PROSPECT PARTNERS ADVISORS, LLC

a liquidating distribution of residual profits. EPCO expects to continue its policy of paying for limited perquisites attributable to our named executive officers. EPCO also makes matching contributions under its defined contribution plans for the benefit of our named executive officers in the same manner as it does for other EPCO employees. EPCO does not offer our named executive officers a defined benefit pension plan. Also, none of our named executive officers had nonqualified deferred compensation during the three years ended December 31, 2025 . Effective as of April 21, 2025, Mr. Hanley entered into a retention agreement with EPCO (the “Retention Agreement”). Pursuant to the Retention Agreement, Mr. Hanley will be entitled to a cash retention payment of $1,000,000, less any applicable

sing price of Partnership common units on December 31, 2025 (the last trading day of 2025) of $32.06 per unit. (3) Of the 2,289,425 phantom unit awards presented in the table, the vesting schedule is as follows: 877,075 in 2026; 669,575 in 2027; 438,325 in 2028, 204,450 in 2029, and 100,000 in 2030. Phantom unit awards For a description of phantom unit awards, see “ Grants of Equity-Based Awards in Fiscal Year 2025” within this Item 11. Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control None of the named executive officers have any employment agreements that call for the payment of termination or severance benefits or provide for any payments in the event of a change in control of Enterprise GP. EPCO has entered into a Retention Agreement with Mr. Hanley, which is described under “Co

expenses attributable to the ASA with EPCO for the years indicated: For the Year Ended December 31, 2025 2024 2023 Operating costs and expenses $ 1,443 $ 1,294 $ 1,189 General and administrative expenses 134 152 141 Total costs and expenses $ 1,577 $ 1,446 $ 1,330 Since the vast majority of such expenses are charged to us on an actual basis (i.e., no mark-up is charged or subsidy is received), we believe that such expenses are representative of what the amounts would have been on a standalone basis. With respect to allocated costs, we believe that the proportional direct allocation method employed by EPCO is reasonable and reflective of the estimated level of costs we would have incurred on a standalone basis. F-60 Table of Contents ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS L.P. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED F