ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Our business and operations are subject to many risks. The risks described below, in addition to the risks described in “Item 1. Business” of this Annual Report, may not be the only risks we face, as our business and operations may also be subject to risks that we do not yet know of, or that we currently believe are immaterial. You should carefully consider the following risk factors together with all of the other information included in this Annual Report, including the financial statements and related notes, when deciding to invest in us. You should be aware that the occurrence of any of the events described in this Risk Factors section and elsewhere in this Annual Report could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows and the trading price of our securities could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment.
Risks Related to Our Business
Oil, natural gas and NGL prices are volatile, due to factors beyond our control, and greatly affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. Any decline in, or sustained low levels of, oil, natural gas and NGL prices will cause a decline in our cash flow from operations, which could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Our revenues, operating results, profitability, liquidity, future growth and the value of our assets depend primarily on prevailing commodity prices. Historically, oil and natural gas prices have been volatile and fluctuate in response to changes in supply and demand, market uncertainty, and other factors that are beyond our control, including:
the regional, domestic and foreign supply of oil, natural gas and NGLs;
the level of commodity prices and expectations about future commodity prices;
the level of global oil and natural gas exploration and production;
localized supply and demand fundamentals, including the proximity and capacity of pipelines and other transportation facilities, and other factors that result in differentials to benchmark prices from time to time;
the cost of exploring for developing, producing and transporting reserves;
the price and quantity of foreign imports, including volatility as a result of tariffs and other trade-related disputes;
political and economic conditions in oil producing countries, including conflicts in or among the Middle East, Africa, South America, Russia and Israel;
the ability of members of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (“OPEC”) to agree to and maintain oil price and production controls;
speculative trading in crude oil and natural gas derivative contracts;
the level of consumer product demand;
weather conditions and other natural disasters;
risks associated with a pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease;
risks associated with operating drilling rigs;
technological advances affecting exploration and production operations and overall energy consumption;
domestic and foreign governmental regulations and taxes;
Table of Contents
the impact of energy conservation efforts;
the continued threat of terrorism and the impact of military and other action, including the Russian invasion of Ukraine and ongoing conflicts or entanglements in the Middle East and South America, and the potential destabilizing effect such conflicts may pose for those regions and/or the global oil and natural gas markets;
the price and availability of competitors’ supplies of oil and natural gas and alternative fuels; and
overall domestic and global economic conditions.
These factors and the volatility of the energy markets make it extremely difficult to predict future oil, natural gas and NGL price movements with any certainty. For example, for the five years ended December 31, 2025, the NYMEX-WTI oil future price ranged from a high of $122.11 per Bbl to a low of $47.62 per Bbl, while the NYMEX-Henry Hub natural gas future price ranged from a high of $9.68 per MMBtu to a low of $1.58 per MMBtu. For the year ended December 31, 2025, the WTI posted prices ranged from a high of $80.04 per Bbl on January 5, 2025 to a low of $55.27 per Bbl on December 16, 2025 and NYMEX-Henry Hub natural gas market price ranged from a high of $5.29 per MMBtu on December 5, 2025 to a low of $2.70 per MMBtu on August 22, 2025. Likewise, NGLs, which are made up of ethane, propane, isobutane, normal butane and natural gasoline, each of which has different uses and different pricing characteristics, have sustained depressed realized prices during this period and are generally correlated with the price of oil. An extended decline in commodity prices could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition, could render many of our development and production projects uneconomical and could result in a downward adjustment of our reserve estimates.
The Company recognized an impairment expense of $42.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2025. The Company recognized an impairment charge due to the carrying value of the assets exceeding the fair market value of the assets sales price. No impairment expense was recognized for the year ended December 31, 2024. An extended decline in commodity prices may cause us to write down, as a non-cash charge to earnings, the carrying value of our oil properties for impairment. We may in the future incur impairment charges that could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period taken.
We are dependent upon a small number of significant customers for the majority of our production sales. The loss of those customers, if not replaced, could reduce our revenues and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
We had two customers that each accounted for 10% or more of total reported revenues for the year ended December 31, 2025. The loss of these customers or any significant customer, should we be unable to replace them, could adversely affect our revenues and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Also, if any significant customer reduces the volume it purchases from us, we could experience a temporary interruption in sales of, or may receive a lower price for, our production, or we could be required to shut in all or a portion of our production, any of which could cause our revenues and cash flows to decline and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. For instance, in October 2024, Phillips 66 announced its plan to cease operations at its Los Angeles area refinery in the fourth quarter of 2025. Given that this refinery had historically made up all of our Beta sales, we had to seek out new customers in the area to replace the volume previously purchased by Phillips 66. Further, these risks may be greater in the future following the completion of several divestiture transactions in 2025, including the sale of our non-operated Eagle Ford assets in July 2025, our East Texas/North Louisiana assets in December 2025, and our Oklahoma assets in December 2025, as sales to these significant customers may constitute an even greater percentage of our total reported revenues in future periods. We cannot assure you that any of our customers will continue to do business with us or that we will continue to have access to suitably liquid markets for our future production. See “Item 1. Business — Operations — Marketing and Major Customers.”
Table of Contents
Our business could be adversely affected by a decline in general economic conditions or a weakening of the broader energy industry, and inflation may adversely affect our financial position and operating results.
A prolonged economic slowdown or recession, adverse events relating to the energy industry, volatility due to tariffs or other trade-related disputes, or regional, national, or global economic conditions and factors, particularly a slowdown in the exploration and production industry, could negatively impact our operations and therefore adversely affect our results. The risks associated with our business are more acute during periods of economic slowdown or recession because such periods may be accompanied by decreased demand for oil and natural gas and decreased prices for oil and natural gas.
Inflationary factors, such as increases in the labor costs, material costs, and overhead costs, may also adversely affect our financial position and operating results. Inflation has also resulted in higher interest rates in the United States, which could increase our cost of debt borrowing in the future.
Our properties are concentrated in a limited number of geographic locations and adverse developments, including potential difficulties in the marketing of oil, in such operating areas could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
As of December 31, 2025, following the completion of our divestitures, our properties are currently located in the Rockies and federal waters offshore Southern California. As a result, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows may be disproportionately affected by adverse developments in these geographic areas, including regional events such as severe weather conditions, natural disasters, regulatory changes, infrastructure changes or local economic downturns. Additionally, increased competition, changes in the availability of services, equipment or the ability to attract and retain field personnel in these concentrated regions, could result in higher costs or operational delays. Any disruption, limitation or curtailment of operations in these areas, whether due to physical, regulatory or market-driven factors, or any potential difficulties in the marketing of our oil from such properties, could materially and adversely affect our overall performance.
The inability of our significant customers, vendors or other counterparties to meet their obligations to us may adversely affect our financial results.
We are subject to credit risk due to the concentration of our oil and natural gas receivables. The inability or failure of our significant customers, or any purchasers of our production, to meet their payment obligations to us or their insolvency or liquidation could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations. To the extent that purchasers of our production rely on access to the credit or equity markets to fund their operations, there could be an increased risk that those purchasers could default in their contractual obligations to us. If for any reason we were to determine that it was probable that some or all of the accounts receivable from any one or more of the purchasers of our production were uncollectible, we would recognize a charge to earnings of that period for the probable loss and could suffer a material reduction in our liquidity and cash flows.
Further, we are exposed to risks of loss in the event of nonperformance by our vendors and other counterparties. Some of our vendors and other counterparties may be highly leveraged and subject to their own operating and regulatory risks. Many of our vendors and other counterparties finance their activities through cash flow from operations, the incurrence of debt or the issuance of equity. The combination of reduction of cash flow resulting from declines in commodity prices and the lack of availability of debt or equity financing may result in a significant reduction in our vendors’ and other counterparties’ liquidity and ability to make payments or perform on their obligations to us. Even if our credit review and analysis mechanisms work properly, we may experience financial losses in our dealings with other parties. Any increase in the nonpayment or nonperformance by our vendors and/or counterparties could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
We are subject to, and in the future may be subject to additional complex federal, state, local and other laws and regulations that could adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of conducting our operations.
Our oil and natural gas development and production operations are subject to complex and stringent laws and regulations administered by governmental authorities vested with broad authority relating to the exploration for and the development, production and transportation of oil and natural gas. To conduct our operations in compliance with these laws and regulations, we must obtain and maintain numerous permits, approvals and certificates from various federal, state and local governmental authorities. We may incur substantial costs in order to maintain compliance with these existing laws and regulations. Failure to comply with laws and regulations applicable to our operations, including any evolving interpretation and enforcement by governmental authorities, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Table of Contents
Our oil and natural gas development and production operations are also subject to stringent and complex federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the discharge of materials into the environment, worker health and safety aspects of our operations, or otherwise relating to environmental protection. These laws and regulations may impose numerous obligations applicable to our operations, including the acquisition of a permit before conducting regulated drilling activities; the restriction of types, quantities and concentration of materials that can be released into the environment; the limitation or prohibition of drilling activities on certain lands lying within wilderness, wetlands, seismically active areas and other protected areas; the application of specific health and safety criteria addressing worker protection; and the imposition of substantial liabilities for pollution resulting from our operations. Numerous governmental authorities, such as the EPA and analogous state agencies, have the power to enforce compliance with these laws and regulations and the permits issued under them, often requiring difficult and costly compliance measures or corrective actions. Further, the Incident (as defined below) or any similar future incidents may result in more stringent permitting obligations and regulation of our properties and other oil and gas activities, including at Beta and elsewhere, particularly relating to environmental, health and safety protection controls, oversight of oil and gas operations and required financial assurance. Regulatory or legislative action may impact the industry as a whole and could be directed specifically towards operators similarly situated to us, which could negatively impact our business. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations may result in the assessment of sanctions, including administrative, civil or criminal penalties, the imposition of investigatory or remedial obligations, the suspension or revocation of necessary permits, licenses and authorizations, the requirement that additional pollution controls be installed and, in some instances, the issuance of orders limiting or prohibiting some or all of our operations. We may also experience delays in obtaining or be unable to obtain required permits, which may delay or interrupt our operations and limit our growth and revenue. In addition, the long-term trend in environmental regulation has been to place more restrictions and limitations on activities that may affect the environment. Thus, our costs of compliance may increase if existing laws and regulations are revised or reinterpreted, or if new laws and regulations become applicable to our operations.
Under certain environmental laws that impose strict as well as joint and several liability, we may be required to remediate contaminated properties currently or formerly owned or operated by us or facilities of third parties that received waste generated by our operations regardless of whether such contamination resulted from the conduct of others or from consequences of our own actions that were in compliance with all applicable laws at the time those actions were taken. In addition, claims for damages to persons or property, including natural resources, may result from the environmental, health and safety impacts of our operations. Moreover, public interest in the protection of the environment has increased in recent years. New laws and regulations continue to be enacted, particularly at the state level, resulting in increased costs of doing business and consequently affecting profitability. To the extent laws are enacted, or other governmental action is taken that restricts drilling or imposes more stringent and costly operating, waste handling, disposal and cleanup requirements, our business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
Further, the Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, as amended (the “Mineral Act”) prohibits ownership of any direct or indirect interest in federal onshore oil and natural gas leases by a foreign citizen or a foreign entity except through equity ownership in a corporation formed under the laws of the United States or of any U.S. State or territory, and only if the laws, customs, or regulations of their country of origin or domicile do not deny similar or like privileges to citizens or entities of the United States. If these restrictions are violated, the oil and natural gas lease can be canceled in a proceeding instituted by the United States Attorney General. We qualify as an entity formed under the laws of the United States or of any U.S. state or territory. Although the regulations promulgated and administered by the BLM pursuant to the Mineral Act provide for agency designations of non-reciprocal countries, there are presently no such designations in effect. It is possible that our stockholders may be citizens of foreign countries who do not own their stock in a U.S. corporation, or that even if such stock are held through a U.S. corporation, their country of citizenship may be determined to be non-reciprocal countries under the Mineral Act. In such event, any federal onshore oil and natural gas leases held by us could be subject to cancellation based on such determination.
See “Item 1. Business — Environmental, Occupational Health and Safety Matters and Regulations” and “— Other Regulation of the Oil and Natural Gas Industry” for a description of the more significant laws and regulations that affect us.
An increase in the differential between the NYMEX or other benchmark prices of oil and natural gas and the wellhead price we receive for our production could significantly reduce our cash flow and adversely affect our financial condition.
The prices that we receive for our oil and natural gas production often reflect a regional discount, based on the location of production, to the relevant benchmark prices, such as NYMEX or ICE, that are used for calculating hedge positions. The prices we receive for our production are also affected by the specific characteristics of the production relative to production sold at benchmark prices. For example, our Beta oil typically has a lower gravity, and a portion has higher sulfur content, than oil sold at certain benchmark prices. Therefore, because our oil requires more complex refining equipment to convert it into high value products, it may sell at a discount to those prices. These discounts, if significant, could reduce our cash flows and adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Table of Contents
The production from our Bairoil properties could be adversely affected by the cessation or interruption of the supply of CO 2 to those properties.
We inject water and CO 2 into formations on substantially all of the Bairoil properties to increase production of oil and natural gas. The additional production and reserves attributable to the use of enhanced recovery methods are inherently difficult to predict. If we are unable to produce oil and gas by injecting CO 2 in the manner or to the extent that we anticipate, our future results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected. Additionally, our ability to utilize CO 2 to enhance production is subject to our ability to obtain sufficient quantities of CO 2 . If, under our CO 2 supply contracts, the supplier is unable to deliver its contractually required quantities of CO 2 to us, or if our ability to access adequate supplies is impeded, then we may not have sufficient CO 2 to produce oil and natural gas in the manner or to the extent that we anticipate, and our future oil and gas production volumes will be negatively impacted.
Certain carbon dioxide purchase agreements are priced based on our counterparty’s ability to claim federal income tax credits which depend, in part, on our compliance with the requirements of such tax credits. If we are unable to comply with those requirements, or if Congress enacts new legislation, we will face increased payment obligations for carbon dioxide, which will negatively impact our economics.
Internal Revenue Code Section 45Q, and its accompanying Treasury Regulations provide, as relevant to our operations, a federal income tax credit for capturing of carbon oxides (“CO2”) from industrial processes that are used for enhanced oil recovery (the “Section 45Q Credit”). We purchase CO2 from counterparties that are eligible for the Section 45Q Credit provided we use the CO2 for enhanced oil recovery (“EOR”) in compliance with the Section 45Q Credit rules. We have negotiated certain CO2 purchase agreements to allow us to share in the value of the Section 45Q Credit in the form of reduced CO2 pricing.
The availability of the Section 45Q Credit, and associated reductions in our CO2 payments, require ongoing compliance by both us and our supplier with an evolving legal and regulatory regime. If Congress revises the Section 45Q Credit, including with retroactive effect, we, or our CO2 supplier may be unable to realize the Section 45Q Credit benefits. Even if Congress does not revise the Section 45Q Credit, it is possible that we are unable to comply with the existing or modified regulatory regimes. In both instances, we will incur higher CO2 costs, which will negatively impact our economics.
Additionally, if we are unable to utilize CO2 for EOR purposes consistent with the Section 45Q Credit requirements, or the CO2 that we purchase leaks from our EOR wells, we will have an indemnity obligation to our CO2 supplier, which will eliminate the savings to which we would otherwise be entitled.
While we have negotiated our CO2 purchase contracts consistent with the Section 45Q Credit requirements and are undertaking our EOR activities in a manner that we believe enables our CO2 supplier to be eligible for the Section 45Q Credit (and corresponding reduced CO2 pricing), there can be no assurances that the IRS will agree with our positions. Any successful challenge by the IRS would reduce or eliminate the Section 45Q Credit and associated cost savings from our reduced CO2 pricing.
