Note 1—Basis of Presentation

The interim-period financial information presented in the financial statements included in this report is unaudited and, in the opinion of management, includes all known accruals and adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the consolidated financial position of ConocoPhillips and its results of operations and cash flows for such periods. All such adjustments are of a normal and recurring nature unless otherwise disclosed. Certain notes and other information have been condensed or omitted from the interim financial statements included in this report. Therefore, these financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes included in our 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Note 2—Variable Interest Entities (VIEs)

We hold variable interests in VIEs that have not been consolidated because we are not considered the primary beneficiary. Information on our significant VIEs follows:

Australia Pacific LNG Pty Ltd (APLNG)

APLNG is considered a VIE, as it has entered into certain contractual arrangements that provide it with additional forms of subordinated financial support. We are not the primary beneficiary of APLNG because we share with Origin Energy and China Petrochemical Corporation (Sinopec) the power to direct the key activities of APLNG that most significantly impact its economic performance, which involve activities related to the production and commercialization of coalbed methane, as well as liquefied natural gas (LNG) processing and export marketing. As a result, we do not consolidate APLNG, and it is accounted for as an equity method investment.

As of March 31, 2017, we have not provided any financial support to APLNG other than amounts previously contractually required. Unless we elect otherwise, we have no requirement to provide liquidity or purchase the assets of APLNG. See Note 5—Investments, Loans and Long-Term Receivables, and Note 10—Guarantees, for additional information.

Marine Well Containment Company, LLC (MWCC)

MWCC provides well containment equipment and technology and related services in the deepwater U.S. Gulf of Mexico. Its principal activities involve the development and maintenance of rapid-response hydrocarbon well containment systems that are deployable in the Gulf of Mexico on a call-out basis. We have a 10 percent ownership interest in MWCC, and it is accounted for as an equity method investment because MWCC is a limited liability company in which we are a Founding Member and exercise significant influence through our permanent seat on the ten-member Executive Committee responsible for overseeing the affairs of MWCC. In 2016, MWCC executed a $154 million term loan financing arrangement with an external financial institution whose terms required the financing be secured by letters of credit provided by certain owners of MWCC, including ConocoPhillips. In connection with the financing transaction, we issued a letter of credit of $22 million which can be drawn upon in the event of a default by MWCC on its obligation to repay the proceeds of the term loan. The fair value of this letter of credit is immaterial and not recognized on our consolidated balance sheet. MWCC is considered a VIE, as it has entered into arrangements that provide it with additional forms of subordinated financial support. We are not the primary beneficiary and do not consolidate MWCC because we share the power to govern the business and operation of the company and to undertake certain obligations that most significantly impact its economic performance with nine other unaffiliated owners of MWCC.

At March 31, 2017, the carrying value of our equity method investment in MWCC was $146 million. We have not provided any financial support to MWCC other than amounts previously contractually required. Unless we elect otherwise, we have no requirement to provide liquidity or purchase the assets of MWCC.

5

Table of Contents

Inventories valued on the last-in, first-out (LIFO) basis totaled $379 million and $269 million at March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. The estimated excess of current replacement cost over LIFO cost of inventories was approximately $121 million and $104 million at March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively.

Note 4—Assets Held for Sale and Other Planned Dispositions

Assets Held for Sale

On March 29, 2017, we signed a definitive agreement with Cenovus Energy to sell our 50 percent nonoperated interest in the Foster Creek Christina Lake (FCCL) oil sands partnership, as well as the majority of our western Canada gas assets, for total consideration of approximately $13.3 billion, based on Cenovus’ share price at the date of signing. Consideration for the transaction consists of $10.6 billion of cash payable at closing, 208 million Cenovus shares, and a five-year uncapped contingent payment. The cash portion of the consideration is subject to customary adjustments. The contingent payment, calculated and paid on a quarterly basis, is $6 million Canadian dollars for every $1 Canadian dollar by which the Western Canada Select (WCS) quarterly average crude price exceeds $52 Canadian dollars per barrel. On the date of signing, we received a $130 million deposit from Cenovus, which is included in the “Cash Flows From Investing Activities” section in our consolidated statement of cash flows. Both FCCL and the western Canada gas assets are included in the Canada segment. The transaction is subject to specific conditions precedent being satisfied, including regulatory review and approval, and is expected to close in the second quarter of 2017.

At March 31, 2017, the carrying value of our equity investment in FCCL was $9.0 billion. Our interests in the western Canada producing properties were considered held for sale resulting in the reclassification of $2.4 billion of properties, plants and equipment (PP&E) to “Prepaid expenses and other current assets” and $671 million of noncurrent liabilities, primarily asset retirement obligations, to “Other accruals,” on our consolidated balance sheet. The before-tax loss associated with our interests in the western Canada gas producing properties was $61 million and $145 million for the three months ended March 31, 2017 and March 31, 2016, respectively. We reported before-tax equity earnings of $120 million and a before-tax equity loss of $154 million related to FCCL for the three months ended March 31, 2017 and March 31, 2016, respectively.

Other Planned Dispositions

On April 12, 2017, we signed a definitive agreement to sell our interests in the San Juan Basin for up to $3.0 billion of total proceeds, comprised of $2.7 billion in cash and a contingent payment of up to $300 million. The cash portion of the proceeds is subject to customary adjustments. The six-year contingent payment is effective beginning January 1, 2018, and is due annually for the periods in which the monthly U.S. Henry Hub (HH) price is at or above $3.20 per million British thermal units (MMBTU). The transaction is subject to specific conditions precedent being satisfied, including regulatory approval, and is expected to close in the third quarter of 2017. The San Juan Basin results of operations are reported within the Lower 48 segment.

6

Table of Contents

At March 31, 2017, the net carrying value was approximately $5.8 billion, consisting primarily of $6.2 billion of PP&E and $392 million of asset retirement obligations. The assets met held for sale criteria in April 2017. A noncash impairment will be recorded in the second quarter of 2017.

Note 5—Investments, Loans and Long-Term Receivables

APLNG

APLNG’s $8.5 billion project finance facility consists of financing agreements executed by APLNG with the Export-Import Bank of the United States for approximately $2.9 billion, the Export-Import Bank of China for approximately $2.7 billion, and a syndicate of Australian and international commercial banks for approximately $2.9 billion. All amounts have been drawn from the facility. APLNG made its first principal and interest repayment in March 2017 and will continue to make bi-annual payments until March 2029. At March 31, 2017, a balance of $8.2 billion was outstanding on the facility. In connection with the execution of the project financing, we provided a completion guarantee for our pro-rata share of the project finance facility until the project achieves financial completion. In October 2016, we reached financial completion for Train 1, which reduced our associated guarantee by 60 percent. See Note 10—Guarantees, for additional information.

APLNG is considered a VIE, as it has entered into certain contractual arrangements that provide it with additional forms of subordinated financial support. See Note 2—Variable Interest Entities (VIEs), for additional information.

During the first quarter of 2017, the outlook for crude oil prices weakened, and as a result, the estimated fair value of our investment in APLNG declined to an amount below carrying value. Based on a review of the facts and circumstances surrounding this decline in fair value, we concluded the impairment was not other than temporary under the guidance of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 323, “Investments—Equity Method and Joint Ventures.” In reaching this conclusion, we primarily considered: (1) the volatility and uncertainty in commodity markets; (2) the intent and ability of ConocoPhillips to retain our investment in APLNG; and (3) the short length of time carrying value has been less than market value (fair value exceeded carrying value as of December 31, 2016). Fair value has been estimated based on an internal discounted cash flow model using estimated future production, an outlook of future prices from a combination of exchanges (short-term) and pricing service companies (long-term), costs, a market outlook of foreign exchange rates provided by a third party, and a discount rate believed to be consistent with those used by principal market participants.

