  and  terminate  the  charter  if  the  customer  defaults  in  its 
payment obligations.  Under the Methane Princess charter, upon a default by us, the charterer is also entitled to require the charter to 
be substituted by a bareboat charter between us and the charterers on terms specified in the charter.  In addition, under the Methane 
Princess  charter,  either  party  may  also  terminate  the  charter  in  the  event  of  war  in  specified  countries  or  in  locations  that  would 
significantly disrupt the free trade of the vessel.  Under the Golar Mazo charter, upon a default by us, the charterer is also entitled to 
take possession of the vessel and operate, maintain and insure it at the charterer’s sole risk and expense.

A termination of any of our LNG carrier charters could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations 
and financial condition and could significantly reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders. However, in the event of a 
contract termination of any of our LNG carrier charters, we believe, based on current market conditions, that we would likely be able 
to re-charter any of our LNG vessels at rates not significantly dissimilar to the charter rates under our existing LNG carrier charters 
without a significant impact to our net cash flow. We cannot however guarantee this outcome.

40

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 47 of 169

Table of Contents

Classification, Inspection and Maintenance

Every large, commercial seagoing vessel must be “classed” by a classification society.  The classification society certifies 
that the vessel is “in class,” signifying that the vessel has been built and maintained in accordance with the rules of the classification 
society  and  complies  with  applicable  rules and  regulations  of  that  particular  class  of  vessel  as  laid  down  by  that  society  and  the 
applicable flag state.

For maintenance of the class certificate, regular and extraordinary surveys of hull, machinery, including the electrical plant 
and  any  special  equipment  classed,  are  required  to  be  performed  by  the  classification  society,  to  ensure  continuing  compliance.  
Vessels are drydocked at least once during  a five-year class cycle for inspection of the underwater parts  and for repairs related to 
inspections.   If  any  defects  are  found,  the  classification  surveyor  will  issue  a  “recommendation” which  must  be  rectified  by  the 
shipowner  within  prescribed  time  limits.   The  classification  society  also  undertakes  on  request  of  the flag  state other  surveys  and 
checks that are required by the regulations and requirements of that flag state.  These surveys are subject to agreements made in each 
individual case and/or to the regulations of the country concerned.

Most  insurance  underwriters  make  it  a  condition  for  insurance  coverage  that  a  vessel  be  certified  as  “in  class” by  a 
classification society, which is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies.  The Golar Mazo is certified by 
Lloyds Register, and the Methane Princess, the Golar Spirit, the Golar Freeze, the Golar Winter, the NR Satu, the Golar Grand and 
the Golar Maria are each certified by Det Norske Veritas.  All of our vessels have been awarded International Safety Management 
("ISM") certification and are currently “in class.”

The ship manager carries out inspections of the ships on a regular basis; both at sea and while the vessels are in port, while 
Golar carries out inspection and ship audits to verify conformity with the manager’s reports.  The results of these inspections, which 
are  conducted  both  in  port  and  while  underway,  result  in  a  report  containing  recommendations  for  improvements  to  the  overall 
condition  of  the  vessel,  maintenance,  safety  and  crew  welfare.   Based  in  part  on  these  evaluations,  we  create  and  implement  a 
program of continual maintenance and improvement for our vessels and their systems.

Safety, Management of Ship Operations and Administration

Safety is our top operational priority.  Our vessels are operated in a manner intended to protect the safety and health of our 
employees,  the  general  public and the environment.   We  actively manage  the  risks  inherent  in  our  business  and are committed  to 
eliminating incidents that threaten safety, such as groundings, fires and collisions.  We are also committed to reducing emissions and 
waste generation.  We have established key performance indicators to facilitate regular monitoring of our operational performance.  
We set targets on an annual basis to drive continuous improvement, and we review performance indicators monthly to determine if 
remedial  action  is necessary to  reach our targets.   Golar’s  shore staff performs a full range of technical,  commercial and business 
development  services  for  us.   This  staff  also  provides  administrative  support  to  our  operations  in  finance,  accounting  and  human 
resources.

Through its affiliates, Golar assists us in managing our ship operations and maintaining a technical department to monitor 
and audit our ship manager operations.  Our appointed  ship manager, Golar Wilhelmsen Management AS (Golar Wilhelmsen),  is 
working  to  the  standard  of  International  Standards  Organization’s  (or  ISO)  9001  and  ISO  14001,  and  have  through  Det  Norske 
Veritas,  the  Norwegian  classification  society,  and  Lloyds,  obtained  approval  of  their  safety  management  systems  as  being  in 
compliance with the International Safety Management Code (or ISM Code), on behalf of the appropriate Flag State for the vessels in 
our current fleet, which are flagged in the Marshall Islands or Liberia.  Golar Wilhelmsen, established in 2010, received its ISO 9001 
certification  on  April 7,  2011.   Our  vessels’ safety  management  certificates  are  being  maintained  through  ongoing  internal  audits 
performed  by  the  manager  and  intermediate  audits  performed  by  Det  Norske  Veritas  or  Lloyds.   To  supplement  our  operational 
experience, Golar and its affiliates provide expertise in various functions critical to our operations.  This affords an efficient and cost 
effective operation and, pursuant to administrative services agreements with certain affiliates of Golar, access to human resources, 
financial  and  other  administrative  functions.   Critical  ship  management  functions  that  will  be  provided  by  Golar  Management 
through various of its offices around the world include:

•

•

•

technical management, maintenance, dockings;

crew management;

procurement, purchasing, forwarding logistics;

• marine operations;

•

vetting, oil major and terminal approvals;

41

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 48 of 169

Table of Contents

•

•

•

shipyard supervision;

insurance; and

financial services.

These  functions  are  supported  by  onboard  and  onshore  systems  for  maintenance,  inventory,  purchasing  and  budget 
management.  In addition, Golar’s day-to-day focus on cost control will be applied to our operations.  To some extent, the uniform 
design  of  some  of  our  vessels  and  the  adoption  of  common  equipment  standards  should  also  result  in  operational  efficiencies, 
including with respect to crew training and vessel management, equipment operation and repair, and spare parts ordering.

Competition

We operate  in  markets  that are  highly  competitive  and  based  primarily on  supply  and  demand.  We compete for charters 

based upon price, customer relationships, operating expertise, professional reputation and size, age and condition of the vessel.

Competition for providing FSRUs and LNG carriers for chartering purposes comes from a number of experienced shipping 
companies. Some of our competitors have significantly greater financial resources than we do and can operate larger fleets and may 
be  able  to  offer  better  charter  rates.  An  increasing  number  of  marine  transportation  companies  have  entered  the  FSRU  and  LNG 
carrier sector, including many with strong reputations and extensive resources and experience. This increased competition may cause 
greater  price  competition for  time  charters.  While  the  majority of  the  existing  world  LNG  carrier  fleet is  employed  on  long-term 
charters, there is competition for the employment of vessels whose charters are expiring and for the employment of vessels which are 
not dedicated to a long-term contract.

Competition  for  long-term  LNG  charters  is  based  primarily  on  price,  vessel  availability,  size,  age  and  condition  of  the 
vessel,  relationships  with  LNG  carrier  users,  the  quality  of  LNG  carrier  users  and  the  experience  and  reputation  of  the  carrier 
operator. In addition, vessels may operate in the emerging LNG carrier spot market that covers short-term charters of one year or less 
during periods of increased competition due to an oversupply of LNG carriers.

Seasonality

Our vessels primarily operate under long-term charters and are not subject to the effect of seasonal variations in demand.

Crewing and Staff

As  of  December 31,  2012,  Golar  employed  (directly  and  through  ship  managers)  approximately  333  seagoing  staff  who 
serve  on  our  vessels.   Golar  and  its  affiliates  may  employ  additional  seagoing  staff  to  assist  us  as  we  grow.   Certain  affiliates  of 
Golar, including Golar Management and Golar Wilhelmsen, provide commercial and technical management services, including all 
necessary  crew-related  services,  to  our  subsidiaries  pursuant  to  the  fleet  management  agreements.   Please  read  “Item  7—Major 
Unitholders  and  Related  Party  Transactions—Related  Party  Transactions—Fleet  Management  Agreements.” We  regard  attracting 
and retaining motivated seagoing personnel as a top priority.  Like Golar, we offer our seafarers competitive employment packages 
and opportunities for personal and career development, which relates to a philosophy of promoting internally.  The officers operating 
our  vessels  are  engaged  on  individual  employment  contracts,  while  the  ship  managers  have  entered  into  Collective  Bargaining 
Agreements that cover substantially all of the seamen that operate the vessels in our current fleet, which are flagged in the Marshall 
Islands, UK or Liberia.  We believe our relationships with these labor unions are good.  Our commitment to training is fundamental 
to  the  development  of  the  highest  caliber  of  seafarers  for  our  marine  operations.   Golar’s  cadet  training  approach  is  designed  to 
balance academic learning with hands-on training at sea.  Golar has relationships with training institutions in Croatia, India, Norway, 
Philippines, Indonesia and the United Kingdom.  After receiving formal instruction at one of these institutions, our cadets’ training 
continues on board one of our vessels.  We believe that high-quality crewing and training policies will play an increasingly important 
role in distinguishing the preferred larger and LNG-experienced independent shipping companies from those that are newcomers to 
LNG and lacking in-house experienced staff and established expertise on which to base their customer service and safety operations.

42

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 49 of 169

Table of Contents

Risk of Loss, Insurance and Risk Management

The operation of any vessel, including FSRUs and LNG carriers, has inherent risks.  These risks include, mechanical failure, 
personal injury, collision, property loss, vessel or cargo loss or damage and business interruption due to political circumstances in 
foreign countries or hostilities.  In addition, there is always an inherent possibility of marine disaster, including explosion, spills and 
other environmental mishaps, and the liabilities arising from owning and operating vessels in international trade.  We believe that our 
present insurance coverage is adequate to protect us against the accident related risks involved in the conduct of our business and that 
we  maintain  appropriate  levels  of  environmental  damage  and  pollution  insurance  coverage  consistent  with  standard  industry 
practice.  However, not all risks can be insured, and there can be no guarantee that any specific claim will be paid, or that we will 
always be able to obtain adequate insurance coverage at reasonable rates.

We have obtained hull and machinery insurance on all our vessels against marine and war risks, which include the risks of 
damage  to  our  vessels,  salvage  or  towing  costs,  and  also  insure  against  actual  or  constructive  total  loss  of  any  of  our  vessels.  
However,  our  insurance  policies  contain deductible  amounts  for  which  we  will be responsible.   We  have  also  arranged  additional 
total loss coverage for each vessel.  This coverage, which is called hull interest and freight interest coverage, provides us additional 
coverage in the event of the total loss of a vessel.

We have also obtained loss of hire insurance to protect us against loss of income in the event one of our vessels cannot be 
employed due to damage that is covered under the terms of our hull and machinery insurance.  Under our loss of hire policies, our 
insurer will pay us the daily rate agreed in respect of each vessel for each day, in excess of a certain number of deductible days, for 
the time that the vessel is out of service as a result of damage, for a maximum of 218 days.  The number of deductible days varies 
from 14 days to 30 days, depending on the type of damage; machinery or hull damage.

Protection and indemnity insurance, which covers our third party legal liabilities in connection with our shipping activities, 
is provided  by a  mutual  protection  and indemnity  association,  or P&I  club.   This  includes  third  party liability  and other  expenses 
related to the injury or death of crew members, passengers and other third party persons, loss or damage to cargo, claims arising from 
collisions  with  other  vessels  or  from  contact  with  jetties  or  wharves  and  other  damage  to  other  third  party  property,  including 
pollution  arising from oil or other substances, and other related  costs, including wreck removal.  Subject  to the capping discussed 
below, our coverage, except for pollution, is unlimited.

Our current protection and indemnity insurance coverage for pollution is $1 billion per vessel or FSRU per incident.  The 
thirteen P&I clubs that comprise the International Group of Protection and Indemnity Clubs insure approximately 90% of the world’s 
commercial tonnage and have entered into a pooling agreement to reinsure each association’s liabilities.  Each P&I club has capped 
its exposure in this pooling agreement so that the maximum claim covered by the pool and its reinsurance would be approximately 
$5.45 billion per accident or occurrence.  We are a member of Gard and Skuld P&I Clubs.  As a member of these P&I clubs, we are 
subject to a call for additional premiums based on the clubs’ claims record, as well as the claims record of all other members of the 
P&I clubs comprising the International Group.  However, our P&I clubs have reinsured the risk of additional premium calls to limit 
our additional exposure.  This reinsurance is subject to a cap, and there is the risk that the full amount of the additional call would not 
be covered by this reinsurance.

The insurers providing the covers for Hull and Machinery, Hull and Cargo interests, Protection and Indemnity and Loss of 
Hire insurances have confirmed that they will consider the FSRUs as vessels for the purpose of providing insurance.  For the FSRUs, 
we have also  arranged an additional  Comprehensive General  Liability  (or CGL) insurance.  This  type of insurance is common for 
offshore operations and is additional to the P&I insurance. Our cover under the CGL insurance is $150 million per unit for the Golar 
Spirit and the Golar Winter, $15 million for the Golar Freeze and $50 million for the NR Satu. 

We  will  use  in  our  operations  Golar’s  thorough  risk  management  program  that  includes,  among  other  things,  computer-
aided risk analysis tools, maintenance and assessment programs, a seafarers competence training program, seafarers workshops and 
membership  in  emergency  response  organizations.   We  expect  to  benefit  from  Golar’s  commitment  to  safety  and  environmental 
protection as certain of its subsidiaries assist us in managing our vessel operations.  Golar Wilhelmsen, our ship manager, received its 
ISO 9001 in April 2011, and is  certified in accordance with  the IMO’s  International  Management Code for  the Safe Operation of 
Ships and Pollution Prevention on a fully integrated basis.

43

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 50 of 169

Table of Contents

Environmental and Other Regulation

General

Governmental  and  international  agencies  extensively  regulate  the  carriage,  handling,  storage  and  regasification  of  LNG.  
These  regulations  include  international  conventions  and  national,  state  and  local  laws  and  regulations  in  the  countries  where  our 
vessels now or, in the future, will operate or where our vessels are registered.  We cannot predict the ultimate cost of complying with 
these  regulations,  or  the  impact  that  these  regulations  will  have  on  the  resale  value  or  useful  lives  of  our  vessels.   Various 
governmental and quasi governmental agencies require us to obtain permits, licenses and certificates for the operation of our vessels.

Although we believe that we are substantially in compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations and have 
all  permits,  licenses  and  certificates  required  for  our  vessels,  future  non-compliance  or  failure  to  maintain  necessary  permits  or 
approvals could require us to incur substantial costs or temporarily suspend operation of one or more of our vessels.  A variety of 
governmental and private entities inspect our vessels on both a scheduled and unscheduled basis.  These entities, each of which may 
have  unique  requirements  and  each of  which conducts  frequent  inspections,  include local  port  authorities,  such as  the  U.S.  Coast 
Guard,  harbor  master  or  equivalent,  classification  societies,  flag  state,  or  the  administration  of  the  country  of  registry,  charterers, 
terminal operators and LNG producers.  

Golar  Wilhelmsen  is  operating  in  compliance  with  the  International  Standards  Organization  (or  ISO)  Environmental 
Standard for the management of the significant environmental aspects associated with the ownership and operation of a fleet of LNG 
carriers.   Golar  Wilhelmsen  received  its  ISO  9001  certification  (quality  management  systems)  in  April 2011  and  the  ISO  14001 
Environmental Standard in August 2012.  This certification requires that we and Golar Wilhelmsen commit managerial resources to 
act on our environmental policy through an effective management system.

International Maritime Regulations of LNG Vessels

The  IMO  is  the  United  Nations’ agency  that  provides  international  regulations  governing  shipping  and  international 
maritime  trade.   The  requirements  contained  in  the  ISM  Code  promulgated  by  the  IMO,  govern  our  operations.   Among  other 
requirements,  the  ISM  Code  requires  the  party  with  operational  control  of  a  vessel  to  develop  an  extensive  safety  management 
system  that  includes,  among  other  things,  the  adoption  of  a  policy  for  safety  and  environmental  protection  policy  setting  forth 
instructions  and  procedures  for  operating  its  vessels  safely  and  also  describing  procedures  for  responding  to  emergencies.   Golar 
Wilhelmsen, our ship manager, holds a Document of Compliance under the ISM Code for operation of Gas Carriers that meets the 
standards set by the IMO.

Vessels that  transport gas,  including  LNG  carriers  and FSRUs,  are  also  subject  to  regulation under the International  Gas 
Carrier Code (or the IGC Code) published by the IMO.  The IGC Code provides a standard for the safe carriage of LNG and certain 
other liquid gases by prescribing the design and construction standards of vessels involved in such carriage.  Compliance with the 
IGC  Code  must  be  evidenced  by  a  Certificate  of  Fitness  for  the  Carriage  of  Liquefied  Gases  in  Bulk.   Each  of  our  vessels  is  in 
compliance with the IGC Code.  Non-compliance with the IGC Code or other applicable IMO regulations may subject a shipowner 
or  a  bareboat  charterer  to  increased  liability,  may  lead  to  decreases  in  available  insurance  coverage  for  affected  vessels  and  may 
result in the denial of access to, or detention in, some ports.

The IMO also promulgates ongoing amendments to the international convention for the Safety of Life at Sea 1974 and its 
protocol  of  1988,  otherwise  known  as  SOLAS.   SOLAS  provides  rules for  the  construction  of  and  equipment  required  for 
commercial vessels and includes regulations for safe operation.  It requires the provision of lifeboats and other life-saving appliances, 
requires  the  use  of  the  Global  Maritime  Distress  and  Safety  System  which  is  an  international  radio  equipment  and  watchkeeping 
standard,  afloat  and  at  shore  stations,  and  relates  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Standards  of  Training  and  Certification  of  Watchkeeping 
Officers  (or  STCW)  also  promulgated  by  the  IMO.   Flag  states  that  have  ratified  SOLAS  and  STCW  generally  employ  the 
classification  societies,  which  have  incorporated  SOLAS  and  STCW  requirements  into  their  class  rules,  to  undertake  surveys  to 
confirm compliance.

SOLAS and other IMO regulations concerning safety, including those relating to treaties on training of shipboard personnel, 
lifesaving appliances, radio  equipment and the global maritime distress and  safety system,  are applicable to our operations.   Non-
compliance with these types of IMO regulations may subject us to increased liability or penalties, may lead to decreases in available 
insurance coverage for affected vessels and may result in the denial of access to or detention in some ports.  For example, the U.S. 
Coast Guard and European Union authorities have indicated that vessels not in compliance with the ISM Code are prohibited from 
trading in U.S. and European Union ports.

44

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 51 of 169

In the wake of increased worldwide security concerns, the IMO amended SOLAS and added the International Ship and Port 
Facility Security Code (or ISPS Code) as a new chapter to that convention.  The objective of the ISPS, which came into effect on 
July 1, 2004, is to detect security threats  and take preventive measures against security incidents affecting ships or port facilities.  
Golar Wilhelmsen has developed Security Plans, appointed and trained Ship and Office Security Officers and all of our vessels have 
been certified to meet the ISPS Code.  See “—Vessel Security Regulations” for a more detailed discussion about these requirements.

The IMO continues to review and introduce new regulations.  It is impossible to predict what additional regulations, if any, 

may be passed by the IMO and what effect, if any, such regulation may have on our operations.

Air Emissions

The  International  Convention  for  the  Prevention  of  Marine  Pollution  from  Ships  (or  MARPOL),  is  the  principal 
international  convention  negotiated  by  the  IMO  governing  marine  pollution  prevention  and  response.   MARPOL  imposes 
environmental standards on the shipping industry relating to oil spills, management of garbage, the handling and disposal of noxious 
liquids,  sewage  and  air  emissions.   MARPOL  73/78  Annex  VI  “Regulations  for  the  prevention  of  Air  Pollution” (or  Annex  VI) 
entered into force on May 19, 2005, and applies to all ships, fixed and floating drilling rigs and other floating platforms.  Annex VI 
sets  limits  on  sulfur  oxide  and  nitrogen  oxide  emissions  from  ship  exhausts,  emissions  of  volatile  compounds  from  cargo  tanks, 
incineration  of  specific  substances,  and  prohibits  deliberate  emissions  of  ozone  depleting  substances.   Annex  VI  also  includes  a 
global  cap  on  sulfur  content  of  fuel  oil  and  allows  for  special  areas  to  be  established  with  more  stringent  controls  on  sulfur 
emissions.  The certification requirements for Annex VI depend on size of the vessel and time of periodical classification survey.  
Ships more than 400 gross tons and engaged in international voyages involving countries that have ratified the conventions, or ships 
flying the flag of those countries, are required to have an International Air Pollution Certificate (or an IAPP Certificate).  Annex VI 
came into force in the United States on January 8, 2009.  As of the current date, all our ships have IAPP Certificates.

In March 2006,  the  IMO  amended Annex I  to  MARPOL, including a  new  regulation  relating  to  oil fuel  tank  protection, 
which  became  effective  August 1,  2007.   The  new  regulation  applies  to  various  ships  delivered  on  or  after  August 1,  2010.   It 
includes  requirements  for  the  protected  location  of  the  fuel  tanks,  performance  standards  for  accidental  oil  fuel  outflow,  a  tank 
capacity  limit  and  certain  other  maintenance,  inspection  and  engineering  standards.   IMO  regulations  also  require  owners  and 
operators of vessels to adopt Ship Oil Pollution Emergency Plans.  Periodic training and drills for response personnel and for vessels 
and their crews are required.

On  July 1,  2010, amendments  proposed by  the  United States,  Norway and  other IMO member states  to  Annex  VI to the 
MARPOL Convention took effect that require progressively stricter limitations on sulfur emissions from ships.  In Emission Control 
Areas (or ECAs), limitations on sulfur emissions require that fuels contain no more than 1% sulfur.  Beginning on January 1, 2012, 
fuel used to power ships may contain no more than 3.5% sulfur.  This cap will then decrease progressively until it reaches 0.5% by 
January 1, 2020.  The amendments all establish new tiers of stringent nitrogen oxide emissions standards for new marine engines, 
depending on their date of installation.  The European directive 2005/33/EU, which is effective from January 1, 2010, bans the use of 
fuel  oils  containing  more  than  0.1%  sulfur by  mass  by  any  merchant  vessel  while  at  berth in  any  EU  country.   Our  vessels  have 
achieved compliance, where necessary, by being modified to burn gas in their boilers when alongside.  Low sulfur marine diesel oil 
(or LSDO) has been purchased as the only fuel for the Diesel Generators.  More specifically, the Methane Princess is trading world 
wide by the charterer and on this vessel the boilers have been converted to burn LSDO.  The FSRUs are arranged for burning of gas 
only while in port, and have not had their boilers converted for burning of LSDO.  The FSRUs (the Golar Winter, Golar Spirit, and 
the Golar Freeze) are not likely to be traded to EU ports in the foreseeable future. The charterer of the Golar Mazo has selected not 
to perform the boiler conversion to burn LSDO. Under the TCP for this vessel the charterer will have to cover the costs for the LSDO 
conversion if he should choose to trade the vessel to an EU port. The Golar Mazo is engaged in carrying the charterer’s LNG from 
Indonesia to Taiwan.

Additionally, more stringent emission standards could apply in coastal areas designated as ECAs, such as the United States 
and Canadian coastal areas designated by the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee, as discussed in “—U.S. Clean Air 
Act” below.  U.S. air emissions standards are now equivalent to these amended Annex VI requirements, and once these amendments 
become effective, we may incur costs to comply with these revised standards.  Additional or new conventions, laws and regulations 
may be adopted that could require the installation of expensive emission control systems.  Because our vessels are largely powered 
by  means  other  than  fuel  oil  we  do  not  anticipate  that  any  emission  limits  that  may  be  promulgated  will  require  us  to  incur  any 
material costs for the operation of our vessels but that possibility cannot be eliminated.

45

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 52 of 169

Table of Contents

Ballast Water Management Convention

The  IMO  has  negotiated  international  conventions  that  impose  liability  for  oil  pollution  in  international  waters  and  the 
territorial waters of the signatory to such conventions.  For example, the IMO adopted an International Convention for the Control 
and  Management  of  Ships’ Ballast  Water  and  Sediments  (or  the  BWM  Convention)  in  February 2004.   The  BWM  Convention’s 
implementing regulations call for a phased introduction of mandatory ballast water exchange requirements (beginning in 2009), to be 
replaced in time with a requirement for mandatory ballast water treatment.  The BWM Convention will not become effective until 12 
months  after  it  has  been  adopted  by  30  states,  the  combined  merchant  fleets  of  which  represent  not  less  than  35%  of  the  gross 
tonnage of the world’s merchant shipping.  Though this has not occurred to-date, the IMO has passed a resolution encouraging the 
ratification  of  the  BWM  Convention  and  calling  upon  those  countries  that  have  already  ratified  to  encourage  the  installation  of 
ballast  water  management  systems  on  new  ships.   As  referenced  below,  the  United  States  Coast  Guard  issued  new  ballast  water 
management  rules on  March 23,  2012  and  the  EPA  issued  a  new  Vessel  General  Permit  in  March  2013  that  contains  numeric 
technology-based ballast water effluent limitations that will apply to certain commercial vessels with ballast water tanks.Under the 
requirements  of the BWM Convention  for units with ballast water capacity more than 5000 cubic meters that were constructed in 
2011 or before, ballast water management exchange or treatment will be accepted until 2016. From 2016 (or not later than the first 
intermediate or renewal survey after 2016), only ballast water treatment will be accepted by the BWM Convention.  Installation of 
ballast water treatment systems will be needed on our four LNG carriers.  As long as our four FSRUs are operating as FSRUs and 
kept stationary they will not need installation of ballast water treatment systems. However, under their time charter party (“TCP”), 
Golar Spirit and Golar Winter may be required to trade as LNG carriers.  If the respective vessel charterers should choose to trade 
the Golar Spirit or Golar Winter internationally as LNG carriers, the vessels will have to be equipped with ballast water treatment 
systems and the cost of the related modifications will be split between the charterer and owner.  Given that ballast water treatment 
technologies  are  still  at  the  developmental  stage,  at  this  time  the  additional  costs  of  complying  with  these  rules are  unclear,  but 
current  estimates  suggest  that  additional  costs  will  likely  be  in  the  range  of  between  $2  million  and  $4  million.  These  costs  are 
expected to be incurred between 2016 and 2019.

Bunkers Convention/CLC State Certificate

The  International  Convention  on  Civil  Liability  for  Bunker  Oil  Pollution  2001  (or  the  Bunker  Convention)  entered  into 
force  in  State  Parties  to  the  Convention  on  November 21,  2008.   The  Bunker  Convention  provides  a  liability,  compensation  and 
compulsory insurance system for the victims of oil pollution damage caused by spills of bunker oil.  The Bunker Convention requires 
the ship owner liable to pay compensation for pollution damage (including the cost of preventive measures) caused in the territory, 
including the territorial sea of a State Party, as well as its economic zone or equivalent area.  Registered owners of any sea going 
vessel and seaborne craft over 1,000 gross tonnage, of any type whatsoever, and registered in a State Party, or entering or leaving a 
port in the territory of a State Party, will be required to maintain insurance which meets the requirements of the Bunker Convention 
and to obtain a certificate issued by a State Party attesting that such insurance is in force.  The State issued certificate must be carried 
on board at all times.

P&I  Clubs  in  the  International  Group  issue  the  required  Bunkers  Convention  “Blue  Cards” to  enable  signatory  states  to 
issue certificates.  All of our vessels have received “Blue Cards” from their P&I Club and are in possession of a CLC State-issued 
certificate attesting that the required insurance coverage is in force.

The  flag  state,  as  defined  by  the  United  Nations  Convention  on  Law  of  the  Sea,  has  overall  responsibility  for  the 
implementation and enforcement of international maritime regulations for all ships granted the right to fly its flag.  The “Shipping 
Industry  Guidelines  on  Flag  State  Performance” evaluates  flag  states  based  on  factors  such  as  sufficiency  of  infrastructure, 
ratification of international maritime treaties, implementation and enforcement of international maritime regulations, supervision of 
surveys, casualty investigations and participation at the IMO meetings.

United States Environmental Regulation of LNG Vessels

Our  vessels  operating  in  U.S.  waters  now  or  in  the  future  will  be  subject  to  various  federal,  state  and  local  laws  and 
regulations relating to protection of the environment.  In some cases, these laws and regulations require us to obtain governmental 
permits  and  authorizations  before  we  may  conduct  certain  activities.   These  environmental  laws  and  regulations  may  impose 
substantial penalties for noncompliance and substantial liabilities for pollution.  Failure to comply with these laws and regulations 
may result in substantial civil and  criminal  fines  and penalties.   As with the industry generally,  our  operations will  entail  risks  in 
these  areas,  and  compliance  with  these  laws  and  regulations,  which  may  be  subject  to  frequent  revisions  and  reinterpretation, 
increases our overall cost of business.

46

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 53 of 169

Table of Contents

Oil Pollution Act and CERCLA

OPA  90  established  an  extensive  regulatory  and  liability  regime  for  environmental  protection  and  clean-up  of oil  spills.  
OPA 90 affects all owners and operators whose vessels trade with the United States or its territories or possessions, or whose vessels 
operate  in  the  waters  of  the  United  States,  which  include  the  U.S.  territorial  waters  and  the  two  hundred  nautical  mile  exclusive 
economic zone of the United States.  CERCLA applies to the discharge of hazardous substances whether on land or at sea.  While 
OPA 90 and CERCLA would not apply to the discharge of LNG, they may affect us because we carry oil as fuel and lubricants for 
our  engines,  and  the  discharge  of  these  could  cause  an  environmental  hazard.   Under  OPA  90,  vessel  operators,  including  vessel 
owners, managers and bareboat or “demise” charterers, are “responsible parties” who are all liable regardless of fault, individually 
and  as  a  group,  for  all  containment  and  clean-up  costs  and  other  damages  arising  from  oil  spills  from  their  vessels.   These 
“responsible parties” would not be liable if the spill results solely from the act or omission of a third party, an act of God or an act of 
war.  The other damages aside from clean-up and containment costs are defined broadly to include:

•

•

•

•

•

natural resource damages and related assessment costs;

real and personal property damages;

net loss of taxes, royalties, rents, profits or earnings capacity;

net cost of public services necessitated by a spill response, such as protection from fire, safety or health hazards; and

loss of subsistence use of natural resources.

Effective July 31, 2009, the U.S. Coast Guard adjusted the limits of OPA liability to the greater of $2,000 per gross ton or 
$17.088 million for any double-hull tanker that is over 3,000 gross tons (subject to possible adjustment for inflation) (relevant to ours 
and Golar’s LNG carriers).  These limits of liability do not apply, however, where the incident is caused by violation of applicable 
U.S.  federal  safety,  construction  or  operating  regulations,  or  by  the  responsible  party’s  gross  negligence  or  willful  misconduct.  
These  limits  likewise  do  not  apply  if  the  responsible  party  fails  or  refuses  to  report  the  incident  or  to  cooperate  and  assist  in 
connection  with  the  substance  removal  activities.   This  limit  is  subject  to  possible  adjustment  for  inflation.   OPA  90  specifically 
permits  individual  states  to  impose  their  own  liability  regimes  with  regard  to  oil  pollution  incidents  occurring  within  their 
boundaries, and some states have enacted legislation providing for unlimited liability for discharge of pollutants within their waters.  
In some cases, states, which have enacted their own legislation, have not yet issued implementing regulations defining shipowners’
responsibilities under these laws.

CERCLA,  which  also  applies  to  owners  and  operators  of  vessels,  contains  a  similar  liability  regime  and  provides  for 
cleanup, removal  and  natural resource damages for releases  of “hazardous substances.” Liability under CERCLA is  limited to the 
greater of $300 per gross ton or $0.5 million for each release from vessels not carrying hazardous substances as cargo or residue, and 
$300 per gross ton or $5 million for each release from vessels carrying hazardous substances as cargo or residue.  As with OPA 90, 
these  limits  of  liability  do  not  apply  where  the  incident  is  caused  by  violation  of  applicable  U.S.  federal  safety,  construction  or 
operating regulations, or by the responsible party’s gross negligence or willful misconduct or if the responsible party fails or refuses 
to report  the incident  or to cooperate  and assist  in  connection with the substance removal  activities.  OPA 90  and CERCLA each 
preserve  the  right  to  recover  damages  under  existing  law,  including  maritime  tort  law.   We  believe  that  we  are  in  substantial 
compliance with OPA 90, CERCLA and all applicable state regulations in the ports where our vessels call.

OPA 90 requires owners and operators of vessels to establish and maintain with the U.S. Coast Guard evidence of financial 
responsibility sufficient to meet the limit of their potential strict liability under OPA 90/CERCLA.  Under the regulations, evidence 
of financial responsibility may be demonstrated by insurance, surety bond, self-insurance or guaranty.  Under OPA 90 regulations, an 
owner or operator of more than one vessel is required to demonstrate evidence of financial responsibility for the entire fleet in an 
amount  equal  only  to  the  financial  responsibility  requirement  of  the  vessel  having  the  greatest  maximum  liability  under  OPA 
90/CERCLA.  We currently maintain U.S. Coast Guard National Pollution Funds Center issued three-year Certificates of Financial 
Responsibility  (or  COFR),  supported  by  guarantees  which  we  purchased  from  an  insurance  based  provider,  for  the  Methane 
Princess, the Golar Spirit, and the Golar Winter. The Golar Mazo has yet to call on a U.S. port and, therefore, does not currently 
have a COFR.  The Golar Freeze previously held a COFR but because it is currently stationed in Dubai as an FSRU with no plans to 
call on a U.S. port, the COFR was not renewed.  We believe that we will be able to continue to obtain the requisite guarantees and 
that we will continue to be granted COFRs for each of our vessels that is required to have one.

47

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Page 54 of 169

In response to the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill, the U.S. Congress is currently considering a number of bills that could 
potentially increase or even eliminate the limits of liability under OPA 90.  Compliance with any new requirements of OPA 90 may 
substantially impact our cost of operations or require us to incur additional expenses to comply with any new regulatory initiatives or 
statutes.  Additional legislation or regulation applicable to the operation of our vessels that may be implemented in the future as a 
result of  the 2010  BP  Deepwater  Horizon oil  spill  in  the  Gulf  of Mexico  could  adversely affect our business and  ability to make 
distributions to our unitholders.

Clean Water Act

The  United  States  Clean  Water  Act  (or  CWA)  prohibits  the  discharge  of  oil  or  hazardous  substances  in  United  States 
navigable waters unless authorized by a permit or exemption, and imposes strict liability in the form of penalties for unauthorized 
discharges.   The  CWA  also  imposes  substantial  liability  for  the  costs  of  removal, remediation  and  damages  and complements  the 
remedies available under OPA and CERCLA.  The EPA has enacted rules governing the regulation of ballast water discharges and 
other discharges incidental to the normal operation of vessels within U.S. waters. Under the new rules, which took effect February 6, 
2009, commercial vessels 79 feet in length or longer (other than commercial fishing vessels), or Regulated Vessels, are required to 
obtain a CWA permit regulating and authorizing such normal discharges. This permit, which the EPA has designated as the Vessel 
General Permit for Discharges Incidental to the Normal Operation of Vessels (or VGP) incorporates the current U.S. Coast Guard 
requirements for ballast water management as well as supplemental ballast water requirements, and includes limits applicable to 26 
specific discharge streams, such as deck runoff, bilge water and gray water. For each discharge type, among other things, the VGP 
establishes  effluent  limits  pertaining  to  the  constituents  found  in  the  effluent,  including  best  management  practices  (or  BMPs) 
designed  to  decrease  the  amount  of  constituents  entering  the  waste  stream.  Unlike  land-based  discharges,  which  are  deemed 
acceptable  by  meeting  certain  EPA-imposed  numerical  effluent  limits,  each  of  the  26  VGP  discharge  limits  is  deemed  to  be  met 
when a Regulated Vessel carries out the BMPs pertinent to that specific discharge stream. The VGP imposes additional requirements 
on  certain  Regulated  Vessel  types  that  emit  discharges  unique  to  those  vessels.  Administrative  provisions,  such  as  inspection, 
monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements, are also included for all Regulated Vessels.  

The  National  Invasive  Species  Act  (or  NISA)  was enacted  in  1996  in  response to  growing  reports  of  harmful  organisms 
being released into U.S. ports through ballast water taken on by ships in foreign ports. NISA established a ballast water management 
program for ships entering U.S. waters. Under NISA, mid-ocean ballast water exchange is voluntary, except for ships heading to the 
Great Lakes, Hudson Bay, or vessels engaged in the foreign export of Alaskan North Slope crude oil. However, NISA’s exporting 
and record-keeping requirements are mandatory for vessels bound for any port in the United States. Although ballast water exchange 
is the primary means of compliance with the act’s guidelines, compliance can also be achieved through the retention of ballast water 
onboard the  ship, or the  use  of  environmentally sound alternative  ballast water  management methods  approved by  the U.S. Coast 
Guard.  If  the  mid-ocean  ballast  exchange  is  made  mandatory  throughout  the  United  States,  or  if  water  treatment  requirements  or 
options are instituted, the costs of compliance could increase for ocean carriers.

Further on March 23, 2012, the U.S. Coast Guard issued a final rule establishing standards for the allowable concentration 
of  living  organisms  in  ballast  water  discharged  in  U.S.  waters  and  requiring  the  phase-in  of  Coast  Guard  approved  ballast  water 
management  systems  (or  BWMS).   The  rule went  into  effect  on  June 20,  2012  and  adopts  ballast  water  discharge  standards  for 
vessels calling on U.S. ports and intending to discharge ballast water equivalent to those set in IMO’s BWM Convention.  The final 
rule requires  that  ballast  water  discharge  have  no  more  than  10  living  organisms  per  milliliter  for  organisms  between  10  and  50 
micrometers  in  size.   For  organisms  larger  than  50  micrometers,  the  discharge  can  have  10  living  organisms  per  cubic  meter  of 
discharge.   The  Coast Guard  will  review  the  practicability of  implementing  a  more stringent  ballast  water discharge  standard  and 
publish the  results no later than January 1, 2016.  Additionally, EPA issued a new Vessel General Permit in March 2013 that will 
become effective on December 19, 2013. In addition to the ballast water best management practices required under the 2008 Vessel 
General Permit, the 2013 Vessel General Permit contains numeric technology-based ballast water effluent limitations that will apply 
to certain commercial vessels with ballast water tanks. For certain existing vessels, the EPA has adopted a staggered implementation 
schedule to require vessels to meet the ballast water effluent limitations by the first drydocking after January 1, 2014 or January 1, 
2016,  depending  on  the  vessel size.  Vessels  that  are  constructed  after  December  1,  2013  are  subject  to  the  ballast  water  numeric 
effluent limitations immediately upon the effective date of the 2013 Vessel General Permit. Under our existing charter agreements, 
the costs associated with the installation of ballast water treatment systems for the Golar Mazo would be allocated to our charterer if 
required exclusively by U.S. law. The costs associated with the installations for our other three LNG carriers, the Golar Winter and 
the  Golar  Spirit  (if  required  to  trade  as  LNG  carriers  under  their  TCP),  if  needed,  would  be,  at  least  in  part,  our  responsibility. 
 Compliance with these regulations will entail additional costs, but current estimates suggest that additional costs are not likely to be 
material.

48

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 55 of 169

Table of Contents

Clean Air Act

The  U.S.  Clean  Air  Act  of  1970,  as  amended  (or  the  CAA)  requires  the  EPA  to  promulgate  standards  applicable  to 
emissions  of  volatile  organic  compounds  and  other  air  contaminants.   Our  vessels  are  subject  to  vapor  control  and  recovery 
requirements  for  certain  cargoes  when  loading,  unloading,  ballasting,  cleaning  and  conducting  other  operations  in  regulated  port 
areas and emission standards for so-called “Category 3” marine diesel engines operating in U.S. waters.  The marine diesel engine 
emission  standards  are  currently  limited  to  new  engines  beginning  with  the  2004  model  year.   On  April 30,  2010,  the  EPA 
promulgated final emission standards for Category 3 marine diesel engines equivalent to those adopted in the amendments to Annex 
VI to MARPOL.  The emission  standards  apply  in  two  stages:   near-term standards  for  newly-built  engines apply  from  2011,  and 
long-term  standards  requiring  an  80%  reduction  in  nitrogen  dioxides  (or  NOx)  will  apply  from  2016.   Compliance  with  these 
standards may cause us to incur costs to install control equipment on our vessels in the future.

Regulation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

In February 2005, the Kyoto Protocol entered into force.  Pursuant to the Kyoto Protocol, adopting countries are required to 
implement national programs to reduce emissions of certain gases, generally referred to as greenhouse gases, which are suspected of 
contributing  to  global  warming.   Currently,  the  emissions  of  greenhouse  gases  from  international  shipping  are  not  subject  to  the 
Kyoto  Protocol.   However, international negotiations are  continuing with respect  to  a successor  to the Kyoto Protocol,  which  sets 
emission  reduction  targets  through  2020,  and  restrictions  on  shipping  emissions  may  be  included  in  any  new  treaty.   In 
December 2009, more than 27 nations, including the United States and China, signed the Copenhagen Accord, which includes a non-
binding commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  In addition, in December 2011, the Conference of the Parties to the United 
Nations  Convention  on  Climate  Change  adopted  the  Durban  Platform  which  calls  for  a  process  to  develop  binding  emissions 
limitations  on  both  developed  and  developing  countries  under  the  United  Nations  Framework  Convention  on  Climate  Change 
applicable  to  all  Parties.  The  European  Commission  is  currently  considering  possible  European  action  in  2013  to  introduce 
monitoring,  reporting  and  verification  of  greenhouse  gas  emissions  from  maritime  transport  as  a  first  step  towards  measures  to 
reduce these emissions.

On January 1, 2013, the IMO's approved mandatory measures to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases from international 
shipping went into  force. These include amendments to  MARPOL Annex VI  Regulations for the prevention of air  pollution  from 
ships  adding  a  new  Chapter  4  to  Annex  VI  on  Regulations  on  energy  efficiency  requiring  the  Energy  Efficiency  Design  Index 
(EEDI), for new ships, and the Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP) for all ships. Other amendments to Annex VI 
add  new  definitions  and  requirements  for  survey  and  certification,  including  the  format  for  the  International  Energy  Efficiency 
Certificate.  The regulations apply to all ships of 400 gross tonnage and above. These new rules will likely affect the operations of 
vessels that are registered in countries that are signatories to MARPOL Annex VI or vessels that call upon ports located within such 
countries. The IMO is also considering the development of a market-based mechanism for greenhouse gas emissions from ships, but 
it is impossible to predict the likelihood that such a standard might be adopted or its potential impact on our operations at this time.

In the  United  States, the EPA has issued a  final  finding  that greenhouse gases  threaten  public  health  and safety,  and  has 
promulgated  regulations  that  regulate  the  emission  of  greenhouse  gases.   In  2009  and  2010,  EPA  adopted  greenhouse  reporting 
requirements  for  various  onshore  facilities,  and  also  adopted  a  rule in  2011  imposing  control  technology  requirements  on  certain 
stationary sources subject to the federal Clean Air Act.  The EPA may decide in the future to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from 
ships  and has  already  been  petitioned by  the  California Attorney  General to regulate  greenhouse gas  emissions  from  ocean-going 
vessels.  Other federal and state regulations relating to the control of greenhouse gas emissions may follow, including climate change 
initiatives that have been considered in the U.S. Congress.  Any passage of climate control legislation or other regulatory initiatives 
by the IMO, the European Union, the United States, or other countries where we operate, or any treaty adopted at the international 
level, that restrict emissions of greenhouse gases could require us to make significant financial expenditures that we cannot predict 
with  certainty  at  this  time.   In  addition,  even  without  such  regulation,  our  business  may  be  indirectly  affected  to  the  extent  that 
climate change results in sea level changes or more intense weather events.

Dubai Environmental Regulations

The Golar Freeze is now in Dubai waters and is subject to various regulations relating to protection of the environment.  
These laws and regulations require us to obtain governmental permits and authorizations before we may conduct certain activities.  
DUSUP, our charter party, has the contractual responsibility to obtain all permits necessary to operate the Golar Freeze in Dubai, 
and it already has done so.  However, it is still our responsibility to meet the requirements of the environmental laws.  To the extent 
that the local environmental laws and regulations of Dubai become more stringent over time, it is DUSUP’s obligation to fund the 
costs of improvements needed to meet any such requirements.

49

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 56 of 169

Table of Contents

For instance, Dubai’s Federal Law No. 24 of 1999 for the Protection and Development of the Environment requires major 
projects  to  be  licensed  by  the  Federal  Environmental  Agency.   As  part  of  the  licensure  application,  the  Agency  requires  an 
environmental  impact  assessment  to  determine  the  project’s  effect  on  the  environment.   Vessels  are  prohibited  from  discharging 
harmful substances, including oil, into Dubai’s waters.  Violators are subject to fines.  At this time, Golar Freeze constitutes a major 
project  under  the  applicable  regulations  and  we  supplied  the  necessary  information  to  DUSUP.   Using  the  information  provided, 
DUSUP has acquired all of the necessary operating permits to comply with Dubai’s Federal Law No. 24.

In  addition,  Dubai’s  Law  No. 11  of  2010  on  licensing  Marine  Transport  Means  includes  licensing  and  registration 
requirements  for  vessels  and  crews.   As  a  condition  of  licensing,  registration,  or  license  renewal,  the  vessel  owner  must  present 
evidence of an insurance policy issued by an insurance company which is licensed to operate in Dubai and which covers the owner 
against liability from damages inflicted upon third parties.  Vessels entering Dubai’s waters are required to be in compliance with the 
technical  specifications  of  their  flag  state  and  the  Dubai  Maritime  City  Authority  (or  DMCA)  is  authorized  to  conduct  technical 
inspections of vessels entering Dubai’s waters.  The DMCA is authorized to create additional environmental regulations and in the 
future the DMCA may create regulations which effect greenhouse gas emissions.  Violators of Law No. 11 of 2010 can be subject to 
fines,  cancellation  of  licensure,  and  seizure  of  the  vessel.   We  have  obtained  the  requisite  insurance  and  have  met  the  applicable 
licensure and registration requirements for the Golar Freeze.

Also, the DMCA has issued two regulations which both took effect on August 1, 2011.  The Dubai Anchorages Regulation 
applies to vessels entering Dubai’s waters and exclusive economic zone.  The owner of a vessel must indemnify the DMCA for all 
claims and costs arising out of actual or potential pollution damage and costs of cleanup resulting from any act, omissions, neglect or 
default of the Master of the vessel, employees, contractors or sub-contractors or from the unseaworthiness of the vessel.  The Ship to 
Ship Transfer Operations Regulation requires vessels to carry a Ship to Ship Transfer Operation Plan conforming to the requirements 
of MARPOL Annex I.  The Operation Plan must be approved by the vessel’s flag administration or submitted electronically to the 
DMCA for review.  After April 1, 2012, all Operation Plans must be approved by the vessel’s flag administration.  Violators of these 
regulations are subject to criminal liability.

These environmental laws and regulations and others may impose costly and onerous obligations and violation or pollution 
events can lead to substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties.  Because the cost of improvements needed to comply with any 
such new laws or regulations of Dubai is generally the responsibility of DUSUP, we do not foresee any increases in our overall cost 
of business due to any revisions or reinterpretations of existing Dubai law, or the promulgation of new Dubai or UAE environmental 
regulations.

Brazil Environmental Regulations

In  Brazil,  the  environmental  requirements  are  defined  by  the  field  operator,  and  in  most  cases,  Petrobras,  where  it  is 
involved. Brazilian environmental law includes international treaties and conventions to which Brazil is a party, as well as federal, 
state and local laws, regulations and permit requirements related to the protection of health and the environment. Brazilian oil and 
gas business is subject to extensive regulations by several governmental agencies, including the National Agency for Oil and Gas, the 
Brazilian Navy and the Brazilian Authority for Environmental Affairs and Renewable Resources. 

The Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter which are operating in Brazil as FSRUs are subject to various local regulations such 
as  the  Conama  Resolution  357  (the  “Water  Act” of  March  2005)  and  the  Conama  Resolution  382  (the  “Air  Pollution  Act” of 
December 2006). Failure to comply may subject us to administrative, criminal and civil liability, with strict liability in administrative 
and civil cases.

Indonesia Environmental Regulations

The NR Satu which is operating in Indonesia as an FSRU is also subject to various local environmental regulations.

50

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Vessel Security Regulations

Page 57 of 169

Since  the  terrorist  attacks  of  September 11,  2001,  there  have  been  a  variety  of  initiatives  intended  to  enhance  vessel 
security.   On  November 25,  2002,  the  Maritime  Transportation  Act  of  2002  (or  MTSA)  came  into  effect.   To  implement  certain 
portions  of  the  MTSA,  in  July 2003,  the  U.S.  Coast  Guard  issued  regulations  requiring  the  implementation  of  certain  security 
requirements  aboard  vessels  operating  in  waters  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  United  States.   Similarly,  in  December 2002, 
amendments  to  SOLAS  created  a  new  chapter  of  the  convention  dealing  specifically  with  maritime  security.   The  new  chapter 
became effective in July 2004 and imposes various detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities, most of which are 
contained in the ISPS Code.  The ISPS Code is designed to protect ports and international shipping against terrorism.  After July 1, 
2004, to trade internationally, a vessel must attain an International Ship Security  Certificate (or  ISSC)  from  a  recognized security 
organization approved by the vessel’s flag state.

Among the various requirements are:

•

•

•

•

•

on-board installation of automatic identification systems to provide a means for the automatic transmission of safety-
related information from among similarly equipped ships and shore stations, including information on a ship’s identity, 
position, course, speed and navigational status;

on-board installation of ship security alert systems, which do not sound on the vessel but only alerts the authorities on 
shore;

the development of vessel security plans;

ship identification number to be permanently marked on a vessel’s hull;

a continuous synopsis record kept onboard showing a vessel’s history including, the name of the ship and of the state 
whose flag the ship is entitled to fly, the date on which the ship was registered with that state, the ship’s identification 
number, the port at which the ship is registered and the name of the registered owner(s) and their registered address; 
and

•

compliance with flag state security certification requirements.

The U.S. Coast Guard regulations, intended to align with international maritime security standards, exempt non-U.S. vessels 
from obtaining U.S. Coast Guard-approved MTSA vessel security plans provided such vessels have on board an ISSC that attests to 
the vessel’s compliance with SOLAS security requirements and the ISPS Code.

Our vessel managers have developed Security Plans, appointed and trained Ship and Office Security Officers and each of 

our vessels in our fleet complies with the requirements of the ISPS Code, SOLAS and the MTSA.

Other Regulation

Our LNG vessels may also become subject to the 2010 HNS Convention, if it is entered into force.  The Convention creates 
a regime of liability and compensation for damage from hazardous and noxious substances (or HNS), including liquefied gases.  The 
2010 HNS Convention sets up a two-tier system of compensation composed of compulsory insurance taken out by shipowners and 
an HNS Fund which comes into play when the insurance is insufficient to satisfy a claim or does not cover the incident.  Under the 
2010 HNS Convention, if damage is caused by bulk HNS, claims for compensation will first be sought from the shipowner up to a 
maximum  of  100  million  Special  Drawing  Rights  (or  SDR).   If  the  damage  is  caused  by  packaged  HNS  or  by  both  bulk  and 
packaged HNS, the maximum liability is 115 million SDR.  Once the limit is reached, compensation will be paid from the HNS Fund 
up to a maximum of 250 million SDR.  The 2010 HNS Convention has not been ratified by a sufficient number of countries to enter 
into force, and we cannot estimate the costs that may be needed to comply with any such requirements that may be adopted with any 
certainty at this time.

Inspection by Classification Societies

Every large, commercial seagoing vessel must be “classed” by a classification society.  A classification society certifies that 
a vessel is “in class,” signifying that the vessel has been built and maintained in accordance with the rules of the vessel’s country of 
registry  and  the  international  conventions  of  which  that  country  is  a  member.   In  addition,  where  surveys  are  required  by 
international  conventions  and  corresponding laws and  ordinances  of  a flag  state, the  classification  society  will undertake them  on 
application or by official order, acting on behalf of the authorities concerned.

51

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 58 of 169

Table of Contents

Our FSRUs, except for the NR Satu, are “classed” as LNG carriers with the additional class notation REGAS-2 signifying 
that the regasification installations are designed and approved for continuous operation.  The reference to “vessels” in the following, 
also  apply  to  our  FSRUs.   For  maintenance  of  the  class  certificate,  regular  and  special  surveys  of  hull,  machinery,  including  the 
electrical plant and any special equipment classed, are required to be performed by the classification society, to ensure continuing 
compliance.  Vessels are drydocked at least once during a five-year class cycle for inspection of the underwater parts and for repairs 
related to inspections.  If any defects are found, the classification surveyor will issue a “condition of class” which must be rectified 
by the shipowner within prescribed time limits.  The classification society also undertakes on request of the flag state other surveys 
and checks that are required by the regulations and requirements of that flag state.  These surveys are subject to agreements made in 
each individual case and/or to the regulations of the country concerned.

The latest FSRU unit, the NR Satu has a dual class (Det Norske Veritas and the Indonesian BKI) with class notation +OI 
Floating Offshore LNG Regasification Terminal, REGAS, POSMOOR. The unit is without a propulsion system and is permanently 
moored without the ability to trade as LNG carrier.  

Most  insurance  underwriters  make  it  a  condition  for  insurance  coverage  that  a  vessel  be  certified  as  “in  class” by  a 
classification society, which is a member of the International Association of Classification Societies.  The Golar Mazo is certified by 
Lloyds  Register,  and  all  our  other  vessels  are  each  certified  by  Det  Norske  Veritas.   Both  being  members  of  the  International 
Association of Classification Societies. All of our vessels have been awarded ISM certification and are currently “in class.”

In-House Inspections

Golar Wilhelmsen, our ship manager, carries out inspections of the ships on a regular basis; both at sea and when the vessels 
are  in  port,  while  we  carry  out  inspection  and  ship  audits  to  verify  conformity  with  manager’s  reports.   The  results  of  these 
inspections, which are conducted both in port and underway, result in a report containing recommendations for improvements to the 
overall condition of the vessel, maintenance, safety and crew welfare.  Based in part on these evaluations, we create and implement a 
program of continual maintenance for our vessels and their systems.

