Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

NOTE 1. ORGANIZATION AND NATURE OF BUSINESS 

Nature of Operations 

Harvest Oil & Gas Corp. is a newly formed Delaware corporation and the successor reporting company to EV Energy Partners, L.P. (“EVEP”) pursuant to Rule 15d-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. As used herein, the terms “Successor”, “Harvest”, or the “Company” refer to Harvest Oil & Gas Corp. and its consolidated subsidiaries as a whole or on an individual basis, depending on the context in which the statements are made. When referring to the “Predecessor” or the “Partnership” in reference to the period prior to the emergence from bankruptcy, the intent is to refer to EVEP, the predecessor that was dissolved following the Effective Date (as defined below) of the Plan (as defined below) and its consolidated subsidiaries as a whole or on an individual basis, depending on the context in which the statements are made.

Unless the context requires otherwise, references to: (i) the “Predecessor’s general partner” and “EV Energy GP” refer to EV Energy GP, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, the Predecessor’s general partner, which was dissolved following the Effective Date of the Plan; (ii) “EV Management” refers to EV Management, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, the former general partner of the Predecessor’s general partner; and (iii) “EnerVest” refers to EnerVest, Ltd., a Texas limited partnership, the owner of EV Management.

Harvest is an independent oil and natural gas company that was formed in June 2018, in connection with the reorganization of the Predecessor. The Predecessor was publicly traded from September 2006 to June 2018. As discussed further in Note 2, on April 2, 2018, EV Energy Partners, L.P. (the “Debtor”), and 13 affiliated debtors (collectively, the “Debtors”) each filed a voluntary petition (the cases commenced thereby, the “Chapter 11 proceedings”) for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (“Chapter 11”) for bankruptcy protection in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the “Bankruptcy Court”) via Case No. 18-10814. The Debtors requested that their cases be jointly administered under Case No. 18-10814 to pursue the prepackaged plan of reorganization. During the pendency of the Chapter 11 proceedings, the Debtor continued to operate its businesses and manage its properties under the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and orders of the Bankruptcy Court as a “Debtors-in-Possession”. On May 17, 2018, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order (the “Confirmation Order”) confirming the Debtors’ First Modified Joint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization (as amended, modified and supplemented from time to time, the “Plan”). The Plan became effective on June 4, 2018 (the “Effective Date”), when all remaining conditions to the effectiveness of the Plan were satisfied and the Company emerged from bankruptcy.

The Company operates one reportable segment engaged in the acquisition, development and production of oil and natural gas properties, and all of its operations are located in the United States. From time to time, the Company may look to divest non-core assets and use proceeds to concentrate in existing position, venture into new basins or repay bank debt. The oil and natural gas properties of Harvest are located in the Barnett Shale, the San Juan Basin, the Appalachian Basin (which includes the Utica Shale), Michigan, Central Texas (which includes the Austin Chalk area and the Eagle Ford Shale), the Mid–Continent areas in Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas, Kansas and Louisiana, the Permian Basin and the Monroe Field in Northern Louisiana.

Basis of Presentation 

The Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements included herein have been prepared pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Accordingly, certain information and disclosures normally included in annual financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) have been condensed or omitted. The Company believes that the presentations and disclosures herein are adequate to make the information not misleading. The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments) necessary for a fair presentation of the interim periods. The results of operations for the interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations to be expected for the full year. These interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes included in EVEP’s Annual Report on Form 10–K for the year ended December 31, 2017. 

All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. In the Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, all dollar and unit amounts in tabulations are in thousands of dollars and units, respectively, unless otherwise indicated

Bankruptcy Accounting

The unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared as if the Company is a going concern and reflect the application of Accounting Standards Codification 852 Reorganizations (“ASC 852”). ASC 852 requires that the financial statements, for periods subsequent to the Chapter 11 filing, distinguish transactions and events that are directly associated with the reorganization from the ongoing operations of the business. Accordingly, certain expenses, gains and losses that were realized or incurred related to the bankruptcy proceedings are recorded in “Reorganization items, net” on the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Upon emergence from bankruptcy on June 4, 2018, the Company elected to adopt and apply the relevant guidance provided in GAAP with respect to the accounting and financial statement disclosures for entities that have emerged from Chapter 11 (“fresh start accounting”) effective May 31, 2018 to coincide with the timing of the Company’s normal accounting period close. As a result of the application of fresh start accounting and the effects of the implementation of the plan of reorganization, the condensed consolidated financial statements as of or after May 31, 2018, are not comparable with the condensed consolidated financial statements prior to that date. To facilitate the financial statement presentations, the Company refers to the reorganized company in these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and notes as the “Successor” for periods subsequent to May 31, 2018 and “Predecessor” for periods prior to June 1, 2018. Furthermore, the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and notes have been presented with a “black line” division to delineate the lack of comparability between the Predecessor and Successor. See Note 3 for additional information.

Use of Estimates

 The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. The Company bases its estimates and judgments on historical experience and on various other assumptions and information that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Estimates and assumptions about future events and their effects cannot be perceived with certainty and, accordingly, these estimates may change as new events occur, as more experience is acquired, as additional information is obtained and as the Company’s operating environment changes. While Harvest believes that the estimates and assumptions used in the preparation of the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements are appropriate, actual results could differ from those estimates.

New Accounting Standards

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2014–09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“ASU 2014-09”) . This ASU, as amended, superseded virtually all of the revenue recognition guidance in generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. The core principle of the five–step model is that an entity will recognize revenue when it transfers control of goods or services to customers at an amount that reflects the consideration to which it expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. Entities can choose to apply the standard using either the full retrospective approach or a modified retrospective approach. The Partnership implemented ASU 2014-09 as of January 1, 2018 using the modified retrospective method. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. See Note 4 for additional details about the impact upon adoption and related disclosures.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases . The main objective of ASU 2016-02 is to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. The main difference between previous GAAP and Topic 842 is the recognition of lease assets and lease liabilities by lessees for those leases classified as operating leases. ASU 2016-02 requires lessees to recognize assets and liabilities arising from leases on the balance sheet. ASU 2016-02 further defines a lease as a contract that conveys the right to control the use of identified property, plant, or equipment for a period of time in exchange for consideration. Control over the use of the identified asset means that the customer has both (1) the right to obtain substantially all of the economic benefit from the use of the asset and (2) the right to direct the use of the asset. ASU 2016-02 requires disclosures by lessees and lessors to meet the objective of enabling users of financial statements to assess the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. In transition, lessees and lessors are required to recognize and measure leases at the beginning of the earliest period presented using a modified retrospective approach. In January 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-01, Leases (Topic 842), Land Easement Practical Expedient for Transition to Topic 842 (“ASU 2018-01”), which permits an entity an optional election to not evaluate under ASU 2016-02 those existing or expired land easements that were not previously accounted for as leases prior to the adoption of ASU 2016-02. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842), Targeted Improvements (“ASU 2018-11”), which permits an entity (i) to apply the provisions of ASU 2016-02 at the adoption date instead of the earliest period presented in the financial statements, and, as a lessor, (ii) to account for lease and nonlease components as a single component as the nonlease components would otherwise be accounted for under the provisions of ASU 2014-09. For public entities, ASU 2016-02 and other related ASUs are effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years; early application is permitted. The Company is continuing to evaluate the impact of this standard on its financial statements and is continuing its assessment of ASU 2016-02 by implementing its project plan, evaluating certain operational and corporate policies and processes, further defining the population of leases under the revised definition and reviewing numerous contracts. The Company does not intend to early adopt this standard, but plans to apply the new standard for its interim and annual reporting periods starting January 1, 2019 using a modified retrospective approach. The Company also plans to elect the package of practical expedients within ASU 2016-02 that allows an entity to not reassess prior to the effective date (i) whether any expired or existing contracts are or contain leases, (ii) the lease classification for any expired or existing leases or (iii) initial direct costs for any existing leases. Additionally, the Company plans to elect the practical expedient under ASU 2018-01 and not evaluate existing or expired land easements not previously accounted for as leases prior to the effective date. The adoption of this standard will result in an increase in the assets and liabilities on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The quantitative impacts of the new standard are dependent on the leases in force at the time of adoption. As a result, the evaluation of the effect of the new standards will extend over future periods.

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016–15, Statement of Cash Flows . This ASU addresses certain cash flow issues with the objective of reducing the existing diversity in practice in how the cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. The Partnership adopted ASU 2016–15 on January 1, 2018. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material impact on the Company’s unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements.

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-18: Statement of Cash Flows– Restricted Cash . The main objective of ASU 2016-18 is to address the diversity that exists in the classification and presentation of changes in restricted cash on the statement of cash flows. The amendments in ASU 2016-18 require that a statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in the total of cash, cash equivalents and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. Thus, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning of period and end of period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. The Partnership adopted ASU 2016-18 on January 1, 2018. The adoption of this ASU resulted in a change to the condensed consolidated statement of cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2017. For the six months ended June 30, 2017, the $5.5 million cash and cash equivalents – beginning of year was revised to $57.6 million cash, cash equivalents and restricted cash – beginning of year and the net cash used in investing activities was increased from $8.2 million to $60.3 million.

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-01, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business (“ASU 2017-01”). The main objective of ASU 2017-01 is to clarify the definition of a business with the objective of adding guidance to assist entities with evaluating whether transactions should be accounted for as acquisitions (or disposals) of assets or businesses. The amendments of this ASU provide a screen to determine when a set is not a business. The screen requires that when substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired (or disposed of) is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or a group of similar identifiable assets, the set is not a business. This screen reduces the number of transactions that need to be further evaluated. If the screen is not met, the amendments of this ASU (i) require that to be considered a business, a set must include, at a minimum, an input and a substantive process that together significantly contribute to the ability to create output and (ii) remove the evaluation of whether a market participant could replace missing elements. The Partnership adopted ASU 2017-01 on January 1, 2018, and the ASU will be applied prospectively to any acquisitions.

No other new accounting pronouncements issued or effective during the six months ended June 30, 2018 have had or are expected to have a material impact on the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements other than those disclosed in EVEP’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017.

Subsequent Events

The Company evaluated subsequent events for appropriate accounting and disclosure through the date these unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements were issued.

In August 2018, the Company entered into a definitive agreement to sell certain oil and gas properties in Central Texas to a third party for $3.5 million (subject to purchase price adjustments).

NOTE 2. EMERGENCE FROM VOLUNTARY REORGANIZATION UNDER CHAPTER 11

On March 13, 2018, the Debtors entered into a Restructuring Support Agreement (the “Restructuring Support Agreement”) with (i) holders (collectively, the “Supporting Noteholders”) of approximately 70% of the 8.0% senior unsecured notes due April 2019 (the “Senior Notes”) issued pursuant to that certain indenture, dated as of March 22, 2011 (as amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time, the “Indenture”), among EVEP, EV Energy Finance Corp., each of the guarantors party thereto, and Delaware Trust Company, as indenture trustee, that are signatories to the Restructuring Support Agreement; (ii) lenders under the Predecessor’s reserve-based lending facility, by and among EVEP, EV Properties, L.P., JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as administrative agent, BNP Paribas and Wells Fargo, National Association, as co-syndication agents, the guarantors party thereto (the “credit facility”), and the lenders signatory thereto, initially constituting approximately 94%, but subsequently increased to 100%, of the principal amount outstanding thereunder; (iii) EnerVest; and (iv) EnerVest Operating, L.L.C. (“EnerVest Operating”). The Restructuring Support Agreement set forth, subject to certain conditions, the commitment of the Debtors and the consenting creditors to support a comprehensive restructuring of the Debtors’ long-term debt (the “Restructuring”).

On April 2, 2018 (the “Petition Date”), the Debtors each filed Chapter 11 proceedings for relief under Chapter 11 in the Bankruptcy Court. The Debtors’ Chapter 11 proceedings were jointly administered under the caption In re EV Energy Partners, L.P., et al ., Case No. 18-10814.

On May 17, 2018, the Bankruptcy Court entered the Confirmation Order confirming the Debtors’ Plan.

On June 4, 2018, the Debtors satisfied the conditions to effectiveness of the Plan, the Plan became effective in accordance with its terms and the Company emerged from bankruptcy. Although the Company is no longer a debtor-in-possession, the Company was a debtor-in-possession from April 2, 2018 through June 4, 2018. As such, certain aspects of the Chapter 11 proceedings and related matters are described below in order to provide context to the Company’s financial condition and results of operations for the period presented.

Plan of Reorganization

In accordance with the Plan, on the Effective Date:

NOTE 3. FRESH START ACCOUNTING

In connection with emergence from the Chapter 11 proceedings on the Effective Date, the Company applied the provisions of fresh start accounting, pursuant to ASC 852, Reorganizations (“ASC 852”), to its consolidated financial statements, which resulted in the Company becoming a new entity for financial reporting purposes. Harvest qualified for fresh start accounting as (i) the holders of existing voting common units of the Predecessor received less than 50% of the voting shares of the emerged entity and (ii) the reorganization value of assets immediately prior to confirmation was less than the post-petition liabilities and allowed claims. ASC 852 requires that fresh start accounting be applied when the Bankruptcy Court enters the Confirmation Order confirming the Plan, or as of a later date when all material conditions precedent to the effectiveness of the Plan are resolved, which was June 4, 2018. The Company elected to apply fresh start accounting effective May 31, 2018, to coincide with the timing of its normal accounting period close. The Company evaluated the events between May 31, 2018 and June 4, 2018 and concluded that the use of an accounting convenience date of May 31, 2018 did not have a material impact on the results of operations or financial position.

Upon adoption of fresh start accounting, the reorganization value derived from the enterprise value was allocated to the Company’s assets and liabilities based on their fair values (except for deferred income taxes) in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification 805 Business Combinations (“ASC 805”). The amount of deferred income taxes recorded was determined in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification 740 Income Taxes (“ASC 740”). The Effective Date fair values of the Company’s assets and liabilities differed materially from their recorded values as reflected on the historical balance sheet of the Predecessor. The effects of the Plan and the application of fresh start accounting were reflected in the condensed consolidated financial statements as of May 31, 2018, and the related adjustments thereto were recorded on the condensed consolidated statement of operations for the five months ended May 31, 2018.

As a result of the adoption of fresh start accounting and the effects of the implementation of the Plan, the Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements subsequent to May 31, 2018, are not comparable to its condensed consolidated financial statements prior to May 31, 2018. References to “Successor” relate to the financial position and results of operations of the reorganized Company as of and subsequent to May 31, 2018. References to “Predecessor” relate to the financial position of the Company prior to, and results of operations through and including, May 31, 2018.

The Company’s condensed consolidated financial statements and related footnotes are presented with a black line division, which delineates the lack of comparability between amounts presented after May 31, 2018, and amounts presented on or prior to May 31, 2018. The Company’s financial results for future periods following the application of fresh start accounting will be different from historical trends and the differences may be material.

Reorganization Value

In the disclosure statement associated with the Plan, which was confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court, the Successor’s enterprise value was estimated to be within a range of $450 million to $550 million, with a midpoint estimate of approximately $500 million. Enterprise value represents the estimated fair value of a company’s interest-bearing debt, its stockholders’ equity and working capital. Based on the estimates and assumptions utilized in the fresh start accounting process, the Company estimated the Successor’s enterprise value to be approximately $524.6 million before the consideration of cash and cash equivalents on hand at the Effective Date. Reorganization value represents the fair value of the Successor’s total assets prior to the consideration of liabilities and is intended to approximate the amount a willing buyer would pay for the assets immediately after a restructuring. The reorganization value, which was derived from the Successor’s enterprise value, was allocated to the Company’s individual assets based on their estimated fair values.

The following table is a reconciliation of the enterprise value to the estimated fair value of the Successor’s common stock at the Effective Date (in thousands): 

The following table is a reconciliation of the enterprise value to the reorganization value of the Successor assets at the Effective Date (in thousands):

Our assets consist primarily of producing oil and natural gas properties. The fair values of proved and unproved oil and natural gas properties were estimated using valuation techniques consistent with the income approach, converting future cash flows to a single discounted amount. The factors to determine fair value include, but are not limited to, estimates of: (i) economic reserves, (ii) future operating and development costs, (iii) future commodity prices and (iv) a market-based weighted average cost of capital. These inputs require significant judgments and estimates by the Company’s management at the time of the valuation and are the most sensitive and subject to change. The underlying commodity prices embedded in the Company’s estimated cash flows are the product of a process that incorporates forward commodity pricing, analyst pricing estimates and adjustments for estimated location and quality differentials, as well as other factors as necessary that the Company’s management believes will impact realizable prices. The fair value of support equipment and facilities were estimated using a cost approach, based on current replacement costs of the assets less depreciation based on the estimated economic useful lives of the assets and age of the assets.

See below under the caption “Fresh Start Adjustments” for additional information regarding assumptions used in the valuation of the Company’s various other significant assets and liabilities.

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet

The adjustments included in the following condensed consolidated balance sheet reflect the effect of the transactions contemplated by the Plan (reflected in the column “Reorganization Adjustments”) as well as fair value and other required accounting adjustments resulting from the adoption of fresh start accounting (reflected in the column “Fresh Start Adjustments”). The explanatory notes provide additional information with regard to the adjustments recorded, the methods used to determine the fair values and significant assumptions.

Reorganization Adjustments

The amount of disallowed interest during the period from the Petition Date through the Effective Date of emergence not included in the accrued interest payable in the table above was $4.7 million.

See Note 12 for additional information on the issuances of the Successor’s equity.

Fresh Start Adjustments

Reorganization Items, Net

The Company has incurred significant costs associated with the reorganization. These costs, which are expensed as incurred, are expected to significantly affect the Company’s results of operations. Reorganization items, net represent costs, gains and losses directly associated with the Chapter 11 proceedings since the Petition Date.

The following table summarizes the components of reorganization items, net included in the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations:

NOTE 4. REVENUE

On January 1, 2018, the Partnership adopted ASU No. 2014–09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (“Topic 606”), using the modified retrospective method applied to contracts that were not completed as of January 1, 2018. Accordingly, the comparative information for the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, has not been adjusted and continues to be reported under the previous revenue standard. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material impact on the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements, and the primary impacts of this change in accounting policy for revenue recognition effective January 1, 2018, are detailed below.

There were no significant changes to the timing of revenue recognized for sales of production. However, as a result of management’s evaluation under new considerations within Topic 606, the adoption did result in certain contracts being recorded on a net basis instead of a gross basis, as well as some contracts being recorded on a gross basis instead of a net basis, as a result of the determined delivery point. These presentation changes did not have an impact on income or loss from operations, earnings per share/unit or cash flows, but did increase oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids revenues and lease operating expenses in the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements by approximately $0.4 million for the one month ended June 30, 2018 and by approximately $0.7 million and $2.1 million for the two and five months ended May 31, 2018, respectively, as compared to what would have been recognized using the revenue recognition guidance that was in effect before the adoption of Topic 606.

The following table summarizes the impact of adopting Topic 606 on the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements:

Revenue from contracts with customers includes the sale of oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids production (recorded in “Oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids revenues” in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations) and gathering and transportation revenues (recorded in “Transportation and marketing-related revenues” in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations).

Oil, Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids Revenues

Oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids revenues are recognized upon the transfer of control of the products to a purchaser. Transfer of control typically occurs when the products are delivered to the purchaser, title has transferred and collectability of the revenue is reasonably assured. Revenue is recognized net of royalties due to third parties in an amount that reflects the consideration the Company expects to receive in exchange for those products.

The Company’s oil production is primarily sold under market-sensitive contracts that are typically priced at a differential to the New York Mercantile Exchange (“NYMEX”) price or at purchaser posted prices for the producing area. For oil contracts, the Company generally records sales based on the net amount received.

The Company’s natural gas production is primarily sold under market-sensitive contracts that are typically priced at a differential to the published natural gas index price for the producing area due to the natural gas quality and the proximity to major consuming markets. For natural gas contracts, the Company generally records wet gas sales at the wellhead or inlet of the gas processing plant as revenues net of transportation, gathering and processing expenses if the processor is the customer and there is no redelivery of commodities to the Company at the tailgate of the plant. Conversely, the Company generally records residual natural gas and NGL sales at the tailgate of the plant on a gross basis along with the associated transportation, gathering and processing expenses if the processor is a service provider and there is redelivery of commodities to the Company at the tailgate of the plant. All facts and circumstances of an arrangement are considered and judgment is often required in making this determination.

In addition, the Company recognizes processing expenses for commodities paid as noncash consideration in exchange for processing services and recognizes the associated revenues for those same commodities. This recognition results in an increase to revenues and expenses with no impact on net income.

Harvest follows the sales method of accounting for natural gas revenues. Under this method of accounting, revenues are recognized based on volumes sold, which may differ from the volume to which the Company is entitled based on its working interest. An imbalance is recognized as a liability only when the estimated remaining reserves will not be sufficient to enable the under–produced owner(s) to recoup its entitled share through future production. Under the sales method, no receivables are recorded where the Company has taken less than its share of production.

Transportation and Marketing-Related Revenues

Harvest owns and operates a network of natural gas gathering systems in the Appalachian Basin and the Monroe field in Northern Louisiana which gather and transport owned natural gas and a small amount of third party natural gas to intrastate, interstate and local distribution pipelines. Natural gas gathering and transportation revenue is recognized when the natural gas has been delivered to a custody transfer point.

The following table disaggregates revenue by significant product and service type:

Contract Balances

Customers are invoiced once the Company’s performance obligations have been satisfied. Payment terms and conditions vary by contract type, although terms generally include a requirement of payment within 30 days. There are no significant judgments that significantly affect the amount or timing of revenue from contracts with customers. Accordingly, the Company’s product sales contacts do not give rise to material contract assets or contract liabilities. 

Accounts receivable are primarily from purchasers of oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids and from exploration and production companies that own interests in properties Harvest operates. This industry concentration could affect overall exposure to credit risk, either positively or negatively, because the Company’s purchasers and joint working interest owners may be similarly affected by changes in economic, industry or other conditions. The Company routinely assesses the financial strength of its customers and bad debts are recorded based on an account-by-account review specifically identifying receivables that the Company believes may be uncollectible after all means of collection have been exhausted, and the potential recovery is considered remote. As of June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, the Company did not have any reserves for doubtful accounts.

Performance Obligations

The Company applies the optional exemptions in Topic 606 and does not disclose consideration for remaining performance obligations with an original expected duration of one year or less or for variable consideration related to unsatisfied performance obligations.

NOTE 5. SHARE–BASED COMPENSATION

On the Effective Date, in connection with the Plan, the Company adopted the MIP, pursuant to which employees, directors, consultants and other service providers of the Company and its subsidiaries are eligible to receive stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units, other stock-based awards and cash-based awards. An aggregate of 689,362 shares of the Company’s common stock are reserved for issuance under the MIP. To the extent that an award under the MIP is expired, forfeited or cancelled for any reason without having been exercised in full, the unexercised award would then be available again for grant under the MIP.

The Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”) (or any properly delegated subcommittee thereof) or a committee of at least two people as the Board may appoint or, if no such committee or subcommittee has been appointed by the Board, the Board (the “Committee”) will administer the MIP. The Committee has broad authority under the MIP to, among other things: (i) select participants; (ii) determine the types of awards that participants are to receive and the number of shares or the amount of cash that are to be subject to such awards and grant such awards; and (iii) determine the terms, conditions and restrictions of awards, including the applicable performance criteria relating to the award.

As of June 30, 2018, the board of directors had not yet approved any grants under the MIP.

Series A Preferred Stock

In connection with the Restructuring under the Plan and in reliance on the exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act provided by Section 1145 of the Bankruptcy Code, Harvest issued 21,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock to one employee of the Company and one employee of EnerVest for consideration of services to the Company pursuant to Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements, dated as of the Effective Date, which vest on the earlier of (i) June 4, 2019 or (ii) immediately prior to the consummation of a Sale Transaction (as defined in the Certificate of Designations). The Company estimated the fair value of the Series A Preferred Stock as of June 30, 2018 at $0.2 million. The fair value of the preferred stock award will be recognized on a straight–line basis over the service period, and the Company will account for forfeitures as they occur.

Each holder of the Series A Preferred Stock is entitled to receive mandatory and cumulative dividends payable semi-annually in arrears with respect to each dividend period ending on and including the last calendar day of each six-month period ending June 4 and December 4, at a rate per share of Series A Preferred Stock equal to 8.0% per annum payable upon the Liquidation Preference (as defined in the Certificate of Designations) payable in kind unless another form of payment is designated by the Board of Directors of the Company. In the event that dividends due to each share of Series A Preferred Stock have not been paid for a period of two consecutive Dividend Periods (as defined in the Certificate of Designations), the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock, as an independent class, shall be entitled to nominate and vote to appoint one director of the Board of Directors of the Company. Holders of shares of Series A Preferred Stock have no right, by virtue of their status as holders of shares of Series A Preferred Stock, to vote on any matters on which holders of shares of New Common Stock are entitled to vote.

The Series A Preferred Stock shall automatically be redeemed upon the consummation of a Sale Transaction (as defined in the Certificate of Designation) at a price equal to the Accrued Liquidation Preference (as defined in the Certificate of Designation). The Series A Preferred Stock may be redeemed at the option of the Company after June 4, 2023, in whole or in part, at a price equal to the Accrued Liquidation Preference. The Series A Preferred Stock may be redeemed at the option of the holder after June 4, 2039, in whole or in part, at a price equal to the Accrued Liquidation Preference.

Predecessor Equity-Based Compensation

EV Management had two long-term incentive plans, the 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2006 Plan”) and the 2016 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “2016 Plan” and together, the “Plans”) for employees, consultants and directors of EV Management and its affiliates who performed services for EVEP. These equity–based awards consisted only of phantom units as of May 31, 2018.

EVEP estimated the fair value of the phantom units at the grant date using the Black–Scholes option pricing model. These phantom units were subject to graded vesting over a four year period. Compensation cost had been recognized for these phantom units on a straight–line basis over the service period, and EVEP accounted for forfeitures as they occurred.

The Predecessor recognized compensation cost related to these phantom units of $0.4 million and $1.0 million for the two months and five months ended May 31, 2018, respectively, under the normal vesting schedule. The Predecessor recognized compensation cost related to these phantom units of $1.0 million and $2.2 million in the three months and six months ended June 30, 2017, respectively. These costs are included in “General and administrative expenses” in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations.

On June 4, 2018, EVEP’s emergence from bankruptcy, which constituted a change of control, resulted in the immediate acceleration of all unvested phantom units. As a result, the total unrecognized compensation cost of $2.8 million was recognized as of May 31, 2018. These costs are included in “General and administrative expenses” in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Activity related to these phantom units is as follows:

The total grant date fair value of the phantom units vested in 2018 was $6.7 million.

NOTE 6. RISK MANAGEMENT 

The Company’s business activities expose it to risks associated with changes in the market price of oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids. In addition, the Company’s floating rate credit facility exposes it to risks associated with changes in interest rates. As such, future earnings are subject to fluctuation due to changes in the market prices of oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids and interest rates. The Company uses derivatives to reduce its risk of volatility in the prices of oil, natural gas and natural gas liquids and interest rates. The Company policies do not permit the use of derivatives for speculative purposes.

The Company has elected not to designate any of its derivatives as hedging instruments . Accordingly, changes in the fair value of derivatives are recorded immediately to operations as “Gain (loss) on derivatives, net” in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations.

In April 2018, in conjunction with the Chapter 11 proceedings, the Predecessor terminated its interest rate swaps for the period of April 2018 to September 2020, which resulted in a cash settlement received in April 2018 of $1.6 million.

After the Effective Date, the Company entered into new commodity derivative contracts. As of June 30, 2018, the Company had entered into the following terms:

 The following table sets forth the fair values and classification of the Company’s outstanding derivatives:

The Company has entered into master netting arrangements with its counterparties. The amounts above are presented on a net basis in the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets when such amounts are with the same counterparty. In addition, the Company has recorded accounts payable and receivable balances related to settled derivatives that are subject to the master netting agreements. These amounts are not included in the above table; however, under the master netting agreements, the Company has the right to offset these positions against forward exposure related to outstanding derivatives.

NOTE 7. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS 

The fair value hierarchy has three levels based on the reliability of the inputs used to determine fair value. Level 1 refers to fair values determined based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 refers to fair values determined based on quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets or inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly through market corroboration. Level 3 refers to fair values determined based on the Company’s own assumptions used to measure assets and liabilities at fair value.