At March 31, 2017, the fair value of our investment in APLNG was estimated to be $8,629 million, resulting in an unrecognized impairment of $1,430 million. We will continue to monitor the relationship between the carrying value and the fair value of APLNG. Should we determine in the future there has been a loss in the value of our investment that is other than temporary, we would record a noncash impairment of our equity investment, calculated as the total difference between carrying value and fair value as of the end of the reporting period.

At March 31, 2017, the carrying value of our equity method investment in APLNG was $10,059 million. The balance is included in the “Investments and long-term receivables” line on our consolidated balance sheet.

FCCL

At March 31, 2017, the carrying value of our equity method investment in FCCL Partnership was $9,006 million, net of a $1,604 million reduction due to cumulative foreign currency translation effects. The balance is included in the “Investments and long-term receivables” line on our consolidated balance sheet. On March 29, 2017, we signed a definitive agreement with Cenovus Energy to sell our 50 percent nonoperated interest in the FCCL Partnership, as well as the majority of our western Canada gas assets, for total consideration of approximately $13.3 billion, based on Cenovus’ share price at the date of signing, before customary adjustments to the cash portion. The transaction is subject to specific conditions precedent being satisfied, including regulatory approvals, and is expected to close in the second quarter of 2017. See Note 4—Assets Held for Sale and Other Planned Dispositions, for additional information.

7

Table of Contents

Loans and Long-Term Receivables

As part of our normal ongoing business operations, and consistent with industry practice, we enter into numerous agreements with other parties to pursue business opportunities. Included in such activity are loans made to certain affiliated and non-affiliated companies. At March 31, 2017, significant loans to affiliated companies included $639 million in project financing to Qatar Liquefied Gas Company Limited (3) (QG3).

The long-term portion of these loans is included in the “Loans and advances—related parties” line on our consolidated balance sheet, while the short-term portion is in “Accounts and notes receivable—related parties.”

Note 6—Suspended Wells and Other Exploration Expenses

The capitalized cost of suspended wells at March 31, 2017, was $834 million, a decrease of $229 million from $1,063 million at year-end 2016. Two suspended wells in Shenandoah in the Gulf of Mexico totaling $94 million and one suspended well in Alaska totaling $17 million were charged to dry hole expense during the first three months of 2017 relating to exploratory well costs capitalized for a period greater than one year as of December 31, 2016.

In February 2017, we reached a settlement agreement on our contract for the Athena drilling rig, initially secured for our four-well commitment program in Angola. As a result of the cancellation, we recorded a before-tax charge of $43 million net in the first quarter of 2017.

This charge is included in the “Exploration expenses” line on our consolidated income statement.

The first quarter of 2017 included an impairment in our Alaska segment of $174 million for the associated PP&E carrying value of our small interest in a nonoperated producing property.

The first quarter of 2016 included impairments in our Europe and North Africa segment of $127 million, primarily as a result of lower natural gas prices in the United Kingdom.

The charges discussed below are included in the “Exploration expenses” line on our consolidated income statement and are not reflected in the table above.

In the first quarter of 2017, we recorded a before-tax impairment of $51 million for the associated carrying value of capitalized undeveloped leasehold costs of Shenandoah in deepwater Gulf of Mexico following the suspension of appraisal activity by the operator.

8

Table of Contents

In the first quarter of 2016, due to lack of commerciality of a drilled well, we recorded a before-tax impairment of $95 million for the associated carrying value of capitalized undeveloped leasehold costs of the Melmar prospect in deepwater Gulf of Mexico. Additionally, following the completion of an initial marketing effort in the Gulf of Mexico, we recorded a before-tax impairment of $73 million, primarily due to changes in the estimated market value.

Note 8—Debt

As of March 31, 2017, our revolving credit facility, expiring in June 2019, was $6.75 billion. This credit facility supports two commercial paper programs: the ConocoPhillips $6.25 billion program, primarily a funding source for short-term working capital needs, and the ConocoPhillips Qatar Funding Ltd. $500 million program, which is used to fund commitments relating to QG3. Commercial paper maturities are generally limited to 90 days.