Taxation of the Partnership

United States Taxation

The  following  is a  discussion of  the  material U.S. federal income tax considerations  applicable to us.   This  discussion is 
based upon provisions of the Code as in effect on the date of this Annual Report, existing final and temporary regulations thereunder 
(or Treasury Regulations), and current administrative rulings and court decisions, all of which are subject to change, possibly with 
retroactive  effect.   Changes  in  these  authorities  may  cause  the  tax  consequences  to  vary  substantially  from  the  consequences 
described  below.   The  following  discussion  is  for  general  information  purposes  only  and does  not  purport to  be a  comprehensive 
description of all of the U.S. federal income tax considerations applicable to us.

Election  to  be  Treated  as  a  Corporation.   We  have  elected  to  be  treated  as  a  corporation  for  U.S.  federal  income  tax 
purposes.   As such,  we are  subject  to U.S. federal  income  tax  on  our  income  to  the extent it  is from  U.S. sources or is otherwise 
effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business in the Unites States as discussed below.

Taxation of Operating Income.  Substantially all of our gross income is attributable to the transportation, regasification and 
storage  of  LNG,  and  we  expect  that  substantially  all  of  our  gross  income  will  continue  to  be  attributable  to  the  transportation, 
regasification  and  storage  of LNG.   Gross  income generated  from  regasification  and storage  of  LNG  outside  of  the  United  States 
generally is not subject to U.S. federal income tax, and gross income generated from such activities in the United States generally is 
subject to U.S. federal income tax.  Gross income that is attributable to transportation that either begins or ends, but that does not 
both  begin  and  end,  in the United States  (or  U.S.  Source  International Transportation Income) is considered to  be  50.0%  derived 
from sources within the United States and may be subject to U.S. federal income tax as described below.  Gross income attributable 
to transportation that both begins and ends in the United States (or U.S. Source Domestic Transportation Income) is considered to be 
100.0% derived from sources within the United States and generally is subject to U.S. federal income tax.  Gross income attributable 
to  transportation  exclusively  between  non-U.S.  destinations  is  considered  to  be  100.0%  derived  from  sources  outside  the  United 
States and generally is not subject to U.S. federal income tax.

We are not permitted by law to engage in transportation that gives rise to U.S. Source Domestic Transportation Income, and 
we do not anticipate providing any regasification or storage services within the territorial seas of the United States.  However, certain 
of our activities give rise to U.S. Source International Transportation Income, and future expansion of our operations could result in 
an increase in the amount of U.S. Source International Transportation Income, all of which could be subject to U.S. federal income 
taxation unless the exemption from U.S. taxation under Section 883 of the Code (or the Section 883 Exemption) applies.

52

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 59 of 169

Table of Contents

The  Section 883  Exemption.   In  general,  the  Section 883  Exemption  provides  that  if  a  non-U.S.  corporation  satisfies  the 
requirements  of Section 883  of  the  Code and the Treasury  Regulations thereunder  (or  the Section 883  Regulations),  it will  not  be 
subject to the net basis and branch taxes or the 4.0% gross basis tax described below on its U.S. Source International Transportation 
Income.   The Section 883  Exemption applies only to U.S.  Source  International  Transportation Income and  does  not apply to U.S. 
Source  Domestic  Transportation  Income.   As  discussed  below,  we  believe  that  based  on  our  current  ownership  structure,  the 
Section 883 Exemption applies  and we are not subject to U.S. federal income tax on our U.S. Source International Transportation 
Income.

To qualify for the Section 883 Exemption, we must, among other things, meet the following three requirements:

•

•

be organized in a jurisdiction outside the United States that  grants  an  equivalent exemption from tax to corporations 
organized in the United States with respect to the types of U.S. Source International Transportation Income that we earn 
(or an Equivalent Exemption);

satisfy the Publicly Traded Test (as described below) or the Qualified Shareholder Stock Ownership Test (as described 
below); and

• meet certain substantiation, reporting and other requirements.

In order  for  a  non-U.S.  corporation  to meet the Publicly Traded Test,  its  equity interests must  be  “primarily  traded” and 
“regularly traded” on an established securities market either in the United States or in a jurisdiction outside the United States that 
grants  an  Equivalent  Exemption.   The  Section 883  Regulations  provide,  in  pertinent  part,  that  equity  interests  in  a  non-U.S. 
corporation will be considered to be “primarily traded” on an established securities market in a given country if, with respect to the 
class or classes of equity relied upon to meet the “regularly traded” requirement described below, the number of units of each such 
class that are traded during any taxable year on all established securities markets in that country exceeds the number of units in such 
class  that  are  traded  during that  year  on  established  securities  markets  in any  other  single  country.   Equity  interests  in  a  non-U.S 
corporation will be considered to be “regularly traded” on an established securities market under the Section 883 Regulations if one 
or  more  classes  of  such  equity  interests  that,  in  the  aggregate,  represent  more  than  50.0%  of  the  combined  vote  and  value  of  all 
outstanding  equity interests in the non-U.S. corporation satisfy certain listing and trading  volume  requirements.  These  listing  and 
trading volume requirements will be satisfied with respect to a class of equity interests if trades in such class are effected, other than 
in de minimis quantities, on an established securities market on at least 60 days during the taxable year and the aggregate number of 
units in such class that are traded on an established securities market during the taxable year is at least 10.0% of the average number 
of units outstanding in that class during the taxable year (with special rules for short taxable years).  In addition,  a class of equity 
interests will be considered  to satisfy these listing and trading volume requirements if the equity  interests in such class are traded 
during  the  taxable  year  on  an  established  securities  market  in  the  United  States  and  are  “regularly  quoted  by  dealers  making  a 
market” in such class (within the meaning of the Section 883 Regulations).

Even if a class of equity satisfies the foregoing requirements, and thus generally would be treated as “regularly traded” on 
an established securities market, an exception may apply to cause the class to fail the regularly traded test if, for more than half of the 
number of days during the taxable year, one or more 5.0% unitholders (i.e., unitholders owning, actually or constructively, at least 
5.0% of the vote and value of that class) own in the aggregate 50.0% or more of the vote and value of the class (or the Closely Held 
Block  Exception).   The  Closely  Held  Block  Exception  does  not  apply,  however,  in  the  event  the  corporation  can  establish  that  a 
sufficient proportion of such 5.0% unitholders are Qualified Shareholders (as defined below) so as to preclude other persons who are 
5.0% unitholders from owning 50.0% or more of the value of that class for more than half the days during the taxable year.

As  set  forth  above,  as  an  alternative  to  satisfying  the  Publicly  Traded  Test,  a  non-U.S.  corporation  may  qualify  for  the 
Section 883  Exemption  by  satisfying  the  Qualified  Shareholder  Stock  Ownership  Test.   A  corporation  generally  will  satisfy  the 
Qualified Shareholder Stock Ownership Test if more than 50.0% of the value of its outstanding equity interests is owned, or treated 
as owned after applying certain attribution rules, for at least half of the number of days in the taxable year by:

•

•

•

individual residents of jurisdictions that grant an Equivalent Exemption;

non-U.S. corporations organized in jurisdictions that grant an Equivalent Exemption and that meet the Publicly Traded Test; 
or

certain  other  qualified  persons  described  in  the  Section 883  Regulations  (which  we  refer  to  collectively  as  Qualified 
Shareholders).

53

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 60 of 169

Table of Contents

We believe that we satisfy all of the requirements for the Section 883 Exemption, and we expect that we will continue to 
satisfy such requirements.  We are organized under the laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands.  The U.S. Treasury Department 
has recognized the Republic of the Marshall Islands as a jurisdiction that grants an Equivalent Exemption.  Consequently, our U.S. 
Source International Transportation Income (including for this purpose, any such income earned by our subsidiaries) is and will be 
exempt  from  U.S.  federal  income  taxation  provided  we  meet  either  the  Publicly  Traded  Test  or  the  Qualified  Shareholder  Stock 
Ownership Test and we satisfy certain substantiation, reporting and other requirements.

Because  our  common  units  are  traded  only  on  The  Nasdaq  Global  Market,  which  is  considered  to  be  an  established 
securities market, our equity interests are “primarily traded” on an established securities market for purposes of the Publicly Traded 
Test.  Although the matter is not free from doubt, based on our current and expected cash flow and distributions on our outstanding 
equity  interests,  we  believe  that  our  common  units  represent  more  than  50.0%  of  the  total  value  of  all  of  our  outstanding  equity 
interests, and we believe that we currently satisfy, and will continue to satisfy, the listing and trading volume requirements described 
previously. In addition, our partnership agreement provides that any person or group that beneficially owns more than 4.9% of any 
class of our units then outstanding generally will be treated as owning only 4.9% of such units for purposes of voting for directors.  
Although there can be no assurance that this limitation will be effective to eliminate the possibility that we have or will have any 
5.0% unitholders for purposes of the Closely Held Block Exception, based on the current ownership of our common units, we believe 
that our common units have not lost eligibility for the Section 883 Exemption as a result of the Closely Held Block Exception.  Thus, 
although  the  matter is not free  from doubt and  is  based  upon  our belief and  expectations  regarding  our  satisfaction of the factual 
requirements described above we believe that we will satisfy the Publicly Traded Test for the present taxable year and future taxable 
years.

The  conclusions  described  above  are  based  upon  legal  authorities  that  do  not  expressly  contemplate  an  organizational 
structure such as ours.  In particular, although we have elected to be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, we 
are organized as a limited partnership under Marshall Islands law.  Accordingly, while we believe that, assuming satisfaction of the 
factual requirements described above, our common units are considered “regularly traded” on an established securities market and 
that we should satisfy the requirements for the Section 883 Exemption, it is possible that the IRS would assert that our common units 
do not meet the “regularly traded” test.  In addition, as described previously, our ability to satisfy the Publicly Traded Test depends 
upon factual matters that are subject to change.  Should any of the factual requirements described above fail to be satisfied, we may 
not be able to satisfy the Publicly Traded Test.  Furthermore, our board of directors could determine that it is in our best interests to 
take an action that would result in our not being able to satisfy the Publicly Traded Test in the future.

In the event we are not able to satisfy the Publicly Traded Test for a taxable year, we may be able to satisfy the Qualified 
Shareholder  Stock  Ownership  Test  for  that  year  provided  Golar  owns  more  than  50.0%  of  the  value  of  our  outstanding  equity 
interests for more than half of the days in such year, Golar itself met the Publicly Traded Test for such year and Golar provided us 
with certain information that we need in order to claim the benefits of the Qualified Shareholder Stock Ownership Test.  Golar has 
represented that it presently meets the Publicly Traded Test and has agreed to provide the information described above.  However, 
there can be no assurance that Golar will continue to meet the Publicly Traded Test or be able to provide the information we need to 
claim the benefits of the Section 883 Exemption under the Qualified Shareholder Ownership Test.  Further, the relative values of our 
equity  interests  are  uncertain  and  subject  to  change,  and  as  a  result  Golar  may  not  own  more  than  50.0%  of  the  value  of  our 
outstanding  equity  interests  for  any  future  year.   Consequently,  there  can  be  no  assurance  that  we  would  meet  the  Qualified 
Shareholder Stock Ownership Test based upon the ownership by Golar of an indirect ownership interest in us.

The Net Basis Tax and Branch Profits Tax.  If we earn U.S. Source International Transportation Income and the Section 883 
Exemption does not apply, the  U.S.  source portion of such  income  may  be  treated as effectively  connected  with  the conduct  of  a 
trade or business in the United States (or Effectively Connected Income) if we have a fixed place of business in the United States 
involved  in  the  earning  of  U.S.  Source  International  Transportation  Income  and  substantially  all  of  our  U.S.  Source  International 
Transportation Income is attributable to regularly scheduled transportation or, in the case of vessel leasing income, is attributable to a 
fixed  place  of  business  in  the  United  States.   In  addition,  if  we  earn  income  from  regasification  or  storage  of  LNG  within  the 
territorial seas of the United States, such income may be treated as Effectively Connected Income.  Based on our current operations, 
substantially  all  of  our  potential  U.S.  Source  International  Transportation  Income  is  not  attributable  to  regularly  scheduled 
transportation or is received from vessel leasing, and none of our regasification or storage activities occur within the territorial seas 
of the United States.  As a result, we do not anticipate that any of our U.S. Source International Transportation Income or income 
earned from regasification or storage will be treated as Effectively Connected Income.  However, there is no assurance that we will 
not earn income pursuant to regularly scheduled transportation or bareboat charters attributable to a fixed place of business  in the 
United States (or earn income from regasification or storage activities within the territorial seas of the United States) in the future, 
which would result in such income being treated as Effectively Connected Income.

54

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 61 of 169

Table of Contents

Any income we earn that is treated as Effectively Connected Income, net of applicable deductions, would be subject to U.S. 
federal corporate income tax (currently imposed at rates of up to 35.0%).  In addition, a 30.0% branch profits tax could be imposed 
on any income we earn that is treated as Effectively Connected Income, as determined after allowance for certain adjustments, and 
on certain interest paid or deemed paid by us in connection with the conduct of our U.S. trade or business.

On the sale of a vessel that has produced Effectively Connected Income, we could be subject to the net basis U.S. federal 
corporate income tax as well as branch profits tax with respect to the gain recognized up to the amount of certain prior deductions for 
depreciation  that  reduced  Effectively  Connected  Income.   Otherwise,  we  would  not  be  subject  to  U.S.  federal  income  tax  with 
respect to gain realized on the sale of a vessel, provided the sale is considered to occur outside of the United States under U.S. federal 
income tax principles.  In general, a sale of vessel will be considered to occur outside of the United States for this purpose if title to 
the vessel, and risk of loss with respect to the vessel, pass to the buyer outside the United States. It is expected that any sale of a 
vessel by us will be considered to occur outside of the United States.

The 4.0% Gross Basis Tax.  If the Section 883 Exemption does not apply and the net basis tax does not apply, we would be 
subject to a 4.0% U.S. federal income tax on the U.S. source portion of our gross U.S. Source International Transportation Income, 
without benefit of deductions.  Under the sourcing rules described above under “—United States Taxation—Taxation of Operating 
Income,” 50.0% of our U.S. Source International Transportation Income would be treated as being derived from U.S. sources.

Marshall Islands Taxation

We  believe  that  because  we,  our  operating  subsidiary  and  our  controlled  affiliates  do  not,  and  do  not  expect  to  conduct 
business  or  operations  in  the  Republic  of  the  Marshall  Islands,  neither  we  nor  our  controlled  affiliates  will  be  subject  to  income, 
capital gains, profits or other taxation under current Marshall Islands law.  As a result, distributions by our operating subsidiary and 
our controlled affiliates to us will not be subject to Marshall Islands taxation.

United Kingdom Taxation

The following is a discussion of the material United Kingdom tax consequences applicable to us.  This discussion is based 
upon  existing  legislation  and  current  H.M.  Revenue &  Customs  practice  as  of  the  date  of  this  Annual  Report.   Changes  in  these 
authorities may cause the tax consequences to vary substantially from the consequences described below.  The following discussion 
is for general information purposes only and does not purport to be a comprehensive description of all of the United Kingdom tax 
considerations applicable to us.

Tax Residence and Taxation of a Permanent Establishment in the United Kingdom.  A company treated as resident in the 
United Kingdom for purposes of the United Kingdom Corporation Tax Acts is subject to corporation tax in the same manner and to 
the  same  extent  as  a  United  Kingdom  incorporated  company.   For  this  purpose,  place  of  residence  is  determined  by  the  place  at 
which central management and control of the company is carried out.

In  addition,  a  non-United  Kingdom  resident  company  will  be  subject  to  United  Kingdom  corporation  tax  on  profits 
attributable to a permanent establishment in the United Kingdom to the extent it carries on a trade in the United Kingdom through 
such  a  permanent  establishment.   A  company  not  resident  in  the  United  Kingdom  will  be  treated  as  having  a  permanent 
establishment in the United Kingdom if it has a fixed place of business in the United Kingdom through which the business of the 
company is wholly or partly carried on or if an agent acting on behalf of the company has and habitually exercises authority to enter 
into contracts on behalf of the company.

Unlike a company, a partnership resident in the United Kingdom or carrying on a trade in the United Kingdom is not itself 
subject  to  tax,  although  its  partners  generally  will  be  liable  for  United  Kingdom  tax  based  upon  their  shares  of  the  partnership’s 
income and gains.  Please read “Item 4—Information about the Partnership—Taxation of the Partnership—Non-United States Tax 
Considerations—United Kingdom Tax Consequences.”

55

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 62 of 169

Table of Contents

Taxation of Non-United Kingdom Incorporated Subsidiaries.  We will undertake measures designed to ensure that our non-
United  Kingdom  incorporated  subsidiaries  will  be  considered  controlled  and  managed  outside  of  the  United Kingdom  and  not  as 
having a permanent establishment or otherwise carrying on a trade in the United Kingdom.  While certain of our subsidiaries that are 
incorporated  outside  of  the  United  Kingdom  will enter  into  agreements  with  Golar  Management, a  United  Kingdom  incorporated 
company, for the provision of administrative and/or technical management services, we believe that the terms of these agreements 
will  not result  in  any of our  non-United  Kingdom  incorporated  subsidiaries being treated  as having  a permanent  establishment  or 
carrying on a trade in the United Kingdom.  As a consequence, we expect that our non-United Kingdom incorporated subsidiaries 
will not be treated as resident in the United Kingdom and the profits these subsidiaries earn will not be subject to tax in the United 
Kingdom.

Taxation  of  United  Kingdom  Incorporated  Subsidiaries.   Each  of  our  subsidiaries  that  is  incorporated  in  the  United 
Kingdom will be regarded for the purposes of the United Kingdom Corporation Tax Acts as being resident in the United Kingdom 
and  will  be  liable  to  United  Kingdom  corporation  tax  on  its  worldwide  income  and  chargeable  gains,  regardless  of  whether  this 
income  or  gains are  remitted  to  the  United Kingdom.   The generally  applicable rate of United Kingdom  corporation tax  is  23.0% 
from April 1, 2013.  Our United Kingdom incorporated subsidiaries will be liable to tax at this rate on their net income, profits and 
gains after deducting expenses incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the business being undertaken.  There is currently 
no United Kingdom withholding taxes on distributions made to us.

Brazilian Taxation

The following discussion is based upon our knowledge and understanding of the tax laws of Brazil and regulations, rulings 
and judicial decisions thereunder, all as in effect of the date of this Annual Report and subject to possible change on a retroactive 
basis.  The following discussion is for general information purposes and does not purport to be a comprehensive description of all the 
Brazilian income tax considerations applicable to us.

One of our subsidiaries, Golar Serviços de Operação de Embarcações Ltda, (or Golar Brazil), has entered into operation and 

services agreements with Petrobras with respect to the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter.

On commencement of trade by Golar Brazil in July 2008 (upon delivery of the Golar Spirit), we became subject to tax in 
Brazil (including net income taxes due from Golar Brazil, if any, and any Brazilian withholding taxes is required to be withheld by 
Golar Brazil from payments it makes to our other subsidiaries) in the approximate amount of 37.5% of the payments due to Golar 
Brazil under the operation and services agreement with respect to the  Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter.   A portion of this  tax is 
withheld  by  Petrobras  from  payments  it  makes  to  Golar  Brazil  under  the  operation  and  services  agreement,  and  the  remainder  is 
collected directly from Golar Brazil.

Petrobras generally will not be required to withhold tax from payments it makes under the charters for the Golar Spirit or 
the Golar Winter so long as the payments are not made to a “non-tax paying” jurisdiction as defined by the Brazilian authorities.  
Payments by Petrobras under the charters will be made to UK resident companies and will not therefore be subject to withholding 
tax.

Brazil  may  levy  tax  on  the  importation  of  goods  and  assets into  Brazil.   However,  under  the  agreements with  Petrobras, 
Petrobras is responsible for these taxes so as long as we provide the proper documentation and take the necessary measures in order 
to clear the vessel and spare parts for importation and customs clearance.  Consequently, we do not expect to be liable for any taxes 
on the importation of goods or assets into Brazil.

Indonesian Taxation

The  following  discussion  is  based  upon  our  knowledge  and  understanding  of  the  tax  laws  of  Indonesia  and  regulations, 
rulings  and  judicial  decisions  thereunder,  all  as  in  effect  of  the  date  of  this  Annual  Report  and  subject  to  possible  change  on  a 
retroactive  basis.   The  following  discussion  is  for  general  information  purposes  and  does  not  purport  to  be  a  comprehensive 
description of all the Indonesian income tax considerations applicable to us.

PTGI, which owns and operates the NR Satu, has entered into a time charter party agreement with PTNR. 

On  commencement of the charter by PTGI  in  Indonesia,  which  occurred  in May 2012 upon delivery of  the NR Satu, we 
became subject to tax in Indonesia payable by PTGI. This included (and is not limited to) corporate income tax on profits at a rate of 
25%, withholding taxes required to be withheld by PTGI from payments it makes to our other subsidiaries which could be dividends 
to PTGI's immediate parent or interest payments on group loans as well as third party debt financing.

56

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 63 of 169

Table of Contents

However,  under  the  time  charter  party  agreement,  as  the  vessel  is  operating  in  Indonesian  waters,  PTNR  is  ultimately 

responsible for all taxes and accordingly, reimburses us through the tax hire rate for any taxes PTGI is responsible for paying.

PTNR does not withhold tax from payments it makes under the charter for the NR Satu as payments to PTGI are to a fellow 

Indonesian entity. 

Employees

Other than our Secretary, we currently do not have any employees and rely on the executive officers, directors and other key 
employees of Golar Management who perform services for us pursuant to the management and administrative services agreement.  
Golar  Management  also  provides  commercial  and  technical  management  services  to  our  fleet  and  will  provide  administrative 
services  to  us  pursuant  to  the  management  and  administrative  services  agreement.   Please  read  “Item  6.  Directors,  Senior 
Management and Employees—Executive Officers.”

C. Organizational Structure

Golar GP LLC, a Marshall Islands limited liability company, is our general partner.  Our general partner is a subsidiary of 
Golar, which is a Bermuda exempted company.  Please read Exhibit 8.1 to this Annual Report for a list of our significant subsidiaries 
as of December 31, 2012.

D. Property, Plant and Equipment

Other than the vessels in our current fleet, we also own a purpose-built mooring structure with a net book value of $35.7 
million  as  of  December  31,  2012.  The  mooring  structure  is  located  off  West  Java,  Indonesia  where  the  NR  Satu  is  permanently 
moored for the duration of its time charter with PTNR. Together with the NR Satu, the mooring structure is under a time charter with 
PTNR  which  terminates  at  the  end  of  2022.  The  mooring  structure,  together  with  the  NR  Satu,  is  also  secured  against  the  $175 
million NR Satu facility. 

Item 4A.

Unresolved Staff Comments

There  are  no  written  comments  which  have  been  provided  by  the  staff  of  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission 

regarding our periodic reports which remain unresolved as of the date of the filing of this Form 20-F with the Commission.

57

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 64 of 169

Table of Contents

Item 5.

Operating and Financial Review and Prospects

The  following  discussion  of  our  financial  condition  and  results  of  operations  should  be  read  in  conjunction  with  our 
historical  financial  statements  and  related  notes  included  elsewhere  in  this  Annual  Report.   Among  other  things,  those  financial 
statements include more detailed information regarding the basis of presentation for the following information.  Our consolidated 
and combined financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP and are presented in U.S. Dollars.

The following discussion assumes that our business was operated as a separate entity prior to our IPO on April 13, 2011. 
References in this Annual Report to our “initial fleet” refer to the Golar Winter, the Golar Spirit, the Golar Mazo and the Methane 
Princess, all of which were contributed to us at or prior to our IPO.  The entities that own the vessels in our initial fleet have been 
acquired  in  transactions  deemed  to  be  a  reorganization  of  entities  under  common  control  and  have,  therefore,  been  recorded  at 
Golar’s book values.  The historical financial statements for periods prior to the completion of our initial public offering on April 13, 
2011, which results are discussed below, have been carved out of the consolidated financial statements of Golar, which operated the 
vessels in our initial fleet for periods prior to our IPO.

In  October 2011  and  July  2012,  we  acquired  from  Golar  interests  in  subsidiaries  that  own  and  operate  the  FSRUs,  the 
Golar Freeze and the NR Satu, respectively. In addition, in November 2012, we acquired from Golar interests in subsidiaries that 
lease and operate the LNG carrier, the Golar Grand. The Golar Freeze, the NR Satu and the Golar Grand are referred to herein 
collectively as the Dropdown Predecessor. These transactions were also deemed to be a reorganization of entities under common 
control. Accordingly,  our  financial  statements prior  to  the  dates  these vessels were  acquired by  us  were retroactively  adjusted  to 
include the results of these vessels.  The periods retroactively adjusted include all periods that we and the Dropdown Predecessor 
were under common control of Golar.

Our financial position, results of operations and cash flows reflected in our consolidated and combined financial statements 
include all expenses allocable to our business, but may not be indicative of those that would have been achieved had we operated as 
a separate public entity for all periods presented or of future results.

Background and Overview

We  were  formed  by  Golar  in  2007,  a  leading  independent  owner  and  operator  of  LNG  carriers  and  FSRUs,  to  own  and 
operate FSRUs and LNG carriers under long-term charters that generate long-term stable cash flows.  Our fleet currently consists of 
four FSRUs and four LNG carriers.  We expect to make additional accretive acquisitions of FSRUs and LNG carriers with long-term 
charters from Golar and third parties in the future as market conditions permit.

On April 13, 2011, we completed our IPO.  In connection with our IPO, we issued to Golar 23,127,254 common units and 
15,949,831 subordinated units.  Our general partner also received 797,492 general partner units, representing a 2.0% general partner 
interest  in  us,  and  81%  of  our  incentive  distribution  rights  (or  our  IDRs).   We  issued  the  remaining  19%  of  our  IDRs  to  Golar 
Energy. Since the delisting of Golar Energy in August 2011, Golar Energy has been a wholly owned subsidiary of Golar.  In the IPO 
of our common units, Golar sold 13,800,000 common units to the public at a price of $22.50 per common unit.

Significant Developments in 2012 and Early 2013

Equity offerings and debt financing

In July 2012, we closed our first follow on public offering, in which we sold a total of 6,325,000 common units (including 
common units sold pursuant to the exercise of the underwriters' over-allotment option) at a price of $30.95 per common unit. Our 
general  partner  maintained  its  2%  general  partner  interest  in  us  by  contributing  a  further  $4.6  million  to  us.  We  also  closed  a 
concurrent  private  placement  of  969,305  common  units  to  Golar  at  a  price  of  $30.95  per  common  unit.  We  received  total  net 
proceeds of $221.7 million from the public offering, the concurrent private placement and general partner's contribution (together, 
the July 2012 Equity Offerings). 

In September 2012, we completed the issuance of a NOK 1,300 million bond in the Norwegian bond market with maturity 
expected  to  be  on  October  12,  2017.  The  aggregate  net  principal  amount  of  the  bonds  is  equivalent  to  approximately  USD  227 
million and has been swapped to US dollars, with a fixed interest rate of 6.485%. We listed the bonds on the Oslo Stock Exchange in 
December 2012. We used a portion of the net proceeds of the offering to repay the $222.3 million vendor loan from Golar in respect 
of the acquisition of the Golar Freeze. 

58

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 65 of 169

Table of Contents

In  November  2012,  we  completed  our  second  follow-on  public  offering,  in  which  we  sold  a  total  of  4,300,000  common 
units,  at  a  price  of  $30.50  per  common  unit. In  addition,  our  general  partner  maintained  its  2%  general  partner  interest  in  us  by 
contributing a further $3.6 million to us. Simultaneously, we also closed a concurrent private placement of 1,524,590 common units 
to  Golar  at  a  price  of  $30.50  per  common  unit.  We  received  total  net  proceeds  of  $180.1  million  from  the  public  offering,  the 
concurrent private placement and the general partner's contribution (together, the November 2012 Equity Offerings). 

In  December  2012,  PTGI,  the  company  that  owns  and  operates  the  FSRU,  NR  Satu,  entered  into  a  7  year  secured  loan 
facility, or the NR Satu facility. The total facility is $175 million and is split into two tranches, a $155 million term loan facility and a 
$20 million revolving facility. The facility is with a syndicate of banks and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin. The facility has a 
balloon payment of $52.5 million payable after 7 years. Immediately after the closing of the NR Satu facility, we used the proceeds 
to repay the $155 million vendor loan from Golar in respect of the acquisition of the NR Satu. The $20 million revolving tranche 
remains undrawn.

In February 2013, we completed our third follow-on public offering, in which we sold a total of 3,900,000 common units at 
a price of $29.74 per common unit. In addition, our general partner contributed approximately $2.6 million to us to maintain its 2.0% 
general partner interest in us. Simultaneously, we also closed a private placement of 416,947 common units to Golar at a price of 
$29.74 per common unit. We received total net proceeds of $130 million, the concurrent private placement and the general partner's 
contribution (together, the February 2013 Equity Offerings).

Acquisitions

In July 2012, we acquired from Golar interests in the NR Satu for a total purchase price of approximately $388.0 million, 
financed  by  the  proceeds  from  the  July  2012  Equity  Offerings  and  a  $155  million  vendor  financing  facility.  This  facility  has 
subsequently been repaid from the proceeds of the NR Satu facility.

In addition, in November 2012, we acquired from Golar interests in subsidiaries that lease and operate the Golar Grand for 
a  total  purchase  price of $265.0 million,  less  the  assumption  of the  capital lease  obligations  of  $90.8 million and  financed  by the 
proceeds of the November 2012 Equity Offerings. 

In  February  2013,  we  acquired  from  Golar  interests  in  the  company  that  owns  and  operates  the  Golar  Maria,  which  is 
currently operating under a time charter with Eni that expires in December 2017, for a total purchase price of approximately $215.0 
million less assumed debt of $89.5 million. The acquisition of the Golar Maria was financed by the proceeds from the February 2013 
Equity Offerings. 

Our Charters

We  generate  revenues  by  chartering  FSRUs  and  LNG  carriers  to  customers  for  a  fixed  period  of  time  at  rates  that  are 

generally fixed but may contain a variable component, such as an inflation adjustment.

As of March 31, 2013, the average remaining term of our existing long-term time charters was approximately nine years for 

our FSRU vessels, subject to certain termination and purchase rights, and six years for our LNG carriers.

Generally,  under  our  existing  charters,  the  rate  we  charge  for  our  services,  which  we  call  the  “hire  rate,” includes  the 

following two cost components:

•

Capital Component.  The capital component relates to the cost of the vessel’s purchase and is structured to meet that cost 
and to provide a profit on  the services  we provide and the  risks we take,  as  well as a return  on invested capital.   The 
capital component of our time charters is usually fixed; however, the Golar Spirit and Golar Winter charters provide for 
inflation adjustments to the capital component.

• Operating Component.  The operating component is intended to compensate us for vessel operating expenses, including 
management  fees.   This  component  is  established  at  the  beginning  of  the  charter  and  then  typically  either  escalates 
annually at a fixed percentage or fluctuates annually based on changes in a specified consumer price index.

59

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 66 of 169

Table of Contents

Under the  NR  Satu  charter,  we also  charge the charterer for  a mooring  element and a  tax element. The  mooring element 
relates to the cost of the mooring system which we constructed as part of the time charter party agreement with the charterer. This 
element is structured to meet the cost of the mooring system. This component is fixed for the time charter and applies only to the 
initial charter term. The tax element is intended to compensate us for any taxes that we may have to pay to the Indonesian authorities 
including corporate taxes, withholding tax on dividends and withholding tax on interest. This element is established at the beginning 
of the charter and shall be adjusted only when there is any change in Indonesian Tax Laws (including any changes in interpretation or 
implementation thereof) or any treaty to which Indonesia is party or the invalidity of any tax assumptions used in determining the tax 
element.

Hire payments may be reduced if a vessel does not perform to certain of its technical specifications, such as if the average 
vessel speed falls below a guaranteed speed or the amount of fuel consumed to power the vessel under normal circumstances exceeds 
a guaranteed amount or if there is a reduction in the output of the regasification unit.  Historically, we have had few instances of hire 
rate reductions and none that have had a material impact on our operating results.

When the vessel is “off-hire”—or not available for service—the customer generally is not required to pay the hire rate and 
we  are  responsible  for  all  costs.   Prolonged  off-hire  may  lead  to  vessel  substitution  or  termination  of  the  time  charter.   A  vessel 
generally will be deemed off-hire if there is a loss of time due to, among other things:

•

•

operational  deficiencies;  drydocking  for  repairs,  maintenance  or  inspection;  equipment  breakdowns;  special  surveys; 
vessel upgrades; or delays due to accidents, crewing strikes, certain vessel detentions or similar problems; or

our  failure  to  maintain  the  vessel  in  compliance  with  its  specifications  and  contractual  standards  or  to  provide  the 
required crew.

For more information on our charters, please read “Item 4—Information on the Partnership—FSRU Charters” and “—LNG 

Carrier Charters.”

Market Overview and Trends

Historically spot and short term charter hire rates for LNG carriers have been uncertain and volatile as has the supply and 
demand for LNG carriers. An excess of LNG carriers first became evident in 2004 before reaching a peak in the second quarter of 
2010 when spot and short term charter hire rates together with utilisation reached historic lows.  Due to a lack of newbuild orders 
placed between 2008 and 2010, this trend then reversed from the third quarter of 2010, such that the demand for LNG shipping was 
not being met by  available  supply in 2011 and the first half of 2012. Spot and short-medium term  charter hire rates together with 
fleet  utilization  reached  historic  highs  as  a  result.  As  of  March  31,  2013,  the  supply  and  demand  imbalance  was  approaching 
equilibrium although charter rates remain at above average levels. 

Please see the section entitled Item 4, “Information on the Partnership.”

Factors Affecting the Comparability of Future Results

Our historical results of operations and cash flows are not indicative of results of operations and cash flows to be expected 

in the future, principally for the following reasons:

• Our financial results reflect the results of the FSRUs, the Golar Freeze and the NR Satu, and the LNG carrier, the 
Golar  Grand,  acquired  from  Golar,  for  all  periods  during  which  such  vessels  were  under  common  control.   Our 
acquisitions of the Golar Freeze, the NR Satu and the Golar Grand in October 2011, July 2012 and November 2012, 
respectively, were deemed to be business acquisitions between entities under common control.  Accordingly, we have 
accounted for these transactions in a manner similar to the pooling of interest method whereby our financial statements 
prior to the date these vessels were acquired by us are retroactively adjusted to include the results of the Golar Freeze, 
the  NR  Satu  and  the  Golar  Grand.   The  periods  retroactively  adjusted  include  all  periods  that  we  and  the  acquired 
vessels were under common control of Golar. All vessels were under common control for all periods presented. As a 
result, our financial statements reflect these vessels and their results of operations referred to herein as the Dropdown 
Predecessor as if we had acquired them when the vessels began operations under the ownership of Golar.

60

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 67 of 169

Table of Contents

•

The Golar Freeze and the NR Satu did not generate revenues during the period of their retrofitting and are being 
operated in a  substantially different manner than they have in the  past.  The Golar Freeze  entered the shipyard in 
June 2009 to undergo retrofitting for FSRU service which was completed in May 2010.  In May 2010, the Golar Freeze
commenced FSRU service under its long-term charter with DUSUP. The NR Satu was in lay up during her long-term 
charter with BG Group in August 2009 until the end of 2010, prior to transitioning and entry into the shipyard in March 
2011 to undergo retrofitting for FSRU service. During her time in lay-up BG Group paid a reduced hire rate to reflect 
her lower operating costs. The NR Satu completed her FSRU retrofitting in April 2012 and commenced FSRU service 
under her long-term charter with PTNR in May 2012. The Golar Freeze and the NR Satu did not earn revenues while 
undergoing retrofitting in the shipyard.

• We intend to increase the size of our fleet by making other acquisitions.  Our growth strategy focuses on expanding 
our fleet through the acquisition of FSRUs and LNG carriers under long-term time charters.  Please read "- Significant 
Developments  in  2012  and  2013"  above  for  further  details  about  our  prior  acquisitions.  Golar  has  a  fleet  of  eleven 
newbuild LNG carriers, four of which deliver in the second half of 2013 and two FSRU's, one of which delivers in the 
second half of 2013, which are potential acquisitions in the event Golar secures long-term charters for these vessels. We 
may need to issue additional equity or incur additional indebtedness to fund additional vessels that we purchase.

•

•

FSRU  operating expenses  are higher than  the operating expenses for LNG carriers  and increase  our  exposure to 
foreign exchange rates.  Our historical operating expenses reflect the operation of the Golar Spirit, the Golar Freeze,
the Golar Winter and  the NR  Satu as LNG carriers  until the  commencement of their FSRU retrofitting in July 2008, 
June 2009, September 2009 and March 2011, respectively.  Following the completion of their retrofitting to FSRUs, we 
incurred  generally  higher  operating  expenses  on  the  vessels  as  compared  to  when  we  operated  these  vessels  as 
conventional LNG carriers.  Under the Petrobras charters, we incur a portion of our expenses and receive a portion of 
our revenues in Brazilian Reais and, therefore, we have increased exposure to foreign exchange rates.

Vessel operating and other costs are facing industry-wide cost pressures.  Due to the specialized nature of operating 
FSRUs and LNG carriers, the industry continues to experience a global manpower shortage of qualified officers due to 
the increase in size of the worldwide LNG carrier fleet. We expect that there will be an increase in crew compensation 
which will result in higher crewing costs. In addition, factors such as pressure on raw material prices and changes in 
regulatory requirements could also increase operating expenditures. Although we continue to take measures to improve 
operational efficiencies and mitigate the impact of inflation and price escalations, future increases to operational costs 
are likely to occur.

• Our  historical  results  of  operations  reflect  allocated  administrative  costs  that  may  not  be  indicative  of  future 
administrative costs.  The administrative costs included in our historical results of operations have been determined by 
allocating Golar’s administrative costs to us based on the size of our fleet in relation to the size of Golar’s fleet.  These 
allocated  costs  may  not  be  indicative  of  our  future  administrative  costs.   Under  the  management  and  administrative 
services  agreement  that  we  have  entered  into  with  Golar  Management,  Golar  Management  provides  significant 
administrative,  financial  and  other  support  services  to  us.   We  reimburse  Golar  Management  for  costs  and  expenses 
incurred in connection with the provision of the services under that agreement.  In addition, we pay Golar Management 
a management fee equal to 5% of its costs and expenses incurred in connection with providing services to us.

• We are incurring additional general and administrative expenses as a publicly traded partnership. Since our IPO in 
April 2011, we have begun to incur additional general and administrative expenses as a consequence of being a publicly 
traded  partnership,  including  costs  associated  with  annual  reports  to  unitholders,  SEC  filings,  investor  relations, 
registrar  and  transfer  agent  fees,  audit  fees,  incremental  director  and  officer  liability  insurance  costs  and  directors’
compensation.

• We  may  enter  into  different  financing  arrangements.   Our  financing  arrangements  currently  in  place  may  not  be 
representative  of  the  arrangements  we  will  enter  into  in  the  future.  For  example, we may amend  our existing  credit 
facilities or enter into new financing arrangements.  For descriptions of our current financing arrangements, please read 
“—Liquidity and Capital Resources—Borrowing Activities.”

• Our results are affected by fluctuations in the fair value of our derivative instruments.  The change in fair value of 
our  derivative  instruments  is  included  in  our  net  income  (loss)  as  our  derivative  instruments  are  not  designated  as 
hedges for accounting purposes.  These changes may fluctuate significantly as interest rates fluctuate.  Please read Note 
24—Financial Instruments in the notes to our consolidated and combined financial statements.  The unrealized gains or 
losses relating to the change in fair value of our derivatives do not impact our cash flows.

61

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 68 of 169

Table of Contents

•

The amount and timing of drydocking and the number of drydocking days of our vessels can significantly affect our 
revenues  between  periods.  Our  vessels  are  off-hire  at  various  points  of  time  due  to  scheduled  and  unscheduled 
maintenance.  During  the  years  ended  December  31,  2012,  2011  and  2010,  we  had  21,  21  and  92  off-hire  days, 
respectively,  relating  to  drydocking  of  our  vessels.  We  expect  that  in  2013,  there  will  be  115  days  of  off-hire  time 
associated with scheduled drydockings. Material differences in the number of off-hire days from period to period could 
cause  financial  results  to  differ  materially.  The  material  impact  of  off-hire  time  on  our  business  and  results  of 
operations is discussed below

Factors Affecting Our Results of Operations

We believe the principal factors that will affect our future results of operations include:

•

•

•

•

•

the number of vessels in our fleet, including our ability to acquire additional vessels from Golar or from third parties;

our ability to maintain good relationships with our five existing customers and our future customers and to increase the 
number of our customer relationships;

increased demand for LNG shipping services, including floating storage and regasification services;

our ability to successfully employ our vessels at economically attractive rates, as our charters expire or are otherwise 
terminated;

the effective and efficient technical management of our vessels;

• Golar’s  ability  to  obtain  and  maintain  major  international  energy  company  approvals  and  to  satisfy  their  technical, 

health, safety and compliance standards; and

•

economic,  regulatory,  political  and  governmental  conditions  that  affect  the  shipping  and  the  LNG  industry.   This 
includes  changes  in  the  number  of  new  LNG  importing  countries  and  regions  and  availability  of  surplus  LNG  from 
projects  around  the  world,  as  well  as  structural  LNG  market  changes  allowing  greater  flexibility  and  enhanced 
competition with other energy sources.

In addition to the factors discussed above, we believe certain specific factors have impacted, and will continue to impact, 

our combined results of operations.  These factors include:

•

the hire rate earned by our vessels, unscheduled off-hire days and the level of our vessel operating expenses;

• mark-to-market charges in interest rate swaps and foreign currency derivatives;

•

•

•

•

•

foreign currency exchange gains and losses;

our access to capital required to acquire additional vessels and/or to implement our business strategy;

increased crewing costs;

our level of debt and the related interest expense and amortization of principal; and

the level of any distribution on our common units.

Please read “Item 3—Key Information—Risk Factors” for a discussion of certain risks inherent in our business.

Important Financial and Operational Terms and Concepts

We  use  a  variety  of  financial  and  operational  terms  and  concepts  when  analyzing  our  performance.   These  include  the 

following:

Total  Operating  Revenues.   Total  operating  revenues refers to  time  charter  revenues.  We  recognize  revenues  from  time 
charters over the term of the charter as the applicable vessel operates under the charter.  We do not recognize revenue during days 
when the vessel is off-hire, unless the charter agreement makes a specific exception.

62

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 69 of 169

Table of Contents

Off-hire (Including Commercial Waiting Time).  Our vessels may be out of service, that is, off-hire, for several reasons: 
scheduled drydocking, special  survey, vessel upgrade or maintenance  or  inspection, which we refer  to  as scheduled off-hire; days 
spent  waiting  for  a  charter,  which  we  refer  to  as  commercial  waiting  time;  and  unscheduled  repairs,  maintenance,  operational 
deficiencies,  equipment  breakdown,  accidents,  crewing  strikes,  certain  vessel  detentions  or  similar  problems,  or  our  failure  to 
maintain the vessel in compliance with its specifications and contractual standards or to provide the required crew, which we refer to 
as unscheduled off-hire.

Drydocking.  We  must  periodically  drydock  each  of  our  vessels  for  inspection,  repairs  and  maintenance  and  any 
modifications required to comply with industry certification or governmental requirements. Except for the NR Satu, which will go 
into drydock after its charter with PTNR, we drydock each of our vessels every two and a half to five years, depending upon the type 
of vessel and its age. In addition, a shipping society classification intermediate survey is performed on our LNG carriers between the 
second and third year of a five-year drydocking period. We capitalize a substantial portion of the costs incurred during drydocking 
and for the survey and amortize those costs on a straight-line basis from the completion of a drydocking or intermediate survey over 
the  estimated  useful  life  of  the  drydock.  We  expense  as  incurred  costs  for  routine  repairs  and  maintenance  performed  during 
drydocking  or  intermediate  survey  that  do  not  improve  or  extend  the  useful  lives  of  the  assets.  The  number  of  drydockings 
undertaken in a given period and the nature of the work performed determine the level of drydocking expenditures. 

Voyage Expenses.  Voyage expenses, which are primarily fuel costs but which also include other costs such as port charges, 
are paid by our customers under our time charters.  However, we may incur voyage related expenses during off-hire periods when 
positioning or repositioning vessels before or after the period of a time charter or before or after drydocking, which expenses will be 
payable by us.  We also incur some voyage expenses, principally fuel costs, when our vessels are in periods of commercial waiting 
time.

Time  Charter  Equivalent  Earnings.  In  order  to  compare vessels  trading  under  different types  of  charters,  it  is  standard 
industry  practice  to  measure  the  revenue  performance  of  a  vessel  in  terms  of  average  daily  TCE.   For  our  time  charters,  this  is 
calculated by dividing time charter revenues by the number of calendar days minus days for scheduled off-hire.  Where we are paid a 
fee to position or reposition a vessel before or after a time charter, this additional revenue, less voyage expenses, is included in the 
calculation  of  TCE.   For  shipping  companies  utilizing  voyage  charters  (where  the  vessel  owner  pays  voyage  costs  instead  of  the 
charterer), TCE is calculated by dividing voyage revenues, net of vessel voyage costs, by the number of calendar days minus days for 
scheduled off-hire.  TCE is a non-GAAP financial measure.  Please read “Item 3—Key Information—Selected Historical Financial 
and Operating Data—Non-GAAP Financial Measures” for a reconciliation of TCE to total operating revenues (TCE’s most directly 
comparable financial measure in accordance with GAAP).

Vessel  Operating  Expenses.   Vessel  operating  expenses  include  direct vessel  operating  costs  associated  with  operating  a 
vessel, such as crew wages, which are the most significant component, vessel supplies, routine repairs, maintenance, lubricating oils, 
insurance and management fees for the provision of commercial and technical management services.

Depreciation and Amortization.  Depreciation and amortization expense, or the periodic cost charged to our income for the 
reduction  in  usefulness  and  long-term  value  of  our  ships,  is  related  to  the  number  of  vessels  we  own or  operate  under  long-term 
capital  leases.   We  depreciate  the  cost  of  our  owned  vessels,  less  their  estimated  residual  value,  and  amortize  the  amount  of  our 
capital lease assets over their estimated economic useful lives, on a straight-line basis.  We amortize our deferred drydocking costs 
over two to five years based on each vessel’s next anticipated drydocking.  Income derived from sale and subsequently leased assets 
is deferred and amortized in proportion to the amortization of the leased assets.

Administrative Expenses.  Administrative expenses are composed of general overhead, including personnel costs, legal and 
professional  fees,  property  costs  and  other  general  administration  expenses.   For  the  historical  periods  presented,  certain 
administrative  expenses  (including  Golar’s  stock-based  compensation)  have  been  principally  carved  out  from  the  administrative 
expenses of Golar on the basis of Golar’s number of vessels.  Administrative expenses also include a small amount of direct costs 
such as professional fees.

Interest Expense and Interest Income.  Interest expense depends on our overall level of borrowing and may significantly 
increase when we acquire or lease ships.  While an LNG carrier is undergoing retrofitting into a FSRU, interest expense incurred is 
capitalized on the cost of the vessel.  Interest expense may also change with prevailing interest rates, although interest rate swaps or 
other derivative instruments may reduce the effect of these changes.  Interest income will depend on prevailing interest rates and the 
level of our cash deposits and restricted cash deposits.

63

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 70 of 169

Table of Contents

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets.  Our vessels are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances 
indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable.  In assessing the recoverability of our vessels’ carrying amounts, we must 
make  assumptions  regarding  estimated  future  cash  flows  and  estimates  in  respect  of  residual  or  scrap  value.   We  estimate  those 
future cash flows based on the existing service potential of our vessels.  As of December 31, 2012, we did not perform an impairment 
test as no trigger events have been identified.  However, in the event there were triggering events identified, we follow a traditional 
present value approach, whereby a single set of future cash flows is estimated.  If the carrying value of a vessel were to exceed the 
undiscounted future cash flows, we would write the vessel down to its fair value, which is calculated by using a risk-adjusted rate of 
interest.  Since our inception, our vessels have not been impaired.

However,  for  the  year  ended  2010,  an  impairment  charge  of  $1.5  million  was  recognized  in  respect  of  unutilized  parts 
ordered for the Golar Spirit FSRU retrofitting following changes to the original specifications.  Some of these parts have been used 
by Golar for other FSRU projects but these parts were not transferred to us by Golar.

Other Financial Items.  Other financial items include financing fee arrangement costs such as commitment fees on credit 
facilities, amortization of deferred financing costs, market valuation adjustments for interest rate swap derivatives, foreign exchange 
gains/losses and foreign currency derivatives. The market valuation adjustment for our interest rate and foreign currency derivatives 
may have a significant impact on our results of operations and financial position although it does not impact our liquidity.  Foreign 
exchange  gains  or  losses  arise  due  to  the  retranslation  of  our  capital  lease  obligations  and  the  cash  deposits  securing  those 
obligations.  Any gain or loss represents an unrealized gain or loss and will arise over time as a result of exchange rate movements.  
Our liquidity position will only be affected to the extent that we choose or are required to withdraw monies from or pay additional 
monies into the deposits securing our capital lease obligations.

Customers

In the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, revenues from the following customers accounted for over 10% of 

our revenues:

Petrobras
DUSUP
Pertamina
BG Group
PTNR
Gas Natural Aprovisionamientos 
SDG S.A.

2012

2011
(dollars in thousands)

2010

$

92,952
48,328
37,300
66,148
41,902

32% $
17%
13%
23%
15%

93,741
47,054
37,829
25,101
—

41% $
21%
17%
11%
—%

90,651
29,894
36,944
40,249
—

—

—%

21,474

10%

—

44%
15%
18%
20%
—%

—%

Inflation and Cost Increases

Although inflation has had a moderate impact on operating expenses, interest costs, drydocking expenses and overhead, we 
do not expect inflation to have a significant impact on direct costs in the current and foreseeable economic environment other than 
potentially in relation to insurance costs and crew costs.  It is anticipated that insurance costs, which have risen considerably over the 
last three years, will continue to rise over the next few years.  LNG transportation is a specialized area and the number of vessels is 
increasing.   Therefore,  there  has  been  an  increased  demand  for  qualified  crew,  which  has  and  will  continue  to  put  inflationary 
pressure  on  crew  costs.   Only  vessels  on  full  cost  pass  through  charters  would  be  fully  protected  from  crew  cost  increases.   The 
impact of these increases will be mitigated to some extent by the following provisions in our existing charters:

•

•

The Golar Mazo’s charter provides for operating cost and insurance cost pass-throughs, and so we will be protected from 
the impact of the vast majority of such increases.

The  Methane  Princess’ charter  provides  that  the  operating  cost  component  of  the  charter  hire  rate,  established  at  the 
beginning of the charter, will increase by a fixed percentage per annum, except for insurance, which is covered at cost.

64

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 71 of 169

Table of Contents

• Under the OSAs for both the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter, the charter hire rates are payable in Brazilian Reais. The 
charter  hire  rates  payable  under  the  OSAs  covers  all  vessel operating expenses, other  than  drydocking and  insurance. 
The charter hire rates payable under the OSAs were established between the parties at the time the charter was entered 
into and will be increased based on a specified mix of consumer price and U.S. Dollar foreign exchange rate indices on 
an annual basis.

•

The Golar Freeze and the NR Satu time charters provides for annual adjustments to the operating expense component of 
the charter hire rate as necessary to take into account cost increases.

A. Operating Results

Year Ended December 31, 2012 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2011

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

Change

% Change

(dollars in thousands, except TCE and average daily vessel operating costs)
$

$

$

Total operating revenues
Vessel operating expenses
Voyage expenses
Administrative expenses
Depreciation and amortization
Interest income
Interest expense
Other financial items
Taxes
Net income
Non-controlling interest
TCE (to the closest $100)
Average daily vessel operating costs

286,630
45,474
4,471
7,269
51,167
1,797
(38,090)
(5,389)
(9,426)
127,141
(10,723)
116,700
17,749

225,452
39,212
785
8,235
45,316
1,640
(19,581)
(18,521)
(45)
95,397
(9,863)
103,600
15,347

61,178
6,262
3,686
(966)
5,851
157
(18,509)
13,132
(9,381)
31,744
(860)
13,100
2,402

27 %
16 %
470 %
(12)%
13 %
10 %
95 %
(71)%
20,847 %
33 %
9 %
13 %
16 %

Operating days: During the year ended December 31, 2012, our total operating days increased to 2,408 days, compared to 

2,162 days in 2011, as a result of the re-delivery of the NR Satu in May 2012 following the completion of its FSRU retrofitting.

Operating Revenues:  Operating revenues  increased by $61.2 million to $286.6 million for the year ended December 31, 

2012, compared to $225.5 million in 2011, primarily as a result of:

•

•

$41.9 million of additional revenue in 2012 representing approximately 8 months of revenues of the NR Satu following 
her successful retrofit to a FSRU and commencement of her long-term charter with PTNR from May 2012. There were 
no corresponding revenues in 2011 as the NR Satu was principally undergoing her FSRU retrofitting; and

$19.1 million of additional revenues from the Golar Grand in 2012 as compared to 2011 due to a higher charter rate 
under  its  current  time  charter  with  BG  Group  which  started  in  the  fourth  quarter  of  2011  compared  to  when  it  was 
trading on the spot market in 2011.

The above are partially offset by a decrease in operating revenues of $2.0 million arising from the Golar Spirit's planned 

off-hire from December 11, 2012, when the vessel commenced its first drydock as an FSRU. 

Calendar days less scheduled off-hire days
Average daily TCE (to the closest $100)

2,417
116,700

$

2,169
103,600

$

$

248
13,100

11%
13%

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

Change

% Change

65

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 72 of 169

Table of Contents

The increase of $13,100 in average daily TCEs for the year ended December 31, 2012 to $116,700, compared to $103,600
in 2011, is primarily due to the commencement of the NR Satu's charter to PTNR, the Golar Grand's improved charter rate in 2012 
and the increase in hire rates under the Petrobras charters as described above.

