Item 1. Business
Unless the context requires otherwise, references to the “Company,” “Ranger Oil,” “we,” “us” or “our” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K refer to Ranger Oil Corporation and its subsidiaries.
Description of Business
We are an independent oil and gas company engaged in the onshore development and production of crude oil, NGLs and natural gas. Our current operations consist of drilling unconventional horizontal development wells and operating our producing wells in the Eagle Ford Shale (the “Eagle Ford”) in South Texas.
On January 15, 2021 (the “Juniper Closing Date”), the Company consummated the transactions, (collectively, the “Juniper Transactions”), contemplated by: (i) the Contribution Agreement, dated November 2, 2020 (the “Contribution Agreement”), by and among the Company, PV Energy Holdings, L.P. (the “Partnership”), and JSTX Holdings, LLC (“JSTX”), an affiliate of Juniper Capital Advisors, L.P. (“Juniper Capital”), and, together with its affiliates (“Juniper”); and (ii) the Contribution Agreement, dated November 2, 2020 (the “Asset Agreement”, and, together with the Contribution Agreement, the “Juniper Transaction Agreements”), by and among Rocky Creek Resources, LLC, an affiliate of Juniper Capital (“Rocky Creek”), the Company and the Partnership, pursuant to which Juniper contributed $150 million in cash and certain oil and gas assets in South Texas in exchange for equity that entitles Juniper to both vote and share in any dividend on the same basis as 22,548,998 shares of our Class A Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share (“Class A Common Stock”) (after post-closing adjustments). See Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this Annual Report on 10-K for further information.
On October 5, 2021, the Company acquired Lonestar Resources US Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Lonestar”), as a result of which Lonestar and its subsidiaries became wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Company (the“Lonestar Acquisition”). Through the Lonestar Acquisition, we acquired certain oil and gas assets, including oil and gas leases covering approximately 51,000 net acres located primarily in the Eagle Ford Shale. Following the completion of the Lonestar Acquisition, the Company changed its name from Penn Virginia Corporation (“Penn Virginia”) to Ranger Oil Corporation and its ticker symbol from “PVAC” to “ROCC.” See Note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information.
Our headquarters and corporate office is located in Houston, Texas. We also have field operations offices near our Eagle Ford assets in South Texas. In conjunction with the Lonestar Acquisition, we acquired Lonestar’s corporate office in Fort Worth that is classified as held for sale at December 31, 2021 on our consolidated balance sheets in the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”
Current Operations
We lease a highly contiguous position of approximately 170,900 gross (139,900 net) acres as of March 4, 2022 in the core liquids-rich area or “volatile oil window” of the Eagle Ford in South Texas, which we believe contains a substantial number of drilling locations that will support a multi-year drilling inventory.
In 2021, our total sales volume was comprised of 76% crude oil, 13% NGLs and 11% natural gas. Crude oil accounted for 90% of our product revenues. We generally sell our crude oil, NGL and natural gas products using short-term floating price physical and spot market contracts.
As of December 31, 2021, our total proved reserves were approximately 241 MMboe, of which 38% were proved developed reserves and 68% were crude oil. As of December 31, 2021, we had 860 gross (724.5 net) productive wells, approximately 95% of which we operate, and leased approximately 172,000 gross (140,900 net) acres of leasehold and royalty interests, approximately 42% of which were undeveloped. Approximately 94% of our total acreage was HBP as of December 31, 2021 and included a substantial number of undrilled locations. During 2021, we completed and turned in line 46 gross (40.4 net) wells. For additional information regarding our production, reserves, drilling activities, wells and acreage, see Part I, Item 2, “Properties.”
Business Strategy
Our business strategy is focused on long-term shareholder value through employing rigorous capital discipline, employment of drilling and completion advanced technologies, and continuous operational improvements to create strong cash-on-cash returns. Maintaining a competitive operating cost structure and strong balance sheet while operating in an environmentally and socially responsible manner are integral to the implementation of our strategy.
Key Contractual Arrangements
In the ordinary course of operating our business, we enter into a number of key contracts for services that are critical with respect to our ability to develop, produce, store and bring our production to market. The following is a summary of our most significant contractual arrangements.
Drilling and Completion. From time to time we enter into drilling, completion and materials contracts in the ordinary course of business to ensure availability of rigs, frac crews and materials to satisfy our development program. As of December 31, 2021, there were no drilling, completion or materials agreements with terms that extended beyond one year.
Crude oil gathering and transportation service contracts. We have long-term agreements that provide us with field gathering and intermediate pipeline transportation services for a majority of our crude oil and condensate production in Lavaca and Gonzales Counties, Texas. We also have volume capacity support for certain downstream interstate pipeline transportation. The following table provides details on these contractual arrangements as of December 31, 2021:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Description of contractual arrangement | | Expiration of Contractual Arrangement | | Minimum Volume Delivery (bbl/d) | | Expiration of Minimum Volume Commitment |
Field gathering agreement | | February 2041 | | 8,000 | | February 2031 |
Intermediate pipeline transportation services | | February 2026 | | 8,000 | | February 2026 |
Volume capacity support | | April 2026 | | 8,000 | | April 2026 |
Each of these arrangements also contain an obligation to deliver the first 20,000 gross barrels of oil per day produced from Gonzales, Lavaca, Fayette and DeWitt Counties, Texas. For certain of our crude oil volumes gathered under the field gathering agreement, our rate includes an adjustment based on NYMEX WTI prices. As crude oil prices increase, up to a cap of $90 per bbl, the gathering rate escalates pursuant to the field gathering agreement.
Crude oil storage. Through February 2041, we have access to 180,000 barrels of crude oil storage as a component of the crude oil gathering agreement referenced above. In addition, we have access for up to a maximum of 340,000 barrels of tank capacity through April 2022, and month-to-month thereafter at several locations in the South Texas region with three vendors including up to approximately 70,000 barrels at the service provider’s central delivery point facility, or CDP, in Lavaca County, Texas, up to 90,000 barrels with a downstream interstate pipeline at their facility in DeWitt County, Texas and up to 62,000 barrels with a marketing affiliate of the aforementioned downstream interstate pipeline within their system on a firm basis and an additional 120,000 barrels, if available, on a flexible basis. For additional information relating to crude oil storage see Note 14 to our consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”
Crude terminal dedication. We have a long-term dedication of certain specific leases to a crude purchase and throughput terminal agreement through 2032. Under the agreement, we may transfer dedicated oil for delivery to a gulf coast terminal in Point Comfort, Texas or to alternate locations to third parties and in either case pay a terminal fee.
Natural gas service contracts. We have agreements that provide us with field gathering, compression and short-haul transportation services for our natural gas production and gas lift for our hydrocarbon production under various terms through 2039.
Natural gas processing contracts. We also have agreements that provide us with services to process our wet gas production into NGL products and dry, or residue, gas. Several agreements covering the majority of our wet gas production extend beyond three years, including one significant agreement that extends into 2029.
Major Customers
We sell a significant portion of our oil and gas production to a relatively small number of customers, as is typical in our industry. For the years ended December 31, 2021 and 2020, approximately 48% and 56%, respectively, of our consolidated product revenues were attributable to three customers, each of whom accounted for at least 10%. For the year ended December 31, 2019, approximately 76% of our consolidated product revenues were attributable to four customers, each of whom accounted for at least 10%. There were no other customers that individually accounted for more than 10% of our consolidated product revenues for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019.
Seasonality
Our sales volumes of crude oil and natural gas are dependent upon the number of producing wells and, therefore, are not seasonal by nature. We do not believe that the pricing of our crude oil and NGL production is subject to any meaningful seasonal effects. Historically, the pricing of natural gas is seasonal, typically with higher pricing in the winter months.
Competition
The oil and gas industry is very competitive, and we compete with a substantial number of other companies, many of which are large, well-established and have greater financial and operational resources than we do. Some of our competitors not only engage in the acquisition, exploration, development and production of oil and gas reserves, but also carry on refining operations, electricity generation and the marketing of refined products. In addition, the oil and gas industry in general competes with other industries supplying energy and fuel to industrial, commercial and individual consumers. Competition is particularly intense in the acquisition of prospective oil and gas properties. We may incur higher costs or be unable to acquire and develop desirable properties at costs we consider reasonable because of this competition. We also compete with other oil and gas companies to secure drilling rigs, frac fleets, sand and other equipment and materials necessary for the drilling and completion of wells and in the recruiting and retaining of qualified personnel. Such materials, equipment and labor may be in short supply from time to time. Shortages of equipment, labor or materials may result in increased costs or the inability to obtain such resources as needed. Many of our larger competitors may have a competitive advantage when responding to commodity price volatility and overall industry cycles.
Government Regulation and Environmental Matters
Our operations are subject to extensive federal, state and local laws and regulations that govern oil and gas operations, regulate the discharge of materials into the environment or otherwise relate to the protection of the environment. These laws, rules and regulations may, among other things:
•require the acquisition of various permits before drilling commences;
•require notice to stakeholders of proposed and ongoing operations;
•require the installation of expensive pollution control equipment;
•restrict the types, quantities and concentration of various substances that can be released into the environment in connection with oil and gas drilling and production and saltwater disposal activities;
•limit or prohibit drilling activities on certain lands lying within wilderness, wetlands and other protected areas, or otherwise restrict or prohibit activities that could impact the environment, including water resources; and
•require remedial measures to mitigate pollution from former and ongoing operations, such as requirements to close pits and plug abandoned wells.
Numerous governmental departments issue rules and regulations to implement and enforce such laws that are often difficult and costly to comply with and which carry substantial administrative, civil and even criminal penalties, as well as the issuance of injunctions limiting or prohibiting our activities for failure to comply. Violations and liabilities with respect to these laws and regulations could also result in remedial clean-ups, natural resource damages, permit modifications or revocations, operational interruptions or shutdowns and other liabilities. The costs of remedying such conditions may be significant, and remediation obligations could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In certain instances, citizens or citizen groups also have the ability to bring legal proceedings against us if we are not in compliance with environmental laws or to challenge our ability to receive environmental permits that we need to operate. Some laws, rules and regulations relating to protection of the environment may, in certain circumstances, impose “strict liability” for environmental contamination, rendering a person liable for environmental and natural resource damages and cleanup costs without regard to negligence or fault on the part of such person. Other laws, rules and regulations may restrict the rate of oil and gas production below the rate that would otherwise exist or even prohibit exploration or production activities in sensitive areas. In addition, state laws often require some form of remedial action to prevent pollution from former operations, such as plugging of abandoned wells. As of December 31, 2021, we had $8.4 million of asset retirement obligations and environmental remediation liabilities assumed in the Lonestar Acquisition of $2.3 million attributable to these activities. The regulatory burden on the oil and gas industry increases its cost of doing business and consequently affects its profitability. These laws, rules and regulations affect our operations, as well as the oil and gas exploration and production industry in general.
We believe that we are in substantial compliance with current applicable environmental laws, rules and regulations and that continued compliance with existing requirements will not have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Nevertheless, changes in existing environmental laws or regulations or the adoption of new environmental laws or regulations, including any significant limitation on the use of hydraulic fracturing or the ability to conduct oil and gas development could have the potential to adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Federal, state or local administrative decisions, developments in the federal or state court systems or other governmental or judicial actions may influence the interpretation or enforcement of environmental laws and regulations and may thereby increase compliance costs. Environmental regulations have historically become more stringent over time, and thus, there can be no assurance as to the amount or timing of future expenditures for environmental compliance or remediation.
The following is a summary of the significant environmental laws to which our business operations are subject:
CERCLA. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, or CERCLA, is also known as the “Superfund” law. CERCLA and comparable state laws impose liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original conduct, on parties that are considered to have contributed to the release of a “hazardous substance” into the environment. These persons include the current or former owner or operator of the site where the release occurred and anyone who disposed or arranged for the disposal of a hazardous substance released at the site. Such “responsible parties” may be subject to joint and several liability under CERCLA for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances that have been released into the environment and for damages to natural resources. It is not uncommon for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by the hazardous substances released into the environment. We currently own or lease properties that have been used for the exploration and production of oil and gas for a number of years. Many of these properties have been operated by third parties whose treatment or release of hydrocarbons or other wastes was not under our control. These properties, and any wastes that may have been released on them, may be subject to CERCLA, and we could potentially be required to investigate and remediate such properties, including soil or groundwater contamination by prior owners or operators, or to perform remedial plugging or pit closure operations to prevent future contamination. States also have environmental cleanup laws analogous to CERCLA, including Texas.
RCRA. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, or RCRA, and comparable state statutes regulate the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, disposal and cleanup of hazardous and non-hazardous wastes. Under the auspices of the EPA, the individual states administer some or all of the provisions of RCRA. While there is currently an exclusion from RCRA for drilling fluids, produced waters and most of the other wastes associated with the exploration and production of oil or gas, it is possible that some of these wastes could be classified as hazardous waste in the future and therefore be subject to more stringent regulation under RCRA. Also, in the course of our operations, we generate some amounts of ordinary industrial wastes that may be regulated as hazardous wastes if such wastes have hazardous characteristics.