At March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, we had no direct outstanding borrowings under the revolving credit facility and no letters of credit. We had no commercial paper outstanding at March 31, 2017 or December 31, 2016, under both the ConocoPhillips and the ConocoPhillips Qatar Funding Ltd. commercial paper programs. Since we had no commercial paper outstanding and had issued no letters of credit, we had access to $6.75 billion in borrowing capacity under our revolving credit facility at March 31, 2017.

In the first quarter of 2017, we made a prepayment of $805 million on our floating rate term loan due in 2019. As of March 31, 2017, the remaining balance on our term loan facility is $645 million. We have the right at any time and from time to time to prepay the term loan, in whole or in part, without premium or penalty upon notice to the Administrative Agent.

The term loan facility contains customary covenants regarding, among other matters, material compliance with laws and restrictions against certain consolidations, mergers and asset sales and creation of certain liens on our assets and consolidated subsidiaries. The term loan facility also contains financial covenants including a total debt to capitalization ratio, excluding the impacts of certain noncash impairments and foreign currency translation adjustments as defined in the Term Loan Agreement, which may not exceed 65 percent. At March 31, 2017, we were in compliance with this covenant.

The term loan facility includes customary events of default (subject to specified cure periods, materiality qualifiers and exceptions), including the failure to pay any interest, principal or fees when due, the failure to perform or the violation of any covenant contained in the term loan facility, the making of materially inaccurate or false representations or warranties, a default on certain material indebtedness, insolvency or bankruptcy, a change of control and the occurrence of material Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) events and certain judgments against us or our material subsidiaries.

At March 31, 2017, we had $283 million of certain variable rate demand bonds (VRDBs) outstanding with maturities ranging through 2035. The VRDBs are redeemable at the option of the bondholders on any business day. The VRDBs are included in the “Long-term debt” line on our consolidated balance sheet.

9

Table of Contents

*Includes components of other comprehensive income, which are disclosed separately in the Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income.

Note 10—Guarantees

At March 31, 2017, we were liable for certain contingent obligations under various contractual arrangements as described below. We recognize a liability, at inception, for the fair value of our obligation as a guarantor for newly issued or modified guarantees. Unless the carrying amount of the liability is noted below, we have not recognized a liability because the fair value of the obligation is immaterial. In addition, unless otherwise stated, we are not currently performing with any significance under the guarantee and expect future performance to be either immaterial or have only a remote chance of occurrence.

APLNG Guarantees

At March 31, 2017, we had outstanding multiple guarantees in connection with our 37.5 percent ownership interest in APLNG. The following is a description of the guarantees with values calculated utilizing March 2017 exchange rates:

10

Table of Contents

Other Guarantees

We have other guarantees with maximum future potential payment amounts totaling approximately $540 million, which consist primarily of a guarantee of the residual value of a leased office building, guarantees of the residual value of leased corporate aircraft, and a guarantee for our portion of a joint venture’s project finance reserve accounts. These guarantees have remaining terms of up to six years and would become payable if, upon sale, certain asset values are lower than guaranteed amounts, business conditions decline at guaranteed entities, or as a result of nonperformance of contractual terms by guaranteed parties.

Indemnifications

Over the years, we have entered into agreements to sell ownership interests in certain corporations, joint ventures and assets that gave rise to qualifying indemnifications. These agreements include indemnifications for taxes, environmental liabilities, employee claims and litigation. The terms of these indemnifications vary greatly. The majority of these indemnifications are related to environmental issues, the term is generally indefinite and the maximum amount of future payments is generally unlimited. The carrying amount recorded for these indemnifications at March 31, 2017, was approximately $100 million. We amortize the indemnification liability over the relevant time period, if one exists, based on the facts and circumstances surrounding each type of indemnity. In cases where the indemnification term is indefinite, we will reverse the liability when we have information the liability is essentially relieved or amortize the liability over an appropriate time period as the fair value of our indemnification exposure declines. Although it is reasonably possible future payments may exceed amounts recorded, due to the nature of the indemnifications, it is not possible to make a reasonable estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments. Included in the recorded carrying amount at March 31, 2017, were approximately $40 million of environmental accruals for known contamination that are included in the “Asset retirement obligations and accrued environmental costs” line on our consolidated balance sheet. For additional information about environmental liabilities, see Note 11—Contingencies and Commitments.