Vessel Operating Expenses:  Vessel operating expenses increased by $6.3 million to $45.5 million for the year ended 

December 31, 2012, compared to $39.2 million for the same period in 2011, principally as a result of:

•

•

the increase in operating costs relating to the NR Satu following her completion of her FSRU retrofitting in April 2012 
and commencement of her long-term charter with PTNR from May 2012 as compared to the same period in 2011 when 
she was primarily undergoing her FSRU retrofitting; and

higher spares purchases during the maintenance window on the two FSRUs operating in Brazil in 2012.

Accordingly, average daily vessel costs for the year ended December 31, 2012 was $17,749, compared to $15,347 in 2011.

Voyage  Expenses:   Voyage  expenses  primarily  relate  to  fuel  costs  associated  with  commercial  waiting  time,  vessel 
positioning costs and charter-hire expenses. When a vessel is on-hire, fuel costs are typically paid by the charterer, whereas during 
periods of commercial waiting time, fuel costs are paid by us.  Voyage expenses increased by $3.7 million to $4.5 million for the 
year ended December 31, 2012, compared to $0.8 million in 2011.  The increase was due to (i) the Golar Spirit incurring positioning 
costs from Brazil to the shipyard at our cost for its drydocking which commenced in December 2012, and (ii) brokers' commissions 
relating to the NR Satu following commencement of its charter in May 2012. We incurred no comparable cost in 2011 in respect of 
the NR Satu, as it was undergoing retrofitting.

Administrative  Expenses:   Administrative  expenses  decreased  by  $1.0  million  to  $7.3  million  for  the  year  ended 

December 31, 2012, as compared to $8.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Since March 30, 2011, we have been party to a management and services agreement with Golar Management, under which 
Golar  Management  provides  certain  management  and  administrative  services  to  us  and  is  reimbursed  for  reasonable  costs  and 
expenses  incurred  in  connection  with  these services at  a  cost plus  5% recharge basis. Under this  arrangement, for the year  ended 
December 31, 2012 and 2011, we incurred recharges of $2.9 million and $1.6 million, respectively. Furthermore, for historic periods 
prior to our IPO in  April 2011 and  with respect to the Golar Freeze, the NR Satu and the Golar Grand, for periods  prior to their 
respective acquisition, administrative expenses were carved out from the administrative expenses of Golar (including an allocation 
for stock-based compensation costs) and a portion was allocated to us based on the size of our fleet that amounted to $1.4 million and 
$4.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. 

The impact of the decrease of the management recharges and carve-out administrative expenses is partially offset by higher 
corporate expenses, such as legal, accounting, regulatory compliance and other incremental costs incurred as a result of operating as 
a listed public entity following our IPO in April 2011. These corporate expenses amounted to $3.0 million and $1.7 million for the 
years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. 

Depreciation and amortization:  Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $5.9 million to $51.2 million for the 
year ended December 31, 2012, compared to $45.3 million in 2011 mainly due to the commencement of depreciation relating to the 
NR Satu FSRU retrofitting expenditures following the completion of its retrofitting in April 2012.

Interest  income:   Interest  income  increased  by  $0.2  million  to  $1.8  million  for  the  year  ended  December 31,  2012, 
compared  to  $1.6  million  in  2011,  primarily  as  a  result  of  the  increase  in  the  restricted  cash  balances.  Interest  income  arose 
principally from our restricted cash balances in respect of debt and lease arrangements.

Interest  expense:   Interest  expense  increased  by  $18.5  million  to  $38.1  million  for  the  year  ended  December 31,  2012, 
compared  to  $19.6  million  in  2011  primarily  due  to  $13.6  million  additional  interest  cost  associated  with  the  vendor  loans  from 
Golar  in  connection  with  the acquisition of  the  Golar Freeze  in October 2011  and  the  NR  Satu  in July 2012. The  $222.3  million 
vendor financing loan in respect of the Golar Freeze was repaid in October 2012 with the proceeds from the issuance of our high-
yield bonds, which generated additional interest costs of $3.3 million in 2012. The $155 million vendor financing loan in respect of 
the NR  Satu  was repaid  in  December 2012  with  the  proceeds  from the NR  Satu  Facility.  Please read  Note 20  in the  notes  to  our 
consolidated and combined carve-out financial statements for a description of these loans. 

66

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Other financial items:

Page 73 of 169

Mark-to-market adjustment for interest rate swap 
derivatives
Interest rate swap cash settlements
Unrealized and realized losses on interest rate swaps
Net foreign currency adjustments for retranslation of 
lease related balances and mark-to-market adjustments for 
the Golar Winter Lease related currency swap derivative
Other

Other financial items, net

$

$

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

Change

% Change

(dollars in thousands)

$

1,328
(6,609)
(5,281)

(9,427) $
(5,788)
(15,215)

1,602
(1,710)
(5,389) $

(1,235)
(2,071)
(18,521) $

10,755
(821)
9,934

2,837
361
13,132

(114)%
14 %
(65)%

(230)%
(17)%
(71)%

Net realized and unrealized (losses) gains on interest rate swap agreements. Net unrealized and realized losses on mark-to-
market adjustments for interest rate swap derivatives decreased by $9.9 million to $5.3 million in December 31, 2012, compared to 
$15.2  million  in 2011. The  decrease is  primarily  due  to  the  improvement  in  the  mark-to-market  adjustment  for interest  rate  swap 
derivatives,  from a loss  of  $9.4  million  in  2011 to a gain of $1.3  million  in  2012.  This  is largely due to a fairly stable  long-term 
interest rate outlook during 2012. In contrast the outlook during 2011 was that long-term interest rates were going to fall.

As of December 31, 2012, our interest rate swaps portfolio (excluding the cross currency interest rate swaps) had a notional 
value of $532.4 million, 45% of which qualified for hedge accounting. Accordingly, an additional $1.1 million gain was accounted 
for  as  a  change  in  other  comprehensive  income  which  would  have  otherwise  been  recognized  in  earnings  for  the  year  ended 
December 31, 2012. 

We also entered into a cross currency interest rate swap with a notional value of $227.2 million which was designated as a 
cash flow hedge. A $5.1 million loss was accounted for as a change in other comprehensive loss which would have otherwise been 
recognized in earnings for the year ended December 31, 2012. 

Included within mark-to-market adjustments for interest rate swaps is an unrealized gain of $0.1 million and $3.3 million for 
the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, representing amounts carved out and allocated to us on the basis of our 
proportion of Golar’s debt.

Net foreign exchange gains and losses on retranslation of lease related balances including currency swap mark-to-market 
gains and losses. Unrealized foreign exchange gains and losses of $1.6 million arose primarily as a result of the retranslation of our 
capital  lease  obligations  and  the  movement  in  the  fair  value  of  the  related  currency  swap  used  to  hedge  the  Golar  Winter  lease 
obligation.  Of the $1.6 million unrealized net foreign exchange gain in 2012, an unrealized gain of $7.2 million (2011: $0.9 million 
unrealized loss) arose in respect of the mark-to-market valuation of the Golar Winter currency swap representing the movement in 
the fair value.  This swap hedges the currency risk arising from lease rentals due in respect of the Golar Winter GBP lease rental 
obligation, by translating GBP payments into U.S. Dollar payments at a fixed GBP/USD exchange rate (i.e. the Partnership receives 
GBP and pays U.S. Dollars). The unrealized loss on retranslation of the lease obligation in respect of the Golar Winter Lease, which 
this swap  hedges,  was $5.7 million (2011: $0.1 million  unrealized gain).  The unrealized loss arose  due  to the depreciation of the 
U.S. Dollar against the GBP during the year. Included within the total for 2011, was a currency swap mark-to-market loss of $0.5 
million that has been carved out from Golar relating to our Dropdown Predecessor.

Other  items.  Other  items  represent,  among  other things, bank  charges,  the  amortization of  debt  related  expenses,  foreign 
currency differences arising on retranslation of foreign currency and gains or losses on short term foreign currency forward contracts. 
Included within other items is a $0.6 million foreign exchange gain (2011: $0.6 million loss) representing amounts carved out from 
Golar. 

67

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 74 of 169

Table of Contents

Income taxes: Income taxes  relate primarily  to the taxation  of our U.K. based vessel operating  companies,  our  Brazilian 
subsidiary  established in connection with  our Petrobras long-term  charters and our Indonesian  subsidiary  related to the  ownership 
and  management  of  the  NR  Satu  with  respect  to  our  long-term  charter  with  PTNR.  However,  the  tax  exposure  in  Indonesia  is 
mitigated by revenue due under the charter such that taxes paid are fully recovered through the time charter rate. Accordingly, the 
increase  of  $9.4  million  in  income  taxes  for  the  year  ended  December  31,  2012  was  primarily  due  to  $7.4  million  tax  expense 
relating to our Indonesian subsidiary; and $1.5 million from the decrease in the offsetting credits, from a credit of $2.4 million in 
2011 to $0.9  million in 2012 , relating to the amortization of deferred tax benefit on intra-group transfers in relation to the Golar 
Freeze and NR Satu which were carved out from the results of Golar for the period prior to their acquisition dates.

Net income: As a result of the foregoing, we earned net income of $127.1 million in 2012, compared to $95.4 million in 

2011.

Non-controlling interest: Non-controlling interest refers to the 40% interest in the Golar Mazo.

Year Ended December 31, 2011 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2010

Year Ended December 31,

2011

2010

Change

% Change

$

Total operating revenues
Vessel operating expenses
Voyage expenses
Administrative expenses
Depreciation and amortization
Impairment of long-term assets
Interest income
Interest expense
Other financial items
Taxes
Net income
Non-controlling interest
TCE (to the closest $100)
Average daily vessel operating costs

$

(in thousands except TCE and average daily vessel operating costs)
225,452
$
39,212
785
8,235
45,316
—
1,640
(19,581)
(18,521)
(45)
95,397
(9,863)
103,600
15,347

205,808
38,516
6,343
7,457
43,106
1,500
3,998
(20,300)
(27,855)
(1,212)
63,517
(9,250)
85,700
15,075

19,644
696
(5,558)
778
2,210
(1,500)
(2,358)
719
9,334
1,167
31,880
(613)
17,900
272

10 %
2 %
(88)%
10 %
5 %
(100)%
(59)%
(4)%
(34)%
(96)%
50 %
7 %
21 %
2 %

Operating  days: During  the  year  ended  December 31,  2011,  our  total  operatings  days  have  decreased  to  2,162  days 
compared to 2,328 days in 2010 as a result of the NR Satu being in lay up for appriximately three months and then transitioning to 
the shipyard before undergoing its FSRU retrofitting from March 2011. This is offset by the Golar Freeze operating for a full year in 
2011 as compared to approximately eight months in 2010.

Operating Revenues: Operating revenues  increased by  $19.6 million  to  $225.5 million for the  year  ended  December 31, 

2011, compared to $205.8 million in 2010, primarily as a result of:

•

•

•

$17.1  million  of  additional  revenue  as  a  result  of  a  full  year  of  operation  of  the  Golar  Freeze  in  2011,  as  compared  to 
approximately eight months in 2010. The Golar Freeze was delivered under its 10 year time charter to DUSUP and was on-
hire commencing May 16, 2010 following its FSRU retrofitting; 

$13.9 million of additional revenues from the Golar Grand due to improved utilization rate of the Golar Grand in 2011 of 
98% compared to 45% in 2010 whilst operating on the spot market; and

$3.0 million of additional revenue due to increased hire rates under the Petrobras charters (in accordance with the charterer's 
bi-annual review  to reflect inflation increases) with respect to  our  FSRUs, the Golar Winter  and  the Golar Spirit, effective 
from April 2011.

68

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 75 of 169

Table of Contents

The above are partially offset by a decrease in operating revenues of $15.2 million arising from the NR Satu being offhire 
for the full year of 2011 when she was undergoing her FSRU retrofitting, as compared to 2010 when she was in lay-up during her 
charter with BG. During her time in lay-up BG paid a reduced rate to reflect her lower operating costs. 

Year Ended December 31,

2011

2010

Change

% Change

Calendar days less scheduled off-hire days
Average daily TCE (to the closest $100)

2,169
103,600

$

$

2,328
85,700

$

(159)
17,900

(7)%
21 %

The increase of $17,900 in average daily time charter equivalent rates, or TCEs, for the year ended December 31, 2011 to 
$103,600, compared to $85,700 in 2010, is due to the reasons described above and is primarily a result of the Golar Freeze earning a 
full year of revenue in 2011, improved utilization rate for the Golar Grand and increase in hire rates under the Petrobras' charters as 
described above.

Vessel  Operating  Expenses: Vessel  operating  expenses  increased  by  $0.7  million  to  $39.2  million  for  the  year  ended 

December 31, 2011, compared to $38.5 million for the same period in 2010 primarily as a result of:

• Higher crew costs in 2011 due primarily (i) to the appreciation of the Brazilian Reais and Euro against the U.S. Dollar and 

(ii) higher training costs incurred on our FSRUs operating in Brazil, the Golar Winter and the Golar Spirit; and

• An increase in vessel operating expenses of approximately $0.5 million relating to the operations of the Golar Freeze which 
was  due  primarily  to  the  Golar  Freeze  operating  for  a  full  year  as  a  FSRU  compared  to  only  eight  months  in  2010. 
However,  this  was  partially  offset  by the  effects of  recruiting  crew in  anticipation of  the  commissioning  process  in  May 
2010 and to commence FSRU training. With respect to the NR Satu, her vessel operating expenses in 2011 and 2010 were 
comparably low in both years as a result of her undergoing her FSRU retrofitting in 2011, as compared to 2010 when she 
was in lay-up. 

Accordingly, average daily vessel costs for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $15,347 compared to $15,075 in 2010.

Voyage  Expenses:  Voyage  expenses  primarily  relate  to  fuel  costs  associated  with  commercial  waiting  time,  vessel 
positioning costs and charter-hire expenses. When a vessel is on-hire, fuel costs are typically paid by the charterer, whereas during 
periods of commercial waiting time, fuel costs  are paid  by  us. Voyage expenses  decreased by $5.6 million  to $0.8 million for the 
year ended December 31, 2011, compared to $6.3 million in 2010. The decrease was due to (i) the improved trading of the Golar 
Grand which resulted in a reduction in offhire days to 28 days in 2011 from 200 days in 2010; and (ii) the Golar Freeze incurring 
positioning costs from the shipyard to the delivery destination at our cost, following the completion of its FSRU retrofitting in May 
2010.

Administrative Expenses: Administrative expenses increased by $0.8 million to $8.2 million for the year ended December 

31, 2011, compared to $7.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2010. 

Included  within  these  expenses  for  the  years  ended  December  31,  2011  and  2010  is  $4.9  million  and  $6.7  million, 
respectively, representing expenses that were carved out from the administrative expenses of Golar (including an allocation for stock-
based  compensation  costs)  and a  portion  allocated  to  us based on  the  size  of  our  fleet.  The decrease in  carved out  administrative 
expenses  of $1.8 million to  $4.9 million in  2011  compared to $6.7  million in 2010 is due  to the carved out expense reflecting  an 
allocation for the initial fleet for the period prior to the IPO in April 2011 and in respect of the Golar Freeze for the period prior to its 
acquisition  in  October  2011.  Pursuant  to  the  management  and  administrative  services  agreement  entered  into  with  Golar 
Management  on March 30, 2011,  under which Golar  Management provides certain management and administrative  services to  us 
and is reimbursed for reasonable costs and expenses incurred in connection with these services on cost plus 5% recharge basis, we 
incurred $1.6 million of these expenses for the year ended December 31, 2011.

The impact of the decrease of the management recharges and carve-out administrative expenses is offset by higher corporate 
expenses, such as legal, accounting, regulatory compliance and other incremental costs incurred as a result of operating as a listed 
public  entity following our IPO in April 2011. These corporate expenses  amounted to $1.7 million  and $0.8 million for the years 
ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. 

69

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 76 of 169

Table of Contents

Depreciation and amortization: Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $2.2 million to $45.3 million for the 
year ended December 31, 2011, compared to $43.1 million for the same period in 2010 mainly due to a full year of depreciation for 
the Golar Freeze FSRU capital expenditure in 2011 compared to approximately eight months in 2010 following the completion of its 
FSRU retrofitting in May 2010. 

Impairment of long-term assets: We incurred an impairment charge of $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 
in respect of parts ordered for the FSRU conversion project that were not required for the conversion of the Golar Spirit, reflecting a 
lower  recoverable  amount  for  these  parts.  These  parts  were  retained  by  Golar  and  were  not  transferred  to  the  Partnership  and 
therefore have been eliminated from the Partnership's equity position as of April 13, 2011. 

Interest  income: Interest  income  decreased  by  $2.4  million  to  $1.6  million  for  the  year  ended  December  31,  2011, 

compared to $4.0 million in 2010, primarily as a result of:

•

•

The  release  of  the  lease  security  deposit  for  the  Golar  Spirit,  the  Golar  Freeze  and  the  NR  Satu  in  connection  with  the 
settlement  of  their  lease  obligations  at  the  end  of  2010.  Consequently,  there  is  no  comparable  Letter  of  Credit  (or  LC) 
deposit interest earned in 2011 compared to LC deposit interest of $1.5 million in 2010; and

The decline in interest rates in 2011 compared to 2010.

Interest  expense:  Interest  expense  decreased  by  $0.7  million  to  $19.6  million  for  the  year  ended  December  31,  2011, 
compared to $20.3 million in 2010 primarily due to (i) a decrease in interest expense of $3.6 million arising from the settlement of 
the Golar Spirit, the Golar Freeze and the NR Satu lease obligations at the end of 2010; (ii) a decline in interest rates and (iii) the 
capitalization  of  deemed  interest  costs  of  $1.9  million  in  2011  compared  to  $0.5  million  in  2010,  which  relates  to  the  FSRU 
retrofittings. The decrease in interest expense was partially offset by an increase of $3.1 million relating to the interest paid to Golar 
for the vendor financing loan in respect of the acquisition of the Golar Freeze in October 2011. Please read Note 20 - Debt - in the 
notes to our consolidated and combined carve-out financial statements for a description of the vendor financing loan from Golar. 

Other financial items:

Year Ended December 31,

2011

2010

Change

% Change

(dollars in thousands)

Mark-to-market adjustment for interest rate swap 
derivatives
Interest rate swap cash settlements
Unrealized and realized (losses) gains on interest rate 
swaps.
Net foreign currency adjustments for re-translation of 
lease related balances and mark-to-market adjustments for 
the Golar Winter Lease related currency swap derivative
Loss on termination of lease arrangements
Financing arrangement fees
Other

Other financial items, net

$

$

(9,427) $
(5,788)

(7,125) $
(9,222)

(2,302)
3,434

(15,215)

(16,347)

1,132

(1,235)
—
(1,467)
(604)
(18,521) $

(2,672)
(3,452)
(5,300)
(84)
(27,855) $

1,437
3,452
3,833
(520)
9,334

32 %
(37)%

(7)%

(54)%
(100)%
(72)%
619 %
(34)%

70

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 77 of 169

Table of Contents

Net realized and unrealized (losses) gains on interest rate swap agreements. Net unrealized and realized losses on mark-to-
market adjustments for interest rate swap derivatives decreased by $1.1 million to $15.2 million in December 31, 2011, compared to 
$16.3 million in 2010. A factor contributing to the $15.2 million unrealized and realized losses on mark-to-market adjustments for 
interest rate swaps in 2011 was our entry into new interest rate swap agreements with a notional value of $285.9 million. In 2011 and 
2010,  long  term  interest  rate  swap  rates  declined  which  led  to  losses  related  to  the  mark-to-market  valuations  of  interest  rate 
derivatives. We hedge account for certain of our interest rate swaps. Accordingly, an additional $0.9 million gain was accounted for 
as a change in other comprehensive income which would have otherwise been recognized in earnings for the year ended December 
31, 2011. Included within mark-to-market adjustments for interest rate swaps is an unrealized gain of $3.3 million and a loss of $4.8 
million for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, representing amounts carved out and allocated to us on the 
basis of our proportion of Golar's debt. 

Net foreign exchange gains and losses on retranslation of lease related balances including currency swap mark-to-market 
gains and losses. Unrealized foreign exchange gains and losses of $1.2 million arose as a result of the retranslation of our capital 
lease obligations and the movement in the fair value of the related currency swap used to hedge the Golar Winter lease obligation. Of 
this $1.2 million unrealized net foreign exchange loss in 2011, an unrealized loss of $0.9 million (2010: $7.7 million unrealized loss) 
arose in respect of the mark-to-market valuation of the Golar Winter currency swap representing the movement in the fair value. This 
swap hedges the currency risk arising from lease rentals due in respect of the Golar Winter lease, by translating GBP payments into 
U.S. Dollar payments at a fixed GBP/USD exchange rate (i.e. the Partnership receives GBP and pays U.S. Dollars). The unrealized 
gain on retranslation of the lease obligation in respect of the Golar Winter lease, which this swap hedges, was $0.1 million (2010: 
$4.3 million unrealized gain). The unrealized gain arose due to the marginal appreciation of the U.S. Dollar against the GBP during 
the year. A currency swap mark-to-market loss of $0.5 million (2010: $0.6 million gain) has been carved out from Golar relating to 
our Dropdown Predecessor. 

Loss on termination of lease arrangements. The decrease of $3.5 million relates to the settlement in 2010 of lease financing 

arrangements in respect of the Golar Spirit, the Golar Freeze and the NR Satu obligations. 

Financing arrangement  fees.  Financing  arrangement  fees decreased by  $3.8  million  to  $1.5  million  in  2011  compared  to 
$5.3 million  in  2010.  This  was due to  higher  financing  arrangement  fees and  other costs  from  the  write-off of deferred financing 
costs in respect of the termination of certain lease financing arrangements in 2010.

Other  items.  Other  items  represent,  among  other things, bank  charges,  the  amortization of  debt  related  expenses,  foreign 
currency differences arising on retranslation of foreign currency and gains or losses on short term foreign currency forward contracts. 
Included within other items is a $0.6 million foreign exchange loss (2010: $0.5 million gain) representing amounts carved out from 
Golar. 

Income taxes: Income taxes relate primarily to the taxation of our U.K. based vessel operating companies and our Brazilian 
subsidiary established in connection with our Petrobras long-term charters. Included within income taxes is a credit of $2.4 million
relating to the amortization of deferred tax benefit on intra-group transfers in relation to the Golar Freeze and NR Satu which were 
carved out from the results of Golar for the period prior to their acquisition dates.

Net income: As  a result of the foregoing,  we earned  net  income  of $95.4  million  in 2011,  compared  to  $63.5  million  in 

2010.

Non-controlling interest: Non-controlling interest refers to the 40% interest in the Golar Mazo.

B. Liquidity and Capital Resources

Liquidity and Cash Needs

We  operate  in  a  capital-intensive  industry,  and  we  expect  to  finance  the  purchase  of  additional  vessels  and  other  capital 
expenditures  through  a  combination  of  borrowings  from,  and  leasing  arrangements  with,  commercial  banks,  cash  generated  from 
operations and debt and equity financings.  In addition to paying distributions, our other short-term liquidity requirements relate to 
servicing interest on our debt, scheduled repayments of long-term debt, funding working capital requirements, including drydocking, 
and maintaining cash reserves against fluctuations in operating cash flows.

Our  funding  and  treasury  activities  are  intended  to  maximize  investment  returns  while  maintaining  appropriate  liquidity. 
Cash  and  cash  equivalents  are  held  primarily  in  U.S.  Dollars  with  some  balances  held  in  British  Pounds.   We  have  not  used 
derivative instruments other than for interest rate and currency risk management purposes.

71

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 78 of 169

Table of Contents

Short-term Liquidity and Cash Requirements

Sources of short-term liquidity include cash  balances, restricted cash  balances, short-term investments, available amounts 
under revolving credit facilities and receipts from our charters. Revenues from our time charters are generally received monthly in 
advance. In addition we benefit from low inventory requirements (consisting primarily of fuel, lubricating oil and spare parts) due to 
fuel costs, which represent the majority of these costs being paid for by the charterer under time charters.

We have entered into an agreement with Petrobras to make certain modifications to the Golar Winter, in consideration for 
an increase in charter hire rates and an extension to the charter term of the Golar Winter. It is expected that the Golar Winter will 
enter  the  shipyard  in  the  second  quarter  of  2013  and  will  be  off-hire  for  a  total  of  approximately  six  weeks.  The  cost  of  the 
modifications together with drydock costs is estimated to be approximately $25 million, which we expect to fund with a combination 
of cash and borrowings under credit facilities.

As of December 31, 2012, our cash and cash equivalents, including restricted cash and short-term investments, was $287.8 
million and we had access to undrawn borrowing facilities of $40 million. Our restricted cash balances contribute to our short and 
medium term liquidity as they are used to fund payment of certain loans and capital leases which would otherwise be paid out of our 
cash balances.  Since December 31, 2012, significant transactions impacting our cash flows include:

•

In  February  2013,  we  paid  a  cash  distribution  of  $0.50  per  unit  ($26.6  million  in  the  aggregate)  with  respect  to  the 
quarter ended December 31, 2012; 

• We received net cash proceeds of approximately $130 million from our February 2013 Equity Offering;

• We acquired interests in the company that owns and operates the Golar Maria, from Golar for a purchase price of $215 
million, which was financed by our assumption of $89.5 million of debt relating to the vessel and the net proceeds from 
our February 2013 Equity Offerings.

• We made $14.0 million of scheduled debt repayments.

As  of  December 31,  2012,  the  Partnership’s  current  liabilities  exceeded  current  assets  by  $62.3  million.  Included  within 
current  liabilities  as  of  December 31,  2012,  are  mark-to-market  valuations  of  interest  rate  swap  derivatives  of  $25.0  million  and 
foreign currency swap derivatives of $20.5 million. The interest rate swaps mature between 2013 and 2018 and the Partnership has 
no intention of terminating these swaps before their maturity and hence realizing these liabilities. The foreign currency swap matures 
in 2032, however, the Partnership is considering the termination of this swap in connection with  a refinancing of the  related debt 
facility. The currency swap was entered into as a hedge against a foreign currency lease obligation and as such a loss on the swap is 
in part offset by a lower lease obligation. In addition, current liabilities include deferred drydocking and operating cost revenue of 
$12.8 million as of December 31, 2012. Deferred drydocking and operating cost revenue pertains to charterhire paid in advance by 
charterers, thus, no cash outflows are expected for these liabilities.

We believe our current resources, including our undrawn credit facilities of $40 million, are sufficient to meet our working 

capital requirements for at least the next twelve months.

Medium to Long-term Liquidity and Cash Requirements

Our  medium  to  long-term  liquidity  requirements  include  funding  the  acquisition  of  new  vessels,  maintenance  capital 
expenditures, the repayment of long-term debt and the payment of distributions to our unitholders, to the extent we have sufficient 
cash from operations after the establishment of cash reserves and payment of fees.

Generally,  our  long-term  sources  of  funds  will  be  cash  from  operations,  long-term  bank  borrowings  and  other  debt  and 
equity financings.  Because we will distribute the majority of our available cash, we expect that we will rely upon external financing 
sources, including bank borrowings and the issuance of debt and equity securities, to fund acquisitions and other expansion capital 
expenditures. Occasionally we may enter into vendor financing arrangements with Golar to provide intermediate financing for capital 
expenditures until longer-term financing is obtained, at which time we will use all or a portion of the proceeds from the longer-term 
financings to repay outstanding amounts due under these arrangements.

72

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 79 of 169

Table of Contents

Cash Flows

The  following  table  summarizes  our  net  cash  flows  from  operating,  investing  and  financing  activities  for  the  periods 

presented:

Net cash provided by operating activities
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities
Net cash used in financing activities
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year

$

Year Ended December 31,

2012

2011

2010

189,343
(78,798)
(93,436)
17,109
49,218
66,327

$

(dollars in thousands)
$

156,972
(102,881)
(58,431)
(4,340)
53,558
49,218

87,090
216,288
(283,666)
19,712
33,846
53,558

In addition to our cash and cash equivalents noted above, as of December 31, 2012, we had short-term restricted cash and 
investments  of  $30.9  million  that  represents  balances  retained  on  restricted  accounts  in  accordance  with  certain  lease  and  loan 
requirements. These balances act as security for, and over time are used to, repay lease and loan obligations. As of December 31, 
2012,  our  long-term  restricted  cash  balances  amounted  to  $190.5  million  and  represented  security  for  our  Methane  Princess  and 
Golar Grand capital lease obligations. They will be released over time in connection with the repayment of our lease obligations.

Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities

Net  cash  provided  by  operating  activities  was  $189.3  million,  $157.0  million  and  $87.1  million  for  the  years  ended 

December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. 

The increase of $32.3 million in 2012, compared to 2011, was primarily due to (i) the contribution from the NR Satu as it 
commenced its time charter to PTNR from May 2012 following the completion of its FSRU retrofitting in April 2012; and (ii) the 
Golar Grand operating at improved charter rates in 2012 compared to 2011. 

The increase of $69.9 million in 2011, compared to 2010, was primarily due to (i) a $16.2 million decrease in amounts due 
to  related  parties  to  $3.2  million  as  of  December  31,  2011  from  $19.5  million  in  December  31,  2010,  primarily  due  to  the  net 
settlement of trading balances  due to related parties; (ii) the increased  contribution from the Golar Freeze as it operated under its 
charter to DUSUP for the full year of 2011, as opposed to approximately eight months in 2010 following its FSRU retrofitting; (iii) 
increased  contribution  from  the  Golar  Grand  due  to  improved  utilization  rates  in  2011  compared  to  2010;  and  (iv)  the  higher 
allocated expenses (carve-out adjustments from Golar) of $24.3 million in 2010 compared to only $2.8 million in 2011. These carve-
out  adjustments  have  been  accounted  for  as  an  equity  contribution.  Accordingly,  these  allocated  expenses  are  presented  as  an 
operating activities cash payment with the related equity contribution shown as a financing activities cash receipt and included within 
the caption “repayment of owner’s funding,” such that the net cash effect to the combined statement of cash flows is $nil.

Net Cash (Used in) Provided by Investing Activities

Net cash used in investing  activities of $78.8 million in 2012  arose mainly due to  additions to vessels  and equipment  of 
$72.3 million primarily in relation to the FSRU retrofitting of the NR Satu which was completed in April 2012 and the increase in 
restricted cash deposits relating to the NR Satu facility.

Net cash used in investing activities of $102.9 million in 2011 arose primarily due to additions to vessels and equipment of 

$100.3 million in relation to the FSRU retrofitting of the NR Satu.

Net cash provided by investing activities of $216.3 million in 2010 arose due to the release of restricted cash deposits that 
were used as security for the Golar Spirit, Golar Freeze and NR Satu lease obligations which were settled during 2010.  This was 
partially offset by additions to vessels and equipment of $60.1 million in relation to the FSRU retrofitting of the Golar Freeze and 
the commencement of ordering long lead items for the NR Satu in preparation of its FSRU retrofitting which commenced in March 
2011. The FSRU retrofitting of the Golar Freeze was completed in May 2010.

73

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 80 of 169

Table of Contents

Net Cash Used in Financing Activities

Net cash used in financing activities is principally generated from funds from equity offerings, new debt and lease finance 

and contributions from owners, partially offset by debt repayments and repayments of invested equity.

Net  cash  used  in  financing  activities  during  the  year  ended  December  31,  2012  of  $93.4  million  was  mainly  due  to  the 

following:

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

payment of cash distributions to our unitholders during the year of $77.6 million;

proceeds from the July 2012 Equity Offerings and November 2012 Equity Offerings of $401.9 million; 

our  acquisition  of  Golar’s  interest  in  certain  subsidiaries  which  own  and  operate  the  NR  Satu.  The  purchase 
consideration  was  $385  million  for  the  vessel  (plus  working  capital  adjustments  of  $3.0  million),  resulting  in  total 
purchase consideration of approximately $388.0 million, of which $230.0 million was financed from the proceeds of 
the July  2012 Equity  offerings and $155.0 million vendor  financing  in the form of  the Golar LNG  vendor financing 
loan; 

our acquisition of Golar's interests in subsidiaries which lease and operate the Golar Grand. The purchase consideration 
was $265.0 million for the vessel (plus working capital adjustments of $2.6 million) net of the assumed capital lease 
obligation  of $90.8  million,  resulting  in  total  purchase  consideration  of  $176.8 million  of  which  $175.0  million  was 
financed from the proceeds of the November 2012 Equity Offerings;

proceeds from the high-yield bond  issuance of $227.3 million, $222.3 million of which was used to repay the Golar 
LNG vendor financing loan relating to the Golar Freeze acquisition;

proceeds from the NR Satu facility of $155.0 million which was used to repay the Golar LNG vendor financing loan 
relating to the NR Satu acquisition; 

repayments of long-term debt and lease obligations of $427.2 million, of which $377.3 million relates to the settlement 
of the vendor financing loans discussed above; and

contributions from the Dropdown Predecessor's funding of $53.6 million.

Net cash used in financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2011 of $58.4 million was mainly relating to the 

following:

•

•

•

•

repayments of long-term debt and lease obligations of $65.0 million;

payment of cash distributions to our unitholders during the year of $29.3 million pursuant to our IPO in April 2011;

payment of dividends relating to the Dropdown Predecessor and repayment of owner’s funding; and

acquisition  of  Golar’s  100%  ownership  interest  in  certain  subsidiaries  which  own  and operate  the  Golar  Freeze  and 
hold the secured bank debt related to the Golar Freeze. The purchase consideration was $330.0 million for the vessel 
and  $9.0  million  of  working  capital  adjustments  net  of  the  assumed  bank  debt  of  $108.0  million,  resulting  in  total 
purchase consideration of approximately $231.0 million, of which $222.3 million was financed by vendor financing in 
the form of the Golar LNG facility.

Net cash used in financing activities during the year ended December 31, 2010 of $283.7 million was primarily in relation to 
repayments of long-term debt, repayments of owners’ funding and the repayment of the Golar Spirit, the Golar Freeze and the NR 
Satu lease  obligations, which were  funded from  restricted cash deposits  held  to  secure these lease  obligations.   This  was partially 
offset by the proceeds from the drawdown on the Golar Freeze facility of $125 million.

Borrowing Activities

Long-Term Debt.  As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, our long-term debt consisted of the following:

74

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 81 of 169

Table of Contents

Mazo facility
Golar LNG Partners credit facility
Golar Freeze facility
Golar LNG vendor financing loan
High-yield bonds
NR Satu facility

Total

December 31,

2012

2011

(in thousands)

$

$

13,521
247,500
89,647
—
233,804
155,000
739,472

$

$

$

$

38,932
257,500
104,142
222,310
—
—
622,884

(in thousands)

64,822
51,838
79,782
42,550
276,355
224,125
739,472

Our outstanding debt of $739.5 million as of December 31, 2012, is repayable as follows:

Year Ending December 31,

2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018 and thereafter

Total

As of December 31, 2012, the margins we pay under our bank loan agreements are above LIBOR at a fixed or floating rate 

ranging from 0.87% to 3.50%. The margin related to our high-yield bond is 5.20% above NIBOR.

Mazo Facility

In  November  1997,  Osprey,  Golar’s  predecessor,  entered  into  a  secured  loan  facility  of  $214.5  million  in  respect  of  the 
vessel, the  Golar Mazo.  The loan is secured  on  the vessel Golar Mazo. This facility  bears floating rate interest of LIBOR plus  a 
margin.  The loan is repayable in semi-annual installments, which increase from $5.0 million to $13.5 million over the term of the 
loan ending in June 2013, at which point the facility will be repaid in full.  The debt agreement requires that certain cash balances, 
representing interest and principal payments for defined future periods, be held by the trust company during the period of the loan. 
These  balances  are  referred  in  these  financial  statements  as  restricted  cash.   As  of  December  31,  2012,  the  value  of  the  deposits 
secured was $11.0 million.  As of December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2011, $13.5 million and $38.9 million, respectively was 
outstanding under the Mazo facility.

Golar LNG Partners Credit Facility

In September 2008, we entered into a revolving credit facility with a banking consortium to refinance existing loan facilities 
in respect of two of our vessels, the Methane Princess and the Golar Spirit (or the Golar LNG Partners credit facility).  The loan is 
secured against the Golar Spirit and assignment to the lending bank of a mortgage given to us by the lessors of the Methane Princess
and the Golar Spirit, with a second priority charge over the Golar Mazo.

75

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 82 of 169

Table of Contents

The Golar  LNG Partners credit facility accrues floating interest at  a  rate  per annum  equal to  LIBOR  plus a margin.   The 
initial draw down  amounted to $250.0  million in November 2008.  The  total amount outstanding at the time of  the refinancing in 
respect of these two vessels’ refinanced facilities was $202.3 million.  We drew down a further $35.0 million for the period to March 
2009. At the time we entered  into  the Golar LNG Partners  credit facility, such facility provided for available borrowings of up to 
$285.0 million.  Pursuant to the terms of the Golar LNG Partners credit facility, the total amount available for borrowing under such 
facility decreases by $2.5 million per quarter from June 30, 2009 through December 31, 2012 and by $5.5 million per quarter from 
March  31,  2013  through  December  31,  2017.   As  of  December  31,  2012,  the  revolving  credit  facility  provided  for  available 
borrowings of up to $247.5 million, of which $247.5 million was outstanding. Accordingly, as of December 31, 2012, we have no 
ability  to  draw additional amounts under  this facility.   The loan  has  a term of ten  years and  is repayable in quarterly installments 
commencing in May 2009 with a final balloon payment of $137.5 million due in March 2018, its maturity date.

As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, we had long-term debt outstanding of $247.5 million and $257.5 million, respectively, 

under the Golar LNG Partners credit facility.

The Golar LNG Partners credit facility contains restrictive covenants that require the prior written consent of the lenders or 

otherwise restrict our ability to, among other things:

• merge or consolidate with any other person;

• make certain capital expenditures;

•

•

•

pay distributions to our unitholders;

terminate or materially amend certain of our charters;

enter into any other line of business;

• make any acquisitions;

•

•

•

incur additional indebtedness or grant any liens to secure any of our existing or future indebtedness;

enter into any sale-leaseback transactions; or

enter into any transactions with our affiliates.

The Golar LNG Partners credit facility prohibits us from paying distributions to our unitholders if we are not in compliance 

with certain financial covenants or upon the occurrence of an event of default.

Furthermore, we are required under the credit facility to, among other things, comply with the ISM Code and the ISPS Code 
and with all international and local environmental laws and to maintain certain levels of insurance on the Methane Princess and the 
Golar Spirit and maintain the vessels’ class certifications with no material overdue recommendations.

Sponsor Credit Facility

In connection  with  our IPO, we  entered into  a  $20.0  million  revolving  credit  facility  (or the sponsor  credit  facility) with 
Golar, to be used to fund our working capital requirements.  The facility has a term of four years and is interest-free and unsecured.  
As of December 31, 2012, we had not borrowed under the facility.  The sponsor credit facility contains covenants that require us to, 
among other things:

•

•

notify Golar  of  any  event which constitutes or may constitute  an  event of default or which may adversely affect our 
ability to perform our obligations under the credit facility; and

provide  Golar  with  information  in  respect  of  our  business  and  financial  status  as  Golar  may  reasonably  require 
including,  but  not  limited  to,  copies  of our  unaudited  quarterly financial  statements and  our  audited  annual  financial 
statements.

76

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Table of Contents

Golar Freeze Credit Facility

Page 83 of 169

In  June  2010,  Golar  Freeze  Holding  Co.,  a  subsidiary  of  Golar,  entered  into  a  $125  million  credit  agreement  with  a 
syndicate of banks, led by DnB NOR Bank ASA as security agent, to refinance conversion costs of the Golar Freeze (or the Golar 
Freeze credit facility).  The loan is secured against the Golar Freeze with second priority mortgage over the Golar Winter, second 
priority  assignment  of  insurances  on  the  Golar  Winter,  and  second  priority  assignment  of  earnings  from  the  Golar  Winter  time 
charter contract with Petrobras, net of lease and certain approved currency swap payments to the Golar Winter lessor. In connection 
with our  acquisition  of  the  Golar  Freeze, we  assumed  all  obligations  under  the  Golar Freeze  credit  facility.   As  of  December  31, 
2012  and  2011,  there  was  $89.6  million  and  $104.1  million  of  borrowings  outstanding  under  the  Golar  Freeze  credit  facility, 
respectively.

The Golar Freeze credit facility bears interest at a floating rate of LIBOR plus a margin and the additional cost (as defined 
in the facility), if any.  The facility is split into two tranches, the commercial loan facility and the Exportfinans ASA loan facility. 
Exportfinans  ASA  acted  as  a  lender  with  a  guarantee  from  Garanti-institute  for  Eksportkredit  (or  GIEK).   Repayments  under  the 
commercial loan facility tranche are due quarterly based on an annuity profile with a final balloon payment of $34.8 million payable 
in  May  2015.   The  Exportfinans  ASA  loan  facility  tranche  is  for  $50  million  with  a  term  of  eight  years  and  repayable  in  equal 
quarterly  installments with the final  payment in June  2018.  This tranche is required to be repaid if the commercial tranche  is not 
refinanced. The Golar Freeze credit facility requires certain cash balances to be held on deposit during the period of the loan.  These 
balances  are  referred  to  in  these  consolidated  financial  statements  as  restricted  cash.   As  of  December  31,  2012,  the  value  of  the 
deposit secured against the loan was $9.0 million.

Under the Golar  Freeze credit facility, we  are  obligated to comply with certain  restrictive  covenants  that will require the 

prior written consent of the lenders or otherwise restrict our ability to, among other things:

• merge or consolidate with any other person;

• make certain capital expenditures;

•

•

•

•

•

•

pay distributions;

terminate or materially amend the Golar Freeze charter or release the charterer from any obligations under such charter;

enter into any other line of business other than the ownership, operation and chartering of the Golar Freeze;

acquire or own certain additional assets;

enter into any sale and leaseback transactions;

enter into any transaction with our affiliates.

In addition, we are required under the Golar Freeze credit facility to, among other things, comply with the ISM Code and 
the  ISPS  Code  and  with  all  international  and  local  environmental  laws  and  to  maintain  certain  levels  of  insurance  on  the  Golar 
Freeze  and  maintain  its  name,  registration  under  the  laws  of  its  flag  state  and  class  certifications  with  no  material  overdue 
recommendations.

The Golar Freeze credit facility prohibits us from paying distributions to our unitholders if we are not in compliance with 
certain  financial  covenants  or  upon  the  occurrence  of  an  event  of  default.   The  financial  covenants  under  the  Golar  Freeze  credit 
facility require us to ensure that as of the end of each quarterly period during and as of the end of each financial year, the ratio of 
Charterhire to Consolidated Debt Service is equal to 1.15:1.

Golar LNG Vendor Financing Loan - Golar Freeze

In connection with our acquisition of the Golar Freeze from Golar in October 2011, we entered into a $222.3 million loan 
agreement with Golar (or the Golar Freeze vendor financing loan). The Golar Freeze vendor financing loan is unsecured and bears 
interest at a fixed rate of 6.75% per annum payable quarterly. The loan is non-amortizing with the payment of $222.3 million due in 
October 2014. The Golar Freeze vendor financing loan was repaid in October 2012 using the net proceeds received from the bond 
issuance.

77

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 84 of 169

Table of Contents

Golar LNG Vendor Financing Loan - NR Satu

In connection with the purchase of the NR Satu from Golar in July 2012, we entered into a financing loan agreement with 
Golar for an amount of $175 million. Of this amount, we drew down $155 million in July 2012. A further $20 million is available for 
drawdown until July 2015. The facility is unsecured and bears interest at a fixed rate of 6.75% per annum payable quarterly. The loan 
is non-amortizing with a final balloon payment for the amount drawn down due within three years from the date of draw down. All 
outstanding borrowings were repaid in December 2012 using the proceeds from the NR Satu facility.

High-yield bonds

In October 2012, we completed the issuance of NOK 1,300 million senior unsecured bonds that mature in October 2017. 
The bonds were in denominations of NOK 1 million each. The bonds bear interest at a rate equal to 3 months NIBOR plus a margin 
of 5.20% payable quarterly. The aggregate principal amount of the bonds was equivalent to approximately $227 million at the time 
they were issued. All interest and principal payments on the bonds were swapped into U.S. dollars, having the effect of fixing interest 
payments at 6.485%. The net proceeds from the bonds were used primarily to repay the $222.3 million 6.75% loan due October 2014 
from Golar that was utilized to purchase the Golar Freeze. The bonds were listed on Oslo Bors in December 2012. The bonds were 
not allowed to be purchased and are not allowed to be transferred to investors located in the U.S. or U.S. persons except to Qualified 
Institutional Buyers within the meaning of Rule 144A under the U.S. Securities Act. 

Under the bond agreement, we are obligated to comply with certain restrictive covenants that will require the prior written 

consent of the lenders or otherwise restrict our ability to, among other things:

• merge or consolidate with any other person;

•

•

•

•

•

de-merge or carry out a corporate reorganization splitting the Partnership into two or more separate entities;

change or cease to carry on the general nature or scope of our business;

sell or dispose of all or a substantial part of our assets or operations;

enter into any transaction with related parties other than on an arms' length basis; and

change our type of organization or jurisdiction of organization

The financial covenants under the bond agreement require us to maintain as of the end of each quarterly period during and 

as of the end of each fiscal year: 

•

•

•

free liquid assets of at least $20 million until June 30, 2013, $25 million from July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2014 and $30 
million from July 1, 2014 until the maturity date;

a minimum EBITDA to debt service ratio of 1.15:1; and

a maximum net debt to EBITDA ratio of 6.5:1.

In addition, we are required to provide the documents and information necessary to maintain the listing and quotation of the bonds on 
the Oslo Bors.

NR Satu Facility

In December 2012, PTGI, the company that owns and operates the NR Satu, entered into a 7 year, $175.0 million secured 
loan facility (or the NR Satu facility). The NR  Satu facility  is split into two tranches, a $155 million  term loan facility and a $20 
million revolving facility. The  facility is with  a syndicate  of banks and bears  interest  at LIBOR plus a margin of 3.5%.  We  drew 
down $155 million on the term loan  facility in December 2012. The  loan is  payable on a quarterly basis starting on February 28, 
2013 with a final balloon payment of $52.5 million payable after 7 years. As of December 31, 2012, we had not borrowed under the 
$20  million  revolving  facility.  The  NR  Satu  facility  requires  certain  cash  balances to  be held  on deposit  during  the  period  of  the 
loan.   These  balances  are  referred  to  in  these  consolidated  financial  statements  as  restricted  cash.   As  of  December  31,  2012,  the 
value of the deposit secured against the loan was $5.5 million.

Under the NR Satu facility, we are obligated to comply with certain restrictive covenants that will require the prior written 

consent of the lenders or otherwise restrict our ability to, among other things:

•

enter into mergers, de-mergers, consolidation or corporate reconstruction;

78

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 85 of 169

Table of Contents

•

•

•

pay distributions;

terminate or materially amend the NR Satu charter or release the charterer from any obligations under such charter;

change the general nature of our business;

• modification of the structure, type or performance characteristics of the NR Satu including the mooring system;

•

•

•

acquire or own certain additional assets;

enter into any sale transactions in respect of the NR Satu including the mooring system; and

enter into any transaction with our affiliates.

In addition, we are required  under the NR  Satu facility to, among other things,  comply  with the ISM  Code and the  ISPS 
Code and with all international and local environmental laws and to maintain certain levels of insurance on the NR Satu (including 
the mooring system), maintain all licenses necessary for ownership and operation of the NR Satu, including the mooring system, in 
Indonesia  and  maintain  its  name,  registration  under  the  laws  of  its  flag  state  and  class  certifications  with  no  material  overdue 
recommendations.

The  NR  Satu  facility  prohibits  us  from  paying  distributions  to  our  unitholders  if  we  are  not  in  compliance  with  certain 
financial covenants or upon the occurrence of an event of default.  The financial covenants under the NR Satu facility require us to 
ensure that as of the end of each quarterly period during and as of the end of each fiscal year, the debt service coverage ratio of PTGI 
is  not  less  than  1.10:1.  In  addition,  it  requires  us  to  ensure  that  the  aggregate  value  of  our  free  liquid  assets  is  not  less  than  $10 
million, the ratio of current assets to current liabilities is not less than 1:1 and net debt is not less than 6.5 times EBITDA.

Capital Lease Obligations.  The following is a summary of our capital lease obligations.  As of December 31, 2012, we are 

committed to make minimum rental payments under our capital leases, as follows:

Year ending December 31,
(in thousands)
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018 and thereafter
Total minimum lease payments
Less: Imputed interest

$

$

Methane
Princess Lease
7,494
7,781
8,082
8,387
8,702
192,856
233,302
(77,495)

Golar Winter
Lease

9,995
9,927
9,911
9,911
9,911
143,705
193,360
(71,902)

$

Grand Lease
9,067
9,014
9,000
9,000
9,000
178,686
223,767
(88,661)

Total
$

26,556
26,722
26,993
27,298
27,613
515,247
650,429
(238,058)

Present value of minimum lease payments

$

155,807

$

121,458

$

135,106

$

412,371

Methane Princess Lease.  In August 2003, Golar entered into a lease arrangement (or the Methane Princess lease) with a 
U.K. bank (or the Methane Princess lessor).  Our obligation to the Methane Princess lessor is primarily secured by a letter of credit, 
which is itself secured by a cash deposit which since June 2008 has been placed with the Methane Princess Lessor.  Lease rentals are 
payable quarterly.  At the end of each quarter the required value of the letter of credit to secure the present value of rentals due under 
the Methane Princess lease is recalculated taking into account the rental payment due at the end of the quarter.  The surplus funds in 
the cash deposits securing the letter of credit, released as a result of the reduction in the required letter of credit amount are available 
to pay the lease rentals due at the end of the same quarter.  Deficits, if any, are financed by working capital.

The lease liability under the Methane Princess lease continues to increase until 2014 and thereafter decreases over the period 
to 2034, being the primary term of the lease.  The value of the deposit used to obtain a letter of credit to secure the Methane Princess 
lease as of December 31, 2012 was $150.9 million.

79

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 86 of 169

Table of Contents

Golar Winter Lease.  In April  2004, Golar signed a lease agreement  in  respect of the Golar  Winter (or the  Golar Winter 
lease) with another U.K. bank (or the Winter lessor) for a primary period of 28 years. Under the Golar Winter lease, Golar received 
an amount of $166 million. The obligations to the Winter lessor under the Golar Winter lease were secured by, among other things, a 
letter of credit provided by another U.K. bank. During 2008 and 2009, an aggregate amount of $52.4 million was released from this 
deposit in consideration of the additional security afforded to the Winter Lessor by the entry of the Golar Winter into a long-term 
time charter with Petrobras. As of December 31, 2012, the value of the deposit used to obtain a LC to secure the Golar Winter lease 
obligation was $nil.

The Golar Winter lease is denominated in GBP while its cash deposit is denominated in U.S. Dollars.  In order to hedge the 
currency risk arising from the GBP lease rental obligation, we have entered into a 28 year currency swap, to swap all lease rental 
payments into U.S. Dollars at a fixed GBP to U.S. Dollar exchange rate (i.e., we receive GBP and pay U.S. Dollars).

Grand Lease. In April 2005, Golar signed a lease agreement in respect of our newbuilding, the Golar Grand (or the Grand 
lease,  with  another  U.K.  bank  (the  "Grand  Lessor")  for  a  primary  period  of  30  years.  Under  the  Grand  lease,  we  received  $150 
million. Our obligations to the Grand lessor under the lease are secured by, among other things, a letter of credit provided by another 
U.K. bank. This letter of credit is secured by a cash deposit of $45.0 million, which we deposited at the same time we entered into 
the lease. The Grand Lease obligation and associated cash deposit are both denominated in USD. 

 For the Methane Princess lease and Golar Winter lease, lease rentals include an interest element that is accrued at a rate 
based  upon  GBP  LIBOR.   In  relation  to  the  Golar  Winter  lease,  we  have  converted  our  GBP  LIBOR  interest  obligation  to  USD 
LIBOR by entering into the cross currency swap referred to above.  We receive interest income on our restricted cash deposits at a 
rate  based  upon  GBP  LIBOR  for  the  Golar  Winter  lease  and  the  Methane  Princess  lease.   Both  these  leases  are  therefore 
denominated  in  GBPs.  The  majority  of  this  GBP  capital  lease  obligation  is  hedged  by  GBP  cash  deposits  securing  the  lease 
obligations, in the case of the Golar Winter lease, or by a currency swap.  This is not, however, a perfect hedge and so the movement 
in the currency exchange rate between the U.S. Dollar and the GBP will affect our results.

In the event of any adverse tax changes to legislation affecting the tax treatment of the leases for the U.K. vessel lessors or a 
successful challenge by the U.K. Revenue authorities to the tax assumptions on which the transactions were based, or in the event 
that we terminate any of our U.K. tax leases before their expiration, we would be required to return all or a portion of, or in certain 
circumstances significantly more than, the upfront cash benefits that we have received or that have accrued over time, together with 
the fees that were financed in connection with our lease financing transactions, post additional security or make additional payments 
to our lessors which would increase the obligations noted above. The Methane Princess lessor has a second priority security interest 
in  the  Methane  Princess  and  the  Golar  Spirit  to  secure  these  potential  obligations  and  similar  obligations  related  to  other  Golar 
vessels.  Golar has  agreed to indemnify us against any of these increased  costs  and  obligations. Costs  related to the  Golar Winter 
lease, which is with a different lessor, have not been indemnified by Golar.  Golar did not receive any up front cash benefit in respect 
of the Golar Winter lease, but rather the benefits accrue over the term of the lease in the form of less expensive financing.

Debt and Lease Restrictions

Our existing debt and lease agreements impose operating and financing restrictions on us and our subsidiaries, which may 

significantly limit or prohibit, among other things, our ability to:

•

•

•

incur additional indebtedness;

create liens;

sell shares of subsidiaries;

• make certain investments;

•

•

•

•

•

engage in mergers and acquisitions; 

purchase and sell vessels;

transfer funds from subsidiary companies to us;

enter into, amend or cancel time or consecutive voyage charters; or

pay distributions to our unitholders without the consent of our lenders and lessors.

80

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 87 of 169

Table of Contents

In  addition,  our  lenders  and  lessors  may  accelerate  the  maturity  of  indebtedness  under  our  financing  agreements  and 
foreclose  upon  the  collateral  securing  the  indebtedness  upon  the  occurrence  of  certain  events  of  default,  including  our  failure  to 
comply with any of the covenants contained in our financing agreements.  Various debt and lease agreements contain covenants that 
require compliance  with  certain financial ratios.  Such  ratios include equity  ratios,  working  capital ratios and earnings to net debt 
ratio covenants, debt service coverage ratios, minimum net worth covenants, minimum value clauses and minimum cash and cash 
equivalent restrictions in respect of our subsidiaries and us.  The lease with respect to the Golar Winter contains a minimum value 
clause that is applicable only if the Golar Winter is not chartered under a time charter acceptable to the lessor for this purpose, such 
as the current time charter.  The Golar Winter lease generally provides that, in the event that the Golar Winter charter is terminated 
and is not replaced with a similar charter, the amount of any obligations outstanding under the Golar Winter lease shall be equal to or 
less  than  80% of the value  of  the  vessel  at the time of any such charter  termination.  In the  event that  the minimum value  clause 
becomes  applicable  and  is  not  satisfied,  the  lessee  shall  either  procure  a  letter  of  credit  in  an  amount  sufficient  to  cover  any 
deficiency between the amount that is equal to 80% of the value of the vessel at the time of any such charter termination and the 
amount of any obligations outstanding under the Golar Winter lease or, if the lessor agrees, provide alternative additional security to 
the lessor.  With respect to minimum levels of cash and cash equivalents, we have covenanted to maintain at least $10.0 million of 
cash and cash equivalents.

In April  2013,  we  received  waivers relating  to  breach of  covenants  under  the  Golar  LNG  Partners  credit  facility  and the 
Golar Freeze facility relating to change of control over the Partnership. The waiver relating to the Golar LNG Partners credit facility 
extends  to  January  1,  2014. The  waiver relating to the Golar  Freeze facility  is permanent. As  discussed in note  1 to our  financial 
statements, following the first annual general meeting of common unitholders on December 13, 2012, Golar ceased to control our 
board of directors as the majority of board members became electable by the common unitholders . Absent this waiver, we would not 
have been in compliance with this covenant as of December 31, 2012 as Golar no longer controls the appointment of the majority of 
the members of our board of directors. In connection with the grant of  such waiver, in order to avoid any such default that could 
occur in the future, the definition of a change of control contained in the Golar LNG Partners credit facility and the Golar Freeze 
facility are being amended.

  In March 2012, we received a waiver relating to our requirement to comply with the consolidated net worth covenant as of 
December 31, 2011 from the lenders under our Golar LNG Partners credit facility. Absent this waiver, we would not have been in 
compliance with such covenant as of December 31, 2011 due to the required accounting treatment of our acquisition from Golar of a 
100%  interest  in  the  subsidiaries that  own and  operate  the  Golar  Freeze.  Such acquisition is  accounted for  as  a reorganization  of 
entities under common control.  Such accounting treatment requires that the excess of the proceeds we paid over the historical cost of 
the  combining  entity  be  treated  as  an  equity  distribution,  which  resulted  in  a  $165.8  million  reduction  in  our  equity  as  of 
December 31, 2011.  In connection with the grant of such waiver, in order to avoid any such default that could occur in the future as 
a  result  of  acquisitions  by  us  from  Golar  that  may  require  accounting  as  a  reorganization  of  entities  under  common  control,  the 
definition of consolidated net worth contained in such credit facility has been amended to permit, in connection with up to two such 
additional  acquisitions  by  us  from  Golar,  the  addition  to  our  consolidated  net  worth  (as  defined  in  such  credit  facility)  of  the 
difference between the original purchase price and the original net book value (subject to adjustment for depreciation).

In addition to mortgage security, some of our debt is also collateralized through pledges of equity shares by our guarantor 

subsidiaries.

Derivatives

We use financial instruments to reduce the risk associated with fluctuations in interest rates and foreign currency exchange 
rates.  We have a portfolio of interest rate swaps that exchange or swap floating rate interest to fixed rates, which from a financial 
perspective, hedges our obligations to make payments based on floating interest rates.  As of December 31, 2012, our interest rate 
swap  agreements  effectively  fixed  our  net  floating  interest  rate  exposure  on  $759.6  million  of  floating  rate  debt,  leaving  $170.8 
million exposed to a floating rate of interest.  In February 2013, we entered into interest rate swaps to fix the LIBOR interest rate on 
the NR Satu facility for a principal amount of $122.5 million at an average rate of 1.27%, expiring in 2018. Our swap agreements 
have expiration dates between 2013 and 2018 and have fixed rates of between 0.92% and 6.49%. 

As noted above, we have entered into a currency swap to hedge an exposure to GBPs in respect of the Golar Winter lease. 

In addition, all interest and principal payments on the high-yield bonds were swapped into U.S. dollars. 

81

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 88 of 169

Table of Contents

We  enter  into  foreign  currency  forward  contracts  in  order  to  manage  our  exposure  to  the  risk  of  movements  in  foreign 
currency exchange rate fluctuations.  We also receive some of the revenue in respect of the Golar Spirit and Golar Winter charters in 
Brazilian Reais.  We are affected by foreign currency fluctuations primarily through our FSRU projects, expenditures in respect of 
our  ships  drydocking,  some operating expenses  including  the  effect of  paying  the  majority  of our  seafaring  officers  in Euros  and 
some of our administrative costs.  The currencies which impact us the most include, but are not limited to, Euro, Norwegian Kroner, 
Singapore Dollars, Indonesian Rupiah and, to a lesser extent, GBP.

Capital Commitments

Possible Acquisitions of Other Vessels

Although  we  do  not currently  have  in  place  any  agreements  relating  to  acquisitions  of  other vessels,  we  assess  potential 
acquisition  opportunities  on  a  regular  basis.   Pursuant  to  our  omnibus  agreement  with  Golar,  we  will  have  the  opportunity  to 
purchase additional LNG carriers and FSRUs from Golar when those vessels are fixed under charters of five or more years upon their 
expiration of their current charters.  Subject to the terms of our loan agreements, we could elect to fund any future acquisitions with 
equity or debt or cash on hand or a combination of these forms of consideration.  Any debt incurred for this purpose could make us 
more leveraged and subject us to additional operational or financial covenants.

Drydocking

We estimate that we will spend in total approximately $46.7 million for drydocking and classification surveys for our eight 
vessels  during  the  five-year  period  ending  December  31,  2017. As  our  fleet  matures  and  expands,  our  drydocking  expenses  will 
likely increase.  Ongoing costs for compliance with environmental regulations are primarily included as part of our drydocking and 
society classification survey costs or are a component of our operating expenses.   We are not  aware  of any regulatory changes or 
environmental liabilities that we anticipate will have a material impact on our current or future operations.

Modifications to the Golar Winter

We have agreed to make certain modifications to the Golar Winter, including the addition of LNG loading arms, as a result 
of Petrobras’ decision to relocate the Golar Winter, from Rio de Janeiro to Bahia.  We have begun to order the long lead items and 
the work is expected to be completed by the third quarter of 2013.  We currently expect the cost of these modifications together with 
the drydocking cost to be approximately $25.0 million, which we expect to fund with a combination of cash and borrowings under 
credit facilities.

Critical Accounting Policies

The  preparation  of  our  consolidated  and  combined  financial  statement  in  accordance  with  U.S.  GAAP  requires  that 
management  make estimates and assumptions affecting  the  reported  amounts  of  assets  and  liabilities  and  disclosure of contingent 
assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting 
period.   The  following  is  a  discussion  of  the  accounting  policies  applied  by  us  that  are  considered  to  involve  a  higher  degree  of 
judgment in their application.  Please read Note 2 (Summary of Significant Accounting Policies) of our consolidated and combined 
financial statements and consolidated and combined financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report.

Revenue Recognition

Our  revenues  include  minimum  lease  payments  under  time  charters,  fees  for  repositioning  vessels  as  well  as  the 
reimbursement  of  certain  vessel  operating  and  drydocking  costs.   We  record  revenues  generated  from  time  charters,  which  we 
classify as operating leases, over the term of the charter as service is provided.

We recognize the  reimbursement for  drydocking costs  evenly over the period  to  the  next  drydocking, which  is generally 
between two to five years.  We recognize repositioning fees (which are included in time charter revenue) received in respect of time 
charters at the end of the charter when the fee becomes fixed and determinable.  However, where there is a fixed amount specified in 
the charter, which is not dependent upon redelivery location, we will recognize the fee evenly over the term of the charter.  Where a 
vessel  undertakes  multiple  single  voyage  time  charters,  revenue  is  recognized,  including  the  repositioning  fee  if  fixed  and 
determinable, on a discharge-to-discharge basis.  Under this basis, revenue is recognized evenly over the period from departure of the 
vessel from its last discharge port to departure from the next discharge port.

82

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 89 of 169

Table of Contents

Depreciation and Amortization

Depreciation and amortization expense, or the periodic cost charged to our income for the reduction in usefulness and long-
term value of our ships, is related to the number of vessels we own or operate under long-term capital leases.  We depreciate the cost 
of our owned vessels, less their estimated residual value, and amortize the amount of our capital  lease  assets  over their estimated 
economic  useful  lives,  on  a  straight-line  basis,  which  we  estimate  at  the  start  of  2013  to  be  approximately  18 years,  27 years, 
31 years, 31 years, 14 years, 19 years and 33 years for the Golar Spirit, the Golar Mazo, the Methane Princess, the Golar Winter, the 
Golar Freeze, the NR Satu and the Golar Grand, respectively.  The economic life for LNG carriers operated worldwide has generally 
been estimated to be 40 years.  On this basis, the Golar Spirit would, therefore, have a remaining useful life of 10 years.  However, 
the  Golar  Spirit,  the  Golar  Freeze  and  the  NR  Satu  have  been  converted  into  FSRUs  and  have  been  moored  in  sheltered  waters 
where fatigue loads on  their hulls are significantly reduced compared to  loads borne  in  connection with operation in a worldwide 
trade pattern.  We believe that these factors support our estimate that the Golar Spirit, the Golar Freeze and the NR Satu will remain 
operational until they are 50 years old and will therefore have remaining useful economic lives of approximately 20 years, each.  We 
amortize our deferred drydocking costs over two to five years based on each vessel’s next anticipated drydocking.

Vessels and Impairment

Our vessels are reviewed for impairment whenever events  or  changes in circumstances indicate  that the  carrying  amount 
may  not  be  recoverable.   In  assessing  the  recoverability  of  our  vessels’ carrying  amounts,  we  must  make  assumptions  regarding 
estimated future cash flows and estimates in respect of residual or scrap value.  We estimate those future cash flows based on the 
existing service potential of our vessels.  As of December 31, 2012, we did not perform an impairment test as no trigger events have 
been identified.

In the event of an impairment trigger, we follow a traditional present value approach, whereby a single set of future cash 
flows is estimated.  If the carrying value of a vessel were to exceed the undiscounted future cash flows, we would write the vessel 
down  to  its  fair  value,  which  is  calculated  by  using  a  risk-adjusted  rate  of  interest.   Since  inception,  our  vessels  have  not  been 
impaired.   However,  for  the  years  ended  2012,  2011  and   2010  we  incurred  impairment  charges  of   $nil,  $nil  and  $1.5  million, 
respectively,  in  respect  of  parts  ordered  for  the  FSRU  conversion  project  that  were  not  required  for  the  conversion  of  the  Golar 
Spirit.  Some of these parts have been used by Golar for other FSRU projects but these parts were not transferred to us by Golar.

Vessel Market Values

In  “—Vessels  and  Impairment” above,  we  discuss  our  policy  for  assessing  impairment  of  the  carrying  values  of  our 
vessels.   During the past few years, the market values of certain vessels in the worldwide fleet have experienced particular volatility, 
with  substantial  declines  in  many  vessel classes.  There  is  a future  risk that  the  sale  value  of  certain  of our  vessels  could  decline 
below  those  vessels’ carrying  value,  even  though  we  would  not  impair  those  vessels’ carrying  value  under  our  impairment 
accounting policy, due to our belief that future undiscounted cash flows expected to be earned by such vessels over their operating 
lives would exceed such vessels’ carrying amounts.

With respect to ascertaining the fair market value of our owned vessels, we believe that the LNG carrier and FSRU markets 
are illiquid, difficult to observe and therefore judgmental.  Our valuation approach is to make an estimate of future net cash flows, 
with particular respect to cash flows derived from preexisting contracts with counterparties.  The principal assumptions we have used 
are:

•

•

•

Cash flows are assumed to be in line with pre-existing contracts and are utilized based on historical performance levels;

For  our  LNG  carriers,  once  the  initial  contract  period  expires,  we  have  estimated  cash  flows  at  the  lower  of  our 
estimated current long-term charter rate or option renewal rate with the existing counterparty;

For our FSRUs, once the initial contract period expires, we have estimated cash flows at the existing contract option 
renewal rate, given the lack of pricing transparency in the market as a whole;

• We  have  used  a  discount  rate  applied  to  future  cash  flows  equivalent  to  our  estimated  incremental  borrowing  rate, 

assuming 10 year interest swap rates plus a market risk premium; and

• We have made certain assumptions in relation to the scrap values of our vessels at the end of their useful lives.

83

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 90 of 169

Table of Contents

While we intend to hold and operate our vessels, were we to hold them for sale, we do not believe that the fair market value 
of any of our owned vessels would be lower than their respective historical book values presented as of December 31, 2012.  Our 
estimates of fair market values assume that we would sell each of our owned vessels in the current environment, on industry standard 
terms, in cash transactions, and to a willing buyer where we are not under any compulsion to sell, and where the buyer is not under 
any  compulsion  to  buy.   For purposes  of this  calculation,  we  have  assumed  that  each owned vessel  would  be  sold  at a  price  that 
reflects our estimate of its current fair market value.  However, we are not holding any of our vessels for sale.  Our estimates of fair 
market values  assume  that our vessels are all  in  good  and seaworthy  condition without  need  for  repair  and  if  inspected would  be 
certified  in  class  without  notations  of  any  kind.   As  we  obtain  information  from  various  sources  of  objective  data  and  internal 
assumptions, our estimates of fair market value are inherently uncertain.  In addition, vessel values are highly volatile; as such, our 
estimates may not be indicative of the current or future fair market value of our vessels or prices that we could achieve if we were to 
sell them.

Time Charters

We account for time charters of vessels to our customers as operating leases and record the customers’ lease payments as 
time charter revenues.  We evaluate each contract to determine whether or not the time charter should be treated as an operating or 
capital  lease,  which  involves  estimates  about  our  vessels’ remaining  economic  useful  lives,  the  fair  value  of  our  vessels,  the 
likelihood of a lessee renewal or extension, incremental borrowing rates and other factors.

Our  estimate  of  the  remaining  economic  useful  lives  of  our  vessels  is  based  on  the  common  life  expectancy  applied  to 
similar vessels in the  FSRU  and LNG  shipping industries.  The fair  value of  our vessels is derived from our  estimate of expected 
present value, and is also benchmarked against open market values considering the point of view of a potential buyer.  The likelihood 
of  a  lessee  renewal  or  extension  is  based  on  current  and  projected  demand  and  prices  for  similar  vessels,  which  is  based  on  our 
knowledge of trends in the industry, historic experience with customers in addition to knowledge of our customers’ requirements.  
The incremental borrowing rate we use to discount expected lease payments and time charter revenues are based on the rates at the 
time of entering into the agreement.

A change in our estimates might impact the evaluation of our time charters, and require that we classify our time charters as 
capital leases, which would include recording an asset similar to a loan receivable and removing the vessel from our balance sheet.  
The  lease  payments  to  us  would  reflect  a  declining  revenue  stream  to  take  into  account  our  interest  carrying  costs,  which  would 
impact the timing of our revenue stream.

Capital Leases

As of December 31, 2012, we leased three vessels in respect of three refinancing transactions where we sold the vessels and 
subsequently  leased  the  vessels  from  UK  financial  institutions  that  routinely  enter  into  finance  leasing  arrangements.   We  have 
accounted  for  these  arrangements  as  capital  leases.   As  identified  in  our  critical  accounting  policy  for  time  charters,  we  make 
estimates and assumptions in determining the classification of our leases.  In addition, these estimates, such as incremental borrowing 
rates and the fair value or remaining economic lives of the vessels, impact the measurement of our vessels and liabilities subject to 
the capital leases.  Changes to our estimates could affect the carrying value of our lease assets and liabilities, which could impact our 
results of operations.  To illustrate, if the incremental borrowing rate had been lower than our initial estimate this would result in a 
higher lease liability being recorded due to a lower discount rate being applied to its future lease rental payments.

One of our capital leases is ‘funded’ via a long-term cash deposit which closely matches the lease liability.  Future changes 
in the lease liability arising from interest rate changes are only partially offset by changes in interest income on the cash deposit, and 
where differences arise this is funded by, or released to, available working capital.

We have also recorded deferred credits in connection with this lease transaction.  The deferred credits represent the upfront 
cash inflow derived  from  undertaking financing in the form of UK leases.   The deferred  credits are  amortized over the  remaining 
economic  lives  of  the  vessels  to  which  the  leases  relate  on  a  straight-line  basis.   The  benefits  under  lease  financings  are  derived 
primarily  from  tax  depreciation  assumed  to  be  available  to  lessors  as  a  result  of  their  investment  in  the  vessels.   If  that  tax 
depreciation ultimately proves not to be available to the lessor, or is clawed back from the lessor (e.g., on a  change of tax law or 
adverse tax ruling), the lessor will be  entitled to adjust the rentals under the relevant lease so as  to maintain its after tax position, 
except in limited circumstances.  Golar has agreed to indemnify us against any increased costs related to the Methane Princess lease 
(but not the Golar Winter or Grand leases).  We would be liable for these costs to the extent Golar is unable to indemnify us.

84

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 91 of 169

Table of Contents

Valuation of Derivative Financial Instruments

Our risk management policies permit the use of derivative financial instruments to manage foreign currency fluctuation and 
interest  rate.  Changes  in  fair  value  of  derivative  financial  instruments  that  are  not  designated  as  cash  flow  hedges  for  accounting 
purposes  are  recognized  in  earnings  in  the  consolidated  statement  of  income  (loss).  Changes  in  fair  value  of  derivative  financial 
instruments that are designated as cash flow hedges for accounting purposes are recorded in other comprehensive income (loss) and 
are  reclassified  to  earnings  in  the  consolidated  statement  of  income  (loss)  when  the  hedged  transaction  is  reflected  in  earnings. 
Ineffective portions of the hedges are recognized in earnings as they occur. During the life of the hedge, we formally assess whether 
each derivative designated  as a hedging instrument continues to  be highly effective in  offsetting changes  in the fair value or cash 
flows  of  hedged  items.  If  it  is  determined  that  a  hedge  has  ceased  to  be  highly  effective,  we  will  discontinue  hedge  accounting 
prospectively.

The fair value of our derivative financial instruments is the estimated amount that we would receive or pay to terminate the 
agreements in an arm’s length transaction under normal business conditions at the reporting date, taking into account current interest 
rates and foreign exchange rates, and estimates of the current credit worthiness of both us and the swap counterparty. Inputs used to 
determine the fair value of our derivative instruments are observable either directly or indirectly in active markets. The process of 
determining credit worthiness is highly subjective and requires significant judgment at many points during the analysis.

If our estimates of fair value are inaccurate, this could result in a material adjustment to the carrying amount of derivative 
asset or liability and consequently the change in fair value for the applicable period that would have been recognized in earnings or 
comprehensive income.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

Adoption of new accounting standards

In  May 2011,  the  FASB  amended  existing  guidance  to  achieve  consistent  fair  value  measurements  and  to  clarify  certain 
disclosure requirements for fair value measurements. The new guidance includes clarification about when the concept of highest and 
best use is applicable to fair value measurements, requires quantitative disclosures about inputs used and qualitative disclosures about 
the  sensitivity  of  fair  value  measurements  using  unobservable  inputs  (Level  3  in  the  fair  value  hierarchy),  and  requires  the 
classification of all assets and liabilities measured at fair value in the fair value hierarchy (including those assets and liabilities which 
are not recorded at fair value but for which fair value is disclosed). The guidance is effective for our interim and annual reporting 
periods  beginning  after  December 15,  2011.  The  adoption  of  this  newly  issued  guidance  did  not  have  a  material  impact  on  our 
consolidated financial statements.

In June 2011, the FASB amended guidance on the presentation of comprehensive income in financial statements. The new 
guidance allows entities to present components of net income and other comprehensive income in one continuous statement, referred 
to as the statement of comprehensive income, or in two separate but consecutive statements, and removes the current option to report 
other comprehensive income and its components in the statement of changes in equity.  Under the two-statement approach, an entity 
is required to present components of net income and total net income in the statement of net income.  The amendments in this update 
do not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income or when an item of other comprehensive income must 
be reclassified to net income.  The amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, 
beginning after December 15, 2011. In January 2012, the FASB deferred the effective date for changes in the above guidance that 
relate  to  the  presentation  of  reclassification  adjustments  out  of  Accumulated  Other  Comprehensive  Income.  The  adoption  of  this 
guidance did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

85

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 92 of 169

Table of Contents

New accounting standards not yet adopted

In  December 2011,  the  FASB  amended  guidance  on  disclosures  about  offsetting  assets  and  liabilities.  The  amendments 
require  an  entity  to  disclose  information  about  offsetting  and  related  arrangements  to  enable  users  of  its  financial  statements  to 
understand  the  effect  of  those  arrangements  on  its  financial  position.  The  amendments  will  enhance  disclosures  required  by  US 
GAAP by requiring improved information about financial instruments and derivative instruments that are either offset or subject to 
an  enforceable  master  netting  arrangement  or  similar  agreement,  irrespective  of  whether  they  are  offset  in  accordance  with  US 
GAAP.  This  information  will  enable  users  of  an  entity’s  financial  statements  to  evaluate  the  effect  or  potential  effect  of  netting 
arrangements on an entity’s financial position, including the effect or potential effect of netting arrangements on an entity’s financial 
position,  including  the  effect  or  potential  effect  of  rights  of  setoff  associated  with  certain  financial  instruments  and  derivative 
instruments  in  the  scope  of  this  update.  The  amendments  will  be  required  for  annual  reporting  periods  beginning  on  or  after 
January 1,  2013,  and  interim  periods  within  those  annual  periods.  An  entity  should  provide  the  disclosures  required  by  those 
amendments  retrospectively  for  all  comparative  periods  presented.  Adoption  of  this  amended  guidance  will  result  in  additional 
disclosures in our consolidated financial statements.

In  October  2012,  the  FASB  amended  several  disclosure  requirements  of  the  Codification  relating  to  investments, 
consolidation,  accounting  changes  and  error  corrections,  inventory,  retirement  benefits  for  defined  benefit  plans,  financial 
instruments  and  balance  sheet.  The  amendments  are  effective  for  fiscal  periods  beginning  after  December  15,  2012.  Adoption  of 
these amendments will result in additional disclosures in our consolidated financial statements.

In  February  2013,  further  guidance  was  provided  relating  to  the  reporting  of  the  effects  on  net  income  of  significant 
amounts reclassified out of each component of accumulated other comprehensive income. Under the updated guidance, the effects on 
net income of significant amounts reclassified out of each component of accumulated other comprehensive income shall be shown, in 
one location, either on the face of the statement where net income is presented or as a separate disclosure in the notes to the financial 
statements. The amendment will result in additional disclosures in our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2013, the FASB issued guidance for the recognition, measurement and disclosure of obligations resulting from 
joint  and  several  liability  arrangements  for  which  the  total  amount  of  the  obligation  is  fixed  at  the  reporting  date,  including  debt 
arrangements,  other  contractual  obligations  and  settled  litigation  and  judicial  rulings.  The  guidance  requires  an  entity  to  measure 
obligations resulting from joint and several liability arrangements for which the total amount of the obligation within the scope of 
this  guidance  is  fixed  at  the  reporting  date,  as  the  sum  of  (a)  the  amount  the  reporting  entity  agreed  to  pay  on  the  basis  of  its 
arrangement among its co-obligors and (b) any additional amount the reporting entity expects to pay on behalf of its co-obligors. The 
guidance  also  requires  an  entity  to  disclose  the  nature  and  amount  of  the  obligation  as  well  as  other  information  about  those 
obligations.  The  amendments  are  effective  for  fiscal  years,  and  interim  periods  within  those  years,  beginning  after  December  15, 
2013. We are evaluating the impact of the adoption of this amended guidance but we do not expect it to have a material impact on 
our consolidated financial statements.

C. Research and Development

Not applicable.

D. Trend Information

Please see the section of Item 5 entitled “Market Overview and Trends.”

E. Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

At December 31, 2012, we do not have any off balance-sheet arrangements.

86

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 93 of 169

Table of Contents

F. Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations

Contractual Obligations

The following table sets forth our contractual obligations for the periods indicated as of December 31, 2012:

$

Long-term debt(1)
Interest commitments on long-term debt - floating(2)
Capital lease obligations
Interest commitments on capital lease obligations(1)
(2)(3)
Modifications on the Golar Winter (4)
Other long-term liabilities(5)

Total
Obligation

Due in
2013

$

739.5
137.3
412.4

64.8
31.7
5.6

Due in
2014—2015
(in millions)
131.6
$
55.4
12.7

Due in
2016—2017

Due
Thereafter

$

$

318.9
43.6
15.3

224.2
6.6
378.8

238.1
25.0
—
1,552.3

21.0
25.0
—
148.1

41.0
—
—
240.7

39.6
—
—
417.4

136.5
—
—
746.1

Total
__________________________________________ 
(1) As of December 31, 2012, taking into account the hedging effect of our interest rate swaps, $170.8 million of our long-term debt 
and capital lease obligations, net of restricted cash deposits, was floating rate debt which accrued interest based on U.S. Dollar 
(USD) LIBOR. 

$

$

$

$

$

(2) Our interest commitment on our long-term debt is calculated based on an assumed average USD LIBOR of 0.83% and taking 
into account our various margin rates and interest rate swaps associated with each debt.  Our interest commitment on our capital 
lease obligations is calculated on an assumed average GBP LIBOR of 5.1%.

(3) In  the  event  of  any  adverse  tax  rate  changes  or  rulings  our  lease  obligations  could  increase  significantly  (please  read  the 
discussion  above  under  “—Liquidity  and  Capital  Resources—Borrowing  Activities—Capital  Lease  Obligations”).   However, 
Golar has agreed to indemnify us against any such increase (other than any increase related to the Golar Winter lease).

(4) We have agreed to make certain modifications to the Golar Winter, including the addition of LNG loading arms, as a result of 
Petrobras'  decision  to  relocate  the  Golar  Winter,  from  Rio  de  Janeiro  to  Bahia.  We  expect  the  cost  of  these  modifications 
together with the drydocking cost to be approximately $25 million. The modification work is expected to be completed by the 
third quarter of 2013.

(5) Our consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2012 includes $18.5 million classified as “Other long-term liabilities” which 
represents deferred credits.  These liabilities have been excluded from the above table as the timing and/or the amount of any 
cash payment is uncertain.

G. Safe Harbor

See “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”

Item 6.

Directors, Senior Management and Employees

A. Directors and Senior Management

Directors

The  following  provides  information  about  each  of  our  directors  as  of  April 30,  2013.   The  business  address  for  these 

individuals is Par-la-Ville Place, 14 Par-la-Ville Road, Hamilton HM 08, Bermuda.

87

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 94 of 169

Table of Contents

Name
Tor Olav Trøim
Hans Petter Aas
Kate Blankenship
Kathrine Fredriksen
Paul Leand Jr.
Carl Steen
Bart Veldhuizen
Georgina Sousa

Age
50
67
48
29
46
62
46
63

Position

Chairman of the Board of Directors
Director and Audit Committee Member
Director and Audit Committee Member
Director
Director and Conflicts Committee Member
Director and Conflicts Committee Member
Director, Conflicts Committee Member and Audit Committee Member
Company Secretary

Tor Olav Trøim has served as our director and chairman of our board of directors since January 2009. Mr. Trøim has also 
been  a  director  of  Golar  LNG  Limited  since  September,  2011,  having  previously  served  as  a  director  and  vice-president  of  the 
Company  from  its  incorporation  in  May  2001  until  October  2009,  after  which  time  he  served  as  a  director  and  Chairman  of  the 
Company's  listed  subsidiary,  Golar  LNG  Energy  Limited.  Mr.  Trøim  graduated  as  M.Sc  Naval  Architect  from  the  University  of 
Trondheim,  Norway  in  1985.  He  has  also  served  as  an  Equity  Portfolio  Manager  with  Storebrand  ASA  (1987-1990),  and  Chief 
Executive  Officer  for the Norwegian Oil Company DNO  AS  (1992-1995). Mr.  Trøim has also  been  a director  of  Archer Limited 
since its incorporation in 2007. Mr. Trøim has also served as Vice-President and a director of Seadrill Limited (or Seadrill) since its 
inception  in  May  2005,  chairman  and  director  of  Seadrill  Partners  LLC  (or  Seadrill  Partners)  since  July  2012  and  is  currently  a 
director of three Oslo Stock Exchange listed companies, Golden Ocean (also listed on the Singapore Stock Exchange), Aktiv Kapital 
ASA and Marine Harvest ASA. He served as a director of Frontline from November 1997 until February 2008.

Hans  Petter  Aas  has  served  on  our  board  of  directors  since  his  appointment  in  March 2011.   Mr. Aas  has  served  as  a 
director of Golar since September 2008.  Mr. Aas has had a long career as a banker in the international shipping and offshore market, 
and  retired  from  his position  as Global Head of the  Shipping, Offshore and Logistics  Division of DnB NOR in August 2008.  He 
joined DnB NOR (then Bergen Bank) in 1989, and has previously worked for the Petroleum Division of the Norwegian Ministry of 
Industry and the Ministry of Energy, as well as for Vesta Insurance and Nevi Finance.  Mr. Aas is also a director and Chairman of 
Ship Finance and Knutsen NYK Offshore Tanker AS, a director of Gearbulk Holding Ltd, and has recently become a director of the 
Norwegian Export Credit Guaranty Institute.

Kate  Blankenship  has  served  on  our  board  of  directors  since  her  appointment  in  September 2007.   Ms. Blankenship  has 
served  as  a  director  of Golar  since  July 2003.   Ms. Blankenship  also  served  as  Company  Secretary of  Golar  from its  inception  in 
2001  until  November 2005.   Ms. Blankenship  has  also  been  a  director  of  Frontline  Limited  (or  Frontline)  since  August 2003  and 
served  as  Chief  Accounting  Officer  and  Secretary  of  Frontline  from  1994  and  October 2005.     Ms. Blankenship  has  served  as  a 
director  of  Ship  Finance  International  Limited  since  July 2003,  Seadrill  since  May 2005,  Golden  Ocean  Group  Limited  since 
November 2004,  Archer  Limited  since  August 2007  and  Seadrill  Partners  since  June  2012.   She  is  a  member  of  the  Institute  of 
Chartered Accountants in England and Wales.

Kathrine Fredriksen was recently appointed to our board of directors in April 2013. Ms. Fredriksen served as a director of 
Golar LNG Limited from September 2008 to April 2013.  Ms. Fredriksen is a graduate of the Wang Handels Gymnas in Norway and 
has studied at the European Business School in London.  Ms. Fredriksen is the daughter of Mr. John Fredriksen, the Chairman of the 
Board of Golar. Ms. Fredriksen is also a director of Frontline, Seadrill and Independent Tankers Corporation Limited.

Paul Leand Jr. has served on our board of directors since his appointment in March 2011.  Mr. Leand has been a Director 
of NYSE-listed Ship Finance International Limited since 2003.  Mr. Leand has served as the Chief Executive Officer and Director of 
AMA  Capital  Partners  LLC,  or  AMA,  an  investment  bank  specializing  in  the  maritime  industry  since  2004.   From  1989  to  1998 
Mr. Leand served  at  the First  National  Bank  of Maryland  where  he  managed its  Railroad Division  and  its  International Maritime 
Division.   He  has  worked  extensively  in  the  U.S.  capital  markets  in  connection  with  AMA’s  restructuring  and  mergers  and 
acquisitions practices.  Mr. Leand serves as a member of American Marine Credit LLC’s Credit Committee and served as a member 
of the Investment  Committee of AMA  Shipping Fund I, a private equity fund  formed and managed by AMA.  Mr. Leand holds  a 
BS/BA from Boston University’s School of Management and is a director of publicly listed SEA CO LTD and privately held Helm 
Financial Corporation and GE SEACO SRL.

88

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 95 of 169

Table of Contents

Carl Steen has served on our board of directors since his appointment in August 2012. Mr. Steen initially graduated in 1975 
from ETH Zurich Switzerland with an M.Sc. in Industrial and Management Engineering. After working for a number of high profile 
companies,  Mr.  Steen  joined  Nordea  Bank  from  January  2001  to  February  2011  as  head  of  the  bank's  Shipping,  Oil  Services  & 
International Division. Currently, Mr. Steen is a director of Seadrill (since February 2011) and holds directorship positions in various 
Norwegian companies including Wilhelm Wilhelmsen Holding ASA and RS Platou ASA.

Bart  Veldhuizen  has  been  working  in  the  shipping  industry  since  1994  on  both  the  banking  and  non  banking  side. 
Mr. Veldhuizen  is  a  founding  director  in  Breakwater  Capital  Ltd.  Breakwater  Capital  is  an  investment  and  advisory  company  in 
London  focusing  on the  maritime  industry. From August 2007 until October 2011,  he  has been the Managing Director &  Head of 
Shipping of Lloyds Banking. In this capacity, Mr. Veldhuizen managed the combined Lloyds Bank and Bank of Scotland’s USD 16 
billion  shipping  loan  and  lease  portfolio.  He  started  his  career  with  Van  Ommeren  Shipping,  a  Dutch  public  shipping &  storage 
company  after  which  he joined DVB  bank as a shipping banker  working  in  both Rotterdam  and Piraeus.  In  2000, he  joined  Smit 
International, a publicly listed Maritime service provider active in Salvage, Marine Contracting and Harbour Towage. After working 
for  Smit  in  both  Greece  and  Singapore,  Mr. Veldhuizen  returned  to  the  Netherlands  in  August 2003  to  work  with NIBC  Bank,  a 
Dutch based merchant bank. Mr. Veldhuizen holds a degree in Business Economics from the Erasmus University in Rotterdam, the 
Netherlands. Currently, Mr. Veldhuizen is a director of Seadrill Partners.

Georgina E. Sousa has served as our secretary since her appointment in April 2011. Ms. Sousa has also served on our board 
of directors from September 2007 to April 2013. Ms. Sousa has also served as Secretary of Golar LNG Limited and its subsidiaries 
since  November 30,  2005.   She  is  also  Head  of  Corporate  Administration  for  Frontline.   Up  until  January 2007,  she  was  Vice-
President-Corporate  Manager  of  Corporate  Administration.   From  1976  to  1982  she  was  employed  by  the  Bermuda  law  firm  of 
Appleby, Spurling & Kempe as a Company Secretary and from 1982 to 1993 she was employed by the Bermuda law firm of Cox & 
Wilkinson as Senior Company Secretary.

Executive Officers

Other than our Secretary, we currently do not have any executive officers and rely on the executive officers and directors of 
Golar Management who perform executive officer services for our benefit pursuant to the management and administrative services 
agreement  and  who  are  responsible  for  our  day-to-day  management  subject  to  the  direction  of  our  board  of  directors.   Golar 
Management also provides certain commercial and technical management services to our fleet.  The following provides information 
about  each  of  the  executive  officers  of  Golar  Management  who  perform  executive  officer  services  for  us  and  who  are  not  also 
members of our board of directors as of March 31, 2013.  The business address for our executive officers is Par-la-Ville Place, 14 
Par-la-Ville Road, Hamilton HM 08, Bermuda.

Name
Graham Robjohns
Oistein Dahl
Brian Tienzo

Age

Position

Principal Executive Officer

48
52 Chief Operating Officer
39

Principal Financial and Accounting Officer

Graham  Robjohns  has  acted  as  our  Principal  Executive  Officer  since  July  2011.  From  April  2011  to  July  2011,  Mr 
Robjohns  served  as  our  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  Chief  Financial  Officer.   Mr.  Robjohns  has  also  served  as  Chief  Executive 
Officer for Seadrill Partners LLC since June 2012. Mr. Robjohns served as the Chief Financial Officer of Golar Management from 
November 2005 until June 2011.  Mr. Robjohns also served as Chief Executive Officer of Golar LNG Management from November 
2009 until July 2011.  Mr. Robjohns served as Group Financial Controller of Golar Management from May 2001 to November 2005 
and as Chief Accounting Officer of Golar Management from June 2003 until November 2005.  He was the Financial Controller of 
Osprey  Maritime  (Europe) Ltd  from  March  2000  to  May  2001.   From  1992  to  March  2000  he  worked  for  Associated  British 
Foods Plc. and then Case Technology Ltd (Case), both manufacturing businesses, in various financial management positions and as a 
director  of  Case.   Prior  to  1992,  Mr.  Robjohns  worked  for  PricewaterhouseCoopers  in  their  corporation  tax  department.   He  is  a 
member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales.

Oistein  Dahl  has  served  as  Managing  Director  of  Golar  Wilhelmsen  Management  since  September  2011  and  as  Chief 
Operating  Officer  of  Golar  Management  since  April  2012.  Prior  to  September  2011,  he  worked  for  the  Leif  Höegh  &  Company 
Group  (roll-on  roll-off  and  LNG  vessels).  He  held  various  positions  within  the  Höegh  Group  of  companies  within  vessel 
management,  newbuilding  and  projects,  as  well  as  business  development  before  becoming  President  for  Höegh  Fleet  in  October 
2007, a position he held for four years. Mr. Dahl has also worked within offshore engineering and with the Norwegian Class Society 
DNV. Mr. Dahl has a MSc degree from the NTNU technical university in Trondheim.

89

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 96 of 169

Table of Contents

Brian  Tienzo  has  acted  as  our  our  Principal  Financial  and  Accounting  Officer  since  July 2011.  Mr. Tienzo  was  our 
Controller from April 2011 until July 2011.  Mr. Tienzo has also served as the Chief Financial Officer of Golar Management since 
July 2011  and  as  the  Group  Financial  Controller  of  Golar  Management  since  2008.   Mr. Tienzo  joined  Golar  Management  in 
February 2001 as the Group Management Accountant.  From 1995 to 2001 he worked for Z-Cards Europe Limited, Parliamentary 
Communications Limited and Interoute Communications Limited in various financial management positions.  He is a member of the 
Association of Certified Chartered Accountants.

B. Compensation

Reimbursement of Expenses of Our General Partner

Our general partner does not receive compensation from us for any services it provides on our behalf, although it will be 
entitled  to  reimbursement  for  expenses  incurred  on  our  behalf.   In  addition,  we  will  reimburse  Golar  Management  for  expenses 
incurred pursuant to the management and administrative services agreement.  Please read “Item 7 — Major Unitholders and Related 
Party Transactions — Management and Administrative Services Agreement.”

Executive Compensation

We  did  not  pay  any  compensation  to  our  directors  or  officers  or  accrue  any  obligations  with  respect  to  management 
incentive  or  retirement  benefits  for  our  directors  and  officers  prior  to  our  initial  public  offering.   Under  the  management  and 
administrative  services  agreement,  we  reimburse  Golar  Management  for  its  reasonable  costs  and  expenses  incurred  in  connection 
with the provision of executive officer and other administrative services to us.  In addition, we pay Golar Management a management 
fee  equal  to  5%  of  its  costs  and  expenses  incurred  on  our  behalf.   During  the  year  ended  December 31,  2012,  we  paid  Golar 
Management $2.9 million in connection with the provision of these services to us.

Golar Management compensates Mr. Robjohns, Mr. Dahl and Mr. Tienzo in accordance with its own compensation policies 
and procedures.  We will not pay any additional compensation to our officers.  Officers and employees of affiliates of our general 
partner  may  participate  in  employee  benefit  plans  and  arrangements  sponsored  by  Golar,  our  general  partner  or  their  affiliates, 
including plans that may be established in the future

Compensation of Directors

Our officers or officers of Golar who also serve as our directors do not receive additional compensation for their service as 
directors  but  may  receive  director  fees  in  lieu  of  other  compensation  paid  by  Golar.  Each  non-management  director  receives 
compensation  for  attending  meetings  of  our  board  of  directors,  as  well  as  committee  meetings.  In  addition,  each  director  is 
reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses in connection with attending meetings of the board of directors or committees.  Each director 
is fully indemnified by us for actions associated with being a director to the extent permitted under Marshall Islands law.

During  the  year  ended December 31,  2012,  we  paid  to  our directors  aggregate  cash  compensation  of approximately  $0.3 

million. We do not have a retirement plan for members of our management team or our directors.

90

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 97 of 169

Table of Contents

C. Board Practices

General

Our board consists of seven members, three of whom were appointed by our general partner in its sole discretion and four of 
whom  were  elected  by  our  common  unitholders.   Directors  appointed  by  our  general  partner  will  serve  as  directors  for  terms 
determined by our general partner.  Our current board of directors consists of three members appointed by our general partner, Kate 
Blankenship,  Tor  Olav  Trøim  and  Katherine  Fredriksen. Our  current  board  of  directors  consists  of  four  members  elected  by  our 
common unitholders, Bart Veldhuizen, Carl Steen, Hans Petter Aas and Paul Leand Jr. Directors elected by our common unitholders 
are divided into three classes serving staggered three-year terms.  One of the four directors elected by our common unitholders, Bart 
Veldhuizen, was designated as the Class I elected director and will serve until our annual meeting of unitholders in 2013. Carl Steen 
was designated as the Class II elected director and will serve until our annual meeting of unitholders in 2014. Hans Petter Aas and 
Paul Leand Jr. were designated as our Class III elected directors and will serve until our annual meeting of unitholders in 2015.  At 
each subsequent annual meeting of unitholders, directors will be elected to succeed the class of directors whose terms have expired 
by a plurality of the votes of the common unitholders.  Directors elected by our common unitholders will be nominated by the board 
of directors or by any limited partner or group of limited partners that holds at least 10% of the outstanding common units. Our board 
has  determined  that  Ms.  Blankenship,  Mr. Aas,  Mr. Leand,  Mr.  Steen  and  Mr.  Veldhuizen  satisfy  the  independence  standards 
established by The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC as applicable to us. 

Each outstanding  common unit  is  entitled  to  one vote on  matters  subject  to  a vote of  common  unitholders.   However,  to 
preserve our ability to be exempt from U.S. federal income tax under Section 883 of the Code, if at any time, any person or group 
owns beneficially more than 4.9% or more of any class of units then outstanding, any such units owned by that person or group in 
excess of 4.9% may not be voted (except for purposes of nominating a person for election to our board).  The voting rights of any 
such unitholders in excess of 4.9% will effectively be redistributed pro rata among the other common unitholders holding less than 
4.9% of the voting power of such class of units.  Our general partner, its affiliates and persons who acquired common units with the 
prior approval of our board of directors will not be subject to this 4.9% limitation except with respect to voting their common units in 
the election of the elected directors.

Committees

We  have  an  audit  committee  that,  among  other  things,  reviews  our  external  financial  reporting,  engages  our  external 
auditors and oversees our internal audit activities and procedures and the adequacy of our internal accounting controls.   Our audit 
committee is comprised of three directors, Hans Petter Aas, Kate Blankenship and Bart Veldhuizen. Ms. Blankenship qualifies as an 
“audit committee expert” for purposes of SEC rules and regulations.

We also have a conflicts committee comprised of three members of our board of directors.  The conflicts committee will be 
available at the board’s discretion to review specific matters that the board believes may involve conflicts of interest.  The conflicts 
committee  will  determine  if  the  resolution  of  the  conflict  of  interest  is  fair  and  reasonable  to  us.   The  members  of  the  conflicts 
committee may not be officers or employees of us or directors, officers or employees of our general partner or its affiliates, and must 
meet  the  independence  standards  established  by  The  Nasdaq  Stock  Market LLC  to  serve  on  an  audit  committee  of  a  board  of 
directors and certain other requirements.  Any matters approved by the conflicts committee will be conclusively deemed to be fair 
and reasonable to us, approved by all of our partners, and not a breach by our directors, our general partner or its affiliates of any 
duties any of them may owe us or our unitholders.  Our conflicts committee is currently comprised of Paul Leand Jr., Carl Steen and 
Bart Veldhuizen.  For additional information about the conflicts committee, please read “Item 7—Conflicts of Interest and Fiduciary 
Duties.”

Exemptions from Nasdaq Corporate Governance Rules

Because  we  qualify  as  a  foreign  private  issuer  under  SEC  rules,  we  are  permitted  to  follow  the  corporate  governance 
practices  of  the  Marshall  Islands  (the  jurisdiction  in  which  we  are  organized)  in  lieu  of  certain  Nasdaq  corporate  governance 
requirements that would otherwise be applicable to us.

Nasdaq rules do not require a listed company that is a foreign private issuer to have a board of directors that is comprised of 
a majority of independent directors.  Under Marshall Islands law, we are not required to have a board of directors comprised of a 
majority of directors meeting the independence standards described in Nasdaq rules.  In addition, Nasdaq rules do not require limited 
partnerships like us to have boards of directors comprised of a majority of independent directors.  Accordingly, while our board is 
currently comprised of a majority of independent directors, our board of directors may not be comprised of a majority of independent 
directors in the future.

91

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 98 of 169

Table of Contents

Nasdaq rules do not require foreign private issuers like us to establish a compensation committee or a nominating/corporate 
governance  committee.   Similarly,  under  Marshall  Islands  law,  we  are  not  required  to  have  a  compensation  committee  or  a 
nominating/corporate  governance  committee.   In  addition,  Nasdaq  rules  do  not  require  limited  partnerships  like  us  to  have  a 
compensation  committee  or  a  nominating/corporate  governance  committee.   Accordingly,  we  will  not  have  a  compensation 
committee or a nominating/corporate governance committee.

D. Employees

Employees  of  Golar  Management,  including  those  employees  acting  as  our  executive  officers,  provide  services  to  our 
subsidiaries  pursuant  to  the  fleet  management  agreements  and  the  management  and  administrative  services  agreement.   As  of 
December 31,  2012,  Golar  employed  (directly  and  through  ship  managers)  approximately  333  seagoing  staff  who  serve  on  our 
vessels.  Golar and its affiliates may employ additional seagoing staff to assist us as we grow.  Certain affiliates of Golar, including 
Golar Management and Golar Wilhelmsen, provide commercial and technical management services, including all necessary crew-
related services, to our subsidiaries pursuant to the fleet management agreements.

Pursuant  to  our  management  agreements,  our  Manager  and  certain  of  its  affiliates  provide  us  with  all  of  our  employees 

(other than our secretary). Our board of directors has the authority to hire other employees as it deems necessary.

E. Unit Ownership

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

As  of  April 12,  2013,  there  were  no  common  units  or  subordinated  units  beneficially  owned  by  our  current  directors  or 

executive officers.

This is based on information filed with the SEC and on information provided to us prior to April 12, 2013.

Item 7.

Major Unitholders and Related Party Transactions

A. Major Unitholders

The following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of our common units and subordinated units as of April 30, 2013 by 
each person that we know to beneficially own more than 5% of our outstanding common or subordinated units. The number of units 
beneficially  owned  by  each  person  is  determined  under  SEC  rules and  the  information  is  not  necessarily  indicative  of  beneficial 
ownership for any other purpose:

Common Units
Beneficially Owned

Subordinated Units
Beneficially Owned

Percentage of Total
Common and
Subordinated Units

Name of Beneficial Owner
Golar LNG Limited(1)
Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors LP(2)
Goldman Sachs Asset Management LP(3)

Number
12,238,096
3,667,513
2,375,477

Percent

Number

Percent

Beneficially Owned

30.2% 15,949,831
—
—

10.12%
6.60%

100%
—
—

49.9%
6.49%
4.20%

(1) World Shipholding Ltd., the company that is the main shareholder of Golar, is indirectly controlled by trusts established by John 
Fredriksen, Chairman of the Board of Directors of Golar, for the benefit of his immediate family.  Amounts exclude the 2.0% 
general partner interest held by our general partner, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Golar.  The address of World Shipholding’s 
principal place of business is P.O. Box 53562, CY3399 Limassol, Cyprus.

(2) Based solely on information contained in a Schedule 13G/A filed on February 8, 2013 by Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors LP.  

The address of Kayne Anderson Capital Advisors LP is 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Second Floor, Los Angeles CA 90067.

(3) Based  solely  on  information  contained  in  a  Schedule  13G  filed  jointly  by  Goldman  Sachs  Asset  Management  LP  and  GS 

Investment Strategies LLC on February 12, 2013.  The address for both holders is 200 West Street New York, NY 10282. 

B. Related Party Transactions

From time to time we have entered into agreements and have consummated transactions with certain related parties.  We 
may enter into related party transactions from time to time in the future. In connection with our initial public offering, we established 
a  conflicts  committee,  comprised  entirely  of  independent  directors,  which  must  approve  all  proposed  material  related  party 
transactions.  

92

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 99 of 169

Table of Contents

Omnibus Agreement

We are subject to an omnibus agreement that we entered into with Golar and certain of its affiliates, our general partner and 

certain of our subsidiaries in connection with our IPO.  On October 5, 2011, we entered into an amendment to the omnibus 
agreement with the other parties thereto.  The following discussion describes certain provisions of the omnibus agreement, as 
amended.

Noncompetition

Under the omnibus agreement, Golar agreed, and caused its controlled affiliates (other than us, our general partner and our 
subsidiaries) to agree, not to acquire, own, operate or charter any FSRU or LNG carrier operating under a charter for five or more 
years.  We refer to these vessels, together with any related charters, as “Five-Year Vessels” and to all other FSRUs and LNG carriers, 
together with any related charters, as “Non-Five-Year Vessels.” The restrictions in this paragraph did not prevent Golar or any of its 
controlled affiliates (other than us and our subsidiaries) from:

(1) acquiring, owning, operating or chartering Non-Five-Year Vessels;

(2) acquiring one or more Five-Year Vessels if Golar promptly offers to sell the vessel to us for the acquisition price plus 
any administrative costs (including re-flagging and reasonable legal costs) associated with the transfer to us at the time 
of the acquisition;

(3) putting  a  Non-Five-Year  Vessel  under  charter  for  five  or  more  years  if  Golar  offers  to  sell  the  vessel  to  us  for  fair 
market value  (x) promptly after the  time  it  becomes  a Five-Year Vessel  and (y) at  each  renewal or  extension of  that 
charter for five or more years;

(4) acquiring one or more Five-Year Vessels as part of the acquisition of a controlling interest in a business or package of 

assets and owning, operating or chartering those vessels; provided, however, that:

(a)

if less than a majority of the value of the business or assets acquired is attributable to Five-Year Vessels, as 
determined in good faith by Golar’s board of directors, Golar must offer to sell such vessels to us for their fair 
market value plus any additional tax or other similar costs that Golar incurs in connection with the acquisition 
and the transfer of such vessels to us separate from the acquired business; and

(b) if a majority or more  of the value  of  the business or assets acquired  is attributable to Five-Year Vessels, as 
determined  in  good  faith  by Golar’s  board  of  directors,  Golar  must notify  us  of the proposed  acquisition  in 
advance.  Not later than 10 days following receipt of such notice, we will notify Golar if we wish to acquire 
such vessels in cooperation and simultaneously with Golar acquiring the Non-Five-Year Vessels.  If we do not 
notify Golar of our intent to pursue the acquisition within 10 days, Golar may proceed with the acquisition and 
then offer to sell such vessels to us as provided in (a) above;

(5) acquiring a non-controlling interest in any company, business or pool of assets;

(6) acquiring,  owning, operating or chartering  any  Five-Year Vessel  if  we  do  not  fulfill  our obligation  to  purchase  such 

vessel in accordance with the terms of any existing or future agreement;

(7) acquiring, owning, operating or chartering a Five-Year Vessel subject to the offers to us described in paragraphs (2), 
(3) and (4) above  pending  our  determination  whether to accept  such  offers and  pending the closing of any offers we 
accept;

(8) providing ship management services relating to any vessel; or

(9) acquiring, owning, operating or chartering a Five-Year Vessel if we have previously advised Golar that we consent to 

such acquisition, operation or charter.

If Golar or any of its controlled affiliates (other than us or our subsidiaries) acquires, owns, operates or charters Five-Year 
Vessels  pursuant to any of the exceptions  described above, it  may not subsequently expand that portion  of its business other than 
pursuant to those exceptions.

In addition, under the omnibus agreement we and our affiliates may not acquire, own, operate or charter Five-Year Vessels 

only.  The restrictions in this paragraph will not:

(1) prevent  us  from  owning,  operating  or  chartering  any  Non-Five-Year  Vessel  that  was  previously  a  Five-Year  Vessel 

while owned by us;

93

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 100 of 169

Table of Contents

(2) prevent us or any of our subsidiaries from acquiring Non-Five-Year Vessels as part of the acquisition of a controlling 
interest in a business or package of assets and owning, operating or chartering those vessels; provided, however, that:

(a)

if less than a majority of the value of the business or assets acquired is attributable to Non-Five-Year Vessels, 
as determined in good faith by us, we must offer to sell such vessels to Golar for their fair market value plus 
any additional  tax or other  similar costs that  we incur in connection with  the acquisition and the  transfer of 
such vessels to Golar separate from the acquired business; and

(b) if a majority or more of the value of the business or assets acquired is attributable to Non-Five-Year Vessels, 
as determined in good faith by us, we must notify Golar of the proposed acquisition in advance.  Not later than 
10 days  following  receipt  of  such  notice,  Golar  must  notify  us  if  it  wishes  to  acquire  the  Non-Five-Year 
Vessels in cooperation and simultaneously with us acquiring the Five-Year Vessels.  If Golar does not notify 
us of its intent to pursue the acquisition within 10 days, we may proceed with the acquisition and then offer to 
sell such vessels to Golar as provided in (a) above;

(3) prevent  us  or  any  of  our  subsidiaries  from  acquiring,  owning,  operating  or  chartering  any  Non-Five-Year  Vessels 
subject to the offer to Golar described in paragraph (2) above, pending its determination whether to accept such offer 
and pending the closing of any offer it accepts; or

(4) prevent us or any of our subsidiaries from acquiring, owning, operating or chartering Non-Five-Year Vessels if Golar 

has previously advised us that it consents to such acquisition, ownership, operation or charter.

