Liberty Energy Inc

Previous wording

Various federal, state, local and other applicable legislative and regulatory initiatives have been, or could be undertaken which could result in additional requirements or restrictions being imposed on hydraulic fracturing operations. Currently, hydraulic fracturing is generally exempt from federal regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act Underground Injection Control (the “SDWA UIC”) program and is typically regulated by state oil and gas commissions or similar agencies but increased scrutiny and regulation by federal agencies does occur. For example, in late 2016, the EPA released a final report on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources, concluding that “water cycle” activities associated with hydraulic fracturing may impact drinking water resources. Additionally, the EPA has asserted regulatory authority pursuant to the SDWA UIC program over hydraulic fracturing activities involving the use of diesel fuel in the fracturing fluid and issued guidance regarding the permitting of such activities. Furthermore, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management has previously published rules that established stringent standards relating to hydraulic fracturing on federal and Native American lands. Similarly, the EPA has adopted rules on the capture of methane and other emissions released during hydraulic fracturing. These rules have been the subject of ongoing legal challenges. Most recently, in December 2022, the EPA finalized additional methane rules for new and existing petroleum operations. The EPA rules could make it more difficult and/or costly to drill and operate oil and gas wells. These rules may result in a decline in the completion of new oil and gas wells or the recompletion of existing wells, which could negatively impact the drilling programs of our customers and, consequently, delay, limit or reduce the demand for our services. In addition to federal regulatory actions, legislation has been introduced, but not enacted, in Congress to provide for further federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing and to require disclosure of the chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process.

Current wording

Various federal, state, local and other applicable legislative and regulatory initiatives have been, or could be undertaken which could result in additional requirements or restrictions being imposed on hydraulic fracturing operations. Currently, hydraulic fracturing is generally exempt from federal regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act Underground Injection Control (the “SDWA UIC”) program and is typically regulated by state oil and gas commissions or similar agencies but increased scrutiny and regulation by federal agencies does occur. For example, in late 2016, the EPA released a final report on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources, concluding that “water cycle” activities associated with hydraulic fracturing may impact drinking water resources. Additionally, the EPA has asserted regulatory authority pursuant to the SDWA UIC program over hydraulic fracturing activities involving the use of diesel fuel in the fracturing fluid and issued guidance regarding the permitting of such activities. Furthermore, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management has previously published rules that established stringent standards relating to hydraulic fracturing on federal and Native American lands. Similarly, the EPA has adopted rules on the capture of methane and other emissions released during hydraulic fracturing. These rules have been the subject of ongoing legal challenges. In recent years, the EPA has enacted additional methane rules for new and existing petroleum operations. The EPA rules could make it more difficult and/or costly to drill and operate oil and gas wells. These rules may result in a decline in the completion of new oil and gas wells or the recompletion of existing wells, which could negatively impact the drilling programs of our customers and, consequently, delay, limit or reduce the demand for our services. In addition to federal regulatory actions, legislation has been introduced, but not enacted, in Congress to provide for further federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing and to require disclosure of the chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process.

Previous wording

Moreover, many states and local governments have adopted, or are considering, regulations that impose new or more stringent permitting, disclosure, disposal and well-construction requirements on hydraulic fracturing operations, including states where we or our customers operate, such as Texas, Colorado and North Dakota. States could also elect to place prohibitions on hydraulic fracturing, as several states have already done. In addition, some states have adopted broader sets of requirements related to oil and gas development more generally that could impact hydraulic fracturing activities. For example, in 2019 the Colorado legislature adopted SB 19-181, which gave greater regulatory authority to local jurisdictions and reoriented the mandate of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to place more emphasis on the protection of human health and the environment. In response, a reconstituted Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission modified its rules to address the requirements of the legislation, adopting increased setback requirements, provisions for assessing alternative sites for well pads to minimize environmental impacts, and consideration to cumulative impacts, among other provisions. The Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment also finalized rules related to the control of emissions from certain pre-production activities. In Texas, there has been increased pressure on the Railroad Commission (“RRC”) to impose more stringent limitations on the flaring of gas from wells to prevent waste and because of increased concerns related to the environmental effects of flaring. The RRC continues to approve flaring permits, but at least one lawsuit has been filed by a pipeline operator challenging the RRC’s flaring approval practices. Environmental groups, local citizens groups and others continue to seek to use a variety of means to force action on additional restrictions on hydraulic fracturing and oil and gas development generally.