On March 1, 2015, a supplier to one of the refineries included in Phillips 66 as part of the separation of our downstream businesses formally registered Phillips 66 as a party to the supply agreement, thereby triggering a guarantee we provided at the time of separation. Our maximum potential liability for future payments under this guarantee, which would become payable if Phillips 66 does not perform its contractual obligations under the supply agreement, is approximately $1.35 billion. At March 31, 2017, the carrying value of this guarantee is approximately $98 million and the remaining term is eight years. Because Phillips 66 has indemnified us for

11

Table of Contents

losses incurred under this guarantee, we have recorded an indemnification asset from Phillips 66 of approximately $98 million. The recorded indemnification asset amount represents the estimated fair value of the guarantee; however, if we are required to perform under the guarantee, we would expect to recover from Phillips 66 any amounts in excess of that value, provided Phillips 66 is a going concern.

Note 11—Contingencies and Commitments

A number of lawsuits involving a variety of claims arising in the ordinary course of business have been filed against ConocoPhillips. We also may be required to remove or mitigate the effects on the environment of the placement, storage, disposal or release of certain chemical, mineral and petroleum substances at various active and inactive sites. We regularly assess the need for accounting recognition or disclosure of these contingencies. In the case of all known contingencies (other than those related to income taxes), we accrue a liability when the loss is probable and the amount is reasonably estimable. If a range of amounts can be reasonably estimated but no amount within the range is a better estimate than any other amount, then the minimum of the range is accrued. We do not reduce these liabilities for potential insurance or third-party recoveries. If applicable, we accrue receivables for probable insurance or other third-party recoveries. With respect to income-tax-related contingencies, we use a cumulative probability-weighted loss accrual in cases where sustaining a tax position is less than certain.

Based on currently available information, we believe it is remote that future costs related to known contingent liability exposures will exceed current accruals by an amount that would have a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial statements. As we learn new facts concerning contingencies, we reassess our position both with respect to accrued liabilities and other potential exposures. Estimates particularly sensitive to future changes include contingent liabilities recorded for environmental remediation, tax and legal matters. Estimated future environmental remediation costs are subject to change due to factors such as the uncertain magnitude of cleanup costs, the unknown time and extent of such remedial actions that may be required, and the determination of our liability in proportion to that of other responsible parties. Estimated future costs related to tax and legal matters are subject to change as events evolve and as additional information becomes available during the administrative and litigation processes.

Environmental

We are subject to international, federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. When we prepare our consolidated financial statements, we record accruals for environmental liabilities based on management’s best estimates, using all information that is available at the time. We measure estimates and base liabilities on currently available facts, existing technology, and presently enacted laws and regulations, taking into account stakeholder and business considerations. When measuring environmental liabilities, we also consider our prior experience in remediation of contaminated sites, other companies’ cleanup experience, and data released by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or other organizations. We consider unasserted claims in our determination of environmental liabilities, and we accrue them in the period they are both probable and reasonably estimable.

Although liability of those potentially responsible for environmental remediation costs is generally joint and several for federal sites and frequently so for other sites, we are usually only one of many companies cited at a particular site. Due to the joint and several liabilities, we could be responsible for all cleanup costs related to any site at which we have been designated as a potentially responsible party. We have been successful to date in sharing cleanup costs with other financially sound companies. Many of the sites at which we are potentially responsible are still under investigation by the EPA or the agency concerned. Prior to actual cleanup, those potentially responsible normally assess the site conditions, apportion responsibility and determine the appropriate remediation. In some instances, we may have no liability or may attain a settlement of liability. Where it appears that other potentially responsible parties may be financially unable to bear their proportional share, we consider this inability in estimating our potential liability, and we adjust our accruals accordingly. As a result of various acquisitions in the past, we assumed certain environmental obligations. Some of these environmental obligations are mitigated by indemnifications made by others for our benefit and some of the indemnifications are subject to dollar limits and time limits.