The Company’s derivatives consist of over–the–counter contracts which are not traded on a public exchange. As the fair value of these derivatives is based on inputs using market prices obtained from independent brokers or determined using quantitative models that use as their basis readily observable market parameters that are actively quoted and can be validated through external sources, including third party pricing services, brokers and market transactions, the Company has categorized these derivatives as Level 2. The Company values these derivatives using the income approach with inputs such as the forward curve for commodity prices based on quoted market prices and prospective volatility factors related to changes in the forward curves and yield curves based on money market rates and interest rate swap data, such as forward LIBOR curves. Estimates of fair value have been determined at discrete points in time based on relevant market data. Furthermore, fair values are adjusted to reflect the credit risk inherent in the transaction, which may include amounts to reflect counterparty credit quality and/or the effect of the Company’s creditworthiness. These assumed credit risk adjustments are based on published credit ratings, public bond yield spreads and credit default swap spreads. There were no changes in valuation techniques or related inputs in the six months ended June 30, 2018.  

Nonrecurring Basis

During the one month ended June 30, 2018, the Company did not recognize any impairment expense related to proved oil and natural gas properties. During both the two and five months ended May 31, 2018, the Predecessor did not recognize any impairment expense related to proved oil and natural gas properties. During the three months ended June 30, 2017, the Predecessor recognized $18.2 million of impairment expense related to proved oil and natural gas properties; $15.3 million of this impairment related to properties located in the Monroe Field and $2.9 million related to properties in East Texas which were sold during April 2017. During the six months ended June 30, 2017, the Predecessor recognized $67.7 million of impairment expense related to proved oil and natural gas properties; $49.5 million of this impairment related to properties located in the Mid-Continent area and the Permian Basin, $15.3 million related to properties located in the Monroe Field and $2.9 million related to properties in East Texas which were sold during April 2017.

The fair values were determined using the income approach and were based on the expected present value of the future net cash flows from reserves. Significant Level 3 assumptions associated with the calculation of discounted cash flows used in the impairment analysis included estimates of future prices, production costs, development expenditures, anticipated production of the Company’s estimated reserves, appropriate risk–adjusted discount rates and other relevant data.

Financial Instruments 

The estimated fair values of the Company’s financial instruments have been determined at discrete points in time based on relevant market information. The Company’s financial instruments consist of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities, derivatives and long–term debt. The carrying amounts of the Company’s financial instruments other than long–term debt approximate fair value because of the short–term nature of the items. Derivatives are recorded at fair value (see above). 

The carrying value of debt outstanding under the Exit Credit Facility approximates fair value because the credit facility’s variable interest rate resets frequently and approximates current market rates available to the Company. The estimated fair value of the Predecessor’s Senior Notes was $176.8 million at December 31, 2017, which differs from the carrying value of $342.5 million at December 31, 2017. The fair value of the Senior Notes was determined using Level 2 inputs .

NOTE 8. ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATIONS 

The Company records an asset retirement obligation (“ARO”) and capitalizes the asset retirement cost in oil and natural gas properties in the period in which the retirement obligation is incurred based upon the fair value of an obligation to perform site reclamation, dismantle facilities or plug and abandon wells. After recording these amounts, the ARO is accreted to its future estimated value using an assumed cost of funds and the additional capitalized costs are depreciated on a unit–of–production basis. The changes in the aggregate ARO are as follows: 

As of June 30, 2018, $2.9 million of the Successor ARO and as of December 31, 2017, $3.2 million of the Predecessor ARO is classified as current and is included in “Accounts payable and accrued liabilities” in the unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheets, respectively.

Exit Credit Facility 

In connection with the Company’s emergence from bankruptcy, on the Effective Date, the Company entered into a Credit Agreement providing for a $1.0 billion new reserve-based revolving loan. The Exit Credit Facility matures on February 26, 2021. Borrowings under the Exit Credit Facility are secured by a first priority lien on substantially all of the Company’s oil and natural gas properties. The Company may use borrowings under the Exit Credit Facility for acquiring and developing oil and natural gas properties, for working capital purposes and for general corporate purposes. The Company also may use up to $50.0 million of available borrowing capacity for letters of credit. As of June 30, 2018, the Company had a $0.2 million letter of credit outstanding.

The terms of the credit facility do not require any repayments of amounts outstanding until it matures in February 2021. Borrowings under the credit facility bear interest at a floating rate based on, at the Company’s election, a base rate or the London Inter–Bank Offered Rate plus applicable premiums based on the percent of the borrowing base outstanding (weighted average effective interest rate of 5.35% at June 30, 2018). 

Borrowings under the Exit Credit Facility may not exceed a “borrowing base” determined by the lenders under the credit facility based on the Company’s oil and natural gas reserves. As of June 30, 2018, the borrowing base under the Exit Credit Facility was $325.0 million. The borrowing base is subject to scheduled redeterminations starting on April 1, 2019, and semi-annually as of April 1 and October 1 of each year thereafter with an additional redetermination once per calendar year at the election of either the Company or the lenders

The Exit Credit Facility requires the maintenance of the following (as defined in the Credit Agreement):

As of June 30, 2018, the Company was in compliance with all of these financial covenants.

Predecessor’s Credit Facility 

The Predecessor was party to a $1.0 billion credit facility, which was scheduled to expire in February 2020. Borrowings under that credit facility were secured by a first priority lien on substantially all of the Predecessor’s oil and natural gas properties. The Predecessor also had access to up to $100.0 million of available borrowing capacity for letters of credit. As of May 31, 2018, the Predecessor had a $0.2 million letter of credit outstanding.

The terms of the Predecessor’s credit facility did not require any repayments of amounts outstanding until it expired in February 2020. Borrowings under the credit facility bore interest at a floating rate based on, at the Partnership’s election, a base rate or the London Inter–Bank Offered Rate plus applicable premiums based on the percent of the borrowing base that the Partnership had outstanding (weighted average effective interest rate of 5.47% and 4.82% at May 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively). 

Borrowings under the Predecessor’s credit facility could not exceed a “borrowing base” determined by the lenders under the credit facility based on the Company’s oil and natural gas reserves. As of May 31, 2018, the borrowing base under the Predecessor’s credit facility was $325.0 million.