Oil Pollution Act. The Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or the OPA, contains numerous restrictions relating to the prevention of and response to oil spills into waters of the United States. The term “waters of the United States” has been interpreted broadly to include inland water bodies, including wetlands and intermittent streams. The OPA imposes certain duties and liabilities on certain “responsible parties” related to the prevention of oil spills and damages resulting from such spills in or threatening waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines. For example, operators of certain oil and gas facilities must develop, implement and maintain facility response plans, conduct annual spill training for certain employees and provide varying degrees of financial assurance. Owners or operators of a facility, vessel or pipeline that is a source of an oil discharge or that poses the substantial threat of discharge is one type of “responsible party” who is liable. The OPA subjects owners of facilities to strict, joint and several liability for all containment and cleanup costs, and certain other damages arising from a spill. As such, a violation of the OPA has the potential to adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Clean Water Act. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or the Clean Water Act, and comparable state laws impose restrictions and strict controls with respect to the discharge of pollutants, including spills and leaks of oil and other substances, into regulated waters, such as waters of the United States. The discharge of pollutants, including dredge or fill materials in regulated wetlands, into regulated waters or wetlands without a permit issued by the EPA, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, or the Corps, or the state is prohibited. The Clean Water Act has been interpreted by these agencies to apply broadly. The EPA and the Corps released a rule to revise the definition of “waters of the United States,” or WOTUS, for all Clean Water Act programs, which went into effect in August 2015. However, the EPA rescinded this rule in 2019 and promulgated the Navigable Waters Protection Rule in 2020. The Navigable Waters Protection Rule defined what waters qualify as navigable waters of the United States and are under Clean Water Act jurisdiction. This new rule has generally been viewed as narrowing the scope of waters of the United States as compared to the 2015 rule, but litigation in multiple federal district courts is currently challenging the rescission of the 2015 rule and the promulgation of the Navigable Waters Protection Rule. In June 2021, the Biden Administration announced plans to develop its own definition for jurisdictional waters. On December 7, 2021, the Administration announced a proposed rule to revise the definition of “waters of the Untied States.” On January 24, 2022, the Supreme Court agreed to consider the scope of the Clean Water Act again in a new appeal, Sackett v. EPA.
The Clean Water Act also requires the preparation and implementation of Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plans in connection with on-site storage of significant quantities of oil. In 2016, the EPA finalized new wastewater pretreatment standards that would prohibit onshore unconventional oil and gas extraction facilities from sending wastewater to publicly-owned treatment works. This restriction of disposal options for hydraulic fracturing waste may result in increased costs. In addition, the Clean Water Act and analogous state laws require individual permits or coverage under general permits for discharges of storm water runoff from certain types of facilities. Federal and state regulatory agencies can impose administrative, civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance with discharge permits or other requirements of the Clean Water Act and analogous state laws and regulations.
Safe Drinking Water Act. The Safe Drinking Water Act, or the SDWA, and the Underground Injection Control Program promulgated under the SDWA, establish the requirements for salt water disposal well activities and prohibit the migration of fluid-containing contaminants into underground sources of drinking water. The Underground Injection Well Program requires that we obtain permits from the EPA or delegated state agencies for our disposal wells, establishes minimum standards for injection well operations, restricts the types and quantities of fluids that may be injected and prohibits the migration of fluid containing any contaminants into underground sources of drinking water. Any leakage from the subsurface portions of the injection wells may cause degradation of freshwater, potentially resulting in cancellation of operations of a well, imposition of fines and penalties from governmental agencies, incurrence of expenditures for remediation of affected resources, and imposition of liability by landowners or other parties claiming damages for alternative water supplies, property damages, and personal injuries. In addition, in some instances, the operation of underground injection wells has been alleged to cause earthquakes (induced seismicity) as a result of flawed well design or operation. This has resulted in stricter regulatory requirements in some jurisdictions relating to the location and operation of underground injection wells, and regulators in some states are seeking to impose additional requirements, including requirements regarding the permitting of produced water disposal wells or otherwise, to assess the relationship between seismicity and the use of such wells. For example, in October 2014, the Texas Railroad Commission, or TRC, adopted disposal well rule amendments designed, among other things, to require applicants for new disposal wells that will receive non-hazardous produced water or other oil and gas waste to conduct seismic activity searches utilizing the U.S. Geological Survey. The searches are intended to determine the potential for earthquakes within a circular area of 100 square miles around a proposed new disposal well. If the permittee or an applicant of a disposal well permit fails to demonstrate that the produced water or other fluids are confined to the disposal zone or if scientific data indicates such a disposal well is likely to be, or determined to be, contributing to seismic activity, then TRC may deny, modify, suspend or terminate the permit application or existing operating permit for that disposal well. TRC has used this authority to deny permits for waste disposal wells. The TRC has created Seismic Response Areas (“SRAs”) with action plans to address seismic activity, including the Gardendale SRA in September 2021, the North Culberson-Reeves SRA in October 2021 and the Stanton SRA in January 2022. The potential adoption of federal, state and local legislation and regulations intended to address induced seismic activity in the areas in which we operate could restrict our drilling and production activities, as well as our ability to dispose of produced water gathered from such activities, which could result in increased costs and additional operating restrictions or delays.
We engage third parties to provide hydraulic fracturing or other well stimulation services to us in connection with the wells in which we act as operator. Hydraulic fracturing is an important and commonly used process in the completion of oil and gas wells, particularly in unconventional plays like the Eagle Ford formation, and is generally exempted from federal regulation as underground injection (unless diesel is a component of the fracturing fluid) under the SDWA. In addition, separate and apart from the referenced potential connection between injection wells and seismicity, concerns have been raised that hydraulic fracturing activities may be correlated to induced seismicity. The EPA also released the results of its comprehensive research study to investigate the potential adverse impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water and ground water in December 2016, finding that hydraulic fracturing activities can impact drinking water resources under some circumstances, including large volume spills and inadequate mechanical integrity of wells. These developments could establish an additional level of regulation, including a removal of the exemption for hydraulic fracturing from the SDWA, and permitting of hydraulic fracturing operations at the federal level, which could lead to operational delays, increased operating and compliance costs and additional regulatory burdens that could make it more difficult or commercially impracticable for us to perform hydraulic fracturing. Such costs and burdens could delay the development of unconventional gas resources from shale formations, which are not commercially feasible without the use of hydraulic fracturing.
Chemical Disclosures Related to Hydraulic Fracturing. Texas has implemented chemical disclosure requirements for hydraulic fracturing operations. We currently disclose hydraulic fracturing additives we use on www.FracFocus.org, a website created by the Ground Water Protection Council and Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission.
Prohibitions and Other Regulatory Limitations on Hydraulic Fracturing. There have been a variety of regulatory initiatives at the state level to restrict oil and gas drilling operations in certain locations.
In addition to chemical disclosure rules, some states have implemented permitting, well construction or water withdrawal regulations that may increase the costs of hydraulic fracturing operations. For example, Texas has water withdrawal restrictions allowing suspension of withdrawal rights in times of shortages while other states require reporting on the amount of water used and its source.
Increased regulation of and attention given by environmental interest groups, as well as state and federal regulatory authorities, to the hydraulic fracturing process could lead to greater opposition to oil and gas production activities using hydraulic fracturing techniques. Additional legislation or regulation could also lead to operational delays or increased operating costs in the production of oil and gas, including from the developing shale plays, or could make it more difficult to perform hydraulic fracturing. These developments could also lead to litigation challenging proposed or existing wells. The adoption of federal, state or local laws or the implementation of regulations regarding hydraulic fracturing that are more stringent could cause a decrease in the completion of new oil and gas wells, as well as increased compliance costs and time, which could adversely affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flows. We use hydraulic fracturing extensively and any increased federal, state, or local regulation of hydraulic fracturing could reduce the volumes of oil and gas that we can economically recover.
Clean Air Act. Our operations are subject to the Clean Air Act, or the CAA, and comparable state and local requirements. In 1990, the U.S. Congress adopted amendments to the CAA containing provisions that have resulted in the gradual imposition of certain pollution control requirements with respect to air emissions from our operations. The EPA and states have developed, and continue to develop, regulations to implement these requirements. We may be required to incur certain capital expenditures in the next several years for air pollution control equipment in connection with maintaining or obtaining operating permits and approvals addressing other air emission-related issues. Further, stricter requirements could negatively impact our production and operations. Federal and state regulatory agencies can impose administrative, civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance with air permits or other requirements of the CAA and associated state laws and regulations. In addition, the EPA has developed, and continues to develop, stringent regulations governing emissions of toxic air pollutants at specified sources.
On April 17, 2012, for example, the EPA issued final rules to subject oil and gas operations to regulation under the New Source Performance Standards, or NSPS, and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, or NESHAPS, programs under the CAA, and to impose new and amended requirements under both programs. The EPA rules include NSPS standards for completions of hydraulically fractured natural gas wells, compressors, controllers, dehydrators, storage tanks, natural gas processing plants and certain other equipment. Further, in May 2016, the EPA issued final NSPS governing methane emissions from the oil and gas industry as well as source determination standards for determining when oil and gas sources should be aggregated for CAA permitting and compliance purposes. However, in August 2020 the EPA rescinded methane and volatile organic compound emissions standards for new and modified oil and gas transmission and storage infrastructure, as well as methane limits for new and modified oil and gas production and processing equipment. The EPA also relaxed requirements for oil and gas operators to monitor emissions leaks. In President Biden’s Executive Order on Protecting Public Health and the Environment and Restoring Science to Tackle the Climate Crisis, President Biden directed the EPA to consider suspending, rescinding, or revising the Trump Administration’s NSPS rule for the oil and gas sector. In November 2021, the EPA proposed new NSPS updates and emission guidelines to reduce methane and other pollutants from the oil and gas industry.
The U.S. Bureau of Land Management, or BLM, finalized its own rules in November 2016 that limit methane emissions from new and existing oil and gas operations on federal lands through limitations on the venting and flaring of gas, as well as enhanced leak detection and repair requirements. The BLM subsequently announced a revised rule which would scale back the waste-prevention requirements of the 2016 rule, but this revised rule was vacated by a California federal district court in 2020, a decision which BLM has appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. However, separately, the federal district court of Wyoming vacated the original 2016 rule in October 2020. These rules have required changes to our operations, including the installation of new equipment to control emissions. These rules would result in an increase to our operating costs and change to our operations. As a result of this continued regulatory focus, future federal and state regulations of the oil and gas industry remain a possibility and could result in increased compliance costs on our operations.
In November 2015, the EPA revised the existing National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ground level ozone to make the standard more stringent. The EPA finished promulgating final area designations under the new standard in 2018, which, to the extent areas in which we operate have been classified as non-attainment, may result in an increase in costs for emission controls and requirements for additional monitoring and testing, as well as a more cumbersome permitting process. Generally, it will take the states several years to develop compliance plans for their non-attainment areas. While we are not able to determine the extent to which this new standard will impact our business at this time, it has the potential to have a material impact on our operations and cost structure.
In June 2016, the EPA finalized a rule “aggregating” individual wells and other facilities and their collective emissions for purposes of determining whether major source permitting requirements apply under the CAA. These changes may introduce uncertainty into the permitting process and could require more lengthy and costly permitting processes and more expensive emission controls.
Collectively, these rules and proposed rules, as well as any future laws and their implementing regulations, may require a number of modifications to our operations. We may, for example, be required to install new equipment to control emissions from our well sites or compressors at initial startup or by the applicable compliance deadline. We may also be required to obtain pre-approval for the expansion or modification of existing facilities or the construction of new facilities. Compliance with such rules could result in significant costs, including increased capital expenditures and operating costs, and could adversely impact our business.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions. In response to findings that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs, present an endangerment to public health and the environment, the EPA has issued regulations to restrict emissions of GHGs under existing provisions of the CAA. These regulations include limits on tailpipe emissions from motor vehicles and preconstruction and operating permit requirements for certain large stationary sources.
Both in the United States and worldwide, there is increasing attention being paid to the issue of climate change and the contributing effect of GHG emissions. Most recently in April 2016, the United States signed the Paris Agreement, which requires countries to review and “represent a progression” in their intended nationally determined contributions, which set GHG emission reduction goals, every five years beginning in 2020. In 2020, the Trump administration withdrew the United States from the Paris Agreement, but under the direction of President Biden, the United States rejoined the Paris Agreement in February 2021. Under the Paris Agreement, the Biden Administration has committed the U.S. to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 50 to 52% from 2005 levels by 2030. In November 2021, the U.S. and other countries entered into the Glasgow Climate Pact, which includes a range of measures designed to address climate change, including but not limited to the phase-out of fossil fuel subsidies, reducing methane emissions 30% by 2030, and cooperating toward the advancement of the development of clean energy.
In August 2015, the EPA issued new regulations limiting carbon dioxide emissions from existing power generation facilities. Under this rule, nationwide carbon dioxide emissions would be reduced by approximately 30% from 2005 levels by 2030 with a flexible interim goal. Several industry groups and states challenged the rule. On February 9, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the implementation of this rule pending judicial review. In August 2019, the EPA finalized the repeal of the 2015 regulations and replaced them with the Affordable Clean Energy rule, or ACE, that designates heat rate improvement, or efficiency improvement, as the best system of emissions reduction for carbon dioxide from existing coal-fired electric utility generating units. In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia struck down the ACE rule, but did not reinstate the former CPP regulation. The power of EPA to reissue the CPP under Section 111(d) of the CAA will be decided by the Supreme Court in 2022.
The EPA has issued the “Final Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases” Rule and a series of revisions to it, which requires operators of oil and gas production, natural gas processing, transmission, distribution and storage facilities and other stationary sources emitting more than established annual thresholds of carbon dioxide-equivalent GHGs to inventory and report their GHG emissions occurring in the prior calendar year on a facility-by-facility basis. These rules do not require control of GHGs. However, the EPA has indicated that it will use data collected through the reporting rules to decide whether to promulgate future GHG limits.
In certain circumstances, large sources of GHG emissions are subject to preconstruction permitting under the EPA’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration program. This program historically has had minimal applicability to the oil and gas production industry. However, there can be no assurance that our operations will avoid applicability of these or similar permitting requirements, which impose costs relating to emissions control systems and the efforts needed to obtain the permit.
Additional GHG regulations potentially affecting our industry include those described above under the subheading “Clean Air Act” which relate to methane.
Future federal GHG regulations of the oil and gas industry remain a possibility. Also, many states and regions have adopted GHG initiatives and certain governmental bodies have or are considering the imposition of fees or taxes based on the emission of GHGs by certain facilities. Many states have established GHG cap and trade programs. Most of these cap and trade programs work by requiring major sources of emissions, such as electric power plants, or major producers of fuels, such as refineries and natural gas processing plants, to acquire and surrender emission allowances. While it is not possible to predict how any regulations to restrict GHG emissions may come into force, these and other legislative and regulatory proposals for restricting GHG emissions or otherwise addressing climate change could require us to incur additional operating costs or curtail oil and gas operations in certain areas and could also adversely affect demand for the oil and gas we sell.
President Biden and the Democrat Party, which currently controls Congress, have identified climate change as a priority, and it is likely that new executive orders, regulatory action, and/or legislation targeting greenhouse gas emissions, or prohibiting, delaying or restricting oil and gas development activities in certain areas, will be proposed and/or promulgated during the Biden Administration. For example, the acting Secretary of the Department of the Interior recently issued an order preventing staff from producing any new fossil fuel leases or permits without sign-off from a top political appointee, and President Biden recently announced a moratorium on new oil and gas leasing on federal lands and offshore waters pending completion of a comprehensive review and reconsideration of federal oil and gas permitting and leasing practices. President Biden’s order also established climate change as a primary foreign policy and national security consideration, affirms that achieving net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by or before mid-century is a critical priority, affirms President Biden’s desire to establish the United States as a leader in addressing climate change, generally further integrates climate change and environmental justice considerations into government agencies’ decision making, and eliminates fossil fuel subsidies, among other measures.
Finally, scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHGs in the Earth’s atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant physical effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, floods and other climatic events; if any such effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our operations.
OSHA. We are subject to the requirements of the Occupational Safety and Health Act, or OSHA, and comparable state laws that regulate the protection of the health and safety of workers. In addition, the OSHA hazard communication standard requires maintenance of information about hazardous materials used or produced in operations, and the provision of such information to employees, state and local government authorities and citizens. Other OSHA standards regulate specific worker safety aspects of our operations.
Endangered Species Act. The Endangered Species Act restricts activities that may affect endangered species or their habitats. While some of our facilities are in areas that may be designated as a habitat for endangered species, we believe that we are in substantial compliance with the Endangered Species Act. The presence of any protected species or the final designation of previously unprotected species as threatened or endangered in areas where we operate could result in increased costs from species protection measures or could result in limitations, delays, or prohibitions on our exploration and production activities that could have an adverse effect on our ability to develop and produce our reserves. Similar protections are given to bald and golden eagles under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act and to migratory birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, and similar protections may be available to certain species protected under state laws.
National Environmental Policy Act. Oil and gas exploration and production activities on federal lands are subject to the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA. NEPA requires federal agencies, including the U.S. Department of Interior, to evaluate major agency actions having the potential to significantly impact the environment. In the course of such evaluations, an agency will prepare an environmental assessment of the potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of a proposed project and, if necessary, will prepare a more detailed environmental impact statement that may be made available for public review and comment. This process has the potential to delay or even halt development of some of our oil and gas projects. For example, on January 27, 2022, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia found that the Bureau of Ocean Management’s failure to calculate the potential emissions from foreign oil consumption violated the agency’s approval of oil and gas leases in the Gulf of Mexico under the National Environmental Policy Act. This decision may disrupt or delay drilling operations if the agency is forced to reassess the environmental impacts of the Gulf of Mexico drilling program.
Natural Gas Pipeline Safety Act. On November 15, 2021, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration promulgated a rule expanding the scope of the Federal Pipeline Safety Regulations to include all onshore gas gathering pipelines. For the first time, gas lines transporting natural gas from production facilities to interstate gas transmission lines will be subject to federal pipeline regulations and operators will be required to report safety information for all gas gathering lines. The rules become effective on May 16, 2022. Compliance with such rules could result in significant costs, including increased capital expenditures and operating costs, and could adversely impact our business.
Human Capital
At Ranger Oil, employees are integral to the Company’s success. Ranger Oil’s key human capital management objectives are to attract, retain and develop talent to deliver on our strategy. As of December 31, 2021, we had a total of 136 employees, including 81 office-based employees and 55 field employees. All of these employees were full-time employees. None of our employees are represented by labor unions or covered by collective bargaining agreements. We focus on the following areas in supporting our human capital:
Diversity and Inclusion. We recognize that a diverse workforce provides the best opportunity to obtain unique perspectives, experiences and ideas to help our business succeed, and we are committed to providing a diverse and inclusive workplace to attract and retain talented employees. We maintain a work culture that treats all employees fairly and with respect, promotes inclusivity, and provides equal opportunities for the professional growth and advancement based on merit. Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age (as defined by the law) or disability.
Health and Safety. Safety is a top priority at Ranger Oil. We promote safety with a robust health and safety program, which includes employee orientation and training, regular safety meetings, contractor management, risk assessments, hazard identification and mitigation, incident reporting and investigation, and corrective and preventative action development. Additionally, we have a Health, Safety and Environment Manual which includes specific field safety procedures, including responsibility to stop work on any activity deemed unsafe without the threat or fear of job reprisal.
Training and Development. We invest in developing our employees to enable us to realize opportunities for growth and contribute to advancing progress on our strategic priorities. Our ongoing efforts and initiatives are aimed at attracting, engaging, and developing employees in a thoughtful and meaningful way to support a diverse and inclusive culture. We encourage our employees to advance their knowledge and skills and to network with other professionals in order to pursue career advancement and enhance their skills.
Compensation and Benefits. We seek to provide fair, competitive compensation and comprehensive benefits to our employees that are designed to attract, retain and motivate employees. To align our short- and long-term objectives, our compensation programs consist of base pay, short-term incentives and long-term incentives, including restricted stock unit grants. Our wide array of benefits include medical, dental, and vision insurance plans for employees and their families, life insurance and long-term disability plans, paid time off for holidays, vacation, sick leave, and other personal leave, and health and dependent care savings accounts. We also provide our employees with a 401(k) plan that includes a competitive company match, and employees have access to several other programs, such as a matching charitable gift program.
COVID-19 Response. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we implemented proactive measures to protect the health and safety of our employees. These measures have included, at various times, implementation of health screenings, allowing remote work, requiring social distancing, requiring the use of masks, frequently and extensively disinfecting common areas, if and when necessary, and implementing isolation requirements, among other things. We are committed to maintaining a safe workplace to protect our employees.
Available Information
Our internet address is http://www.rangeroil.com. We make available free of charge on or through our website our Corporate Governance Principles, Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Audit Committee Charter, Compensation and Benefits Committee Charter, Nominating and Governance Committee Charter and Reserves Committee Charter, and we will provide copies of such documents to any shareholder who so requests. We also make available free of charge on or through our website our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. Investors can obtain current and important information about the company from our website on a regular basis. The information contained on, or connected to, our website is not incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K and should not be considered part of this or any other report that we furnish or file with the SEC. We intend for our website to serve as a means of public dissemination of information for purposes of Regulation FD.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Our business and operations are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties as described below; however, the risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we may currently deem immaterial, may become important factors that harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows in the future. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could suffer and the trading price of our Class A Common Stock could decline.
Risks in this section are grouped by the following categories: (1) Risks Associated with our General Business; (2) Financial and Related Risks; (3) Legal and Regulatory Risks; (4) Tax-Related Risks; (5) Technology-Related Risks; and (6) Risks Related to the Ownership of Our Class A Common Stock. Many risks affect more than one category, and the risks are not in order of significance or probability of occurrence because they have been grouped by categories.
Risks Associated with our General Business
Prices for crude oil, NGLs and natural gas are dependent on many factors that are beyond our control and strongly affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Prices for crude oil, NGLs and natural gas are dependent on many factors that are beyond our control, including:
•domestic and foreign supplies of crude oil, NGLs and natural gas;
•domestic and foreign consumer demand for crude oil, NGLs and natural gas;
•political and economic conditions in oil or gas producing regions;
•the extent to which the members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and other oil exporting nations (“OPEC+”) agree upon and maintain production constraints and oil price controls;
•overall domestic and foreign economic conditions;
•prices and availability of, and demand for, alternative fuels;
•the effect of energy conservation efforts, alternative fuel requirements and climate change-related initiatives;
•shareholder activism or activities by non-governmental organizations to restrict the exploration, development and production of oil, natural gas and NGLs so as to minimize emissions of carbon dioxide and methane GHGs;
•volatility and trading patterns in the commodity-futures markets;
•technological advances or social attitudes and policies affecting energy consumption and energy supply;
•political and economic events that directly or indirectly impact the relative strength or weakness of the United States dollar, on which crude oil prices are benchmarked globally, against foreign currencies;
•changes in trade relations and policies, including the imposition of tariffs by the United States or China or sanctions related to the Russia-Ukraine conflict;
•risks related to the concentration of our operations in the Eagle Ford Shale field in South Texas;
•speculation by investors in oil and gas;
•the availability, cost, proximity and capacity of gathering, processing, refining and transportation facilities;
•the cost and availability of products and personnel needed for us to produce oil and gas;
•weather conditions;
•the impact and uncertainty of world health events, including the COVID-19 pandemic; and
•domestic and foreign governmental relations, regulation and taxation, including limits on the United States’ ability to export crude oil.
For example, oil and natural gas prices continued to be volatile in 2021, as COVID-19 pandemic-related restrictions began to loosen and global economic activity grew, resulting in the demand for energy outpacing supply. The NYMEX oil prices in 2021 ranged from a high of $84.65 to a low of $47.62 per bbl, while the spot market prices for natural gas in 2021 ranged from a high of $23.61 (due to the February 2021 winter storm) to a low of $2.36 per MMBtu. Though oil prices have fully recovered, prices will continue to be influenced by the duration and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic and its resulting impact on oil and natural gas demand, the extent to which countries abide by the OPEC+ production agreement, the effects of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and U.S. production levels.
The long-term effects of these and other conditions on the prices of oil and natural gas are uncertain, and there can be no assurance that the demand or pricing for our products will follow historic patterns or that the recent pricing trend will continue. Any substantial or extended decline, or sustained market uncertainty, in the actual prices of crude oil, NGLs or natural gas would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations, cash flows and borrowing capacity, stock price, the quantities of oil and gas reserves that we can economically produce, the quantity of estimated proved reserves that may be attributed to our properties and our ability to fund our capital program.
It is impossible to predict future commodity price movements with certainty; however, many of our projections and estimates are based on assumptions as to the future prices of crude oil, NGLs and natural gas. These price assumptions are used for planning purposes. We expect our assumptions will change over time and that actual prices in the future will likely differ from our estimates.
Drilling and operations activities are high-risk activities with many uncertainties and may not result in commercially productive reserves.
Our future financial condition and results of operations depend on the success of our exploration and production activities. Oil and gas exploration and production activities are subject to numerous risks beyond our control, including the risk that drilling will not result in commercially viable oil and gas production. The costs of drilling, completing and operating wells are often substantial and uncertain, and drilling and completion operations may be curtailed, delayed or canceled as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control, including:
•unexpected drilling conditions;
•the use of multi-well pad drilling that requires the drilling of all of the wells on a pad until any one of the pad’s wells can be brought into production;
•risks associated with drilling horizontal wells and extended lateral lengths, such as deviating from the desired drilling zone or not running casing or tools consistently through the wellbore, particularly as lateral lengths get longer;
•risks associated with downspacing and multi-well pad drilling;
•fracture stimulation accidents or failures;
•reductions in oil, natural gas and NGL prices;
•elevated pressure or irregularities in geologic formations;
•loss of title or other title related issues;
•equipment failures or accidents;
•costs, shortages or delays in the availability of drilling rigs, frac fleets, crews, equipment and materials;
•shortages in experienced labor;
•crude oil, NGLs or natural gas gathering, transportation, processing, storage and export facility availability, restrictions or limitations;
•surface access restrictions;
•delays imposed by or resulting from compliance with regulatory requirements, including any hydraulic fracturing regulations and other applicable regulations, and the failure to secure or delays in securing necessary regulatory, contractual and third-party approvals and permits;
•political events, public protests, civil disturbances, terrorist acts or cyber attacks;
•environmental hazards, such as natural gas leaks, oil and produced water spills, pipeline and tank ruptures, encountering naturally occurring radioactive materials, and unauthorized discharges of brine, well stimulation and completion fluids, toxic gases or other pollutants into the surface and subsurface environment;
•limited availability of financing at acceptable terms;
•limitations in the market for crude oil, natural gas and NGLs;
•fires, explosions, blow-outs and surface cratering;
•adverse weather conditions; and
•actions by third-party operators of our properties.
The wells we drill may not be productive and we may not recover all or any portion of our investment in such wells. Our decisions to purchase, explore, develop or otherwise exploit prospects or properties depend in part on the evaluation of data obtained through geophysical and geological analyses, production data and engineering studies, the results of which are often inconclusive or subject to varying interpretations. The seismic data and other technologies we use do not allow us to know conclusively prior to drilling a well that oil or gas is present or may be produced economically. The type curves we use in our development plans are only estimates of performance of the acreage we might develop and actual production can differ materially. Furthermore, the cost of drilling, completing, equipping and operating a well is often uncertain, and cost factors can adversely affect the economics of a project. Overruns in budgeted expenditures are common risks that can make a particular project uneconomical or less economical than forecasted. In addition, limitations on the use of hydraulic fracturing could have an adverse effect on our ability to develop and produce oil and gas from new wells, which would reduce our rate of return on these wells and our cash flows. Drilling activities can result in dry holes or wells that are productive but do not produce sufficient net revenues after operating and other costs to cover initial drilling costs.
