Item 1A.    Risk Factors

         Natural gas prices fluctuate due to a number of factors that are beyond the control of the Trust and Greylock Production, and lower prices would reduce proceeds to the Trust and cash distributions to unitholders.

        The Trust's reserves and quarterly cash distributions are highly dependent upon the prices realized from the sale of natural gas. Natural gas prices can fluctuate widely on a month-to-month basis in response to a variety of factors that are beyond the control of the Trust and Greylock Production. These factors include, among others:

•

weather conditions and seasonal trends;



•

regional, domestic and foreign supply and perceptions of supply of natural gas;



•

availability of imported liquefied natural gas, or LNG;



•

the level of demand and perceptions of demand for natural gas;



•

anticipated future prices of natural gas, LNG and other commodities;



•

technological advances affecting energy consumption and energy supply;



•

U.S. and worldwide political and economic conditions;



•

the occurrence or threat of epidemic or pandemic diseases, including the recent outbreak of COVID-19, or any government response to such occurrence or threat;



•

the price and availability of alternative fuels;



•

the proximity, capacity, cost and availability of gathering and transportation facilities;



•

the volatility and uncertainty of regional pricing differentials;



•

acts of force majeure;



•

governmental regulations and taxation; and



•

energy conservation and environmental measures.

        Continued low natural gas prices due to the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic or other factors will reduce proceeds to which the Trust is entitled, which will reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to unitholders, and may ultimately reduce the amount of natural gas that is economic to produce from the Underlying Properties. As a result, the operator of any of the Underlying Properties could determine during periods of low natural gas prices to shut in or curtail production from wells on the Underlying Properties. In addition, the operator of the Underlying Properties could determine during periods of low natural gas prices to plug and abandon marginal wells that otherwise may have been allowed to continue to produce for a longer period under conditions of higher prices. Specifically, Greylock Production may abandon any well or property if it reasonably believes that the well or property can no longer produce natural gas in commercially economic quantities. This could result in termination of the portion of the royalty interest relating to the abandoned well or property, and Greylock Production would have no obligation to drill a replacement well. In making such decisions, Greylock Production is required under the applicable conveyance to act as a reasonably prudent operator in the AMI under the same or similar circumstances as it would act if it were acting with respect to its own properties, disregarding the existence of the Royalty Interests as burdens affecting such property. The volatility of natural gas prices also reduces the accuracy of estimates of future cash distributions to Trust unitholders.

23

Table of Contents

         Actual reserves and future production may be less than current estimates, which could reduce cash distributions by the Trust and the value of the Trust units.

        The value of the Trust units and the amount of future cash distributions to the Trust unitholders will depend upon, among other things, the accuracy of the reserves estimated to be attributable to the Trust's Royalty Interests. The Trust's reserve quantities and revenues are based on estimates of reserve quantities and revenues for the Underlying Properties. See "The underlying properties—Natural gas reserves" in the Prospectus for a discussion of the method of allocating Proved reserves to the Trust. It is not possible to measure underground accumulations of natural gas in an exact way, and estimating reserves is inherently uncertain. Ultimately, actual production and revenues for the Underlying Properties could vary negatively and in material amounts from estimates and those variations could be material. Petroleum engineers are required to make subjective estimates of underground accumulations of natural gas based on factors and assumptions that include:

•

historical production from the area compared with production rates from other producing areas;



•

natural gas prices, production levels, Btu content, production expenses, transportation costs, severance and excise taxes and capital expenditures; and



•

the assumed effect of governmental regulation.

        Changes in these assumptions or actual production costs incurred and results of actual development and production costs could materially decrease reserve estimates.

        Further, the reserve report estimating the Trust's proved reserves, future production and income attributable to the Royalty Interests as of December 31, 2019 was prepared, in accordance with applicable regulations, using a weighted benchmark price adjusted for differentials resulting in an average natural gas price of $2.34 per Mcf during 2019, as described in Appendix A to this report. At the date of this report, the weighted benchmark natural gas price, adjusted for differentials, for production in which the Trust has an interest is below $2.34 A reserve report prepared using the current lower value would result in lower proved reserves, future production and income attributable to the Trust's Royalty Interests.

         The generation of proceeds for distribution by the Trust depends in part on gathering, transportation and processing facilities owned by Greylock Midstream and others. Any limitation in the availability of those facilities could interfere with sales of natural gas production from the Underlying Properties.

        The amount of natural gas that may be produced and sold from any well to which the Underlying Properties relate is subject to curtailment in certain circumstances, such as by reason of weather conditions, pipeline interruptions due to scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, failure of tendered gas to meet quality specifications of gathering lines or downstream transporters, excessive line pressure which prevents delivery of gas, physical damage to the gathering system or transportation system or lack of contracted capacity on such systems. The curtailments may vary from a few days to several months. In many cases, Greylock Production is provided limited notice, if any, as to when production will be curtailed and the duration of such curtailments. If Greylock Production is forced to reduce production due to such a curtailment, the revenues of the Trust and the amount of cash distributions to the Trust unitholders would similarly be reduced due to the reduction of proceeds from the sale of production.

24

Table of Contents

         The generation of proceeds for distribution by the Trust depends in part on the ability of Greylock Production and/or its customers to obtain service on transportation facilities owned by third party pipelines. Any limitation in the availability of those facilities and/or any increase in the cost of service on those facilities could interfere with sales of natural gas production from the Underlying Properties.

        Natural gas that is gathered on the GCGS, including natural gas produced from the Underlying Properties, is currently shipped on two interstate natural gas transportation pipelines. Greylock Production or its purchasers have contracted with those pipelines for firm or interruptible transportation service. The rates for service on the transportation pipelines are regulated by the FERC and are subject to increase if the pipeline demonstrates that the existing rates are unjust and unreasonable.

        Greylock Production has an agreement with Columbia Gas Transmission, LLC ("Columbia") to provide firm transportation downstream of the GCGS for 50,000 MMBtu per day. This firm transportation arrangement has been in effect since August 1, 2011 and is at Columbia's filed tariff rate, which is currently $0.2508 per MMBtu at one hundred percent load factor. Unless otherwise modified or altered, the agreement will terminate on July 31, 2021 with respect to 45,000 MMBtu per day, and on July 31, 2022 with respect to the remaining 5,000 MMBtu per day, unless Greylock Production exercises its right of first refusal to extend the term. Greylock Production has entered into an additional agreement with Columbia to provide firm transportation downstream of the GCGS for 100,000 MMBtu per day that will utilize Columbia's Mountaineer XPress Project. This firm transportation arrangement went into effect on January 18, 2019, and is at a fixed demand rate of $0.50 per MMBtu at one hundred percent load factor plus applicable Columbia tariff surcharges. Unless otherwise modified or altered, this agreement will terminate in January 2034. Firm transportation utilized as to the Trust's interests is a chargeable post-production cost, and the Trust bears its proportionate share of such costs.

        In the future, Greylock Production may seek to obtain additional firm transportation capacity, but such capacity may not be available. In addition, to the extent Greylock Production's customers or Greylock Production became dependent on interruptible service, and to the extent that either pipeline receives requests for service that exceed the capacity of the pipeline, the pipeline will honor requests by its firm customers first, and will then allocate remaining capacity, if any, to interruptible shippers. As a result, Greylock Production or its customers may be unable to obtain all or a part of any requested interruptible capacity service on the transportation pipelines. Any inability of Greylock Production or its customers to procure sufficient capacity to transport the natural gas gathered on the GCGS will decrease and/or delay the receipt of any proceeds that may be associated with natural gas production from wells on the Underlying Properties. In addition, any increase in transportation rates paid by Greylock Production for production attributable to the Trust's interests will decrease the proceeds received by the Trust.