12

Table of Contents

We are currently participating in environmental assessments and cleanups at numerous federal Superfund and comparable state and international sites. After an assessment of environmental exposures for cleanup and other costs, we make accruals on an undiscounted basis (except those acquired in a purchase business combination, which we record on a discounted basis) for planned investigation and remediation activities for sites where it is probable future costs will be incurred and these costs can be reasonably estimated.

At March 31, 2017, our balance sheet included a total environmental accrual of $260 million, compared with $247 million at December 31, 2016, for remediation activities in the United States and Canada. We expect to incur a substantial amount of these expenditures within the next 30 years. In the future, we may be involved in additional environmental assessments, cleanups and proceedings.

Legal Proceedings

We are subject to various lawsuits and claims including but not limited to matters involving oil and gas royalty and severance tax payments, gas measurement and valuation methods, contract disputes, environmental damages, personal injury, and property damage. Our primary exposures for such matters relate to alleged royalty and tax underpayments on certain federal, state and privately owned properties and claims of alleged environmental contamination from historic operations. We will continue to defend ourselves vigorously in these matters.

Our legal organization applies its knowledge, experience and professional judgment to the specific characteristics of our cases, employing a litigation management process to manage and monitor the legal proceedings against us. Our process facilitates the early evaluation and quantification of potential exposures in individual cases. This process also enables us to track those cases that have been scheduled for trial and/or mediation. Based on professional judgment and experience in using these litigation management tools and available information about current developments in all our cases, our legal organization regularly assesses the adequacy of current accruals and determines if adjustment of existing accruals, or establishment of new accruals, is required.

Other Contingencies

We have contingent liabilities resulting from throughput agreements with pipeline and processing companies not associated with financing arrangements. Under these agreements, we may be required to provide any such company with additional funds through advances and penalties for fees related to throughput capacity not utilized. In addition, at March 31, 2017, we had performance obligations secured by letters of credit of $266 million (issued as direct bank letters of credit) related to various purchase commitments for materials, supplies, commercial activities and services incident to the ordinary conduct of business.

In 2007, we announced we had been unable to reach agreement with respect to our migration to an empresa mixta structure mandated by the Venezuelan government’s Nationalization Decree. As a result, Venezuela’s national oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA), or its affiliates, directly assumed control over ConocoPhillips’ interests in the Petrozuata and Hamaca heavy oil ventures and the offshore Corocoro development project. In response to this expropriation, we filed a request for international arbitration on November 2, 2007, with the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). An arbitration hearing was held before an ICSID tribunal during the summer of 2010. On September 3, 2013, an ICSID arbitration tribunal held that Venezuela unlawfully expropriated ConocoPhillips’ significant oil investments in June 2007. On January 17, 2017, the Tribunal reconfirmed the decision that the expropriation was unlawful. A separate arbitration phase is currently proceeding to determine the damages owed to ConocoPhillips for Venezuela’s actions. Separate arbitrations for contractual compensation against PDVSA are also pending before an International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) arbitration tribunal. In addition, ConocoPhillips brought fraudulent transfer actions in the U.S. District Court of Delaware, alleging that PDVSA has taken actions to improperly expatriate assets from the United States to Venezuela in an effort to avoid judgment creditors.