Current wording

Moreover, many states and local governments have adopted, or are considering, regulations that impose new or more stringent permitting, disclosure, disposal and well-construction requirements on hydraulic fracturing operations, including states where we or our customers operate, such as Texas, Colorado and North Dakota. States could also elect to place prohibitions on hydraulic fracturing, as several states have already done. In addition, some states have adopted broader sets of requirements related to oil and gas development more generally that could impact hydraulic fracturing activities. For example, the Colorado legislature adopted SB 19-181, which gave greater regulatory authority to local jurisdictions and reoriented the mandate of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to place more emphasis on the protection of human health and the environment. In response, a reconstituted Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission modified its rules to address the requirements of the legislation, adopting increased setback requirements, provisions for assessing alternative sites for well pads to minimize environmental impacts, and consideration to cumulative impacts, among other provisions. The Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment also finalized rules related to the control of emissions from certain pre-production activities. In Texas, there has been increased pressure on the Railroad Commission (“RRC”) to impose more stringent limitations on the flaring of gas from wells to prevent waste and because of increased concerns related to the environmental effects of flaring. The RRC continues to approve flaring permits, but at least one lawsuit was filed by a pipeline operator challenging the RRC’s flaring approval practices, but the suit was subsequently dismissed without any substantive opinion on the issue of flaring. Environmental groups, local citizens groups and others continue to seek to use a variety of means to force action on additional restrictions on hydraulic fracturing and oil and gas development generally.

Previous wording

Additionally, some states have enacted legislation limiting PFAS usage in certain products or limiting PFAS usage generally. For example, Colorado has banned the use of PFAS in oil and gas products including hydraulic fracturing fluids, drilling fluids and proppants. Should PFAS be in hydraulic fracturing chemicals, this could open up a new front for the regulation of hydraulic fracturing and result in additional exposure to liability for contamination resulting from the use or release of hydraulic fracturing chemicals.

Current wording

Additionally, some states have enacted legislation limiting PFAS usage in certain products or limiting PFAS usage generally. For example, Colorado has banned the use of PFAS in oil and gas products including hydraulic fracturing fluids, drilling fluids and proppants. Should PFAS be in hydraulic fracturing chemicals, this could open up a new front for the regulation of hydraulic fracturing and result in additional exposure to liability for contamination resulting from the use or release of hydraulic fracturing chemicals. Additionally, various regulatory actions have been taken with respect to PFAS, including listing of certain PFAS as hazardous substances under CERCLA, that may result in additional exposure to liability for contamination resulting from the use or release of these chemicals.

Previous wording

Businesses and operations of our customers may be carried out on federal lands. The Biden administration has announced that it is considering more stringent regulations for operations on such lands, and in January 2021, the U.S. Department of the Interior issued an order that effectively suspends new oil and gas leases and drilling permits on non-Indian federal lands and waters for a period of 60 days. However, the suspension does not limit existing operations under valid leases.

Current wording

Businesses and operations of our customers may be carried out on federal lands. As an example, in January 2021, based on a directive from President Biden, the U.S. Department of the Interior issued an order that effectively suspended new oil and gas leases and drilling permits on non-Indian federal lands and waters for a period of 60 days. However, the suspension did not limit existing operations under valid leases.

Previous wording

President Biden followed with an executive order directing the Secretary of the Interior to pause the issuance of new oil and gas leases on federal public lands and offshore waters pending completion of a comprehensive review of federal oil and gas permitting and leasing practices that take into consideration potential climate and other impacts associated with oil and gas activities. The leasing suspension has been the subject of several lawsuits, resulting in conflicting decisions on the legality of the lease suspension. For example, in August 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana blocked the Biden administration’s ability to unilaterally pause oil and gas leasing in 13 states, holding that the U.S. Department of the Interior violated federal law when it canceled onshore and offshore leasing on federal lands. While the various lawsuits were pending, in August 2022, Congress passed the IRA 2022 which, among other things, makes changes to the federal oil and gas leasing program (including increasing royalty rates and implementing policies to discourage venting and flaring) and requires the Biden administration to hold several oil and gas lease auctions, including many that had been suspended or cancelled.

Current wording

President Biden followed with an executive order directing the Secretary of the Interior to pause the issuance of new oil and gas leases on federal public lands and offshore waters pending completion of a comprehensive review of federal oil and gas permitting and leasing practices that take into consideration potential climate and other impacts associated with oil and gas activities. The leasing suspension was the subject of several lawsuits, resulting in conflicting decisions on the legality of the lease suspension. While the various lawsuits were pending, in August 2022, Congress passed the IRA 2022 which, among other things, made changes to the federal oil and gas leasing program (including increasing royalty rates and implementing policies to discourage venting and flaring) and require several oil and gas lease auctions, including some that had been suspended or cancelled.

Previous wording

Additionally, in November 2021, the U.S. Department of the Interior released a report on the federal oil and gas leasing program, which found that the current program fails to serve the public interest. The report makes several recommendations, including increasing royalty rates and adding new restrictions on what lands are made available for oil and gas development to minimize leasing of lands with low potential for development. The U.S. Department of the Interior is expected to propose rules based on these recommendations. In April 2022, the U.S. Department of the Interior also announced that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management would post notices for significantly reformed onshore lease sales that would promote the public interest in public lands while addressing deficiencies in the current federal oil and gas leasing program. The new lease sales will incorporate many of the recommendations in the U.S. Department of the Interior report on the federal leasing program. Such scheduled sales began in June 2022.

Current wording

Additionally, in November 2021, the U.S. Department of the Interior released a report on the federal oil and gas leasing program, which found that the then current program failed to serve the public interest. The report made several recommendations, including increasing royalty rates and adding new restrictions on what lands are made available for oil and gas development to minimize leasing of lands with low potential for development. The U.S. Department of the Interior promulgated rules in 2024 based on the recommendations. In April 2022, the U.S. Department of the Interior also announced that the U.S. Bureau of Land Management would post notices for significantly reformed onshore lease sales that would promote the public interest in public lands while addressing deficiencies in the current federal oil and gas leasing program. The new lease sales will incorporate many of the recommendations in the U.S. Department of the Interior report on the federal leasing program. Such scheduled sales began in June 2022.

Previous wording

Prices for oil and natural gas historically have been extremely volatile and are expected to continue to be volatile. During the year 2023, the posted WTI price traded at an average of $77.58 per barrel (“Bbl”), as compared to the 2022 average of $94.90 per Bbl and the 2021 average of $68.13 per Bbl. During this three-year period, the WTI price fluctuated between a high of $123.64 per Bbl and a low of $47.47 per Bbl. If the prices of oil and natural gas remain or become more volatile, our operations, financial condition, cash flows and level of expenditures may be materially and adversely affected.

Current wording

Bbl and the 2022 average of $94.90 per Bbl. During this three-year period, the WTI price fluctuated between a high of $123.64 per Bbl and a low of $66.61 per Bbl. If the prices of oil and natural gas remain or become more volatile, our operations, financial condition, cash flows and level of expenditures may be materially and adversely affected.

Previous wording

Climate change continues to be the focus of political and societal attention. Numerous proposals have been made and are likely to be forthcoming on the international, national, regional, state and local levels to reduce GHG emissions. These efforts have included or may include cap-and-trade programs, carbon taxes, GHG reporting obligations and other regulatory programs that limit or require control of GHG’s from certain sources. Upon taking office, President Biden issued several Executive Orders relating climate change, envisioning a “government-wide approach” to climate policy. At the 26 th Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change held in October and November 2021, President Biden announced a commitment to significantly reduce GHG’s and transition the U.S. economy to net-zero carbon by 2050. At the 27th Conference of the Parties in 2022, President Biden reinforced these commitments and emphasized efforts to reduce methane emissions from the oil and gas sector. At the 28 th Conference of the Parties (the “COP28”) in 2023, the United States announced a new rule on requiring reductions in methane and other air pollutants from oil and natural gas industry. Programs addressing climate change may limit the ability to produce crude oil and natural gas, require stricter limits on the release of methane or other GHGs, increase reporting and/or other compliance obligations associated with GHG emissions, limit the ability to explore in new areas, limit the construction of pipelines and related equipment or may make it more expensive to produce, any of which may decrease the demand for our services and our revenues.

Current wording

Climate change continues to be the focus of political and societal attention. Numerous proposals have been made and are likely to be forthcoming on the international, national, regional, state and local levels to reduce GHG emissions. These efforts have included or may include cap-and-trade programs, carbon taxes, GHG reporting obligations and other regulatory programs that limit or require control of GHG’s from certain sources. Programs addressing climate change may limit the ability to produce crude oil and natural gas, require stricter limits on the release of methane or other GHGs, increase reporting and/or other compliance obligations associated with GHG emissions, limit the ability to explore in new areas, limit the construction of pipelines and related equipment or may make it more expensive to produce, any of which may decrease the demand for our services and our revenues.