If  we  or  any  of  our  subsidiaries  acquires,  owns,  operates  or  charters  Non-Five-Year  Vessels  pursuant  to  any  of  the 
exceptions described above, neither we nor such subsidiary may subsequently expand that portion of our business other than pursuant 
to those exceptions.

Upon  a  change  of  control  of  us  or  our  general  partner,  the  noncompetition  provisions  of  the  omnibus  agreement  will 
terminate immediately.  Upon a change of control of Golar, the noncompetition provisions of the omnibus agreement applicable to 
Golar will terminate at  the time that is  the later of  the date  of  the change of  control and the date  on  which  all of  our  outstanding 
subordinated units have been converted to common units.

Under  the  omnibus  agreement,  a  change  of  control  occurs  upon  (i)  the  sale,  lease,  exchange  or  other  transfer  of  all  or 
substantially all assets to another entity, (ii) the consolidation or merger into another entity, and (iii) an entity other than Golar or its 
Affiliates becoming the beneficial owner of more than 50% of all outstanding voting stock.

Golar Freeze

Under the omnibus agreement, Golar granted us the right to purchase the Golar Freeze at fair market value at any time prior 
to  April 13,  2013.   In  October 2011,  we  completed  the  acquisition  of  the  Golar  Freeze  from  Golar  for  a  purchase  price  of  $330 
million. See “—Vessel Acquisitions and Related Transactions.”

NR Satu 

Under the omnibus agreement, Golar granted us  the  right  to  purchase the  NR Satu  from Golar at  fair market  value  upon 
completion of the vessel’s retrofitting and  acceptance by its charterer.   In July 2012, we completed the acquisition of the  NR Satu
from Golar for a purchase price of $385 million. See “—Vessel Acquisitions and Related Transactions.”

Rights of First Offer on FSRUs and LNG carriers

Under the omnibus agreement, we and our subsidiaries granted to Golar a right of first offer on any proposed sale, transfer 
or other disposition of any Five-Year Vessels or Non-Five-Year Vessels owned by us.  Under the omnibus agreement, Golar and its 
subsidiaries granted a similar right of first offer to us for any Five-Year Vessels they might own.  These rights of first offer do not 
apply to a (a) sale, transfer or other disposition of vessels between any affiliated subsidiaries, or pursuant to the terms of any current 
or future charter or other agreement with a charter party or (b) merger with or into, or sale of substantially all of the assets to, an 
unaffiliated third-party.

94

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 101 of 169

Table of Contents

Prior  to  engaging  in  any  negotiation  regarding  any  vessel  disposition  with  respect  to  a  Five-Year  Vessel  with  a  non-
affiliated third-party or any Non-Five-Year Vessel, we or Golar will deliver a written notice to the other relevant party setting forth 
the material terms and conditions of the proposed transaction.  During the 30-day period after the delivery of such notice, we and 
Golar will negotiate in good faith to  reach an agreement on the transaction.  If  we do not reach an agreement within such 30-day 
period, we  or  Golar,  as  the case  may be, will be able  within the  next 180 calendar days to  sell, transfer,  dispose  or  re-charter the 
vessel to a third party (or to agree in writing to undertake such transaction with a third party) on terms generally no less favorable to 
us or Golar, as the case may be, than those offered pursuant to the written notice.

Upon  a  change  of  control  of  us  or  our  general  partner,  the  right  of  first  offer  provisions  of  the  omnibus  agreement  will 
terminate immediately.  Upon a change of control of Golar, the right of first offer provisions applicable to Golar under the omnibus 
agreement will terminate at the time that is the later of the date of the change of control and the date on which all of our outstanding 
subordinated units have converted to common units.

Indemnification

Under the omnibus agreement, Golar agreed to indemnify us for a period of five years after our initial public offering (and 
for  a  period  of  at  least  three  years  after  our  purchase  of  the  NR  Satu,  if  applicable)  against  certain  environmental  and  toxic  tort 
liabilities with respect to the assets contributed or sold to us to the extent arising prior to the time they were contributed or sold to us.  
Liabilities  resulting  from  a  change  in  law  after  the  closing  of  our  initial  public  offering  are  excluded  from  the  environmental 
indemnity.  There is an aggregate cap of $5.0 million on the amount of indemnity coverage provided by Golar for environmental and 
toxic tort liabilities.  No claim may be made unless the aggregate dollar amount of all claims exceeds $500,000, in which case Golar 
is liable for claims only to the extent such aggregate amount exceeds $500,000.

Golar will also indemnify us for liabilities related to:

•

•

•

certain  defects  in  title  to  the  assets  contributed  or  sold  to  us  and  any  failure  to  obtain,  prior  to  the  time  they  were 
contributed to us, certain consents  and  permits  necessary to conduct our business, which liabilities  arise  within  three 
years after the closing of our initial public offering (or, in the case of the NR Satu, within three years after our purchase 
of the NR Satu, if applicable);

certain income tax liabilities attributable to the operation of the assets contributed or sold to us prior to the time they 
were contributed or sold; and

any  liabilities  in  excess  of  our  scheduled  payments  under  the  UK  tax  lease  used  to  finance  the  Methane  Princess, 
including liabilities in connection with termination of such lease.

Amendments

The omnibus agreement may not be amended without the prior approval of the conflicts committee of our board of directors 

if the proposed amendment will, in the reasonable discretion of our board of directors, adversely affect holders of our common units.

Our Management Agreements

Management and Administrative Services Agreement

In connection with our IPO, we entered into a management and administrative services agreement (as amended and restated, 
the management and administrative services agreement) with Golar Management, pursuant to which Golar Management agreed to 
provide certain commercial, management and administrative support services to us, such as accounting, auditing, legal, insurance, IT, 
cash management,  clerical, investor relations and other  administrative services.  In  addition,  certain officers and directors of Golar 
Management are to provide executive officer functions for our benefit.  These officers of Golar Management are responsible for our 
day-to-day management, subject to the direction of our board of directors.  As of July 1, 2011, we and Golar Management entered 
into  an  amended  and restated  management  and administrative  services  agreement  to  reflect  changes  in  the titles  of certain of  our 
officers.  The material provisions of the amended and restated management and administrative services agreement, including terms 
related  to  our  obligations  and  the  obligations  of  Golar  Management  to  provide  us  with  services,  remain  unchanged  from  those 
contained  in  the  management  and  administrative  services  agreement  entered  into  at  the  time  of  our  IPO.   The  management  and 
administrative services agreement expires in May 2016.

95

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 102 of 169

Table of Contents

The management and administrative services agreement may be terminated prior to the end of its term by us upon 120 days' 
notice for any reason in the sole discretion of our board of directors. For each of the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, the 
fees  under  the  management  and  administrative  services  agreement  were  $2.9  million  and  $1.6  million,  respectively.  Golar 
Management  may  terminate  the  management  and  administrative  services  agreement  upon  120  days  notice  in  the  event  of  certain 
circumstances, such as a change of control of us or our general partner, an order to wind up the partnership, amongst other events. A 
change of control  under the  management services agreement means an event in which securities of any class entitling the holders 
thereof to elect a majority of the members of the board of directors of the entity are acquired, directly or indirectly, by a person or 
group,  who did  not  immediately  before  such  acquisition,  own  securities  of  the entity entitling  such  person  or  group to  elect  such 
majority.

We reimburse Golar Management for its reasonable costs and expenses incurred in connection with the provision of these 
services.  In addition, we pay  Golar Management a management fee equal to 5% of its costs and expenses incurred  in connection 
with providing services to us for the month after Golar Management submits to us an invoice for such costs and expenses, together 
with any supporting detail that may be reasonably required. 

Under  the  management  and  administrative  services  agreement,  we  agreed  to  indemnify  Golar  Management  and  its 
employees  and  agents  against  all  actions  which  may  be  brought  against  them  under  the  management  and  administrative  services 
agreement  including,  without  limitation,  all  actions  brought  under  the  environmental  laws  of  any  jurisdiction,  and  against  and  in 
respect  of  all costs  and expenses  they  may  suffer  or incur  due to  defending  or  settling such  actions; provided, however that  such 
indemnity excludes any or all losses which may be caused by or due to the fraud, gross negligence or willful misconduct of Golar 
Management or its employees or agents.

Fleet management agreements 

Each  vessel  in  our  fleet  is  subject  to  management  agreements,  pursuant  to  which  certain  commercial  and  technical 
management services are provided by certain affiliates of Golar, principally Golar Management and Golar Wilhelmsen, as described 
below.  Under these fleet management agreements, our subsidiaries pay fees to, and reimburse the costs and expenses of the vessel 
managers as described below.

Golar Management Limited 

The  vessel  owning  subsidiaries  (or  disponent  owners  of  the  vessels)  have  each  entered  into  separate  vessel  management 
agreements  directly  (or  in  the  case  of  GolarMazo,  indirectly)  with  Golar  Management  to  manage  the  vessels  in  accordance  with 
sound and commercial technical ship management practice, so far as practicable, which includes principally: 

•

•

Commercial and technical management of the vessel. Managing day-to-day vessel operations, including but not limited 
to,  seeking,  negotiating  and  administering  charter  parties  with  respect  to  the  vessels  and  receipts  of  payments 
thereunder, ensuring regulatory compliance, arranging for the vetting of vessels, appointing counsel and negotiating the 
settlement of all claims in connection with the operation of each vessel, appointing surveyors and technical consultants 
as  necessary,  arranging  and  supervising  of  drydockings,  repairs,  alterations  and  maintenance  of  such  vessel  and 
purchasing of stores, spares and lubricating oils, arranging insurance for vessels and providing technical support;
Vessel  Maintenance  and  crewing:  including  supervising  the  maintenance  and  general  efficiency  of  vessels,  and 
ensuring  the  vessels  are  in  seaworthy  condition,  provision  of  competent,  suitably  qualified  crew  for  each  vessel  and 
arranging transportation for crew.

To carry out the services required pursuant to the vessel management agreements, Golar Management is entitled to engage 

the services of sub-managers to carry out its duties. 

The aggregate management fees payable under these fleet management agreements for each of the years ended December 
31, 2012 and 2011 was $4.2 million and $4.1 million, respectively. The vessel management fees are reviewed annually and revised 
by  mutual  agreement  of  the  parties.  In  addition,  pursuant  to  the  vessel  management  agreements,  Golar  Management  is  to  be 
reimbursed an amount equal to the disbursements and expenses in connection with the provision of the services contracted under the 
management agreement. 

96

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 103 of 169

Table of Contents

Vessels

Vessels Management Agreements
Term
Equal to the Pertamina charter term
Indefinite
Indefinite
Indefinite
Until April 2016
Until May 2013 then indefinite
Indefinite
Indefinite

Golar Mazo*
Methane Princess
Golar Spirit
Golar Winter
Golar Freeze
NR Satu
Golar Grand
Golar Maria
*The  vessel  management  agreement  is  between  Faraway  and  Aurora  Management  Inc.  (“Aurora  Management”),  in  which  the  Partnership  has  a  90%  ownership 
interest, but which Aurora Management has indirectly subcontracted to Golar Management.
**The  vessel  management  agreement  may  be  terminated  prior  to  the  end  of  the  initial  Pertamina  charter  term  in  2017  upon  12  months'  notice  under  certain 
circumstances, including but not limited to, loss of ownership of the vessel, loss of the vessel, cease of charter to Pertamina, non-payment of money owed, material 
breach of the agreement, bankruptcy or dissolution of either party or the inability to carry out obligations under the agreement due to force majeure.

Notice for termination
12 months**
30 days
30 days
30 days
120 days
30 days
30 days
30 days

Technical Management Sub-Agreement with Golar Wilhelmsen 

In order to assist with the technical management of each of the vessels in our current fleet, Golar Management has entered 
into the BIMCO Standard Ship Management Agreement with Golar Wilhelmsen, as sub-managers, for the operations of our fleet (the 
Vessels Sub-Management Agreement).  The Vessels Sub-Management Agreement provides that Golar Wilhelmsen must use its best 
endeavors to provide the following technical services:

•

•

Crew  Management. Golar  Wilhelmsen  must  provide  suitably  qualified  crew  for  each  vessel  and  provide  for  the 
management of the crew including, but not limited to, arranging for all transportation of the crew, ensuring the crew 
meets all medical requirements of the flag state, and conducting union negotiations.
Technical Management. Golar Wilhelmsen must provide for the technical management of each vessel, which includes, 
but is  not limited to the  provision of competent personnel to  supervise the maintenance and efficiency  of  the vessel; 
arrange  and  supervise  drydockings,  repairs,  alterations  and  maintenance  of  such  vessel  and  arrange  and  supply  the 
necessary stores, spares and lubricating oils.

The  aggregate  management  fees  payable  under  the  technical  management  sub-agreement  for  each  of  the  years  ended 
December 31, 2012 and 2011 was $1.8 million and $1.7 million, respectively. Golar Management is responsible for payment of the 
annual management fee to Golar Wilhelmsen in respect of the vessels.  We are not responsible for paying this management fee to 
Golar Wilhelmsen.  This fee is subject to upward adjustments based on cost of living indexes in the domicile of Golar Wilhelmsen.  
Golar Wilhelmsen is entitled to extra remuneration for the performance of tasks outside the scope of the Vessels Sub-Management 
Agreement. 

The  Vessels  Sub-Management  Agreement  will  terminate  upon  failure  by  either  party  to  meet  its  obligations  under  the 
agreement,  in  the  case  of  the  sale  or  total  loss  of  the  vessel,  or  in  the  event  an  order  or  resolution  is  passed  for  the  winding  up, 
dissolution, liquidation or bankruptcy of either party or if a receiver is appointed.  In addition, Golar Management must indemnify 
Golar  Wilhelmsen  and  its  employees,  agents  and  subcontractors  against  all  actions,  proceedings,  claims,  demands  or  liabilities 
arising in connection with the performance of the agreement.

Agency Agreement with PT Pesona Sentra Utama (or PT Pesona) PT Pesona, an Indonesian company established in 2005 
and  engaged  in  technical  crewing  management  in  Indonesia,  owns  51%  of  the  issued  share  capital  in  our  subsidiary,  PT  Golar 
Indonesia,  the  owner  and  operator  of  NR  Satu,  in  order  to  comply  with  Indonesian  cabotage  requirements.  Under  the  agency 
agreement  PT  Pesona  provides  agency  and  local  representation  services  for  us  with  respect  to  NR  Satu,  which  includes,  but  not 
limited to, accounting, charter administration, legal and liaison services with respect to Indonesian legal and government authorities 
and clerical services. Under the agency agreement PT Pesona currently receives a fee of $350,000 per annum. This fee is subject to 
review annually and revision by mutual agreement of the parties. Golar Management is responsible for payment of the agency fee to 
PT Pesona.  We are not responsible for paying this management fee to PT Pesona.

 The PT Pesona agency agreement shall continue indefinitely, unless and until terminated upon notice by either party within 

30 days of expected termination. 

97

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 104 of 169

Table of Contents

Sponsor Credit Facility

In connection with the closing of our IPO, we entered into the sponsor credit facility with Golar, to fund our working capital 
requirements.  The sponsor credit facility has a term of four years and is interest-free and unsecured.  For a more detailed description 
of this credit facility, please read “Item 5—Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources—
Borrowing Activities—Long-Term Debt—Sponsor Credit Facility.”

Other Related Party Transactions

The following is a discussion of certain other related party transactions and agreements that we entered into or were party to 

during the year ended December 31, 2012:

Vessel Acquisitions and Related Transactions

 In July 2012, we acquired from Golar an interest in the NR Satu for a total purchase price of approximately $388.0 million. 
The acquisition of the NR Satu was financed from the proceeds of a $155 million vendor financing facility from Golar and from the 
proceeds of the July 2012 Equity Offering and the related private placement to Golar and general partner contribution. The Conflicts 
Committee approved the purchase price for the NR Satu and the terms of the vendor financing loan related to the acquisition of the 
NR Satu. The Conflicts Committee retained a financial advisor to assist with its evaluation of the transaction. The common units sold 
to  Golar  in  the  private  placement were offered  and  sold  to  it  at  the  price  that  the  common  units were  concurrently  offered  to the 
public.

In addition, in November 2012, we acquired from Golar interests in subsidiaries that lease and operate the Golar Grand for 
a  total  purchase  price  of  $265.0  million.  The  acquisition  of  the  Golar  Grand  was  funded  by  the  assumption  of  the  capital  lease 
obligation of $90.8 million and the proceeds of the November 2012 Equity Offering and the related private placement to Golar and 
general partner contribution. The Conflicts Committee approved the purchase price for the Golar Grand. The Conflicts Committee 
retained a financial advisor to assist with its evaluation of the transaction. The common units sold to Golar in the private placement 
were concurrently offered and sold to it at the price that the common units were offered to the public.

In  February  2013,  we  acquired  from  Golar  interests  in  the  company  that  owns  and  operates  the  LNG  carrier,  the  Golar 
Maria  for  a  total  purchase  price  of  approximately  $215.0  million.  The  acquisition  of  the  Golar  Maria  was  financed  by  the 
assumption of approximately $89 million of outstanding debt relating to the Golar Maria and from the net proceeds of the February 
2013 Equity Offering and the related private placement to Golar and general partner contribution. The Conflicts Committee approved 
the  purchase  price  for  the  Golar  Maria.  The  Conflicts  Committee  retained  a  financial  advisor  to  assist  with  its  evaluation  of  the 
transaction. The common units sold to Golar in the private placement were offered and sold to it at the price that the common units 
were concurrently offered to the public.

In connection with the acquisition of the Golar Grand, the Partnership entered into an Option Agreement with Golar. Under 
the Option Agreement, the Partnership has an option to require Golar to enter into a new time charter with Golar as charterer until 
October 2017 if the current charterer does not renew or extend the existing charter after the initial term.

See Note 25 to our consolidated and combined financial statements.

High-Yield Bonds

In October 2012, we completed the issuance of NOK 1,300 million in senior unsecured bonds that mature in October 2017. 
The  aggregate  principal  amount  of  the  bonds  is  equivalent  to  approximately  $227  million.  Of  this  amount,  approximately  $35.0 
million was issued to Golar. See Note 25 to our consolidated and combined financial statements.

Golar Energy Loan

In January 2012, Golar LNG (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. (or Golar Singapore), the subsidiary which holds the investment in PTGI, 
drew down $25 million on its loan agreement entered into in December 2011 with Golar Energy. The loan was unsecured, repayable 
on demand and bears interest at the rate of 6.75% per annum, payable on a quarterly basis. In connection with the acquisition of the 
subsidiaries that own and operate the NR Satu, all amounts payable to Golar  Energy by the subsidiaries acquired by us, including 
Golar Singapore, were extinguished.

98

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 105 of 169

Table of Contents

Trading Balances

Receivables  and  payables  with  Golar and its  affiliates  are comprised  primarily of unpaid  management  fees,  advisory  and 
administrative services.  In addition, certain receivables and payables arise when we pay an invoice on behalf of a related party and 
vice versa.  Receivables and payables are generally settled quarterly in arrears. Trading balances due to Golar and its affiliates are 
unsecured, interest-free and intended to be settled in the ordinary course of business. They primarily relate to recharges for trading 
expenses paid on our behalf, including ship management and administrative service fees due to Golar.

Dividends to China Petroleum Corporation

During the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, Faraway Maritime Shipping Co., which is 60% owned by us 

and 40% owned by CPC, paid total dividends to CPC of $1.8 million, $2.4 million and $3.1 million, respectively.

C.

Interests of Experts and Counsel

Not applicable.

Item 8.

Financial Information

A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information

Please see Item 18 — Financial Statements below for additional information required to be disclosed under this item.

99

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 106 of 169

Table of Contents

Legal Proceedings

From time to time we have been, and expect to continue to be, subject to legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course 
of  our  business,  principally  personal  injury  and  property  casualty  claims.  These claims,  even  if  lacking  merit,  could  result  in  the 
expenditure of significant financial and managerial resources.  

PT Golar Indonesia, our subsidiary that is both the owner and operator of the NR Satu, has been notified of a claim that may 
be filed against it by PT Rekayasa, a subcontractor of the charterer, PTNR, claiming that Golar and its subcontractor caused damage 
to the pipeline in connection with the FSRU conversion of the NR Satu and the related mooring. As of the current date, no suit has 
been filed and we are of the view that, were the claim to be filed with the Indonesian authorities, any resolution could potentially take 
years. We believe that we have meritorious defences against these claims and therefore as of December 31, 2012, have not recorded  
any  provision.  We  are  unable  to  estimate  the  possible  loss  given  the  early  stages  of  the  claim,  but  based  on  indicative  numbers 
provided  by  the  claimant,  the  maximum  amount  of  loss  would  be  $9.6  million.  Nevertheless  in  the  event  any  such  claim  were 
successful  against  us,  under  the  indemnity  provisions  of  the  Time  Charter  Party,  we  believe  we  have  full  recourse  against  the 
charterer, PTNR. Furthermore, as part of the acquisition of the NR Satu in July 2012 from Golar, Golar has also agreed to indemnify 
us against any such losses.

Our Cash Distribution Policy

Rationale for Our Cash Distribution Policy

Our  cash  distribution  policy  reflects  a  judgment  that  our  unitholders  will  be  better  served  by  our  distributing  our  cash 
available (after deducting expenses, including estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures and reserves) rather than 
retaining it.  Because we believe we will generally finance any expansion capital expenditures from external financing sources, we 
believe that our investors are best served by our distributing all of our available cash.  Our cash distribution policy is consistent with 
the  terms  of  our  partnership  agreement,  which  requires  that  we  distribute  all  of  our  available  cash  quarterly  (after  deducting 
expenses, including estimated maintenance and replacement capital expenditures and reserves).

Limitations on Cash Distributions and Our Ability to Change Our Cash Distribution Policy

There  is  no  guarantee  that  unitholders  will  receive  quarterly  distributions  from  us.   Our  distribution  policy  is  subject  to 

certain restrictions and may be changed at any time, including:

• Our  unitholders  have  no  contractual  or  other  legal  right  to  receive  distributions  other  than  the  obligation  under  our 
partnership agreement to distribute available cash on a quarterly basis, which is subject to the broad discretion of our 
board of directors to establish reserves and other limitations.

• We will be subject to restrictions on distributions under our financing arrangements, including the Golar LNG Partners 
credit facility and lease arrangements.  Our financing arrangements contain material financial tests and covenants that 
must  be  satisfied  in  order  to  pay  distributions.   If  we  are  unable  to  satisfy  the  restrictions  included  in  any  of  our 
financing  arrangements  or  are  otherwise  in  default  under  any  of  those  agreements,  it  could  have  a  material  adverse 
effect on our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders, notwithstanding our stated cash distribution policy.

• We are required to make  substantial  capital expenditures to maintain  and  replace  our  fleet.   These  expenditures may 
fluctuate  significantly  over  time,  particularly  as  our  vessels  near  the  end  of  their  useful  lives.   In  order  to  minimize 
these  fluctuations,  our  partnership  agreement requires  us to deduct  estimated, as opposed to actual,  maintenance  and 
replacement capital expenditures from  the amount of cash that we  would otherwise have available for distribution to 
our  unitholders.   In  years  when  estimated  maintenance  and  replacement  capital  expenditures  are  higher  than  actual 
maintenance and replacement capital expenditures, the amount of cash available for distribution to unitholders will be 
lower than if actual maintenance and replacement capital expenditures were deducted.

• Although  our  partnership  agreement  requires  us  to  distribute  all  of  our  available  cash,  our  partnership  agreement, 
including  provisions  contained  therein  requiring  us  to  make  cash  distributions,  may  be  amended.   During  the 
subordination period, with certain exceptions, our partnership agreement may not be amended without the approval of 
non-affiliated  common  unitholders.   After  the  subordination  period  has  ended,  our  partnership  agreement  can  be 
amended with the approval of a majority of the outstanding common units.  Golar currently owns approximately 40.3% 
of our common units and all of our subordinated units.

•

Even  if  our  cash  distribution  policy  is  not  modified  or  revoked,  the  amount  of  distributions  we  pay  under  our  cash 
distribution  policy  and  the  decision  to  make  any  distribution  is  determined  by  our  board  of  directors,  taking  into 
consideration the terms of our partnership agreement.

100

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 107 of 169

Table of Contents

• Under Section 51 of the Marshall Islands Act, we may not make a distribution to unitholders if the distribution would 

cause our liabilities to exceed the fair value of our assets.

• We  may  lack  sufficient  cash  to  pay  distributions  to  our  unitholders  due  to  decreases  in  total  operating  revenues, 
decreases in hire rates, the loss of a vessel (including, without limitation, through a customer’s exercise of its purchase 
option) or increases in operating or general and administrative expenses, principal and interest payments on outstanding 
debt, taxes, working capital requirements, maintenance and replacement capital expenditures or anticipated cash needs.  
Please read “Item 3—Key Information—Risk Factors” for a discussion of these factors.

Minimum Quarterly Distribution

Common unitholders are entitled under our partnership agreement to receive a quarterly distribution of $0.3850 per unit, or 
$1.54 per unit per year, prior to any distribution on the subordinated units to the extent we have sufficient cash on hand to pay the 
distribution,  after  establishment  of  cash  reserves  and  payment  of  fees  and  expenses.   There  is  no  guarantee  that  we  will  pay  the 
minimum quarterly distribution on the common units and subordinated units in any quarter.  Even if our cash distribution policy is 
not modified or revoked, the amount of distributions paid under our policy and the decision to make any distribution is determined 
by our board of directors, taking into consideration the terms of our partnership agreement.  We will be prohibited from making any 
distributions  to  unitholders  if  it  would  cause  an  event  of  default,  or  an  event  of  default  is  then  existing,  under  our  financing 
arrangements.   Please  read  “Item  5—Operating  and  Financial  Review  and  Prospects—Liquidity  and  Capital  Resources” for  a 
discussion  of  the  restrictions  contained  in  our  credit  facilities  and  lease  arrangements  that  may  restrict  our  ability  to  make 
distributions.

During the year ended December 31, 2012, the aggregate amount of cash distribution paid was $77.6 million.

In  February 2013,  the  Partnership  declared  and  paid  a  cash  distribution  of  $0.50  per  unit  in  respect  of  the  three  months 
ended December 31, 2012. The distribution was paid on February 14, 2013 to all holders of record of common units, subordinated 
units and the general partner units on February 1, 2013. The aggregate amount of the paid distribution was $26.6 million.

In April 2013, the Partnership declared a cash distribution of $0.515 per unit in respect of the three months ended March 31, 

2013.

Subordination Period

General

During  the  subordination  period,  the  common  units  will  have  the  right  to  receive  distributions  of  available  cash  from 
operating surplus in an amount equal to the minimum quarterly distribution of $0.3850 per unit, plus any arrearages in the payment 
of  the  minimum  quarterly  distribution  on  the  common  units  from  prior  quarters,  before  any  distributions  of  available  cash  from 
operating  surplus  may  be  made  on  the  subordinated  units.   Distribution  arrearages  do  not  accrue  on  the  subordinated  units.   The 
purpose of the subordinated units is to increase the likelihood that during the subordination period there will be available cash from 
operating surplus to be distributed on the common units.

Incentive Distribution Rights

Incentive  distribution  rights  represent  the  right  to  receive  an  increasing  percentage  of  quarterly  distributions  of  available 
cash  from  operating  surplus  after  the  minimum  quarterly  distribution  and  the  target  distribution  levels  have  been  achieved.   Our 
general  partner  and  Golar  currently  hold  the  incentive  distribution  rights.   The  incentive  distribution  rights  may  be  transferred 
separately  from  our general partner interest,  subject  to  restrictions  in the  partnership agreement.   Except for transfers of  incentive 
distribution  rights  to  an  affiliate  or another  entity  as  part of  our  general partner’s  merger  or  consolidation  with  or  into,  or sale  of 
substantially all of its assets to such entity, the approval of a majority of our common units (excluding common units held by our 
general partner and its affiliates), voting separately as a class, generally is required for a transfer of the incentive distribution rights to 
a third party prior to March 31, 2016.  Any transfer by our general partner of the incentive distribution rights would not change the 
percentage allocations of quarterly distributions with respect to such rights.

101

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 108 of 169

Table of Contents

The following table illustrates the percentage allocations of the additional available cash from operating surplus among the 
unitholders, our general partner and the holders of the incentive distribution rights up to the various target distribution levels.  The 
amounts set forth under “Marginal Percentage Interest in Distributions” are the percentage interests of the unitholders, our general 
partner  and  the  holders  of  the  incentive  distribution  rights  in  any  available  cash  from  operating  surplus  we  distribute  up  to  and 
including the corresponding amount in the column “Total Quarterly Distribution Target Amount,” until available cash from operating 
surplus we distribute reaches the next target distribution level, if any.  The percentage interests shown for the unitholders, our general 
partner  and the  holders  of  the  incentive  distribution  rights  for  the  minimum  quarterly  distribution  are  also applicable  to  quarterly 
distribution amounts that are less than the minimum quarterly distribution.  The percentage interests shown for our general partner 
include its 2.0% general partner interest only and assume that our general partner has contributed any capital necessary to maintain 
its 2.0% general partner interest.

Total Quarterly

Distribution Target Amount
$0.3850
up to $0.4428
above $0.4428 up to 
$0.4813
above $0.4813 up to 
$0.5775
above $0.5775

Marginal Percentage Interest in
Distributions

Unitholders

General Partner

Holders of IDRs

98.0%
98.0%

85.0%

75.0%
50.0%

2.0%
2.0%

2.0%

2.0%
2.0%

0%
0%

13.0%

23.0%
48.0%

Minimum Quarterly Distribution
First Target Distribution
Second Target Distribution

Third Target Distribution

Thereafter

B. Significant Changes

Not applicable.

Item 9.

The Offer and Listing.

C. Markets

Our common units started trading on The Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “GMLP” on April 8, 2011.

The following table sets forth the high and low prices for the common units on the Nasdaq since the date of listing for the 

periods indicated.

Year ended December 31, 2012
Year ended December 31, 2011(1)

First quarter 2013
Fourth quarter 2012
Third quarter 2012
Second quarter 2012
First quarter 2012
Fourth quarter 2011
Third quarter 2011
Second quarter 2011(2)

Month ended March 31, 2013
Month ended February 28, 2013
Month ended January 31, 2013
Month ended December 31, 2012
Month ended November 30, 2012
Month ended October 31, 2012

102

High

Low

$
$

39.05
30.91

$
$

33.07
33.02
35.00
37.86
39.05
30.91
29.74
28.83

33.07
31.25
32.39
30.33
32.10
33.02

25.52
22.41

28.90
25.52
26.43
28.01
30.23
23.02
22.41
23.50

28.90
29.25
29.02
28.50
25.52
30.33

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 109 of 169

Table of Contents

__________________________________________
(1) For the period from April 8, 2011 through December 31, 2011.
(2) For the period from April 8, 2011 through June 30, 2011.

Item 10.

Additional Information

A. Share Capital

Not applicable.

B. Memorandum and Articles of Association

The information required to be disclosed under Item 10B is incorporated by reference to our Registration Statement on 

Form 8-A filed with the SEC on April 5, 2011.

C. Material Contracts

The following is a summary of each material contract, other than material contracts entered into in the ordinary course of 
business, to which we or any of our subsidiaries is a party, for the two years immediately preceding the date of this Annual Report, 
each of which is included in the list of exhibits in Item 19:

1. Credit facility agreement dated September 29, 2008 providing for a Senior Secured Revolving Credit Facility by and among 
Golar  LNG  Partners  L.P.  (as  borrower)  and  the  Banks  and  Financial  Institutions  Referred  to  therein  (as  lenders).  In 
September 2008, we entered into a revolving credit facility with a banking consortium to refinance existing loan facilities in 
respect of two of our vessels, the Methane Princess and the Golar Spirit (or the Golar LNG Partners credit facility).  The 
loan is secured against the Golar Spirit and assignment to the lending bank of a mortgage given to us by the lessors of the 
Methane Princess and the Golar Spirit, with a second priority charge over the Golar Mazo. The Golar LNG Partners credit 
facility accrues floating interest at a rate per annum equal to LIBOR plus a margin.  See “Item 5—Operating and Financial 
Review and Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a summary of certain terms.

2. Omnibus Agreement dated  April 13, 2011,  by and among  Golar LNG  Ltd.,  Golar LNG  Partners LP, Golar GP  LLC  and 
Golar  Energy  Limited.   See  “Item  7—Major  Unitholders  and  Related  Party  Transactions—Certain  Relationships  and 
Related Party Transactions for a summary of certain contract terms.”

3. Amendment No. 1 to Omnibus Agreement, dated October 5, 2011 by and among Golar LNG Ltd., Golar LNG Partners LP, 
Golar  GP  LLC  and  Golar  Energy  Limited.  See  “Item  7—Major  Unitholders  and  Related  Party  Transactions—Certain 
Relationships and Related Party Transactions for a summary of certain contract terms.”

4. First  Amended  and  Restated  Management  and  Administrative  Services  Agreement  between  Golar  LNG  Partners  LP  and 
Golar  Management  Limited.   In  connection  with  our  initial  public  offering,  we  entered  into  a  management  and 
administrative services agreement (as amended and restated, the management and administrative services agreement) with 
Golar  Management,  pursuant  to  which  Golar  Management  agreed  to  provide  certain  management  and  administrative 
support services to us. As of July 1, 2011, we and Golar Management entered into an amended and restated management 
and administrative services agreement to reflect changes in the titles of certain of our officers.  The material provisions of 
the amended and restated management and administrative services agreement, including terms related to our obligations and 
the  obligations  of  Golar  Management  to  provide  us  with  services,  remain  unchanged  from  those  contained  in  the 
management  and  administrative  services  agreement  entered  into  at  the  time  of  our  initial  public  offering.  See  “Item  7—
Major Unitholders and Related Party Transactions—Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions” for a summary 
of certain contract terms.

5. Contribution  and  Conveyance  Agreement,  dated  as  of  April  5,  2011,  among  Golar  LNG  Limited,  Golar  GP  LLC,  Golar 
LNG  Partners  LP,  Golar  LNG  Holding  Co.,  and  Golar  Partners  Operating  LLC,  pursuant  to  which,  among  other  things, 
Golar contributed interests in certain vessels in our initial fleet to us in connection with our initial public offering.

6. Time  Charter  Party  dated  July  2,  1997  between  Faraway  Maritime  Shipping  Company  and  Pertamina.   See  “Item  4—
Information on the Partnership—Business Overview—LNG Carrier Charters” for a summary of certain contract terms.

7. Time  Charter  Party  dated August 27, 2003  between  Golar  2215 UK Ltd. and  Methane  Services  Limited.  See  “Item  4—
Information on the Partnership—Business Overview—LNG Carrier Charters” for a summary of certain contract terms.

8. Time  Charter  Party  dated  September  4,  2007  between  Golar  Spirit  UK  Ltd.  and  Petróleo  Brasileiro  S.A.   “Item  4—

Information on the Partnership—Business Overview—FSRU Charters” for a summary of certain contract terms.

103

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 110 of 169

Table of Contents

9. Operation  and  Services  Agreement  dated  September  4,  2007  between  Golar  Serviços  de  Operação  de  Embarcações 
Limitada and Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. “Item 4—Information on the Partnership—Business Overview—FSRU Charters” for 
a summary of certain contract terms.

10. Time Charter Party dated September 4, 2007 between Golar Winter UK Ltd. and Petróleo Brasileiro S.A.  See “Item 4—

Information on the Partnership—Business Overview—FSRU Charters” for a summary of certain contract terms.

11. Operation  and  Services  Agreement  dated  September  4,  2007  between  Golar  Serviços  de  Operação  de  Embarcações 
Limitada and Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. See “Item 4—Information on the Partnership—Business Overview—FSRU Charters”
for a summary of certain contract terms.

12. $20.0 Million Revolving Credit Agreement by and between Golar LNG Partners LP and Golar LNG Limited.  In connection 
with our initial public offering, we entered into a $20.0 million revolving credit facility (or the sponsor credit facility) with 
Golar, to be used to fund our working capital requirements.  The facility has a term of four years and is interest-free and 
unsecured.   As  of  December  31,  2011,  we  had  not  borrowed  under  the  facility.   See  “Item  5—Operating  and  Financial 
Review and Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a summary of certain terms.

13. Purchase,  Sale  and  Contribution  Agreement,  dated  October  5,  2011,  by  and  between  the  Golar  LNG  Partners  LP,  Golar 
Partners Operating LLC and Golar LNG Ltd., providing for, among other things, the acquisition of the Golar Freeze.  See 
“Item 7—Major Unitholders and Related Party Transactions—Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions” for a 
summary of certain contract terms.

14. Loan Agreement, dated October 18, 2011, by and between Golar LNG Limited as the lender and Golar LNG Partners LP as 
the  borrower.   In  connection  with  our  acquisition  of  the  Golar  Freeze  from  Golar  in  October  2011,  we  entered  into  a 
financing loan agreement with Golar for an amount of $222.3 million (or the Golar Freeze vendor loan). The Golar Freeze 
vendor  loan  is  unsecured and  bears interest  at  a  fixed  rate  of 6.75%  per  annum  and interest  payments  are  quarterly  over 
three  years  with  a  final  balloon  payment  of  $222.3  million  due  in  October  2014.  See  “Item  5—Operating  and  Financial 
Review and Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a summary of certain terms.

15. Purchase, Sale and Contribution Agreement, dated July 9, 2012, by and between the Golar LNG Partners LP, Golar Partners 
Operating  LLC  and  Golar  LNG  Ltd.,  providing  for,  among  other  things,  the  acquisition  of  the  NR  Satu.   See  “Item  7—
Major Unitholders and Related Party Transactions—Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions” for a summary 
of certain contract terms.

16. Purchase, Sale and Contribution Agreement, dated November 1, 2012, by and between the Golar LNG Partners LP, Golar 
Partners Operating LLC and Golar LNG Ltd., providing for, among other things, the acquisition of the Golar Grand.  See 
“Item 7—Major Unitholders and Related Party Transactions—Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions” for a 
summary of certain contract terms.

17. $175 million Facility  Agreement, dated December 14, 2012, by and among a group of banks as the lender and PT Golar 
Indonesia as the borrower. PT Golar Indonesia, the company that owns and operates the FSRU, NR Satu, entered into a 7 
year secured loan facility. The total facility amount is $175 million and is split into two tranches, a $155 million term loan 
facility  and  a  $20  million revolving facility. The facility is with a syndicate of banks and bears interest at LIBOR plus  a 
margin  of  3.5%.  PT  Golar  Indonesia  drew  down  $155  million  on  the  term  loan  facility  in  December  2012.  The  loan  is 
payable on a quarterly basis with a final balloon payment of $52.5 million payable after 7 years. See “Item 5—Operating 
and Financial Review and Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a summary of certain terms.

18. Purchase,  Sale and Contribution  Agreement,  dated January  30, 2013, by and between the  Golar LNG  Partners LP, Golar 
Partners Operating LLC and Golar LNG Ltd., providing for, among other things, the acquisition of the Golar Maria.  See 
“Item 7—Major Unitholders and Related Party Transactions—Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions” for a 
summary of certain contract terms.

19. Bond Agreement dated October 11, 2012 between Golar LNG Partners LP and Norsk Tillitsmann ASA as bond trustee. We 
completed the issuance of NOK 1,300 million senior unsecured bonds that mature in October 2017. The bonds bear interest 
at  a  rate  equal  to  3  months  NIBOR  plus  a  margin  of  5.20%  payable  quarterly.  See  “Item  5—Operating  and  Financial 
Review and Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a summary of certain terms.

D. Exchange Controls

We are not aware of any governmental laws, decrees or regulations, including foreign exchange controls, in the Republic of 
The Marshall Islands that restrict the export or import of capital, or that affect the remittance of dividends, interest or other payments 
to non-resident holders of our securities.

104

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 111 of 169

Table of Contents

We are not aware of any limitations on the right of non-resident or foreign owners to hold or vote our securities imposed by 

the laws of the Republic of The Marshall Islands or our partnership agreement.

E. Taxation

Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations

The  following  is  a  discussion  of  the  material  U.S.  federal  income  tax  considerations  that  may  be relevant to  prospective 

unitholders.

This  discussion is based upon provisions of the Code, Treasury Regulations,  and  current administrative rulings  and  court 
decisions,  all  as  in  effect  or  existence  on  the  date  of  this  Annual  Report  and  all  of  which  are  subject  to  change,  possibly  with 
retroactive  effect.   Changes  in  these  authorities  may  cause  the  tax  consequences  of  unit  ownership  to  vary  substantially  from  the 
consequences described below.  Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this section to “we,” “our” or “us” are references 
to Golar LNG Partners LP.

The following discussion applies only to beneficial owners of common units that own the common units as “capital assets”
within the meaning of Section 1221 of the Code (i.e., generally, for investment purposes) and is not intended to be applicable to all 
categories  of  investors,  such  as  unitholders  subject  to  special  tax  rules  (e.g.,  financial  institutions,  insurance  companies,  broker-
dealers, tax-exempt organizations, retirement plans or individual retirement accounts or former citizens or long-term residents of the 
United  States),  persons  who  will  hold  the  units  as  part  of  a  straddle,  hedge,  conversion,  constructive  sale  or  other  integrated 
transaction for U.S. federal income tax purposes, or persons that have a functional currency other than the U.S. dollar, each of whom 
may  be  subject  to tax  rules  that  differ  significantly  from those  summarized  below.  If a  partnership or  other entity classified as  a 
partnership  for  U.S. federal  income  tax  purposes  holds  our  common  units,  the  tax  treatment  of its  partners  generally  will  depend 
upon the status of the partner and the activities of the partnership.  Unitholders who are partners in a partnership holding our common 
units, should consult a tax advisor regarding the tax consequences to them of the partnership’s ownership of our common units.

No ruling has been or will be requested from the IRS regarding any matter affecting us or our unitholders.  The statements 

made herein may be challenged by the IRS and, if so challenged, may not be sustained upon review in a court.

This  discussion  does  not  contain  information  regarding  any  U.S.  state  or  local,  estate,  gift  or  alternative  minimum  tax 
considerations concerning the ownership or disposition of common units.  This discussion does not comment on all aspects of U.S. 
federal  income  taxation  that  may  be  important  to  particular  unitholders  in  light  of  their  individual  circumstances,  and  each 
prospective unitholder is urged to consult its own tax advisor regarding the U.S. federal, state, local and other tax consequences of 
the ownership or disposition of common units.

Election to be Treated as a Corporation

We have  elected to be treated as a corporation for U.S.  federal income tax purposes.  Consequently,  among other things, 
U.S. Holders (as defined below) will not be directly subject to U.S. federal income tax on our income, but rather will be subject to 
U.S. federal income tax on distributions received from us and dispositions of units as described below.

U.S. Federal Income Taxation of U.S. Holders

As  used  herein,  the  term  “U.S.  Holder” means  a  beneficial  owner  of  our  common  units  that  owns  (actually  or 

constructively) less than 10.0% of our equity and that is:

•

•

•

•

an individual U.S. citizen or resident (as determined for U.S. federal income tax purposes),

a corporation (or other entity that is classified as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes) organized under 
the laws of the United States or any of its political subdivisions,

an estate the income of which is subject to U.S. federal income taxation regardless of its source, or

a trust if (i) a court within the United States is able to exercise primary jurisdiction over the administration of the trust 
and one or more U.S. persons have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust or (ii) the trust has a 
valid election in effect to be treated as a U.S. person for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

105

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 112 of 169

Table of Contents

Distributions

Subject to the discussion below of the rules applicable to PFICs, any distributions to a U.S. Holder made by us with respect 
to our common units generally will constitute dividends, which may be taxable as ordinary income or “qualified dividend income” as 
described in more detail below, to the extent of our current and accumulated earnings and profits, as determined under U.S. federal 
income tax principles.  Distributions in excess of our earnings and profits will be treated first as a nontaxable return of capital to the 
extent of the U.S. Holder’s tax basis in its common units and, thereafter, as capital gain.  U.S. Holders that are corporations generally 
will not be entitled to claim dividends received deduction with respect to distributions they receive from us because we are not a U.S. 
corporation.   Dividends  received  with  respect  to  our  common  units  generally  will  be  treated  as  “passive  category  income” for 
purposes of computing allowable foreign tax credits for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Dividends  received  with  respect  to  our  common  units  by  a  U.S.  Holder  that  is  an  individual,  trust  or  estate  (or  a  U.S. 
Individual  Holder)  generally  will  be  treated  as  “qualified  dividend  income,” which  is  currently  taxable  to  such  U.S.  Individual 
Holder  at  preferential  capital  gain  tax  rates  provided  that:  (i)  our  common  units  are  readily  tradable  on  an  established  securities 
market in the United States (such as The Nasdaq Global Market on which our common units are traded); (ii) we are not a PFIC for 
the taxable year during which the dividend is paid or the immediately preceding taxable year (which we do not believe we are, have 
been  or  will  be,  as  discussed  below  under  “—U.S.  Federal  Income  Taxation  of  U.S.  Holders—PFIC  Status  and  Significant  Tax 
Consequences”);  (iii)  the  U.S.  Individual  Holder  has  owned  the  common  units  for  more  than  60  days  during  the  121-day  period 
beginning 60 days before the  date on which the common units become ex-dividend (and has  not entered into certain risk limiting 
transactions  with  respect  to  such  common  units);  and  (iv)  the  U.S.  Individual  Holder  is  not  under  an  obligation  to  make  related 
payments with respect to positions in substantially similar or related property.  There is no assurance that any dividends paid on our 
common units will be eligible for these preferential rates in the hands of a U.S. Individual Holder, and any dividends paid on our 
common units that are not eligible for these preferential rates will be taxed as ordinary income to a U.S. Individual Holder.  

Special  rules  may  apply  to  any  amounts  received  in  respect  of  our  common  units  that  are  treated  as  “extraordinary 
dividends.” In general, an extraordinary dividend is a dividend with respect to a common unit that is equal to or in excess of 10.0% 
of  a  unitholder’s  adjusted  tax  basis  (or  fair  market  value  upon  the  unitholder’s  election)  in  such  common  unit.   In  addition, 
extraordinary  dividends  include  dividends  received  within  a  one  year  period  that,  in  the  aggregate,  equal  or  exceed  20.0%  of  a 
unitholder’s adjusted tax basis (or fair market value).  If we pay an “extraordinary dividend” on our common units that is treated as 
“qualified dividend income,” then any loss recognized by a U.S. Individual Holder from the sale or exchange of such common units 
will be treated as long-term capital loss to the extent of the amount of such dividend.

Medicare Tax on Net Investment Income

Certain U.S. Holders, including individuals, estates and trusts, will be subject to an additional 3.8% Medicare tax on, among 
other  things,  dividends  and  capital  gains  from  the  sale  or  other  disposition  of  equity  interests  for  taxable  years  beginning  after 
December 31, 2012. For individuals, the additional Medicare tax applies to the lesser of (i) “net investment income” or (ii) the excess 
of  “modified  adjusted  gross  income” over  $200,000  ($250,000  if  married  and  filing  jointly  or  $125,000  if  married  and  filing 
separately).  “Net  investment  income” generally  equals  the  taxpayer's  gross  investment  income  reduced  by  deductions  that  are 
allocable  to  such  income.  Unitholders  should  consult  their  tax  advisors  regarding  the  implications  of  the  additional  Medicare  tax 
resulting from their ownership and disposition of our common units.

Sale, Exchange or Other Disposition of Common Units

Subject  to  the  discussion  of  PFIC  status  below,  a  U.S.  Holder  generally  will  recognize  capital  gain  or  loss  upon  a  sale, 
exchange or other disposition of our units in an amount equal to the difference between the amount realized by the U.S. Holder from 
such sale, exchange or other disposition and the U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in such units.  The U.S. Holder’s initial tax basis in 
its units generally will be the U.S. Holder’s purchase price for the units and that tax basis will be reduced (but not below zero) by the 
amount of any distributions on the units that are treated as non-taxable returns of capital.  Such gain or loss will be treated as long-
term  capital  gain  or  loss  if  the  U.S.  Holder’s  holding  period  is  greater  than  one  year  at  the  time  of  the  sale,  exchange  or  other 
disposition.  Certain U.S. Holders (including individuals) may be eligible for preferential rates of U.S. federal income tax in respect 
of  long-term  capital  gains.   A  U.S.  Holder’s  ability  to  deduct  capital  losses  is  subject  to  limitations.   Such  capital  gain  or  loss 
generally will be treated as U.S. source income or loss, as applicable, for U.S. foreign tax credit purposes.

106

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 113 of 169

Table of Contents

PFIC Status and Significant Tax Consequences

Adverse U.S. federal income tax rules apply to a U.S. Holder that owns an equity interest in a non-U.S. corporation that is 
classified as a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes.  In general, we will be treated as a PFIC with respect to a U.S. Holder if, 
for any taxable year in which the holder held our units, either:

•

•

at least 75.0% of our gross income (including the gross income of our vessel-owning subsidiaries) for such taxable year 
consists of passive income (e.g., dividends, interest, capital gains from the sale or exchange of investment property, and 
rents derived other than in the active conduct of a rental business); or

at  least  50.0%  of  the average  value  of  the  assets  held  by  us  (including  the  assets  of our  vessel-owning  subsidiaries) 
during such taxable year produce, or are held for the production of, passive income.

Income  earned,  or  deemed  earned,  by  us  in  connection  with  the  performance  of  services  would  not  constitute  passive 
income.   By  contrast,  rental  income  generally  would  constitute  “passive  income” unless  we  were  treated  as  deriving  that  rental 
income in the active conduct of a trade or business under the applicable rules.

Based on our current and projected method of operation, we believe that we were not a PFIC for any taxable year, and we 
expect that we will not be treated as a PFIC for any future taxable year.  We believe that more than 25.0% of our gross income for 
each taxable year was or will be nonpassive income and more than 50.0% of the average value of our assets for each such year was 
or will be held for the production of such nonpassive income.  This belief is based on certain valuation and projections regarding our 
assets, income and charters, and its validity is conditioned on the accuracy of such representations and projections.  

While we believe such valuations and projections to be accurate, the shipping market is volatile and no assurance can be 
given that they will continue to be accurate at any time in the future. Moreover, there are legal uncertainties involved in determining 
whether  the  income  derived  from  time-chartering  activities  constitutes  rental  income  or  income  derived  from  the  performance  of 
services.  The  conclusions  described  above  are  not  free  from  doubt.   While  there  is  legal  authority  supporting  our  conclusions, 
including IRS pronouncements concerning the characterization of income derived from time charters as services income, the United 
States Court of Appeals  for the  Fifth  Circuit (or the  Fifth  Circuit)  held in Tidewater Inc. v. United  States, 565 F.3d 299 (5th  Cir. 
2009)  that  income  derived  from  certain  marine  time  charter  agreements  should  be  treated  as  rental  income  rather  than  services 
income  for  purposes  of  a  “foreign  sales  corporation” provision  of  the  Code.   In  that  case,  the  Fifth  Circuit  did  not  address  the 
definition of passive income or the PFIC  rules; however,  the reasoning of the case could have implications as to  how the income 
from a time charter would be classified under such rules.  If the reasoning of this case were extended to the PFIC context, the gross 
income we derive or are deemed to derive from our time chartering activities may be treated as rental income, and we would likely 
be treated as a PFIC.  The IRS has announced its nonacquiescence with the court's holding in the Tidewater case and, at the same 
time,  announced the position  of  the IRS  that  the marine time  charter agreements at issue in that case should  be  treated as service 
contracts.  

Distinguishing between arrangements treated as generating rental income and those treated as generating services income 
involves weighing and balancing competing factual considerations, and there is no legal authority under the PFIC rules addressing 
our specific method of operation.  Conclusions in this area therefore remain matters of interpretation. We are not seeking a ruling 
from the IRS on the treatment of income generated from our time chartering operations.  Thus, it is possible that the IRS or a court 
could disagree with this position.  In addition, although we intend to conduct our affairs in a manner to avoid being classified as a 
PFIC with respect to any taxable year, we cannot assure unitholders that the nature of our operations will not change in the future and 
that we will not become a PFIC in any future taxable year.

As discussed more fully below, if we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year, a U.S. Holder would be subject to 
different taxation rules depending on whether the U.S. Holder makes an election to treat us as a “Qualified Electing Fund,” which we 
refer to as a “QEF election.” As an alternative to making a QEF election, a U.S. Holder should be able to make a “mark-to-market”
election with respect to our common units, as discussed below.  If we are a PFIC, a U.S. Holder will be subject to the PFIC rules 
described herein with respect to any of our subsidiaries that are PFICs.  However, the mark-to-market election discussed below will 
likely not be available with respect to shares of such PFIC subsidiaries.  In addition, if a U.S. Holder owns our common units during 
any taxable year that we are a PFIC, such holder must file an annual report with the IRS.

107

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 114 of 169

Table of Contents

Taxation of U.S. Holders Making a Timely QEF Election

If  a  U.S.  Holder  makes  a  timely  QEF  election  (or  an  Electing  Holder),  then,  for  U.S.  federal  income  tax  purposes,  that 
holder must report as income for its taxable year its pro rata share of our ordinary earnings and net capital gain, if any, for our taxable 
years  that end  with or within the  taxable year  for which that holder is reporting, regardless of  whether or  not the Electing Holder 
received distributions from us in that year.  The Electing Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the common units will be increased to reflect 
taxed  but  undistributed  earnings  and  profits.   Distributions  of  earnings  and  profits  that  were  previously  taxed  will  result  in  a 
corresponding reduction in the Electing Holder’s adjusted tax basis in common units and will not be taxed again once distributed.  
An Electing Holder generally will recognize capital gain or loss on the sale, exchange or other disposition of our common units.  A 
U.S. Holder makes a QEF election with respect to any year that we are a PFIC by filing IRS Form 8621 with its U.S. federal income 
tax return.  If contrary to our expectations, we determine that we are treated as a PFIC for any taxable year, we will provide each U.S. 
Holder with the information necessary to make the QEF election described above.