13

Table of Contents

In 2008, Burlington Resources, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of ConocoPhillips, initiated arbitration before ICSID against The Republic of Ecuador, as a result of the newly enacted Windfall Profits Tax Law and government-mandated renegotiation of our production sharing contracts. Despite a restraining order issued by the ICSID tribunal, Ecuador confiscated the crude oil production of Burlington and its co-venturer and sold the seized crude oil. In 2009, Ecuador took over operations in Blocks 7 and 21, fully expropriating our assets. In June 2010, the ICSID tribunal concluded it has jurisdiction to hear the expropriation claim. On April 24, 2012, Ecuador filed supplemental counterclaims asserting environmental damages, which we believe are not material. The ICSID tribunal issued a decision on liability on December 14, 2012, in favor of Burlington, finding that Ecuador’s seizure of Blocks 7 and 21 was an unlawful expropriation in violation of the Ecuador-U.S. Bilateral Investment Treaty. An additional arbitration phase to determine the damages owed to ConocoPhillips for Ecuador’s actions and to address Ecuador’s counterclaims is complete. In February 2017, the tribunal unanimously awarded Burlington $380 million for Ecuador’s unlawful expropriation and breach of the U.S.-Ecuador bilateral investment treaty. The tribunal also issued a separate decision finding Ecuador to be entitled to $42 million for limited environmental and infrastructure impacts associated with the operations of Burlington and its co-venturer. Ecuador recently filed a request for annulment of this decision with ICSID. The schedule for the annulment process has not yet been set.

In December 2016, ConocoPhillips Angola filed a notice of arbitration against Sonangol E.P. under the Block 36 Production Sharing Contract relating to disputes arising thereunder. The arbitration will be conducted under the United Nations Commission on International Trade Laws (UNCITRAL) rules using a three-person tribunal. The schedule for this arbitration has not yet been set.

Note 12—Derivative and Financial Instruments

Derivative Instruments

We use futures, forwards, swaps and options in various markets to meet our customer needs and capture market opportunities. Our commodity business primarily consists of natural gas, crude oil, bitumen, LNG and natural gas liquids.

Our derivative instruments are held at fair value on our consolidated balance sheet. Where these balances have the right of setoff, they are presented on a net basis. Related cash flows are recorded as operating activities on our consolidated statement of cash flows. On our consolidated income statement, realized and unrealized gains and losses are recognized either on a gross basis if directly related to our physical business or a net basis if held for trading. Gains and losses related to contracts that meet and are designated with the normal purchase normal sale exception are recognized upon settlement. We generally apply this exception to eligible crude contracts. We do not use hedge accounting for our commodity derivatives.

The following table presents the gross fair values of our commodity derivatives, excluding collateral, and the line items where they appear on our consolidated balance sheet:

14

Table of Contents

The gains (losses) from commodity derivatives incurred, and the line items where they appear on our consolidated income statement were:

The table below summarizes our material net exposures resulting from outstanding commodity derivative contracts:

Foreign Currency Exchange Derivatives

We have foreign currency exchange rate risk resulting from international operations. Our foreign currency exchange derivative activity primarily relates to managing our cash-related and foreign currency exchange rate exposures, such as firm commitments for capital programs or local currency tax payments, dividends, and cash returns from net investments in foreign affiliates. We do not elect hedge accounting on our foreign currency exchange derivatives.

The following table presents the gross fair values of our foreign currency exchange derivatives, excluding collateral, and the line items where they appear on our consolidated balance sheet:

15

Table of Contents

The losses from foreign currency exchange derivatives incurred and the line item where they appear on our consolidated income statement were:

We had the following net notional position of outstanding foreign currency exchange derivatives:

    *Primarily Canadian dollar and Norwegian krone.

  **Primarily British pound.

***Primarily Euro and Canadian dollar.

Financial Instruments

We have certain financial instruments on our consolidated balance sheet related to interest-bearing time deposits and commercial papers. These held-to-maturity financial instruments are included in “Cash and cash equivalents” on our consolidated balance sheet if the maturities at the time we made the investments were 90 days or less; otherwise, these investments are included in “Short-term investments” on our consolidated balance sheet.

Credit Risk

Financial instruments potentially exposed to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash equivalents, short-term investments, over-the-counter (OTC) derivative contracts and trade receivables. Our cash equivalents and short-term investments are placed in high-quality commercial paper, money market funds, government debt securities and time deposits with major international banks and financial institutions.

16

Table of Contents

The credit risk from our OTC derivative contracts, such as forwards and swaps, derives from the counterparty to the transaction. Individual counterparty exposure is managed within predetermined credit limits and includes the use of cash-call margins when appropriate, thereby reducing the risk of significant nonperformance. We also use futures, swaps and option contracts that have a negligible credit risk because these trades are cleared with an exchange clearinghouse and subject to mandatory margin requirements until settled; however, we are exposed to the credit risk of those exchange brokers for receivables arising from daily margin cash calls, as well as for cash deposited to meet initial margin requirements.

Our trade receivables result primarily from our petroleum operations and reflect a broad national and international customer base, which limits our exposure to concentrations of credit risk. The majority of these receivables have payment terms of 30 days or less, and we continually monitor this exposure and the creditworthiness of the counterparties. We do not generally require collateral to limit the exposure to loss; however, we will sometimes use letters of credit, prepayments and master netting arrangements to mitigate credit risk with counterparties that both buy from and sell to us, as these agreements permit the amounts owed by us or owed to others to be offset against amounts due to us.

Certain of our derivative instruments contain provisions that require us to post collateral if the derivative exposure exceeds a threshold amount. We have contracts with fixed threshold amounts and other contracts with variable threshold amounts that are contingent on our credit rating. The variable threshold amounts typically decline for lower credit ratings, while both the variable and fixed threshold amounts typically revert to zero if we fall below investment grade. Cash is the primary collateral in all contracts; however, many also permit us to post letters of credit as collateral, such as transactions administered through the New York Mercantile Exchange.

The aggregate fair value of all derivative instruments with such credit-risk-related contingent features that were in a liability position on March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, was $35 million and $42 million, respectively. For these instruments, no collateral was posted as of March 31, 2017 or December 31, 2016. If our credit rating had been downgraded below investment grade on March 31, 2017, we would be required to post $35 million of additional collateral, either with cash or letters of credit.

Note 13—Fair Value Measurement

We carry a portion of our assets and liabilities at fair value that are measured at a reporting date using an exit price (i.e., the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability) and disclosed according to the quality of valuation inputs under the following hierarchy:

The classification of an asset or liability is based on the lowest level of input significant to its fair value. Those that are initially classified as Level 3 are subsequently reported as Level 2 when the fair value derived from unobservable inputs is inconsequential to the overall fair value, or if corroborated market data becomes available. Assets and liabilities initially reported as Level 2 are subsequently reported as Level 3 if corroborated market data is no longer available. Transfers occur at the end of the reporting period. There were no material transfers in or out of Level 1 during 2017 or 2016.

Recurring Fair Value Measurement

Financial assets and liabilities reported at fair value on a recurring basis primarily include commodity derivatives. Level 1 derivative assets and liabilities primarily represent exchange-traded futures and options that are valued using unadjusted prices available from the underlying exchange. Level 2 derivative assets and liabilities primarily represent OTC swaps, options and forward purchase and sale contracts that are valued using adjusted exchange prices, prices provided by brokers or pricing service companies that are all corroborated by

17

Table of Contents

market data. Level 3 derivative assets and liabilities consist of OTC swaps, options and forward purchase and sale contracts where a significant portion of fair value is calculated from underlying market data that is not readily available. The derived value uses industry standard methodologies that may consider the historical relationships among various commodities, modeled market prices, time value, volatility factors and other relevant economic measures. The use of these inputs results in management’s best estimate of fair value. Level 3 activity was not material for all periods presented.

The following table summarizes the fair value hierarchy for gross financial assets and liabilities (i.e., unadjusted where the right of setoff exists for commodity derivatives accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis):

The following table summarizes those commodity derivative balances subject to the right of setoff as presented on our consolidated balance sheet. We have elected to offset the recognized fair value amounts for multiple derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty in our financial statements when a legal right of setoff exists.    

At March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, we did not present any amounts gross on our consolidated balance sheet where we had the right of setoff.

Reported Fair Values of Financial Instruments

We used the following methods and assumptions to estimate the fair value of financial instruments:

18

Table of Contents

The following table summarizes the net fair value of financial instruments (i.e., adjusted where the right of setoff exists for commodity derivatives):