         Declines in the financial position of Greylock Production could impede the operation of wells.

        The value of the Royalty Interests and the Trust's ultimate cash available for distribution is highly dependent on the financial condition of Greylock Production. The ability to operate the Underlying Properties depends on future financial condition and economic performance and access to capital, which in turn will depend upon the supply and demand for natural gas, prevailing economic conditions and financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of such operators. If the reduced demand for natural gas in the global market as a result of the economic effects of the outbreak of COVID-19 persists for the near future or longer, or if the outbreak adversely affects employees of Greylock Production or other operators and their ability to conduct operations, such factors could have a negative impact on the financial condition and economic performance of Greylock Production.

25

Table of Contents

        In the event of any future bankruptcy of Greylock Production, the value of the Royalty Interests could be adversely affected by, among other things, delay or cessation of payments under the Royalty Interests, business disruptions or cessation of operations by the operator, replacements of operators, inability to find a replacement operator if necessary, reduced production of reserves, or decreased distributions to Trust unitholders.

         Due to the Trust's lack of industry and geographic diversification, adverse developments in the Trust's existing area of operation could adversely impact its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and reduce its ability to make distributions to the unitholders.

        The Underlying Properties are operated for natural gas production only and are focused exclusively in the Marcellus Shale formation in Greene County, Pennsylvania. In particular, the concentration of the Underlying Properties in the Marcellus Shale formation in Greene County could disproportionately expose the Trust's interests to operational and regulatory risk in that area. Due to the lack of diversification in industry type and location of the Trust's interests, adverse developments in the natural gas market or the area of the Underlying Properties could have a significantly greater impact on the Trust's financial condition, results of operations and cash flows than if the Trust's Royalty Interests were more diversified.

         The Trust units may lose value as a result of title deficiencies with respect to the Underlying Properties.

        The existence of a material title deficiency with respect to the Underlying Properties can reduce the value or render a property worthless, thus adversely affecting the distributions to unitholders. Greylock Production does not obtain title insurance covering mineral leaseholds. Additionally, undeveloped acreage has greater risk of title defects than developed acreage.

        Prior to the drilling of the PUD Wells, Legacy ECA obtained preliminary title reviews to ensure there were no obvious defects in title to the leasehold. However, a title review is not title insurance, and in the event of a material title problem in the future, proceeds available for distribution to unitholders, and the value of the Trust units, may be reduced.

         The Trust is passive in nature and has no stockholder voting rights in Greylock Production, managerial, contractual or other ability to influence Greylock Production, or control over the field operations of, sale of natural gas from, or development of, the Underlying Properties.

        Neither the Trust nor the Trust unitholders has any voting rights with respect to Greylock Production and therefore none of them has any managerial, contractual or other ability to influence Greylock Production's activities or operations of the natural gas properties. This is how, pursuant to the Administrative Services Agreement and the Development Agreement, Legacy ECA was able to transfer operations of all of the Trust properties to Greylock Production, who also retains the right to transfer operations of any or all of the Trust properties. Any third-party operators may not have the operational expertise of Greylock Production within the AMI. Natural gas properties are typically managed pursuant to an operating agreement among the working interest owners in the properties. The typical operating agreement contains procedures whereby the owners of the working interests in the property designate one of the interest owners to be the operator of the property. Under these arrangements, the operator is typically responsible for making all decisions relating to drilling activities, sale of production, compliance with regulatory requirements and other matters that affect the property. Neither the Trustee nor the Trust unitholders has any contractual ability to influence or control the field operations of, sale of natural gas from, or any future development of, the Underlying Properties. The Trust units are a passive investment that entitles the Trust only to receive cash distributions attributable to the Royalty Interests.

26

Table of Contents

         Greylock Production may sell all or a portion of the Underlying Properties, subject to and burdened by the Royalty Interests, and any such purchaser could have a weaker financial position and/or be less experienced in natural gas development and production than Greylock Production.

        Trust unitholders will not be entitled to vote on any sale of the Underlying Properties if the Underlying Properties are sold subject to and burdened by the Royalty Interests, and the Trust will not receive any proceeds from any such sale. The purchaser would be responsible for all of Greylock Production's obligations relating to the Royalty Interests on the portion of the Underlying Properties sold, and Greylock Production would have no continuing obligation to the Trust for those properties. Additionally, Greylock Production may enter into farmout or joint venture arrangements with respect to the wells burdened by the Royalty Interests. Any purchaser, farmout counterparty or joint venture partner could have a weaker financial position and/or be less experienced in natural gas development and production than Greylock Production.

         The natural gas reserves estimated to be attributable to the Underlying Properties of the Trust are depleting assets and production from those reserves will diminish over time. Furthermore, the Trust is precluded from acquiring other oil and gas properties or Royalty Interests to replace the depleting assets and production.

        The proceeds payable to the Trust from the Royalty Interests are derived from the sale of the production of natural gas from the Underlying Properties. The natural gas reserves attributable to the Underlying Properties are depleting assets, which means that the reserves of natural gas attributable to the Underlying Properties will decline over time. As a result, the quantity of natural gas produced from the Underlying Properties will decline over time. Based on the estimated production volumes in the original reserve report described in the Prospectus, the gas production from proved producing reserves attributable to the PDP Royalty Interest was projected to decline at an average rate of approximately 8.5% per year over the life of the Trust. With respect to the PUD Wells, as of the Trust formation date, the production rate was expected to decline approximately 37.3% during the first year of production, approximately 14.7% during the next three to five years of production and approximately 8.0% per year for the remainder of the economically productive life of the well. These production characteristics were generally consistent with other development wells in the AMI. The anticipated rate of decline as originally projected was an estimate and actual decline rates may vary from those estimates. The average decline rate for the 40 PUD Wells for which Greylock Production now has several years of production data was about 43.5% during the first year.

        Future maintenance may affect the quantity of Proved reserves that can be economically produced from the Underlying Properties to which the wells relate. The timing and size of these projects will depend on, among other factors, the market prices of natural gas. Greylock Production has no contractual obligation to make capital expenditures on the Underlying Properties in the future. Furthermore, for properties on which Greylock Production is not designated as the operator, Greylock Production has no control over the timing or amount of those capital expenditures. Greylock Production also has the right to non-consent and not participate in the capital expenditures on properties for which it is not the operator, in which case Greylock Production and the Trust will not receive the production resulting from such capital expenditures. If Greylock Production or other operators of the wells to which the Underlying Properties relate do not implement maintenance projects when warranted, the future rate of production decline of Proved reserves may be higher than the rate currently expected by Greylock Production or estimated in the reserve report.

        The Trust Agreement provides that the Trust's business activities are limited to owning the Royalty Interests and any activity reasonably related to such ownership, including activities required or permitted by the terms of the conveyances related to the Royalty Interests. As a result, the Trust is not permitted to acquire other oil and gas properties or royalty interests to replace the depleting assets and production attributable to the Trust.

27

Table of Contents

         The amount of cash available for distribution by the Trust will be reduced by the amount of post-production costs, applicable taxes associated with the Trust's interest, and Trust expenses.

        The Royalty Interests and the Trust bear certain costs and expenses that reduce the amount of cash received by the Trust or available for distribution by the Trust to the holders of the Trust units. These costs and expenses include those described below.

•

Substantially all of the production from the Producing Wells and the PUD Wells utilize the GCGS. The Trust paid the initial Post-Production Services Fee to Legacy ECA for use of such system, which includes the Sponsor's costs to gather, compress, transport, process, treat, dehydrate and market the gas. This fee was fixed until Legacy ECA's obligation to drill the PUD Wells was satisfied in 2011; since then, the Sponsor has been permitted to increase this fee to the extent necessary to recover certain capital expenditures on the GCGS, provided the resulting charge does not exceed the prevailing charges in the area for similar services. Additionally, the Trust is charged for the cost of fuel used in the compression process or equivalent electricity charges when electric compressors are used.



•

Any third-party post-production costs incurred and associated with the Trust's interests reduces cash received by the Trust or available for distribution by the Trust to the holders of the Trust units, including any amounts paid by Greylock Production for transportation on downstream interstate pipelines. Such post-production costs include the costs incurred in connection with Greylock Production's agreements with a third party to obtain firm transportation downstream of the GCGS for 50,000 MMBtu per day at the third party's filed tariff rate, which equates to $0.2508 per MMBtu at a one hundred percent load factor, and beginning in January 2019 to obtain firm transportation downstream of the GCGS for 100,000 MMBtu per day at a fixed demand rate of $0.50 per MMBtu at a one hundred percent load factor plus applicable third party tariff charges. The filed tariff rate is subject to adjustments, which may be retroactive, by regulatory authorities.



•

Taxes allocated to or imposed on the Trust include Pennsylvania franchise tax and any applicable property, ad valorem, production, severance, excise and other similar taxes. Currently, there are no taxes in Pennsylvania related to the production or severance of oil and natural gas in Pennsylvania; however, there have been proposals to enact a severance tax, none of which were adopted, in both the Pennsylvania Senate Finance Committee and the House Energy and Environmental Resources Committees, and lawmakers may propose other taxes in the future. If adopted, such taxes would be a post-production cost that is borne by the Trust.



•

The Trust bears 100% of Trust administrative expenses, including fees paid to the Trustee and the Delaware Trustee and an annual administrative services fee of $60,000 payable to Greylock Production.



•

The Trust is also responsible for paying other expenses, including costs associated with annual and quarterly reports to unitholders, tax return and Schedule K-1 preparation and distribution, independent auditor fees and registrar and transfer agent fees.

        The amount of costs and expenses borne by the Trust may vary materially from quarter-to-quarter. The extent by which the costs and expenses described above are higher or lower in any quarter will directly decrease or increase the amount received by the Trust and available for distribution to the unitholders.

28

Table of Contents

         The Trust has established a cash reserve for contingent liabilities and to pay expenses in accordance with the Trust Agreement, which would reduce net profits payable to the Trust and distributions to Trust unitholders.

        The Trust's source of capital is the cash flows from the Royalty Interests. Pursuant to the Trust Agreement, the Trust may establish a cash reserve through the withholding of cash for contingent liabilities and to pay expenses, which will reduce the amount of cash otherwise available for distribution to unitholders. Commencing with the distribution paid to unitholders in the first quarter of 2019, the Trustee has been gradually building a cash reserve for the payment of future expenses and liabilities to approximately $1.8 million by withholding cash reserve amounts from each quarterly distribution equal to the greater of $90,000 or 10% of the amount distributable to unitholders. Accordingly, in 2019 the Trustee withheld an aggregate of $526,550 from the funds otherwise available for distribution. In February 2020, the Trustee withheld $90,000 from funds otherwise available for distribution. The Trustee may increase or decrease the targeted amount at any time, and may increase or decrease the rate at which it is withholding funds to build the cash reserve at any time, without advance notice to the unitholders.

         A decrease in the differential between the price realized by Greylock Production for natural gas produced from the Underlying Properties and the NYMEX or other benchmark price of natural gas could reduce the proceeds to the Trust and therefore the cash distributions by the Trust and the value of Trust units.

        During the first few years of the Trust's existence, prices received for natural gas production from Trust properties exceeded the relevant benchmark prices, such as NYMEX; however, since 2014 the prices received have been lower than the benchmark prices, and this dynamic could continue in the future. The difference between the price received and the benchmark price is called a differential. The differential may vary significantly due to market conditions, the quality and location of production and other factors. Greylock Production cannot accurately predict natural gas differentials. Further decreases in the differential between the realized price of natural gas and the benchmark price for natural gas could reduce the proceeds to the Trust and, accordingly, reduce the cash distributions by the Trust and the value of the Trust units.

         The Trust has no hedges in place to protect against the price risk inherent in holding interest in natural gas, a commodity that is frequently characterized by significant price volatility.

        At the formation of the Trust, approximately fifty percent of the estimated natural gas production attributable to the Royalty Interests was hedged from April 1, 2010 through March 31, 2014. From inception through the termination of the hedge arrangements, the Trust received approximately $35 million that it would not have received without the hedge arrangements. The last of the hedge arrangements expired March 31, 2014. Consequently, unitholders no longer have the benefit of any hedge arrangements, and all production is subject to the price risks inherent in holding interests in natural gas, a commodity that is frequently characterized by significant price volatility.

         Natural gas wells are subject to operational hazards that can cause substantial losses. Greylock Production maintains insurance but may not be adequately insured for all such hazards.

        There are a variety of operating risks inherent in natural gas production and associated activities, such as fires, leaks, explosions, mechanical problems, major equipment failures, blow-outs, uncontrollable flow of natural gas, water or drilling fluids, casing collapses, abnormally pressurized formations and natural disasters. The occurrence of any of these or similar accidents that temporarily or permanently halt the production and sale of natural gas at any of the Underlying Properties will reduce Trust distributions by reducing the amount of proceeds available for distribution.

29

Table of Contents

        Additionally, if any of such risks or similar accidents occur, Greylock Production could incur substantial losses as a result of injury or loss of life, severe damage or destruction of property, natural resources and equipment, regulatory investigation and penalties and environmental damage and clean-up responsibility. If Greylock Production experiences any of these problems, its ability to conduct operations and perform its obligations to the Trust could be adversely affected. While Greylock Production maintains insurance coverage it deems appropriate for these risks with respect to the Underlying Properties, Greylock Production's operations may result in liabilities exceeding such insurance coverage or liabilities not covered by insurance. If a well is damaged, Greylock Production would have no obligation to drill a replacement well or make the Trust whole for the loss. The Trust does not maintain any type of insurance against any of the risks of conducting oil and gas exploration and production or related activities.

         The Trustee may, under certain circumstances, sell the Royalty Interests and dissolve the Trust. Unless sooner terminated, the Trust will begin to terminate following the end of the 20-year period in which the Trust owns the Term Royalty Interests.

        The Trustee must sell the Royalty Interests if unitholders approve the sale or vote to dissolve the Trust. The Trustee must also sell the Royalty Interests if the gross proceeds to the Trust attributable to the Royalty Interests over any four consecutive quarters are less than $1.5 million. Sale of all the Royalty Interests will result in the dissolution of the Trust. The net proceeds of any such sale will be distributed to the Trust unitholders. Unless sooner terminated, the Trust will begin to liquidate on the Termination Date. The Trust unitholders will not be entitled to receive any proceeds from the sale of production from the Underlying Properties following such date. The Term Royalty Interests will automatically revert to Greylock Production at the Termination Date, while the Perpetual Royalty Interests will be sold and the proceeds will be distributed to the unitholders (including Greylock Production to the extent of any Trust units it owns) at the Termination Date or soon thereafter. Greylock Production has a right of first refusal to purchase the Perpetual Royalty Interests upon termination of the Trust.

         If the Trust cannot meet the New York Stock Exchange continued listing requirements, the NYSE may delist the common units.

        Under the continued listing requirements of The New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE"), a company will be considered to be out of compliance with the exchange's minimum price requirement if the company's average closing price over a consecutive 30 trading day period ("Average Closing Price") is less than $1.00 (the "Minimum Price Requirement"). Under NYSE rules, a company that is out of compliance with the Minimum Price Requirement has a cure period of six months to regain compliance if it notifies the NYSE within 10 business days of receiving a deficiency notice of its intention to cure the deficiency. A company may regain compliance if on the last trading day of any calendar month during the cure period the company has a closing share price of at least $1.00 and an average closing share price of at least $1.00 over the 30-trading-day period ending on the last trading day of that month. If at the expiration of the cure period, both a $1.00 closing share price on the last trading day of the cure period and a $1.00 average closing share price over the 30-trading-day period ending on the last trading day of the cure period are not attained, the NYSE will commence suspension and delisting procedures. If delisted by the NYSE, a company's shares may be transferred to the over-the-counter ("OTC") market, a significantly more limited market than the NYSE, which could affect the market price, trading volume, liquidity and resale price of such shares. Securities that trade on the OTC markets also typically experience more volatility compared to securities that trade on a national securities exchange. During the cure period, the company's shares would continue to trade on the NYSE, subject to compliance with other continued listing requirements.

30

Table of Contents

        On November 21, 2019, the Trust received written notification from the NYSE that the Trust was not in compliance with the Minimum Price Requirement. Neither the Trust nor the Trustee has any control over the trading price of the Trust units, and neither the Trust nor the Trustee intends to attempt to cause a reverse split of the Trust units or other action in an effort to affect the trading price of the Trust units. Even if the Trust does regain compliance, it might be unable to maintain compliance, and would again become subject to the NYSE delisting procedures.

         The Private Investors may sell additional Trust units, and such sales could have an adverse effect on the trading price of the common units.

        As of December 31, 2019, Greylock Production held no common units, while select Private Investors held common units. In connection with the Trust's formation, the Trust and the Private Investors entered into a registration rights agreement, pursuant to which the Trust in 2012 filed a registration statement on Form S-3, to facilitate sales of common units by such holders. If the Private Investors were to sell or offer to sell a substantial number of common units, the market price of the units could be adversely affected.

         Conflicts of interest could arise between Greylock Production and the Trust unitholders.

        As a working interest owner in the Underlying Properties, Greylock Production could have interests that conflict with the interests of the Trust and the Trust unitholders. For example:

•

Greylock Production's interests may conflict with those of the Trust and the Trust unitholders in situations involving the development, maintenance, operation or abandonment of the Underlying Properties. Additionally, Greylock Production may abandon a well which is uneconomic to it while such well is still generating revenue for the Trust unitholders. Greylock Production may make decisions with respect to expenditures and decisions to allocate resources on projects in other areas that adversely affect the Underlying Properties, including reducing expenditures on these properties, which could cause gas production to decline at a faster rate and thereby result in lower cash distributions by the Trust in the future. In making such decisions, Greylock Production is required under the applicable conveyance to act as a reasonably prudent operator in the AMI under the same or similar circumstances as it would act if it were acting with respect to its own properties, disregarding the existence of the royalty interests as burdens affecting such property.



•

Greylock Production may sell some or all of the Underlying Properties. Any such sale may not be in the best interests of the Trust unitholders. Any purchaser may lack Greylock Production's experience in the Marcellus Shale or its creditworthiness.



•

Greylock Production may, without the consent of the Trust unitholders, require the Trust to release Royalty Interests with an aggregate value to the Trust of up to $5.0 million during any 12-month period. These releases will be made only in connection with the sale by Greylock Production of the Underlying Properties and are conditioned upon the Trust receiving an amount equal to the fair value to the Trust of such Royalty Interests. See "Sale and Abandonment of Underlying Properties" in Item 2 of this report.



•

Greylock Production may in its discretion increase its Post-Production Services Fee for post-production costs on the GCGS to the extent necessary to recover certain capital expenditures on the GCGS.



•

Greylock Production is permitted under the conveyance agreements creating the Royalty Interests to enter into new processing and transportation contracts without obtaining bids from or otherwise negotiating with any independent third parties, and Greylock Production will deduct from the Trust's proceeds any charges under such contracts attributable to production from the

31

Table of Contents

Trust properties. Provisions in the conveyance agreements, however, require that charges under future contracts with affiliates of Greylock Production relating to processing or transportation of natural gas must be comparable to charges prevailing in the area for similar services.

•

Greylock Production can purchase or sell Trust units without considering the effects the transaction may have on common unit prices or on the Trust itself. Additionally, Greylock Production can vote its Trust units in its sole discretion.

         The Trust is administered by a Trustee who cannot be replaced except at a special meeting of Trust unitholders.

        The business and affairs of the Trust are administered by the Trustee. Voting rights of Trust unitholders are more limited than those of stockholders of most public corporations. For example, there is no requirement for annual meetings of Trust unitholders or for an annual or other periodic re-election of the Trustee. The Trust Agreement provides that the Trustee may only be removed and replaced by the holders of a majority of the outstanding Trust units, including Trust units held by Greylock Production, if any, at a special meeting of Trust unitholders called by either the Trustee or the holders of not less than 10% of the outstanding Trust units. As a result, it will be difficult for public Trust unitholders to remove or replace the Trustee without the cooperation of Greylock Production (if at the time it holds a significant percentage of total Trust units) or other holders of a substantial percentage of the outstanding Trust units.

         Trust unitholders have limited ability to enforce provisions of the Royalty Interests, and Greylock Production's liability to the Trust is limited.

        The Trust Agreement permits the Trustee and the Trust to sue Greylock Production or any other future owner of the Underlying Properties to enforce the terms of the conveyances creating the PDP and PUD Royalty Interests. If the Trustee does not take appropriate action to enforce provisions of these conveyances, Trust unitholders' recourse would be limited to bringing a lawsuit against the Trustee to compel the Trustee to take specified actions. The Trust Agreement expressly limits a Trust unitholder's ability to directly sue Greylock Production or any other third party other than the Trustee. As a result, Trust unitholders will not be able to sue Greylock Production or any future owner of the Underlying Properties to enforce these rights. Furthermore, the Royalty Interest conveyances provide that, except as set forth in the conveyances, Greylock Production is not liable to the Trust for the manner in which it performs its duties in operating the Underlying Properties as long as it acts in good faith.

         Courts outside of Delaware may not recognize the limited liability of the Trust unitholders provided under Delaware law.

        Under the Delaware Statutory Trust Act, Trust unitholders will be entitled to the same limitation of personal liability extended to stockholders of corporations under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware. Nevertheless, courts in jurisdictions outside of Delaware may not give effect to such limitation.

         Greylock Production is subject to complex federal, state, local and other laws and regulations that could adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of conducting its operations or expose Greylock Production to significant liabilities.

        Greylock Production's natural gas exploration, production and transportation operations are subject to complex and stringent laws and regulations. In order to conduct its operations in compliance with these laws and regulations, Greylock Production must obtain and maintain numerous permits, drilling bonds, approvals and certificates from various federal, state and local governmental authorities

32

Table of Contents

and engage in extensive reporting. Greylock Production may incur substantial costs in order to maintain compliance with these existing laws and regulations. Further, in light of the explosion and fire on the drilling rig Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, as well as recent incidents involving the release of natural gas and fluids as a result of drilling activities in the Marcellus Shale, there has been a variety of regulatory initiatives at the federal and state level to restrict oil and gas drilling operations in certain locations. Any increased regulation or suspension of oil and gas exploration and production, or revision or reinterpretation of existing laws and regulations, that arises out of these incidents or otherwise could result in delays and higher operating costs. Such costs or significant delays could have a material adverse effect on Greylock Production's business, financial condition and results of operations. Greylock Production must also comply with laws and regulations prohibiting fraud and market manipulations in energy markets. To the extent Greylock Production is a shipper on interstate pipelines, it must comply with the tariffs of such pipelines and with federal policies related to the use of interstate capacity.