Taxation of U.S. Holders Making a “Mark-to-Market” Election

If we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year and, as we anticipate, our units were treated as “marketable stock,”
then, as an alternative to making a QEF election, a U.S. Holder would be allowed to make a “mark-to-market” election with respect 
to our common units, provided the U.S. Holder completes and files IRS Form 8621 in accordance with the relevant instructions and 
related Treasury Regulations.  If that election is made, the U.S. Holder generally would include as ordinary income in each taxable 
year the excess, if any, of the fair market value of the U.S. Holder’s common units at the end of the taxable year over the holder’s 
adjusted tax basis in the common units.  The U.S. Holder also would be permitted an ordinary loss in respect of the excess, if any, of 
the U.S. Holder’s adjusted tax basis in the common units over the fair market value thereof at the end of the taxable year, but only to 
the extent of the net amount previously included in income as a result of the mark-to-market election.  A U.S. Holder’s tax basis in 
its common units would be adjusted to reflect any such income or loss recognized.  Gain recognized on the sale, exchange or other 
disposition  of  our  common  units  would  be  treated  as  ordinary  income,  and  any  loss  recognized  on  the  sale,  exchange  or  other 
disposition of the common units would be treated as ordinary loss to the extent that such loss does not exceed the net mark-to-market 
gains  previously  included  in  income  by  the  U.S.  Holder.   Because  the  mark-to-market  election  only  applies  to  marketable  stock, 
however, it would not apply to a U.S. Holder’s indirect interest in any of our subsidiaries that were determined to be PFICs.

Taxation of U.S. Holders Not Making a Timely QEF or Mark-to-Market Election

If we were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year, a U.S. Holder that does not make either a QEF election or a “mark-
to-market” election for that year (or a Non-Electing Holder) would be subject to special rules resulting in increased tax liability with 
respect to (1) any excess distribution (i.e., the portion of any distributions received by the Non-Electing Holder on our common units 
in a taxable year in excess of 125.0% of the average annual distributions received by the Non-Electing Holder in the three preceding 
taxable years, or, if shorter, the Non-Electing Holder’s holding period for the common units), and (2) any gain realized on the sale, 
exchange or other disposition of the units.  Under these special rules:

•

•

•

the excess distribution or gain would be allocated ratably over the Non-Electing Holder’s aggregate holding period for 
the common units;

the amount allocated to the current taxable year and any taxable year prior to the taxable year we were first treated as a 
PFIC with respect to the Non-Electing Holder would be taxed as ordinary income; and

the amount allocated to each of the other taxable years would be subject to tax at the highest rate of tax in effect for the 
applicable  class  of  taxpayers  for  that  year,  and  an  interest  charge  for  the  deemed deferral  benefit  would be  imposed 
with respect to the resulting tax attributable to each such other taxable year.

These penalties would not apply to a qualified pension, profit sharing or other retirement trust or other tax-exempt 
organization that did not borrow money or otherwise utilize leverage in connection with its acquisition of our common units. If we 
were treated as a PFIC for any taxable year and a Non-Electing Holder who is an individual dies while owning our common units, 
such holder's successor generally would not receive a step-up in tax basis with respect to such units.

U.S. Federal Income Taxation of Non-U.S. Holders

A beneficial owner of our common units (other than a partnership or an entity or arrangement treated as a partnership for 
U.S. federal income tax purposes) that is not a U.S. Holder is referred to as a Non-U.S. Holder.  Unitholders who are a partner in a 
partnership (or an entity or arrangement treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes) holding our common units, 
should consult a tax advisor regarding the tax consequences to them of the partnership’s ownership of our common units.

108

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 115 of 169

Table of Contents

Distributions

Distributions we pay to a Non-U.S. Holder will not be subject to U.S. federal income tax or withholding tax if the Non-U.S. 
Holder is not engaged in a U.S. trade or business.  If the Non-U.S. Holder is engaged in a U.S. trade or business, our distributions 
will be subject to U.S. federal income tax to the extent they constitute income effectively connected with the Non-U.S. Holder’s U.S. 
trade  or  business.   However,  distributions  paid  to  a  Non-U.S.  Holder  that  is  engaged  in  a  trade  or  business  may  be  exempt  from 
taxation under an income tax treaty if the income arising from the distribution is not attributable to a U.S. permanent establishment 
maintained by the Non-U.S. Holder.

Disposition of Units

In general, a Non-U.S. Holder is not subject to U.S. federal income tax or withholding tax on any gain resulting from the 
disposition of our common units provided the Non-U.S. Holder is not engaged in a U.S. trade or business.  A Non-U.S. Holder that is 
engaged in a U.S. trade or business will be subject to U.S. federal income tax in the event the gain from the disposition of units is 
effectively connected  with  the  conduct  of  such  U.S.  trade  or  business  (provided,  in  the  case  of  a  Non-U.S.  Holder  entitled  to  the 
benefits of an income tax treaty with the United States, such gain also is attributable to a U.S. permanent establishment).  However, 
even  if  not  engaged  in  a  U.S.  trade  or  business,  individual  Non-U.S.  Holders  may  be  subject  to  tax  on  gain  resulting  from  the 
disposition of our common units if they are present in the United States for 183 days or more during the taxable year in which those 
units are disposed and meet certain other requirements.

Backup Withholding and Information Reporting

In general, payments to a non-corporate U.S. Holder of distributions or the proceeds of a disposition of common units will 
be subject to information reporting.  These payments to a non-corporate U.S. Holder also may be subject to backup withholding if 
the non-corporate U.S. Holder:

•

•

•

fails to provide an accurate taxpayer identification number;

is notified by the IRS that it has failed to report all interest or corporate distributions required to be reported on its U.S. 
federal income tax returns; or

in certain circumstances, fails to comply with applicable certification requirements.

Non-U.S.  Holders  may  be  required  to  establish  their  exemption  from  information  reporting  and  backup  withholding  by 

certifying their status on IRS Form W-8BEN, W-8ECI or W-8IMY, as applicable.

Backup withholding is not an additional tax.  Rather, a unitholder generally may obtain a credit for any amount withheld 
against its liability for U.S. federal income tax (and obtain a refund of any amounts withheld in excess of such liability) by timely 
filing a U.S. federal income tax return with the IRS.

In addition, individual citizens or residents of the United States holding certain “foreign financial assets” (which generally 
includes stock and other securities issued by a foreign person unless held in account maintained by a financial institution) that exceed 
certain thresholds (the lowest being holding foreign financial assets with an aggregate value in excess of: (1) $50,000 on the last day 
of the tax year or (2) $75,000 at any time during the tax year) are required to report information relating to such assets.  Significant 
penalties  may  apply  for  failure  to satisfy  the  reporting obligations  described above.   Unitholders should  consult  their tax  advisors 
regarding their reporting obligations, if any, result of their purchase, ownership or disposition of our units.

Non-United States Tax Considerations

Marshall Islands Tax Consequences

The following discussion is based upon the current laws of the Republic of the Marshall Islands applicable to persons who 

do not reside in, maintain offices in or engage in business in the Republic of the Marshall Islands.

We and certain of our subsidiaries are incorporated in the Marshall Islands.  Under current Marshall Islands law, we are not 
subject to tax on income or capital gains, and no Marshall Islands withholding tax will be imposed upon payments of dividends by us 
to  unitholders  that  are  not  residents  or  domiciled  or  carrying  any  commercial  activity  in  the  Marshall  Islands,  nor  will  such 
unitholders be subject to any Marshall Islands taxation on the sale or other disposition of common units.

109

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 116 of 169

Table of Contents

United Kingdom Tax Consequences

The  following  is  a  discussion  of  the  material  United  Kingdom  tax  consequences  that  may  be  relevant  to  prospective 
unitholders  who are persons not resident  or  individuals  not  ordinarily  resident for  tax purposes  in  the United Kingdom  (non-U.K. 
Holders).

Prospective unitholders who are  resident or ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom are urged to  consult their own tax 
advisors regarding the potential United Kingdom tax consequences to them of an investment in our common units.  For this purpose, 
a  company incorporated  outside of the United Kingdom will be treated as resident in the United Kingdom  in the event its central 
management and control is carried out in the United Kingdom.

The  discussion  that  follows  is  based  upon  existing  United  Kingdom  legislation  and  current  H.M.   Revenue  &  Customs 
practice as of the date of this Annual Report.  Changes in these authorities may cause the tax consequences to vary substantially from 
the consequences of unit ownership described below.  Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this section to “we,” “our”
or “us” are references to Golar LNG Partners LP.

Taxation of Non-U.K. Holders

Under  the  United  Kingdom  Tax  Acts,  non-U.K.  holders  will  not  be  subject  to  any  United  Kingdom  taxes  on  income  or 
profits (including chargeable (capital) gains) in respect of the acquisition, holding, disposition or redemption of the common units, 
provided that:

• we are not treated as carrying on business in the United Kingdom;

•

•

such holders do not have a fixed base or permanent establishment in the United Kingdom to which such common units 
pertain; and

such holders do not use or hold and are not deemed or considered to use or hold their common units in the course of 
carrying on a business in the United Kingdom.

A non-United Kingdom resident company or an individual not resident or ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom that 
carries on a business in the United Kingdom through a partnership is subject to United Kingdom  tax on income derived from the 
business carried on by the partnership in the United Kingdom.  Nonetheless, we expect to conduct our affairs in such a manner that 
we will not be treated as carrying on business in the United Kingdom.  Consequently, we expect that non-U.K. Holders will not be 
considered to be carrying on business in the United Kingdom for the purposes of the United Kingdom Tax Acts solely by reason of 
the acquisition, holding, disposition or redemption of their common units.

While we do not expect it to be the case, if the arrangements we propose to enter into result in our being considered to carry 
on business in the United Kingdom for the purposes of the United Kingdom Tax Acts, our unitholders would be considered to be 
carrying on business in the United Kingdom and would be required to file tax returns with the United Kingdom taxing authority and, 
subject to any relief provided in any relevant double taxation treaty (including, in the case of holders resident in the United States, 
the  double  taxation  agreement  between  the  United  Kingdom  and  the  United  States),  would  be  subject  to  taxation  in  the  United 
Kingdom on any income and chargeable gains that are considered to be attributable to the business carried on by us in the United 
Kingdom.

EACH PROSPECTIVE UNITHOLDER IS URGED TO CONSULT HIS OWN TAX COUNSEL OR OTHER ADVISOR 
WITH  REGARD  TO  THE  LEGAL  AND  TAX  CONSEQUENCES  OF  UNIT  OWNERSHIP  UNDER  THEIR  PARTICULAR 
CIRCUMSTANCES.

F. Dividends and Paying Agents

Not applicable.

G. Statements by Experts

Not applicable.

110

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 117 of 169

Table of Contents

H. Documents on Display

Documents concerning us that are referred to herein may be inspected at our principal executive headquarters at Par-la-Ville 
Place,  14  Par-la-Ville  Road,  Hamilton,  HM  08,  Bermuda.  Those  documents  electronically  filed  via  the  SEC’s  Electronic  Data 
Gathering,  Analysis,  and  Retrieval  (or  EDGAR)  system  may  also  be  obtained  from  the  SEC’s  website  at  www.sec.gov,  free  of 
charge,  or  from  the  SEC’s  Public  Reference  Section  at  100  F  Street,  NE,  Washington,  D.C.  20549,  at  prescribed  rates.  Further 
information on the operation of the SEC public reference rooms may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.

I.

Subsidiary Information

Not applicable.

Item 11.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

We are exposed to various market risks, including interest rate and foreign currency exchange risks.  We enter into a variety 

of derivative instruments and contracts to maintain the desired level of exposure arising from these risks.

Our policy is to hedge our exposure to risks, where possible, within boundaries deemed appropriate by management.

A discussion of our accounting policies for derivative financial instruments is included in Note 2 — Significant Accounting 
Policies  to  our  audited  consolidated  and  combined  financial  statements.   Further  information  on  our  exposure  to  market  risk  is 
included in Note 24 — Financial Instruments to our audited consolidated and combined financial statements included elsewhere in 
this Annual Report.

The following analyses provide quantitative information regarding our exposure to foreign currency exchange rate risk and 
interest rate risk.  There are certain shortcomings inherent in the sensitivity analyses presented, primarily due to the assumption that 
exchange rates change in a parallel fashion and that interest rates change instantaneously.

Interest rate risk.  A significant portion of our long-term debt and capital lease obligations is subject to adverse movements 
in  interest  rates.   Our  interest  rate  risk  management  policy  permits  economic  hedge  relationships  in  order  to  reduce  the  risk 
associated  with  adverse  fluctuations  in  interest  rates.   We  use  interest  rate  swaps  and  fixed  rate  debt  to  manage  the  exposure  to 
adverse movements in interest rates.  Interest rate swaps are used to convert floating rate debt obligations to a fixed rate in order to 
achieve an overall desired position of fixed and floating rate debt.  Credit exposures are monitored on a counterparty basis, with all 
new transactions subject to senior management approval.

As of December 31, 2012, the notional amount of the interest rate swaps outstanding in respect of our debt and net capital 
lease  obligation,  net  of  restricted  cash,  was  $759.6  million.   The  principal  of  the  loans  and  net  capital  lease  obligations,  net  of 
restricted  cash,  outstanding  as  of  December  31,  2012  was  $930.4  million.   Based  on  our  floating  rate  debt  and  net  capital  lease 
obligations outstanding of $170.8 million as of December 31, 2012, a 1% increase in the floating interest rate would increase interest 
expense  by  $0.6  million  for  the  year  ended  December  31,  2012. For  disclosure  of  the  fair  value  of  the  derivatives  and  debt 
obligations outstanding as of December 31 2012, please read Note 24 to the Golar LNG Partners audited consolidated and combined 
financial  statements  included  elsewhere  in  this  Annual  Report.  In  February  2013,  we  entered  into  interest  rate  swaps  to  fix  the 
LIBOR interest rate on the NR Satu facility for a principal amount of $122.5 million at an average rate of 1.27%, expiring in 2018. 

Foreign currency risk.  A substantial amount of our transactions, assets and liabilities are denominated in currencies other 
than U.S. Dollars, such as GBPs, in relation to the administrative expenses we will be charged by Golar Management in the UK and 
operating  expenses  incurred  in  a  variety  of  foreign  currencies  and  Brazilian  Reais  in  respect  of  our  Brazilian  subsidiary  which 
receives income and pays expenses in Brazilian Reais.  Based on our GBP expenses for the year ended December 31, 2012, a 10% 
depreciation  of  the  U.S.  Dollar  against  GBP  would  have  increased  our  expenses  by  approximately  $0.5  million.   Based  on  our 
Brazilian Reais expenses for the year ended December 31, 2012, a 10% depreciation of the U.S. Dollar against the Brazilian Reais 
would have increased our net revenue and expenses by approximately $0.7 million.

The  base  currency  of  the  majority  of  our  seafaring  officers’ remuneration  was  the  Euro,  Indonesian  Rupiah  or  Brazilian 
Reais.   Based  on  the  crew  costs  for  the  year  ended  December  31,  2012,  a  10%  depreciation  of  the  U.S.  Dollar  against  the  Euro, 
Indonesian Rupiah and the Brazilian Reais would increase our crew cost by approximately $1.2 million.

111

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 118 of 169

Table of Contents

We are exposed to some extent in respect of the lease transaction entered into with respect to the Methane Princess, which 
is  denominated  in  British  Pounds,  although  it  is  hedged  by  the  British  Pound  cash  deposit  that  secures  the  obligations  under  the 
lease.  We use cash from the deposits to make payments in respect of the lease transaction entered into with respect to the Methane 
Princess.  Gains or losses that we incur are unrealized unless we choose or are required to withdraw monies from or pay additional 
monies into the deposit securing this obligation.  Among other things, movements in interest rates give rise to a requirement for us to 
adjust the amount of the British Pound cash deposit.  Based on this lease obligation and the related cash deposit as of December 31, 
2012,  a  10%  appreciation  in  the  U.S.  Dollar  against  British  Pounds  would  give  rise  to  a  foreign  exchange  movement  of 
approximately $0.5 million.

In respect  of  the  Golar  Winter lease,  the  obligation  is denominated  in GBP. As  of  December  31,  2012,  the  cash  deposit 
securing the lease obligation is $nil.  We are therefore exposed to the currency movements on the lease obligation of $121.5 million
as of December 31, 2012.  In order to hedge this exposure, we entered into a currency swap with a bank, which is also our lessor, to 
exchange our GBP payment obligations into U.S. Dollar payment obligations.  We could be exposed to a currency fluctuation risk if 
we terminate this lease.

We issued senior unsecured high-yield bonds denominated in Norwegian Kroner. We are therefore exposed to the currency 
movements on the liability of $233.8 million as of December 31, 2012. In order to hedge this exposure, we entered into a currency 
swap with a banks to exchange our Norwegian payment obligations into U.S. Dollar payment obligations. We could be exposed to a 
currency fluctuation risk if upon the occurrence of a change of control event, the bondholders exercise their right of pre-payment.

Item 12.

Description of Securities Other than Equity Securities

Not applicable.

112

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 119 of 169

Table of Contents

PART II

Item 13.

Defaults, Dividend Arrearages and Delinquencies

In April  2013,  we  received  waivers relating  to  breach of  covenants  under  the  Golar  LNG  Partners  credit  facility  and the 
Golar Freeze facility relating to change of control over the Partnership. The waiver relating to the Golar LNG Partners credit facility 
extends  to  January  1,  2014. The  waiver relating to the Golar  Freeze facility  is permanent. As  discussed in note  1 to our  financial 
statements, following the first annual general meeting of common unitholders on December 13, 2012, Golar ceased to control our 
board of directors as the majority of board members became electable by the common unitholders . Absent this waiver, we would not 
have been in compliance with this covenant as of December 31, 2012 as Golar no longer controls the appointment of the majority of 
the members of our board of directors. In connection with the grant of  such waiver, in order to avoid any such default that could 
occur in the future, the definition of a change of control contained in the Golar LNG Partners credit facility and the Golar Freeze 
facility are being amended.

In March 2012, we received a waiver relating to our requirement to comply with the consolidated net worth covenant as of 
December 31, 2011 from the lenders under our Golar LNG Partners credit facility. Absent this waiver, we would not have been in 
compliance with such covenant as of December 31, 2011 due to the required accounting treatment of our acquisition from Golar of a 
100%  interest  in  the  subsidiaries that  own and  operate  the  Golar  Freeze.  Such acquisition is  accounted for  as  a reorganization  of 
entities under common control.  Such accounting treatment requires that the excess of the proceeds we paid over the historical cost of 
the combining entity be treated as an equity distribution, which resulted in a $165.8 million reduction in our equity as of December 
31, 2011.  In connection with the grant of such waiver, in order to avoid any such default that could occur in the future as a result of 
acquisitions by us from  Golar that may require accounting as a reorganization of entities  under common control, the definition of 
consolidated net worth contained in such credit facility has been amended to permit, in connection with up to two such additional 
acquisitions by us from Golar, the addition to our consolidated net worth (as defined in such credit facility) of the difference between 
the original purchase price and the original net book value (subject to adjustment for depreciation).

Item 14.

Material Modifications to the Rights of Security Holders and Use of Proceeds

None.

Item 15.

Controls and Procedures

(a)          Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Management assessed the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to 
Rule  13a-15(e)  of  the  Exchange  Act  of  1934,  as  of  the  end  of  the  period  covered  by  this  annual  report  as  of  December  31, 
2012.  Based upon that evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial and accounting officer concluded that our 
disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the evaluation date.

(b)

Management's Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Our  management  is  responsible  for  establishing  and  maintaining  adequate  internal  control  over  financial  reporting  as 

defined in Rules 13a-15(f) promulgated under the Exchange Act.

Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) or 15d-15(f) promulgated under the Exchange Act as a 
process  designed  by,  or  under  the  supervision  of,  the  our  principal  executive  and  principal  financial  officers  and  effected  by  the 
Partnership's  board  of  directors,  management  and  other  personnel,  to  provide  reasonable  assurance  regarding  the  reliability  of 
financial  reporting  and  the  preparation  of  financial  statements  for  external  purposes  in  accordance  with  generally  accepted 
accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that;

•

•

•

Pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and 
dispositions of the assets of the Partnership;

Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in 
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only 
in accordance with authorizations of the Partnership's management and directors; and

Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of 
our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

113

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 120 of 169

Table of Contents

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.  Also, 
projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of 
changes in conditions, or that the degree or compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Management conducted the evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal controls over financial reporting using the control 
criteria  framework  issued  by  the  Committee  of  Sponsoring  Organizations  of  the  Treadway  Commission  (COSO)  published  in  its 
report entitled Internal Control-Integrated Framework.

Our  management  with  the  participation  of  our  principal  executive  officer  and  principal  financial  and  accounting  officer 
assessed the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Partnership's internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Rule 
13a-15  of  the  Exchange  Act,  as  of  December  31,  2012.  Based  upon  that  evaluation,  management  with  the  participation  of  the 
principal executive officer and principal financial and accounting officer concluded that our internal controls over financial reporting 
are effective as of December 31, 2012.

Our  independent  registered  public  accounting  firm  has  issued  an  attestation  report  on  our  internal  control  over  financial 

reporting.

(c)          Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm

The effectiveness of the Partnership's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012 has been audited by 
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears on page F-2 
of our Consolidated Financial Statements.

(d)          Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There  were  no  changes  in  our  internal  controls  over  financial  reporting  that  occurred  during  the  period  covered  by  this 
annual  report  that  have  materially  affected,  or  are  reasonably  likely  to  materially  affect,  the  Partnership's  internal  control  over 
financial reporting.

Item 16.

[Reserved]

Item 16A.

Audit Committee Financial Expert

Our  board  of  directors  has  determined  that  Kate  Blankenship  qualifies  as  an  audit  committee  financial  expert  and  is 

independent under applicable Nasdaq and SEC standards.

Item 16B.

Code of Ethics

We  have  adopted  the  Golar  LNG  Partners  LP  Corporate  Code  of  Business  Ethics  and  Conduct  that  applies  to  all  of  our 
employees  and  our  officers  and  directors.  This  document  is  available  under  the  “Corporate  Governance” tab  in  the  “Investor 
Relations” section of our website (www.golarlngpartners.com). We intend to disclose, under this tab of our web site, any waivers to 
or amendments of the Golar LNG Partners LP Corporate Code of Business Ethics and Conduct for the benefit of any of our directors 
and executive officers.

Item 16C.

Principal Accountant Fees and Services

Our principal accountant for 2012 was PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.

Fees Incurred by the Partnership for PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP’s Services

In 2012 and 2011, the fees rendered by the auditors were as follows:

114

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 121 of 169

Table of Contents

Audit Fees
Tax Fees
All Other Fees

Audit Fees

2012

795,784
16,527
4,451

$

2011
1,178,062
19,153
—

816,762

$

1,197,215

$

$

Audit fees for 2012 and 2011 include fees related to aggregate fees billed for professional services rendered by the principal 
accountant  for  the  audit  of  the  Partnership’s  annual  financial  statements  and  services  provided  by  the  principal  accountant  in 
connection with statutory and regulatory filings or engagements for the two most recent fiscal years.

In addition, audit fees in 2012 include fees of $0.4 million relating to professional services comprising of assurance work in 
connection with financing and other agreements in connection with our acquisition of the NR Satu and the Golar Grand in July 2012 
and November 2012, respectively.  

Audit fees in 2011 include fees of $0.8 million relating to professional services comprising of assurance work in connection 

with financing and other agreements in connection with our IPO in April 2011. These fees were borne by Golar on our behalf.

Tax Fees

Tax fees for 2012 and 2011 are primarily for tax consultation services.

The audit committee has the authority to pre-approve permissible audit-related and non-audit services not prohibited by law 
to be performed by our independent auditors and associated fees.  Engagements for proposed services either may be separately pre-
approved by the audit committee or entered into pursuant to detailed pre-approval policies and procedures established by the audit 
committee, as long as the audit committee is informed on  a  timely  basis  of any engagement  entered into on  that  basis.   The  audit 
committee separately pre-approved all engagements and fees paid to our principal accountant in 2012.

Item 16D.

Exemptions from the Listing Standards for Audit Committees

Not applicable.

Item 16E.

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

Not applicable.

Item 16F.

Change in Registrants’ Certifying Accountant

Not applicable.

Item 16G. Corporate Governance

Because  we  qualify  as  a  foreign  private  issuer  under  SEC  rules,  we  are  permitted  to  follow  the  corporate  governance 
practices  of  the  Marshall  Islands  (the  jurisdiction  in  which  we  are  organized)  in  lieu  of  certain  Nasdaq  corporate  governance 
requirements that would otherwise be applicable to us.

Nasdaq rules do not require a listed company that is a foreign private issuer to have a board of directors that is comprised of 
a majority of independent directors.  Under Marshall Islands law, we are not required to have a board of directors comprised of a 
majority of directors meeting the independence standards described in Nasdaq rules.  In addition, Nasdaq rules do not require limited 
partnerships like us to have boards of directors comprised of a majority of independent directors.  As of April 30, 2013, our board of 
directors comprised of a majority of independent directors.

115

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 122 of 169

Table of Contents

Nasdaq rules do not require foreign private issuers like us to establish a compensation committee or a nominating/corporate 
governance  committee.   Similarly,  under  Marshall  Islands  law,  we  are  not  required  to  have  a  compensation  committee  or  a 
nominating/corporate  governance  committee.   In  addition,  Nasdaq  rules  do  not  require  limited  partnerships  like  us  to  have  a 
compensation  committee  or  a  nominating/corporate  governance  committee.   Accordingly,  we  will  not  have  a  compensation 
committee or a nominating/corporate governance committee.

Item 16H. Mine Safety Disclosure

Not applicable.

116

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 123 of 169

Table of Contents

PART III

Item 17.

Financial Statements

Not applicable.

Item 18.

Financial Statements

The  following  financial  statements,  together  with  the  related  reports  of  PricewaterhouseCoopers  LLP, Independent 

Registered Public Accounting Firm thereon, are filed as part of this Annual Report appearing on pages F-1 through F-43.

Item 19.

Exhibits

The following exhibits are filed as part of this Annual Report:

Exhibit
Number
1.1

1.2**
4.1

4.2**

4.2(a)**

4.3**

4.4**

4.5†

4.6†

4.7†

4.10†

4.11†

4.13

4.14**

Description

Certificate of Limited Partnership of Golar LNG Partners LP (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the 
registrant’s Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration No. 333-173160))
First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Golar LNG Partners LP
Facility Agreement dated September 29, 2008 for a Senior Secured Revolving Credit Facility by and among 
Golar LNG Partners L.P. (as borrower) and the Banks and Financial Institutions Referred to therein (as lenders) 
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the registrant’s Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration 
No. 333-173160))
Omnibus Agreement dated April 13, 2011, by and among Golar LNG Ltd., Golar LNG Partners LP, Golar GP 
LLC and Golar Energy Limited
Amendment No. 1 to Omnibus Agreement, dated October 5, 2011 by and among Golar LNG Ltd., Golar LNG 
Partners LP, Golar GP LLC and Golar Energy Limited
First Amended and Restated Management and Administrative Services Agreement, effective as of July 1, 2011, 
between Golar LNG Partners LP and Golar Management Limited
Contribution and Conveyance Agreement, dated as of April 5, 2011, among Golar LNG Limited, Golar GP LLC, 
Golar LNG Partners LP, Golar LNG Holding Co., and Golar Partners Operating LLC
Time Charter Party dated July 2, 1997 between Faraway Maritime Shipping Company and Pertamina 
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to the registrant’s Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration 
No. 333-173160))
Time Charter Party dated August 27, 2003 between Golar 2215 UK Ltd. and Methane Services Limited 
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to the registrant’s Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration 
No. 333-173160))
Time Charter Party dated September 4, 2007 between Golar Spirit UK Ltd. and Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. 
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to the registrant’s Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration 
No. 333-173160))
Time Charter Party dated September 4, 2007 between Golar Winter UK Ltd. and Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. 
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to the registrant’s Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration 
No. 333-173160))
Operation and Services Agreement dated September 4, 2007 between Golar Serviços de Operação de 
Embarcações Limitada and Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the registrant’s 
Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration No. 333-173160))
Form of Management Agreement with Golar Management Limited (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to 
the registrant’s Registration Statement on Form F-1 (Registration No. 333-173160))
$20.0 Million Revolving Credit Agreement by and between Golar LNG Partners LP and Golar LNG Limited

117

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 124 of 169

Table of Contents

Exhibit
Number

4.15**

4.16**

4.17

4.18

4.19

4.20

4.21

8.1*
12.1*
12.2*

13.1*
13.2*

15.1*
101. INS***
101. SCH***
101. CAL***
101. DEF***
101. LAB***
101. PRE***

Description
Purchase, Sale and Contribution Agreement, dated October 5, 2011, by and between Golar LNG Partners LP, 
Golar Partners Operating LLC and Golar LNG Ltd., providing for, among other things, the acquisition of the 
Golar Freeze
Loan Agreement, dated October 18, 2011, by and between Golar LNG Limited as the lender and Golar LNG 
Partners LP as the borrower
Purchase, Sale and Contribution Agreement, dated July 9, 2012, by and between Golar LNG Partners LP, 
Golar Partners Operating LLC and Golar LNG Ltd., providing for, among other things, the acquisition of the 
NR Satu (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the registrant’s Report of Foreign Issuer on Form 6-K 
filed on July 16, 2012)

Purchase, Sale and Contribution Agreement, dated November 1, 2012, by and between Golar LNG Partners 
LP, Golar Partners Operating LLC and Golar LNG Ltd., providing for, among other things, the acquisition of 
the Golar Grand (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the registrant’s Report of Foreign Issuer on 
Form 6-K filed on November 6, 2012)

$175 million Facility Agreement, dated December 14, 2012, by and among a group of banks as the lender and 
PT Golar Indonesia as the borrower (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the registrant’s Report of 
Foreign Issuer on Form 6-K filed on February 5, 2013)

Purchase, Sale and Contribution Agreement, dated January 30, 2013, by and between Golar LNG Partners LP, 
Golar Partners Operating LLC and Golar LNG Ltd., providing for, among other things, the acquisition of the 
Golar Maria (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the registrant’s Report of Foreign Issuer on 
Form 6-K filed on February 5, 2013)

Bond Agreement dated October 11, 2012 between Golar LNG Partners LP and Norsk Tillitsmann ASA as 
bond trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the registrant’s Report of Foreign Issuer on Form 6-
K filed on November 6, 2012)

Subsidiaries of Golar LNG Partners LP.
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of Golar LNG Partners LP Principal Executive Officer
Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification of Golar LNG Partners LP Principal Financial and Accounting 
Officer.
Certification under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 of the Principal Executive Officer
Certification under Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 of the Principal Financial and Accounting 
Officer.
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. 
XBRL Instance Document
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Calculation Linkbase
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Definition Linkbase
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Label Linkbase
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Presentation Linkbase

__________________________________________ 
*

 Filed herewith.

  Certain  portions  have  been  omitted  pursuant  to  a  confidential  treatment  request.   Omitted  information  has  been  filed 

†
separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

     Incorporated by reference to the Exhibits of the Partnership's Annual Report on Form 20-F for fiscal year ended December 

**
31, 2011.

***    Pursuant to Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, these interactive data files are deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or 
prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 or Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 
otherwise are not subject to liability under such sections.

118

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 125 of 169

Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

The registrant hereby certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form 20-F and that it has duly caused and 

authorized the undersigned to sign this annual report on its behalf.

Date: April 30, 2013

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP

By:

/s/ Graham Robjohns
Name:
Title:

Graham Robjohns
Principal Executive Officer

119

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 126 of 169

Table of Contents

INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP
AUDITED CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED CARVE-OUT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Consolidated and Combined Carve-Out Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 
2010
Consolidated and Combined Carve-Out Statements of Comprehensive Income for the years ended December 31, 2012, 
2011 and 2010
Consolidated and Combined Carve-Out Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2012 and 2011
Consolidated and Combined Carve-Out Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 
2010
Consolidated and Combined Carve-Out Statements of Changes in Partners’ Capital/Owners’ and Dropdown 
Predecessor Equity for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010
Notes to the Audited Consolidated and Combined Carve-Out Financial Statements

Page

F-2

F-3

F-4
F-5

F-6

F-7
F-9

F-1

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 127 of 169

Table of Contents

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Partners of Golar LNG Partners LP:

In  our  opinion,  the  accompanying  consolidated  and  combined  carve-out  balance  sheets  and  the  related  consolidated  and 
combined  carve-out  statements  of  operations,  comprehensive  income,   changes  in  partners’ capital/owners’ and  dropdown  
predecessor  equity and cash  flows present fairly, in all material respects, the  financial  position of Golar LNG Partners LP  and  its 
subsidiaries  (the  “Partnership”)  at  December 31,  2012  and  December 31,  2011,  and  the  results  of  their  operations  and  their  cash 
flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2012 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted 
in the United States of America. Also, in our opinion, the Partnership maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control 
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by 
the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Partnership's management is responsible for 
these  financial  statements,  for  maintaining  effective  internal  control  over  financial  reporting  and  for  its  assessment  of  the 
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in "Management's annual report on internal controls over financial 
reporting"  under  Item  15  of  this  Form  20-F.  Our  responsibility  is  to  express  opinions  on  these  financial  statements,  and  on  the 
Partnership's internal control over financial reporting based on our audits (which was an integrated audit in 2012). We conducted our 
audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require 
that  we  plan  and  perform  the  audits  to  obtain  reasonable  assurance  about  whether  the  financial  statements  are  free  of  material 
misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the 
financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, 
assessing  the  accounting  principles  used  and  significant  estimates  made  by  management,  and  evaluating  the  overall  financial 
statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control 
over  financial  reporting,  assessing  the  risk  that  a  material  weakness  exists,  and  testing  and  evaluating  the  design  and  operating 
effectiveness  of  internal  control  based  on  the  assessed  risk.  Our  audits  also  included  performing  such  other  procedures  as  we 
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

A company's internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the 
reliability  of  financial  reporting  and  the  preparation  of  financial  statements  for  external  purposes  in  accordance  with  generally 
accepted accounting principles. A company's internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) 
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the 
assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial 
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being 
made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance 
regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company's assets that could have a 
material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, 
projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of 
changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
London, United Kingdom
April 30, 2013

F-2

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 128 of 169

Table of Contents

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP

CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED CARVE-OUT STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEARS ENDED 
DECEMBER 31, 2012, 2011 AND 2010

(in thousands of $, except per unit amounts)

Notes

2012

2011

2010

Operating revenues
Time charter revenues
Total operating revenues
Operating expenses
Vessel operating expenses
Voyage expenses
Administrative expenses
Depreciation and amortization
Impairment of long-term assets
Total operating expenses

Operating income
Financial income (expense)
Interest income
Interest expense
Other financial items, net
Net financial expenses
Income before income taxes and non-controlling 
interest
Income taxes
Net income
Net income attributable to non-controlling interest
Net income attributable to Golar LNG Partners LP 
Owners
Dropdown Predecessor’s interest in net income (loss) (note 
1)
General Partner’s interest in net income
Limited Partners’ interest in net income
Earnings per unit:

Common unit (basic and diluted)
Subordinated unit (basic and diluted)
General partner unit (basic and diluted)

Cash distributions declared and paid per unit (1)

286,630
286,630

45,474
4,471
7,269
51,167
—
108,381
178,249

1,797
(38,090)
(5,389)
(41,682)

136,567
(9,426)
127,141
(10,723)

116,418

28,015
2,750
85,653

2.08
1.85
2.00
1.78

225,452
225,452

39,212
785
8,235
45,316
—
93,548
131,904

1,640
(19,581)
(18,521)
(36,462)

95,442
(45)
95,397
(9,863)

85,534

21,937
1,272
62,325

1.89
1.16
1.59
0.73

205,808
205,808

38,516
6,343
7,457
43,106
1,500
96,922
108,886

3,998
(20,300)
(27,855)
(44,157)

64,729
(1,212)
63,517
(9,250)

54,267

(3,467)
1,155
56,579

1.54
1.31
1.45
—

8

9

10

27

(1) Refers to cash distributions declared and paid in the period.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

F-3

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 129 of 169

Table of Contents

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP

CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED CARVE-OUT STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME FOR THE YEARS 
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012, 2011 AND 2010

(in thousands of $)

Net income
Other comprehensive (loss) income:

Unrealized net (loss) gain on qualifying cash flow hedging instruments

Other comprehensive (loss) income
Comprehensive income

Comprehensive income attributable to:

Owners’ and Dropdown Predecessor Equity
Non-controlling interest

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

F-4

2012
127,141

(3,950)
(3,950)
123,191

112,468
10,723
123,191

2011
95,397

934

934
96,331

86,468
9,863
96,331

2010
63,517

(2,302)

(2,302)
61,215

51,965
9,250
61,215

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 130 of 169

Table of Contents

CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED CARVE-OUT BALANCE SHEETS AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2012 AND 2011
(in thousands of $)

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP

Notes

2012

2011

ASSETS
Current assets

Cash and cash equivalents
Restricted cash and short-term investments
Trade accounts receivable
Other receivables, prepaid expenses and accrued income
Amounts due from related parties
Inventories

Total current assets
Long-term assets
Restricted cash
Vessels and equipment, net
Vessels under capital leases, net
Deferred charges
Other non-current assets

Total assets

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY

Current liabilities

Current portion of long-term debt
Current portion of obligations under capital leases
Trade accounts payable
Accrued expenses
Amounts due to related parties
Other current liabilities
Total current liabilities
Long-term liabilities
Long-term debt
Long-term debt due to related parties
Obligations under capital leases
Other long-term liabilities

Total liabilities

Commitments and contingencies (See Note 26)
Equity

Owner’s and Dropdown Predecessor Equity
Partners’ capital:

Common unitholders (36,246,149 and 23,127,254 units issued and 
outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively)
Subordinated unitholders (15,949,831 units issued and outstanding at 
December 31, 2012 and 2011)
General partner interest (1,065,225 and 797,492 units issued and 
outstanding at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively)
Total Partners’ capital

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

Non-controlling interest

Total equity
Total liabilities and equity

 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

F-5

17
12
13
25

17
14
15
16
18

21
22

19
25
20

21
25
22
23

66,327
30,900
—
4,336
3,883
1,924
107,370

190,523
707,147
485,632
15,023
5,279

49,218
24,512
173
2,626
3,235
1,074
80,838

185,270
662,021
501,903
7,742
39

1,510,974

1,437,813

64,822
5,837
3,407
26,530
4,429
64,692
169,717

639,697
34,953
406,534
18,529
1,269,430

49,906
5,909
790
12,448
—
70,216
139,269

350,668
222,310
399,934
27,599
1,139,780

—

208,069

169,515

30,163

3,713

369

5,447

178,675
(8,989)
169,686
71,858

241,544
1,510,974

1,537

32,069
(5,039)
27,030
62,934

298,033
1,437,813

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 131 of 169

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 132 of 169

Table of Contents

CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED CARVE-OUT STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS FOR
THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012, 2011 AND 2010

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP

(in thousands of $)

Operating activities

Net income

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating 
activities:
Depreciation and amortization

Amortization of deferred tax benefit on intragroup transfers

Impairment of long-term assets

Amortization of deferred charges

Unrealized foreign exchange losses (gains)

Drydocking expenditure

Trade accounts receivable

Inventories

Prepaid expenses, accrued income and other assets

Amounts due from/to related parties

Trade accounts payable

Accrued expenses

Interest element included in obligations under capital leases

Loss on termination of lease financing agreements

Other current liabilities

Net cash provided by operating activities

Investing activities

Additions to vessels and equipment

Restricted cash and short-term investments

Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities

Financing activities

Proceeds from issuance of equity

Proceeds from long-term debt

Repayments of long-term debt

Repayments of obligations under capital lease

Financing arrangement fees and other costs

Dividends paid to noncontrolling interests

Cash distributions paid

Distribution to Golar LNG Limited ("Golar") for acquisition of the Golar 
Freeze
Dropdown Predecessor dividends

Distribution to Golar for acquisition of the NR Satu

Distribution to Golar for acquisition of the Golar Grand

Contributions from (repayments of) owner’s funding

Net cash used in financing activities

Net increase in cash and cash equivalents

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:

Cash paid during the year for:

Interest paid, net of capitalized interest

Income taxes paid

Notes

2012

2011

2010

127,141

95,397

63,517

51,167

(912)

—

1,123

13,893

(8,288)

173

(849)

(6,948)

3,781

2,617

14,015

401

—

(7,971)

189,343

(72,286)

(6,512)

(78,798)

401,851

537,194

(427,217)

(6,287)

(8,400)

(1,799)

(77,588)

—

—

(387,993)

(176,769)

53,572

(93,436)

17,109

49,218

66,327

45,316

(2,363)

—

931

1,040

(10,543)

1,698

1,440

295

16,240

(1,281)

1,134

897

—

6,771

156,972

(100,259)

(2,622)

(102,881)

—

222,310

(58,832)

(6,151)

(854)

(2,399)

(29,276)

(231,579)

(24,336)

—

—

72,686

(58,431)

(4,340)

53,558

49,218

43,106

—

1,500

2,999

(4,205)

(7,266)

1,096

(1,485)

(483)

(29,968)

2,527

1,546

997

3,452

9,757

87,090

(60,065)

276,353

216,288

—

125,000

(84,682)

(247,160)

(4,360)

(3,120)

—

—

—

—

—

(69,344)

(283,666)

19,712

33,846

53,558

40,858

1,444

20,415

1,685

25,708

470

4

21

25(j)

25(j)

25(j)

 The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

F-6

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 133 of 169

Table of Contents

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP

CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED CARVE-OUT STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN PARTNERS’
CAPITAL /OWNERS’ AND DROPDOWN PREDECESSOR EQUITY FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012, 
2011 AND 2010

(in thousands of $)

Partners’ Capital

Common 
Units

Subordinated 
Units

General 
Partner

Accumulated 
Other 
Comprehensive 
Income 
(loss)

Total 
before 
Non-
controlling 
interest

Non-
controlling 
Interest

Total 
Owner’s 
Equity

Combined balance at December 31, 
2009

Net income

Dropdown 
Predecessor 
Equity

Owner's 
Invested 
Equity

170,426

168,423

(3,467)

57,734

Non-controlling interest dividends

Other comprehensive income

—

—

—

(2,302)

Movement in invested equity

(2,077)

(67,267)

Combined balance at December 31, 
2010

Combined carve-out net income 
(Jan 1, 2011 — April 12, 2011) (1)

Combined carve-out other 
comprehensive income

Movement in invested equity (Jan 
1, 2011 — April 12, 2011)

Non-controlling interest dividend

164,882

156,588

—

—

—

—

20,741

984

(13,999)

—

Combined balance at April 12, 2011

164,882

164,314

Dropdown predecessor dividends

(24,336)

Net income (1)

21,937

Other comprehensive (loss) income

(378)

—

—

—

Elimination of equity

24,810

14,856

Allocation of Partnership capital to 
unit holders — April 12, 2011

Net change in Parent’s equity in 
Dropdown Predecessor

Cash distributions

Non-controlling interest dividend

Purchase of Golar Freeze from 
Golar (note 25(j))

Allocation of Dropdown 
Predecessor equity (note 25(j))

Combined balance at December 31, 
2011

Net income (2)

Movement in invested equity

Non-controlling interest dividends

Other comprehensive income

Cash distributions

Net proceeds from issuance of 
common units

Elimination of equity not 
transferred to the Partnership

Purchase of NR Satu from Golar 
(note 25(j))

Allocation of Dropdown 
Predecessor equity - NR Satu (note 
25(j))

Purchase of Golar Grand from 
Golar (note 25(j))

Allocation of Dropdown 
Predecessor equity - Golar Grand 
(note 25(j))

Consolidated balance at December 
31, 2012

86,685

—

—

(231,330)

165,799

208,069

28,015

53,572

—

—

—

—

9,046

(387,993)

132,321

(176,769)

133,739

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

29,029

12,079

1,748

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

(16,980)

(11,710)

—

(249)

(162,112)

30,163

53,998

—

—

—

—

—

—

369

31,655

—

—

—

—

—

3,683

—

(586)

—

—

(3,308)

1,537

2,750

—

—

—

(47,725)

(28,311)

(1,552)

—

—

—

—

—

—

8,037

—

—

(2,650)

—

(2,675)

393,814

—

—

(129,671)

—

(131,064)

169,515

F-7

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

328

—

—

—

—

—

(379)

(5,039)

—

—

—

(3,950)

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

338,849

54,267

49,340

388,189

9,250

63,517

—

(3,120)

(3,120)

(2,302)

(69,344)

—

—

(2,302)

(69,344)

321,470

55,470

376,940

20,741

2,709

23,450

984

(13,999)

—

—

984

(13,999)

—

(1,000)

(1,000)

329,196

57,179

386,375

(24,336)

64,793

(50)

39,666

86,685

(29,276)

—

(24,336)

7,154

71,947

—

—

—

—

—

(50)

39,666

—

86,685

(29,276)

—

(1,399)

(1,399)

(231,579)

— (231,579)

—

—

—

235,099

116,418

53,572

62,934

298,033

10,723

127,141

—

53,572

—

(1,799)

(1,799)

(3,950)

(77,588)

401,851

9,046

—

—

—

—

(3,950)

(77,588)

401,851

9,046

(387,993)

— (387,993)

—

—

—

(176,769)

— (176,769)

—

—

—

—

(179,170)

180,475

(4,988)

—

3,713

5,447

(8,989)

169,686

71,858

241,544

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 134 of 169

Table of Contents

__________________________________________

(1)

(2)

The post acquisition net income (from October 19, 2011 to December 31, 2011) relating to the Golar Freeze in 2011 included within net income was 
$4.8 million. 

The post acquisition net income in 2012 relating to the NR Satu (from July 19, 2012 to December 31, 2012) and the Golar Grand (from November 8, 
2012 to December 31, 2012) included within net income amounted to $11.5 million and $4.8 million, respectively.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

F-8

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 135 of 169

Table of Contents

GOLAR LNG PARTNERS LP

NOTES TO THE AUDITED CONSOLIDATED AND COMBINED CARVE-OUT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

1. GENERAL

Golar LNG Partners LP (the “Partnership”) was formed as an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Golar LNG Limited (“Golar”) in 
September 2007  under  the  laws  of  the  Marshall  Islands  for  the  purpose  of  acquiring  the  interests  in  wholly-owned  and  partially 
owned subsidiaries of Golar.

In November 2008, Golar transferred to the Partnership interests in certain of its wholly-owned and partially owned subsidiaries that 
owned a 60% interest in a liquefied natural gas (“LNG”) carrier, the Golar Mazo, and which leased the LNG carrier, the Methane 
Princess, and the floating storage and regasification unit (“FSRU”), the Golar Spirit.  During April 2011, Golar contributed to the 
Partnership the shares of a subsidiary which leased the FSRU, the Golar Winter.

During  April 2011,  the  Partnership  completed  its  initial  public  offering  (“IPO”).   In  connection  with  the  IPO,  (i) the  Partnership 
issued  to  Golar  23,127,254  common  units  and  15,949,831  subordinated  units,  representing  a  98%  limited  partner  interest  in  the 
Partnership;  (ii)  the  Partnership  issued  to  Golar  GP  LLC,  a  wholly-owned  subsidiary  of  Golar  and  the  general  partner  of  the 
Partnership  (the  “General  Partner”),  a  2%  general  partner  interest  in  the  Partnership  and  81%  of  the  Partnership’s  incentive 
distribution rights (“IDRs”); (iii) the Partnership issued to Golar LNG Energy Limited, a subsidiary of Golar (“Golar Energy”), 19%
of the IDRs; (iv) Golar sold 13,800,000 common units to the public in the IPO and received gross proceeds of $310.5 million, all as 
further described in Note 3.

The transfers and contributions of the subsidiaries holding interests in the Golar Mazo, the Methane Princess and the Golar Spirit in 
November 2008,  and  the  Golar  Winter  in  April 2011  from  Golar  to  the  Partnership  are  deemed  to  be  a  reorganization  of  entities 
under  common  control.  As  a  result,  these  transactions  have  been  recorded  by  the  Partnership  at  Golar’s  historical  book  values. 
Accordingly, prior to April 13, 2011 (the closing date of the IPO), Golar LNG Partners LP and its subsidiaries that have interests in 
four vessels, the Golar Mazo, the Methane Princess, the Golar Spirit and the Golar Winter (“Initial Fleet”), are collectively referred 
to as the “Combined Entity”.

In October 2011 and July 2012, the Partnership acquired from Golar interests in subsidiaries that own and operate the FSRUs, the 
Golar Freeze and the Nusantara Regas Satu ("NR Satu"), repectively. In addition, in November 2012, the Partnership acquired from 
Golar interests in subsidiaries that lease and operate the LNG carrier, the Golar Grand. These transactions are also deemed to be a 
reorganization of entities under common control. As a result, the Partnership’s balance sheets, statements of operations, statements of 
comprehensive income, cash flows and changes in partners’ capital/ owners’ equity have been retroactively adjusted to include these 
vessels (herein collectively referred to as the “Dropdown Predecessor”) as if the Partnership had acquired these vessels when they 
began operations under the ownership of Golar. All vessels were under common control for all periods included in these financial 
statements.  The  excess  of  the  consideration  paid  by  the  Partnership  over  Golar’s  historical  costs  is  accounted  for  as  an  equity 
distribution to Golar (refer to Note 25(j)). The effect of adjusting the Partnership’s financial statements to account for these common 
control exchanges is shown below:

(in thousands of $)
Time charter revenues
Net income (loss)
Equity
Total assets
Total liabilities

2011
Amount of 
change
21,727
5,873
208,069
362,318
154,249

As revised
225,452
95,397
298,033
1,437,813
1,139,780

As reported
203,725
89,524
89,964
1,075,495
985,531

As revised
205,808
63,517
376,940
1,407,810
1,030,870

2010
Amount of 
change
23,268
(8,094)
101,680
271,917
170,237

As reported
182,540
71,611
275,260
1,135,893
860,633

The adjustment to total assets in 2011 includes $180.1 million relating to the NR Satu and $130.7 million relating to the Golar Grand
which are presented in vessels and equipment and vessels under capital leases net and $45.0 million restricted cash relating to the 
Golar  Grand  which  is  presented  in  non-current  restricted  cash.  The  adjustment  to  total  liabilities  in  2011  includes  $8.4  million 
relating to deferred tax benefits on intra-group transfers of long-term assets relating to the NR Satu which are presented in other non-
current liabilities and $137.7 million relating to the capital lease obligations in respect of the Golar Grand. 

F-9

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 136 of 169

Table of Contents

As of December 31, 2012, the Partnership operates a fleet of four FSRUs and three LNG carriers.  The Partnership’s vessels operate 
under long-term charter contracts with expiration dates  between  2017  and 2024,  except for the  Golar  Grand which operates on  a 
medium-term charter which expires in 2015. 

Under the Partnership Agreement, the general partner has irrevocably delegated to the Partnership's board of directors the power to 
oversee and direct the operations of, manage and determine the strategies and policies of Golar Partners. During the period from the 
IPO in April 2011 until the time of the Partnership's first annual general meeting ("AGM") on December 13, 2012, Golar retained the 
sole power to appoint, remove and replace all members of the Partnerhip's board of directors. From the first AGM, four of the seven 
board members became electable by the common unitholders and accordingly, from this date, Golar no longer retains the power to 
control the board of directors and, hence, the Partnership. As a result, the Partnership is no longer considered to be under common 
control with  Golar and as a consequence, from December 13, 2012, the Partnership will no longer account for  vessel acquisitions 
from Golar as transfer of equity interests between entities under common control.

As  of  December 31,  2012,  the  Partnership’s  current  liabilities  exceeded  current  assets  by  $62.3  million.  Included  within  current 
liabilities  as  of  December 31,  2012,  are  mark-to-market  valuations  of  interest  rate  swap  derivatives  of  $25.0  million  and  foreign 
currency  swap  derivatives  of  $20.5  million.  The  interest  rate  swaps  mature  between  2013  and  2018  and  the  Partnership  has  no 
intention of terminating these swaps before their maturity and hence realizing these liabilities. The foreign currency swap matures in 
2032,  however,  the  Partnership  is  considering  the  termination  of  this  swap  in  connection  with  a  refinancing  of  the  related  debt 
facility. The currency swap was entered into as a hedge against a foreign currency lease obligation and as such a loss on the swap is 
in part offset by a lower lease obligation. In addition, current liabilities include deferred drydocking and operating cost revenue of 
$12.8 million as of December 31, 2012. Deferred drydocking and operating cost revenue pertains to charterhire paid in advance by 
charterers, thus, no cash outflows are expected for these liabilities. 

2. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Basis of accounting

These consolidated and combined financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in 
the  United  States  of  America.  Investments  in  entities  in  which  the  Partnership  directly  or  indirectly  holds  more  than  50%  of  the 
voting  control  are  consolidated  in  the  financial  statements,  as  well  as  certain  variable  interest  entities  in  which  the  Partnership  is 
deemed to be subject to a majority of the risk of loss from the variable interest entity’s activities or entitled to receive a majority of 
the entity’s residual returns, or both. All intercompany balances and transactions are eliminated. The non-controlling interests of the 
above mentioned subsidiaries are included in the Balance Sheets and Statements of Operations as “Non-controlling interests”.

A variable interest entity is defined by the accounting standard as a legal entity where either (a) equity interest holders as a group 
lack the  characteristics of a controlling financial interest,  including decision making ability and  an  interest  in  the entity’s residual 
risks and rewards, or (b) the equity holders have not provided sufficient equity investment to permit the entity to finance its activities 
without additional subordinated financial support, or (c) the voting rights of some investors are not proportional to their obligations 
to absorb the expected losses of the entity, their rights to receive the expected residual returns of the entity, or both and substantially 
all of the entity’s activities either involve or are conducted on behalf of an investor that has disproportionately few voting rights. A 
party that is a variable interest holder is required to consolidate a VIE if the holder has both (a) the power to direct the activities that 
most  significantly  impact  the  entity's  economic  performance  and  (b)  the  obligation  to  absorb  losses  that  could  potentially  be 
significant to the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE.

The accompanying consolidated and combined financial statements include the financial statements of the entities listed in Note 5.