Our future drilling activities may not be successful, and we cannot be sure that our overall drilling success rate or our drilling success rate within a particular area will not decline. Unsuccessful drilling activities could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Also, we may not be able to obtain any options or lease rights in potential drilling locations that we identify. Although we have identified numerous potential drilling locations, we may not be able to economically produce oil or gas from all of them.
The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected our business, and the ultimate effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and/or cash flows will depend on future developments, which are uncertain and cannot be predicted.
The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the global economy, disrupted global supply chains, and created significant volatility and disruption of financial and commodity markets. In addition, the pandemic has resulted in travel restrictions, business closures and the institution of quarantining and other restrictions on movement in many communities. As a result, during the course of the pandemic, there have been significant reductions in demand for and prices of oil, NGLs and natural gas, which have at times adversely impacted, and may in the future adversely impact, our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows. The COVID-19 pandemic has had an adverse impact on our operational and financial performance and its future impact is uncertain and depends on various factors, including how the pandemic and measures taken in response to the pandemic may impact demand for oil, NGLs and natural gas, the availability of personnel, equipment and services critical to our ability to operate our properties and the impact of potential governmental restrictions on travel, transports and operations. In particular, vaccine or testing mandates could be implemented in the future, which could result in disruptions to our workforce and may result in increased attrition, as well as increased costs in connection with retaining our workforce and implementation.
There is uncertainty around the extent and duration of the disruption. The degree to which the COVID-19 pandemic adversely impacts our results will depend on future developments, which cannot be predicted with precision, including, but not limited to, the duration and spread of the outbreak (including the impact of coronavirus mutations and resurgences), its severity, the actions to contain the virus or treat its impact, the development, availability and public acceptance of effective treatments or vaccines, its impact on the U.S. and world economies, the U.S. capital markets and market conditions, the availability of federal, state, or local funding programs, and how quickly and to what extent normal economic and operating conditions can resume.
Our business involves many operating risks, including hydraulic fracturing, that may result in substantial losses for which insurance may be unavailable or inadequate.
Our operations are subject to all of the risks and hazards typically associated with the exploitation, development and exploration for and the production and transportation of oil and gas, including well stimulation and completion activities such as hydraulic fracturing. These operating risks include:
•fires, explosions, blowouts, cratering and casing collapses;
•formations with abnormal pressures or structures;
•pipeline ruptures or spills;
•mechanical difficulties, such as stuck oilfield drilling and service tools;
•uncontrollable flows of oil, natural gas or well fluids;
•migration of fracturing fluids into surrounding groundwater;
•spills or releases of fracturing fluids including from trucks sometimes used to deliver these materials;
•spills or releases of brine or other produced water that may go off-site;
•subsurface conditions that prevent us from (i) stimulating the planned number of stages, (ii) accessing the entirety of the wellbore with our tools during completion or (iii) removing all fracturing-related materials from the wellbore to allow production to begin;
•environmental hazards such as natural gas leaks, oil or produced water spills and discharges of toxic gases; and
•natural disasters and other adverse weather conditions, such as named winter storms in 2021 and 2022 that caused us to temporarily shut-in production, (including events that may be caused or exacerbated by climate change);
•terrorism, vandalism and physical, electronic and cyber security breaches.
Any of these risks could result in substantial losses resulting from injury or loss of life, damage to or destruction of property, natural resources and equipment, pollution and other environmental damages, clean up responsibilities, regulatory investigations and penalties, loss of well location, acreage, expected production and related reserves and suspension of operations. Moreover, a potential result of climate change is more frequent or more severe weather events or natural disasters. To the extent such weather events or natural disasters become more frequent or more severe, disruptions to our business and costs to repair damaged facilities could increase. To the extent such weather events or natural disasters become more frequent or severe, disruptions to our business and costs to repair damaged facilities could increase. In addition, under certain circumstances, we may be liable for environmental damage caused by previous owners or operators of properties that we own, lease or operate. As a result, we may incur substantial liabilities to third parties or governmental entities, which could reduce or eliminate funds available for exploration, development or acquisitions or cause us to incur losses.
If we experience any problems with well stimulation and completion activities, such as hydraulic fracturing, our ability to explore for and produce oil or natural gas may be adversely affected. We could incur substantial losses or otherwise fail to realize reserves in particular formations as a result of:
•delays imposed by or resulting from compliance with environmental and other governmental or regulatory requirements, which may include limitations on hydraulic fracturing or the discharge of GHGs;
•the need to shut down, abandon and relocate drilling operations;
•the need to sample, test and monitor drinking water in particular areas and to provide filtration or other drinking water supplies to users of water supplies that may have been impacted or threatened by potential contamination from fracturing fluids;
•the need to modify drill sites to ensure there are no spills or releases off-site and to investigate and/or remediate any spills or releases that might have occurred; or
•suspension of our operations.
In accordance with industry practice, we maintain insurance at a level that balances the cost of insurance with our assessment of the risk and our ability to achieve a reasonable rate of return on our investments. We cannot assure you that our insurance will be adequate to cover losses or liabilities or that we will purchase insurance against all possible losses or liabilities. Also, we cannot predict the continued availability of insurance at premium levels that justify its purchase. The occurrence of a significant event, not fully insured or indemnified against, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Multi-well pad drilling and project development may result in volatility in our operating results.
We utilize multi-well pad drilling and project development where practical. Project development may involve more than one multi-well pad being drilled and completed at one time in a relatively confined area. Wells drilled on a pad or in a project may not be brought into production until all wells on the pad or project are drilled and completed. Problems affecting one pad or a single well could adversely affect production from all of the wells on the pad or in the entire project. As a result, multi-well pad drilling and project development can cause delays in the scheduled commencement of production, or interruptions in ongoing production. These delays or interruptions may cause declines or volatility in our operating results due to timing as well as declines in oil and natural gas prices. Further, any delay, reduction or curtailment of our development and producing operations, due to operational delays caused by multi-well pad drilling or project development, or otherwise, could result in the loss of acreage through lease expirations.
Additionally, infrastructure expansion, including more complex facilities and takeaway capacity, could become challenging in project development areas. Managing capital expenditures for infrastructure expansion could cause economic constraints when considering design capacity.
We could experience adverse impacts associated with a high concentration of activity and tighter drilling spacing.
We are subject to drilling, completion and operating risks, including our ability to efficiently execute large-scale project development, as we could experience delays, curtailments and other adverse impacts associated with a high concentration of activity and tighter drilling spacing. A higher concentration of activity and tighter drilling spacing may increase the risk of unintentional communication with other adjacent wells and the potential to reduce total recoverable reserves from the reservoir. If these risks materialize and negatively impact our results of operations relative to guidance or market expectations, the research analysts who cover us may downgrade our Class A Common Stock or change their recommendations or earnings or performance estimates, which may result in a decline in the market price of our Class A Common Stock.
We may not adhere to our proposed drilling schedule.
Our final determination of whether to drill any wells will be dependent on a number of factors, including:
•the results of our exploration efforts and the acquisition, review and analysis of the seismic data;
•the availability of sufficient capital resources to us and the other participants for the drilling of the prospects;
•the approval of the prospects by the other participants after additional data has been compiled;
•economic and industry conditions at the time of drilling, including prevailing and anticipated prices for oil and gas and the availability and prices of drilling rigs and crews, frac crews, and related equipment and material; and
•the availability of leases and permits on reasonable terms for the prospects.
Although we have identified numerous drilling prospects, we may not be able to lease or drill those prospects within our expected time frame or at all. There can be no assurance that these projects can be successfully developed or that any identified drill sites will, if drilled, encounter reservoirs of commercially productive oil or gas or that we will be able to complete such wells on a timely basis, or at all. We may seek to sell or reduce all or a portion of our interest in a project area or with respect to prospects wells within such project area.
Our business depends on gathering, processing, refining and transportation facilities owned by others.
We deliver substantially all of our oil and gas production through pipelines and trucks that we do not own. The marketability of our production depends upon the availability, proximity and capacity of these pipelines and trucks, as well as gathering systems, gas processing facilities and downstream refineries. The unavailability of or lack of available capacity on these systems and facilities could result in the shut-in of producing wells, the reduction in wellhead pricing or the delay or discontinuance of development plans for properties. Federal, state and local regulation of oil and gas production and transportation, tax and energy policies, changes in supply and demand, pipeline pressures, damage to or destruction of pipelines and general economic conditions could adversely affect our ability to produce, gather, process, refine and market our oil and gas.
We have entered into firm transportation contracts that require us to pay fixed sums of money regardless of quantities actually shipped. If we are unable to deliver the minimum quantities of production, such requirements could adversely affect our results of operations, financial position, and liquidity.
We have entered into firm transportation contracts that require us to pay fixed sums of money regardless of quantities actually shipped. If we are unable to deliver the minimum quantities of production, such requirements could adversely affect our results of operations, financial position, and liquidity. We have entered into firm transportation agreements for a portion of our production in certain areas in order to improve our ability, and that of our purchasers, to successfully market our production. We may also enter into firm transportation arrangements for additional production in the future. These firm transportation agreements may be more costly than interruptible or short-term transportation agreements. Additionally, these agreements obligate us to pay fees on minimum volumes regardless of actual throughput. If we have insufficient production to meet the minimum volumes, the requirements to pay for quantities not delivered could have an impact on our results of operations, financial position, and liquidity.
The unavailability, high cost or shortage of drilling rigs, frac crews, equipment, raw materials, supplies, oilfield services or personnel may restrict our operations.
Where we are the operator of a property, we rely on third-party service providers to perform necessary drilling and completion operations. The ability and availability of third-party service providers to perform such drilling and completion operations will depend on those service providers’ ability to compete for and retain qualified personnel, financial condition, economic performance, and access to capital, which in turn will depend upon the supply and demand for oil, NGLs and natural gas, prevailing economic conditions and financial, business and other factors. The failure of a third-party service provider to adequately perform operations on a timely basis could delay drilling or completion operations, reduce production from the property or cause other damage to operations, each of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Moreover, the oil and gas industry is cyclical, which can result in shortages of drilling rigs, frac crews, equipment, raw materials (particularly sand and other proppants), supplies and personnel, including geologists, geophysicists, engineers and other professionals. When shortages occur, the costs and delivery times of drilling rigs, equipment and supplies increase and demand for, and wage rates of, qualified drilling rig and frac crews also rise with increases in demand. The prevailing prices of crude oil, NGLs and natural gas also affect the cost of and the demand for drilling rigs, frac crews, materials (including sand) and other equipment and related services. The availability of drilling rigs, frac crews, materials (including sand) and equipment can vary significantly from region to region at any particular time. Although land drilling rigs and frac crews can be moved from one region to another in response to changes in levels of demand, an undersupply in any region may result in drilling and/or completion delays and higher well costs in that region.
We cannot predict whether these conditions will exist in the future and, if so, what their timing and duration will be. In accordance with customary industry practice, we rely on independent third-party service providers to provide most of the services necessary to drill new wells. If we are unable to secure a sufficient number of drilling rigs and frac crews at reasonable costs, our financial condition and results of operations could suffer, and we may not be able to drill all of our acreage before our leases expire. Shortages of drilling rigs, frac crews, equipment, raw materials (particularly sand and other proppants), supplies, personnel, trucking services, tubulars, fracking and completion services and production equipment could delay or restrict our exploration and development operations, which in turn could impair our financial condition and results of operations. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and recent industry downturn, many experienced service providers have left the industry and remaining personnel are more limited and in some cases, less experienced, which could impact success of our operations and have a safety impact.
The COVID-19 pandemic has also significantly disrupted global supply chains including with respect to certain materials necessary to our operations, tubulars and steel in particular, and the Russia-Ukraine conflict may have further disruptive effects or increase costs of these materials. If we are unable to timely source such materials in the future or if the prices of such materials increase, we may have to curtail or delay our operations and our results of operations and cash flows may be adversely impacted. Further, limited availability of materials may limit our ability to optimize our drilling and completions designs which could negatively impact our operations.
Our future performance depends on our ability to find or acquire additional oil and gas reserves that are economically recoverable.
Producing oil and gas reservoirs generally are characterized by declining production rates that vary depending upon reservoir characteristics and other factors. Unless we successfully replace the reserves that we produce, our reserves will decline, eventually resulting in a decrease in oil and gas production and lower revenues and cash flows from operating activities. We must make substantial capital expenditures to find, acquire, develop and produce new oil and gas reserves. We may not be able to make the necessary capital investments to maintain or expand our oil and gas reserves with our cash flows from operating activities. Furthermore, external sources of capital may be limited.
The ability to attract and retain key members of management, qualified Board members and other key personnel is critical to the success of our business and may be challenging.
Our success will depend to a large extent upon the efforts and abilities of our management team and having experienced individuals serving on our Board who are also knowledgeable about our operations and our industry. The success of our business also depends on other key personnel. The ability to attract and retain these key personnel may be difficult in light of the volatility of our business. We may need to enter into retention or other arrangements that could be costly to maintain. These factors could cause us to incur greater costs or prevent us from pursuing our development and exploitation strategy as quickly as we would otherwise wish to do. If executives, directors or other key personnel resign, retire or are terminated, or their service is otherwise interrupted, we may not be able to replace them adequately or in a timely manner and we could experience significant declines in productivity.
Certain of our undeveloped leasehold assets are subject to leases that will expire over the next several years unless production is established on the acreage.