Previous wording

Incentives to conserve energy or use alternative energy sources, which can be part of climate change programs, may increase the competitiveness of alternative energy sources (such as wind, solar, geothermal, tidal and biofuels) or increase the focus on reducing the use of combustion engines in transportation (such as governmental mandates that ban the sale of new gasoline-powered automobiles). At COP28, the parties adopted a statement calling for “transitioning away from fossil fuels” and an increased focus on renewable energy capacity and energy efficiency. These actions could, in turn, reduce demand for hydrocarbons and therefore for our services, which would lead to a reduction in our revenues. Additionally, on January 26, 2024, the Biden Administration announced a temporary pause on pending decisions regarding exports of liquified natural gas until the U.S. Department of Energy can update the underlying analyses for authorization.

Current wording

Incentives to conserve energy or use alternative energy sources, which can be part of climate change programs, may increase the competitiveness of alternative energy sources (such as wind, solar, geothermal, tidal and biofuels) or increase the focus on reducing the use of combustion engines in transportation (such as governmental mandates that ban the sale of new gasoline-powered automobiles). At various Conferences of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, the parties adopted a statement calling for “transitioning away from fossil fuels” and an increased focus on renewable energy capacity and energy efficiency. These actions could, in turn, reduce demand for hydrocarbons and therefore for our services, which would lead to a reduction in our revenues.

Previous wording

Furthermore, the SEC has announced proposed rules that, among other matters, will establish a framework for reporting climate related risks. To the extent that any proposed rules impose additional reporting obligations, we could face increased costs. Separately, the SEC has also announced that it is scrutinizing existing climate change related disclosure in public filings, increasing the potential for enforcement if the SEC were to allege our existing climate disclosures are misleading or deficient. Furthermore, in November 2022, the U.S. Department of Labor adopted final rules that allow plan fiduciaries to consider climate change and other ESG factors when they select retirement investments and exercise shareholder rights, such as proxy voting. Should plan investors decide to not invest in us based on ESG factors, our business and access to capital may be negatively impacted. In 2023, the State of California enacted legislation that will require large U.S. companies doing business in California to make broad-based climate-related disclosures starting as early as 2026, and other jurisdictions, domestically and internationally, are also considering various climate change disclosure requirements.

Current wording

In 2023, the State of California enacted legislation that will require large U.S. companies doing business in California to make broad-based climate-related disclosures starting as early as 2026, and other jurisdictions, domestically and internationally, are also considering various climate change disclosure requirements.

Previous wording

Trucking services can be adversely impacted by traffic congestion, shortage of drivers and weather delays which could hinder our service levels. During 2021 and into 2022 there was a shortage of available trucking services in the United States due to the industry not having enough qualified drivers, which impacted our field operations at times. In addition, our field employees are generally required to have a commercial driver’s license (“CDL”) so they can drive trucks and move our frac pumps and other equipment from location to location. Obtaining employees with CDLs can be challenging during times when the trucking industry has driver shortages, as competition for qualified employees is often more intense. If we are unable to obtain trucking services on a timely basis or the services of a sufficient number of field employees with CDLs, it could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Current wording

Trucking services can be adversely impacted by traffic congestion, shortage of drivers and weather delays which could hinder our service levels. We have experienced in the past, and we may experience in the future, a shortage of available trucking services in the United States due to the industry not having enough qualified drivers, which impacted our field operations at times. In addition, our field employees are generally required to have a commercial driver’s license (“CDL”) so they can drive trucks and move our frac pumps and other equipment from location to location. Obtaining employees with CDLs can be challenging during times when the trucking industry has driver shortages, as competition for qualified employees is often more intense. If we are unable to obtain trucking services on a timely basis or the services of a sufficient number of field employees with CDLs, it could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Previous wording