The  consolidated  and  combined  financial  statements  reflect  the  results  of  operations,  cash  flows  and  net  assets  of  the  Combined 
Entity  including  the  Dropdown  Predecessor,  which  have  been  carved  out  of  the  consolidated  financial  statements  of  Golar.  The 
historical  combined  financial  statements  include  assets,  liabilities,  revenues,  expenses  and  cash  flows  directly  attributable  to  the 
Partnership’s interests in the four  vessels in the Initial Fleet and the Dropdown Predecessor. Accordingly, the historical combined 
carve-out  financial  statements  reflect  allocations  of  certain  expenses,  including  that  of  administrative  expenses  including  share 
options  and  pension  costs,  mark-to-market  of  interest  rate,  foreign  currency  swap  derivatives  and  amortization  of  deferred  tax 
benefits on intragroup transfers.  These allocated  costs  have  been accounted for as  an equity contribution  in the combined  balance 
sheets. Allocated costs (income) included in the accompanying consolidated and combined statements of income are as follows:

F-10

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 137 of 169

Table of Contents

(in thousands of $)
Administrative expenses
Pension costs
Net financial (income) expenses 

2012

2011

2010

1,365
220
(149)
1,436

4,947
805
(2,983)

2,769

6,651
1,439
16,172

24,262

For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 the above table includes allocated costs (income) for the combined entity for 
the period prior to April 13, 2011, representing the period prior to the Partnership’s IPO and for the Dropdown Predecessor for the 
periods prior to their acquisition from Golar.

Included  in  the  Combined  Entity’s  equity  as  of  April 13,  2011,  are  net  liabilities  of  $14.9  million  relating  to  certain  assets  and 
liabilities  of  the  Golar  Spirit  that  were  carved  out  as  they  were  readily  separable  and  identifiable  within  the  books  of  Golar. 
However,  these  amounts  have  been  retained  by  Golar  and  have  not  been  transferred  to  the  Partnership  and  therefore  have  been 
eliminated from the Partnership’s equity position as of April 13, 2011.

Included in the Dropdown Predecessor’s equity as of October 18, 2011 and July 18, 2012, were net liabilities of $24.8 million and 
$9.0 million relating to the Golar Freeze and the NR Satu, respectively, that were carved out and retained by Golar. These amounts 
have not been transferred to the Partnership and therefore have been eliminated from the Partnership’s equity upon acquisition by the 
Partnership.

Details of the net liabilities eliminated are as follows:

Dropdown
Predecessor
 relating to NR 
Satu (1)

Dropdown
Predecessor 
relating to Golar
Freeze (2)

Combined
Entity
(“Initial
Fleet”)(3)

—
(1,511)
(7,535)
(9,046)

—
—
(24,810)
(24,810)

12,007
—
(26,863)
(14,856)

Total

12,007
(1,511)
(59,208)
(48,712)

(in thousands of $)
Balance Sheet captions:

Other non-current assets
Other current liabilities
Other long-term liabilities

Total
__________________________________________ 
(1) As of July 19, 2012
(2) As of October 19, 2011
(3) As of April 13, 2011

These  consolidated  and  combined  financial  statements  include  the  financial  position,  results  of  operations  and  cashflows  of  the 
Combined  Entity and the Dropdown Predecessor.  In the preparation of these consolidated and combined financial  statements, the 
loan and related balances and interest expenses relating to the NR Satu and the Golar Freeze, the lease related expenses (including 
termination thereof) relating to the NR Satu, the Golar Freeze and the Golar Spirit, general and administrative expenses (including 
pension  and  stock-based  compensation),  income  tax  expense,  and  certain  derivatives’ related  expenses  which  were  not  directly 
attributable to the respective vessels have been allocated to the Partnership on the following basis:

Prior to June 2010, the debt relating to the Golar Freeze was held in a subsidiary of Golar in connection with the loan facility for five 
of Golar’s vessels, including the Golar Freeze. In June 2010, the Golar Freeze’s share of the loan facility was repaid and the vessel 
was refinanced through a loan facility within the Partnership. Accordingly, for periods prior to June 2010 the Golar Freeze’s share of 
the loan facility, interest expense, deferred finance fees and related balances have been carved out based on the cash settlement value 
in June 2010. 

The debt relating to the NR Satu was held in a subsidiary of Golar in connection with the loan facility for five of Golar’s vessels, 
including the NR Satu. The loan facility was repaid in April 2011. Accordingly, for periods prior to April 2011 the NR Satu’s share 
of the loan facility, interest expense, deferred finance fees and related balances have been carved out based on the remaining loan 
balance  following  the  settlement  of  the  Golar  Spirit  and  the  Golar  Freeze  related  balances  in  November  2008  and  June  2010, 
respectively, and based on the 2003 internal valuations performed at inception of the debt. In addition, the NR Satu associated lease 
balances, termination thereof and amortization of deferred tax benefits on intragroup transfers were carved out on the same basis as 
the loan facility.

F-11

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 138 of 169

Table of Contents

In  contrast,  the  Golar  Freeze,  Golar  Spirit  and  the  NR  Satu  associated  lease  balances,  termination  thereof  and  amortization  of 
deferred  tax  benefits  on  intragroup  transfers  have  been  reflected  in  these  financial  statements  at  Golar’s  book  value,  as  they  are 
readily separable and identifiable within the books of Golar (see note 23).

Vessel  operating  expenses  includes  ship  management  fees  for  the  provision  of  technical  and  commercial  management  of  vessels, 
which have been allocated to the Partnership based on intercompany charges invoiced by Golar.

Vessel operating  expenses include an allocation of Golar’s defined  benefit pension  plan costs. Golar operates  two defined benefit 
pension plans for itself and its subsidiaries: one for the crews and one for administrative personnel. The pension cost is calculated in 
the subsidiaries on a contribution basis and relates principally to crew whose employment cannot be tied to a specific vessel, as they 
were  a  shared  resource  across  all  vessels.  Accordingly,  the  pension  costs  have  been  allocated  based  on  the  number  of  vessels  in 
Golar’s fleet.

Administrative expenses (including stock-based compensation, which are described further below) of Golar that cannot be attributed 
to a specific vessel and for which the Partnership is deemed to have received benefit have been allocated based on the number of 
vessels in Golar’s fleet.

 Administrative expenses include an allocation of Golar’s stock-based compensation costs. In respect of options awarded to certain 
employees and directors of Golar, whose employment or service cannot be specifically attributed to any specific vessel. Therefore, it 
is considered that  the Partnership, as a  part of Golar,  received  benefit  from  their  services,  and so  should recognize a share  of the 
respective cost. Accordingly, stock-based compensation costs have been allocated based on the number of vessels in Golar’s fleet.

Other financial items include an allocation of Golar’s mark-to-market adjustments for interest rate swap and foreign currency swap 
derivatives. In respect of mark-to-market adjustments for interest rate swap derivatives these have been allocated on the basis of the 
Partnership’s proportion of Golar’s debt including capital leases. For foreign currency derivatives and related adjustments to earnings 
these have been allocated on the basis of being separately identifiable and specifically for the benefit of the Partnership.

Income tax expense has been determined for the Partnership on a separate returns basis.

Management has deemed the related allocation reasonable to present the financial position, results of operations, and cash flows of 
the Combined Entity and Dropdown Predecessor on a stand-alone basis. However, the financial position, results of operations and 
cash  flows  of  the  Combined  Entity  and  Dropdown  Predecessor  may  differ  from  those  that  would  have  been  achieved  had  the 
Partnership  operated  autonomously  for  all  years  presented  as  the  Partnership  would  have  had  additional  administrative  expenses, 
including legal, accounting, treasury and regulatory compliance and other costs normally incurred  by a listed public entity for the 
periods prior to the IPO. Accordingly, the financial statements do not purport to be indicative of the future financial position, results 
of operations or cash flows of the Partnership.

Business combination between entities under common control

Reorganization of entities under common control are accounted for similar to the pooling of interests method of accounting.  Under 
this method, the carrying amount of net assets recognized in the balance sheets of each combining entity are carried forward to the 
balance sheet of the combined entity, and no other assets or liabilities are recognized as a result of the combination.  The excess of 
the proceeds paid, if any, over the historical cost of the combining entity is accounted for as an equity distribution.  In addition re-
organization of entities under common control are accounted for as if the transfer occurred from the date  that both the combining 
entity and combined entity were both under the common control of Golar.  Therefore, the Partnership’s financial statements prior to 
the  date  the  interests  in  the  combining  entity  were  actually  acquired  will  be  retroactively  adjusted  to  include  the  results  of  the 
Combined Entity during the periods it was under common control of Golar.

As discussed in note 1, following the first annual general meeting of common unitholders on December 13, 2012, Golar ceased to 
control  the  board  of  directors  as  the  majority  of  board  members  became  electable  by  the  common  unitholders.  As  a  result,  the 
Partnership  is  not  considered  to  be  under  common  control  with  Golar.  As  a  consequence,  starting  with  December  13,  2012,  the 
Partnership will no longer account for vessel acquisitions from Golar as a transfer of equity interest between entities under common 
control.

F-12

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 139 of 169

Table of Contents

Revenue and expense recognition

Revenues  include  minimum  lease  payments  under  time  charters,  fees  for  repositioning  vessels  as  well  as  the  reimbursement  of 
certain vessel operating and drydocking costs. Revenues generated from time charters, which are classified as operating leases by the 
Partnership, are recorded over the term of the charter as service is provided. The Partnership does not recognize revenues during days 
that the vessel is off-hire. Incentives for charterers to enter into lease agreements are spread evenly over the lease term.

Reimbursement for drydocking costs is recognized evenly over the period to the next drydocking, which is generally between two to 
five years. Repositioning fees (which are included in time charter revenue) received in respect of time charters are recognized at the 
end of the charter when the fee becomes fixed and determinable. However, where there is a fixed amount specified in the charter, 
which  is  not  dependent  upon  redelivery  location,  the  fee  will  be  recognized  evenly  over  the  term  of  the  charter.  Where  a  vessel 
undertakes multiple single voyage time charters, revenue is recognized, including the repositioning fee if fixed and determinable, on 
a discharge-to-discharge basis. Under this basis, revenue is recognized evenly over the period from departure of the vessel from its 
last discharge port to departure from the next discharge port. For arrangements where operating costs are borne by the charterer on a 
pass through basis, the pass through of operating costs is reflected in revenue and expenses.

Under time charters, voyage expenses are paid by the Partnership’s customers. Voyage related expenses, principally fuel, may also 
be incurred when positioning or repositioning the vessel before or after the period of time charter and during periods when the vessel 
is not under charter or is offhire, for example when the vessel is undergoing repairs. These expenses are recognized as incurred.

Vessel operating expenses, which are recognized when incurred, include crewing, repairs and maintenance, insurance, stores, lube 
oils, communication expenses and third party management fees.

Operating leases

Initial direct costs (those  directly  related to the negotiation and consummation of the lease) are deferred and allocated to earnings 
over the lease term. Rental income and expense are amortized over the lease term on a straight-line basis.

Income taxes

Income taxes are based on a separate return basis. The guidance on income taxes prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement 
attributes for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized principally for the expected tax consequences of temporary differences between the 
tax bases of assets and liabilities and their reported amounts. Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance when, in the 
opinion of management, it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Realization 
of the deferred income tax asset is dependent on generating sufficient taxable income in future years.

Comprehensive Income

As  at  December 31,  2012,  2011  and  2010,  the  Partnership’s  accumulated  other  comprehensive  loss  consisted  of  the  following 
components:

(in thousands of $)
Unrealized net loss on qualifying cash flow hedging instruments

2012

2011

2010

(8,989)

(5,039)

(5,943)

Cash and cash equivalents

The Partnership considers all demand and time deposits and highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less 
to be equivalent to cash.

F-13

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 140 of 169

Table of Contents

Restricted cash and short-term investments

Restricted cash and short-term investments consist of bank deposits, which may only be used to settle certain pre-arranged loan or 
lease payments. The Partnership considers all short-term investments as held to maturity. These investments are carried at amortized 
cost. The Partnership places its short-term investments primarily in fixed term deposits with high credit quality financial institutions.

Trade receivables

Trade  receivables  are  presented  net  of  allowances  for  doubtful  balances.   At  each  balance  sheet  date,  all  potentially  uncollectible 
accounts are assessed individually for purposes of determining the appropriate provision for doubtful accounts.

Inventories

Inventories, which are comprised principally of fuel, lubricating oils and ship spares, are stated at the lower of cost or market value. 
Cost is determined on a first-in, first-out basis.

Vessels and equipment

Vessels  are  stated  at  cost  less  accumulated  depreciation.  The cost  of  vessels  less  the  estimated  residual  value  is  depreciated  on  a 
straight-line basis over the assets’ remaining useful economic lives.

Cost  of  building  the  mooring  equipment  was  incurred  as  part  of  the  NR  Satu  time  charter  agreement.  The  cost  of  the  mooring 
equipment is capitalized and depreciated over the initial lease term of the NR Satu charter.

Refurbishment costs incurred during the period are capitalized as part of vessels and depreciated over the vessels’ remaining useful 
economic lives. Refurbishment costs are costs that appreciably increase the capacity, or improve the efficiency or safety of vessels 
and  equipment.  Drydocking  expenditures  are  capitalized  when  incurred  and  amortized  over  the  period  until  the  next  anticipated 
drydocking, which is generally between two and five years. For vessels that are newly built or acquired, the Partnership has adopted 
the “built-in overhaul” method of accounting. The built-in overhaul method is based on the segregation of vessel costs into those that 
should be depreciated over the useful life of the vessel and those that require drydocking at periodic intervals to reflect the different 
useful lives of the components of the assets. The estimated cost of the drydocking component is amortized until the date of the first 
drydocking following acquisition, upon which the cost is capitalized and the process is repeated.

Useful lives applied in depreciation are as follows:

Vessels
Deferred drydocking expenditure
Mooring equipment

40 to 50 years
two to five years
11 years

Interest  costs  capitalized in connection  with  the conversion of the  NR Satu and the  Golar  Freeze into  FSRUs for the  years ended 
December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 were $1.8 million, $1.9 million and $0.5 million, respectively.

Vessels under capital lease

The  Partnership  leases  certain  vessels  under  agreements  that  have  been  accounted  for  as  capital  leases.  Obligations  under  capital 
leases are carried at the present value of future minimum lease payments, and the asset balance is amortized on a straight-line basis 
over the remaining economic useful lives of the vessels. Interest expense is calculated at a constant rate over the term of the lease.

Depreciation of vessels under capital lease is included within depreciation and amortization expense in the statement of operations. 
Vessels  under  capital lease  are  depreciated  on  a  straight-line  basis  over  the  vessels’ remaining  useful  economic  lives,  based  on  a 
useful life of 40 to 50 years. Refurbishment costs and drydocking expenditures incurred in respect of vessels under capital lease are 
accounted for consistently as that of vessels.

F-14

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 141 of 169

Table of Contents

Certain of our capital leases are ‘funded’ via long term cash deposits which closely match the lease liability. Future changes in the 
lease  liability  arising  from  interest  rate  changes  are  only  partially  offset  by  changes  in  interest  income  on  the  cash  deposits,  and 
where differences arise this is funded by, or released to, available working capital.

Interest costs capitalized

Interest costs are expensed as incurred except for interest costs that are capitalized. Interest is capitalized on all qualifying assets that 
require a period of time to get them ready for their intended use. Qualifying assets consist of vessels under construction and includes 
vessels  undergoing  retrofitting  into  FSRUs  for  the  Partnership’s  own  use.  The  interest  capitalized  is  calculated  using  the  rate  of 
interest on  the loan to fund  the expenditure  or  the Partnership’s weighted average  cost of borrowings where appropriate, over the 
term period from commencement of the conversion work until substantially all the activities necessary to prepare the assets for its 
intended use are complete.

Deferred credit from capital leases

Income derived from the sale of subsequently leased assets is deferred and amortized in proportion to the amortization of the leased 
assets  (see  note 23).  Amortization  of  deferred  income  is  offset  against  depreciation  and  amortization  expense  in  the  statement  of 
operations.

Impairment of long-lived assets

The Partnership continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate carrying amounts of long-lived assets 
may not be recoverable.  When  such  events  or  changes in circumstances are  present, the  Partnership  assesses the recoverability of 
long-term assets by determining whether the carrying value of such assets will be recovered through undiscounted expected future 
cash  flows.  If  the  total  of  the  future  cash  flows  is  less  than  the  carrying  amount  of  those  assets,  the  Partnership  recognizes  an 
impairment loss based on the excess of the carrying amount over the fair value of the assets.

The  Partnership  assessed  the  potential  impairment  of  its  long-term  assets,  in  respect  of  unutilized  parts  originally  ordered  for  the 
Golar Spirit FSRU conversion following changes to the original project specifications. The Partnership incurred impairment charges 
for the year ended December 31, 2010 (see Note 8).

Deferred charges

Costs associated with long-term financing, including debt arrangement fees, are deferred and amortized over the term of the relevant 
loan. Amortization of deferred loan costs is included in “Other financial items, net” in the statement of operations. If a loan is repaid 
early, any unamortized portion of the related deferred charges is charged against income in the period in which the loan is repaid.

Provisions

The Partnership, in the ordinary course of business, is subject to various claims, suits and complaints.  Management, in consultation 
with internal and external advisers, will provide for a contingent loss in the financial statements if the contingency had occurred at 
the  date  of  the  financial  statements  and  the  likelihood  of  loss  was  probable  and  the  amount  can  be  reasonably  estimated.   If  the 
Partnership  has  determined  that  the  reasonable  estimate  of  the  loss  is  a  range  and  there  is  no  best  estimate  within  the  range,  the 
Partnership  will  provide  the  lower  amount  within  the  range.   See  Note  26,  "Other  Commitments  and  Contingencies"  for  further 
discussion.

Derivatives

The Partnership uses derivatives to reduce market risks associated with its operations. The Partnership uses interest rate swaps for the 
management  of  interest  rate  risk  exposure.  The  interest  rate  swaps  effectively  convert  a  portion  of  the  Partnership’s  debt  from  a 
floating to a fixed rate over the life of the transactions without an exchange of underlying principal.

The Partnership seeks to reduce its exposure to fluctuations in foreign exchange rates through the use of foreign currency forward 
contracts.

All  derivative  instruments  are  initially  recorded  at  cost  as  either  assets  or  liabilities  in  the  accompanying  balance  sheets  and 
subsequently remeasured to fair value, regardless of the purpose or intent for holding the derivative.

F-15

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 142 of 169

Table of Contents

Where the fair value of a derivative instrument is a net liability, the derivative instrument is classified in “Other current liabilities” in 
the balance sheet. Where the fair value of a derivative instrument is a net asset, the derivative instrument is classified in “Other non-
current assets” in the consolidated and combined carve-out balance sheet, except if the current portion is a liability, in which case the 
current  portion  is  included  in  “Other  current  liabilities.” The  method  of  recognizing  the  resulting  gain  or  loss  is  dependent  on 
whether  the  derivative  contract  is  designed  to  hedge  a  specific  risk  and  also  qualifies  for  hedge  accounting.  The  Partnership  has 
adopted  hedge  accounting  for  certain  of  its  interest  rate  swap  arrangements  designated  as  cash  flow  hedges.  For  derivative 
instruments that are not designated or do not qualify as hedges, the changes in fair value of the derivative financial instrument are 
recognized in earnings and recorded each period in current earnings in “Other financial items, net”.

When a derivative is designated as a cash flow hedge, the Partnership formally documents the relationship between the derivative 
and the hedged item. This documentation includes the strategy risk and risk management for undertaking the hedge and the method 
that will be used to assess effectiveness of the hedge. If the derivative is an effective hedge, changes in the fair value are initially 
recorded  as  a  component  of  accumulated  other  comprehensive  income  in  owner’s  equity.  The  ineffective  portion  of  the  hedge  is 
recognized  immediately  in  earnings,  as  are  any  gains  or  losses  on  the  derivative  that  are  excluded  from  the  assessment  of  hedge 
effectiveness. The Partnership does not apply hedge accounting if it is determined that the hedge was not effective or will no longer 
be effective, the derivative was sold or exercised, or the hedged item was sold or repaid.

In the periods when the hedged items affect earnings, the associated fair value changes on the hedged derivatives are transferred from 
equity to the corresponding earnings line item on the settlement of a derivative. The ineffective portion of the change in fair value of 
the  derivative  financial  instrument  is  immediately  recognized  in  earnings.  If  a  cash  flow  hedge  is  terminated  and  the  originally 
hedged item is still considered probable of occurring, the gains and losses initially recognized in owner’s equity remain there until 
the hedged item impacts earnings at which point they are transferred to the corresponding earnings line item (i.e. interest expense). If 
the hedged items are no longer probable of occurring, amounts recognized in equity are immediately reclassified to earnings.

Cash flows from derivative instruments that are accounted for as cash flow hedges are classified in the same category as the cash 
flows from the items being hedged.

Foreign currencies

The  Partnership’s  and  its  subsidiaries’ functional  currency  is  the  U.S.  dollar  as  the  majority  of  the  revenues  are  received  in  U.S. 
dollars and  a  majority  of  the  Partnership’s  expenditures are incurred  in  U.S.  dollars. The  Partnership’s  reporting  currency  is  U.S. 
dollars.

Transactions in foreign currencies during the year are translated into U.S. dollars at the rates of exchange in effect at the date of the 
transaction. Foreign currency monetary assets and liabilities are translated using rates of exchange at the balance sheet date. Foreign 
currency  non-monetary  assets  and  liabilities  are  translated  using  historical  rates  of  exchange.  Foreign  currency  transaction  and 
translation gains or losses are included in the statements of operations.

Fair Value measurements

The Partnership accounts for fair value measurements in accordance with the Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) guidance 
using fair value to measure assets and liabilities. The guidance provides a single definition of fair value, together with a framework 
for measuring it, and requires additional disclosure about the use of fair value to measure assets and liabilities.

Use of estimates

The preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP requires that management make estimates and assumptions 
affecting the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial 
statements and the  reported  amounts of revenues  and  expenses during the reporting period. Actual  results could  differ from those 
estimates.

3. FORMATION TRANSACTIONS AND INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING

During April 2011, the following transactions in connection with the transfer of the interests in the Golar Winter and the subsequent 
IPO occurred:

F-16

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 143 of 169

Table of Contents

Capital contribution

(i)

Golar  contributed  to  the  Partnership  its  100%  interest  in  the  subsidiary  which  leases  the  Golar  Winter.  This  has  been 
accounted for as a capital contribution by Golar to the Partnership. 

Recapitalization of the Partnership

(ii)

(iii)

The Partnership issued to Golar 23,127,254 common units and 15,949,831 subordinated units, representing a 98% limited 
partner interest in the Partnership, in exchange for Golar’s existing 98% limited partner interest in the Partnership; and

The Partnership issued 797,492 general partner units to the General Partner, representing a 2% general partner interest in the 
Partnership,  and  81%  of  the  IDRs.  The  remaining  19%  of  the  IDRs  were  issued  to  Golar  Energy.  The  IDRs  entitle  the 
holder to increasing percentages of the cash the Partnership distributes in excess of $0.4428 per unit per quarter.

Initial Public Offering

(iv)

In the IPO, Golar sold 13,800,000 common units of the Partnership to the public at a price of $22.50 per unit, raising gross 
proceeds of $310.5 million. 1,800,000 of these common units were sold pursuant to the exercise of the overallotment option 
granted to the underwriters. Expenses relating to the IPO were borne by Golar.

Rights and Obligations of Partnership Units

•

•

Common units. These represent limited partner interests in the Partnership. During the subordination period, the common 
units have preferential dividend and liquidation rights over the subordinated units as described in note 27. Each outstanding 
common unit is entitled to one vote on matters subject to a vote of common unitholders. However, if at any time, any person 
or group owns beneficially more than 4.9% or more of any class of units outstanding, any such units owned by that person 
or group in excess of 4.9% may not be voted (except for purposes of nominating a person for election to our board). The 
voting rights of any such common unitholder in excess of 4.9% will effectively be redistributed pro rata among the other 
common unitholders holding less than 4.9% of the voting power of such class of units. The General Partner, its affiliates and 
persons who acquired common units with the prior approval of the board of directors will not be subject to this 4.9% limit 
except with respect to voting their common units in the election of the four elected directors. 

Subordinated  units.  These  represent  limited  partner  interests  in  the  Partnership.  Subordinated  units  have  limited  voting 
rights and most notably are excluded from voting in the election of the elected directors. During the subordination period the 
common units have preferential dividend rights to the subordinated units (see note 27). The subordination period will end on 
the satisfaction of various tests as prescribed in the Partnership Agreement, but will not end before March 31, 2016, except 
with the removal of the Company as the general partner. Upon the expiration of the subordination period, the subordinated 
units will convert into common units and will be subject to the same rights as common units. 

• General Partner units. General partner units have preferential liquidation and dividend rights over the subordinated units. 
There is a limitation on the transferability of the general partner interest such that the General Partner may not transfer all or 
any part of its general partner interest to another person (except to an affiliate of the General Partner or another entity as part 
of the merger or consolidation of the General Partner with or into another entity or the transfer by the General Partners of all 
or substantially all of its assets to another entity) prior to March 31, 2021 without the approval of the holders of at least a 
majority  of  the  outstanding  common  units,  excluding  common  units  held  by  the  General  Partner  and  its  affiliates.  The 
general partner units are not entitled to vote in the election of the four elected directors. However, the General Partner in 
their sole discretion appoints three of the seven board directors. 

•

IDRs.  The  IDRs  are  non-voting  and  represent  rights  to  receive  an  increasing  percentage  of  quarterly  distributions  of 
available cash from operating surplus after the minimum quarterly distribution and the target distribution levels have been 
achieved as described in note 27. The General Partner or its affiliates or Golar Energy or its affiliates may not transfer all or 
any part of its IDRs to another person (except to an affiliate of the General Partner or another entity as part of the merger or 
consolidation of the General Partner with or into another entity or the transfer by the General Partners of all or substantially 
all of its assets to another entity) prior to March 31, 2016 without the approval of the holders of at least a majority of the 
outstanding common units, excluding common units held by the General Partner and its affiiates.

The  Partnership  Agreement provides that if  the General Partner is  removed  as a general partner under circumstances where cause 
does not exist and units held by the General Partner and its affiliates are not voted in favor of that removal:

F-17

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 144 of 169

Table of Contents

•

•
•

the subordination period will end and all outstanding subordinated units will immediately convert into common units on a 
one-for-one basis;
any existing arrearages in payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the common units will be extinguished; and
the General Partner will have the right to convert its general partner interest and its IDRs (and Golar Energy will have the 
right to convert its IDRs) into common units or to receive cash in exchange for those interests based on the fair market value 
of the interests at the time.

Agreements

In connection with the IPO, the Partnership entered into several agreements including:

•

•

•

A  management  and  administrative  services  agreement  with  Golar  Management  Limited,  a  subsidiary  of  Golar  (“Golar 
Management”), pursuant to which Golar Management agreed to provide certain management and administrative services to 
the Partnership;

A $20.0 million revolving credit agreement with Golar; and

An Omnibus Agreement with Golar, the General Partner and others governing, among other things:
•
•
•

To what extent the Partnership and Golar may compete with each other;
Certain rights of first offer on certain FSRUs and LNG carriers operating under charters for five or more years; and
The provision of certain indemnities to the Partnership by Golar.

The Partnership exercised its option under the Omnibus Agreement to purchase the Golar Freeze from Golar in October 2011 and 
the NR Satu in July 2012.

4. EQUITY ISSUANCES

The following table summarizes the issuances of common and general partner units since the Partnership's IPO in April 2011:

Number of 
Common 
Units 
Issued1
7,294,305 $
5,824,590 $

Offering 
Price

30.95
30.50

Gross 
Proceeds (in 
thousands 
of $)2
230,366
181,275

Net 
Proceeds 
(in 
thousands 
of $)
221,746
180,105

Golar's 
Ownership 
after the 
Offering3

Use of Proceeds

57.5% Acquisition of the NR Satu
54.1% Acquisition of the Golar Grand

Date
July 2012
November 2012

1 Includes common units issued by the Partnership to Golar in a private placement made concurrent to the public offering of 
969,305 common units and 1,524,590 common units in July 2012 and November 2012, respectively. 
2 Includes General Partner's 2% proportionate capital contribution.
3 Includes Golar's 2% general partner interest in the Partnership.

The following table shows the movement in the number of common units, subordinated units and general partner units during the 
years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011:

(in units)
April 2011 IPO
December 31, 2011
July 2012 offerings
November 2012 offerings

December 31, 2012

5. SUBSIDIARIES

Common Units
23,127,254
23,127,254
7,294,305
5,824,590
36,246,149

Subordinated Units
15,949,831
15,949,831
—
—
15,949,831

GP Units

797,492
797,492
148,864
118,869
1,065,225

The  following  table  lists  the  Partnership’s  significant  subsidiaries  and  their  purpose  as  of  December 31,  2012.  Unless  otherwise 
indicated, the Partnership owns 100% of each subsidiary.

F-18

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 145 of 169

Table of Contents

Name
Golar Partners Operating LLC
Golar LNG Holding Corporation
Golar Maritime (Asia) Inc.
Oxbow Holdings Inc.
Faraway Maritime Shipping Company (60% ownership)
Golar LNG 2215 Corporation
Golar Spirit Corporation
Golar LNG 2220 Corporation
Golar Freeze Holding Corporation
Golar 2215 UK Ltd
Golar Spirit UK Ltd
Golar Winter UK Ltd
Golar Freeze UK Ltd
Golar Servicos de Operacao de Embaracaoes Limited
Golar Khannur Corporation
Golar LNG (Singapore) Pte.
PT Golar Indonesia*
Golar LNG 2226 Corporation
Golar 2226 UK Ltd

Jurisdiction of
Incorporation

Marshall Islands
Marshall Islands
Republic of Liberia
British Virgin Islands
Republic of Liberia
Marshall Islands
Marshall Islands
Marshall Islands
Marshall Islands
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
United Kingdom
Brazil
Marshall Islands
Singapore
Indonesia
Marshall Islands
United Kingdom

Purpose

Holding Company
Holding Company
Holding Company
Holding Company
Owns and operates Golar Mazo
Leases Methane Princess
Owns Golar Spirit
Leases Golar Winter
Owns Golar Freeze
Operates Methane Princess
Operates Golar Spirit
Operates Golar Winter
Operates Golar Freeze
Management Company
Holding Company
Holding Company
Owns and operates NR Satu
Leases Golar Grand
Operates Golar Grand

* The Partnership holds all of the voting stock and controls all of the economic interests in PT Golar Indonesia ("PTGI") pursuant to a Shareholder's Agreement with 
the other shareholder of PTGI, PT Pesona Sentra Utama ("PT Pesona"). PT Pesona holds the remaining 51% interest in the issued share capital of PTGI.

The Partnership consolidated PTGI, which owns the NR Satu, in its consolidated financial statements effective September 28, 2011. 
PTGI became a VIE and the Partnership became its primary beneficiary upon the Partnership's agreement to acquire all of Golar's 
interests in certain subsidiaries that own and operate the NR Satu (see note 25(j)) on July 18, 2012. As this acquisition was deemed to 
be a reorganization of entities under common control, the balance sheet as of December 31, 2011 has been retroactively adjusted to 
include  PTGI.  The  Partnership  consolidates  PTGI  as  it  holds  all  of  the  voting  stock  and  controls  all  of  the  economic  interests  in 
PTGI.

The following table summarizes the balance sheet of PTGI as of December 31, 2012 and 2011:

F-19

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 146 of 169

Table of Contents

(in thousands of $)
ASSETS
Cash
Restricted cash
Vessels and equipment
Other assets

Total assets

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
Accrued liabilities
Current portion of long-term debt
Amounts due to related parties
Long-term debt
Other liabilities

Total liabilities
Total equity

Total liabilities and equity

2012

2011

3,979
5,474
375,443
6,335
391,231

31,778
14,300
199,891
140,700
1,335

388,004
3,227
391,231

—
—
—
11,000
11,000

—
—
—
—
—

—
11,000
11,000

Trade creditors of PTGI have no recourse to the general credit of the Partnership. 

The long-term debt of PTGI is secured against the NR Satu and has been guaranteed by the Partnership.

6. RECENTLY ISSUED ACCOUNTING STANDARDS

Adoption of new accounting standards

In May 2011, the FASB amended existing guidance to achieve consistent fair value measurements and to clarify certain disclosure 
requirements for fair value measurements. The new guidance includes clarification about when the concept of highest and best use is 
applicable  to  fair  value  measurements,  requires  quantitative  disclosures  about  inputs  used  and  qualitative  disclosures  about  the 
sensitivity of fair value measurements using unobservable inputs (Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy), and requires the classification 
of  all  assets  and  liabilities  measured  at  fair  value  in  the  fair  value  hierarchy  (including  those  assets  and  liabilities  which  are  not 
recorded  at  fair  value  but  for  which  fair  value  is  disclosed).  The  guidance  is  effective  for  the  Partnership’s  interim  and  annual 
reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of this newly issued guidance did not have a material impact on 
its consolidated financial statements.

In June 2011, the FASB amended guidance on the presentation of comprehensive income in financial statements. The new guidance 
allows entities to present components of net income and other comprehensive income in one continuous statement, referred to as the 
statement of comprehensive income, or in two separate but consecutive statements, and removes the current option to report other 
comprehensive  income  and  its components in the  statement  of  changes in equity.   Under  the  two-statement approach, an entity is 
required to present components of net income and total net income in the statement of net income.  The amendments in this update 
do not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income or when an item of other comprehensive income must 
be reclassified to net income.  The amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, 
beginning after December 15, 2011. In January 2012, the FASB deferred the effective date for changes in the above guidance that 
relate  to  the  presentation  of  reclassification  adjustments  out  of  Accumulated  Other  Comprehensive  Income.  The  adoption  of  this 
guidance did not have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. 

In  September 2011,  the  FASB  amended  guidance  on  the  procedure  for  testing  goodwill  for  impairment.  The  amended  guidance 
permits an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit 
is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test 
described  in  Topic  350.  The  more-likely-than-not  threshold  is  defined  as  having  a  likelihood  of  more  than  50  percent.  The 
amendments include a number of events and circumstances for an entity to consider in conducting the qualitative assessment. The 
amendments in this update are effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after 
December 15,  2011.  Early  adoption  is  permitted.  The  amended  guidance  did  not  have  a  material  impact  on  the  Partnership’s 
consolidated financial statements.

F-20

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 147 of 169

Table of Contents

In July  2012, the  FASB  amended  disclosure requirements  relating  to testing indefinite-lived intangible assets for impairment.  The 
amendments  no  longer  require  entities  to  disclose  the  quantitative  information  about  significant  unobservable  inputs  used  in  fair 
value measurements categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy that relate to the financial accounting and reporting for an 
indefinite-lived  intangible  asset  after  its  initial  recognition.  The  amendment  is  effective  for  annual  and  interim  impairment  tests 
performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012. Early adoption is permitted. The amendment did not have a material 
impact on the Partnership’s consolidated financial statements.

New accounting standards not yet adopted

In December 2011, the FASB amended guidance on disclosures about offsetting assets and liabilities. The amendments require an 
entity to disclose information about offsetting and related arrangements to enable users of its financial statements to understand the 
effect of those arrangements on its financial position. The amendments will enhance disclosures required by US GAAP by requiring 
improved information about financial instruments and derivative instruments that are either offset or subject to an enforceable master 
netting arrangement or  similar agreement, irrespective of whether they are offset in  accordance with US GAAP. This information 
will enable users of an entity’s financial statements to evaluate the effect or potential effect of netting arrangements on an entity’s 
financial  position,  including  the  effect  or  potential  effect  of  netting  arrangements  on  an  entity’s  financial  position,  including  the 
effect or potential effect of rights of setoff associated with certain financial instruments and derivative instruments in the scope of 
this update. The amendments will be required for annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013, and interim periods 
within  those  annual  periods.  An  entity  should  provide  the  disclosures  required  by  those  amendments  retrospectively  for  all 
comparative periods presented. Adoption of this amended guidance will result in additional disclosures in the financial statements of 
the Partnership.

In  October  2012,  the  FASB  amended  several  disclosure  requirements  of  the  Codification  relating  to  investments,  consolidation, 
accounting changes and error corrections, inventory, retirement benefits for defined benefit plans, financial instruments and balance 
sheet. The amendments are effective for fiscal periods beginning after December 15, 2012. Adoption of these amendments will result 
in additional disclosures in the financial statements of the Partnership.

In  February  2013,  further  guidance  was  provided  relating  to  the  reporting  of  the  effects  on  net  income  of  significant  amounts 
reclassified  out  of  each  component  of  accumulated  other  comprehensive  income.  Under  the  updated  guidance,  the  effects  on  net 
income of significant amounts reclassified out of each component of accumulated other comprehensive income shall be shown, in 
one location, either on the face of the statement where net income is presented or as a separate disclosure in the notes to the financial 
statements. The amendment will result in additional disclosures in the Partnership’s consolidated financial statements.

In February 2013, the FASB issued guidance for the recognition, measurement and disclosure of obligations resulting from joint and 
several liability arrangements for which the total amount of the obligation is fixed at the reporting date, including debt arrangements, 
other  contractual  obligations  and  settled  litigation  and  judicial  rulings.  The  guidance  requires  an  entity  to  measure  obligations 
resulting from joint and several liability arrangements for which the total amount of the obligation within the scope of this guidance 
is fixed at the reporting date, as the sum of (a) the amount the reporting entity agreed to pay on the basis of its arrangement among its 
co-obligors and (b) any additional amount the reporting entity expects to pay on behalf of its co-obligors. The guidance also requires 
an entity to disclose the nature and amount of the obligation as well as other information about those obligations. The amendments 
are  effective  for  fiscal  years,  and  interim  periods  within  those  years,  beginning  after  December  15,  2013.  The  Partnership  is 
evaluating the impact of the adoption of this amended guidance but does not expect it to have a material impact on its consolidated 
financial statements. 

7. SEGMENTAL INFORMATION

The  Partnership  has  not  presented  segmental  information  as  it  considers  it  operates  in  one  reportable  segment,  the  LNG  market. 
During 2012, 2011 and 2010, the Partnership’s fleet operated under time charters and in particular with five charterers, Petrobras, 
Dubai Supply Authority (“DUSUP”), Pertamina, PT Nusantara Regas ("PTNR") and BG Group plc. Petrobras is a Brazilian energy 
company. DUSUP is a government entity which is the sole supplier of natural gas to the Emirate.  Pertamina is the state-owned oil 
and gas company of Indonesia. PTNR is a joint venture company of Pertamina and Perusahaan Gas Negara, an Indonesian company 
engaged in the transport and distribution of natural gas in Indonesia. BG Group plc is headquartered in the United Kingdom. In time 
charters, the charterer, not the Partnership, controls the choice of which routes the Partnership’s vessel will serve. These routes can 
be  worldwide  as  determined  by  the  charterers  except  for  the  Partnership's  FSRUs  which  operate  at  specific  locations  where  the 
charterers are based. Accordingly, the Partnership’s management, including the chief operating decision maker, does not evaluate the 
Partnership’s performance either according to customer or geographical region.

F-21

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 148 of 169

Table of Contents

In  the  years  ended  December  2012,  2011  and  2010,  revenues  from  the  following  customers  accounted  for  over  10%  of  the 
Partnership’s consolidated and combined revenues:

(in thousands of $)
Petrobras
DUSUP
Pertamina
BG Group plc
PTNR
Gas Natural Aprovisionamientos 
SDG S.A.

2012

2011

2010

92,952
48,328
37,300
66,148
41,902

—

32%
17%
13%
23%
15%

—%

93,741
47,054
37,829
25,101
—

21,474

41%
21%
17%
11%
—%

10%

90,651
29,894
36,944
40,249
—

—

44%
15%
18%
20%
—%

—%

Geographic segment data 
The following geographical data presents the Partnership's revenues and fixed assets with respect only to its FSRUs, operating under 
long-term charters, at specific locations.

Revenues

Brazil
United Arab Emirates
Indonesia

2012

2011

2010

92,952
48,328
41,902

93,741
47,054
—

90,651
29,894
—

The following describes the Partnership's long-lived assets by country. LNG vessels operate on a worldwide basis and are not 
restricted to specific locations. Accordingly, it is not possible to allocate the assets of these operations to specific countries.

Fixed assets

Brazil
United Arab Emirates
Indonesia

2012

2011

379,061
153,097
247,942

393,214
163,495
—

8. IMPAIRMENT OF LONG-TERM ASSETS

The Partnership continually monitors events and changes in circumstances that could indicate carrying amounts of long-lived assets 
may not be recoverable.

The Partnership incurred impairment charges in respect of unutilized parts originally ordered for the Golar Spirit FSRU conversion 
following changes to the original specifications. The impairment charge of $1.5 million reflected a lower recoverable amount for the 
year ended December 31, 2010. These assets were retained by Golar and were not transferred to the Partnership and therefore were 
eliminated from the Partnership’s equity position as of April 13, 2011 (see Note 2).

F-22

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 149 of 169

Table of Contents

9. OTHER FINANCIAL ITEMS, NET

(in thousands of $)
Amortization of deferred financing costs
Financing arrangement fees and other costs
Interest rate swap cash settlements
Mark-to-market adjustment for interest rate swap derivatives (see note 24)
Mark-to-market adjustment for currency swap derivatives (see note 24)
Foreign exchange (loss) gain on capital lease obligations and related 
restricted cash
Foreign exchange loss on operations
Loss on termination of financing arrangements
Total

2012

2011

2010

(1,123)
(411)
(6,609)
1,328
7,204

(5,602)
(176)
—
(5,389)

(931)
(536)
(5,788)
(9,427)
(1,417)

182
(604)
—
(18,521)

(2,999)
(2,301)
(9,222)
(7,125)
(7,162)

4,490
(84)
(3,452)
(27,855)

As  discussed  in  note 2,  mark-to-market  adjustments  on  interest  rate  and  currency  swap  derivatives  also  include  an  allocation  of 
Golar's mark-to-market adjustments on derivatives entered into by Golar. For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, 
the amounts allocated to the Partnership was a gain of $0.1 million, loss of $2.5 million and gain of $7.9 million, respectively.

10. TAXATION

The components of income tax expense are as follows:

(in thousands of $)
Current tax expense:

U.K.
Indonesia
Brazil

Total current tax expense
Deferred tax income:

U.K.
Amortization of deferred tax benefit on intra-group transfer (Note 23)

Total income tax expense

United States

2012

2011

2010

1,888
7,395
1,055
10,338

—
(912)

9,426

1,044
—
1,364
2,408

—
(2,363)

45

160
—
1,596
1,756

(544)
—

1,212

Pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code of the United States (the “Code”), U.S. source income from the international operations of 
ships is generally exempt from U.S. tax if the company operating the ships meets certain requirements. Among other things, in order 
to  qualify  for  this  exemption,  the  company  operating  the  ships  must  be  incorporated  in  a  country  which  grants  an  equivalent 
exemption  from  income  taxes  to  U.S.  citizens  and  U.S.  corporations  and  must  be  more  than  50%  owned  by  individuals  who  are 
residents,  as  defined,  in  such  country  or  another  foreign  country  that  grants  an  equivalent  exemption  to  U.S.  citizens  and  U.S. 
corporations. The management of the Partnership believes that it satisfied these requirements and therefore by virtue of the above 
provisions, it was not subject to tax on its U.S. source income.

A reconciliation between the income tax expense resulting from applying either the U.S. federal or Marshall Islands statutory income 
tax rate and the reported income tax expense has not been presented herein as it would not provide additional useful information to 
users of the financial statements as the Partnership’s net income is subject to neither Marshall Islands nor U.S. tax.

F-23

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 150 of 169

Table of Contents

United Kingdom

Current  taxation  charge  of  $1.9  million,  $1.0  million  and  $0.2  million  for  the  years  ended  December 31,  2012,  2011  and  2010, 
respectively, relates to taxation of the operations of the Partnership’s United Kingdom subsidiaries. Taxable revenues in the United 
Kingdom are generated by UK subsidiary companies of the Partnership and are comprised of revenues from the operation of four of 
the Partnership’s vessels. The statutory tax rate in the United Kingdom as of December 31, 2012 is 24%.

As  of  December 31,  2012,  the  2012  U.K.  income  tax  returns  have  not  been  filed.  Accordingly,  once  filed,  these  returns  and  the 
returns for the years 2009 through to 2011 remain open for examination by the U.K. tax authorities.

The Partnership records deferred income taxes to reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amount of 
assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. The Partnership did not have any 
deferred tax assets at December 31, 2012 and 2011.

Brazil

Current  taxation  charge  of  $1.1  million,  $1.4  million  and  $1.6  million  for  the  years  ended  December 31,  2012,  2011  and  2010, 
respectively, refers to taxation levied on the operations of the Partnership’s Brazilian subsidiary.

Indonesia

Current taxation charge of $7.4 million, $nil and $nil for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively, refers to 
taxation levied on the operations of the Partnership’s Indonesian subsidiary. However, the tax exposure in Indonesia is mitigated by 
revenue due under the charter such that taxes paid are fully recovered through the time charter rate.

Other jurisdictions

No  tax  has  been  levied  on  income  derived  from  the  Partnership’s  subsidiaries  registered  in  the  Marshall  Islands,  Liberia  and  the 
British Virgin Islands.

Deferred income tax assets are summarized as follows:

(in thousands of $)

Deferred tax assets, gross
Valuation allowances
Deferred tax assets, net

2012

2011

—
—
—

1,025
(1,025)
—

Deferred tax assets, gross relate to net operating losses carried forward for Golar Spirit. The deferred tax asset was fully provided for 
during the  year  ended December  31,  2011 as the Partnership  does  not  consider  this is realizable.  However,  the  deferred  tax  asset 
provision has been recharged by the Partnership to Golar as this relates to pre-IPO tax items.

11. OPERATING LEASES

Rental and service income

The minimum contractual future revenues to be received on time charters as of December 31, 2012, were as follows:

F-24

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 151 of 169

Table of Contents

Year ending December 31,
(in thousands of $) 
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018 and later
Total

Total

302,034
321,495
315,823
310,072
306,967
985,765
2,542,156 (1)

__________________________________________ 
(1) This includes additional revenues relating to the amendment to the terms of the Golar Winter charter pursuant to modifications 
to the vessel. The amendment includes an increase in charter hire rates and an extension of the charter hire term by 5 years from 
2019 to 2024 contingent upon the completion of the modification work to the Golar Winter expected in 2013.  The amendment 
to the charter was effected in January 2012.

The contract for the vessels are time charters but the operating costs are borne by the charterers on a pass through basis for all the 
vessels except for the Golar Grand. The pass through of operating costs is reflected in the minimum lease revenues set out above.

PTNR has the right to purchase the NR Satu at any time after the first anniversary of the commencement date of its charter at a price 
that must be agreed upon between the Partnership and PTNR. The Partnership has assumed that this  option will  not be exercised. 
Accordingly, the minimum lease revenues set out above include revenues arising within the option period.

The cost and accumulated depreciation of vessels leased to third parties at December 31, 2012 and 2011 were $1,555.7 million and 
$1,482.0  million;  and  $362.9  million  and  $318.1  million,  respectively.  For  arrangements  where  operating  costs  are  borne  by  the 
charterer on a pass through basis, the pass through of operating costs are reflected in both revenue and expenses.

12. TRADE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE

Trade accounts receivable are presented net of provisions for doubtful accounts. As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, there was no
provision for doubtful accounts.

13. OTHER RECEIVABLES, PREPAID EXPENSES AND ACCRUED INCOME

(in thousands of $)
Other receivables
Prepaid expenses
Accrued interest income

14. VESSELS AND EQUIPMENT, NET

(in thousands of $)
Cost
Accumulated depreciation
Net book value

2012

2011

1,219
2,874
243
4,336

489
1,795
342
2,626

2012
954,992
(247,845)
707,147

2011
881,598
(219,577)
662,021

As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, the Partnership owned four vessels.

Drydocking costs of $20.9 million and $21.9 million are included in the cost amounts for December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. 
Accumulated amortization of those costs at December 31, 2012 and 2011 was $4.3 million and $7.1 million, respectively. 

F-25

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 152 of 169

Table of Contents

Mooring  equipment  of  $38.1  million  and  $26.9  million  is  included  in  the  cost  amounts  for  December 31,  2012  and  2011, 
respectively.  Accumulated  depreciation  of  the  mooring  equipment  at  December 31,  2012  and  2011  was  $2.4  million  and  $nil, 
respectively.

Depreciation and amortization expense for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $35.2 million, $29.3 million and 
$28.5 million, respectively.

As of December 31, 2012 and 2011, vessels and equipment with a net book value of $707.1 million and $481.9 million, respectively 
were pledged as security for certain debt facilities (see note 26).

15. VESSELS UNDER CAPITAL LEASES, NET

(in thousands of $)
Cost
Accumulated depreciation
Net book value

2012
600,733
(115,101)
485,632

2011
600,394
(98,491)
501,903

As  of  December 31,  2012  and  2011,  the  Partnership  operated  three  vessels  under  capital  leases.  These  leases  are  in  respect  of  a 
refinancing  transaction  undertaken  during  2003,  a  lease  financing  transaction  during  2004  and  another  in  2005,  as  described  in 
note 22.

Drydocking  costs  of  $9.9  million  are  included  in  the  cost  amounts  above  as  of  December 31,  2012  and  2011.  Accumulated 
amortization of those costs at December 31, 2012 and 2011 was $6.7 million and $4.9 million, respectively.

Depreciation and amortization expense for vessels under capital leases for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was 
$16.6 million, $16.6 million and $15.4 million, respectively.

16. DEFERRED CHARGES

Deferred charges represent financing costs, principally bank fees that are capitalized and amortized to other financial items over the 
life of the debt instrument. If a loan is repaid early, any unamortized portion of the related deferred charges is charged against income 
in the period in which the loan is repaid. The deferred charges are comprised of the following amounts:

(in thousands of $)
Debt arrangement fees and other deferred financing charges
Accumulated amortization

2012

2011

19,684
(4,661)
15,023

11,280
(3,538)
7,742

Amortization expense of  deferred charges, for the years ended December 31, 2012,  2011 and 2010 was $1.1 million, $0.9 million
and $3.0 million, respectively.

17. RESTRICTED CASH AND SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS

The Partnership’s short-term restricted cash and investment balances in respect of its debt and lease obligations are as follows:

(in thousands of $)
Total security lease deposits for lease obligations
Restricted cash relating to the Golar Freeze facility (see note 21)
Restricted cash relating to the Mazo facility (see note 21)
Restricted cash relating to the NR Satu facility (see note 21)

F-26

2012

2011

5,398
8,994
11,034
5,474
30,900

5,246
9,012
10,254
—
24,512

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 153 of 169

Table of Contents

Restricted  cash  does  not  include  minimum  consolidated  cash  balances  of  $20  million  required  to  be  maintained  as  part  of  the 
financial covenants in some of the Partnership’s loan facilities, as these amounts are included in “Cash and cash equivalents” (see 
note 21).

As  of  December 31,  2012  and  2011,  the  value  of  deposits  used  to  obtain  letters  of  credit  to  secure  the  obligations  for  the  lease 
arrangements described in  note 21  was  $195.9  million  and $190.5 million,  respectively. These  security deposits are  referred  to  in 
these financial statements as restricted cash and earn interest based upon GBP LIBOR for the Methane Princess Lease.

The Partnership’s restricted cash balances in respect of its lease obligations are as follows:

(in thousands of $)
Methane Princess Lease security deposits
Golar Grand Lease security deposits
Total security deposits for lease obligations
Included in short-term restricted cash and short-term investments

Long-term restricted cash

18. OTHER NON-CURRENT ASSETS

2012
150,913
45,008
195,921
(5,398)
190,523

2011
145,508
45,008
190,516
(5,246)

185,270

(in thousands of $)
Other long term assets
Mark-to-market cross currency interest rate swaps valuation relating to high-yield bonds (see 
note 24)

Other non-current assets

2012

2011

3,460

1,819
5,279

39

—
39

As of December 31, 2012, other long-term assets principally relate to (i) $2.3 million of lease incentives incurred in securing the NR 
Satu time charter. The lease incentive is amortized over the term of the NR Satu time charter, $0.2 million was amortized in the year 
ended December 31, 2012; and (ii) $1.2 million which relate to parts ordered for the Golar Winter modification. 

19. ACCRUED EXPENSES

(in thousands of $)
Vessel operating and drydocking expenses
Administrative expenses
Interest expense
Provision for tax

20. OTHER CURRENT LIABILITIES

(in thousands of $)
Deferred drydocking and operating cost revenue
Mark-to-market interest rate swaps valuation (see note 24)
Mark-to-market foreign exchange rate swaps valuation (see note 24)
Deferred credits from capital lease transactions (see note 23)
Other creditors

F-27

2012

2011

6,737
281
7,729
11,783
26,530

4,906
846
3,583
3,113
12,448

2012

2011

12,848
24,991
20,527
625
5,701
64,692

14,506
27,351
27,732
627
—
70,216

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 154 of 169

Table of Contents

21. DEBT

(in thousands of $)
Total long-term debt due to third parties
Less: current portion of long-term debt due to third parties
Total long-term debt due to third parties
Total long-term debt due to related parties
Long-term debt

The Partnership’s outstanding debt as of December 31, 2012 is repayable as follows:

Year Ending December 31,
(in thousands of $)
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018 and thereafter
Total

2012
704,519
(64,822)
639,697
34,953
674,650

2011
400,574
(49,906)
350,668
222,310
572,978

64,822
51,838
79,782
42,550
276,355
224,125
739,472

Except for the high-yield bonds, the Partnership’s debt is denominated in U.S. dollars and bears interest at fixed or floating rates at a 
weighted average interest rate for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 of 3.93% and 3.84%, respectively.

At December 31, 2012, the maturity dates for the Partnership’s debt were as follows:

(in thousands of $)
Mazo facility
Golar LNG vendor financing loan - Golar Freeze
High-yield bonds
Golar LNG Partners credit facility
Golar Freeze facility
NR Satu facility

2012

2011

13,521
—
233,804
247,500
89,647
155,000
739,472

38,932
222,310
—
257,500
104,142
—
622,884

Maturity date
2013
2014
2017
2018
2015/2018*
2019

*The Commercial Loan facility tranche matures in 2015 and the Exportfinans Loan facility tranche matures in 2018.