Leases on oil and gas properties typically have a term after which they expire unless, prior to expiration, a well is drilled and production of hydrocarbons in paying quantities is established. If our leases expire and we are unable to renew the leases, we will lose our right to develop the related properties. While we seek to actively manage our leasehold inventory through drilling wells to hold the leasehold acreage that we believe is material to our operations, our drilling plans for these areas are subject to change and subject to the availability of capital.
Certain of our wells may be adversely affected by actions we or other operators may take when drilling, completing, or operating wells that they own.
The drilling and production of potential locations by us or other operators could cause a depletion of our proved reserves and may inhibit our ability to further develop our proved reserves. In addition, completion operations and other activities conducted on adjacent or nearby wells by us or other operators could cause production from our wells to be shut in for indefinite periods of time, could result in increased lease operating expenses and could adversely affect the production and reserves from our wells after they re-commence production. We have no control over the operations or activities of offsetting operators.
We are exposed to the credit risk of our customers, and nonpayment or nonperformance by these parties would reduce our cash flows.
We are subject to risk from loss resulting from our customers’ nonperformance or nonpayment. We depend on a limited number of customers for a significant portion of our revenues. The concentration of credit risk may be affected by changes in economic or other conditions within our industry and may accordingly affect our overall credit risk. In 2021, approximately 48% of our total consolidated product revenues resulted from three of our customers. Any nonpayment or nonperformance by our customers would reduce our cash flows.
We participate in oil and gas leases with third parties and these third parties may not be able to fulfill their commitments to our projects.
We frequently own less than 100% of the working interest in the oil and gas leases on which we conduct operations, and other parties own the remaining portion of the working interest under joint venture arrangements. Financial risks are inherent in any operation where the cost of drilling, equipping, completing and operating wells is shared by more than one party. We could be held liable for joint venture obligations of other working interest owners, such as nonpayment of costs and liabilities arising from the actions of the other working interest owners. In addition, the volatility in commodity prices increases the likelihood that some of these working interest owners may not be able to fulfill their joint venture obligations. Some of our project partners have experienced liquidity and cash flow problems in the past. These problems have led and may lead our partners to attempt to delay the pace of project development in order to preserve cash. A partner may be unable or unwilling to pay its share of project costs. In some cases, a partner may declare bankruptcy. In the event any of our project partners do not pay their share of such costs, we would likely have to pay those costs, and we may be unsuccessful in any efforts to recover these costs from our partners, which could materially adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Estimates of oil and gas reserves and future net cash flows are not precise, and undeveloped reserves may not ultimately be converted into proved producing reserves.
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains estimates of our proved oil and gas reserves and the estimated future net cash flows from such reserves. These estimates are based upon various factors and assumptions, including assumptions relating to crude oil, NGL and natural gas prices, drilling and operating expenses, capital expenditures, development costs and workover and remedial costs, the quantity, quality and interpretation of relevant data, taxes and availability of funds. The process of estimating oil and gas reserves is complex. This process requires significant decisions and assumptions in the evaluation of available geological, geophysical, engineering and economic data for each reservoir. These estimates are dependent on many variables and inherently uncertain, therefore, changes often occur as these variables evolve and commodity prices fluctuate. Furthermore, different reserve engineers may make different estimates of reserves and cash flows based on the same data, and improvements or other changes in geological, geophysical and engineering evaluation methods may cause reserve estimates to change over time. Any material inaccuracies in these reserve estimates, cash flow estimates or underlying assumptions could materially affect the estimated quantities and present value of our reserves.
Actual future production, crude oil, NGL and natural gas prices, revenues, taxes, development expenditures, operating expenses and quantities of recoverable oil and gas reserves will most likely vary from those estimated. Any significant variance could materially affect the estimated quantities and present value of reserves disclosed by us. In addition, we may adjust estimates of proved reserves to reflect production history, results of exploration and development, prevailing crude oil, NGL and natural gas prices and other factors, many of which are beyond our control.
At December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, approximately 62% and 60%, respectively, of our estimated proved reserves were proved undeveloped. Estimation of proved undeveloped reserves is based on volumetric calculations and adjacent reserve performance data. Recovery of proved undeveloped reserves requires significant capital expenditures and successful drilling operations. Our reserve data assumes that we can and will make these significant expenditures to develop our reserves and conduct these drilling operations successfully. These assumptions, however, may not prove correct, and our estimated costs may not be accurate, development may not occur as scheduled and actual results may not occur as estimated.
The reserve estimation standards under SEC rules provide that, subject to limited exceptions, proved undeveloped reserves may only be booked if they relate to wells scheduled to be drilled within five years of the date of booking. These standards may limit our potential to book additional proved undeveloped reserves as we pursue our drilling program. Moreover, we may be required to write down our proved undeveloped reserves if we do not develop those reserves within the required five-year time frame or cannot demonstrate that we could do so. Accordingly, our reserve report at December 31, 2021, includes estimates of total future development costs over the next five years associated with our proved undeveloped reserves of approximately $1.7 billion. If we choose not to spend the capital to develop these reserves, or if we are not otherwise able to successfully develop these reserves, we will be required to write-off these reserves. During the year ended December 31, 2021, we wrote-off 14.0 MMboe of proved undeveloped reserves because they are no longer expected to be developed within five years of their initial recording. Any such write-offs of our reserves could reduce our ability to borrow money and could reduce the value of our securities.
You should not assume that the present value of estimated future net cash flows (standardized measure) referred to herein is the current fair value of our estimated oil and gas reserves. In accordance with SEC requirements, we base the estimated discounted future net cash flows from our proved reserves on prices and costs on the date of the estimate. Actual current and future prices and costs may be materially higher or lower than the prices and costs as of the date of the estimate. As a result, net present value estimates using actual prices and costs may be significantly less than the SEC estimate that is provided herein. Actual future net cash flows may also be affected by the amount and timing of actual production, availability of financing for capital expenditures necessary to develop our undeveloped reserves, supply and demand for oil and gas, increases or decreases in consumption of oil and gas and changes in governmental regulations or taxation. In addition, the 10% discount factor, which is required by the SEC to be used in calculating discounted future net cash flows for reporting purposes, is not necessarily the most accurate discount factor based on interest rates in effect from time to time and risks associated with us or the oil and gas industry in general. With all other factors held constant, if commodity prices used in the reserve report were to decrease by 10%, our standardized measure and PV-10 would have decreased to approximately $2.5 billion and $2.8 billion, respectively. Any adjustments to the estimates of proved reserves or decreases in the price of our commodities may decrease the value of our securities.
We may record impairments on our oil and gas properties.
Quantities of proved reserves are estimated based on economic conditions in existence in the period of assessment. Lower crude oil, NGL and natural gas prices may have the impact of shortening the economic lives of certain fields because it becomes uneconomic to produce all reserves within such fields, thus reducing proved property reserve estimates. If such revisions in the estimated quantities of proved reserves occur, it will have the effect of increasing the rates of depreciation, depletion and amortization, or DD&A, on the affected properties, which would decrease earnings or result in losses through higher DD&A expense. The revisions may also be significant enough to result in a write-down that would further decrease reported earnings.
The full cost method of accounting for oil and gas properties under GAAP requires that at the end of each quarterly reporting period, the unamortized cost of our oil and gas properties, net of deferred income taxes, is limited to the sum of the estimated after tax discounted future net revenues from proved properties adjusted for costs excluded from amortization (the “Ceiling Test”). The estimated after tax discounted future net revenues are determined using the prior 12-month’s average price based on closing prices on the first day of each month, adjusted for differentials, discounted at 10%. The calculation of the Ceiling Test and provision for DD&A are based on estimates of proved reserves. There are significant uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of proved reserves and projecting future rates of production, timing and plan of development. In addition to revisions to reserves and the impact of lower commodity prices, Ceiling Test write-downs may occur due to increases in estimated operating and development costs and other factors. During fiscal 2021, we recorded impairments of our oil and gas properties of $1.8 million.
If we cannot obtain sufficient capital when needed, we will not be able to continue with our business strategy.
The oil and gas industry is capital intensive. We incur and expect to continue to incur substantial capital expenditures for the acquisition, exploration and development of oil and gas reserves. We incurred approximately $274.1 million in acquisition, exploration and development costs, including capitalized interest and capitalized labor during the year ended December 31, 2021. We intend to finance our future capital expenditures, other than significant acquisitions, through cash flow from operations and, if necessary, through borrowings under our credit agreement (as defined below). However, our cash flow from operations and access to capital are subject to a number of variables, including: (i) the volume of oil and gas we are able to produce from existing wells, (ii) our ability to transport our oil and gas to market, (iii) the prices at which our commodities are sold, (iv) the costs of producing oil and gas, (v) global credit and securities markets, (vi) the ability and willingness of lenders and investors to provide capital and the cost of the capital, (vii) our ability to acquire, locate and produce new reserves, (viii) the impact of potential changes in our credit ratings and (ix) our proved reserves. Additionally, a negative shift in investor sentiment towards the oil and gas industry could adversely affect our ability to raise equity and debt capital.
We may not generate expected cash flows and may have limited ability to obtain the capital necessary to sustain our operations at current or anticipated levels. A decline in cash flow from operations or our financing needs may require us to revise our capital program or alter or increase our capitalization substantially through the issuance of debt or equity securities. The issuance of additional equity securities could have a dilutive effect on the value of our Class A Common Stock. Additional borrowings under our credit agreement or the issuance of additional debt securities will require that a greater portion of our cash flow from operations be used for the payment of interest and principal on our debt, thereby reducing our ability to use cash flow to fund working capital, capital expenditures and acquisitions. In addition, our credit agreements and the Indenture impose certain limitations on our ability to incur additional indebtedness. If we desire to issue additional debt securities other than as expressly permitted under such debt agreements, we will be required to seek the consents in accordance with the requirements of such debt agreements, which consent may be withheld at their discretion. In the future, we may not be able to obtain financing in sufficient amounts or on acceptable terms when needed, which could adversely affect our operating results and prospects. If we cannot raise the capital required to implement our business strategy, we may be required to curtail operations, which could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Our property acquisitions carry significant risks.
Acquisition of oil and gas properties is a key element of maintaining and growing reserves and production. Competition for these assets has been and will continue to be intense. We may not be able to identify attractive acquisition opportunities. Even if we do identify attractive candidates, we may not be able to complete the acquisition or do so on commercially acceptable terms. In the event we do complete an acquisition, such as the recently completed acquisition of Lonestar Resources US Inc. and of certain oil and gas assets from Rocky Creek, its success will depend on a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include, future crude oil, NGL and natural gas prices, the ability to reasonably estimate or assess the recoverable volumes of reserves, rates of future production and future net revenues attainable from reserves, future operating and capital costs, results of future exploration, exploitation and development activities on the acquired properties and future abandonment, possible future environmental or other liabilities and the effect on our liquidity or financial leverage of using available cash or debt to finance acquisitions. There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of proved oil and gas reserves, actual future production rates and associated costs and the assumption of potential liabilities with respect to prospective acquisition targets. Actual results may vary substantially from those assumed in the estimates. A customary review of subject properties will not necessarily reveal all existing or potential problems.
Additionally, significant acquisitions can change the nature of our operations and business depending upon the character of the acquired properties if they have substantially different operating and geological characteristics or are in different geographic locations than our existing properties. To the extent that acquired properties are substantially different than our existing properties, our ability to efficiently realize the expected economic benefits of such transactions may be limited.
Integrating acquired businesses and properties is costly and involves a number of special risks. These risks include the possibility that management may be distracted from regular business concerns by the need to integrate operations and systems, that unforeseen difficulties can arise in integrating operations and systems and in retaining and assimilating employees. Any of these or other similar risks could lead to potential adverse short-term or long-term effects on our operating results, and may cause us to not be able to realize any or all of the anticipated benefits of the acquisitions. Further, we may not realize expected synergies. For instance, if we are unable to realize expected synergies from the Lonestar Acquisition, or the cost to achieve these synergies is greater than expected, then the anticipated benefits may not be realized fully or at all or may take longer to realize than expected. In addition, it is possible that the integration process of Lonestar could result in the loss of key employees, customers, providers, vendors or business partners, the disruption of our ongoing businesses, inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies, potential unknown liabilities and unforeseen expenses, delays, or regulatory conditions associated with higher than expected integration costs and an overall post-completion integration process that takes longer than originally anticipated.
Properties we acquire may not produce as projected, and we may be unable to determine reserve potential, identify liabilities associated with the properties or obtain protection from sellers against them.
Our initial technical reviews of properties we acquire are necessarily limited because an in-depth review of every individual property involved in each acquisition generally is not feasible. Even a detailed review of records and properties may not necessarily reveal existing or potential problems, nor will it permit a buyer to become sufficiently familiar with the properties to assess fully their deficiencies and potential. Inspections may not always be performed on every well and environmental problems, such as soil or ground water contamination, are not necessarily observable even when an inspection is undertaken. Even when problems are identified, we may assume certain environmental and other risks and liabilities in connection with acquired properties, or discover unknown liabilities after the acquisition, and such risks and liabilities could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations and financial condition.
We may incur losses as a result of title deficiencies.