The failure to replace our proved oil reserves could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, production and cash flows.
Producing oil reservoirs are characterized by declining production rates that vary depending upon reservoir characteristics and other factors. Our future oil reserves and production and therefore, our cash flows, are highly dependent on our success in efficiently developing and exploiting our current reserves. Our production decline rates may be significantly higher than currently estimated if our wells do not produce as expected. Further, our decline rate may change when we drill additional wells or make acquisitions. We may not be able to develop, find or acquire additional reserves to replace our current and future production at economically acceptable terms, which would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If we reduce our capital spending in an effort to conserve cash, this would likely result in production being lower than anticipated, and could result in reduced revenues, cash flows from operations and income. Further, if our revenues decrease, as a result of lower oil prices or for any other reason, we may not be able to obtain the capital necessary to sustain our operations.
Table of Contents
Our estimated reserves and future production rates are based on many assumptions that may turn out to be inaccurate. Any material inaccuracies in our reserve estimates or underlying assumptions will materially affect the quantities and present value of our estimated reserves.
It is not possible to measure underground accumulations of oil or natural gas in an exact way. The process of estimating natural gas and oil reserves is complex. It requires interpretations of available technical data and many assumptions, including assumptions relating to current and future economic conditions and commodity prices. Any significant inaccuracies in these interpretations or assumptions could materially affect our estimated quantities and present value of our reserves.
In order to prepare our estimates, we must project production rates and timing of operating and development expenditures. We must also analyze available geological, geophysical, production and engineering data. The extent, quality and reliability of this data can vary.
The process also requires economic assumptions about matters such as natural gas and oil prices, drilling and operating expenses, capital expenditures and availability of funds.
Actual future production, oil prices, revenues, development expenditures, operating expenses and quantities of recoverable reserves will vary from our estimates. Any significant variance could materially affect the estimated quantities and present value of our reserves. In addition, we may adjust our reserve estimates to reflect production history, results of development, existing commodity prices and other factors, many of which are beyond our control.
You should not assume that the present value of future net revenues from our reserves is the current market value of our estimated reserves. We generally base the estimated discounted future net cash flows from our reserves on prices and costs on the date of the estimate. Actual future prices and costs may differ materially from those used in the present value estimate.
Any material inaccuracies in these reserve estimates or underlying assumptions will materially affect the quantities and present value of our reserves, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
The standardized measure of our estimated proved reserves is not necessarily the same as the current market value of our estimated proved oil and natural gas reserves.
The present value of future net cash flows from our proved reserves shown in this report, or standardized measure, may not be the current market value of our estimated natural gas and oil reserves. In accordance with rules established by the SEC and the FASB, we base the estimated discounted future net cash flows from our proved reserves on the trailing 12-month average oil and gas index prices, calculated as the unweighted arithmetic average for the first-day-of-the-month price for each month and costs in effect on the date of the estimate, holding the prices and costs constant throughout the life of the properties. Actual future prices and costs may differ materially from those used in the net present value estimate, and future net present value estimates using then-current prices and costs may be significantly less than the current estimate. In addition, the 10% discount factor we use when calculating discounted future net cash flows for reporting requirements, which is required by the SEC and FASB, is not necessarily the most appropriate discount factor based on interest rates in effect from time to time and risks associated with us or the natural gas and oil industry in general.
Developing and producing oil and natural gas are costly and high-risk activities with many uncertainties that may result in a total loss of investment or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Our drilling activities are subject to many risks, including the risk that we will not discover commercially productive reservoirs. Drilling for oil and natural gas often involves unprofitable efforts, not only from dry holes, but also from wells that are productive but do not produce sufficient oil or natural gas to return a profit at then-realized prices after deducting drilling, operating and other costs. The seismic data and other technologies we use do not allow us to know conclusively prior to drilling a well that oil or natural gas is present or that it can be produced economically. The costs of our development and production activities are subject to numerous uncertainties beyond our control and increases in those costs can adversely affect the economics of a project. Further, our development and production operations may be curtailed, delayed, canceled or otherwise negatively impacted as a result of other factors, including:
high costs, shortages or delivery delays of equipment, labor, electrical power or other services;
unusual or unexpected geological formations;
Table of Contents
composition of sour natural gas, including sulfur, carbon dioxide and other diluent content;
unexpected operational events and conditions;
failure of down hole equipment and tubulars;
loss of wellbore mechanical integrity;
failure, unavailability or shortage of capacity of gathering and transportation pipelines, or other transportation facilities;
human errors, facility or equipment malfunctions and equipment failures or accidents, including acceleration of deterioration of our facilities and equipment due to the highly corrosive nature of sour natural gas;
title problems;
loss of drilling fluid circulation;
hydrocarbon or oilfield chemical spills;
fires, blowouts, surface craterings and explosions;
surface spills or underground migration due to uncontrollable flows of oil, natural gas, formation water or well fluids;
delays imposed by or resulting from compliance with environmental and other governmental or regulatory requirements; and
adverse weather conditions and natural disasters.
Additionally, our operations are subject to all of the hazards and operating risks associated with drilling for and production of oil and natural gas, including natural disasters, the risk of fire, explosions, blowouts, surface cratering, uncontrollable flows of natural gas, oil and formation water, pipe or pipeline failures, abnormally pressured formations, casing collapses and environmental hazards such as oil spills, natural gas leaks, ruptures or discharges of toxic gases, all of which could cause substantial financial losses. The location of any properties and other assets near populated areas, including residential areas, commercial business centers and industrial sites, could significantly increase the level of potential damages resulting from these risks.
Any of these risks can cause substantial losses, including personal injury or loss of life, damage to or destruction of property, natural resources and equipment, pollution, environmental contamination or loss of wells and other regulatory penalties. In the event that planned operations are delayed or canceled, or existing wells or development wells have lower than anticipated production due to one or more of the factors above or for any other reason, our financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected. If any of these factors were to occur with respect to a particular field, we could lose all or a part of our investment in the field or we could fail to realize the expected benefits from the field, either of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Expenses not covered by our insurance could have a material adverse effect on our financial position and results of operations.
We maintain insurance coverage against potential losses that we believe is customary in the industry. However, insurance against all operational risk is not available to us. These insurance policies may not cover all liabilities, claims, fines, penalties or costs and expenses that we may incur in connection with our business and operations, including those related to environmental claims. Pollution and environmental risks generally are not fully insurable. In addition, we cannot assure you that we will be able to maintain adequate insurance at rates we consider reasonable. We may elect not to obtain insurance if we believe that the cost of available insurance is excessive relative to the perceived risks presented. A liability, claim or other loss not fully covered by insurance could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Table of Contents
Our business depends in part on pipelines, gathering systems and processing facilities owned by us or others. Any limitation in the availability of those facilities could interfere with our ability to market our oil production.
The marketability of our oil production depends in part on the availability, proximity and capacity of pipelines and other transportation methods, gathering systems and processing facilities owned by third parties. The amount of oil that can be produced and sold is subject to curtailment in certain circumstances, such as pipeline interruptions due to scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, excessive pressure, physical damage or lack of contracted capacity on such systems. For example, our ability to produce and sell oil from the Beta properties will depend on the availability of the pipeline infrastructure between platforms as well as the San Pedro Bay Pipeline for delivery of that oil to shore, and any unavailability of that pipeline infrastructure or pipeline could cause us to shut in all or a portion of the production from the Beta properties for the length of such unavailability. Our access to transportation options can also be affected by U.S. federal and state regulation of oil and natural gas production and transportation, general economic conditions and changes in supply and demand. The curtailments arising from these and similar circumstances may last from a few days to several months. In many cases, we are provided with only limited, if any, notice as to when these circumstances will arise and their duration. Any significant curtailment in gathering systems or transportation or processing facility capacity could reduce our ability to market our oil production and harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Development and production of oil and natural gas in offshore waters have inherent and historically higher risk than similar activities onshore.
Our offshore operations are subject to a variety of operating risks specific to the marine environment, such as a dependence on a limited number of electrical transmission lines, as well as capsizing, collisions and damage or loss from adverse weather conditions. Offshore activities are subject to more extensive governmental regulation than our other oil and natural gas activities. We are vulnerable to the risks associated with operating in the Pacific Outer Continental Shelf, including risks relating to:
impacts of climate change and natural disasters such as earthquakes, tidal waves, mudslides, fires and floods;
oil field service costs and availability;
compliance with environmental and other laws and regulations;
third-party marine vessels, such as the anchor dragging incident at Beta in 2021;
remediation and other costs resulting from oil spills, releases of hazardous materials and other environmental and natural resource damages; and
failure of equipment or facilities.
In addition to lost production and increased costs, these hazards could cause serious injuries, fatalities, contamination or property damage for which we could be held responsible. The potential consequences of these hazards are particularly severe for us because significant portions of our offshore operations are conducted in environmentally sensitive areas, including areas with significant residential populations and public and commercial infrastructure. An accidental oil spill or release on or related to offshore properties and operations could expose us to joint and several strict liability, without regard to fault, under applicable law for all containment and oil removal costs and a variety of public and private damages including, but not limited to, the costs of remediating a release of oil, natural resource damages, and economic damages suffered by persons adversely affected by an oil spill. If an oil discharge or substantial threat of discharge were to occur, we may be subject to regulatory scrutiny and liable for costs and damages, which costs and damages could be material to our business, financial condition or results of operations and could subject us to criminal and civil penalties. Finally, maintenance activities undertaken to reduce operational risks can be costly and can require exploration, exploitation and development operations to be curtailed while those activities are being completed.
Table of Contents
Our hedging strategy may not effectively mitigate the impact of commodity price volatility from our cash flows, and our hedging activities could result in cash losses and may limit potential gains.
We intend to maintain a portfolio of commodity derivative contracts covering at least 25%- 75%, depending on availability under the Revolving Credit Facility, of our estimated production from proved developed producing reserves over a one-year period at any given point in time. These commodity derivative contracts include natural gas, oil and NGL financial swaps, put options, costless collars, and three-way collars. The prices and quantities at which we enter into commodity derivative contracts covering our production in the future will be dependent upon oil and natural gas prices and price expectations, at the time we enter into these transactions, which may be substantially higher or lower than current or future oil and natural gas prices. Accordingly, our price hedging strategy may not protect us from significant declines in oil, natural gas and NGL prices received for our future production. Many of the derivative contracts to which we will be a party will require us to make cash payments to the extent the applicable index exceeds a predetermined price, thereby limiting our ability to realize the benefit of increases in oil and NGL prices. If our actual production and sales for any period are less than our hedged production and sales for that period (including reductions in production due to operational delays) or if we are unable to perform our drilling activities as planned, we might be forced to satisfy all or a portion of our hedging obligations without the benefit of the cash flow from our sale of the underlying physical commodity, which may materially impact our liquidity.
Many of our properties are in areas that may have been partially depleted or drained.
Many of our properties are in areas that may have already been partially depleted or drained. The owners of leasehold interests lying contiguous or adjacent to or adjoining any of our properties could take actions, such as drilling additional wells that could adversely affect our operations. When a new well is completed and produced, the pressure differential in the vicinity of the well causes the migration of reservoir fluids towards the new wellbore (and potentially away from existing wellbores). As a result, the drilling and production of these potential locations could cause a depletion of our proved reserves and may inhibit our ability to further exploit and develop our reserves.
Our expectations for future development activities are planned to be realized over several years, making them susceptible to uncertainties that could materially alter the occurrence or timing of such activities.
We have identified drilling, recompletion and development locations and prospects for future drilling, recompletion and development. These drilling, recompletion and development locations represent a significant part of our future drilling and enhanced recovery opportunity plans. We cannot predict in advance of drilling, testing and analysis of data whether any particular drilling location will yield production in sufficient quantities to recover drilling or completion costs or to be economically viable. Even if sufficient amounts of oil or natural gas reserves exist, we may damage the potentially productive hydrocarbon bearing formation or experience mechanical difficulties while drilling or completing the well, possibly resulting in a reduction in production from the well or abandonment of the well. If we drill dry holes in our current and future drilling locations, our drilling success rate may decline and materially harm our business. Our ability to drill, recomplete and develop locations depends on a number of factors, including the availability of capital, seasonal conditions, regulatory approvals, negotiation of agreements with third parties, commodity prices, costs, the generation of additional seismic or geological information, the availability of drilling rigs, drilling results, construction of infrastructure and lease expirations. Because of these uncertainties, we cannot be certain of the timing of these activities or that they will ultimately result in the realization of estimated proved reserves or meet our expectations for success. As such, our actual drilling and enhanced recovery activities may materially differ from our current expectations, which could have a significant adverse effect on our estimated reserves, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Loss of our key executive officers or other key personnel, or an inability to attract and retain such officers and personnel, could negatively affect our business.
Our future success depends on the skills, experience and efforts of our key executive officers. The sudden loss of any of these executives’ services or our failure to appropriately plan for any expected key executive succession could materially and adversely affect our business and prospects, as we may not be able to find suitable individuals to replace them on a timely basis, if at all. Additionally, we also depend on our ability to attract and retain qualified personnel to operate and expand our business. If we fail to attract or retain talented new employees, our business and results of operations could be negatively affected.
Table of Contents
Part of our strategy may involve using horizontal drilling and completion techniques, which involve risks and uncertainties in their application.
Our operations may involve utilizing some of the latest drilling and completion techniques as developed by us and our service providers. Risks that we may face while drilling horizontal wells include, but are not limited to, the following:
landing our wellbore in the desired drilling zone;
staying in the desired drilling zone while drilling horizontally through the formation;
running our casing the entire length of the wellbore; and
being able to run tools and other equipment consistently through the horizontal wellbore.
Risks that we may face while completing wells include, but are not limited to, the following:
the ability to run tools the entire length of the wellbore during completion operations; and
If our drilling results are less than anticipated, the return on our investment for a particular project may not be as attractive as we anticipated and we could incur material write-downs of unevaluated properties, and the value of our undeveloped acreage could decline in the future.
Our potential use of 2-D and 3-D seismic data is subject to interpretation and may not accurately identify the presence of oil and natural gas, which could adversely affect the results of our drilling operations.
Even when properly used and interpreted, 2-D and 3-D seismic data and visualization techniques are only tools used to assist geoscientists in identifying subsurface structures and hydrocarbon indicators and do not enable the interpreter to know whether hydrocarbons are, in fact, present in those structures. In addition, the use of 3-D seismic and other advanced technologies requires greater predrilling expenditures than traditional drilling strategies and we could incur losses as a result of such expenditures. As a result, future drilling activities may not be successful or economical, which could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
SEC rules could limit our ability to book additional PUDs in the future.
SEC rules require that, subject to limited exceptions, PUDs may only be booked if they relate to wells scheduled to be drilled within five years after the date of booking. This requirement has limited and will likely continue to limit our ability to book additional PUDs, especially in a time of depressed commodity prices. Moreover, we may be required to write down our PUDs if we do not drill those wells within the required five-year timeframe.
The unavailability or high cost of equipment, supplies and crews could delay our operations, increase our costs and delay forecasted revenue.
Our industry is cyclical, and historically there have been periodic shortages of equipment, supplies and crew. Sustained declines in oil and natural gas prices may reduce the number of service providers for equipment, supplies and crews, contributing to or resulting in shortages. Alternatively, during periods of higher oil and natural gas prices, the demand for equipment, supplies and crews is increased and can lead to shortages of, and increasing costs for, development equipment, supplies, services and personnel. Shortages of, or increasing costs for, experienced development crews and oil field equipment and services could restrict the Company’s ability to drill the wells and conduct the operations that it currently has planned relating to the fields where our properties are located. In addition, some of our operations require supply materials for production, such as CO 2 , which could become subject to shortages and increased costs. Any delay in the development of new wells or a significant increase in development costs could reduce our revenues and impact our development plan, which would thus affect our financial conduction, results of operations and our cash flows.
Table of Contents
We may incur losses as a result of title defects in the properties in which we invest.
The existence of a material title deficiency can render a lease worthless and can adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. While we typically obtain title opinions prior to commencing drilling operations on a lease or in a unit, the failure of title may not be discovered until after a well is drilled, in which case we may lose the lease and the right to produce all or a portion of the minerals under the property.
We may be unable to compete effectively with larger companies.
The oil and natural gas industry is intensely competitive with respect to acquiring prospects and productive properties, marketing oil and natural gas and securing equipment and trained personnel. Our ability to acquire additional properties and to discover reserves in the future will depend on our ability to evaluate and select suitable properties and to consummate transactions in a highly competitive environment. Many of our larger competitors not only drill for and produce oil and natural gas but also carry-on refining operations and market petroleum and other products on a regional, national or worldwide basis and many of our competitors have access to capital at a lower cost than that available to us. These companies may be able to pay more for oil and natural gas properties and evaluate, bid for and purchase a greater number of properties than our financial, technical or personnel resources permit. In addition, there is substantial competition for investment capital in the oil and natural gas industry. These larger companies may have a greater ability to continue development activities during periods of low oil and natural gas prices and to absorb the burden of present and future federal, state, local and other laws and regulations. Furthermore, we may not be able to aggregate sufficient quantities of production to compete with larger companies that are able to sell greater volumes of production to intermediaries, thereby reducing the realized prices attributable to our production. Any inability to compete effectively with larger companies could have a material adverse impact on our business activities, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
We may be unable to maintain compliance with the covenants in the Revolving Credit Facility, which could result in an event of default thereunder that, if not cured or waived, would have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.
Under our Revolving Credit Facility, we are required to (i) maintain, as of the date of determination, a maximum total debt to EBITDAX ratio of 3.00 to 1.00, commencing with the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2026, (ii) maintain a current ratio of not less than 1.00 to 1.00, and (iii) hedge at least 25%−75%, depending on availability under the Revolving Credit Facility, of our estimated production from total proved developed producing reserves. If we were to violate any of the covenants under our Revolving Credit Facility and were unable to obtain a waiver or amendment, it would be considered a default after the expiration of any applicable grace period. If we were in default under our Revolving Credit Facility, then the lenders may exercise certain remedies including, among others, declaring all borrowings outstanding thereunder, if any, immediately due and payable. This could adversely affect our operations and our ability to satisfy our obligations as they come due, because we might not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient funds to make these accelerated payments. In addition, our obligations under our Revolving Credit Facility are secured by mortgages on not less than 90% of the PV-9 value of our oil and gas properties together with all or substantially all material midstream assets necessary to operate our proved, developed and producing oil and gas properties, and if we are unable to repay our indebtedness under our Revolving Credit Facility, the lenders could seek to foreclose on our assets.
Restrictive covenants in our Revolving Credit Facility could limit our growth and our ability to finance our operations, fund our capital needs, respond to changing conditions and engage in other business activities that may be in our best interests.
Restrictive covenants in our Revolving Credit Facility impose significant operating and financial restrictions on us and our subsidiaries. These restrictions limit our ability to, among other things:
incur additional liens;
incur additional indebtedness;
merge, consolidate or sell our assets;
pay dividends or make other distributions or repurchase or redeem our stock;
make certain investments; and
enter into transactions with our affiliates.
Table of Contents
Our Revolving Credit Facility also requires us to comply with certain financial maintenance covenants as discussed above. A breach of any of these covenants could result in a default under our Revolving Credit Facility. If a default occurs and remains uncured or unwaived, the administrative agent or majority lenders under our Revolving Credit Facility may elect to declare all borrowings outstanding thereunder, if any, together with accrued interest and other fees, to be immediately due and payable. The administrative agent or majority lenders under our Revolving Credit Facility would also have the right in these circumstances to terminate any commitments they have to provide further borrowings. If we are unable to repay our indebtedness when due or declared due, the administrative agent will also have the right to proceed against the collateral pledged to it to secure the indebtedness under our Revolving Credit Facility. If such indebtedness were to be accelerated, our assets may not be sufficient to repay in full our secured indebtedness.
We may also be prevented from taking advantage of business opportunities that arise because of the limitations imposed on us by the restrictive covenants in our Revolving Credit Facility. The terms and conditions of our Revolving Credit Facility affect us in several ways, including:
requiring us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to service our existing debt, thereby reducing the cash available to finance our operations and other business activities and could limit our flexibility in planning for or reacting to changes in our business and the industry in which we operate;
increasing our vulnerability to economic downturns and adverse developments in our business;
limiting our ability to access the capital markets to raise capital on favorable terms or to obtain additional financing for working capital, capital expenditures or acquisitions or to refinance existing indebtedness;
placing restrictions on our ability to obtain additional financing, make investments, lease equipment, sell assets and engage in business combinations;
placing us at a competitive disadvantage relative to competitors with lower levels of indebtedness in relation to their overall size or less restrictive terms governing their indebtedness; and
limiting management’s discretion in operating our business.
Our variable rate indebtedness subjects us to interest rate risk, which could cause our debt service obligations to increase.
Borrowings under our Revolving Credit Facility bear interest at variable rates and expose us to interest rate risk. If interest rates increase, our debt service obligations on the variable rate indebtedness would increase even if the amount borrowed remained the same, and our net income and cash available for servicing our indebtedness would decrease.
Our lenders periodically redetermine the amount we may borrow under our Revolving Credit Facility, which may materially impact our operations.
Our Revolving Credit Facility allows us to borrow in an amount up to the borrowing base, which is primarily based on the estimated value of our oil properties and our commodity derivative contracts as determined semi-annually by our lenders in their sole discretion. The borrowing base is subject to redetermination on at least a semi-annual basis primarily based on an engineering report with respect to our estimated oil and NGL reserves, which takes into account the prevailing natural gas, oil and NGL prices at such time, as adjusted for the impact of our commodity derivative contracts. Accordingly, declining commodity prices may have an impact on the amount we can borrow, which could affect our cash flows and ability to execute our business plans. Any further reduction in the borrowing base may affect our business and financing activities, limit our flexibility and management’s discretion in operating our business, and increase the risk that we may default on our debt obligations. In addition, as hedges roll off, the borrowing base is subject to further reduction. Our Revolving Credit Facility requires us to repay any deficiency over a certain period or pledge additional oil and gas properties to eliminate such deficiency within 30 days of notice. If our outstanding borrowings exceed the borrowing base and we are unable to repay the deficiency or pledge additional oil and gas properties to eliminate such deficiency, our failure to repay any of the installments due related to the borrowing base deficiency would constitute an event of default under the Revolving Credit Facility and as such, the lenders could declare all outstanding principal and interest to be due and payable, could freeze our accounts, or foreclose against the assets securing the obligations owed under our Revolving Credit Facility.
Table of Contents
Our business is subject to climate-related transition risks, including fuel conservation measures, technological advances and increasing public attention to climate change and environmental matters, which could reduce demand for oil and natural gas and have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and reputation.
Increased attention from governmental and regulatory bodies, investors, consumers, industry and other stakeholders on responding to climate change, together with fuel conservation measures, alternative fuel requirements, incentives to conserve energy or use alternative energy sources, and development of, and increased demand from consumers and industry for, lower-emission products and services (including electric vehicles and renewable residential and commercial power supplies) as well as more efficient products and services, increasing consumer demand for alternatives to oil and natural gas (including wind, solar, nuclear, and geothermal sources as well as electric vehicles), societal expectations on companies to address climate change, investor and societal expectations regarding voluntary climate-related disclosures, and technological advances in fuel economy and energy transmission, storage, consumption and generation devices (including advances in wind, solar and hydrogen power, as well as battery technology), could reduce demand for oil and natural gas. Such initiatives or related activism aimed at responding to climate change and reducing air pollution, as well as negative investor sentiment toward our industry and the impact of the changing demand for oil and natural gas services and products may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and ability to access capital.
The oil and natural gas industry, and energy industry more broadly, is characterized by rapid and significant technological advancements and introductions of new products and services using new technologies. As others use or develop new technologies, including technological advances in fuel economy and energy generation devices or other technological advances that could reduce demand for oil and natural gas, we may be placed at a competitive disadvantage or may be forced by competitive pressures to implement new technologies at substantial costs. We may not be able to respond to these competitive pressures or implement new technologies on a timely basis or at an acceptable cost. If one or more of the technologies we use now or in the future were to become obsolete, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
Moreover, parties concerned about the potential effects of climate change have directed their attention at sources of funding for energy companies, which has resulted in certain financial institutions, funds and other sources of capital, restricting or eliminating their investment in oil and natural gas activities. Some investors, including investment advisors and certain sovereign wealth funds, pension funds, university endowments and family foundations, have stated policies to disinvest in the oil and gas sector based on their social and environmental considerations. Certain investment banks and asset managers based both domestically and internationally have announced that they are adopting climate change guidelines for their banking and investing activities. Institutional lenders who provide financing to energy companies such as ours may be more attentive to sustainable lending practices, and some may elect not to provide traditional energy producers or companies that support such producers with funding. Certain other stakeholders have also pressured commercial and investment banks to stop financing oil and gas production and related infrastructure projects. Such developments, including environmental activism and initiatives aimed at limiting climate change and reducing air pollution, could result in downward pressure on the stock prices of oil and gas companies, including ours. This may also potentially result in a reduction of available capital funding or higher cost of capital for potential development projects, as well as the restriction, delay or cancellation of infrastructure projects and energy production activities, ultimately impacting our future financial results.
Negative public perception regarding us and/or our industry resulting from, among other things, concerns raised by advocacy groups about climate change, may also lead to increased litigation risk and regulatory, legislative, and judicial scrutiny, which may, in turn, lead to new state and federal safety and environmental laws, regulations, guidelines and enforcement interpretations. In addition, claims have been made against certain energy companies alleging that GHG emissions from oil and natural gas operations constitute a public nuisance or have caused other redressable injuries under federal and/or state common law. While our business is not a party to any such litigation, we could be named in actions making similar allegations. An unfavorable ruling in any such case could adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Governmental authorities exercise considerable discretion in the timing and scope of permit issuance and the public may engage in the permitting process, including through intervention in the courts. Negative public perception could cause the permits we need to conduct our operations to be withheld, delayed, or burdened by requirements that restrict our ability to profitably conduct our business. In addition, various officials and candidates at the federal, state and local levels have made climate-related pledges. More broadly, the enactment of climate change-related policies and initiatives across the market at the corporate level and/or investor community level may in the future result in increases in the Company’s compliance costs and other operating costs and have other adverse effects (e.g., greater potential for governmental investigations or litigation). For further discussion regarding the transition risks posed to us by climate change-related regulations, policies and initiatives, see the discussion below in “—Climate change legislation or regulations restricting emissions of “greenhouse gases,” or GHGs, could result in increased operating costs and reduced demand for the oil and natural gas that we produce, while the physical effects of climate change could disrupt our production and cause us to incur significant costs in preparing for or responding to those effects.”
Table of Contents
Increasing scrutiny and changing stakeholder expectations in respect of environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) and sustainability practices may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and damage our reputation.
Companies across all industries are facing increasing scrutiny from a variety of stakeholders, including investor advocacy groups, proxy advisory firms, certain institutional investors and lenders, investment funds and other influential investors and rating agencies, related to their sustainability practices. If we do not adapt to or comply with investor or other stakeholder expectations and standards on sustainability matters as they continue to evolve, meet sustainability-related goals that we have set, or if we are perceived to have not responded appropriately or quickly enough to growing concern for sustainability issues, regardless of whether there is a regulatory or legal requirement to do so, we may suffer from reputational damage and our business, financial condition and/or stock price could be materially and adversely affected.
In addition, the Company’s continuing efforts to research, establish, accomplish, and accurately report on the implementation of our sustainability strategy, including any specific sustainability objectives, may also create additional operational risks and expenses and expose us to reputational, legal, and other risks. While we create and publish voluntary disclosures regarding sustainability matters from time to time, some of the statements in those voluntary disclosures may be based on hypothetical expectations and assumptions that may or may not be representative of current or actual risks or events or forecasts of expected risks or events, including the costs associated therewith. Such expectations and assumptions are necessarily uncertain and may be prone to error or subject to misinterpretation given the long timelines involved and the lack of an established single approach to identifying, measuring, and reporting on many sustainability matters. Further, organizations that provide information to investors on corporate governance and related matters have developed ratings processes for evaluating companies on their approach to sustainability matters. Such ratings are used by some investors to inform their investment and voting decisions. Unfavorable sustainability ratings could lead to increased negative investor sentiment toward us and our industry and to the diversion of investment to other industries, which could have a negative impact on our stock price and our access to and costs of capital.
Our operations, projects and growth opportunities require us to have strong relationships with various key stakeholders, including our shareholders, employees, suppliers, customers, local communities and others. We may face pressure from stakeholders, many of whom are focused on climate change, to prioritize sustainable energy practices, reduce our carbon footprint and promote sustainability while at the same time remaining a successfully operating public company. At the same time, recent political developments could subject the Company to increased risk of criticism or litigation risks from certain “anti-ESG” parties. Such sentiment may focus on the Company’s GHG reduction initiatives, which anti-ESG proponents may assert as unlawful, political or polarizing in nature. If we do not successfully manage expectations across these varied stakeholder interests, it could erode stakeholder trust and thereby affect our brand and reputation. Such erosion of confidence could negatively impact our business through decreased demand and growth opportunities, delays in projects, increased legal action and regulatory oversight, adverse press coverage and other adverse public statements, difficulty hiring and retaining top talent, difficulty obtaining necessary approvals and permits from governments and regulatory agencies on a timely basis and on acceptable terms and difficulty securing investors and access to capital.
Climate change legislation or regulations pertaining to emissions of “greenhouse gases,” or GHGs, could result in increased operating costs and reduced demand for the oil and natural gas that we produce, while the physical effects of climate change could disrupt our production and cause us to incur significant costs in preparing for or responding to those effects.
The EPA has adopted and implemented regulations to restrict emissions of GHGs under existing provisions of the CAA. In addition, the EPA has also adopted rules requiring the monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions from specified sources on an annual basis in the United States, including, among others, certain oil and natural gas production facilities, which includes certain of our operations. The adoption and implementation of any regulations imposing reporting obligations on, or limiting emissions of GHGs from, our equipment and operations could require us to incur costs to reduce emissions of GHGs associated with our operations or could adversely affect demand for the oil and natural gas we produce. Such climate change regulatory and legislative initiatives could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Table of Contents
In August 2022, then-President Biden signed into law the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. The Inflation Reduction Act includes a methane emissions reduction program that amends the CAA to include a Methane Emissions and Waste Reduction Incentive Program for petroleum and natural gas systems. This program requires the EPA to impose a WEC on certain oil and gas sources that are already required to report under EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. To implement the program, in May 2024, the EPA finalized revisions to the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program for petroleum and natural gas facilities. The emissions reported under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program were set as the basis for any payments under the Methane Emissions Reduction Program. However, petitions for reconsideration to the EPA are pending and litigation in the D.C. Circuit has commenced. In addition, EPA proposed on September 12, 2025 to eliminate or suspend Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program requirements for most industries, with final rules implementing the proposed rollback expected by mid-2026. In November 2024, the EPA finalized a regulation to implement the Inflation Reduction Act’s WEC. However, in January 2025, President Trump issued an executive order directing the heads of all federal agencies to identify and begin the processes to suspend, revise, or rescind all agency actions that are unduly burdensome on the identification, development, or use of domestic energy resources. In addition, in March 2025, President Trump signed Congress’ Joint Resolution of Disapproval of the WEC, and in May 2025, the EPA issued a final rule to remove the WEC regulations from the Code of Federal Regulations. In July 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act delayed the effective date of the WEC until 2034. Consequently, future implementation and enforcement of these rules remain uncertain at this time. Additionally, many of the states have taken legal measures to reduce emissions of GHGs, including through the planned development of GHG emission inventories and/or regional GHGs cap and trade programs. For example, in October 2023, California enacted legislation that will ultimately require certain companies that do business in California to publicly disclose certain climate-related information, including their Scopes 1, 2 and 3 GHG emissions, with third party assurance of such data, and their climate-related financial risks and related mitigation measures with certain disclosures required in 2026. These laws are subject to ongoing legal challenges and certain requirements are currently enjoined. It is unclear how the litigation process and additional legal developments will impact enforceability of these requirements and the timeline and cost of compliance.
The 2007 case Massachusetts v. EPA held that GHGs are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act, and that EPA must determine whether certain GHG emissions may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. In December 2009, EPA issued a final rule stating that current and projected concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs endanger public health and welfare (“2009 Endangerment Finding”). The 2009 Endangerment Finding served as legal support for subsequent EPA Clean Air Act rulemakings that have significantly affected industry operational costs, including New Source Performance Standards and Existing Source Guidelines rules requiring technology investments to detect and reduce methane leaks and emissions from new and existing oil and gas infrastructure. In the 2022 Supreme Court case West Virginia v. EPA, the Court held that EPA lacked clear statutory authority under the Clean Air Act, absent specific and explicit authorization from Congress, to implement an EPA rulemaking that mandated a shift for electricity production from higher greenhouse gas emissions sources to lower emissions sources. In the 2024 Supreme Court case Loper Bright Enters. v. Raimondo, the Court held that courts must independently determine the best reading of a statute, rather than deferring to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutory language. On February 12, 2026, EPA issued a pre-publication copy of a final rule, submitted for publication in the Federal Register, rescinding the 2009 Endangerment Finding on the basis that the 2009 Endangerment Finding exceeded EPA authority, was not supported by specific and explicit authorization from Congress, and did not meet the best reading of the underlying Clean Air Act provision under the West Virginia and Loper Bright holdings. Litigation following the February 2026 final rule publication is expected, and the potential impact of the February 2026 final rule, potential subsequent revisions to existing emission standards, and the outcome of related litigation, including private nuisance litigation, remain uncertain and could affect our operations.
At the international level, in 2015, at COP21 the international community adopted the Paris Agreement, an international treaty aimed at addressing climate change whereby parties agreed to determine national contributions and set GHG emission reduction goals every five years beginning in 2020. However, in January 2025, President Trump issued an executive order directing the immediate notice to the United Nations of the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. The withdrawal became effective in January 2026. In January 2026, President Trump announced the United States will also withdraw from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. Despite this, various states and local governments have vowed to continue to enact regulations to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement, and related initiatives are expected to continue.
Although it is not possible at this time to predict how legislation or new regulations that may be adopted to address GHG emissions (including those related to carbon pricing schemes) would impact our business, any such future laws and regulations that require reporting of GHGs or otherwise limit emissions of GHGs from our equipment and operations could require us to incur costs to monitor and report on GHG emissions or reduce emissions of GHGs associated with our operations, and such requirements also could adversely affect demand for the oil and natural gas that we produce and restrict our ability to execute on our business strategy, reducing our access to financial markets, or create greater potential for governmental investigations or litigation.
Table of Contents
Finally, most scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHGs in the Earth’s atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant physical effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, droughts and floods and other climatic events. If any such effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. For example, such effects could adversely affect or delay demand for the oil or natural gas produced or cause us to incur significant costs in preparing for or responding to the effects of climatic events themselves. Potential adverse effects could include disruption of our production activities, increases in our costs of operation or reductions in the efficiency of our operations, impacts on our personnel, supply chain, or distribution chain, as well as potentially increased costs for or limited availability of insurance coverages in the aftermath of such effects. Our ability to mitigate the adverse physical impacts of climate change depends in part upon our disaster preparedness and response and business continuity planning. Further, energy needs could increase or decrease as a result of extreme weather conditions depending on the duration and magnitude of any such climate changes. Increased energy use due to weather changes may require us to invest in additional equipment to serve increased demand. A decrease in energy use due to weather changes may affect our financial condition through decreased revenues. The effect of fluctuations on supply and demand may become more pronounced within specific geographic oil and natural gas producing areas, which may cause these conditions to occur with greater frequency or magnify the effects of these conditions.
The listing of a species as either “threatened” or “endangered” under the federal Endangered Species Act could result in increased costs, new operating restrictions, or delays in our operations, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
The ESA and analogous state laws regulate activities that could have an adverse effect on threatened and endangered species. Operations in areas where threatened or endangered species or their habitat are known to exist may require us to incur increased costs to implement mitigation or protective measures and also may restrict or preclude our activities in those areas or during certain seasons, such as breeding and nesting seasons. The listing of species in areas where we operate or, alternatively, entry into certain range-wide conservation planning agreements could result in increased costs to us from species protection measures, time delays or limitations on our activities, which costs, delays or limitations may be significant and could adversely affect our results of operations and financial position. There is also increasing interest in nature-related matters beyond protected species, such as general biodiversity, which may similarly require us or our customers to incur costs or take other measures which may adversely impact our and our customers’ business or operations.
The third parties on whom we rely for gathering and transportation services are subject to complex federal, state and other laws that could adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of conducting our business.
The operations of the third parties on whom we rely for gathering and transportation services are subject to complex and stringent laws and regulations that require obtaining and maintaining numerous permits, approvals and certifications from various federal, state and local government authorities. These third parties may incur substantial costs in order to comply with existing laws and regulations. If existing laws and regulations governing such third-party services are revised or reinterpreted, or if new laws and regulations become applicable to their operations, these changes may affect the costs that we pay for such services. Similarly, a failure to comply with such laws and regulations by the third parties on whom we rely for gathering and transportation services could impact the availability of those services. Any potential impact to the availability of gathering and transportation services could impact our ability to market and sell our production, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. See “Item 1. Business — Environmental, Occupational Health and Safety Matters and Regulations” and “— Other Regulation of the Oil and Natural Gas Industry” for a description of the laws and regulations that affect the third parties on whom we rely for gathering and transportation services.
Table of Contents
Oil and natural gas producers’ operations, are substantially dependent on the availability of water and the disposal of waste, including produced water and drilling fluids. Restrictions on the ability to obtain water or dispose of waste may impact our operations.
Water is an essential component of oil and natural gas production during the drilling process. Our inability to locate sufficient amounts of water or to dispose of or recycle water used in our development and production operations could adversely impact our operations. Moreover, the imposition of new environmental initiatives and regulations could include restrictions on our ability to conduct certain operations such as hydraulic fracturing or disposal of waste, including, but not limited to, produced water, drilling fluids and other wastes associated with the exploration, development or production of natural gas. The Clean Water Act imposes restrictions and strict controls regarding the discharge of produced waters and other natural gas and oil waste into “waters of the United States.” Permits must be obtained to discharge pollutants to such waters and to conduct construction activities in such waters, which include certain wetlands. The Clean Water Act and similar state laws provide for civil, criminal and administrative penalties for any unauthorized discharges of pollutants and unauthorized discharges of reportable quantities of oil and other hazardous substances. State and federal discharge regulations prohibit the discharge of produced water and sand, drilling fluids, drill cuttings and certain other substances related to the natural gas and oil industry into coastal waters. Compliance with current and future environmental regulations and permit requirements governing the withdrawal, storage and use of surface water or groundwater and the disposal and recycling of produced water, drilling fluids, and other wastes, may increase our operating costs and cause delays, interruptions or termination of our operations, the extent of which cannot be predicted. In addition, in some instances, the operation of underground injection wells for the disposal of waste has been alleged to cause earthquakes. In some jurisdictions, such issues have led to orders prohibiting continued injection or the suspension of drilling in certain wells identified as possible sources of seismic activity or resulted in stricter regulatory requirements relating to the location and operation of underground injection wells. Any additional orders or regulations addressing concerns about seismic activity from well injection in jurisdictions where we operate could affect our operations. See “Item 1. Business — Environmental, Occupational Health and Safety Matters and Regulations — Water Discharges and Other Waste Discharges & Spills” and “— Hydraulic Fracturing” for an additional description of the laws and regulations relating to the discharge of water and other wastes and hydraulic fracturing that affect us.