Laws and regulations protecting the environment generally have become more stringent in recent years and are expected to continue to do so, which could lead to material increases in costs for future environmental compliance and remediation. In particular, the ESA restricts activities that may result in a “take” of endangered or threatened species and provides for substantial penalties in cases where listed species are taken by being harmed. The dunes sagebrush lizard is one example of a species that, if listed as endangered or threatened under the ESA, could impact our operations and the operations of our customers. The dunes sagebrush lizard is found in the active and semi-stable shinnery oak dunes of southeastern New Mexico and adjacent portions of Texas, including areas where our customers operate and our frac sand facilities are located. The FWS is currently conducting a review to determine whether listing the dunes sagebrush lizard as endangered or threatened under the ESA is warranted. In July 2020, the FWS published a 90-day finding that a 2018 petition seeking that the dunes sagebrush lizard be listed as endangered or threatened presented substantial evidence indicating that listing may be warranted. In May 2022, an environmental group filed suit against the U.S. Department of the Interior and the FWS alleging that they have unlawfully delayed protection of the dunes sagebrush. In July 2023, the FWS proposed to list the dunes sagebrush lizard as endangered. If the dunes sagebrush lizard is listed as an endangered or threatened species, our operations and the operations of our customers in any area that is designated as the dunes sagebrush lizard’s habitat may be limited, delayed or, in some circumstances, prohibited, and we and our customers could be required to comply with expensive mitigation measures intended to protect the dunes sagebrush lizard and its habitat. Furthermore, new laws and regulations, amendment of existing laws and regulations, reinterpretation of legal requirements or increased governmental enforcement with respect to environmental matters could restrict, delay or curtail exploratory or developmental drilling for oil and natural gas by our customers and could limit our well servicing opportunities.

Current wording

Laws and regulations protecting the environment generally have become more stringent in recent years and are expected to continue to do so, which could lead to material increases in costs for future environmental compliance and remediation. In particular, the ESA restricts activities that may result in a “take” of endangered or threatened species and provides for substantial penalties in cases where listed species are taken by being harmed. The dunes sagebrush lizard is one example of a species that was recently listed as an endangered species. The State of Texas has filed suit challenging the listing. The dunes sagebrush lizard is found in the active and semi-stable shinnery oak dunes of southeastern New Mexico and adjacent portions of Texas, including areas where our customers operate and our frac sand facilities are located. The listing of the dunes sagebrush lizard as an endangered species, may impact our operations and the operations of our customers in any area that is designated as the dunes sagebrush lizard’s habitat. Depending on the locations of our operations, we and our customers may be required to comply with expensive mitigation measures intended to protect the dunes sagebrush lizard and its habitat. If the U.S. Department of the Interior and Fish and Wildlife Service lists additional species as endangered or protected, it could negatively impact our business activities or the business activities of our customers which could subsequently impact demand for our services and thereafter our revenue. Furthermore, new laws and regulations, amendment of existing laws and regulations, reinterpretation of legal requirements or increased governmental enforcement with respect to environmental matters could restrict, delay or curtail exploratory or developmental drilling for oil and natural gas by our customers and could limit our well servicing opportunities.

Previous wording

OPEC+ is an intergovernmental organization that seeks to manage the price and supply of oil on the global energy market. Actions taken by OPEC+ members, including those taken alongside other oil exporting nations, have a significant impact on global oil supply and pricing. For example, OPEC+ and certain other oil exporting nations have previously agreed to take measures, including production cuts, to support crude oil prices. In 2020, largely as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, oil prices decreased dramatically, and OPEC+ agreed to historic production cuts in an effort to support prices. Conversely, sanctions imposed on Russia as a result of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2022 increased prices. In October 2022, OPEC+ again determined to reduce production of oil, by approximately 2 million barrels per day. At its meeting on December 4, 2022, OPEC+ agreed to keep its current policy unchanged as the oil markets struggle to assess the impact of a slowing Chinese economy on demand, and the Group of Seven Nations agreed on a price cap on Russian oil supply. In June 2023, OPEC+ members announced they would extend crude oil production cuts through 2024, limiting global crude oil supplies. In November 2023, OPEC+ agreed to cut production by an additional 1 million barrels per day beginning in January 2024.