We purchase working and revenue interests in the oil and gas leasehold interests upon which we will perform our exploration activities from third parties or directly from the mineral fee owners. The existence of a material title deficiency can render a lease worthless and can adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. Title insurance covering mineral leaseholds is not generally available and, in all instances, we forgo the expense of retaining lawyers to examine the title to the mineral interest to be placed under lease or already placed under lease until the drilling block is assembled and ready to be drilled. Even then, the cost of performing detailed title work can be expensive. We may choose to forgo detailed title examination by title lawyers on a portion of the mineral leases that we place in a drilling unit or conduct less title work than we have traditionally performed. As is customary in our industry, we generally rely upon the judgment of oil and gas lease brokers or independent landmen who perform the field work in examining records in the appropriate governmental offices and abstract facilities before attempting to acquire or place under lease a specific mineral interest and before drilling a well on a leased tract. We, in some cases, perform curative work to correct deficiencies in the marketability or adequacy of the title to us. The work might include obtaining affidavits of heirship or causing an estate to be administered. In cases involving more serious title problems, the amount paid for affected oil and gas leases can be generally lost and the target area can become undrillable. The failure of title may not be discovered until after a well is drilled, in which case we may lose the lease and the right to produce all or a portion of the minerals under the property.
As a small company, we face unique difficulties competing in the larger market.
We operate in a highly competitive environment for acquiring properties, marketing oil and gas and securing trained personnel, and we may face difficulties in competing with larger companies. The costs of doing business in the exploration and production industry, including such costs as those required to explore new oil and gas plays, to acquire new acreage, and to develop attractive oil and gas projects, are significant. We face intense competition in all areas of our business from companies with greater and more productive assets, greater access to capital, substantially larger staffs and greater financial and operating resources than we have. Those companies may be able to pay more for productive oil and gas properties and exploratory prospects and to evaluate, bid for and purchase a greater number of properties and prospects than our financial or personnel resources permit. Also, there is substantial competition for capital available for investment in the oil and gas industry. Our limited size has placed us at a disadvantage with respect to funding our capital and operating costs, and means that we are more vulnerable to commodity price volatility and overall industry cycles (such as the volatility and general economic challenges attributable to COVID-19), are less able to absorb the burden of changes in laws and regulations, and that poor results in any single exploration, development or production play can have a disproportionately negative impact on us. We also compete for people, including experienced geologists, geophysicists, engineers and other professionals. Our limited size has placed us at a disadvantage with respect to attracting and retaining management and other professionals with the technical abilities necessary to successfully operate our business.
Our lack of diversification increases the risk of an investment in us and we are vulnerable to risks associated with operating primarily in one major contiguous area.
All of our operations are in the Eagle Ford Shale in South Texas, making us vulnerable to risks associated with operating in one geographic area. Due to the concentrated nature of our business activities, a number of our properties could experience any of the same conditions at the same time, resulting in a relatively greater impact on our results of operations than they might have on other companies that are more diversified. In particular, we may be disproportionately exposed to the impact of regional supply and demand factors, delays or interruptions of production from wells in which we have an interest that are caused by transportation capacity constraints, curtailment of production, availability of equipment, facilities, personnel or services, significant governmental regulation, natural disasters, adverse weather conditions, water shortages or other drought related conditions, plant closures for scheduled maintenance or interruption of transportation of crude oil or natural gas produced from wells in the Eagle Ford. Such delays or interruptions could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Our oil, natural gas and NGLs are primarily sold in geographic markets in Texas which have a fixed amount of storage and processing capacity. As a result, if such markets become oversupplied with oil, natural gas and/or NGLs, it could have a material negative effect on the prices we receive for our products and therefore an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. There is a risk that refining capacity in the U.S. Gulf Coast may be insufficient to refine all of the light sweet crude oil being produced in the United States. If light sweet crude oil production remains at current levels or continues to increase, demand for our light crude oil production could result in widening price discounts to the world crude prices and potential shut-in of production due to a lack of sufficient markets despite the lift on prior restrictions on the exporting of oil and natural gas.
Financial and Related Risks
We have substantial indebtedness and may incur substantially more debt. Higher levels of indebtedness make us more vulnerable to economic downturns and adverse developments in our business.
We had $601.8 million of outstanding debt at March 4, 2022, including $193.0 million under the Credit Facility, $400.0 million, excluding unamortized discount and issuance costs, under the 9.25% Senior Notes due 2026 and other debt totaling $8.8 million.
Our indebtedness and any increase in our level of indebtedness could have adverse effects on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, including (i) imposing additional cash requirements on us in order to support interest payments, which reduces the amount we have available to fund our operations and other business activities, (ii) increasing the risk that we may default on our debt obligations, (iii) increasing our vulnerability to adverse changes in general economic and industry conditions, economic downturns and adverse developments in our business, (iv) increasing our exposure to a rise in interest rates, which will generate greater interest expense, (v) limiting our ability to engage in strategic transactions or obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures, general corporate and other purposes and (vi) limiting our flexibility in planning for or reacting to changes in our business and industry in which we operate. Our ability to meet our debt obligations and to reduce our level of indebtedness depends on our future performance, which is affected by general economic conditions and financial, business and other factors, many of which are out of our control.
Additionally, we may incur substantially more debt in the future. Our Credit Facility and the Indenture contains restrictions that limit our ability to incur indebtedness. These restrictions, however, are subject to a number of qualifications and exceptions, and under certain circumstances, we could incur substantial additional indebtedness in compliance with these restrictions. If we were to incur additional indebtedness without retiring existing debt, the risks described above could be magnified.
The borrowing base under our credit facility may be reduced in the future if commodity prices decline.
As of December 31, 2021, the borrowing base under the Credit Facility was $725 million with aggregate elected commitments of $400 million. As of March 4, 2022, we had $193.0 million outstanding under the Credit Facility. Our borrowing base is generally redetermined at least twice each year and is scheduled to next be redetermined in April 2022. During a borrowing base redetermination, the lenders can unilaterally adjust the borrowing base and the borrowings permitted to be outstanding under our Credit Facility. In the event of a decline in crude oil, NGL or natural gas prices or for other reasons deemed relevant by our lenders, the borrowing base under the Credit Facility may be reduced. Additionally, the lenders typically may, at their discretion, initiate a redetermination at any time during the six-month period between scheduled redeterminations. As a result, we may be unable to obtain funding under the Credit Facility. If funding is not available when or in the amounts needed, or is available only on unfavorable terms, it might adversely affect our development plan and our ability to make new acquisitions. Furthermore, a determination to lower the borrowing base in the future to a level less than our outstanding indebtedness thereunder would require us to repay any indebtedness in excess of the redetermined borrowing base. Any such repayment or reduced access to funds could have a material adverse effect on our production, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
The Credit Facility and the Indenture have restrictive covenants that could limit our financial flexibility.
The Credit Facility and the Indenture contain financial and other restrictive covenants that limit our ability to engage in activities that may be in our long-term best interests. Our ability to borrow under the Credit Facility is subject to compliance with certain financial covenants, including leverage, interest coverage and current ratios.
The Credit Facility and the Indenture include other restrictions that, among other things, limit our ability to incur indebtedness; grant liens; engage in mergers, consolidations and liquidations; make asset dispositions, restricted payments and investments; enter into transactions with affiliates; and amend, modify or prepay certain indebtedness.
Our business plan and our compliance with these covenants are based on a number of assumptions, the most important of which is relatively stable oil and gas prices at economically sustainable levels. If the price that we receive for our oil and gas production deteriorates significantly from current levels it could lead to lower revenues, cash flows and earnings, which in turn could lead to a default under certain financial covenants contained in our Credit Facility. Because the calculations of the financial ratios are made as of certain dates, the financial ratios can fluctuate significantly from period to period as the amounts outstanding under our Credit Facility are dependent on the timing of cash flows related to operations, capital expenditures, sales of oil and gas properties and securities offerings. Our failure to comply with these covenants could result in an event of default that, if not cured or waived, could result in the acceleration of all of our debts. We may not have sufficient working capital to satisfy our debt obligations in the event of an acceleration of all or a significant portion of our outstanding indebtedness.
Adverse changes in our credit rating may affect our borrowing capacity and borrowing terms.
Our outstanding debt is periodically rated by nationally recognized credit rating agencies. The credit ratings are based on our operating performance, liquidity and leverage ratios, overall financial position, and other factors viewed by the credit rating agencies as relevant to our industry and the economic outlook. Our credit rating may affect the amount of capital we can access, as well as the terms of any financing we may obtain. Because we rely in part on debt financing to fund growth, adverse changes in our credit rating may have a negative effect on our future growth.
Derivative transactions may limit our potential gains and involve other risks.
In order to achieve more predictable cash flows and manage our exposure to commodity price risks in the sale of our crude oil, NGLs and natural gas, we periodically enter into commodity price hedging arrangements with respect to a portion of our expected production. Our hedges are limited in duration, usually for periods of three years or less. While intended to reduce the effects of volatile crude oil, NGL and natural gas prices, such transactions may limit our potential gains if crude oil, NGL or natural gas prices were to rise over the price established by the hedging arrangements. In trying to maintain an appropriate balance, we may end up hedging too much or too little, depending upon how commodity prices fluctuate in the future, which could have the effect of reducing our net income.
In addition, derivative transactions may expose us to the risk of financial loss in certain circumstances, including instances in which:
•our production is less than expected;
•there is a widening of price basis differentials between delivery points for our production and the delivery point assumed in the hedge arrangement;
•the counterparty to a derivatives instrument fails to perform under the contract; or
•a sudden, unexpected event materially impacts commodity prices.
In addition, we may enter into derivative instruments that involve basis risk. Basis risk in a derivative contract occurs when the index upon which the contract is based is more or less variable than the index upon which the hedged asset is based, thereby making the hedge less effective. For example, a NYMEX index used for hedging certain volumes of production may have more or less variability than the regional price index used for the sale of that production.
The adoption of derivatives legislation and implementing rules could have an adverse effect on our ability to use derivative instruments to reduce the effect of commodity price risks associated with our business.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd Frank Act, enacted on July 21, 2010, established federal oversight and regulation of the over-the-counter derivatives market and entities, such as us, that participate in that market. The Dodd-Frank Act requires the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, or CFTC, and the SEC, to promulgate rules and regulations implementing the Dodd-Frank Act. While some of these rules have been finalized, some have not been finalized or implemented, and it is not possible at this time to predict when this will be accomplished. In October 2011, the CFTC issued regulations to set position limits for certain futures and option contracts in the major energy markets and for swaps that are their economic equivalents; however, this initial position limits rule was vacated by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in September 2012. The CFTC has subsequently issued proposals for new rules that would place position limits on certain core futures contracts and equivalent swap contracts for or linked to certain physical commodities, subject to certain exceptions for bona fide hedging transactions, though these rules have not been finalized and the impact of those provisions on us is uncertain at this time.
While the CFTC has designated certain interest rate swaps and credit default swaps subject to mandatory clearing, and the associated rules also will require us, in connection with covered derivative activities, to comply with clearing and trade-execution requirements or take steps to qualify for an exemption to such requirements. The CFTC has not yet proposed rules subjecting any other classes of swaps, including physical commodity swaps, to mandatory clearing. Although we believe we qualify for the end-user exception from the mandatory clearing requirements for swaps entered to hedge our commercial risks, the application of the mandatory clearing and trade execution requirements to other market participants, such as swap dealers, may change the cost and availability of the swaps that we use for hedging. If our swaps do not qualify for the end-user exception from mandatory clearing, or if the cost of entering into uncleared swaps becomes prohibitive, we may be required to clear such transactions or our ability to hedge may be impacted. The ultimate effect of the rules and any additional regulations on our business is uncertain at this time.
In addition, certain banking regulators and the CFTC have adopted final rules establishing minimum margin requirements for uncleared swaps. Although we expect to be exempt from such requirements for the mandatory exchange of margin for uncleared swaps, the application of such requirements to other market participants, such as swap dealers, may change the cost and availability of the swaps that we use for hedging. Further, if we did not qualify for an exemption and were required to post collateral for our swaps, it could reduce our liquidity and cash available for capital expenditures and our ability to manage commodity price volatility and the volatility in cash flows.
The full impact of the Dodd-Frank Act and related regulatory requirements upon our business will not be known until the regulations are implemented and the market for derivatives contracts has adjusted. When fully implemented, the Dodd-Frank Act and any new regulations could increase the operational and transactional cost of derivatives contracts, reduce the availability of derivatives to protect against risks that we encounter, reduce our ability to monetize and restructure our existing derivatives contracts and affect the number and/or creditworthiness of available counterparties. If we reduce our use of derivatives as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act and regulations, our results of operations may become more volatile and our cash flows may be less predictable, which could adversely affect our ability to plan for and fund capital expenditures.
In addition, we may transact with counterparties based in the European Union, Canada or other jurisdictions which, like the U.S., are in the process of implementing regulations to regulate derivatives transactions, some of which are currently in effect and impose operational and transactional costs on our derivatives activities.
A negative shift in investor sentiment towards the oil and gas industry could adversely affect our ability to raise equity and debt capital.
Certain segments of the investor community have recently developed negative sentiment towards investing in our industry. The negative sentiment toward our sector versus other industry sectors has led to lower oil and gas representation in certain key equity market indices. Some investors, including certain pension funds, university endowments and family foundations, have stated policies to reduce or eliminate their investments in the oil and gas sector based on social and environment considerations. Such development could result in a reduction of available capital funding for potential development projects or diminution of capital to fund our business which could impact our future financial results. Additionally, such developments have resulted and could continue to result in downward pressure on the stock prices of oil and gas companies, including ours.
In addition, organizations that provide information to investors on corporate governance and related matters have developed ratings processes for evaluating companies on their approach to environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) matters. Currently, there are no universal standards for such scores or ratings, but the importance of sustainability evaluations is becoming more broadly accepted by investors and shareholders. Such ratings are used by some investors to inform their investment and voting decisions. Additionally, certain investors use these scores to benchmark companies against their peers and if a company is perceived as lagging, these investors may engage with companies to require improved ESG disclosure or performance. Moreover, certain members of the broader investment community may consider a company’s sustainability score as a reputational or other factor in making an investment decision. Consequently, a low sustainability score could result in exclusion of our stock from consideration by certain investment funds, engagement by investors seeking to improve such scores and a negative perception of our operations by certain investors.