In connection with EVEP’s emergence from bankruptcy on June 4, 2018, the holders of claims under the Predecessor’s credit facility received full recovery, consisting of (i) their pro rata share of the $1 billion new reserve-based revolving loan; (ii) cash in amount equal to the accrued but unpaid interest payable to such lenders under the credit facility as of the Effective Date; and (iii) unfunded commitments and letter of credit participation under the Exit Credit Facility equal to the unfunded commitments and letter of credit participation of such lender as of the Effective Date

Predecessor’s 8.0% Senior Notes due April 2019 

The Predecessor’s Senior Notes were issued under the Indenture, would have matured April 15, 2019 and bore interest at 8.0%. The Senior Notes were fully and unconditionally guaranteed, jointly and severally, on a senior unsecured basis, by all of the Predecessor’s wholly owned subsidiaries other than EV Energy Finance Corp. (“Finance”), which was a co–issuer of the Senior Notes. Neither EVEP nor Finance had independent assets or operations apart from the assets and operations of the Predecessor’s subsidiaries.

As a result EVEP’s emergence from bankruptcy, the Senior Notes were cancelled and the Predecessor’s liability thereunder discharged as of June 4, 2018, and the holders of the Notes received (directly or indirectly) their pro rata share of New Common Stock representing, in the aggregate, 95% of the New Common Stock on the Effective Date (subject to dilution by the MIP and the common shares issuable upon exercise of the Warrants). See also Note 2.

NOTE 10. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

On the Effective Date, Harvest entered into a Services Agreement (the “Services Agreement”) with EnerVest, Ltd. and EnerVest Operating, L.L.C. (together, the “EnerVest Group”). Pursuant to the Services Agreement, the EnerVest Group will provide certain administrative, management, operating and other services and support to Harvest (the “Services”) following the Effective Date. In addition, the EnerVest Group will also provide Harvest with sufficient office space, equipment and office supplies pursuant to the Services Agreement. The Services Agreement covers the people EnerVest employs who provide direct support to the Company’s operations; however, the Services Agreement does not cover the six full-time employees of Harvest which include the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer. Harvest will pay to the EnerVest Group a management fee equal to $1,433,333 per month, which is subject to annual redetermination by agreement of the parties and may also be adjusted for acquisitions or divestitures over $5 million. The EnerVest Group will provide the Services until December 31, 2020.

The Company is involved in disputes or legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company does not believe the outcome of such disputes or legal actions will have a material effect on its unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements. No amounts were accrued at June 30, 2018 or December 31, 2017.

NOTE 11. INCOME TAXES

Effective June 4, 2018, pursuant to the Plan, the Successor became a corporation subject to federal and state income taxes. Prior to the Plan being effective, the Predecessor was a limited partnership and organized as a pass-through entity for federal and most state income tax purposes. As a result, the Predecessor’s limited partners were responsible for federal and state income taxes on their share of taxable income. The Predecessor was subject to the Texas margin tax for partnership activity in the state of Texas. The Successor is also subject to the Texas margin tax for corporate activity in the state of Texas after the Effective Date of the Plan. Obligations of the Predecessor and Successor under the Texas gross margin tax are recorded as “Income taxes” in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations.

Management assesses the available positive and negative evidence to estimate whether it is more likely than not that sufficient future taxable income will be generated to realize the Company’s deferred tax assets. Due to significant negative evidence, the Company has established a valuation allowance against its net deferred tax asset of $20.7 million as of June 30, 2018.  In addition to the emergence from bankruptcy, the Predecessor incurred a cumulative loss over the three-year period ended June 4, 2018. The net deferred tax asset before valuation allowance as of June 30, 2018 primarily relates to temporary differences in GAAP and tax bankruptcy emergence valuations.

The Company had no income tax expense or benefit for the period from June 1, 2018 through June 30, 2018 as a result of changes in valuation allowances. The Company recorded an income tax expense for the period from January 1, 2018 through May 31, 2018 of $0.2 million related to state income taxes. The Company’s income tax benefit related to state income taxes for the six months ended June 30, 2017 was less than $0.1 million.

NOTE 12. EQUITY 

Issuance of Common Stock and Cancellation of Units

In accordance with the Plan, on the Effective Date:

On the Effective Date, there were 10,000,016 shares of New Common Stock issued and outstanding.

On the Effective Date, the Company entered into a warrant agreement with Computershare Trust Company N.A., as warrant agent, pursuant to which the Company issued Warrants to purchase up to 800,000 shares of the Company’s common stock (representing 8% of the Company’s outstanding total issued and outstanding common stock as of the Effective Date including shares of the Company’s common stock issuable upon full exercise of the Warrants, but excluding any common stock issuable under the MIP), exercisable for a five year period commencing on the Effective Date at an exercise price of $37.48 per warrant.

The fair values for the Warrants upon issuance have been estimated using the Black-Scholes option pricing model using the following assumptions:

Predecessor

At May 31, 2018, owners’ equity consisted of 49,368,869 common units, representing a 98% limited partnership interest in us, and a 2% general partnership interest. During the five months ended May 31, 2018, the Predecessor did not issue any common units.

Net income of the Predecessor was allocated between the general partner and the limited partners in accordance with the provisions of the partnership agreement. Net income was generally allocated first to the general partner and the limited partners in an amount equal to the net losses allocated to the general partner and the limited partners in the current and prior tax years under the partnership agreement. The remaining net income was allocated to the general partner and the limited partners in accordance with their respective percentage interests of the general partner and limited partners.

Predecessor Cash Distributions 

The Predecessor’s credit facility prohibited the Partnership from making cash distributions if any default or event of default, as defined in the credit facility, occurred or would result from the cash distribution.