Current wording

OPEC+ is an intergovernmental organization that seeks to manage the price and supply of oil on the global energy market. Actions taken by OPEC+ members, including those taken alongside other oil exporting nations, have a significant impact on global oil supply and pricing. For example, OPEC+ and certain other oil exporting nations have previously agreed to take measures, including production cuts, to support crude oil prices. In 2020, largely as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, oil prices decreased dramatically, and OPEC+ agreed to historic production cuts in an effort to support prices. Conversely, sanctions imposed on Russia as a result of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2022 increased prices. In October 2022, OPEC+ again determined to reduce production of oil, by approximately 2 million barrels per day. At its meeting on December 4, 2022, OPEC+ agreed to keep its current policy unchanged as the oil markets struggle to assess the impact of a slowing Chinese economy on demand, and the Group of Seven Nations agreed on a price cap on Russian oil supply. In June 2023, OPEC+ members announced they would extend crude oil production cuts through 2024, limiting global crude oil supplies. In November 2023, OPEC+ agreed to cut production by an additional 1 million barrels per day beginning in January 2024. In December 2024, OPEC+ agreed to delay the beginning of output rises and extended the full unwinding of previous production cuts until the end of 2026.

Previous wording

Our top five customers represented approximately 34%, 30%, and 27%, of our consolidated revenue for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021, respectively. It is possible that we will derive a significant portion of our revenue from a concentrated group of customers in the future. If a major customer fails to pay us, revenue would be impacted and our operating results and financial condition could be materially harmed. Additionally, if we were to lose any material customer or our customers were to consolidate or merge with other operators, we may not be able to redeploy our equipment at similar utilization or pricing levels or within a short period of time and such loss could have a material adverse effect on our business until the equipment is redeployed at similar utilization or pricing levels.

Current wording

Our top five customers represented approximately 43%, 34%, and 30%, of our consolidated revenue for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023, and 2022, respectively. It is possible that we will derive a significant portion of our revenue from a concentrated group of customers in the future. If a major customer fails to pay us, revenue would be impacted, and our operating results and financial condition could be materially harmed. Additionally, if we were to lose any material customer or our customers were to consolidate or merge with other operators, we may not be able to redeploy our equipment at similar utilization or pricing levels or within a short period of time and such loss could have a material adverse effect on our business until the equipment is redeployed at similar utilization or pricing levels.

Previous wording

We have established relationships with certain suppliers of our materials (such as, but not limited to, proppant and chemical additives) and other parts, supplies and items needed for our operations. Delays or shortages in materials can result from a variety of reasons, including those caused by weather and natural disasters. Presently, the United States is undergoing a supply chain disruption due to backlogged ports and trucking shortages, and our business is not immune from these effects. Even once the root cause of the supply chain disruption or any future shortage or delay has passed, it can take time for our supply chain to recover and run in a regular fashion. Should the nationwide supply chain disruption continue, or should any of our current suppliers be unable to provide the necessary materials or otherwise fail to deliver the materials in a timely manner and in the quantities required, any resulting delays in the provision of services could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Additionally, increasing costs of such materials may negatively impact demand for our services or the profitability of our business operations. In the past, our industry faced sporadic proppant shortages associated with hydraulic fracturing operations requiring work stoppages, which are believed to have adversely impacted the operating results of several competitors. We may not be able to mitigate any future shortages of materials, including proppant, or the impact of supply chain disruptions. Furthermore, to the extent our contracts require us to purchase more materials, including proppant, than we ultimately require, we may be forced to pay for the excess amount under “take or pay” contract provisions.

Current wording

We have established relationships with certain suppliers of our materials (such as, but not limited to, proppant and chemical additives) and other parts, supplies and items needed for our operations. Delays or shortages in materials can result from a variety of reasons, including those caused by weather and natural disasters. Historically, the United States has undergone supply chain disruptions due to backlogged ports and trucking shortages, and our business is not immune from these effects. Even once the root cause of the supply chain disruption or any future shortage or delay has passed, it can take time for our supply chain to recover and run in a regular fashion. Should the nationwide supply chain disruption continue, or should any of our current suppliers be unable to provide the necessary materials or otherwise fail to deliver the materials in a timely manner and in the quantities required, any resulting delays in the provision of services could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Additionally, increasing costs of such materials may negatively impact demand for our services or the profitability of our business operations. In the past, our industry faced sporadic proppant shortages associated with hydraulic fracturing operations requiring work stoppages, which are believed to have adversely impacted the operating results of several competitors. We may not be able to mitigate any future shortages of materials, including proppant, or the impact of supply chain disruptions. Furthermore, to the extent our contracts require us to purchase more materials, including proppant, than we ultimately require, we may be forced to pay for the excess amount under “take or pay” contract provisions.