        Laws and regulations governing natural gas exploration and production may also affect production levels. Greylock Production is required to comply with federal and state laws and regulations governing conservation matters, including provisions related to the unitization or pooling of the natural gas properties; the establishment of maximum rates of production from natural gas wells; the spacing of wells; the plugging and abandonment of wells; and removal of related production equipment. These and other laws and regulations can limit the amount of natural gas Greylock Production can produce from its wells, limit the number of wells it can drill, or limit the locations at which it can conduct drilling operations, which in turn could negatively impact Trust distributions, estimated and actual future net revenues to the Trust and estimates of reserves attributable to the Trust's interests.

        The Trust was historically required to pay Pennsylvania franchise tax on its capital stock value, as determined pursuant to the statute and apportioned to Pennsylvania. The tax rate of 0.045% was completely phased out effective January 1, 2016, though it could be readopted by the General Assembly in its annual budget process. Changes in current state law may subject the Trust to additional entity-level taxation by Pennsylvania or other states. Because of widespread state budget deficits and other reasons, several states are evaluating ways to subject partnerships to entity-level taxation through the imposition of state income, franchise and other forms of taxation. Imposition of any additional taxes on the Trust may substantially reduce the cash available for distribution to unitholders and, therefore, negatively impact the value of an investment in the Trust units.

        New laws or regulations, or changes to existing laws or regulations, may unfavorably impact Greylock Production, could result in increased operating costs and have a material adverse effect on Greylock Production's financial condition and results of operations. For example, Congress has previously considered legislation that, if adopted in its proposed form, would subject companies involved in natural gas and oil exploration and production activities to, among other items the elimination of most U.S. federal tax incentives and deductions available to natural gas exploration and production activities, and the prohibition or additional regulation of private energy commodity derivative and hedging activities. Additionally, the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board has proposed amendments to Pennsylvania's oil and gas regulations to update existing requirements regarding the drilling, casing, cementing, testing, monitoring and plugging of oil and gas wells, and the protection of water supplies, including reporting the list of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing or to stimulate the well.

        Additionally, state and federal regulatory authorities may expand or alter applicable pipeline safety laws and regulations, compliance with which may require increased capital costs on the part of Greylock Production and third party downstream natural gas transporters. These and other potential regulations could increase Greylock Production's operating costs, reduce Greylock Production's liquidity, delay Greylock Production's operations, increase direct and third party post production costs associated with the Trust's interests or otherwise alter the way Greylock Production conducts its

33

Table of Contents

business, which could have a material adverse effect on Greylock Production's financial condition, results of operations and cash flows and which could reduce cash received by or available for distribution, including any amounts paid by Greylock Production for transportation on downstream interstate pipelines.

         The ability of Greylock Production to satisfy its obligations to the Trust depends on the financial position of Greylock Production, and in the event of a default by Greylock Production in its obligations to the Trust, or in the event of Greylock Production's bankruptcy, it would be expensive and time-consuming for the Trust to exercise its remedies.

        Greylock Production is a privately held, independent energy company engaged in the exploration, development, production, gathering and aggregation and sale of natural gas and oil, primarily in the Appalachian Basin and Rocky Mountain regions in the United States. Greylock Production is also the operator of all of the Producing Wells and all of the PUD Wells. The conveyances also provide that Greylock Production is obligated to market, or cause to be marketed, the natural gas production related to the Underlying Properties. Due to the Trust's reliance on Greylock Production to fulfill these numerous obligations, the value of the Royalty Interests and its ultimate cash available for distribution will be highly dependent on Greylock Production's performance. Greylock Production is not a reporting company and does not file periodic reports with the SEC. Therefore, Trust unitholders do not have access to financial information of Greylock Production.

        The ability of Greylock Production to perform its obligations to the Trust will depend on Greylock Production's future financial condition and economic performance and access to capital, which in turn will depend upon the supply and demand for natural gas and oil, prevailing economic conditions and financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of Greylock Production.

        Due to uncertainty under Pennsylvania law, the Royalty Interests conveyed by Legacy ECA to the Trust might not be treated as real property interests, or as interests in hydrocarbons in place or to be produced. As a result, the Royalty Interests might be treated as unsecured claims of the Trust against Greylock Production, as the assignee of Legacy ECA, in the event of Greylock Production's bankruptcy. The Royalty Interest Lien is intended to provide security to the Trust should the Royalty Interests be subject to such a challenge. If the PDP Royalty Interest or the PUD Royalty Interest were determined not to be a real property interest owned by the Trust, the Trust's remedy would be to foreclose on the Trust's Royalty Interest Lien to cause the Trust to receive a volume of natural gas production from the Trust properties calculated in accordance with the provisions of the conveyances of the Royalty Interests to the Trust. Foreclosure on the Royalty Interest Lien is exercisable only following a bankruptcy filing of Greylock Production or its successor and based on an uncured payment default occurring under the conveyances of the Royalty Interests to the Trust existing at the time of, or occurring after, such bankruptcy filing. The process of foreclosing to enforce the Royalty Interest Lien would be expensive and time-consuming, and the resulting delays and expenses could reduce Trust distributions substantially or eliminate them for an unpredictable period of time.

        The proceeds of the Royalty Interests may be commingled, for a period of time, with proceeds of the Sponsor's retained interest. The Trust may not have adequate facts to trace its entitlement to funds in the commingled pool of funds and that other persons may, in asserting claims against the Sponsor's retained interest, be able to assert claims to the proceeds that should be delivered to the Trust. In addition, during a bankruptcy of Greylock Production, payments of the royalties may be delayed or deferred; in addition, the obligation to pay royalties may be disaffirmed or cancelled. In either situation, the Trust may need to look to the Royalty Interest Lien to replace its rights under the Royalty Interests. During the pendency of any bankruptcy proceedings involving Greylock Production, the Trust's ability to foreclose on the Royalty Interest Lien, and the ability to collect cash payments from customers being held in Greylock Production's accounts that are attributable to production from the Trust properties, may be stayed by the bankruptcy court. Delay in realizing on the collateral for the

34

Table of Contents

Royalty Interest Lien is possible, and a bankruptcy court might not permit such foreclosure. The bankruptcy also might delay the execution of a new agreement with another driller or operator. If the Trust were to enter into a new agreement with a drilling or operating partner, the new partner might not achieve the same levels of production or sell natural gas at the same prices as Greylock Production was able to achieve.

         The operations of Greylock Production are subject to environmental laws and regulations that may result in significant costs and liabilities.

        The natural gas exploration and production operations of Greylock Production in the Marcellus Shale are subject to stringent and comprehensive federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the discharge, emission or release of materials into the environment or otherwise relating to environmental protection. These laws and regulations may impose numerous obligations that are applicable to Greylock Production's operations including the acquisition of a permit before conducting drilling; water withdrawal or waste disposal operations; govern the amounts and types of substances that may be disposed or released into the environment; limit or prohibit construction or drilling activities in sensitive areas such as wetlands, wilderness areas or areas containing endangered or threatened species or their habitats; require investigatory and response actions to mitigate pollution conditions arising from Greylock Production's operations or attributable to former operations; and impose obligations to reclaim and abandon well sites, impoundments and pits. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations may result in the assessment of administrative, civil or criminal penalties; the imposition of investigatory or remedial obligations and the issuance of orders enjoining some or all of Greylock Production's operations in affected areas.

