Amplify Energy Corp

References

Amplify Energy Corp. (“Amplify Energy,” the “Company,” “we,” “us,” “our,” or similar terms), is a publicly traded Delaware corporation, in which our common stock is listed on the NYSE under the symbol “AMPY.”

Amplify Energy is an independent oil and natural gas company engaged in the acquisition, development, exploitation and production of oil and natural gas properties. Our management evaluates performance based on one reportable business segment, as the economic environments are not different within the operation of our oil and natural gas properties. Our business activities are conducted through OLLC, our wholly owned subsidiary, and its wholly owned subsidiaries. Our assets consist primarily of producing oil and natural gas properties located in Oklahoma, the Rockies (“Bairoil”), federal waters offshore Southern California (“Beta”), East Texas/North Louisiana, and Eagle Ford (Non-op). Most of our oil and natural gas properties are located in large, mature oil and natural gas reservoirs.

The Company’s properties consist primarily of operated and non-operated working interests in producing and undeveloped leasehold acreage and working interests in identified producing wells. As of December 31, 2023:

Industry Trends

During 2023, commodity prices generally declined when compared to the same period of 2022 and, as a result, we experienced a decrease in revenues. The Company expects continued price volatility in 2024.

We continue to monitor the impact of the actions of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and other large producing nations; the Russia-Ukraine conflict; conflicts in the Middle East; global inventories of oil and natural gas and the uncertainty associated with recovering oil demand; inflation and future monetary policy; and governmental policies aimed at transitioning towards lower carbon energy. The Russia-Ukraine conflict and conflicts in the Middle East continue to evolve, and the extent to which these events may impact our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence.

Properties

We engaged Cawley, Gillespie and Associates, Inc. (“CG&A”), our independent reserve engineers, to prepare our reserves estimates for all of our proved reserves at December 31, 2023. The following table summarizes information, based on a reserve report prepared by CG&A (which we refer to as our “reserve report”), about our proved oil and natural gas reserves by geographic region as of December 31, 2023, and our average net production for the three months ended December 31, 2023:

Our Areas of Operation

Oklahoma

Approximately 30% of our estimated proved reserves as of December 31, 2023 and approximately 27% of our average daily net production for the three months ended December 31, 2023 were located in the Oklahoma region. Our Oklahoma properties include wells and properties primarily located in Alfalfa and Woods counties in Oklahoma. Those properties collectively contained 29.5 MMBbls of estimated net proved reserves as of December 31, 2023 based on our reserve report and generated average net production of 5.5 MBoe/d for the three months ended December 31, 2023.

Based on our reserve report, the Dacoma field contains more than 15% of our total estimated reserves. The following table summarizes production volumes from this field for the period presented:

Bairoil

Approximately 24% of our estimated proved reserves as of December 31, 2023 and approximately 16% of our average daily net production for the three months ended December 31, 2023 were located in Bairoil. Our Bairoil properties include wells and properties primarily located in the Lost Soldier and Wertz fields in Wyoming at our Bairoil complex. Our Bairoil properties contained 23.5 MMBbls of estimated net proved oil and NGLs reserves as of December 31, 2023 based on our reserve report and generated average net production of 3.4 MBoe/d for the three months ended December 31, 2023.

Beta

Approximately 13% of our estimated proved reserves as of December 31, 2023 were associated with the Beta field located in federal waters approximately 11 miles offshore from the Port of Long Beach, California. Our ownership in Beta consists of 100% of the working interests and 75.2% average net revenue interest in three Pacific Outer Continental Shelf lease blocks (P-0300, P-0301 and P-0306) (referred to as the “Beta Unit”) in the Beta field. The Beta properties contained 12.7 MMBbls of estimated net proved oil reserves as of December 31, 2023 based on our reserve report and generated average net production of 3.0 MBoe/d for the three months ended December 31, 2023. Oil and gas are produced from the Beta Unit via two production platforms, referred to as the Ellen and Eureka platforms, equipped with permanent drilling rigs and associated equipment. On a third platform, Elly, the oil, water and gas are separated, and the oil is prepared for sale, while the gas is utilized as fuel for power and the water is recycled back into the reservoir for pressure maintenance. Sales quality oil is then pumped from the Elly platform to the Beta pump station located onshore at the Port of Long Beach, California via a 16-inch diameter oil pipeline, which extends approximately 17.5 miles. Amplify Energy’s wholly owned subsidiary, San Pedro Bay Pipeline Company owns and operates the pipeline system.

For a discussion regarding the Incident, see Note 15 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this Annual Report for additional information.

East Texas / North Louisiana

Approximately 30% of our estimated proved reserves as of December 31, 2023 and approximately 38% of our average daily net production for the three months ended December 31, 2023 were located in the East Texas/ North Louisiana region. Our East Texas/ North Louisiana properties include wells and properties primarily located in the Joaquin, Carthage, Willow Springs and East Henderson fields in East Texas. Those properties collectively contained 29.9 MMBoe of estimated net proved reserves as of December 31, 2023 based on our reserve report and generated average net production of 8.0 MBoe/d for the three months ended December 31, 2023.

Eagle Ford

Approximately 3% of our estimated proved reserves as of December 31, 2023 and approximately 4% of our average daily net production for the three months ended December 31, 2023 were located in the Eagle Ford region. Our Eagle Ford properties include wells and properties in fields located primarily in the Eagleville fields. Our Eagle Ford properties contained 2.5 MMBoe of estimated net proved reserves as of December 31, 2023 based on our reserve report. Those properties collectively generated average net production of 0.9 MBoe/d for the three months ended December 31, 2023.

Our Oil and Natural Gas Data

Our Reserves

*Internal Controls.*Our proved reserves were estimated at the well or unit level for reporting purposes by CG&A, our independent reserve engineers. We maintain internal evaluations of our reserves in a secure reserve engineering database. CG&A interacts with our internal petroleum engineers and geoscience professionals in each of our operating areas and with operating, accounting, and marketing employees to obtain the necessary data to prepare our proved reserves report. Reserves are reviewed and approved internally by our senior management on an annual basis and evaluated by our lender group on at least a semi-annual basis in connection with borrowing base redeterminations under our Revolving Credit Facility. Our reserve estimates are prepared by CG&A at least annually.

Our internal professional staff works closely with CG&A to ensure the integrity, accuracy and timeliness of data that is furnished to them in order to prepare the reserves report. All of the reserve information maintained in our secure reserve engineering database is provided to the external engineers. In addition, we provide CG&A with other pertinent data, such as seismic information, geologic maps, well logs, production tests, material balance calculations, well performance data, operating procedures and relevant economic criteria. We make all requested information, as well as our pertinent personnel, available to the external engineers as part of their preparation of our reserves.

Qualifications of Responsible Technical Persons

Internal Engineers. Tony Lopez is the technical person at the Company, primarily responsible for overseeing and providing oversight of the preparation of the reserves estimates with our third-party reserve engineers.

Mr. Lopez has over 16 years of corporate reserve reporting experience. Mr. Lopez joined the Company as Vice President of Corporate Reserves in June 2018 and currently serves as the Company’s Senior Vice President of Engineering & Exploitation. Prior to that Mr. Lopez was Vice President of Acquisitions and Engineering for EnerVest, Ltd., where he managed the corporate reserve reporting process and the financial planning & analysis department. Mr. Lopez is a graduate of West Virginia University and holds a B.S. in Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering. Mr. Lopez is an active member of the Society of Petroleum Engineers.

*Cawley, Gillespie and Associates Inc.*CG&A is an independent oil and natural gas consulting firm. No director, officer, or key employee of CG&A has any financial ownership in us or any of our affiliates. CG&A’s compensation for the preparation of its report is not contingent upon the results obtained and reported. CG&A has not performed other work for us or any of our affiliates that would affect its objectivity. The estimates of our proved reserves presented in the CG&A reserve report were overseen by Todd Brooker.

Mr. Brooker is the President of CG&A and has been an employee of CG&A since 1992. His responsibilities include reserve and economic evaluations, fair market valuations, field studies, pipeline resource studies and acquisition/divestiture analysis. His reserve reports are routinely used for public company SEC disclosures. Prior to joining CG&A, Mr. Brooker worked in Gulf of Mexico drilling and production engineering at Chevron Corporation. Mr. Brooker’s experience includes significant projects in both conventional and unconventional resources in every major U.S. producing basin and abroad, including oil and gas shale plays, coalbed methane fields, waterfloods and complex, faulted structures.

Mr. Brooker graduated with honors from the University of Texas at Austin in 1989 with a Bachelor of Science degree in Petroleum Engineering and is a registered Professional Engineer in the State of Texas. He is also a member of the Society of Petroleum Engineers and the Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers.

Estimated Proved Reserves

The following table summarizes our estimated proved oil and natural gas reserves and related standardized measure of discounted future net cash flows attributable to our properties as of December 31, 2023, which are based on the prepared reserve report by CG&A, our independent reserve engineers.

The data in the table above represents estimates only. Oil and natural gas reserve engineering is inherently a subjective process of estimating underground accumulations of oil and natural gas that cannot be measured exactly. The accuracy of any reserve estimate is a function of the quality of available data and engineering and geological interpretation and judgment. Accordingly, reserve estimates may vary from the quantities of oil and natural gas that are ultimately recovered.

Future prices received for production and costs may vary, perhaps significantly, from the prices and costs assumed for purposes of these estimates. The 10% discount factor used to calculate standardized measure, which is required by the SEC and FASB, is not necessarily the most appropriate discount rate. The present value, no matter what discount rate is used, is materially affected by assumptions as to timing of future production, which may prove to be inaccurate. For these reasons, neither standardized measure nor PV-10 should be construed as the fair value of our oil and natural gas reserves.

For a discussion of risks associated with internal reserve estimates, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Business — 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.”

Development of Proved Undeveloped Reserves

As of December 31, 2023, we had 1,926 MBoe of proved undeveloped reserves (“PUDs”) comprised of 1,772 MBbls of oil, 451 MMcf of natural gas and 77 MBbls of NGLs. None of our proved undeveloped reserves as of December 31, 2023 are scheduled to be developed on a date more than five years from the date the reserves were initially booked as PUDs. PUDs will be converted from undeveloped to developed as the applicable wells begin production.

For the year ended December 31, 2023, total proved undeveloped reserves increased by 868 MBoe. The majority of this increase (1,122 MBoe) was due to the addition of 4 Beta PUD locations included in our 2024 budget offset by transfers (215 MBoe) to proved developed reserves from certain non-operated properties in the Eagle Ford and East Texas. Other changes (39 MBoe) included modifications to the non-operated Eagle Ford development plan.

Approximately 20.3% (215 MBoe) of our PUDs recorded as of December 31, 2022 were developed during the twelve months ended December 31, 2023. Total costs incurred to develop these PUDs were approximately $4.4 million, of which $1.8 million was incurred in fiscal year 2022 and $2.6 million incurred in fiscal year 2023. In total, we incurred total capital expenditures of approximately $2.6 million during fiscal year 2023 developing PUDs. Based on our current expectations of our cash flows, we believe that we can fund the drilling of our current PUD inventory and our expansions in the next five years from our cash flow from operations and borrowings under our Revolving Credit Facility. For a more detailed discussion of our liquidity position, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

Production, Revenue and Price History

For a description of our production, revenues, and average sales prices and per unit costs, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Results of Operations.”

The following tables summarize our average net production, average unhedged sales prices by product and average lease operating cost expense per Boe by geographic region for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively:

Productive Wells

Productive wells consist of producing wells and wells capable of production, including natural gas wells awaiting pipeline connections to commence deliveries and oil wells awaiting connection to production facilities. Gross wells are the total number of producing wells in which we own an interest and net wells are the sum of our fractional working interests owned in gross wells. The following table sets forth information relating to the productive wells in which we owned a working interest as of December 31, 2023.

Developed Acreage

Acreage related to royalty, overriding royalty and other similar interests is excluded from this summary. As of December 31, 2023, substantially all of our leasehold acreage was held by production. The following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2023 relating to our leasehold acreage.

Undeveloped Acreage

As of December 31, 2023, we had no gross and net undeveloped acreage expiring over the next two years as all of our gross and net acreage is currently held by production.

Drilling Activities

Our drilling activities primarily consist of development wells. The following table sets forth information with respect to (i) wells drilled and completed during the periods indicated and (ii) wells drilled in a prior period but completed during the periods indicated. The information should not be considered indicative of future performance, nor should a correlation be assumed between the number of productive wells drilled, quantities of reserves found or economic value. At December 31, 2023, we had no wells that were in various stages of completion.

Delivery Commitments

We have no commitments to deliver a fixed and determinable quantity of our oil or natural gas production in the near future under our existing sales contracts.

Operations

General

As of December 31, 2023, the Company is the operator of record of properties containing 92% of our total estimated proved reserves. We design and manage the development, recompletion and/or workover operations, and supervise other operation and maintenance activities for all of the wells we operate. We do not own the drilling rigs used for drilling wells on our onshore properties; independent contractors provide all the equipment and personnel associated with these activities. Our Beta platforms have permanent drilling systems in place.

Marketing and Major Customers

The following individual customers each accounted for 10% or more of our total reported revenues for the period indicated:

The production sales agreements covering our properties contain customary terms and conditions for the oil and natural gas industry and provide for sales based on prevailing market prices. A majority of those agreements have terms that renew on a month-to-month basis until either party gives advance written notice of termination.

If we were to lose any one of our customers, the loss could temporarily delay production and sale of a portion of our oil and natural gas in the related producing region. If we were to lose any single customer, we believe we could identify a substitute customer to purchase the impacted production volumes. However, if one or more of our larger customers ceased purchasing oil or natural gas altogether and we were unable to replace them, the loss of any such customer could have a detrimental effect on our production volumes and revenues in general.

Title to Properties

We believe that we have satisfactory title to all of our producing properties in accordance with industry standards. More thorough title investigations are customarily made before the consummation of an acquisition of producing properties and before commencement of drilling operations on undeveloped properties. Individual properties may be subject to burdens that we believe do not materially interfere with the use or affect the value of the properties. As is customary in the industry, in the case of undeveloped properties, often cursory investigation of record title is made at the time of lease acquisition. Burdens on properties may include customary royalty interests, liens incident to operating agreements and for current taxes, obligations or duties under applicable laws, development obligations under natural gas leases, or net profits interests.

Derivative Activities

We enter into commodity derivative contracts with unaffiliated third parties, generally lenders under our Revolving Credit Facility or their affiliates, to achieve more predictable cash flows and to reduce our exposure to fluctuations in oil and natural gas prices. We intend to enter into commodity derivative contracts at times and on terms desired to maintain a portfolio of commodity derivative contracts covering at least 50% − 75% of our estimated production from total proved developed producing reserves over a one-to-three-year period at any given point of time. We may, however, from time to time, hedge more or less than this approximate amount.

Periodically, we enter into interest rate swaps to mitigate exposure to market rate fluctuations by converting variable interest rates (such as those in our Revolving Credit Facility) to fixed interest rates.

It is our policy to enter into derivative contracts only with creditworthy counterparties, which generally are financial institutions, deemed by management as competent and competitive market makers. Some of the lenders, or certain of their affiliates, under our Revolving Credit Facility are counterparties to our derivative contracts. We will continue to evaluate the benefit of employing derivatives in the future.

Competition

We operate in a highly competitive environment for acquiring properties, leasing acreage, contracting for drilling equipment and securing trained personnel. Many of our competitors possess and employ financial, technical and personnel resources substantially greater than ours, which can be particularly important in the areas in which we operate. As a result, our competitors may be able to pay more for productive oil and natural gas properties and exploratory prospects, as well as evaluate, bid for and purchase a greater number of properties and prospects than our financial or personnel resources permit. Our ability to acquire additional properties and to find and develop reserves will depend on our ability to evaluate and select suitable properties and to consummate transactions in a highly competitive environment. In addition, there is substantial competition for capital available for investment in the oil and natural gas industry and many of our competitors have access to capital at a lower cost than that available to us.

Seasonal Nature of Business

The price we receive for our natural gas production is impacted by seasonal fluctuations in demand for natural gas. The demand for natural gas typically peaks during the coldest months and tapers off during the milder months, with a slight increase during the summer to meet the demands of electric generators. The weather during any particular season can affect this cyclical demand for natural gas. Seasonal anomalies such as mild winters or hot summers can lessen or intensify this fluctuation. In addition, certain natural gas users utilize natural gas storage facilities and purchase some of their anticipated winter requirements during the summer. This can also lessen seasonal demand fluctuations.

Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic fracturing is used as a means to maximize the productivity of almost every well that we drill and complete, except in our offshore wells. Hydraulic fracturing is a necessary part of the completion process because our properties are dependent upon our ability to effectively fracture the producing formations in order to produce at economic rates. Our proved developed non-producing and proved undeveloped reserves make up 9.6% of the total proved reserves, with approximately 41.6% of these requiring hydraulic fracturing as of December 31, 2023.

We believe we have followed and continue to substantially follow applicable industry standard practices and legal and regulatory requirements for groundwater protection in our hydraulic fracturing operations, which are subject to supervision by state and federal regulators (including the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (the “BLM”) on federal acreage). These protective measures include setting surface casing at a depth sufficient to protect fresh water zones as determined by regulatory agencies and cementing the well to create a permanent isolating barrier between the casing pipe and surrounding geological formations. This aspect of well design is intended to essentially eliminate a pathway for the fracturing fluid to contact any aquifers during the hydraulic fracturing operations. For recompletions of existing wells, the production casing is pressure tested prior to perforating the new completion interval.

Injection rates and pressures are monitored instantaneously and in real time at the surface during our hydraulic fracturing operations. Pressure is monitored on both the injection string and the immediate annulus to the injection string. Hydraulic fracturing operations would be shut down immediately if an abnormal change occurred to the injection pressure or annular pressure.

Certain state regulations require disclosure of the components in the solutions used in hydraulic fracturing operations. Approximately 99% of the hydraulic fracturing fluids we use are made up of water and sand, and the fluids are managed and used in accordance with applicable requirements.

Hydraulic fracture stimulation requires the use of a significant volume of water. Upon flowback of the water, we dispose of it into approved disposal or injection wells. We currently do not discharge water to the surface.

For information regarding existing and proposed governmental regulations regarding hydraulic fracturing and related environmental matters, see “— Environmental, Occupational Health and Safety Matters and Regulations — Hydraulic Fracturing.”

Insurance

In accordance with customary industry practice, we maintain insurance against many, but not all, potential losses or liabilities arising from our operations and at costs that we believe to be economic. We regularly review our risks of loss and the cost and availability of insurance and revise our insurance accordingly. Our insurance does not cover every potential risk associated with our operations, including the potential loss of significant revenues. We can provide no assurance that our coverage will adequately protect us against liability from all potential consequences, damages and losses. We currently have insurance policies that include the following:

We continuously monitor regulatory changes and comments and consider their impact on the insurance market, along with and our overall risk profile. As necessary, we will adjust our risk and insurance program to provide protection at a level we consider appropriate while weighing the cost of insurance against the potential and magnitude of disruption to our operations and cash flows. Changes in laws and regulations could lead to changes in underwriting standards, limitations on scope and amount of coverage, and higher premiums, including possible increases in liability caps for claims of damages from oil spills.

Environmental, Occupational Health and Safety Matters and Regulations

General

Our oil and natural gas development and production operations are subject to stringent and complex federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the discharge of materials into the environment, occupational health and safety aspects of our operations, or otherwise relating to protection of the environment and natural resources. These laws and regulations impose numerous obligations applicable to our operations, including the acquisition of certain permits 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 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“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 or corrective actions. 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 and 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 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, and the long-term trend of more expansive and stringent environmental legislation and regulations applied to the crude oil and natural gas industry could continue, resulting in increased costs of doing business and consequently affecting profitability. To the extent new or more stringent 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.

The following is a summary of the more significant existing environmental, occupational health and safety laws and regulations to which our business operations are subject and for which compliance may have a material adverse impact on our operations, capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position.

Offshore Operations

Our oil and gas operations associated with our Beta properties are conducted on offshore leases in federal waters and those operations are regulated by agencies such as the BOEM and the BSEE, which have broad authority to regulate our oil and gas operations associated with our Beta properties.

BOEM is responsible for managing environmentally and economically responsible development of the nation’s offshore resources. Its functions include offshore leasing, resource evaluation, review and administration of oil and gas exploration and development plans, renewable energy development, and National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) analysis and environmental review. Lessees must obtain BOEM approval for exploration, development and production plans prior to the commencement of offshore operations. BOEM generally requires that lessees have substantial net worth, post supplemental bonds or provide other acceptable assurances that the obligations will be met. In October 2020, BOEM and BSEE issued a proposed rule to clarify, streamline, and provide greater transparency to financial assurance requirements for the oil and gas industry, including streamlining the evaluation criteria for determining if and when additional security is required for Outer Continental Shelf (“OCS”) leases, pipeline rights-of-way and rights-of-use and easement (“RUE”) and revising the process for issuing decommissioning obligations for facilities on the OCS. Pursuant to Executive Order 13990, BOEM conducted a review of the 2020 proposal and decided not to move forward with the BOEM-administered portions, and instead issued a new notice of proposed rulemaking to address the financial policy concerns. BSEE finalized the BSEE-related provisions, which became effective on May 18, 2023, to focus on clarifying decommissioning obligations of RUE grant holders and promulgate BSEE policy regarding the obligations of predecessors that must decommission their units. In May 2023, BOEM issued a new notice of proposed rulemaking proposing to modify criteria for determining whether oil, gas, and sulfur lessees, RUE grant holders, and pipeline right-of-way grant holders are required to provide bonds or other financial assurance above what is currently required to ensure compliance with OCS obligations. The comment period has expired, and the final rule is expected to be issued in April 2024.

BSEE is responsible for safety and environmental oversight of offshore oil and gas operations. Its functions include the development and enforcement of safety and environmental regulations, permitting offshore exploration, development and production, inspections, offshore regulatory programs, oil spill response and training and environmental compliance programs. BSEE regulations require offshore production facilities and pipelines located on the OCS to meet stringent engineering and construction specifications, and BSEE has proposed and/or promulgated additional safety-related regulations concerning the design and operating procedures of these facilities and pipelines, including regulations to safeguard against or respond to well blowouts and other catastrophes. BSEE regulations also restrict the flaring or venting of natural gas, prohibit the flaring of liquid hydrocarbons and govern the plugging and abandonment of wells located offshore and the installation and removal of all fixed drilling and production facilities.

BOEM and BSEE have adopted regulations providing for enforcement actions, including civil penalties and lease forfeiture or cancellation for failure to comply with regulatory requirements for offshore operations. If we fail to pay royalties or comply with safety and environmental regulations, BOEM and BSEE may require that our operations on the Beta properties be suspended or terminated, and we may be subject to civil or criminal liability, which may have a negative impact on our operations, capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position.

In June 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld a federal district court prohibition against BOEM and BSEE approving any plans or issuing permits involving hydraulic fracturing and/or acid well stimulation on the Pacific OCS until the agencies complete consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under the Endangered Species Act (the “ESA”) and submit a consistency determination under the Coastal Zone Management Act to the California Coastal Commission. Although we do not use either hydraulic fracturing or acid stimulation routinely in connection with our operations on the Beta properties, delays in the approval or refusal of plans and issuance of permits by BOEM or BSEE because of staffing, economic, environmental, legal or other reasons (or other actions taken by BOEM or BSEE) could adversely affect our offshore operations. The requirements imposed by BOEM and BSEE regulations are frequently changed and subject to new interpretations. Also, in addition to permits and approvals required by BOEM and BSEE, approvals and permits may be required from other agencies for the oil and gas operations associated with our Beta properties, such as the U.S. Coast Guard, the EPA, U.S. Department of Transportation, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and the South Coast Air Quality Management District.

Hazardous Substances and Waste Handling

Our operations are subject to environmental laws and regulations relating to the management and release of hazardous substances, solid and hazardous wastes and petroleum hydrocarbons. These laws generally regulate the generation, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of solid and hazardous waste and may impose strict and, in some cases, joint and several liability for the investigation and remediation of affected areas where hazardous substances may have been released or disposed. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as amended (“CERCLA”), also referred to as the Superfund law and comparable state laws, impose liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original conduct, on certain classes of persons deemed “responsible parties.” These persons include current owners or operators of the site where a release of hazardous substances occurred, prior owners or operators that owned or operated the site at the time of the release or disposal of hazardous substances and companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substances found at the site. Under CERCLA, these persons may be subject to strict and joint and several liability for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances that have been released into the environment, for damages to natural resources and for the costs of certain health studies. CERCLA also authorizes the EPA and, in some instances, third parties to act in response to threats to the public health or the environment and to seek to recover the costs they incur from the responsible classes of persons. Despite the “petroleum exclusion” of Section 101(14) of CERCLA, which currently encompasses natural gas, we may nonetheless handle hazardous substances within the meaning of CERCLA, or similar state statutes, in the course of our ordinary operations and as a result, may be jointly and severally liable under CERCLA for all or part of the costs required to clean up sites at which these hazardous substances have been released into the environment. Also, comparable state statutes may not contain a similar exemption for petroleum, and it is also not uncommon for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file common law-based claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by hazardous substances or other pollutants released into the environment. In addition, we may have liability for releases of hazardous substances at our properties by prior owners or operators or other third parties.

The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA”) is the primary federal law imposing oil spill liability. The OPA contains numerous requirements relating to the prevention of, and response to petroleum releases into waters of the United States, including the requirement that operators of offshore facilities and certain onshore facilities near or crossing waterways must maintain certain significant levels of financial assurance to cover potential environmental cleanup and restoration costs. Under the OPA, strict, joint and several liability may be imposed on “responsible parties” for all containment and cleanup costs and certain other damages arising from a release, including, but not limited to, the costs of responding to a release of oil to surface waters and natural resource damages resulting from oil spills into or upon navigable waters, adjoining shorelines or in the exclusive economic zone of the United States. A “responsible party” includes the owner or operator of an onshore facility. The OPA establishes a liability limit for onshore facilities, but these liability limits may not apply if: a spill is caused by a party’s gross negligence or willful misconduct; the spill resulted from violation of a federal safety, construction or operating regulation; or a party fails to report a spill or to cooperate fully in a cleanup. We are also subject to analogous state statutes that impose liabilities with respect to oil spills. For example, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Office of Oil Spill Prevention and Response has adopted oil-spill prevention regulations that overlap with federal regulations.

We also generate solid wastes, including hazardous wastes, which are subject to the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended (“RCRA”), and comparable state statutes. Although RCRA regulates both solid and hazardous wastes, it imposes stringent requirements on the generation, storage, treatment, transportation and disposal of hazardous wastes. Certain petroleum production wastes are excluded from RCRA’s hazardous waste regulations. These wastes, instead, are regulated under RCRA’s less stringent solid waste provisions, state laws or other federal laws. It is possible that these wastes, which could include wastes currently generated during our operations, could be designated as “hazardous wastes” in the future and, therefore, be subject to more rigorous and costly disposal requirements. Indeed, legislation has been proposed from time to time in Congress to re-categorize certain oil and gas exploration and production wastes as “hazardous wastes.” Any such changes, including to state programs, could result in an increase in our costs to manage and dispose of oil and gas waste, which could have a material adverse effect on our maintenance capital expenditures and operating expenses.

It is possible that our oil and natural gas operations may require us to manage naturally occurring radioactive materials (“NORM”). NORM is present in varying concentrations in sub-surface formations, including hydrocarbon reservoirs, and may become concentrated in scale, film and sludge in equipment that comes into contact with crude oil and natural gas production and processing streams. Some states have enacted regulations governing the handling, treatment, storage and disposal of NORM.

Administrative, civil and criminal penalties can be imposed for failure to comply with hazardous substance and waste handling requirements. We believe that we are in substantial compliance with the requirements of CERCLA, OPA, RCRA, and other applicable federal and related state and local laws and regulations, and that we hold all necessary and up-to-date permits, registrations and other authorizations required under such laws and regulations. Although we believe that the current costs of managing our hazardous substances and wastes as they are presently classified are reflected in our budget, any legislative or regulatory reclassification of oil and natural gas exploration and production wastes could increase our costs to manage and dispose of such wastes.

Water Discharges

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (the “Clean Water Act”), the Safe Drinking Water Act (“SDWA”), the OPA and analogous state laws, impose restrictions and strict controls with respect to the discharge of pollutants, including oil and hazardous substances, into navigable waters of the United States, as well as state waters. The discharge of pollutants into regulated waters is prohibited, except in accordance with the terms of a permit issued by the EPA or an analogous state agency. These laws and regulations also prohibit certain activity in wetlands unless authorized by a permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”). In June 2015, the EPA and the Corps issued a rule to revise the definition of “waters of the United States” (“WOTUS”) for all Clean Water Act programs, which never took effect before being replaced by the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (“NWPR”) in April 2020. The NWPR was vacated by two separate federal district courts in late 2021. The definition of WOTUS was further impacted by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision issued in May 2023 in Sackett v. EPA wherein the Court held that the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act extends only to those adjacent wetlands that are indistinguishable from traditional navigable bodies of water due to a continuous surface connection and rejected the “significant nexus” test embraced in earlier jurisprudence. In September 2023, EPA and the Corps published a direct-to-final rule redefining WOTUS to amend the January 2023 rule and align with the decision in Sackett. The final rule eliminated the “significant nexus” test from consideration when determining federal jurisdiction and clarified that the Clean Water Act only extends to relatively permanent bodies of water and wetlands that have a continuous surface connection with such bodies of water. To the extent a new rule or further litigation expands the scope of the Clean Water Act’s jurisdiction or impacts available agency resources, the Company could face increased costs and/or delays with respect to obtaining permits for dredge and fill activities in wetland areas.

The EPA has also adopted regulations requiring certain oil and natural gas exploration and production facilities to obtain individual permits or coverage under general permits for storm water discharges. Costs may be associated with the treatment of storm water or developing and implementing storm water pollution prevention plans, as well as for monitoring and sampling the storm water runoff from certain of our facilities. Some states also maintain groundwater protection programs that require permits or specify other requirements for discharges or operations that may impact groundwater conditions. These same regulatory programs may also limit the total volume of water that can be discharged, hence limiting the rate of development and requiring us to incur compliance costs. Additionally, we are required to develop and implement spill prevention, control and countermeasure plans, in connection with on-site storage of significant quantities of oil.

These laws and any implementing regulations provide for administrative, civil and criminal penalties for any unauthorized discharges of oil and other substances in reportable quantities and may impose substantial potential liability for the costs of removal, remediation and damages. Additionally, obtaining permits has the potential to delay the development of natural gas and oil projects. We maintain all required discharge permits necessary to conduct our operations and we believe we are in substantial compliance with their terms.

In addition, in some instances, the operation of underground injection wells for the disposal of wastewater has been alleged to cause earthquakes. For example, the EPA released a report with findings and recommendations related to public concern about induced seismic activity from disposal wells. The report recommended strategies for managing and minimizing the potential for significant injection-induced seismic events. 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. Such issues have also led to lawsuits by private parties alleging damages relating to induced seismicity. For example, the Railroad Commission of Texas (the “Commission”) requires applicants for new disposal wells that will receive non-hazardous produced water and hydraulic fracturing flowback fluid to conduct seismic activity searches utilizing the U.S. Geological Survey, which are intended to determine the potential for earthquakes within a circular area of 100 square miles around a proposed, new disposal well. The Commission is authorized to modify, suspend or terminate a disposal well permit if scientific data indicates a disposal well is likely to contribute to seismic activity. The Commission is also considering new restrictions that could limit the volume and pressure of produced water injected into disposal wells. Additionally, we conduct oil and gas drilling and production operations in the Mississippian Lime formation in Oklahoma, a high-water play, which requires us to dispose of large volumes of saltwater generated as part of our operations. The Oklahoma Geological Survey attributed an increase in seismic activity in Oklahoma to saltwater disposal wells in the Arbuckle formation and, the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (“OCC”), whose Oil and Gas Conservation Division regulates oil and gas operations in Oklahoma, issued regulations targeting saltwater disposal activities in certain areas of interest within the Arbuckle formation. The regulations include operational requirements (i.e., mechanical integrity testing of wells permitted for disposal of 20,000 or more barrels of water per day, daily monitoring and recording of well pressure and discharge volume), as well as orders to shut-in wells, reduce well depths, or decrease disposal volumes. Under these regulations, the OCC ordered us to limit the volume of saltwater disposed of in saltwater disposal wells in the Arbuckle formation, and it established caps for ten of our saltwater disposal wells, which caps are still in place. To ensure that we had an adequate number of wells for disposal, we secured permits for additional saltwater disposal wells outside of the Arbuckle formation. We are currently in compliance with all OCC saltwater disposal requirements and have maintained our production base without any negative material impact. However, any future orders or regulations addressing concerns about seismic activity from well injection in jurisdictions where we operate could affect or curtail our operations.

Hydraulic Fracturing

We use hydraulic fracturing extensively in our onshore operations, but not our offshore operations. Hydraulic fracturing is an essential and common practice in the oil and gas industry used to stimulate production of natural gas and/or oil from low permeability subsurface rock formations. Hydraulic fracturing involves using water, sand and certain chemicals to fracture the hydrocarbon-bearing rock formation to allow the flow of hydrocarbons into the wellbore. While hydraulic fracturing has historically been regulated by state oil and natural gas commissions, the practice has become increasingly controversial in certain parts of the country, resulting in increased scrutiny and regulation. For example, the EPA’s wastewater pretreatment standards prohibit onshore unconventional oil and natural gas extraction facilities from sending wastewater to publicly-owned treatment works. This restriction of disposal options for hydraulic fracturing waste and other changes to environmental requirements may result in increased costs.

The BLM has previously issued a rule that would restrict hydraulic fracturing on federal and Indian lands, but the BLM rescinded that rule in December 2017, overruling the objections of several environmental groups and states that challenged rescission of the rule. In July 2023, legislation was introduced in Congress that, if passed, would give the EPA the authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing processes across the U.S. and require U.S. fracturing companies to publicly disclose the chemicals used in such process, but that legislation did not pass out of committee.

Several states have also adopted, or are considering adopting, regulations requiring the disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing and/or otherwise imposing additional requirements for hydraulic fracturing activities. For example, Oklahoma requires oil and gas producers to report the chemicals they use in hydraulic fracturing to FracFocus.org, a national hydraulic fracturing chemical registry, or to the OCC, which will convey the information to FracFocus.org. The Louisiana Department of Natural Resources has adopted rules requiring the public disclosure of the composition and volume of fracturing fluids used in hydraulic fracturing operations. Also, Texas requires oil and natural gas operators to disclose to the Commission and the public the chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process, as well as the total volume of water used. Texas has also imposed requirements for drilling, putting pipe down and cementing wells, and testing and reporting requirements.

Certain governmental reviews have been conducted that focus on environmental aspects of hydraulic fracturing practices, which could lead to increased regulation. For example, the EPA issued a report examining the potential for hydraulic fracturing activities to impact drinking water resources, finding that, under some circumstances, the use of water in hydraulic fracturing activities can impact drinking water resources. The EPA has also issued a report on onshore conventional and unconventional oil and gas extraction wastewater management, and conducted a study of private wastewater treatment facilities, also known as centralized waste treatment facilities, accepting oil and gas extraction wastewater. Other governmental agencies, including the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the U.S. Government Accountability Office, have evaluated various other aspects of hydraulic fracturing. In addition, as discussed above, BOEM and BSEE completed a study regarding the potential environmental impacts of well-stimulation practices on the Pacific OCS. These studies could spur initiatives to further regulate hydraulic fracturing and could ultimately make it more difficult or costly for us to perform fracturing and increase our costs of compliance and doing business.

Additionally, a number of lawsuits and enforcement actions have been initiated across the country, alleging that hydraulic fracturing practices have induced seismic activity and adversely impacted drinking water supplies, use of surface water, and the environment generally. Several states and municipalities have adopted, or are considering adopting, regulations that could restrict or prohibit hydraulic fracturing in certain circumstances. We believe that we follow standard industry practices and legal requirements applicable to our hydraulic fracturing activities. Nonetheless, in the event of new or more stringent federal, state or local legal restrictions are adopted in areas where we are currently conducting, or in the future plan to conduct operations, we may incur additional costs to comply with such requirements that may be significant in nature, experience delays or curtailment in the pursuit of exploration, development, or production activities, and perhaps even be precluded from the drilling of wells. If new laws or regulations that significantly restrict hydraulic fracturing are adopted, such laws could make it more difficult or costly for us to perform fracturing to stimulate production from tight formations as well as make it easier for third parties opposing the hydraulic fracturing process to initiate legal proceedings based on allegations that specific chemicals used in the fracturing process could adversely affect groundwater or otherwise have negative impacts.

In addition, if hydraulic fracturing is further regulated at the federal, state or local level, our fracturing activities could become subject to additional permitting and financial assurance requirements, more stringent construction specifications, increased monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping obligations, plugging and abandonment requirements and also to attendant permitting delays and potential increases in costs. Any such legislative changes could cause us to incur substantial compliance costs, and compliance or the consequences of any failure to comply by us could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. At this time, it is not possible to estimate the impact on our business of newly enacted or potential federal or state legislation governing hydraulic fracturing, and any of the above risks could impair our ability to manage our business and have a material adverse effect on our operations, cash flows and financial position.

Air Emissions

The federal Clean Air Act, as amended (“CAA”), and comparable state laws restrict the emission of air pollutants from many sources, including compressor stations, through the issuance of permits and the imposition of other requirements. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (“SCAQMD”) is a regulatory subdivision of the State of California and is responsible for air pollution control from stationary sources within Orange County and designated portions of Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino Counties. Our Beta properties and associated facilities are subject to regulation by the SCAQMD. Federal, SCAQMD, and other state laws and regulations may require us to obtain pre-approval for the construction or modification of certain projects or facilities expected to produce or significantly increase air emissions, obtain and strictly comply with stringent air permit requirements or utilize specific equipment or technologies to control emissions of certain pollutants.

The EPA has developed, and continues to develop, stringent regulations governing emissions of air pollutants at specified sources. New facilities may be required to obtain permits before work can begin, and modified and existing facilities may be required to obtain additional permits.

In November 2021, the EPA issued a proposed rule intended to establish standards for methane and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from new and modified oil and natural gas production and natural gas processing and transmission facilities. The proposed rule sought to make the existing regulations in Subpart OOOOa more stringent and create a Subpart OOOOb to expand reduction requirements for new, modified, and reconstructed oil and gas sources, including standards focusing on certain source types that have never been regulated under the CAA (including intermittent vent pneumatic controllers, associated gas, and liquids unloading facilities). In addition, the proposed rule sought to establish “Emissions Guidelines,” creating a Subpart OOOOc that would require states to develop plans to reduce methane emissions from existing sources that must be at least as effective as presumptive standards set by EPA. In November 2022, the EPA issued a proposed rule supplementing the November 2021 proposed rule. Among other things, the November 2022 supplemental proposed rule removed an emissions monitoring exemption for small wellhead-only sites and created a new third-party monitoring program to flag large emissions events, referred to in the proposed rule as “super emitters”. The EPA announced a final rule in December 2023, which, among other things, requires the phase out of routine flaring of natural gas from new oil wells and routine leak monitoring at all well sites and compressor stations. Notably, EPA updated the applicability date for Subparts OOOOb and OOOOc to December 6, 2022, meaning that sources constructed prior to that date will be considered existing sources with later compliance dates under state plans. The final rule gives states, along with federal tribes that wish to regulate existing sources, two years to develop and submit their plans for reducing methane from existing sources. The final emissions guidelines under Subpart OOOOc provide three years from the plan submission deadline for existing sources to comply.

Additionally, in 2016, the BLM finalized rules related to further controlling the venting and flaring of natural gas on BLM land, which was challenged by a group of states. In September 2018, the BLM published a final rule that revised the 2016 rules, which was again challenged by states and environmental groups. On November 30, 2022, the BLM also issued a proposed rule to reduce the waste of natural gas from venting, flaring, and leaks during oil and gas production activities on Federal and Indian leases, and a final rule is expected in January 2024. As a result of these regulatory changes, the scope of any final methane regulations or the costs for complying with the federal methane regulations are uncertain. However, any future changes to the regulations governing methane emissions, and other air quality programs, may require us to obtain pre-approval for the expansion or modification of existing facilities or the construction of new facilities expected to produce air emissions, impose stringent air permit requirements, or utilize specific equipment or technologies to control emissions. Compliance with such rules could result in significant costs, including increased capital expenditures and operating costs and could adversely impact our business.

We may be required to incur certain capital expenditures in the next few years for air pollution control equipment in connection with maintaining or obtaining operating permits addressing air emission related issues, which may have a material adverse effect on our operations. Obtaining permits also has the potential to delay the development of oil and natural gas projects and increase our costs of development, which costs could be significant. We believe that we currently are in substantial compliance with all air emissions regulations and that we hold all necessary and valid construction and operating permits for our current operations.

Climate Change Regulation

At the international level, the United States joined the international community at the 21st Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris, France in 2015, which resulted in an agreement intended to nationally determine their contributions and set GHG emission reduction goals every five years beginning in 2020. In February 2021, the current administration announced reentry of the U.S. into the Paris Agreement along with a new “nationally determined contribution” for U.S. GHG emissions that would achieve emissions reductions of at least 50% relative to 2005 levels by 2030. Pursuant to its obligations as a signatory to the Paris Agreement, the United States has set a target to reduce its GHG emissions by 50-52% by the year 2030 as compared with 2005 levels and has agreed to provide periodic updates on its progress. In addition, in 2021, President Biden publicly announced the Global Methane Pledge, a pact that aims to reduce global methane emissions at least 30% below 2020 levels by 2030, including “all feasible reductions” in the energy sector. Since its formal launch at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change 26th Conference of the Parties (“COP26”), over 150 countries have joined the pledge. COP26 concluded with the finalization of the Glasgow Climate Pact (the “Glasgow Pact”), which stated long-term global goals (including those in the Paris Agreement) to limit the increase in the global average temperature and emphasized reductions in GHG emissions. International commitments, re-entry into the Paris Agreement and President Biden’s executive orders may result in the development of additional regulations or changes to existing regulations. At the 27th conference of parties (“COP27”), President Biden announced the EPA’s proposed standards to reduce methane emissions from existing oil and gas sources, and agreed, in conjunction with the European Union and a number of other partner countries, to develop standards for monitoring and reporting methane emissions to help create a market for low methane-intensity natural gas. Additionally, at the 28th Conference of the Parties (“COP28”), nearly 200 countries, including the United States, entered into an agreement that calls for actions towards achieving, at a global scale, a tripling of renewable energy capacity and doubling energy efficiency improvements by 2030. The goals of the agreement, among other things, is to accelerate efforts towards the phase-down of unabated coal power, phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies, and take other measures that drive the transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems. Various state and local governments have also publicly committed to furthering the goals of the Paris Agreement.

The $1 trillion legislative infrastructure package passed by Congress in November 2021 includes a number of climate-focused spending initiatives targeted at climate resilience, enhanced response and preparation for extreme weather events, and clean energy and transportation investments. In August 2022, President Biden signed into law the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Among other things, 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 “waste emissions charge” on certain oil and gas sources that are already required to report under EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. In order to implement the program, the Inflation Reduction Act required revisions to GHG reporting regulations for petroleum and natural gas systems (Subpart W) by 2024. In July 2023, the EPA proposed to expand the scope of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program for petroleum and natural gas facilities, as required by the Inflation Reduction Act. Among other things, the proposed rule expands the emissions events that are subject to reporting requirements to include “other large release events” and applies reporting requirements to certain new sources and sectors. The rule is currently scheduled to be finalized in the spring of 2024 and would take effect on January 1, 2025, in advance of the deadline for GHG reporting for 2024 (March 2025). The fee imposed under the Methane Emissions and Waste Reduction Incentive Program for 2024 would be $900 per ton emitted over annual methane emissions thresholds, and would increase to $1,200 in 2025, and $1,500 in 2026. Additionally, a number of states have intensified or stated their intent to intensify efforts to support international climate commitments and treaties and have taken legal measures to reduce emissions of GHGs, including through carbon taxes, policies and incentives to encourage the use of renewable energy or alternative low-carbon fuels, the planned development of GHGs emission inventories and/or regional GHGs cap and trade programs.

At the state level, California enacted legislation in October 2023 that will ultimately require certain companies that do business in California and exceed specified financial thresholds to publicly disclose their Scopes 1, 2, and 3 GHG emissions, with third party assurance of such data, and issue public reports on climate-related financial risk and related mitigation measures. The implementing regulations for these laws have not yet been drafted and the requirements are currently set to begin taking effect in 2026, with additional requirements phasing in through 2030. While we are still assessing the impact of these requirements, additional reporting obligations could cause us to incur increased costs.

Additionally, on March 21, 2022, the SEC issued a proposed rule regarding the enhancement and standardization of mandatory climate-related disclosures. The proposed rule would require registrants to include certain climate-related disclosures in their registration statements and periodic reports, including, but not limited to, information about the registrant’s governance of climate-related risks and relevant risk management processes; climate-related risks that are reasonably likely to have a material impact on the registrant’s business, results of operations, or financial condition and their actual and likely climate-related impacts on the registrant’s business strategy, model, and outlook; climate-related targets, goals and transition plan (if any); certain climate-related financial statement metrics in a note to their audited financial statements; Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions; and Scope 3 GHG emissions and intensity, if material, or if the registrant has set a GHG emissions reduction target, goal or plan that includes Scope 3 GHG emissions. Although the proposed rule’s ultimate date of effectiveness and the final form and substance of these requirements is not yet known and the ultimate scope and impact on our business is uncertain, compliance with the proposed rule, if finalized, may result in increased legal, accounting and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming and costly, and place strain on our personnel, systems and resources.

While we are subject to certain federal GHG monitoring and reporting requirements, our operations are not currently adversely impacted by existing federal, state and local climate change initiatives. The adoption and implementation of any new 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. For example, any GHG regulation could increase our costs of compliance by potentially delaying the receipt of permits and other regulatory approvals; requiring us to monitor emissions, install additional equipment or modify facilities to reduce GHG and other emissions; purchase emission credits; and utilize electric driven compression at facilities to obtain regulatory permits and approvals in a timely manner. Such climate change regulatory and legislative initiatives could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Moreover, any legislation or regulatory programs to reduce GHG emissions could increase the cost of consumption, and thereby reduce demand for, the oil and natural gas we produce. Consequently, legislation and regulatory programs to reduce emissions of GHGs could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Incentives to conserve energy or use alternative energy sources as a means of addressing climate change could also reduce demand for the oil and natural gas we produce.

National Environmental Policy Act

Oil and natural gas exploration and production activities on federal lands are subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”). NEPA requires federal agencies, including the U.S. Departments of the Interior and Agriculture, to evaluate major federal actions having the potential to significantly impact the human environment. In the course of such evaluations, an agency evaluates the potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of a proposed project. If the proposed impacts are considered significant, the agency will prepare a detailed environmental impact statement that is made available for public review and comment. In July 2020, the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality published a final rule to amend the NEPA implementing regulations intended to streamline the environmental review process, including shortening the time for review as well as eliminating the requirement to evaluate cumulative impacts. The final rule required federal agencies to develop procedures consistent with the new rule within one year of the rule’s effective date (which was extended to two years in June 2021). The new regulations are subject to ongoing litigation, which has been stayed pending an ongoing review of the 2020 rule. In October 2021, the Council on Environmental Quality issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend the NEPA regulatory changes adopted in 2020 in two phases. Phase I of the Council on Environmental Quality’s proposed rulemaking process was finalized in April 2022, and generally restored provisions that were in effect prior to 2020. In July 2023, the Council on Environmental Quality issued a proposed rule for the Phase II rulemaking. The proposed Phase II rule restores certain mitigation language from the pre-2020 version of the NEPA regulations, and proposes further revisions to ensure the NEPA process “provides for efficient and effective environmental reviews,” and meets environmental, environmental justice and climate change objectives. A final rule is expected in April 2024. All of our current development and production activities, as well as proposed development plans, on federal lands, including those in the Pacific Ocean, require governmental permits that are subject to the requirements of NEPA. This environmental review process has the potential to delay the development of oil and natural gas projects. Authorizations under NEPA also are subject to protest, appeal or litigation, which can delay or halt projects.

Endangered Species Act and Migratory Bird Treaty Act

The federal ESA and analogous state statutes restrict activities that may adversely affect endangered and threatened species or their habitat. In August 2019, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (the “FWS”) and National Marine Fisheries Service (“NMFS”) issued three rules amending the implementation of the ESA regulations revising, among other things, the process for listing species and designating critical habitats, which was challenged by a coalition of states and environmental groups. In June and July 2022, the FWS issued final rules rescinding the regulations defining “habitat” and governing critical habitat exclusions. Similar protections are offered to migratory birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (“MBTA”), which makes it illegal to, among other things, hunt, capture, kill, possess, sell, or purchase migratory birds, nests, or eggs without a permit. This prohibition covers most bird species in the U.S. In January 2021, the Department of the Interior finalized a rule limiting the application of the MBTA. However, the Department of the Interior revoked the rule in October 2021. With this revocation of the January 2021 rule, the FWS returned to prohibiting incidental take and applying enforcement discretion pursuant to the MBTA, consistent with agency practice prior to 2017. In June 2023, the U.S. FWS issued three proposed rules governing critical habitat designation and expanding protection options for species listed as threatened pursuant to the ESA. The comment periods for these rules ended in August 2023, and final rules are expected by April 2024. Concurrently, the FWS issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking seeking comment on the Department of the Interior’s plan to develop regulations that authorize incidental take under certain prescribed conditions. The notice of proposed rulemaking was expected in October 2023 with a final rule to follow by April 2024; however, the notice of proposed rulemaking has not yet been issued. Future implementation of the rules implementing the ESA and the MBTA are uncertain. The designation of previously unidentified endangered or threatened species in areas where we operate could cause us to incur additional costs or become subject to operating delays, restrictions or bans. Numerous species have been listed or proposed for protected status in areas in which we currently, or could in the future, undertake operations. The presence of protected species in areas where we operate could impair our ability to timely complete or carry out those operations, lose leaseholds as we may not be permitted to timely commence drilling operations, cause us to incur increased costs arising from species protection measures, and consequently, 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 business or operations.

Occupational Safety and Health Act

We are also subject to the requirements of the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act (“OSHA”) and comparable state laws that regulate the protection of the health and safety of employees. In addition, OSHA’s hazard communication standard requires that information be maintained about hazardous materials used or produced in our operations and that this information be provided to employees, state and local government authorities and citizens. Other OSHA standards regulate specific worker safety aspects of our operations. For example, under a new OSHA standard limiting respirable silica exposure, the oil and gas industry was required to implement engineering controls and work practices to limit exposures below the new limits. Failure to comply with OSHA requirements can lead to the imposition of penalties. We believe that our operations are in substantial compliance with the OSHA requirements.

Other Regulation of the Oil and Natural Gas Industry

The oil and natural gas industry is extensively regulated by numerous federal, state and local authorities. Legislation affecting the oil and natural gas industry is under constant review for amendment or expansion, frequently increasing the regulatory burden on our assets. Additionally, numerous departments and agencies, both federal and state, are authorized by statute to issue rules and regulations that are binding on the oil and natural gas industry and its individual members, some of which carry substantial penalties for failure to comply. Although the regulatory burden on the oil and natural gas industry increases our cost of doing business and, consequently, affects our profitability, these burdens generally do not affect us any differently or to any greater or lesser extent than they affect other companies in the oil and natural gas industry with similar types, quantities and locations of production.

Legislation continues to be introduced in Congress, and the development of regulations continues in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and other agencies concerning the security of industrial facilities, including oil and natural gas facilities. Our operations may be subject to such laws and regulations. Presently, it is not possible to accurately estimate the costs we could incur to comply with any such facility security laws or regulations, but such expenditures could be substantial.

Drilling and Production

Our operations are subject to various types of regulation at federal, state and local levels. These types of regulation include requiring permits for the drilling of wells, drilling bonds and reports concerning operations. Most states, and some counties and municipalities, in which we operate also regulate one or more of the following:

State laws regulate the size and shape of drilling and spacing units or proration units governing the pooling of oil and natural gas properties. Some states allow forced pooling or integration of tracts to facilitate exploration, while other states rely on voluntary pooling of lands and leases. In some instances, forced pooling or unitization may be implemented by third parties and may reduce our interest in the unitized properties. In addition, state conservation laws establish maximum rates of production from oil and natural gas wells, generally prohibit the venting or flaring of natural gas and impose requirements regarding the ratability of production. These laws and regulations may limit the amount of oil and natural gas we can produce from our wells or limit the number of wells or the locations at which we can drill. Moreover, each state generally imposes a production or severance tax with respect to the production and sale of oil, natural gas and NGLs within its jurisdiction.

Sale and Transportation of Gas and Oil

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) has jurisdiction over the construction and operations of interstate gas pipeline facilities and the rates, terms and conditions of service under which companies provide interstate transportation of gas, oil and other liquids by pipeline. Although the FERC does not have jurisdiction over the production of gas, the FERC exercises regulatory authority over wholesale sales of gas in interstate commerce through the issuance of blanket marketing certificates that authorize the wholesale sale of gas at market rates and the imposition of a code of conduct on blanket marketing certificate holders that regulate certain affiliate interactions. The FERC does not regulate the sale of oil or petroleum products or the construction of oil or other liquids pipelines. The FERC also has oversight of the performance of wholesale natural gas markets, including the authority to facilitate price transparency and to prevent market manipulation. In furtherance of this authority, the FERC imposed an annual reporting requirement on all industry participants, including otherwise non-jurisdictional entities, engaged in wholesale physical natural gas sales and purchases in excess of a minimum level. These agency actions have been intended to foster increased competition within all phases of the gas industry. To date, the FERC’s pro-competition policies have not materially affected our business or operations. It is unclear what impact, if any, future rules or increased competition within the gas industry will have on our gas sales efforts.

The FERC and other federal agencies, the U.S. Congress or state legislative bodies and regulatory agencies may consider additional proposals or proceedings that might affect the gas or oil industries. We cannot predict when or if these proposals will become effective or any effect they may have on our operations. We do not believe, however, that any such proposal will affect us any differently than it would affect other gas or oil producers with which we compete.

The Beta properties include the San Pedro Bay Pipeline Company, which owns and operates an offshore crude oil pipeline. This pipeline is subject to regulation by the FERC under the Interstate Commerce Act and the Energy Policy Act of 1992. Tariff rates for liquids pipelines, which include both crude oil pipelines and refined products pipelines, must be just and reasonable and not unduly discriminatory. FERC regulations require that interstate oil pipeline transportation rates and terms of service be filed with the FERC and posted publicly. The FERC has established a formulaic methodology for oil and liquids pipelines to change their rates within prescribed ceiling levels that are tied to an inflation index. The FERC reviews the formula every five years. Effective July 1, 2021, the current index for the five-year period ending June 30, 2026 is the producer price index for finished goods minus 0.21 percent. The San Pedro Bay Pipeline Company uses the indexing methodology to change its rates.

The Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act requires that all pipelines operating on or across the OCS provide open access, non-discriminatory transportation service. BOEM/BSEE has established formal and informal complaint procedures for shippers that believe they have been denied open and non-discriminatory access to transportation on the OCS.

The U.S. Department of Transportation Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (“PHMSA”) regulates the safety of all pipeline transportation in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, including pipeline facilities on the OCS. The San Pedro Bay pipeline is subject to regulation by the PHMSA. In recent years, PHMSA has been active in proposing and finalizing additional regulations for natural gas and hazardous liquids pipelines. For example, in January 2017, PHMSA finalized new regulations for hazardous liquid pipelines that significantly extend and expand the reach of certain PHMSA integrity management requirements (i.e., periodic assessments, repairs and leak detection), regardless of the pipeline’s proximity to a high consequence area (“HCA”). The final rule also requires all pipelines in or affecting an HCA to be capable of accommodating in-line inspection tools within the next 20 years. In addition, the final rule extends annual and accident reporting requirements to gravity lines, and all gathering lines and also imposes inspection requirements on pipelines in areas affected by extreme weather events and natural disasters, such as hurricanes, landslides, floods, earthquakes, or other similar events that are likely to damage infrastructure. In addition, in April 2016, PHMSA proposed a rule regarding the safety of natural gas transmission pipelines and gas gathering pipelines. In October 2019, PHMSA issued a final rule on the natural gas transmission lines portion of the April 2016 rulemaking, and in November 2021 PHMSA issued a final rule on the gathering lines portion of the April 2016 rulemaking. Under the new final rule, operators of onshore natural gas gathering pipelines that were previously excluded from certain PHMSA regulations face additional testing, safety and reporting requirements or may be forced to reduce their allowable operating pressures, which would reduce the amount of capacity available to the Company. Certain reporting requirements arising from the new PHMSA rule took effect in 2022, with additional requirements taking effect later in 2023.

Moreover, effective April 2017, the PHMSA adopted new rules increasing the maximum administrative civil penalties for violation of the pipeline safety laws and regulations. PHMSA updates the maximum administrative civil penalties each year to account for inflation, and as of December 2023, the penalty limits are up to $266,015 per violation per day and up to $2,660,135 for a related series of violations. The PHMSA has also issued a final rule applying safety regulations to certain rural low-stress hazardous liquid pipelines that were not covered previously by some of its safety regulations. In March 2022, PHMSA announced a final rule, effective October 5, 2022, to improve pipeline safety and reduce methane emissions by requiring the installation of remotely controlled or automatic shut-off valves, or similar technologies, in new and replaced onshore natural gas and other hazardous liquid pipelines. In August 2022, PHMSA passed a final rule, effective May 24, 2023, to protect the safety and environmental protection of onshore gas transmission pipelines, which establishes new standards for identifying threats, failures and worst-case scenarios throughout from initial failure through conclusion of an incident. Additionally, in May 2023, PHMSA issued a proposed rule to implement congressional mandates to reduce methane leaks by up to 55% from new and existing natural gas transmission, distribution and gathering pipelines and liquefied natural gas facilities. The comment period for the rule ended in August 2023. A final rule has not yet been issued.

Federal and state legislative and regulatory initiatives relating to pipeline safety that require the use of new or more stringent safety controls or result in more stringent enforcement of applicable legal requirements could subject us to increased capital costs, operational delays and costs of operation.

Anti-Market Manipulation Laws and Regulations

The FERC, with respect to the purchase or sale of natural gas or the purchase or sale of transmission or transportation services subject to FERC jurisdiction and the Federal Trade Commission with respect to petroleum and petroleum products, operating under various statutes, have each adopted anti-market manipulation regulations, which prohibit, among other things, fraud and price manipulation in the respective markets. These agencies hold substantial enforcement authority, including the ability to assess substantial civil penalties, to order repayment or disgorgement of profits and to recommend criminal penalties. Should we violate the anti-market manipulation laws and regulations, we could also be subject to related third-party damage claims by, among others, sellers, royalty owners and taxing authorities.

Derivatives Regulation

Comprehensive financial reform legislation was signed into law by the President on July 21, 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”). This legislation called for the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) to regulate certain markets for derivative products, including over-the-counter derivatives. The CFTC has issued several new relevant regulations and rulemakings to implement the Dodd-Frank Act, the mandate to cause significant portions of derivatives markets to clear through clearinghouses, along with other mandated changes. While some of these rules have been finalized, some have not. As a result, the final form and timing of the implementation of the new regulatory regime affecting commodity derivatives remains uncertain.

In particular, on October 18, 2011, the CFTC adopted final rules under the Dodd-Frank Act establishing position limits for certain energy commodity futures and options contracts and economically equivalent swaps, futures and options. The CFTC’s final rules were challenged in court by two industry associations and were vacated and remanded by a federal district court. Subsequently, the CFTC proposed new rules in November 2013 and December 2016. In January 2020, the CFTC withdrew the 2013 and 2016 proposals. In January 2021 the CFTC issued a final rule on the matter, effective March 15, 2021. The final rule includes limits on positions in (1) certain “Core Referenced Futures Contracts,” including contracts for several energy commodities; (2) futures and options on futures that are directly or indirectly linked to the price of a Core Referenced Futures Contract, or to the same commodity for delivery at the same location as specified in that Core Referenced Futures Contract; and (3) economically equivalent swaps. The final rule also includes exemptions from position limits for bona fide hedging activities.

The Dodd-Frank Act and new, related regulations may prompt counterparties to our derivative instruments to spin off some of their derivatives activities to separate entities, which may not be as creditworthy as the current counterparties. The new legislation and any new regulations could significantly increase the cost of derivative contracts, materially alter the terms of derivative contracts, reduce the availability of derivatives to protect against risks we encounter, reduce our ability to monetize or restructure our existing derivative contracts, and increase our exposure to less creditworthy counterparties. If we reduce our use of derivatives as a result of the legislation and regulations, our results of operations may become more volatile and our cash flows may become less predictable, which could adversely affect our ability to plan for and fund capital expenditures and to generate sufficient cash flow to pay quarterly distributions at current levels or at all. Our revenues could be adversely affected if a consequence of the legislation and regulations is to lower commodity prices. Any of these consequences could have a material, adverse effect on us, our financial condition and our results of operations. Our use of derivative financial instruments does not eliminate our exposure to fluctuations in commodity prices and interest rates and has in the past and could in the future result in financial losses or reduce our income.

Our sales of oil and natural gas are also subject to anti-manipulation and anti-disruptive practices authority under (i) the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”), as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder by the CFTC, and (ii) the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (“EISA”) and regulations promulgated thereunder by the FTC. The CEA, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, prohibits any person from using or employing any manipulative or deceptive device in connection with any swap, or a contract for sale of any commodity, or for future delivery on such commodity, in contravention of the CFTC’s rules and regulations. It also prohibits knowingly delivering or causing to be delivered false, misleading or inaccurate reports concerning market information or conditions that affect or tend to affect the price of any commodity. The FTC’s Petroleum Market Manipulation Rule, issued pursuant to EISA, prohibits fraudulent or deceptive conduct (including false or misleading statements of material fact) in connection with wholesale purchases or sales of crude oil or refined petroleum products. Under both the CEA and the EISA, fines for violations can be up to $1,000,000 per day per violation (subject to adjustment for inflation) and certain knowing or willful violations may also lead to a felony conviction.

Additional proposals and proceedings that may affect the crude oil and natural gas industry are pending before the U.S. Congress, federal agencies and the courts. The Company cannot predict the ultimate impact these proposals may have on its crude oil and natural gas operations, but the Company does not expect any such action to affect the Company differently than it will affect other gas or oil producers with which we compete.

State Regulation

Various states regulate the drilling for, and the production, gathering and sale of, oil and natural gas, including imposing severance taxes and requirements for obtaining drilling permits. For example, the baseline Texas severance tax on oil and gas is 4.6% of the market value of oil produced and 7.5% of the market value of gas produced and saved. A number of exemptions from or reductions of the severance tax on oil and gas production are provided by the State of Texas which effectively lowers the cost of production. States also regulate the method of developing new fields, the spacing and operation of wells and the prevention of waste of natural gas resources. States may regulate rates of production and may establish maximum daily production allowable from natural gas wells based on market demand or resource conservation, or both. States do not regulate wellhead prices or engage in other similar direct economic regulation, but there can be no assurance that they will not do so in the future. The effect of these regulations may be to limit the amount of oil and natural gas that may be produced from our wells and to limit the number of wells or locations we can drill.

The petroleum industry is also subject to compliance with various other federal, state and local regulations and laws. Some of those laws relate to resource conservation and equal employment opportunity. We do not believe that compliance with these laws will have a material adverse effect on us.

Human Capital

On December 31, 2023, the Company had 214 employees, none of whom were represented by labor unions or covered by any collective bargaining agreement. We strive to create a high-performing culture and positive work environment that allows us to attract and retain a diverse group of talented individuals who can foster the Company’s success. To attract and retain top talent, our human resources programs are designed to reward and incentivize our employees through competitive compensation practices, our commitment to employee health and safety, training and talent development and our commitment to diversity and inclusion.

Safety

Safety is our highest priority, and we are dedicated to the well-being of our employees, contractors, business partners, stakeholders and the environment. We promote safety with a robust health and safety program, which includes employee orientation and training, contractor management, risk assessment, hazard identification and mitigation, audits, incident reporting and investigation, and corrective and preventative action development.

In addition, we employ environmental, health and safety personnel at each of our asset locations, who provide in-person safety training and regular safety meetings. We also utilize learning management software to provide safety training on a variety of topics, and we contract with third-party technical experts to facilitate training on specialized topics that are unique to each of our areas of operation.

It is our policy to provide our employees with a safe and healthy workplace and to follow procedures aimed at safeguarding employees. We believe accident prevention and efficiency in production run hand-in-hand. Our internal Stop Work Authority (“SWA”) empowers employees to pause operations so that an observed potential hazard can be eliminated or mitigated.

We are committed to maintaining a safe and healthy work environment by complying with state and federal regulations concerning the health and safety of our employees. Our employees are expected to demonstrate a cooperative spirit by working together to help us in this effort. As such, every employee is directly responsible for the proper care and use of Amplify property and equipment placed in their charge, either temporarily or on a regular basis.

Compensation

We operate in a highly competitive environment and have designed our compensation program to attract, retain and motivate talented and experienced individuals. Our compensation philosophy is designed to align the interests of our workforce with those of our stakeholders and to reward them for achieving the Company’s business and strategic objectives and driving shareholder value. We consider competitive market compensation paid by our peers and other companies comparable to us in size, geographic location and operations in order to ensure our compensation remains competitive and fulfills our goal of recruiting and retaining talented employees.

Training and Development

We are committed to the training and development of our employees. Employees are regularly provided training opportunities to develop skills in leadership, safety, and technical acumen, which bolsters our efforts in conducting business in a safe manner and with high ethical standards. Further, we believe that supporting our employees in achieving their career and development goals is a key element of our approach to attracting and retaining top talent. We encourage our employees to advance their knowledge and skills and to network with other professionals in order to pursue career advancement and potential future opportunities with the Company. Our employees are able to attend training seminars and off-site workshops or to join professional associations that will enable them to remain up-to-date on the latest changes and best practices in their respective fields.

Diversity and Inclusion

We are committed to providing a diverse and inclusive workplace and career development opportunities to attract and retain talented employees. As of December 31, 2023, approximately 17% of our total workforce self-identified as a racial or ethnic minority and approximately 18% self-identified as female. As of the same date, approximately 29% of the employees located in our corporate headquarters self-identified as a racial or ethnic minority and approximately 49% self-identified as female. We recognize that a diverse workforce provides the opportunity to obtain unique perspectives, experiences, ideas, and solutions to help our business succeed. To that end, it is our policy to prohibit discrimination and harassment of any type and afford equal employment opportunities to employees and applicants without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, veteran status, or any other basis protected by federal, state or local law. Further, it is our policy to forbid retaliation against any individual who reports, claims, or makes a charge of discrimination or harassment, fraud, unethical conduct, or a violation of our Company policies. To sustain and promote an inclusive culture, we maintain a robust compliance program rooted in our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and other Company policies, which provide policies and guidance on non-discrimination, anti-harassment, and equal employment opportunities. We require all employees to complete periodic training sessions on various aspects of our corporate policies through an annual acknowledgment and certification process.

Health and Wellness

We support our employees and their families by offering a robust package of health and welfare benefits, medical, dental, and vision insurance plans for employees and their families, life insurance and long-term disability plans, paid time off for holidays, vacation, sick leave, and other personal leave, and health and dependent care savings accounts. We also provide our employees with a 401(k) plan that includes a competitive company match, and employees have access to a variety of resources and services to help them plan for retirement.

In addition to these programs, we have several other programs designed to further promote the health and wellness of our employees, including, among others, an employee assistance program that offers counseling and referral services for a broad range of personal and family situations.

The success of our business is fundamentally connected to the safety and well-being of our employees. Our focus remains on providing a safe office environment for our employees while continuing to allow for remote work, hybrid work and flexible work schedules where feasible. With the support of the varying work arrangements and a geographically dispersed workforce, we continue to develop ways to best support our people.

Offices

Our principal executive office is located at 500 Dallas Street, Suite 1700, Houston, Texas 77002. Our main telephone number is (832) 219-9001.

Available Information

Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8–K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act are made available free of charge on our website atwww.amplifyenergy.com as soon as reasonably practicable after these reports have been electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Our website also includes our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, Corporate Governance Guidelines and the charters of our audit committee, compensation committee and nominating & governance committee. The information contained on, or connected to, our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report and should not be considered part of this or any other report that we file with or furnish to the SEC.

The SEC maintains a website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding the Company at www.sec.gov.