Previous wording

Effective January 23, 2023, using proceeds from borrowings on our ABL Facility (as defined herein), we repaid all amounts outstanding under the Term Loan Facility (as defined herein). As of February 5, 2024, the Company had $159.0 million outstanding under our ABL Facility, in addition to letters of credit in the amount of $7.4 million, with $235.1 million of remaining availability. Please see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

Current wording

Effective January 23, 2023, using proceeds from borrowings on our ABL Facility (as defined herein), we repaid all amounts outstanding under the Term Loan Facility (as defined herein). As of February 3, 2025, the Company had $261.0 million outstanding under our ABL Facility, in addition to letters of credit in the amount of $14.0 million, with $93.0 million of remaining availability. Please see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

Previous wording

Our operations are located in different regions of the United States and Canada. Some of these areas, including the DJ Basin, Powder River Basin, Williston Basin and our Canadian operations, are adversely affected by seasonal weather conditions, primarily in the winter and spring. However, as evidenced by the severe winter weather experienced in the southern United States and Canada during December 2022, weather-related hazards can exist in almost all the areas where we operate. During periods of heavy snow, ice or rain, we may be unable to move our equipment between locations or obtain adequate supplies of raw material or fuel, thereby reducing our ability to provide services and generate revenues. The exploration activities of our customers may also be affected during such periods of adverse weather conditions. Additionally, extended drought conditions in our operating regions could impact our ability or our customers’ ability to source sufficient water or increase the cost for such water. As a result, a natural disaster or inclement weather conditions could severely disrupt the normal operation of our business and adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, if the area in which we operate or the market demand for oil and natural gas is affected by a public health crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, or other similar catastrophic event outside of our control, our business and results of operations could be adversely impacted.

Current wording

Our operations are located in different regions of the United States and Canada. Some of these areas, including the DJ Basin, Powder River Basin, Williston Basin and our Canadian operations, are adversely affected by seasonal weather conditions, primarily in the winter and spring. Weather-related hazards exist in almost all the areas where we operate. During periods of heavy snow, ice or rain, we may be unable to move our equipment between locations or obtain adequate supplies of raw material or fuel, thereby reducing our ability to provide services and generate revenues. The exploration activities of our customers may also be affected during such periods of adverse weather conditions. Additionally, extended drought conditions in our operating regions could impact our ability or our customers’ ability to source sufficient water or increase the cost for such water. As a result, a natural disaster or inclement weather conditions could severely disrupt the normal operation of our business and adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, if the area in which we operate or the market demand for oil and natural gas is affected by a public health crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, or other similar catastrophic event outside of our control, our business and results of operations could be adversely impacted.

Previous wording

In February of 2022, Russian military forces invaded Ukraine, resulting in conflict and disruption in the region. The length, impact and outcome of the ongoing military conflict in Ukraine is highly unpredictable. This conflict has led and may continue to lead to significant market and other disruptions, including significant volatility in commodity prices and supply of energy resources, instability in financial markets, higher inflation, supply chain interruptions, political and social instability, changes in consumer or purchaser preferences as well as increase in cyberattacks and espionage. As a result of the invasion and ongoing military conflict, governments in the European Union, the United States, the United Kingdom, Switzerland and other countries have implemented and may implement additional sanctions, export controls or other measures against Russia, Belarus and other countries, regions, officials, individuals or industries in the respective territories. Such sanctions, and other measures, as well as the existing and potential further responses from Russia or other countries to such sanctions, supply chain disruptions, tensions and military actions, could adversely affect the global economy and financial markets and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, and could also aggravate the other risk factors that we identify herein.

Current wording

The global economy has been negatively impacted by geopolitical conflicts, such as the continuing military conflict between Russia and Ukraine and the conflict between Israel and Hamas, which has resulted in instability in the Middle East. Such conflicts have led and may continue to lead to significant market and other disruptions, including significant volatility in commodity prices and supply of energy resources, instability in financial markets, higher inflation, supply chain interruptions, political and social instability, changes in consumer or purchaser preferences as well as increase in cyberattacks and espionage. As a result of the invasion and ongoing military conflict in Ukraine, governments in the European Union, the United States, the United Kingdom, Switzerland and other countries have implemented and may implement additional sanctions, export controls or other measures against Russia, Belarus and other countries, regions, officials, individuals or industries in the respective territories. Such sanctions, and other measures, as well as the existing and potential further responses from Russia or other countries to such sanctions, supply chain disruptions, tensions and military actions, could adversely affect the global economy and financial markets and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, and could also aggravate the other risk factors that we identify herein.