        There is inherent risk of incurring significant environmental costs and liabilities in the performance of Greylock Production's operations due to its handling of petroleum hydrocarbons and wastes, because of air emissions and wastewater discharges related to its operations, and as a result of historical industry operations and waste disposal practices. Under certain environmental laws and regulations, Greylock Production could be subject to joint and several strict liabilities for the removal or remediation of previously released materials or property contamination regardless of whether Greylock Production was responsible for the release or contamination or if the operations were not in compliance with all applicable laws at the time those actions were taken. Private parties, including the owners of properties upon which Greylock Production's wells are drilled and facilities where Greylock Production's petroleum hydrocarbons or wastes are taken for reclamation or disposal may also have the right to pursue legal actions to enforce compliance, as well as to seek damages for non-compliance with environmental laws and regulations or for personal injury or property damage or to recover some or all of the costs of the removal or remediation of released materials. In addition, the risk of accidental spills or releases could expose Greylock Production to significant liabilities that could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations. Changes in environmental laws and regulations occur frequently, and any changes that result in more stringent or costly waste handling, storage, transport, disposal or cleanup requirements could require Greylock Production to make significant expenditures to attain and maintain compliance and may otherwise have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, competitive position or financial condition. Greylock Production may not be able to recover some or any of these costs from insurance.

         Climate change laws and regulations restricting emissions of "greenhouse gases" could result in increased operating costs and reduced demand for the natural gas that Greylock Production produces while the physical effects of climate change could disrupt Greylock Production's production and cause Greylock Production to incur significant costs in preparing for or responding to those effects.

        In December 2009, the EPA published its findings that emissions of GHGs present an endangerment to public health and the environment because emissions of such gases are, according to

35

Table of Contents

the EPA, contributing to warming of the earth's atmosphere and other climatic changes. The EPA has taken a number of steps aimed at gathering information about, and reducing the emissions of, GHGs from industrial sources, including oil and natural gas sources. The EPA has adopted rules requiring the reporting of GHG emissions from oil, natural gas and NGL production and processing facilities on an annual basis, as well as reporting GHG emissions from gathering and boosting systems, oil well completions and workovers using hydraulic fracturing. The EPA has also adopted and implemented regulations under existing provisions of the CAA that, among other things, establish Prevention of Significant Deterioration ("PSD") construction and Title V operating permit reviews for GHG emissions from certain large stationary sources that already are potential major sources of certain principal, or criteria, pollutant emissions. Facilities required to obtain PSD permits for their GHG emissions also will be required to meet "best available control technology" standards that typically are established by the states. This rule could adversely affect Greylock Production's operations upon the Underlying Properties and restrict or delay its ability to obtain air permits for new or modified facilities that exceed GHG emission thresholds. In June 2016, the EPA published a final rule adopting New Source Performance Standards ("NSPS") for new, modified, or reconstructed oil and gas facilities that require control of the GHG methane from affected facilities, including requirements to find and repair fugitive leaks of methane emissions at well sites ("Methane Rule"). Following the 2016 presidential election and change in administrations, the EPA convened a reconsideration proceeding that culminated in a 2019 rule proposal that would eliminate the obligation to control methane emissions under the NSPS, while maintaining the rule's substantive emissions control requirements because they serve to control emissions of other pollutants. The ultimate fate of the Methane Rule requirements is unclear. Nevertheless, regulations promulgated under the CAA may require Greylock Production to incur development expenses to install and utilize specific equipment, technologies, or work practices to control emissions from its operations.

        At the state level, more than one-third of the states, either individually or through multi-state regional initiatives, already have begun implementing legal measures to control or reduce emissions of GHGs. The adoption and implementation of any regulations imposing reporting obligations on, or limiting emissions of GHGs from, Greylock Production's equipment and operations could require Greylock Production to incur costs to reduce emissions of GHGs associated with its operations or could adversely affect demand for the natural gas that it produces. Finally, 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, and floods and other climatic events; if any such effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on Greylock Production's assets and operations.

         Cyber-attacks or other failures in telecommunications or information technology systems could result in information theft, data corruption and significant disruption of Greylock Energy's business operations.

        Greylock Energy increasingly relies on information technology ("IT") systems and networks in connection with its business activities, including certain of its exploration, development and production activities. Greylock Energy relies on digital technology, including information systems and related infrastructure, as well as cloud applications and services, to, among other things, estimate quantities of oil and natural gas reserves, analyze seismic and drilling information, process and record financial and operating data and communicate with employees and third parties. As dependence on digital technologies has increased, cyber incidents, including deliberate attacks and attempts to gain unauthorized access to computer systems and networks, have increased in frequency and sophistication. These threats pose a risk to the security of Greylock Energy's systems and networks, the confidentiality, availability and integrity of its data and the physical security of its employees and assets. Greylock Energy has experienced, and expects to continue to experience, attempts from hackers and other third parties to gain unauthorized access to its IT systems and networks. Although prior cyber-attacks have not had a material adverse effect on Greylock Energy's operations or financial performance, Greylock

36

Table of Contents

Energy might not be successful in preventing cyber-attacks or mitigating their effect. Any cyber-attack could have a material adverse effect on Greylock Energy's reputation, competitive position, business, financial condition and results of operations, and could have a material adverse effect on the Trust. Cyber-attacks or security breaches also could result in litigation or regulatory action, as well as significant additional expense to Greylock Production to implement further data protection measures.

        In addition to the risks presented to Greylock Energy's systems and networks, cyber-attacks affecting oil and natural gas distribution systems maintained by third parties, or the networks and infrastructure on which they rely, could delay or prevent delivery to markets. A cyber-attack of this nature would be outside Greylock Energy's ability to control, but could have a material adverse effect on Greylock Energy's business, financial condition and results of operations, and could have a material adverse effect on the Trust.

         Cyber-attacks or other failures in telecommunications or IT systems could result in information theft, data corruption and significant disruption of the Trustee's operations.

        The Trustee depends heavily upon IT systems and networks in connection with its business activities. Despite a variety of security measures implemented by the Trustee, events such as the loss or theft of back-up tapes or other data storage media could occur, and the Trustee's computer systems could be subject to physical and electronic break-ins, cyber-attacks and similar disruptions from unauthorized tampering, including threats that may come from external factors, such as governments, organized crime, hackers and third parties to whom certain functions are outsourced, or may originate internally from within the respective companies.

        If a cyber-attack were to occur, it could potentially jeopardize the confidential, proprietary and other information processed and stored in, and transmitted through, the Trustee's computer systems and networks, or otherwise cause interruptions or malfunctions in the operations of the Trust, which could result in litigation, increased costs and regulatory penalties. Although steps are taken to prevent and detect such attacks, it is possible that a cyber incident will not be discovered for some time after it occurs, which could increase exposure to these consequences.

Tax Risks Related to the Trust's Common Units

         The Trust's tax treatment depends on its status as a partnership for United States federal income tax purposes. At the inception of the Trust, the Trust received an opinion from tax counsel that the Trust will be treated as a partnership for United States federal income tax purposes. If the Internal Revenue Service were to treat the Trust as a corporation for United States federal income tax purposes, then its cash available for distribution would be substantially reduced.

        The anticipated after-tax economic benefit of an investment in the Trust units depends largely on the Trust being treated as a partnership for United States federal income tax purposes. At the inception of the Trust, Legacy ECA and the Trust received an opinion from tax counsel that the Trust would be treated as a partnership for United States federal income tax purposes. In order for the Trust to be treated as a partnership for United States federal income tax purposes, current law requires that 90% or more of our gross income for every taxable year consist of "qualifying income," as defined in Section 7704 of the Internal Revenue Code. The Trust may not meet this requirement or current law may change so as to cause, in either event, the Trust to be treated as a corporation for United States federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject the Trust to taxation as an entity. Although the Trust does not believe based upon its current activities that it is so treated, a change in current law could cause it to be treated as a corporation for United States federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject it to taxation as an entity. The Trust has not requested, and does not plan to request, a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service, which we referred to as the IRS, on this or any other tax matter affecting it.

37

Table of Contents

        If the Trust was treated as a corporation for United States federal income tax purposes, it would pay United States federal income tax on its taxable income at the corporate tax rate, which is currently a maximum of 21%, and likely would be required to pay state income tax. Distributions to unitholders generally would be taxed again as corporate distributions, and no income, gains, losses, deductions or credits would flow through to unitholders. Because additional tax would be imposed upon the Trust as a corporation, its cash available for distribution to unitholders would be substantially reduced. Therefore, treatment of the Trust as a corporation would result in a material reduction in the anticipated cash flow and after-tax return to the Trust unitholders, likely causing a substantial reduction in the value of the Trust units.

        The Trust Agreement provides that if a law is enacted or existing law is modified or interpreted in a manner that subjects the Trust to taxation as a corporation or otherwise subjects it to entity-level taxation for United States federal income tax purposes, the target distribution amounts may be adjusted to reflect the impact of that law on the Trust.

         If the Trust were subjected to a material amount of additional entity-level taxation by Pennsylvania or any other states, the Trust's cash available for distribution to you would be reduced.

        The Trust was historically required to pay Pennsylvania franchise tax on its capital stock value, as determined pursuant to the statute and apportioned to Pennsylvania. The tax rate of 0.045% was completely phased out effective January 1, 2016, though it could be readopted by the General Assembly in its annual budget process. Changes in current state law may subject the Trust to additional entity-level taxation by Pennsylvania or other states. Because of widespread state budget deficits and other reasons, several states are evaluating ways to subject partnerships to entity-level taxation through the imposition of state income, franchise and other forms of taxation. Imposition of any additional taxes on the Trust may substantially reduce the cash available for distribution to unitholders and, therefore, negatively impact the value of an investment in the Trust units.

         If enacted, severance taxes in Pennsylvania could materially increase the applicable taxes that are borne by the Trust.

        Although Pennsylvania historically has not imposed a severance tax on the production of natural gas, in 2018 and 2019 the Governor of Pennsylvania proposed a tiered severance tax on the value of natural gas at the wellhead. While the details of the proposal currently remain unclear, the Governor has indicated the percentage may vary between 3 percent and 5 percent depending on sales pricing. Prior proposals included severance taxes of 5 percent, later reduced to 3.5 percent, plus 4.7 cents per thousand cubic feet of natural gas extracted. Any such severance tax, if adopted, would be a cost that would be borne by the Trust and could materially reduce distributions to unitholders. Pennsylvania already imposes an "Impact fee" based on production, the effect of which is similar to that of a severance tax.

         Tax legislation enacted in 2017 may have a significant impact on the taxation of the Trust and Trust unitholders.

        The TCJA enacted in December 2017 provides the most substantial tax reform in over thirty years. In general, the TCJA lowers tax rates, eliminates or limits numerous deductions and other tax benefits, and significantly changes international tax rules. Given the complexity of the TCJA and the significant changes to prior tax law, and the significant amount of regulations that the Treasury Department and the IRS have yet to issue, propose and finalize to interpret and implement TCJA changes, the impact and effect of the legislation on the Trust and Trust unitholders in respect of income and loss of the Trust remains uncertain.

38

Table of Contents

        The foregoing is not a complete summary of all of the changes in law that may apply to or impact the Trust or a unitholder with respect to income of the Trust (or otherwise), unitholders strongly are urged to consult with their own tax advisors to determine how they might be affected by the TCJA, both generally and specifically with respect to their ownership of trust units.

         The tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships or an investment in the Trust units could be affected by recent and potential legislative, judicial or administrative changes and differing interpretations, possibly on a retroactive basis.

        The current United States federal income tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships, including the Trust, or an investment in the Trust units, may be modified by administrative, legislative or judicial interpretation at any time. In the past, Congress has considered substantive changes to the existing United States federal income tax laws that affect certain publicly traded partnerships. Any modification to the United States federal income tax laws or interpretations thereof could cause the Trust to be taxed as a corporation or make it difficult or impossible to meet the requirements for the Trust to be treated as a partnership for United States federal income tax purposes, affect or cause us to change our business activities, affect the tax considerations of an investment in the Trust, change the character or treatment of portions of the Trust income and adversely affect an investment in the Trust's units. Moreover, any modification to the United States federal income tax laws and interpretations thereof may or may not be applied retroactively. Any potential change in law or interpretation thereof could negatively impact the value of an investment in the Trust units.

        Under current law for the taxable year ending December 31, 2020, the highest marginal United States federal income tax rate applicable to ordinary income of individuals is 37% and the highest marginal United States federal income tax rate applicable to long-term capital gains (generally, capital gains on certain assets held for more than 12 months) of individuals is 20%. These rates are subject to change by new legislation at any time.

        In addition, a 3.8% Medicare tax is imposed on certain net investment income from a variety of sources earned by individuals. For these purposes, net investment income generally includes a Trust unitholder's allocable share of the Trust income and gain realized by a Trust unitholder from a sale of the Trust units. The tax will be imposed on the lesser of (i) the Trust unitholder's net income from all investments, or (ii) the amount by which the Trust unitholder's modified adjusted gross income exceeds $250,000 (if the Trust unitholder is married and filing jointly) or $200,000 (if the Trust unitholder is unmarried).

        The TCJA, which is applicable to the Trust for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 alters the procedures for auditing large partnerships and also alters the procedures for assessing and collecting income taxes due (including applicable penalties and interest) as a result of an audit. Unless the Trust is eligible to (and chooses to) elect to issue revised Schedules K-1 to our partners with respect to an audited and adjusted return, the IRS may assess and collect income taxes (including any applicable penalties and interest) directly from the Trust in the year in which the audit is completed under the new rules. If the Trust is required to pay income taxes, penalties and interest as the result of audit adjustments, cash available for distribution to Trust unitholders may be substantially reduced. In addition, because payment would be due for the taxable year in which the audit is completed, Trust unitholders during that taxable year would bear the expense of the adjustment even if they were not Trust unitholders during the audited taxable year.

39

Table of Contents

         The Trust prorates items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of the Trust units each month based upon the ownership of the Trust units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred.

        The Trust prorates items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of the Trust units each month based upon the ownership of the Trust units on the first day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred. The use of this proration method may not be permitted under existing Treasury Regulations, and, accordingly, the Trust's counsel was unable to opine as to the validity of this method. If the IRS were to challenge this method or new Treasury Regulations were issued, we may be required to change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among the Trust unitholders. If the IRS contests the federal income tax positions the Trust takes, the market for the Trust units may be adversely impacted, the cost of any IRS contest will reduce the Trust's cash available for distribution to unitholders and items of income, gain, loss and deduction may be reallocated among Trust unitholders.

         If the IRS contests the United States federal income tax positions the Trust takes, the market for the Trust units may be adversely impacted and the cost of any IRS contest will reduce the Trust's cash available for distribution.

        The Trust has not requested a ruling from the IRS with respect to its treatment as a partnership for United States federal income tax purposes or any other matter affecting the Trust. The IRS may adopt positions that differ from the conclusions of the Trust's counsel expressed in the Prospectus or from the positions the Trust takes. It may be necessary to resort to administrative or court proceedings to attempt to sustain some or all of the conclusions of the Trust's counsel or the positions the Trust takes. A court may not agree with some or all of the conclusions of the Trust's counsel or positions the Trust takes. Any contest with the IRS may materially and adversely impact the market for the Trust units and the price at which they trade. In addition, the Trust's costs of any contest with the IRS will be borne indirectly by the Trust unitholders because the costs will reduce the Trust's cash available for distribution.

         Each unitholder is required to pay taxes on the unitholder's share of the Trust's income even if a unitholder does not receive any cash distributions from the Trust.

        Because the Trust unitholders are treated as partners to whom the Trust allocates taxable income that could be different in amount than the cash the Trust distributes, each unitholder may be required to pay any United States federal income taxes and, in some cases, state and local income taxes on the unitholder's share of the Trust's taxable income even if a unitholder receives no cash distributions from the Trust. A unitholder may not receive cash distributions from the Trust equal to the unitholder's share of the Trust's taxable income or even equal to the actual tax liability that result from that income.

         Tax gain or loss on the disposition of the Trust units could be more or less than expected.

        If a unitholder sells its Trust units, the unitholder will recognize a gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and the unitholder's tax basis in those Trust units. Because distributions in excess of a unitholder's allocable share of the Trust's net taxable income decrease the unitholder's adjusted tax basis in its Trust units, the amount, if any, of such prior excess distributions with respect to the Trust units unitholders sell will, in effect, become taxable income to unitholders if unitholders sell such Trust units at a price greater than the unitholder's tax basis in those Trust units, even if the price the unitholder receives is less than the unitholder's original cost. Furthermore, a substantial portion of the amount realized, whether or not representing gain, may be taxed as ordinary income due to potential recapture items, including depletion recapture.

40

Table of Contents

         Tax-exempt organizations and non-United States persons face unique tax issues from owning the Trust units that may result in adverse tax consequences to them.

        Tax-Exempt Organizations.    Employee benefit plans and most other organizations exempt from U.S. federal income tax including individual retirement accounts (known as IRAs) and other retirement plans are subject to U.S. federal income tax on unrelated business taxable income. Because all of the income of the Trust is expected to be royalty income, interest income and gain from the sale of real property, none of which is expected to be unrelated business taxable income, any such organization exempt from U.S. federal income tax is not expected to be taxed on income generated by ownership of Trust units so long as neither the property held by the Trust nor the Trust units are debt-financed property within the meaning of IRC Section 514(b). However, such investors should consult their own tax advisors as to the proposed treatment of income from the Trust.

        Non-U.S. Persons.    Pursuant to IRC Section 1446, withholding tax on income effectively connected to a United States trade or business allocated to non-U.S. persons ("ECI") should be made at the highest marginal rate. Under IRC Section 1441, withholding tax on fixed, determinable, annual, periodic income from United States sources allocated to non-U.S. persons should be made at 30% of gross income unless the rate is reduced by treaty. Nominees and brokers should withhold at the highest marginal rate on the distribution made to non-U.S. persons. As a result of the TCJA enacted in December 2017, a non-U.S. holder's gain on the sale of Trust units is now treated as ECI to the extent such holder would have had ECI if the Trust had sold all of its assets at fair market value on the date of the exchange. The TCJA also requires the transferee of units to withhold 10% of the amount realized on the sale of exchange of units (generally, the purchase price) unless the transferor certifies that it is not a nonresident alien individual or foreign corporation. Pending the finalization of proposed regulations under IRC Section 1446, the IRS has suspended this new withholding obligation with respect to publically traded partnerships such as the Trust, which is classified as a partnership for federal and state income tax purposes.

         The Trust treats each purchaser of Trust units as having the same economic attributes without regard to the actual Trust units purchased. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of the Trust units.

        Due to a number of factors, including the Trust's inability to match transferors and transferees of Trust units, the Trust may adopt positions that may not conform to all aspects of existing Treasury Regulations. A successful IRS challenge to those positions could adversely alter the tax effects of an investment in Trust units. It also could affect the timing of tax benefits or the amount of gain from a unitholder's sale of Trust units and could have a negative impact on the value of the Trust units or result in audit adjustments to a unitholder's tax returns.

         A Trust unitholder whose Trust units are loaned to a "short seller" to cover a short sale of Trust units may be considered as having disposed of those Trust units. If so, he would no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those Trust units during the period of the loan and may recognize gain or loss from the disposition.

        Because a Trust unitholder whose Trust units are loaned to a "short seller" to cover a short sale of Trust units may be considered as having disposed of the loaned Trust units, the Trust unitholder may no longer be treated for United States federal income tax purposes as a partner with respect to those Trust units during the period of the loan to the short seller and the unitholder may recognize gain or loss from such disposition. Moreover, during the period of the loan to the short seller, any of the Trust's income, gain, loss or deduction with respect to those Trust units may not be reportable by the unitholder and any cash distributions received by the unitholder as to those Trust units could be fully taxable as ordinary income. The Trust's counsel has not rendered an opinion regarding the treatment of a unitholder where Trust units are loaned to a short seller to cover a short sale of Trust units;

41

Table of Contents

therefore, Trust unitholders desiring to assure their status as partners and avoid the risk of gain recognition from a loan to a short seller are urged to modify any applicable brokerage account agreements to prohibit their brokers from loaning their Trust units.

         The Trust may adopt certain valuation methodologies that may affect the income, gain, loss and deduction allocable to the Trust unitholders. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of the Trust units.

        The United States federal income tax consequences of the ownership and disposition of Trust units will depend in part on the Trust's estimates of the relative fair market values, and the initial tax basis of the Trust's assets. Although the Trust may from time to time consult with professional appraisers regarding valuation matters, the Trust will make many of the relative fair market value estimates itself. These estimates and determinations of basis are subject to challenge and will not be binding on the IRS or the courts. If the estimates of fair market value or basis are later found to be incorrect, the character and amount of items of income, gain, loss or deductions previously reported by Trust unitholders might change, and Trust unitholders might be required to adjust their tax liability for prior years and incur interest and penalties with respect to those adjustments. It also could affect the amount of gain from unitholders' sale of Trust units and could have a negative impact on the value of the Trust units or result in audit adjustments to unitholders' tax returns without the benefit of additional deductions.

         Certain United States federal income tax preferences currently available with respect to natural gas production may be eliminated as a result of future legislation.

        In recent years, the U.S. government's budget proposals and other proposed legislation have included the elimination of certain key U.S. federal income tax incentives currently available to oil and natural gas exploration and production. If enacted into law, these proposals would eliminate certain tax preferences applicable to taxpayers engaged in the exploration or production of natural resources. These changes include, but are not limited to (i) the repeal of the percentage depletion allowance for oil and natural gas properties, (ii) the elimination of current deductions for intangible drilling and development costs, (iii) the elimination of the deduction for U.S. production activities and (iv) the increase in the amortization period from two years to seven years for geophysical costs paid or incurred in connection with the exploration for or development of, oil and natural gas within the U.S. It is unclear whether any such changes will be enacted or how soon any such changes would become effective. The passage of any legislation as a result of these proposals or any other similar changes in U.S. federal income tax laws could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.