Mazo Facility

In November 1997, Osprey, Golar’s predecessor, entered into a secured loan facility of $214.5 million in respect of the vessel, the 
Golar  Mazo.  The  facility  bears  a  floating  interest  rate  equal  to  LIBOR  plus  a  margin  and  repayments  are  due  semi-annually  and 
commenced  in  June 2001,  ending  June 2013.  The  loan  agreement  requires  that  certain  cash  balances,  representing  interest  and 
principal  repayments  for  defined  future  periods,  be  held  by  the  trust  company  during  the  period  of  the  loan.  These  balances  are 
referred to in these financial statements as restricted cash (see note 17).

High-yield bonds

In October 2012, the Partnership completed the issuance of NOK1,300 million senior unsecured bonds that mature in October 2017. 
The  aggregate principal amount of the bonds at the  time of issuance is equivalent to approximately $227 million. The  bonds bear 
interest  at  3  months  NIBOR  plus  a  margin  of  5.20%  payable  quarterly.  All  interest  and  principal  payments  on  the  bonds  were 
swapped  into U.S. dollars  including  fixing  interest  payments  at  6.485%. The  net  proceeds  from the bonds were used primarily  to 
repay the $222.3 million 6.75% loan due October 2014 from Golar that was utilized to purchase the Golar Freeze (Golar LNG 

F-28

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 155 of 169

Table of Contents

Vendor Financing Loan - Golar Freeze). The bonds were listed on the Oslo Bors ASA in December 2012. As of December 31, 2012, 
the U.S. dollar equivalent of the principal amount is $233.8 million. 

Golar LNG Partners Credit Facility

In September 2008, the Partnership refinanced existing loan facilities in respect of two of its vessels the Methane Princess and the 
Golar Spirit and entered into a new $285 million revolving credit facility with a banking consortium. The loan is secured against the 
Golar Spirit and assignment to the lending of a bank mortgage given to the Partnership by the lessors of the Methane Princess, with 
a second priority charge over the Golar Mazo.

The  revolving  credit  facility  accrues  floating  interest  at  a  rate  per  annum  equal  to  LIBOR  plus  a  margin.  The  initial  draw  down 
amounted to $250 million in November 2008. The total amount outstanding at the time of refinancing, in respect of the two vessels’
facilities was $202.3 million. The Partnership drew down a further $35 million for the period to March 2009. As of December 31, 
2012,  the  revolving  credit  facility  provided  for  available  borrowings  of  up  to  $247.5  million,  of  which  $247.5  million  was 
outstanding.  The  revolving  credit  facility  is  a  reducing  facility  which  decreases  by  $2.5  million  per  quarter  from  June 30,  2009 
through December 31, 2012 and by $5.5 million per quarter from March 31, 2013 through December 31, 2017. Accordingly, as of 
December 31, 2012, the Partnership has no ability to draw additional amounts under this facility. The loan has a term of ten years
and  is  repayable  in  quarterly  installments  commencing  in  May 2009  with  a  final  balloon  payment  of  $137.5  million  due  in 
March 2018, its maturity date.

Golar Freeze Facility

The Golar Freeze facility was assumed by the Partnership pursuant to the purchase of the Golar Freeze from Golar, in October 2011. 
The amount originally drawn down under the facility in June 2010 was $125 million. The amount outstanding under the facility at 
the time the Partnership assumed the debt was approximately $108.0 million.  As of December 31, 2012, there was approximately 
$89.6  million  of  borrowings  outstanding  under  the  Golar  Freeze  facility.  The  Golar  Freeze  facility  is  secured  against  the  Golar 
Freeze  with  second  priority  mortgage  over  the  Golar  Winter,  second  priority  assignment  of  insurances  on  the  Golar  Winter,  and 
second priority assignment of earnings from the Golar Winter time charter contract with Petrobras, net of lease and certain approved 
currency  swap  payments  to  the  Golar  Winter  lessor.  The  facility  is  with  a syndicate of  banks  and financial  institutions  and bears 
interest  at  LIBOR  plus  a  margin.  The  facility  is  split  into  two tranches,  the  Commercial Loan  facility  and  the  Exportfinans  Loan 
facility. Repayments under the Commercial Loan facility tranche are due quarterly based on an annuity profile with a final balloon 
payment of $34.8 million payable in May 2015. The Exportfinans Loan facility tranche is for $50 million with a term of eight years 
and  repayable  in  equal  quarterly  installments  with  the  final  payment  due  in  June 2018.  The  Golar  Freeze  facility  requires  certain 
balances to be held on deposit during the period of the loan (see note 17).

NR Satu Facility

In December 2012, PT Golar Indonesia, the company that owns and operates the FSRU, NR Satu, entered into a 7 year secured loan 
facility. The total facility amount is $175 million and is split into two tranches, a $155 million term loan facility and a $20 million 
revolving facility. The facility is with a syndicate of banks and bears interest at LIBOR plus a margin of 3.5%. PT Golar Indonesia 
drew down $155 million on the term loan facility in December 2012. The loan is payable on a quarterly basis with a final balloon 
payment of $52.5 million payable after 7 years. The NR Satu facility requires certain balances to be held on deposit during the period 
of the loan (see note 17). 

Golar LNG Vendor Financing Loan - Golar Freeze

In  connection  with  the  purchase  of  the  Golar  Freeze  from  Golar  in  October 2011,  the  Partnership  entered  into  a  financing  loan 
agreement  with  Golar  for  an  amount  of  $222.3  million.   The  facility  is  unsecured  and  bears  interest  at  a  fixed  rate  of  6.75%  per 
annum payable quarterly. The loan is non-amortizing with a final balloon payment of $222.3 million due in October 2014. The loan 
was repaid in October 2012 using the net proceeds from the bond issuance.

Golar LNG Vendor Financing Loan - NR Satu

In connection with the purchase of the NR Satu from Golar in July 2012, the Partnership entered into a financing loan agreement with 
Golar for an amount of $175 million. Of this amount, $155 million was drawn down in July 2012. A further $20 million is available 
for drawdown until July 2015. The facility is unsecured and bears interest at a fixed rate of 6.75% per annum payable quarterly. The 
loan is non-amortizing with a final balloon payment for the amount drawn down due within three years from the date of draw down. 
The loan was repaid in December 2012 using the proceeds from the NR Satu facility.

F-29

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 156 of 169

Table of Contents

As of December 31, 2012, the margins the Partnership pays under its loan agreements are above LIBOR at a fixed or floating rate 
ranging from 0.87% to 3.50%. The margin related to our high-yield bond is 5.20% above NIBOR.

Debt and lease restrictions

The Partnership’s loan debt is collateralized by ship mortgages and, in the case of some debt, pledges of shares by each guarantor 
subsidiary. The existing financing agreements impose operating and financing restrictions which may limit or prohibit, among other 
things,  the  Partnership’s  ability  to  incur  additional  indebtedness,  create  liens,  sell  capital  shares  of  subsidiaries,  make  certain 
investments,  engage  in  mergers  and  acquisitions, purchase  and  sell vessels,  enter into  time  or consecutive  voyage  charters or  pay 
dividends  without  the  consent  of  the  lenders.  In  addition,  lenders  may  accelerate  the  maturity  of  indebtedness  under  financing 
agreements and foreclose upon the collateral securing the indebtedness upon the occurrence of certain events of default, including a 
failure  to  comply  with  any  of  the  covenants  contained  in  the  financing  agreements.  Various  debt  agreements  of  the  Partnership 
contain certain covenants, which require compliance with certain financial ratios. Such ratios include equity ratio covenants, working 
capital ratios, net debt to EBITDA ratios and minimum free cash restrictions. With regards to cash restrictions, the Partnership has 
covenanted to retain at least $20 million of cash and cash equivalents on a consolidated group basis.

In April 2013, the Partnership received waivers relating to breach of covenants under the Golar LNG Partners credit facility and the 
Golar Freeze facility relating to change of control over the Partnership. The waiver relating to the Golar LNG Partners credit facility 
extends to January 1, 2014. The waiver relating to the Golar Freeze facility is permanent. As discussed in note 1, following the first 
annual general meeting of common unitholders on December 13, 2012, Golar ceased to control the board of directors as the majority 
of  board  members  became  electable  by  the  common  unitholders.  Absent  this  waiver,  the  Partnership  would  not  have  been  in 
compliance with this covenant as of December 31, 2012 as Golar no longer controls the appointment of the majority of the members 
of  the  board of  directors.  In  connection  with  the  grant  of  such  waiver,  in order  to  avoid  any such  default  that  could  occur  in  the 
future, the definition of a change of control contained in the Golar LNG Partners credit facility and the Golar Freeze credit facility 
are being amended.

In March 2012, the Partnership received a waiver relating to the Partnership’s requirement to comply with the consolidated net worth 
covenant effective as of December 31, 2011 from the lenders under the Golar LNG Partners credit facility. Absent this waiver, the 
Partnership  would  not  have  been  in  compliance  with  such  covenant  as  of  December 31,  2011  due  to  the  required  accounting 
treatment of the Partnership’s acquisition from Golar of a 100% interest in the subsidiaries that own and operate the Golar Freeze.
Such acquisition is accounted for as a reorganization of entities under common control.  Such accounting treatment requires that the 
excess of the proceeds the Partnership paid over the historical cost of the combining entity be treated as an equity distribution, which 
resulted in a  $165.8  million  reduction  in  the  Partnership’s equity  as  of December 31,  2011.   In connection with the grant  of  such 
waiver, in order to avoid any such default that could occur in the future as a result of acquisitions by the Partnership from Golar that 
may require accounting as a reorganization of entities under common control, the definition of consolidated net worth contained in 
such credit facility has been amended to permit, in connection with up to two such additional acquisitions by the Partnership from 
Golar,  the  addition  to  the  Partnership’s  consolidated  net  worth  (as  defined  in  such  credit  facility)  of  the  difference  between  the 
original purchase price and the original net book value (subject to adjustment for depreciation). The Partnership has completed the 
acquisitions of the the NR Satu and the Golar Grand from Golar since securing the waiver in March 2012.

22. CAPITAL LEASES

(in thousands of $)
Total obligations under capital leases
Less: current portion of obligations under capital leases
Long-term obligations under capital leases

2012
412,371
(5,837)
406,534

2011
405,843
(5,909)
399,934

As  of  December 31,  2012  and  2011,  the  Partnership  operated  three  vessels  under  capital  leases.  These  leases  are  in  respect  of  a 
refinancing transaction undertaken during 2003, a lease financing transaction during 2004 and another in 2005.

The leasing transaction, which occurred in August 2003, was in relation to the newbuilding, the Methane Princess. The Partnership 
novated the Methane Princess newbuilding contract prior to completion of construction and leased the vessel from the same financial 
institution  in  the  United  Kingdom  (“The  Methane  Princess  Lease”).   The  lessor  of  the  Methane  Princess  has  a  second  priority 
security interest in the Methane Princess and the Golar Spirit.

F-30

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 157 of 169

Table of Contents

The leasing transaction, which occurred in April 2004, was in relation to the newbuilding, the Golar Winter. The Partnership novated 
the Golar Winter newbuilding contract prior to completion of construction and leased the vessel from a financial institution in the 
UK (“Golar Winter Lease”).

The leasing transaction in April 2005 was in relation to the newbuilding, the Golar Grand. In April 2005, the Partnership novated the 
Golar Grand newbuilding contract prior to completion of construction and leased the vessel from the same financial institution in the 
UK ("Grand Lease").

The  Partnership’s  obligations  to  the  lessors  under  the  Methane  Princess  Lease  and  Grand  Lease  are  secured  by  letters  of  credit 
(“LC”)  provided  by  other  banks.  Details  of  the  security  deposits  provided  by  the  Partnership  to  the  banks  providing  the  LCs  are 
given in note 17.

As  of  December 31,  2012,  the  Partnership  is  committed  to  make  quarterly  minimum  rental  payments  (including  interest)  under 
capital leases, as follows:

Year ending December 31,
(in thousands of $)
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018 and thereafter
Total minimum lease payments
Less: Imputed interest
Present value of minimum lease payments

Methane
Princess Lease
7,494
7,781
8,082
8,387
8,702
192,856
233,302
(77,495)
155,807

Golar Winter
Lease

Grand Lease

Total

9,995
9,927
9,911
9,911
9,911
143,705
193,360
(71,902)
121,458

9,067
9,014
9,000
9,000
9,000
178,686
223,767
(88,661)
135,106

26,556
26,722
26,993
27,298
27,613
515,247
650,429
(238,058)
412,371

The Methane Princess Lease liability continues to increase until 2014 and thereafter decreases over the period to 2034, which is the 
end of the primary term of the lease. The interest element of the lease rentals is accrued at a floating rate based upon British Pound 
(GBP) LIBOR.

The Golar Winter Lease is for a primary period of 28 years, expiring in April 2032.  The  lease liability is reduced by lease rentals 
from inception. The interest element of the lease rentals is accrued at a rate based upon floating rate GBP LIBOR. The lease with 
respect to the Golar Winter contains a minimum value clause that is applicable only if the Golar Winter is not chartered under a time 
charter acceptable to the lessor for this purpose, such as the current time charter. The Golar Winter Lease generally provides that, in 
the  event  that  the  Golar  Winter  charter  is  terminated  and  is  not  replaced  with  a  similar  charter,  the  amount  of  any  obligations 
outstanding under the Golar Winter Lease shall be equal to or less than 80% of the value of the vessel at the time of any such charter 
termination.  In  the  event  that  the  minimum  value  clause  becomes  applicable  and  is  not satisfied,  the  lessee  shall  either  procure  a 
letter of credit in an amount sufficient to cover any deficiency between the amount that is equal to 80% of the value of the vessel at 
the time of any such charter termination and the amount of any obligations outstanding under the Golar Winter Lease or, if the lessor 
agrees, provide alternative additional security to the lessor.

The  Grand  Lease  is  for  a  primary  period  of  30  years,  expiring  January  2036.  The  lease  liability  is  reduced  by  lease  rentals  from 
inception.  The  interest  element  of  the  lease  rentals  is  accrued  at  a  rate  based  upon  floating  rate  USD  LIBOR.  In  contrast  to  the 
Partnership's other leases, the Grand Lease obligation and the cash deposits securing the lease obligation are denominated in USD. 
However, in common with the Golar Winter Lease, the cash deposits securing the lease obligation are significantly less than the lease 
obligation itself. 

The  Partnership  determined  that  the  entities  that  owned  the  vessels  were  variable  interest  entities  in  which  the  Partnership  had  a 
variable interest and was the primary beneficiary. Upon transferring the vessels to the financial institutions, the Partnership measured 
the subsequently leased vessels at the same amounts as if the transfer had not occurred, which was cost less accumulated depreciation 
at the time of transfer.

F-31

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 158 of 169

Table of Contents

23. OTHER LONG-TERM LIABILITIES

(in thousands of $)
Tax benefits on intra-group transfers of long-term assets
Deferred credits from capital lease transactions

2012

2011

—
18,529
18,529

8,446
19,153
27,599

Tax benefits arising on intra-group transfers of long-term assets arose from transactions between controlled entities in respect of five 
vessels  which  included  the  NR  Satu  that  generated  a  permanent  tax  benefit  for  Golar.  Tax  benefits  for  the  NR  Satu  totaling  $8.4 
million at December 31, 2011 have been reflected in these financial statements based on the allocation method as described in note 2. 
These liabilities were not transferred to the Partnership as part of the transfer of the NR Satu in July 2012 and therefore have been 
eliminated from the Partnership’s equity (see note 2).

Deferred credits from capital lease transactions

(in thousands of $)
Deferred credits from capital lease transactions
Less: Accumulated amortization

Short-term (see note 20)

Long-term

2012

2011

24,691
(5,537)
19,154

625
18,529
19,154

24,691
(4,911)
19,780

627
19,153
19,780

In  connection  with  the  Methane  Princess  Lease  (See  note 22),  the  Partnership  recorded  an  amount  representing  the  difference 
between  the  net  cash  proceeds  received  upon  sale  of  the  vessel  and  the  present  value  of  the  minimum  lease  payments.  The 
amortization of the deferred credit for the year is offset against depreciation and amortization expense in the statement of operations. 
The deferred credits represent the upfront benefits derived from undertaking finance in the form of a UK lease. The deferred credits 
are amortized over the remaining estimated useful economic life of the Methane Princess on a straight-line basis.

Amortization for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $0.6 million, $0.6 million and $0.8 million, respectively.

24. FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

As  discussed  in  note 2,  in  respect  of  the  Combined  Entity  and  Dropdown  Predecessor,  earnings  include  an  allocation  of  Golar’s 
mark-to-market  adjustments  for  interest  rate  swap  and  foreign  currency  swap  derivatives  and  related  foreign  exchange  gains  and 
losses, captured within “other financial items, net” (See note 9). These amounts have been accounted for as an equity contribution.

Interest rate risk management

In certain situations, the Partnership may enter into financial instruments to reduce the risk associated with fluctuations in interest 
rates. The Partnership has entered into swaps that convert floating rate interest obligations to fixed rates, which from an economic 
perspective  hedge  the  interest  rate  exposure.  Certain  interest  rate  swap  agreements  qualify  and  are  designated,  for  accounting 
purposes,  as  cash  flow  hedges.  The  Partnership  does  not  hold  or  issue  instruments  for  speculative  or  trading  purposes.  The 
counterparties to such contracts are major banking and financial institutions. Credit risk exists to the extent that the counterparties are 
unable to perform under the contracts; however the Partnership does not anticipate non-performance by any of its counterparties.

The Partnership manages its debt and capital lease portfolio with interest rate swap agreements in U.S. dollars to achieve an overall 
desired position of fixed and floating interest rates. The Partnership hedge accounts for certain of its interest rate swap arrangements 
designated as cash flow hedges. Accordingly, the net gains and losses have been reported in a separate component of accumulated 
other  comprehensive  income  to  the  extent  the  hedges  are  effective.  The  amount  recorded  in  accumulated  other  comprehensive 
income will subsequently be reclassified into earnings in the same period as the hedged items affect earnings. As at December 31, 
2012,  the  Partnership  does  not  expect  any  material  amounts  to  be  reclassified  from  accumulated  other  comprehensive  income  to 
earnings during the next twelve months.

F-32

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 159 of 169

Table of Contents

The Partnership manages its debt and capital lease portfolio with interest rate swap agreements in U.S. dollars to achieve an overall 
desired  position  of  fixed  and  floating  interest rates.  The  Partnership  has  entered  into  the  following  interest  rate  swap transactions 
involving the payment of fixed rates in exchange for LIBOR:

Instrument
(in thousands of $)
Interest rate swaps:

Notional Amount

December 31, 2012

December 31, 2011

Maturity
Dates

Fixed Interest
Rate

Receiving floating, pay fixed

759,590 (1)

526,892

2013 to 2018

0.92% to 6.49%

(1) This includes the nominal value of the cross currency interest rate swap of $227.2 million described below.

As of December 31,  2012 and  2011  the  notional  principal amount  of  the  debt  and capital  lease obligations outstanding  subject  to 
such swap agreements was $759.6 million and $526.9 million, respectively.

The effect of cash flow hedging relationships relating to interest rate swap agreements on the statements of operations is as follows:

Derivatives designated as
hedging instruments

(in thousands of $)
Interest rate swaps

Location
Other financial items, 
net

Effective
portion Gain/(loss)
reclassified from
Accumulated Other
Comprehensive Loss

Ineffective Portion

2012

2011

2010

2012

2011

2010

—

—

—

(409)

(412)

(388)

The effect of cash flow hedging relationships relating to interest rate swap agreements excluding the cross currency interest rate swap 
on the other comprehensive income is as follows:

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

(in thousands of $)
Interest rate swaps

Amount of gain/
(loss) recognized in
OCI on derivative
(effective portion)

2012

2011

2010

1,113

934

(2,302)

As of December 31, 2012, the Partnership’s accumulated other comprehensive income included $3.9 million of unrealized losses on 
interest rate swap agreements excluding the cross currency interest rate swap designated as cash flow hedges.

Foreign currency risk

For the periods reported, majority of the vessels’ gross earnings were receivable in U.S. dollars and the majority of the Partnership’s 
transactions,  assets  and  liabilities  were  denominated  in  U.S.  dollars,  the  functional  currency  of  the  Partnership.  However,  the 
Partnership  incurs  expenditures  in  other  currencies.  Certain  capital  lease  obligations  and  related  restricted  cash  deposits  of  the 
Partnership are denominated in British Pounds. There is a risk that currency fluctuations will have a negative effect on the value of 
the Partnership’s cash flows.

A net foreign  exchange gain  of  $1.6 million,  loss of  $1.2 million and loss  of $2.7 million arose in the  years ended December 31, 
2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The net foreign exchange gain of $1.6 million arose in the year ended December 31, 2012 as a 
result of the mark-to-market valuation on the currency swap referred to below net of the loss (2011: gain) on the retranslation of the 
Partnership’s capital lease obligations and the cash deposits securing those obligations. The net gain for the year ended December 31, 
2012 arose due to the mark-to-market valuation of the Golar Winter currency swap representing the movement in fair value. This net 
gain represents an unrealized gain and does not therefore materially impact the Partnership’s liquidity given the maturity dates of the 
underlying lease obligations and the Golar Winter currency swap. Further foreign exchange gains or losses will arise over time in 
relation to the Partnership’s capital lease obligations as a result of exchange rate movements. Gains or losses will only be realized to 
the extent that monies are, or are required to be withdrawn or paid into the deposits securing our capital lease obligations or if the 
leases are terminated.

F-33

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 160 of 169

Table of Contents

As described in note 22, in April 2004, the Partnership entered into a lease arrangement in respect of the Golar Winter, the obligation 
in respect of which is denominated in GBP. In this transaction the restricted cash deposit, which secured the letter of credit given to 
the  lessor  to  secure  part  of  Golar’s  obligations  to  the  lessor,  is  much  less  than  the  obligation  and  therefore,  unlike  the  Methane 
Princess Lease, does not provide a natural hedge. In order therefore to hedge this exposure the Partnership entered into a currency 
swap with a bank, who is also the lessor, to exchange GBP payment obligations into U.S. dollar payment obligations as set out in the 
table below. The swap hedges the full amount of the GBP lease obligation and the restricted cash deposit was denominated in U.S. 
dollars. The Partnership could be exposed to currency risk if the lease was terminated.

As described in note 21, in October 2012, the Partnership issued NOK denominated senior unsecured bonds. In order to hedge the 
Partnership's exposure, the Partnership entered into a currency swap to exchange NOK payment obligations into U.S. dollar payment 
obligations as set out in the table below. The swap hedges the full amount of the NOK obligation. The Partnership has designated the 
currency  swap  as  a  cash  flow  hedge.  Accordingly,  the  net  loss  has  been  reported  in  a  separate  component  of  accumulated  other 
comprehensive income to the extent the hedge is effective. The amount recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income will 
subsequently  be  reclassified  into  earnings  in  the  same  period  as  the  hedged  item  affects  earnings.  As  at  December 31,  2012,  the 
Partnership  does  not  expect  any  material  amounts  to  be  reclassified  from  accumulated  other  comprehensive  income  to  earnings 
during the next twelve months.

As of December 31, 2012, the Partnership has foreign currency forward contracts as summarized below:

Instrument
(in thousands)
Currency rate swaps:

British Pounds
Norwegian Kroner

Notional Amount

Receiving in
foreign currency

Pay in USD

Maturity
Date

Average forward

rate USD foreign
currency

(1)

58,126
1,300,000

106,836
227,193

2032
2017

1.838
5.722

(1) This pertains to the cross currency interest rate swap described below.

Cross currency interest rate swap

As  described  in  note  21,  the  Partnership  issued  NOK  denominated  senior  unsecured  bonds.  In  order  to  hedge  the  Partnership's 
exposure, it entered into a non-amortizing cross currency interest rate swap agreement. The swap hedges both the full redemption 
amount of the NOK obligation and the related quarterly interest payments. The Partnership designated the cross currency interest rate 
swap as a cash flow hedge. Accordingly, the net loss recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income is as follows:

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

(in thousands of $)
Cross currency interest rate swap

Amount of gain/
(loss) recognized in
OCI on derivative
(effective portion)

2012

2011

2010

(5,063)

—

—

As of December 31, 2012, the Partnership’s accumulated other comprehensive income included $5.1 million of unrealized losses on 
the cross currency interest rate swap designated as a cash flow hedge.

Fair values

The carrying value and estimated fair value of the Partnership’s financial instruments at December 31, 2012 and 2011 are as follows:

F-34

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 161 of 169

Table of Contents

(in thousands of $)
Non-Derivatives:

Fair Value
Hierarchy(1)

2012 Carrying 
Value

2012 Fair Value

2011 Carrying 
Value

2011 Fair Value

Cash and cash equivalents
Restricted cash and short-term investments
High-yield bonds(3)
Long-term debt—floating
Long-term debt—fixed
Obligations under capital leases

Derivatives:

Cross currency interest rate swap asset(1)(2)
Interest rate swaps liability(1)(2)
Foreign currency swaps liability(1)

Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
Level 2
Level 2
Level 2

Level 2
Level 2
Level 2

66,327
221,423
233,804
505,668
—
412,371

1,819
24,991
20,527

66,327
221,423
234,708
505,668
—
412,371

1,819
24,991
20,527

49,218
209,782
—
400,574
222,310
405,843

—
27,351
27,732

49,218
209,782
—
400,574
219,966
405,843

—
27,351
27,732

__________________________________________ 
(1) Derivative liabilities are captured within other current liabilities and derivative assets are captured within long-term assets on the 

balance sheet.

(2) The  fair  value/carrying  value  of  interest  rate  swap  agreements  that  qualify  and  are  designated  as  cash  flow  hedges  as  at 
December 31,  2012 and 2011, was  $5.9 million (with a notional amount of  $466.8 million)  and  $8.4 million (with a notional 
amount  of  $254.1  million),  respectively.  The  expected  maturity  of  these  interest  rate  agreements  is  from  November 2013  to 
March 2018.

(3) This  pertains  to  high-yield  bonds  with  a  carrying  value  of  $233.8  million  as  of  December 31,  2012  which  is  included  under 
Long-term debt on the balance sheet. The fair value of the high-yield bonds as of December 31, 2012 was $234.7 million, which 
is 100.50% of its face value.

The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each class of financial instrument.

Certain methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value of each class of financial instruments. The carrying amounts of 
accounts  receivables,  accounts  payables  and  accrued  liabilities  approximate  fair  values  because  of  the  short  maturity  of  those 
instruments.

The carrying value of cash and cash equivalents, which are highly liquid, is a reasonable estimate of fair value.

The estimated fair value for restricted cash and short-term investments is considered to be equal to the carrying value since they are 
placed  for  periods of less  than  six  months.  The estimated  fair value  for  long-term restricted  cash  is  considered  to  be equal  to the 
carrying value since it bears variable interest rates which are reset on a quarterly basis.

The estimated fair value of our high yield bonds is based on the quoted market price as of the balance sheet date.

The  estimated fair value for floating long-term debt is considered to be equal  to the carrying value since it bears  variable interest 
rates, which are reset on a quarterly or six monthly basis. 

The estimated fair value of the fixed rate long-term debt is estimated using discounted cash flow analyses based on the rate of a three 
year U.S. Treasury bond.

The estimated fair values of long-term lease obligations under capital leases are considered to be equal to the carrying value since 
they bear interest at rates, which are reset on a quarterly basis.

The  fair  value  of  the  Partnership’s  derivative  instruments  is  the  estimated  amount  that  the  Partnership  would  receive  or  pay  to 
terminate  the  agreements  at  the  reporting  date,  taking  into  account  current  interest  rates,  foreign  exchange  rates  and  the  credit 
worthiness  of  the  Partnership  and  its  swap  counterparty.  The  mark-to-market  gain  or  loss  on  the  Partnership’s  interest  rate  and 
foreign  currency  swaps  that  are  not  designated  as  hedges  for  accounting  purposes  for  the  period  is  reported  in  the  statement  of 
operations caption “other financial items, net” (see note 9).

The Partnership recognizes its fair value estimates using a fair value hierarchy based on the inputs used to measure fair value. The 
fair value hierarchy has three levels based on reliability of inputs used to determine fair value as follows:

F-35

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 162 of 169

Table of Contents

Level 1: Quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities.

Level 2: Observable market based inputs or unobservable inputs that are corroborated by market data.

Level 3: Unobservable inputs that are not corroborated by market data.

The  following  table  summarizes  the  valuation  of  the  Partnership’s  financial  instruments  based  on  the  above  hierarchy  as  of 
December 31, 2012:

(in thousands of $)
Cross currency interest rate swap—asset position
Interest rate swaps—liability position
Foreign currency swaps—liability position

Quoted Market
Prices in Active
Markets (Level 1)
—
—
—

Significant Other
Observable
Inputs (Level 2)

1,819
24,991
20,527

Total

1,819
24,991
20,527

The  fair  value  measurement  of  a  liability  must  reflect  the  non-performance  risk  of  the  entity.  Therefore,  the  impact  of  the 
Partnership’s  credit-worthiness  has  also  been  factored  into  the  fair  value  measurement  of  the  derivative  instruments  in  a  liability 
position.

Concentrations of risk

There is a concentration of  credit risk with  respect to cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and short-term investments  to the 
extent that substantially all of the amounts are carried with Nordea Bank of Finland PLC, Lloyds TSB Bank plc, The Bank of New 
York,  DNB  Bank  ASA,  Santander  UK  Plc,  Sumitomo  Mitsui  Banking  Corporation  and  Standard  Chartered  plc.  However,  the 
Partnership believes this risk is remote.

During  the  year  ended  December 31,  2012,  five  customers  accounted  for  all  revenues  of  the  Partnership.  These  revenues  and 
associated  accounts  receivable are derived from  two  time  charters with BG  Group plc, one  time charter with Pertamina,  one time 
charter  with  DUSUP,  two  time  charters  with  Petrobras  and  one  time  charter  with  PTNR.  Pertamina  is  a  state  enterprise  of  the 
Republic of Indonesia. Credit risk is mitigated by the long-term contracts with Pertamina being on a ship-or-pay basis. Also, under 
the  various  contracts  the  Partnership’s  vessel  hire  charges  are  paid  by  the  Trustee  and  Paying  Agent  from  the  immediate  sale 
proceeds of the delivered gas. The Trustee must pay the ship owner before Pertamina and the gas sales contracts are with the Chinese 
Petroleum Corporation. The Partnership considers the credit risk of BG Group plc, Petrobras, DUSUP, PTNR and Pertamina to be 
low.

During the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, Petrobras accounted for more than 30% of gross revenue (See Note 7). 
Details of revenues derived from each customer for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 are found in Note 7.

25. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

Historically,  the  Combined  Entity  and  the  Dropdown  Predecessor  were  an  integrated  part  of  Golar.  As  such,  the  Bermudan  and 
London office locations of Golar have provided general and corporate management services for the Combined Entity and Dropdown 
Predecessor as well as other Golar entities and operations. Consequently, for the purpose of the combined statement of operations 
this includes allocations for administrative expenses and other financial items as described  in note  2 which  are excluded from the 
disclosures below:

F-36

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 163 of 169

Table of Contents

Net expenses from related parties:

(in thousands of $)
Transactions with Golar and affiliates:

Management and administrative services fees (a)
Ship management fees (b)
Interest expense on Golar LNG vendor financing loan - Golar Freeze (c)
Interest expense on Golar LNG vendor financing loan - NR Satu (d)
Interest expense on high-yield bonds (e)
Interest expense on Golar Energy loan (f)

Total

Receivables (payables) from related parties:

2012

2011

2010

2,876
4,222
11,921
4,737
575
829
25,160

1,576
4,146
3,085
—
—
—
8,807

—
3,826
—
—
—
—
3,826

As of December 31, 2012 and 2011 balances with related parties consisted of the following:

(in thousands of $)
Trading balances due to Golar and affiliates (g)
Golar LNG vendor financing loan (c)
High-yield bonds (e)

2012

2011

(546)
—
(34,953)
(35,499)

3,235
(222,310)
—
(219,075)

(a) Management  and  administrative  services  agreement  - On  March 30,  2011,  the  Partnership  entered  into  a  management  and 
administrative  services  agreement  with  Golar  Management,  a  wholly-owned  subsidiary  of  Golar,  pursuant  to  which  Golar 
Management  will  provide  to  the  Partnership  certain  management  and  administrative  services.  The  services  provided  by  Golar 
Management  are  charged  at  cost  plus  a  management  fee  equal  to  5%  of  Golar  Management’s  costs  and  expenses  incurred  in 
connection with providing these services. The Partnership may terminate the agreement by providing 120 days written notice.

(b) Ship management fees - Golar and certain of its affiliates charged ship management fees to the Partnership for the provision of 
technical  and  commercial  management  of  the  vessels.  Each  of  the  Partnership’s  vessels  is  subject  to  management  agreements 
pursuant to which certain commercial and technical management services are provided by certain affiliates of Golar, including Golar 
Management and Golar Wilhelmsen AS (“Golar Wilhelmsen”), a partnership that is jointly controlled by Golar and by Wilhelmsen 
Ship Management (Norway) AS.

(c) Golar LNG vendor financing loan - Golar Freeze - In October 2011, in connection with the purchase of the Golar Freeze, the 
Partnership entered into a financing loan agreement with Golar for an amount of $222.3 million. The facility is unsecured and bears 
interest at a  fixed  rate of 6.75% per annum payable quarterly. The  loan is non-amortizing with  a final balloon payment  of $222.3 
million due in October 2014. The loan was repaid in October 2012 (see note 21).

(d)  Golar  LNG  vendor  financing  loan  - NR Satu - In  July 2012,  in  connection with  the  purchase  of  the  NR  Satu,  the  Partnership 
entered into a financing loan agreement with Golar for an amount of $175 million. Of this amount, $155 million was drawn down in 
July 2012. A further $20 million is available for drawdown until July 2015. The facility is unsecured and bears interest at a fixed rate 
of 6.75% per annum payable quarterly. The loan is non-amortizing with a final balloon payment for the  amount drawn down due 
within three years from the date of draw down. The loan was repaid in December 2012 (see note 21).

(e) High-yield bonds - In October 2012, the Partnership completed the issuance of NOK1,300 million in senior unsecured bonds that 
mature in October 2017. The aggregate principal amount of the bonds is equivalent to approximately $227 million. Of this amount, 
approximately $35.0 million was issued to Golar (see note 21).

(f) Golar  Energy  loan -  In  January  2012,  Golar  LNG  (Singapore)  Pte.  Ltd.  ("Golar  Singapore"),  the  subsidiary  which  holds  the 
investment in PTGI, drew down $25 million on its loan agreement entered into in December 2011 with Golar LNG Energy Limited 
("Golar Energy"). The  loan was  unsecured,  repayable on  demand  and  bears interest at the rate  of  6.75% per annum  payable on  a 
quarterly basis. In connection with the acquisition of the subsidiaries that own and operate the NR Satu, all amounts payable to Golar 
Energy by the subsidiaries acquired by the Partnership, including Golar Singapore, were extinguished .

F-37

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 164 of 169

Table of Contents

(g) Trading balances - Receivables and payables with Golar and its affiliates are comprised primarily of unpaid management fees, 
advisory  and  administrative services.  In addition,  certain receivables and  payables  arise when  the  Partnership  pays  an invoice  on 
behalf of a related party and vice versa.  Receivables and payables are generally settled quarterly in arrears. Trading balances due to 
Golar and its affiliates are unsecured, interest-free and intended to be settled in the ordinary course of business. They primarily relate 
to recharges for trading expenses paid on behalf of the Partnership including ship management and administrative service fees due to 
Golar.

(h) $20 million revolving credit facility - On April 13, 2011, the Partnership entered into a $20 million revolving credit facility with 
Golar.  The facility matures in December 2014 and is unsecured and interest-free. As of December 31, 2012, the Partnership had not 
borrowed under the facility.

(i)   Dividends  to  China  Petroleum  Corporation - During  the  years  ended  December 31,  2012,  2011  and  2010,  Faraway  Maritime 
Shipping  Co.,  which  is  60%  owned  by  the  Partnership  and  40%  owned  by  China  Petroleum  Corporation  (“CPC”),  paid  total 
dividends to CPC of $1.8 million, $2.4 million and $3.1 million, respectively.

(j) Acquisitions  from  Golar - The Partnership  acquired  from  Golar  equity interests in certain subsidiaries  which own  or lease  and 
operate  the  Golar Freeze,  the  NR  Satu and  the  Golar  Grand.  These  transactions  were  concluded  between entities  under  common 
control  and,  thus,  the  net  assets  acquired  were  recorded  at  historic  book  value.  The  Board  of  Directors  of  the  Partnership  (“the 
Board”)  and  the  Conflicts  Committee  of  the  Board  (“the  Conflicts  Committee”)  have  approved  the  purchase  price  and  vendor 
financing  loan  for  each  transaction.  The  Conflicts  Committee  retained  a  financial  advisor,  DnB  Nor  Markets,  to  assist  with  its 
evaluation of the transaction. The details of each transaction are as follows:

(in millions of $)
Purchase consideration
Less: Net assets acquired

- Vessel – historic book value
- Capital lease obligation assumed (net of restricted cash)
- Loan debt assumed
- Other net assets

Total net assets acquired

Deduction to equity

Golar Freeze

2012

2011

Golar Grand

NR Satu

Golar Freeze

176.8

127.5
(90.8)
—
6.4
(43.1)

133.7

388.0

231.3

257.6
—
—
(1.9)
(255.7)

132.3

166.0
—
(108.0)
7.5
(65.5)
165.8

On October 19, 2011, the Partnership acquired Golar’s 100% ownership interest in certain subsidiaries which own and operate the 
Golar Freeze and hold the secured bank debt. The purchase consideration was $330 million for the vessel and $9 million of working 
capital adjustments net of the assumed bank debt of $108.0 million, resulting in total purchase consideration of approximately $231.3 
million  of  which  $222.3  million  was  financed  by  vendor  financing  in  the  form  of  the  Golar  LNG  vendor  financing  loan,  further 
described in paragraph (c) above. 

NR Satu

On July 19, 2012, the Partnership acquired Golar’s equity interests in certain subsidiaries which own and operate the NR Satu. The 
purchase consideration was $385 million for the vessel and working capital adjustments of $3.0 million, resulting in total purchase 
consideration of approximately $388 million of which $230 million was financed from the proceeds of the July 2012 equity offering 
and $155 million vendor financing in the form of the Golar LNG vendor financing loan, further described in paragraph (d) above. 

Golar Grand

On November 8, 2012, the Partnership acquired Golar's equity interests in subsidiaries which lease and operate the Golar Grand. The 
purchase consideration was $265 million for the vessel and working capital adjustments of $2.6 million, net of the assumed capital 
lease obligation of $90.8 million, resulting in total purchase consideration of $176.8 million which was principally financed from the 
proceeds of the November 2012 equity offering.

F-38

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 165 of 169

Table of Contents

Golar Grand option

In connection with the acquisition of the Golar Grand in November 2012, the Partnership entered into an Option Agreement with 
Golar. Under the Option Agreement, the Partnership has an option to require Golar to enter into a new time charter with Golar as 
charterer until October 2017 if the current charterer does not renew or extend the existing charter after the initial term.

Indemnifications and guarantees

Tax lease indemnifications

Under the Omnibus Agreement, Golar has agreed to indemnify the Partnership in the event of any liabilities in excess of scheduled 
or final settlement amounts arising from the Methane Princess leasing arrangement and the termination thereof. 

In addition, Golar has agreed to indemnify the Partnership in the event of a successful challenge by the UK Revenue Authorities with 
regard to the initial tax basis of the transactions relating to the six vessels currently or previously financed by UK tax leases.

Environmental and other indemnifications

Under the Omnibus Agreement, Golar has agreed to indemnify the Partnership until April 13, 2016, against certain environmental 
and toxic tort liabilities with respect to the assets that Golar contributed or sold to the Partnership to the extent arising prior to the 
time they were contributed or sold. However, claims are subject to a deductible of $0.5 million and an aggregate cap of $5 million.

In  addition,  pursuant  to  the  Omnibus  Agreement,  Golar  agreed  to  indemnify  the  Partnership  for  any  defects  in  title  to  the  assets 
contributed or sold to  the Partnership and any failure to obtain,  prior  to April 13,  2011, certain  consents and permits necessary to 
conduct the Partnership’s business, which liabilities arise within three years after the closing of the IPO on April 13, 2011.

Acquisition of Golar Freeze and NR Satu

Under the Purchase, Sale and Contribution Agreement entered into between Golar and the Partnership on October 19, 2011 and July 
19, 2012, Golar has agreed to extend the above indemnifications to include any liabilities relating to the Golar Freeze and the NR 
Satu.

26. OTHER COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Assets pledged

(in thousands of $)
Book value of vessels and equipment secured against long-term loans and capital leases

December 31, 2012 December 31, 2011
983,785

1,192,779

Other contractual commitments and contingencies

Insurance

The  Partnership  insures  the  legal  liability  risks  for  its  shipping  activities  with  Gard  and  Skuld,  which  are  mutual  protection  and 
indemnity associations. As a member of a mutual association, the Partnership is subject to calls payable to the associations based on 
the Partnership’s claims record in addition to the claims records of all other members of the association. A contingent liability exists 
to the extent that the claims records of the members of the association in the aggregate show significant deterioration, which results 
in additional calls on the members.

F-39

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 166 of 169

Table of Contents

Tax lease benefits

The benefits under lease financings are derived primarily from tax depreciation assumed to be available to lessors as a result of their 
investment in the vessels. If that tax depreciation ultimately proves not to be available to the lessors, or is recovered from the lessor 
as a result of adverse tax rate changes or rulings, or in the event the Partnership terminates one or more of its leases, the Partnership 
would be required to return all or a portion of, or in certain circumstances significantly more than the upfront cash benefits that it 
received, together with fees that were financed in connection with its lease financing transactions, post additional security or make 
additional payments to its lessors. As of December 31, 2012, the total unamortized balance of deferred credits from the Partnership’s 
capital lease transactions (see note 23) was $19.2 million. A termination of any of these leases would realize the accrued currency 
gain or loss. As of December 31, 2012, this was a net accrued gain of approximately $5.9 million.  Golar has agreed to indemnify the 
Partnership against any of these increased costs. Costs related to the Golar Winter lease, which is with a different lessor, have not 
been  indemnified  by  Golar.   Golar  did  not  receive  any  up  front  cash  benefit  in  respect  of  the  Golar  Winter  lease,  but  rather  the 
benefits accrue over the term of the lease in the form of less expensive financing.

Winter modification

In January 2012, the Partnership agreed to make certain modifications to the Golar Winter, including the addition of LNG loading 
arms, as a result of Petrobras' decision to relocate the Golar Winter from Rio de Janeiro to Bahia. We have begun to order the long 
lead  items  and  the  work  is  expected  to  be  completed  by  the  third  quarter  of  2013.  The  Partnership  expects  the  cost  of  these 
modifications together with the drydocking cost to be approximately $25 million.

Legal proceedings and claims

The Partnership may, from time to time, be involved in legal proceedings and claims that arise in the ordinary course of business. 

PT Golar Indonesia, a subsidiary of the Partnership that is both the owner and operator of the NR Satu, has been notified of a claim 
that  may  be  filed  against  it  by  PT  Rekayasa,  a  subcontractor  of  the  charterer,  PT  Nusantara  Regas,  claiming  that  Golar  and  its 
subcontractor caused damage to the pipeline in connection with the FSRU conversion of the NR Satu and the related mooring. As of 
the  current  date,  no  suit  has  been  filed  and  the  Partnership  is  of  the  view  that,  were  the  claim  to  be  filed  with  the  Indonesian 
authorities, any resolution could potentially take years. The Partnership believes that it has meritorious defences against these claims 
and therefore as of December 31, 2012, has not recorded  any provision. The Partnership is unable to estimate the possible loss given 
the early stages of the claim, but based on indicative numbers provided by the claimant, the maximum amount of loss would be $9.6 
million.  Nevertheless  in  the  event  any  such  claim  were  successful  against  the  Partnership,  under  the  indemnity  provisions  of  the 
Time Charter Party, the Partnership believes it has full recourse against the charterer, PT Nusantara Regas. Furthermore, as part of 
the acquisition of the NR Satu in July 2012 from Golar, Golar has also agreed to indemnify the Partnership against any such losses.

27. EARNINGS PER UNIT AND CASH DISTRIBUTIONS

The calculations of basic and diluted earnings per unit are presented below:

F-40

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 167 of 169

Table of Contents

(in thousands of $ except unit and per unit data)
Net income attributable to general partner and limited partner interests
Less: Dropdown Predecessor (net income)/loss
Less: distributions paid
Under distributed earnings
Under distributed earnings attributable to:

Common unit holders
Subordinated unit holders
General Partner

Weighted average units outstanding (basic and diluted) (in thousands):

Common units
Subordinated units
General Partner units

Earnings per unit (basic and diluted)(1):

Common units
Subordinated units
General Partner units

Cash distributions declared and paid in the period per unit (2):
Subsequent event: Cash distributions declared and paid per unit relating to 
the period (3)
__________________________________________

2012

2011

2010

116,418
(28,015)
(87,072)
1,331

1,304
—
27

27,441
15,949
886

2.08
1.85
2.00
1.78

0.50

85,534
(21,937)
(46,423)
17,174

16,829
—
345

23,127
15,949
797

1.89
1.16
1.59
0.73

0.43

54,267
3,467
—
57,734

35,615
20,964
1,155

23,127
15,949
797

1.54
1.31
1.45
—

—

(1) Earnings per unit have been calculated in accordance with the distribution guidelines set forth in the Partnership agreement 
and  are  determined  by  adjusting  net  income  for  the  period  by  distributions  made  or  to be  made  in relation  to the  period 
irrespective of the declaration and payment dates. 

(2) Refers to cash distribution declared and paid during the period.
(3) Refers to cash distribution declared and paid subsequent to the period end.

As of December 31, 2012, of the Partnership’s total number of units outstanding, 46% (2011: 35%) were held by the public and the 
remaining units were held by Golar (including the general partner units representing a 2% interest).

Earnings per unit is determined by adjusting net income for the period by distributions made or to be made in relation to the period. 
Any  earnings  in  excess  of  distributions  are  allocated  to  partnership  units  based  upon  the  cash  distribution  guidelines  in  the 
Partnership’s First  Amended  and Restated  Agreement  of  Limited  Partnership (the  “Partnership Agreement”).  Any  distributions  in 
excess  of  earnings  are  allocated  to  partnership  units  based  upon  the  allocation  and  distribution  of  amounts  from  partners’ capital 
accounts. The resulting earnings figure is divided by the weighted-average number of units outstanding during the period. For the 
periods presented prior to April 13, 2011, such units are deemed equal to the common and subordinated units received by Golar.

The  General  Partner’s,  common  unit  holders’ and  subordinated  unit  holder’s  interests  in  net  income  are  calculated  as  if  all  net 
income was distributed according to the terms of the Partnership Agreement, regardless of whether those earnings would or could be 
distributed. The Partnership Agreement does not provide for the distribution of net income; rather, it provides for the distribution of 
available  cash,  which  is  a  contractually  defined  term  that  generally  means  all  cash  on  hand  at  the  end  of  the  quarter  after 
establishment  of  cash  reserves  determined  by  the  Partnership’s  board  of  directors  to  provide  for  the  proper  conduct  of  the 
Partnership’s  business  including  reserves  for  maintenance  and  replacement  capital  expenditure  and  anticipated  credit  needs.  In 
addition, the General Partner and Golar Energy are entitled to incentive distributions if the amount the Partnership distributes to unit 
holders with respect to any quarter exceeds specified target levels. Unlike available cash, net income is affected by non-cash items, 
such  as  depreciation  and  amortization,  unrealized  gains  or  losses  on  non-designated  derivative  instruments  and  foreign  currency 
translation gains (losses).

Under the Partnership Agreement, during the subordination period, the common units will have the right to receive distributions of 
available cash from operating surplus in an amount equal to the minimum quarterly distribution of $0.3850 per unit per quarter, plus 
any arrearages in the payment of minimum quarterly distribution on the common units from prior quarters, before any distributions 
of available cash from operating surplus may be made on the subordinated units.

F-41

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 168 of 169

Table of Contents

The amount of the minimum quarterly distribution is $0.3850 per unit or $1.54 unit per unit on an annualized basis and is made in 
the following manner, during the subordination period:

•

•

•

First, 98% to the common unit holders, pro rata, and 2% to the General Partner until each common unit has received a 
minimum quarterly distribution of $0.3850;

Second, 98% to the common unit holders, pro rata, and 2% to the General Partner, until each common unit has received 
an  amount  equal  to  any arrearages  in  payment of  the minimum  quarterly  distribution  on the common  units  for  prior 
quarters during the subordination period; and

Third, 98% to the holders of subordinated units, pro rata, and 2% to the General Partner until each subordinated unit has 
received a minimum quarterly distribution of $0.3850.

In addition, the General Partner and Golar Energy currently holds all of the incentive distribution rights in the Partnership.  Incentive 
distribution rights represent the right to receive an increasing percentage of quarterly distributions of available cash from operating 
surplus after the minimum quarterly distribution and the target distribution levels have been achieved.

If for any quarter:

•

•

the Partnership has distributed available cash from operating surplus to the common and subordinated unit holders in an 
amount equal to the minimum quarterly distribution; and

the  Partnership  has  distributed  available  cash  from  operating  surplus  on  outstanding  common  units  in  an  amount 
necessary to eliminate any cumulative arrearages in payment of the minimum quarterly distribution;

then, the Partnership will distribute any additional available cash from operating surplus for that quarter among the unit holders and 
the General Partner in the following manner:

•

•

•

•

first,  98.0%  to  all  unit  holders,  pro  rata,  and  2.0%  to  the  General  Partner,  until  each  unit  holder  receives  a  total  of 
$0.4428 per unit for that quarter (the “first target distribution”);

second,  85.0%  to  all  unit  holders,  pro  rata,  2.0%  to  the  General  Partner  and  13.0%  to  the  holders  of  the  incentive 
distribution rights, pro rata, until each unit holder receives a total of $0.4813 per unit for that quarter (the “second target 
distribution”);

third,  75.0%  to  all  unit  holders,  pro  rata,  2.0%  to  the  General  Partner  and  23.0%  to  the  holders  of  the  incentive 
distribution rights, pro rata, until each unit holder receives a total of $0.5775 per unit for that quarter (the “third target 
distribution”); and

thereafter, 50.0% to all unit holders, pro rata, 2.0% to the General Partner and 48.0% to  the holders of the  incentive 
distribution rights, pro rata.

In  each  case,  the  amount  of  the  target  distribution  set  forth  above  is  exclusive  of  any  distributions  to  common  unit  holders  to 
eliminate  any  cumulative  arrearages  in  payment  of  the  minimum  quarterly  distribution.  The  percentage  interests  set  forth  above 
assume that the General Partner maintains its 2.0% general partner interest and that the Partnership does not issue additional classes 
of equity securities.

28.  SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

In February 2013, the Partnership paid a cash distribution of $0.50 per unit in respect of the three months ended December 31, 2012.

In  February  2013,  the  Partnership  completed  its  third  follow-on  offering  selling  a  total  of  3,900,000  common  units,  representing 
limited  partner  interests,  at  a  price  of  $29.74  per  common  unit.  In  addition,  Golar  GP  LLC,  the  Partnership's  general  partner, 
contributed  approximately  $2.6  million  to  the  Partnership  to  maintain  its  2.0%  general  partner  interest  in  the  Partnership. 
Simultaneously, the Partnership also closed a private placement of 416,947 common units to Golar at a price of $29.74 per common 
unit. The Partnership's total combined net proceeds amounted to approximately $130 million.

F-42

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013

GMLP-12/31/2012-20F

Page 169 of 169

Table of Contents

In February 2013, the Partnership completed its acquisition of interests in the company that owns and operates the LNG carrier, the 
Golar Maria (see note 29). 

In April 2013, the Partnership declared a cash distribution of $0.515 per unit in respect of the three months ended March 31, 2013.

29.  ACQUISITION AFTER BALANCE SHEET DATE

In  February  2013,  the  Partnership  acquired  Golar's  100%  interest  in  the  company  that  owns  and  operates  the  Golar  Maria.  The 
purchase consideration was $215 million for the vessel less the assumed bank debt of $89.5 million and the fair value of the interest 
rate swap liability of $3.1 million plus working capital adjustments. The Golar Maria was delivered to its current charterer, LNG 
Shipping S.p.A. ("LNG Shipping"), a subsidiary of Eni S.p.A in November 2012 under a charter expiring in December 2017. The 
acquisition of the Golar Maria was deemed accretive to the Partnership’s distributions. 

The  Partnership  will  account  for  the  acquisition  of  the  Golar  Maria  as  an  acquisition  of  a  business.  The  purchase  price  of  the 
acquisition has been allocated to the identifiable assets acquired. The Partnership is in the process of finalizing the accounting for the 
acquisition  and  amounts  shown  below  are  provisional.  Additional  business  combination  disclosures  will  be  presented  in  the 
Partnership's next available interim report.

The allocation of the purchase price to acquired identifiable assets was based on their estimated fair values at the date of acquisition. 
The provisional fair values allocated to each class of identifiable assets of Golar Maria and the difference between the purchase price 
and net assets acquired was calculated as follows:

(in thousands of $)
Purchase consideration 
Less: Fair value of net assets acquired:
Vessel and equipment
Mark-to-market on interest rate swaps
Long term debt
Others
Subtotal

Difference between the purchase price and fair value of net assets acquired

February 7, 
2013
122,379

(1)

215,000
(3,096)
(89,525)

— (2)

(122,379)
—

(1) This includes the purchase consideration for the vessel less the assumed bank debt and fair value of the interest rate swap liability but excludes 
any working capital adjustments which will be available upon finalization of the results of the Golar Maria for the first quarter of 2013.

(2) This information will be available upon finalization of the results of the Golar Maria for the first quarter of 2013.

F-43

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1415916/000144530513000999/gmlp-12312...

10/06/2013