Legal and Regulatory Risks
We are subject to complex laws and regulations that can adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of doing business.
Exploration, development, production and sale of oil and gas are subject to extensive federal, state and local laws and regulations, including complex environmental laws. Future laws or regulations, any adverse changes in the interpretation of existing laws and regulations, inability to obtain necessary regulatory approvals or a failure to comply with existing legal requirements may harm our business, results of operations, financial condition or cash flows. We may be required to make large expenditures to comply with environmental and other governmental regulations. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations may result in the suspension or termination of operations and subject us to administrative, civil and criminal penalties. Matters subject to regulation include discharge permits for drilling operations, drilling bonds, spacing of wells, unitization and pooling of properties, environmental protection and taxation. Our operations create the risk of environmental liabilities to the government or third parties for any unlawful discharge of oil, gas or other pollutants into the air, soil or water. In the event of environmental violations or other environmental, health or safety impacts, we may be charged with remedial costs and land owners may file claims for alternative water supplies, property damage or bodily injury. Laws and regulations protecting the environment have become more stringent in recent years, and may, in some circumstances, result in liability for environmental damage regardless of negligence or fault. New laws, regulations or enforcement policies could be more stringent and impose unforeseen liabilities or significantly increase compliance costs. Moreover, these risks are likely to be enhanced with the current U.S. presidential administration and Democrats controlling Congress. For example, see Part I, Item 1, “Business – Government Regulation and Environmental Matters – Greenhouse Gas Emissions” for information about certain actions the Biden Administration has taken targeting greenhouse gas emissions. No assurance can be given that continued compliance with existing or future environmental laws and regulations will not result in a curtailment of production or processing activities or result in a material increase in the costs of production, development, exploration or processing operations. In addition, pollution and similar environmental risks generally are not fully insurable. These liabilities and costs could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. See Part I, Item 1, “Business – Government Regulation and Environmental Matters.”
Access to water to drill and conduct hydraulic fracturing may not be available if water sources become scarce, and we may face difficulty disposing of produced water gathered from drilling and production activities.
The availability of water is crucial to conduct hydraulic fracturing. A significant amount of water is necessary for drilling and completing each well with hydraulic fracturing. In the past, Texas has experienced severe droughts that have limited the water supplies that are necessary to conduct hydraulic fracturing. Although we have taken measures to secure our water supply, we can make no assurances that sufficient water resources will be available in the short or long term to carry out our current activities. If we are unable to obtain water to use in our operations from local sources, we may be unable to economically produce oil and gas, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
In addition, we must dispose of the fluids produced from oil and natural gas production operations, including produced water. The legal requirements related to the disposal of produced water into a non-producing geologic formation by means of underground injection wells are subject to change based on concerns of the public or governmental authorities regarding such disposal activities. One such concern arises from recent seismic events near underground disposal wells that are used for the disposal by injection of produced water resulting from oil and natural gas activities. In March 2016, the United States Geological Survey identified Texas and Colorado as being among the states with areas of increased rates of induced seismicity that could be attributed to fluid injection or oil and natural gas extraction. In response to concerns regarding induced seismicity, regulators in some states have imposed, or are considering imposing, additional requirements in the permitting of produced water disposal wells to assess any relationship between seismicity and the use of such wells. For example, in Texas, the RRC adopted new rules governing the permitting or re-permitting of wells used to dispose of produced water and other fluids resulting from the production of oil and natural gas in order to address these seismic activity concerns within the state. Among other things, these rules require companies seeking permits for disposal wells to provide seismic activity data in permit applications, provide for more frequent monitoring and reporting for certain wells and allow the state to modify, suspend or terminate permits on grounds that a disposal well is likely to be, or determined to be, causing seismic activity. States may issue orders to temporarily shut down or to curtail the injection depth of existing wells in the vicinity of seismic events. Increased regulation and attention given to induced seismicity could also lead to greater opposition, including litigation to limit or prohibit oil and natural gas activities utilizing injection wells for produced water disposal.
Climate change legislation, laws and regulations restricting emissions of greenhouse gases or prohibiting, restricting, or delaying oil and gas development on public lands, or legal or other action taken by public or private entities related to climate change could force us to incur increased capital and operating costs and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows, as well as our reputation.
In December 2009, the EPA determined that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs endanger public health and the environment because emissions of such gases are, according to the EPA, contributing to warming of the Earth’s atmosphere and other climatic changes. Based on these findings, the EPA began adopting and implementing regulations to restrict emissions of GHGs under existing provisions of the CAA. For example, the EPA issued rules restricting methane emissions from hydraulically fractured and refractured gas wells, compressors, pneumatic controls, storage vessels, and natural gas processing plants. For more information on GHG regulation, see Part I, Item 1, “Business – Government Regulation and Environmental Matters.”
While Congress has from time to time considered legislation to reduce emissions of GHGs, there has not been significant activity in the form of adopted legislation to reduce emissions of GHGs in recent years. In the absence of Congressional action, many states have established rules aimed at reducing GHG emissions, including GHG cap and trade programs. Most of these cap and trade programs work by requiring major sources of emissions, such as electric power plants, or major producers of fuels, such as refineries and natural gas processing plants, to acquire and surrender emission allowances. The number of allowances available for purchase is reduced each year in an effort to achieve the overall GHG emission reduction goal. In the future, the United States may also choose to adhere to international agreements targeting GHG reductions. The adoption of legislation or regulatory programs or other government action to reduce emissions of GHGs or restrict, delay or prohibit oil and gas development on public lands could require us to incur increased operating costs, such as costs to purchase and operate emissions control systems, to acquire emissions allowances or to comply with new regulatory or reporting requirements, or prevent us from conducting operations in certain areas. Any such legislation or regulatory programs could also increase the cost of consuming, and thereby reduce demand for, the oil and gas we produce. These risks are likely to be enhanced with the current U.S. presidential administration and Democrats controlling Congress. See Part I, Item 1, “Business – Government Regulation and Environmental Matters -Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Consequently, legislation and regulatory programs to reduce emissions of GHGs could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Reduced demand for the oil and gas that we produce could also have the effect of lowering the value of our reserves.
In addition, some scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHGs in the Earth’s atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant physical effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, droughts, floods and other climatic events. If such climactic events were to occur more frequently or with greater intensity, our exploration and development activities and ability to transport our production to market could be adversely affected, as these events could cause a loss of production from temporary cessation of activity or damaged facilities and equipment. If any such events were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. For a more complete discussion of environmental laws and regulations intended to address climate change and their impact on our business and operations, see Part I, Item 1, “Business – Government Regulation and Environmental Matters.”
There have also been efforts in recent years to influence the investment community, including investment advisors and certain sovereign wealth, pension and endowment funds, as well as other stakeholders, promoting divestment of fossil fuel equities and pressuring lenders to limit funding to companies engaged in the extraction of fossil fuel reserves. Such environmental activism and initiatives aimed at limiting climate change and reducing air pollution could interfere with our business activities, operations and ability to access capital and adversely impact our reputation. Finally, increasing attention to the risks of climate change has resulted in an increased possibility of lawsuits or investigations brought by public and private entities against oil and gas companies in connection with their GHG emissions. Should we be targeted by any such litigation or investigation, we may incur liability, which, to the extent that societal pressures or political or other factors are involved, could be imposed without regard to our causation of or contribution to the asserted damage, or to other mitigating factors.
Federal state and local legislation and regulatory initiatives relating to hydraulic fracturing, as well as governmental reviews of such activities, could result in increased costs and additional operating restrictions or delays and adversely affect our production.
Hydraulic fracturing involves the injection of water, sand or other propping agents and chemicals under pressure into rock formations to stimulate oil and gas production. We routinely use hydraulic fracturing to complete wells. The EPA released the final results of its comprehensive research study on the potential adverse impacts that hydraulic fracturing may have on drinking water resources in December 2016. The EPA concluded that hydraulic fracturing activities can impact drinking water resources under some circumstances, including large volume spills and inadequate mechanical integrity of wells. The results of the EPA’s study could spur action towards federal legislation and regulation of hydraulic fracturing or similar production operations. In past sessions, Congress has considered, but did not pass, legislation to amend the SDWA to remove the SDWA’s exemption granted to most hydraulic fracturing operations (other than operations using fluids containing diesel) and to require reporting and disclosure of chemicals used by oil and gas companies in the hydraulic fracturing process. The EPA has issued SDWA permitting guidance for hydraulic fracturing operations involving the use of diesel fuel in fracturing fluids in those states where the EPA is the permitting authority. The EPA has also issued proposed and final regulations under the CAA establishing performance standards, including standards for the capture of VOCs and methane released during hydraulic fracturing; an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking under the Toxic Substances Control Act to require companies to disclose information regarding the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing; and final rules in June 2016 to prohibit the discharge of wastewater from hydraulic fracturing operations to publicly owned wastewater treatment plants. In addition, a number of states and local regulatory authorities and federal politicians are considering or have implemented more stringent regulatory requirements applicable to hydraulic fracturing, including bans/moratoria on drilling that effectively prohibit further production of oil and gas through the use of hydraulic fracturing or similar operations. Texas has adopted regulations that require the disclosure of information regarding the substances used in the hydraulic fracturing process, and the RRC has also adopted rules governing well casing, cementing and other standards for ensuring that hydraulic fracturing operations do not contaminate nearby water resources. Moreover, the legal requirements related to the disposal of produced water into a non-producing geologic formation by means of underground injection wells are subject to change based on concerns of the public or governmental authorities regarding such disposal activities, and the RRC has recently limited certain disposal well activity resulting from an increase in seismic events in certain areas of Texas. In light of concerns about seismic activity being triggered by the injection of produced waters into underground wells, Texas regulators have asserted regulatory authority to limit injection activities in certain wells in an effort to reduce seismic activity. Another consequence of seismic events may be lawsuits alleging that disposal well operations have caused damage to neighboring properties or otherwise violated state and federal rules regulating waste disposal. These developments could result in additional regulation and restrictions on the use of injection wells by us. Increased regulation and attention given to induced seismicity could also lead to greater opposition, including litigation to limit or prohibit oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids activities utilizing injection wells for produced water disposal.
The adoption of new laws or regulations imposing reporting or operational obligations on, or otherwise limiting or prohibiting, the hydraulic fracturing process could make it more difficult to complete oil and gas wells in unconventional plays. In addition, if hydraulic fracturing becomes regulated at the federal level as a result of federal legislation or regulatory initiatives by the EPA, hydraulic fracturing activities could become subject to additional permitting requirements, and also to attendant permitting delays and potential increases in cost, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations. These risks are likely to be enhanced with the current U.S. presidential administration and Democrats controlling Congress.
Restrictions on drilling activities intended to protect certain species of wildlife or their habitat may adversely affect our ability to conduct drilling activities in some of the areas where we operate.
Various federal and state statutes prohibit certain actions that harm endangered or threatened species and their habitats, migratory birds, wetlands and natural resources. These statutes include the Endangered Species Act, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, the Clean Water Act, CERCLA and the OPA. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service may designate critical habitat and suitable habitat areas that it believes are necessary for survival of threatened or endangered species. A critical habitat or suitable habitat designation could result in further material restrictions to federal land use and private land use and could delay or prohibit land access or oil and gas development. If harm to species or damages to wetlands, habitat or natural resources occur or may occur, government entities or, at times, private parties may act to prevent oil and gas exploration or development activities or seek damages for harm to species, habitat or natural resources resulting from drilling, construction or releases of oil, wastes, hazardous substances or other regulated materials, and in some cases, may seek criminal penalties.
We may be involved in legal proceedings that could result in substantial liabilities.
Like many oil and gas companies, from time to time, we expect to be involved in various legal and other proceedings, such as title, royalty or contractual disputes, regulatory compliance matters and personal injury or property damage matters, in the ordinary course of business. Such legal proceedings are inherently uncertain and their results cannot be predicted. Regardless of the outcome, such proceedings could have an adverse impact on us because of legal costs, diversion of management and other personnel and other factors. In addition, it is possible that a resolution of one or more such proceedings could result in liability, penalties or sanctions, as well as judgments, consent decrees or orders requiring a change in our business practices, which could materially and adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. Accruals for such liability, penalties or sanctions may be insufficient, and judgments and estimates to determine accruals or range of losses related to legal and other proceedings could change from one period to the next, and such changes could be material.
Tax-Related Risks
Our ability to use net operating loss carryforwards to offset future taxable income may be subject to certain limitations.
Our ability to utilize U.S. net operating loss, or NOL, carryforwards to reduce future taxable income is subject to various limitations under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code. As disclosed in Note 10 to our consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” we have substantial NOL carryforwards. The utilization of such carryforwards may be limited upon the occurrence of certain ownership changes, including the purchase or sale of our stock by 5% shareholders and our offering of stock during any three-year period resulting in an aggregate change of more than 50% in our beneficial ownership. In the event of an ownership change, Section 382 of the Code imposes an annual limitation on the amount of our taxable income that can be offset by these carryforwards. As of December 31, 2021, we do not believe that an ownership change has occurred; however, to the extent an ownership change has occurred or were to occur in the future, it is possible that the limitations imposed on our ability to use pre-ownership change losses could cause a significant net increase in our U.S. federal income tax liability and could cause U.S. federal income taxes to be paid earlier than they otherwise would be paid if such limitations were not in effect. In addition, U.S. NOLs generated on or after January 1, 2018, can be limited to 80% of taxable income. To the extent we are not able to offset our future income with our NOLs, this could adversely affect our operating results and cash flows once we attain profitability.
Certain federal income tax deductions currently available with respect to oil and gas exploration and development may be eliminated. Additional state taxes on oil and gas extraction may be imposed, as a result of future legislation.
In recent years, lawmakers and Treasury have proposed certain significant changes to U.S. tax laws applicable to oil and gas companies. These changes include, but are not limited to: (i) the repeal of the percentage depletion allowance for oil and gas properties; (ii) the elimination of current deductions for intangible drilling and development costs; and (iii) an extension of the amortization period for certain geological and geophysical expenditures. It is unclear whether any such changes will be enacted or if enacted, when such changes could be effective. If such proposed changes are ever made, as well as any similar changes in in U.S. federal tax law or state law, it could eliminate or postpone certain tax deductions that are currently available to us with respect to oil and gas exploration and development, and any such change could negatively affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Additionally, future legislation could be enacted that increases the taxes or fees imposed on oil and gas extraction. Any such legislation could result in increased operating costs and/or reduced consumer demand for petroleum products, which in turn could affect the prices we receive for our crude oil, NGLs and natural gas.
Technology-Related Risks
We may not be able to keep pace with technological developments in our industry.
The oil and gas industry is characterized by rapid and significant technological advancements and introductions of new products and services using new technologies. As others use or develop new technologies, we may be placed at a competitive disadvantage, and competitive pressures may force us to implement those new technologies at substantial cost. In addition, other oil and gas companies may have greater financial, technical and personnel resources that allow them to enjoy technological advantages and may allow them to implement new technologies before we can. We may not be able to respond to these competitive pressures and implement new technologies on a timely basis or at an acceptable cost. If one or more of the technologies we use now or in the future were to become obsolete or if we are unable to use the most advanced commercially available technology, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be adversely affected.
A cybersecurity incident could result in theft of confidential information, data corruption or operational disruption.
The oil and gas industry is increasingly dependent on digital technologies to conduct certain exploration, development and production activities. Software programs are used for, among other things, reserve estimates, seismic interpretation, modeling and compliance reporting. In addition, the use of mobile communication is widespread. Increasingly, we must protect our business against potential cyber incidents including attacks as we have experienced and will continue to experience varying degrees of cyber incidents in the normal conduct of our business.
If our systems for protecting against cyber incidents prove insufficient, we could be adversely affected by unauthorized access to our digital systems which could result in theft of confidential information, data corruption or operational disruption. These cybersecurity threat actors are becoming more sophisticated and coordinated in their attempts to access a company’s information technology systems and data, including the information technology systems of cloud providers and third parties with which a company conducts business. As cyber threats continue to evolve, we may be required to expend additional resources to continue to modify and enhance our protective systems or to investigate and remediate any vulnerabilities.
Information technology solution failures, network disruptions and breaches of data security could disrupt our operations by causing delays or cancellation of customer orders, impeding processing of transactions and reporting financial results, resulting in the unintentional disclosure of customer, employee or our information, or damage to our reputation. A cyber attack involving our information systems and related infrastructure, or that of our business associates, could negatively impact our operations in a variety of ways, including but not limited to, the following:
•Unauthorized access to seismic data, reserves information, strategic information, or other sensitive or proprietary information could have a negative impact on our ability to compete for oil and gas resources;
•Data corruption, communication interruption, or other operational disruption during drilling activities could result in failure to reach the intended target or a drilling incident;
•Data corruption or operational disruptions of production-related infrastructure could result in a loss of production, or accidental discharge;
•A cyber attack on a vendor or service provider could result in supply chain disruptions which could delay or halt our major development projects;
•A cyber attack on third-party gathering, pipeline, or other transportation systems could delay or prevent us from transporting and marketing our production, resulting in a loss of revenues;
•A cyber attack involving commodities exchanges or financial institutions could slow or halt commodities trading, thus preventing us from marketing our production or engaging in hedging activities, resulting in a loss of revenues;
•A cyber attack which halts activities at a power generation facility or refinery using natural gas as feed stock could have a significant impact on the natural gas market;
•A cyber attack on a communications network or power grid could cause operational disruption resulting in loss of revenues;
•A cyber attack on our automated and surveillance systems could cause a loss in production and potential environmental hazards;
•A deliberate corruption of our financial or operating data could result in events of non-compliance which could then lead to regulatory fines or penalties; and
•A cyber attack resulting in the loss or disclosure of, or damage to, our or any of our customer’s or supplier’s data or confidential information could harm our business by damaging our reputation, subjecting us to potential financial or legal liability, and requiring us to incur significant costs, including costs to repair or restore our systems and data or to take other remedial steps.
Additionally, certain cyber incidents may remain undetected for an extended period. There can be no assurance that a system failure or data security breach will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Furthermore, the growth of cyber attacks has resulted in evolving legal and compliance matters which impose significant costs that are likely to increase over time.
Risks Related to the Ownership of Our Class A Common Stock
Juniper controls the Company, and their interests may conflict with the Company’s and its shareholders’ interests in the future.
Juniper beneficially owns approximately 51.7% of our Common Stock. As a result, Juniper is able to control the election and removal of our directors and thereby control our policies and operations and its interests may not in all cases be aligned with other shareholders’ interests. In addition, Juniper may have an interest in pursuing acquisitions, divestitures and other transactions that, in its judgment, could enhance its investment, even though such transactions might involve risks to other shareholders. For example, Juniper could cause us to make acquisitions that increase our indebtedness or cause us to sell revenue-generating assets. Additionally, Juniper and its designated directors are not obligated to present any business opportunities (other than those presented to such directors in their roles as directors of the Company) to us.
In addition, Juniper is able to determine the outcome of many matters requiring shareholder approval and is able to cause or prevent a change of control of the Company or a change in the composition of our Board of Directors and could preclude any acquisition of the Company. This concentration of voting control could deprive shareholders of an opportunity to receive a premium for their shares of Class A Common Stock as part of a sale of the Company and ultimately might affect the market price of our Class A Common Stock.
Moreover, Juniper has certain director designation rights entitling them to designate up to five members of the Board out of a total of nine directors, with such designation rights being subject to certain step-downs.
We are a “controlled company” within the meaning of the Nasdaq rules and, as a result, expect to qualify for exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements.
Juniper controls a majority of the voting power of our Common Stock. As a result, we are a “controlled company” within the meaning of the corporate governance standards of Nasdaq. As a result, we are not required to comply with certain corporate governance requirements, including the requirement to have a majority of the board of directors be independent directors and the requirement to have compensation and nominating committees that are composed entirely of independent directors. While we have not elected to utilize these exemptions, in the future we could elect to do so. If we were to utilize any such exemptions, our shareholders would not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are subject to all of the corporate governance rules for Nasdaq-listed companies.
Ranger Oil is a holding company. Ranger Oil’s only material asset is its equity interest in the Partnership, and Ranger Oil is accordingly dependent upon distributions from the Partnership to pay taxes and cover its operating expenses and other obligations.
Following the Juniper Transactions, Ranger Oil is a holding company and has no material assets other than its equity interest in the Partnership. Ranger Oil has no independent means of generating revenue. To the extent the Partnership has available cash, Ranger Oil intends to cause the Partnership to make (i) pro rata distributions to its limited partners, including Ranger Oil, in an amount sufficient to allow Ranger Oil to pay its taxes and (ii) payments to Ranger Oil to cover its operating expenses and other obligations. To the extent that Ranger Oil needs funds and the Partnership or its subsidiaries are restricted from making such distributions or payments under applicable law or regulation or under the terms of any future financing arrangements, or are otherwise unable to provide such funds, Ranger Oil’s liquidity and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.
Moreover, because Ranger Oil has no independent means of generating revenue, Ranger Oil’s ability to pay dividends will be dependent on the ability of the Partnership to make cash distributions. This ability, in turn, may depend on the ability of the Partnership’s subsidiaries to make distributions to it. The ability of the Partnership, its subsidiaries and other entities in which it directly or indirectly holds an equity interest to make such distributions will be subject to, among other things, (i) applicable laws or regulations that may limit the amount of funds available for distribution and (ii) restrictions in relevant debt instruments issued by the Partnership or its subsidiaries and other entities in which it directly or indirectly holds an equity interest.
In certain circumstances, the Partnership will be required to make tax distributions to its unitholders, including us, and the tax distributions that the Partnership will be required to make may be substantial.
Pursuant to the A&R Partnership Agreement, the Partnership will make generally pro rata cash distributions, or tax distributions, to its unitholders, including us, in an amount generally intended to allow the unitholders to satisfy their respective income tax liabilities with respect to their allocable share of the income of the Partnership, based on certain assumptions and conventions, provided that the distribution will be sufficient to allow us to satisfy our actual tax liabilities. Because tax distributions will be made pro rata based on ownership and based on an assumed tax rate, the Partnership could be required to make tax distributions that, in the aggregate, exceed the amount of taxes that the Partnership would have paid if it were taxed on its net income at its effective tax rate.
Funds used by the Partnership to satisfy its tax distribution obligations will not be available for reinvestment in the business. Moreover, the tax distributions the Partnership will be required to make may be substantial and may exceed the unitholder’s tax liabilities if the unitholder has an overall effective tax rate that is lower than the assumed rate.
Certain provisions of our certificate of incorporation and our bylaws may make it difficult for stockholders to change the composition of our Board and may discourage, delay or prevent a merger or acquisition that some stockholders may consider beneficial.
Certain provisions of our Articles of Incorporation and our Bylaws may have the effect of delaying or preventing changes in control if our Board determines that such changes in control are not in the best interests of the Company and our stockholders. The provisions in our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws include, among other things, those that:
•authorize our Board to issue preferred stock and to determine the price and other terms, including preferences and voting rights, of those shares without stockholder approval;
•establish advance notice procedures for nominating directors or presenting matters at stockholder meetings; and
•limit the persons who may call special meetings of stockholders.
While these provisions have the effect of encouraging persons seeking to acquire control of the Company to negotiate with our Board, they could enable the Board to hinder or frustrate a transaction that some, or a majority, of the stockholders may believe to be in their best interests and, in that case, may prevent or discourage attempts to remove and replace incumbent directors. These provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our Board, which is responsible for appointing the members of our management.
Our Articles of Incorporation designate the United States Direct Court for the Eastern District of Virginia or the federal district courts for the United States of America as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our shareholders, which could limit our shareholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees.
Our Articles of Incorporation provide that, to the fullest extent required by law, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, (or, if United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia lacks subject matter jurisdiction, another state or federal court located within the Commonwealth of Virginia) is the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of the Company, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer or other employee of the Company to the Company or the Company’s shareholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the Virginia Stock Corporation Act or (iv) any action asserting a claim governed by the internal affairs doctrine. Furthermore, under our Articles of Incorporation, the federal district courts for the United States of America are the sole and exclusive forum for causes of action arising under the Securities Act.
Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our capital stock is deemed to have received notice of and consented to the foregoing forum selection provision. This provision may limit our shareholders’ ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that they find favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits. Alternatively, if a court were to find this choice of forum provision inapplicable to, or unenforceable in respect of, one or more of the specified types of actions or proceedings, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, prospects, or results of operations.
The market price of our Class A Common Stock is subject to volatility.
The market price of our Class A Common Stock could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to, and the level of trading of our Class A Common Stock may be affected by, numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control. These factors include, among other things, our limited trading volume, the concentration of holdings of our Class A Common Stock, actual or anticipated variations in our operating results and cash flow, the nature and content of our earnings releases, announcements or events that impact our products, customers, competitors or markets, business conditions in our markets and the general state of the securities markets and the market for energy-related stocks, as well as general economic and market conditions and other factors that may affect our future results, including those described in this report. Significant sales of our Class A Common Stock, or the expectation of these sales, by significant shareholders, officers or directors could materially and adversely affect the market price of our Class A Common Stock.
Our business and the trading prices of our securities could be negatively affected as a result of actions of so-called “activist” shareholders, and such activism could impact the trading value of our securities.
Shareholders may from time to time attempt to effect changes, engage in proxy solicitations or advance shareholder proposals. Activist shareholders may make strategic proposals, suggestions or requested changes concerning our operations, strategy, management, assets or other matters. If we become the subject of activity by activist shareholders, responding to such actions could be costly and time-consuming, diverting the attention of our management and employees. Furthermore, activist campaigns can create perceived uncertainties as to our future direction, strategy, or leadership and may result in the loss of potential business opportunities and cause our stock price to experience periods of volatility.
There may be future sales or other dilution of our equity, which may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
We are not restricted from issuing additional common stock, including securities that are convertible into or exchangeable for, or that represent a right to receive, common stock. Any issuance of additional shares of our common stock or convertible securities will dilute the ownership interest of our common stockholders. Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock or other equity-related securities in the public market, or the perception that these sales could occur, could depress the market price of our common stock and impair our ability to raise capital through the sale of additional equity securities. We cannot predict the effect that future sales of our common stock or other equity-related securities would have on the market price of our common stock.
As of March 4, 2022, Juniper beneficially owned 22,548,998 shares of our Class B common stock, par value of $0.01 per share (“Class B Common Stock”) and 22,548,998 common units in our Up-C partnership subsidiary, which are redeemable or exchangeable for 22,548,998 shares of our Class A Common Stock at the election of the holder for no additional consideration. Juniper may decide to reduce its investment in the Company at any time. Pursuant to the Investor and Registration Rights Agreement with Juniper, at their election, we are required to assist them in a secondary offering of the sale of their securities. Any such sales of Class A Common Stock by Juniper, or expectations thereof, could have the effect of depressing the market price for our Class A Common Stock.