The cost of decommissioning is uncertain.
We are required to maintain reserve funds to provide for the payment of decommissioning costs associated with the Beta properties. The estimates of decommissioning costs are inherently imprecise and subject to change due to changing cost estimates, oil and natural gas prices and other factors. If actual decommissioning costs exceed such estimates, or we are required to provide a significant amount of additional collateral in cash or other security as a result of a revision to such estimates, our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows may be materially adversely affected.
We are required to post cash collateral, and in the future we may be required to post additional collateral, pursuant to our agreements with sureties under our existing or future bonding arrangements, which may have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and our ability to execute our capital expenditure plan, our ARO plan and comply with our existing debt instruments.
Pursuant to the terms of our existing bonding arrangements with various sureties in connection with the decommissioning obligations related to our Beta properties, or under any future bonding arrangements we may enter into, we may be required to post additional collateral at any time, on demand, at the sureties’ sole discretion. If additional collateral is required to support surety bond obligations, this collateral would probably be in the form of cash or letters of credit, certificate of deposit or other similar forms of liquid collateral. We cannot provide assurance that we will be able to satisfy collateral demands for current bonds or for future bonds.
We have two escrow funding agreements with certain of our surety providers to fund interest-bearing escrow accounts to reimburse and indemnify the surety providers for any claims arising under the surety bonds related to the decommissioning of our Beta properties. If we fail to comply with our obligations under such escrow agreements, the surety providers may request additional collateral in the form of cash or letters of credit, certificates of deposit or other similar forms of liquid collateral. If we are required to provide additional collateral pursuant to any such request or otherwise, our liquidity position may be negatively impacted, and we may be required to seek alternative financing. To the extent we are unable to secure adequate financing, we may be forced to reduce our capital expenditures in the current year or future years, may be unable to execute our asset retirement obligation plan or may be unable to comply with our existing debt instruments. If we are unable or unwilling to provide additional collateral, we may have to pursue alternate bonding arrangements with other sureties. See Note 7, “Asset Retirement Obligations” and Note 17, “Commitments and Contingencies — Supplemental Bond for Decommissioning Liabilities Trust Agreement” of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Part II, “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” in this Annual Report for additional information.
Table of Contents
Certain U.S. federal income tax deductions currently available with respect to oil and natural gas exploration and production may be eliminated as a result of future legislation.
From time to time, legislation has been proposed that would, if enacted into law, make significant changes to U.S. tax laws, including certain key U.S. federal income tax incentives currently available to oil and natural gas exploration and production companies. Such proposed legislative changes have included, but have not been limited to, (i) the repeal of the percentage depletion allowance for oil and natural gas properties, (ii) the elimination of current deductions for intangible drilling and development costs, or IDCs, (iii) the elimination of the deduction for certain domestic production activities and (iv) an extension of the amortization period for certain geological and geophysical expenditures. It is unclear whether any of the foregoing or similar proposals will be considered and enacted as part of future tax reform legislation and if enacted, how soon any such changes could become effective. The passage of any legislation as a result of these proposals or any similar changes in U.S. federal income tax laws could eliminate or postpone certain tax deductions that are currently available with respect to oil and natural gas exploration and development and any such change could have an adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Our business could be negatively affected by security threats, including cybersecurity threats, destructive forms of protest and opposition by activists and other disruptions.
As an oil and natural gas producer, we face various security threats, including cybersecurity threats to gain unauthorized access to sensitive information, to misappropriate financial assets or to render data or systems unusable; threats to the security of our facilities and infrastructure or third-party facilities and infrastructure, such as processing plants and pipelines; and threats from terrorist acts. The potential for such security threats has subjected our operations to increased risks that could have a material adverse effect on our business. In particular, our implementation of various procedures and controls to monitor and mitigate security threats and to increase security for our information, facilities and infrastructure may result in increased capital and operating costs. Moreover, there can be no assurance that such procedures and controls will be sufficient to prevent security breaches from occurring. If any of these security breaches were to occur, they could lead to losses of financial assets, sensitive information, critical infrastructure or capabilities essential to our operations and could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Cybersecurity attacks in particular are becoming more sophisticated and include, but are not limited to, malicious software, attempts to gain unauthorized access to data and systems, and other electronic security breaches that could lead to disruptions in critical systems, unauthorized release of confidential or otherwise protected information, and corruption of data. These events could lead to financial losses from remedial actions, loss of business or potential liability. In addition, destructive forms of protest and opposition by activists and other disruptions, including acts of sabotage or eco-terrorism, against oil and gas production and activities could potentially result in damage or injury to people, property or the environment or lead to extended interruptions of our operations, adversely affecting our financial condition and results of operations.
Any failure to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could impair the reliability of our financial statements, which in turn could harm our business, impair investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and our access to the capital markets and cause the price of our Common Stock to decline and subject us to regulatory penalties.
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (“ICFR”), and for evaluating and reporting on that system of internal control. Our ICFR is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance that the information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including the principal executive officer and principal financial officer of the Company, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure, and is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. As a public company, we are required to certify our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires us to furnish annually a report by management on the effectiveness of our ICFR.
As part of our ongoing monitoring and assessment of internal controls for the year ended December 31, 2025, we discovered a material weakness in our internal controls related to the lack of the appropriate control processes and activities to sufficiently mitigate for changes in personnel with the necessary technical and accounting knowledge, experience, and training that requires remediation. The Company assessed the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the “COSO Framework”). Based on this assessment, because of the effect of the material weakness, the Company’s management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2025, based on the criteria set forth under the COSO Framework.
Table of Contents
While the material weakness did not result in any identified misstatements to the financial statements and there were no changes to previously released financial results, effective internal controls and disclosure controls and procedures are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and disclosures to shareholders, to prevent fraud and to operate successfully as a public company. For additional information, see “Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.” While we intend to remediate the material weakness in 2026, there can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully complete the remediation within the contemplated timeline.
We will continue to periodically test and update, as necessary, our internal control systems, including our financial reporting controls. However, our actions may not be sufficient to result in an effective internal control environment, and if we fail to implement and maintain effective ICFR, our ability to accurately and timely report our financial results could be impaired, which could result in late filings of our periodic reports under the Exchange Act, restatements of our consolidated financial statements, suspension or delisting of our Common Stock from the NYSE. Such events could harm our business, cause investors to lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our reported financial information, cause the trading price of our shares of Common Stock to decline, limit our access to the capital markets or other financing sources and subject us to investigations, enforcement actions or regulatory penalties.
The operation of our business leverages IT infrastructure across our offices and facilities, and our business systems may (i) be susceptible to errors, shutdowns, sufficiency issues, or technical difficulties, (ii) experience security incidents impacting the integrity of sensitive data processed thereby, and (iii) be subject to evolving and potentially burdensome legal compliance requirements, including requirements around data privacy and security and the use of artificial intelligence technologies.
We may be subject to data protection, privacy, cybersecurity and/or other information security laws and regulations in the jurisdictions in which they do business (collectively, “Privacy Laws”). Compliance with the applicable Privacy Laws may require adhering to stringent legal and operational requirements, which could increase compliance costs for us and require the dedication of additional time and resources to compliance for such entities which may increase over time. A failure to comply with such Privacy Laws could result in fines, sanctions or other penalties, which could materially and adversely affect the results of operations and overall business, as well as our reputation. Our operations will be impacted by a growing movement to adopt comprehensive privacy and data protection laws, where such laws generally focus on privacy as an individual right.
Table of Contents