Within 45 days after the end of each quarter, the Predecessor would distribute all of its available cash (as defined in the partnership agreement) to its general partner and unitholders of record on the applicable record date. The amount of available cash generally was all cash on hand at the end of the quarter; less the amount of cash reserves established by the general partner to provide for the proper conduct of business, to comply with applicable laws, any of the debt instruments, or other agreements or to provide funds for distributions to unitholders and to the general partner for any one or more of the next four quarters; plus all cash on hand on the date of determination of available cash for the quarter resulting from working capital borrowings made after the end of the quarter. Working capital borrowings were generally borrowings that are made under the credit facility and in all cases was used solely for working capital purposes or to pay distributions to partners.

The partnership agreement required that the Predecessor make distributions of available cash from operating surplus in the following manner:

The minimum quarterly distribution was not guaranteed and distributions below the minimum quarterly distribution would not be accrued in arrears.

The general partner was entitled to incentive distributions if the amount distributed with respect to one quarter exceeded specified target levels shown below:

During 2017, the board of directors of EV Management announced that it had elected to suspend distributions to unitholders for all four quarters of 2017. The board of directors also elected to suspend distributions for the first quarter of 2018.

NOTE 13. EARNINGS PER SHARE/UNIT 

Basic earnings (loss) per share/unit is computed by dividing net earnings attributable to stockholders/unitholders by the weighted average number of shares/units outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per share/unit is computed by adjusting the average number of shares/units outstanding for the dilutive effect, if any, of potential common shares/units. The Company uses the treasury stock method to determine the dilutive effect.

The Predecessor used the two–class method to compute earnings per limited partner unit. The two-class method is an earnings allocation formula that determines earnings per unit for common units and participating securities as if all earnings for the period had been distributed. As the Predecessor’s unvested phantom units and its earned but unvested performance units participated in dividends on an equal basis with the common units, they were considered to be participating securities. Earnings used in the determination of earnings per limited partner unit for each reporting period was reduced by the amount of earnings allocated to the general partner and available cash that would be distributed to the limited partners and the participating securities. The undistributed earnings, if any, were then allocated to the limited partners and the participating securities in accordance with the terms of the partnership agreement. Basic and diluted earnings per limited partner unit were then calculated by dividing earnings, after deducting the amount allocated to the general partner and the earnings attributable to the participating securities, by the weighted average number of outstanding limited partner units during the period.

The following sets forth the calculation of earnings per share/unit, for the period indicated:

NOTE 14. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

As a result the Restructuring under the Plan, EnerVest is no longer a related party to the Company. However, Harvest will continue to its relationship with EnerVest through an agreement for EnerVest to operate its properties. See Note 10 for additional information regarding the Services Agreement.

Prior to emergence from bankruptcy, the Predecessor’s general partner was EV Energy GP, and the general partner of its general partner was EV Management. EV Management is a wholly owned subsidiary of EnerVest. EnerVest and its affiliates also had a significant interest in the Partnership through their 71.25% ownership of EV Energy GP which, in turn, owned a 2% general partner interest in the Partnership and all of its incentive distribution rights. In addition, the Predecessor’s board of directors included directors who were also executives of EnerVest. As a result, EnerVest was considered a related party to the Predecessor.

However, in accordance with the Plan, EV Energy GP, the Predecessor’s general partner, was dissolved following the Effective Date, and the terms of the Predecessor’s board of directors automatically expired on the Effective Date. The Successor formed a new five-member board of directors which does not consist of any members of EnerVest management. As a result, EnerVest is not considered a related party to the Successor.

Pursuant to a services agreement, referred to as an omnibus agreement, the Predecessor paid EnerVest $2.9 million and $7.2 million for general and administrative services provided during the two and five months ended May 31, 2018, respectively. Under the omnibus agreement, the Predecessor also paid EnerVest $3.5 million and $7.0 million for services provided during the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, respectively. These fees were based on an allocation of charges between EnerVest and EVEP based on the estimated use of such services by each party, and the Partnership believed that the allocation method employed by EnerVest was reasonable and reflective of the estimated level of costs the Partnership would have incurred on a standalone basis. These fees are included in “General and administrative expenses” in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations.

The Partnership entered into operating agreements whereby a wholly owned subsidiary of EnerVest and its affiliates acted as contract operator of the oil and natural gas wells and related gathering systems and production facilities in which EVEP owned an interest. The Predecessor reimbursed EnerVest approximately $3.3 million and $8.4 million in the two and five months ended May 31, 2018, respectively, for direct expenses incurred in the operation of its wells and related gathering systems and production facilities and for the allocable share of the costs of EnerVest employees who performed services on its properties. Under that operating agreement, the Predecessor also reimbursed EnerVest $4.9 million and $9.4 million in the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, respectively, for direct expenses incurred. As the vast majority of such expenses were charged to the Partnership on an actual basis (i.e., no mark–up or subsidy is charged or received by EnerVest), EVEP believed that the aforementioned services were provided at fair and reasonable rates relative to the prevailing market and were representative of the costs that would have been incurred on a standalone basis. These costs are included in “Lease operating expenses” in the unaudited condensed consolidated statements of operations. Additionally, in its role as contract operator, this EnerVest subsidiary also collected proceeds from oil and natural gas sales and distributed them to the Partnership and other working interest owners.

As of December 31, 2017, the Predecessor owed EnerVest Operating $4.2 million.

Effective November 1, 2011, EVEP, along with certain institutional partnerships managed by EnerVest, sold a portion of its unproved, undeveloped Utica acreage in ten Ohio counties to Total E&P USA, Inc. A portion of the purchase price was paid in cash with the balance payable in the form of a carried interest in future development activity. In early 2017, the allocated share of the Carry for one of the institutional partnerships was completely utilized. As such, that institutional partnership purchased Carry rights from EVEP and the other institutional partnerships equal to the benefit to be received from Total for their continued participation in the Carry. EVEP’s share of this benefit was $0.7 million for the five months ended May 31, 2018. These purchased Carry rights were recorded as reimbursements to oil and gas properties.

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities consisted of the following: