Epsilon Energy Ltd

On March 10, 2021, Epsilon filed a complaint against Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC (“Chesapeake”) in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, Scranton, Pennsylvania (“Middle District”). Epsilon claimed that Chesapeake had breached a settlement agreement and several operating agreements (“JOAs”) to which Epsilon and Chesapeake are parties. Epsilon asserted that Chesapeake had failed to cooperate with Epsilon’s efforts to develop resources in the Auburn Development, located in North-Central Pennsylvania, as required under both the settlement agreement and JOAs.

Epsilon requested a preliminary injunction but was unsuccessful in obtaining that injunction. Epsilon filed a motion to amend its original Complaint. Chesapeake opposed. The Court ruled in Epsilon’s favor and allowed Epsilon’s amendment. Chesapeake moved to dismiss the amended Complaint. The Court granted the motion to dismiss on a narrow issue without prejudice to Epsilon’s right to file a new lawsuit based on new proposals made after the Court’s decision. Epsilon filed a motion for reconsideration of that decision, but the court denied the motion for reconsideration on January 18, 2022.

Epsilon filed a notice of appeal on February 15, 2022 challenging the District Court's rulings in the case. Following the Third Circuit's ruling to remand the case back to District court, Epsilon sought and was granted a dismissal of the case without prejudice in September 2023.

Regulation

Environmental Regulation

Epsilon is subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the handling, management, disposal and discharge of materials into the environment or otherwise relating to the protection of human health, safety and the environment. Numerous governmental agencies, such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, or the EPA, issue regulations to implement and enforce such laws, which often require difficult and costly compliance measures that carry substantial administrative, civil and criminal penalties or that may result in injunctive relief for failure to comply. These laws and regulations may:

Compliance with environmental laws and regulations increases Epsilon’s overall cost of business, but has not had, to date, a material adverse effect on Epsilon’s operations, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, it is not anticipated, based on current laws and regulations, that Epsilon will be required in the near future to expend amounts (whether for environmental control facilities or otherwise) that are material in relation to its total exploration and

development expenditure program in order to comply with such laws and regulations. However, given that such laws and regulations are subject to change, Epsilon is unable to predict the ultimate cost of compliance or the ultimate effect on Epsilon’s operations, financial condition and results of operations.

Climate Change

There is consensus in the international scientific community that increasing concentrations of greenhouse gas emissions (“GHG”) in the atmosphere will produce changes to global, as well as local, climate. Scientists project that increased concentrations of GHGs will cause more frequent, and more powerful storms, droughts, floods and other climatic events. If such effects were to occur, our development and production operations, as well as operations of our third party providers and customers, could be adversely affected. To date, we have not developed a comprehensive plan to address potential impacts of climate change on our operations and there can be no assurance that any such impacts would not have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Attempts to address GHGs, as well as climate change more generally, have taken the form of local, state, national and international proposals. Broadly speaking, examples include cap-and-trade programs, carbon tax proposals, GHG reporting and tracking programs, and regulations that directly limit GHGs from certain sources.

In the United States, federal proposals are rooted in the EPA’s “endangerment finding,” that was upheld by the Supreme Court. Simply, EPA has concluded that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs present an endangerment to public health and the environment. For example, the EPA adopted regulations that require Prevention of Significant Deterioration (“PSD”) construction under Title V operating permit reviews for GHG emissions from certain large stationary sources that constitute major sources of emissions. Facilities required to obtain PSD permits for their GHG emissions also will be required to meet “best available control technology” standards.

Rules requiring the monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions from designated sources in the United States on an annual basis, including, oil and natural gas production facilities and processing, transmission, storage and distribution facilities, which include certain of our operations, have been adopted. The EPA has expanded the GHG reporting requirements to all segments of the oil and natural gas industry, including gathering and boosting facilities.

Federal agencies also have begun directly regulating emissions of methane from natural gas operations. In 2016, the EPA published New Source Performance Standards (“NSPS”), known as Subpart OOOOa, that require certain facilities to reduce methane gas and volatile organic compound emissions. EPA published amendments to those regulations effective September 15, 2020. However, on January 20, 2021, President Biden issued an Executive Order directing EPA to consider suspending, revising or rescinding the September 15, 2020 amendments and also to consider proposing new regulations governing methane and volatile organic compound emissions from existing oil and gas sector operations.

In November 2016, the Bureau of Land Management (“BLM”) published a final rule to reduce methane emissions by regulating venting, flaring, and leaking from oil and natural gas operations on public lands. A federal district court vacated much of that rule in October 2020 and that decision is now subject to an appeal.

Internationally, in April 2016, the United States joined other countries in entering into a non-binding agreement in France for nations to limit their GHG emissions through country-determined reduction goals every five years beginning in 2020 (the “Paris Agreement”). Although the Trump Administration subsequently announced plans to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, on January 20, 2021, President Biden issued an Executive Order providing that he was accepting the Paris Agreement on behalf of the United States.

In addition, recent activism directed at shifting funding away from companies with energy-related assets could result in limitations on certain sources of funding for the energy sector. Ultimately, this could make it more difficult to secure funding for exploration and production or midstream activities.

Epsilon is unable to predict the timing, scope and effect of any currently proposed or future, laws, regulations or treaties regarding climate change and GHG emissions. Any limits on GHG emissions, however, could adversely affect demand for the oil and natural gas that production operators produce, some of whom are our customers, which could thereby reduce demand for our gas gathering services. We are currently unable to calculate or predict the direct and indirect costs of GHG or climate change related laws, regulations and treaties, and accordingly, we cannot assure you that any such

efforts will not have a material impact on our operations, financial condition and results.

Hydraulic Fracturing

Hydraulic fracturing is an important and common practice that is used to stimulate production of hydrocarbons. The process involves the injection of water, sand and chemicals under pressure into formations to fracture the surrounding rock and stimulate production. The process is typically regulated by state oil and natural gas commissions. However, the EPA has asserted federal regulatory authority over certain hydraulic fracturing practices and has finalized a study of the potential environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing activities. In 2014, the EPA issued an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking under the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 requesting comments related to disclosure for hydraulic fracturing chemicals. The Department of the Interior had released final regulations governing hydraulic fracturing on federal and Native American oil and natural gas leases which require lessees to file for approval of well stimulation work before commencement of operations and require well operators to disclose the trade names and purposes of additives used in the fracturing fluids. However, in December 2017, the Bureau of Land Management published a final rule rescinding the March 26, 2015 rule (“BLM 2015 Rule”), entitled “Natural gas and oil; Hydraulic Fracturing on Federal and Indian Lands.” The primary purposes of the BLM 2015 Rule were to ensure that wells were constructed so as to protect water supplies, to ensure environmentally responsible management of fluids displaced by fracturing, and to provide public disclosure of chemicals used in fracturing operations. The net effect of the December 2017 rule making is to return the affected sections of the Code of Federal Regulations to the language that existed before the BLM’s 2015 Rule. In addition, legislation has from time to time been introduced, but not adopted, in Congress to provide for additional federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing and to require additional disclosure of the chemicals used in the fracturing process. In addition, some states have adopted, and other states are considering adopting, regulations that could restrict hydraulic fracturing in certain circumstances.

Epsilon is unable to predict the timing, scope and effect of any currently proposed or future laws or regulations regarding hydraulic fracturing in the United States, but there can be no assurance that the direct and indirect costs of such laws and regulations (if enacted) would not materially and adversely affect Epsilon’s operations, financial condition and results of operations.

Gathering System Regulation

Regulation of gathering facilities may affect certain aspects of Epsilon’s business and the market for Epsilon’s services. Historically, the transportation and sale for resale of natural gas in interstate commerce have been regulated by agencies of the U.S. federal government, primarily the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or the FERC. The FERC regulates interstate natural gas transportation rates, terms and conditions of service, which affects the marketing of natural gas produced by Epsilon, as well as the revenues received for sales of Epsilon’s natural gas.

The transportation and sale for resale of natural gas in interstate commerce is regulated primarily under the Natural Gas Act, or the NGA, and by regulations and orders promulgated under the NGA by the FERC. In certain limited circumstances, intrastate transportation, gathering, and wholesale sales of natural gas may also be affected directly or indirectly by laws enacted by the U.S. Congress and by FERC regulations.

Market for Our Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters

*Market Information.*Commencing on February 19, 2019, the common shares of the Company trade on the NASDAQ Global Market with the ticker symbol ‘‘EPSN.’’ The last reported sales price of our common shares on the NASDAQ Global Market on March 19, 2024 was $5.01 per share.

*Shareholders.*We had approximately 975 shareholders of record as of March 1, 2024.

*Dividends.*Epsilon made aggregate quarterly distributions of $5.6 million ($0.25 per share) during the year ended December 31, 2023. The dividend is well supported and the Company intends to maintain it going forward.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Incentive Plans.

The following tables set out the number of common shares available to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options issued and the changes to the options outstanding for the year pursuant to our equity compensation plans and the weighted average exercise price of outstanding options for the periods indicated:

For the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, we had no warrants or other common share-related rights outstanding.

At December 31, 2023, under the 2020 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2020 Plan”) (See Note 7, “Shareholders’ Equity” of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements), we are authorized to issue 2,000,000 common shares to employees and directors of the Company. As of that date, we had 1,042,511 common shares granted under the 2020 Plan. No more shares are authorized to be issued under our predecessor plan.

The following table sets out the number of time restricted common shares available to be issued upon vesting over the next three years and the changes during the year pursuant to our share compensation plans and the weighted average market price at date of issue for outstanding shares for the periods indicated:

The following table sets out the number of performance-based common shares available to be issued upon vesting over the next three years and the changes during the year pursuant to our share compensation plans and the weighted average market price at date of issue for outstanding shares for the periods indicated:

Recent Developments

On January 30, 2024, the Company repurchased 248,700 shares at $4.82 per share (excluding commissions) under the existing share repurchase plan.