XML 80 R21.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT  v2.3.0.11
Fair Value Measurements
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2010
Fair Value Measurements [Abstract]  
Fair Value Measurements
Note 14. Fair Value Measurements
     Fair value is the amount received to sell an asset or the amount paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants (an exit price) at the measurement date. Fair value is a market-based measurement considered from the perspective of a market participant. We use market data or assumptions that we believe market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated, or unobservable. We apply both market and income approaches for recurring fair value measurements using the best available information while utilizing valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs.
     The fair value hierarchy prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value, giving the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). We classify fair value balances based on the observability of those inputs. The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are as follows:
    Level 1 — Quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that we have the ability to access. Active markets are those in which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to provide pricing information on an ongoing basis. Our Level 1 measurements primarily consist of financial instruments that are exchange traded.
    Level 2 — Inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets included in Level 1, that are either directly or indirectly observable. These inputs are either directly observable in the marketplace or indirectly observable through corroboration with market data for substantially the full contractual term of the asset or liability being measured. Our Level 2 measurements primarily consist of over-the-counter (OTC) instruments such as forwards, swaps, and options.
 
    Level 3 — Inputs that are not observable or for which there is little, if any, market activity for the asset or liability being measured. These inputs reflect management’s best estimate of the assumptions market participants would use in determining fair value. Our Level 3 measurements consist of instruments that are valued utilizing unobservable pricing inputs that are significant to the overall fair value.
     In valuing certain contracts, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. For disclosure purposes, assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety in the fair value hierarchy level based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the overall fair value measurement. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment and may affect the placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.
     The following table presents, by level within the fair value hierarchy, our assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis.
                                                                 
    December 31, 2010     December 31, 2009  
    Level 1     Level 2     Level 3     Total     Level 1     Level 2     Level 3     Total  
            (Millions)                     (Millions)          
Assets:
                                                               
Energy derivatives
  $ 96     $ 475     $ 2     $ 573     $ 178     $ 911     $ 5     $ 1,094  
ARO Trust Investments (see Note 15)
    40                   40       22                   22  
 
                                               
Total assets
  $ 136     $ 475     $ 2     $ 613     $ 200     $ 911     $ 5     $ 1,116  
 
                                               
Liabilities:
                                                               
Energy derivatives
  $ 78     $ 210     $ 1     $ 289     $ 177     $ 826     $ 3     $ 1,006  
 
                                               
Total liabilities
  $ 78     $ 210     $ 1     $ 289     $ 177     $ 826     $ 3     $ 1,006  
 
                                               
     Energy derivatives include commodity based exchange-traded contracts and OTC contracts. Exchange-traded contracts include futures, swaps, and options. OTC contracts include forwards, swaps and options.
     Many contracts have bid and ask prices that can be observed in the market. Our policy is to use a mid-market pricing (the mid-point price between bid and ask prices) convention to value individual positions and then adjust on a portfolio level to a point within the bid and ask range that represents our best estimate of fair value. For offsetting positions by location, the mid-market price is used to measure both the long and short positions.
     The determination of fair value for our energy derivative assets and liabilities also incorporates the time value of money and various credit risk factors which can include the credit standing of the counterparties involved, master netting arrangements, the impact of credit enhancements (such as cash collateral posted and letters of credit) and our nonperformance risk on our liabilities. The determination of the fair value of our liabilities does not consider noncash collateral credit enhancements.
     Exchange-traded contracts include New York Mercantile Exchange and Intercontinental Exchange contracts and are valued based on quoted prices in these active markets and are classified within Level 1.
     Forward, swap, and option contracts included in Level 2 are valued using an income approach including present value techniques and option pricing models. Option contracts, which hedge future sales of production from our Exploration & Production segment, are structured as costless collars and are financially settled. They are valued using an industry standard Black-Scholes option pricing model. Significant inputs into our Level 2 valuations include commodity prices, implied volatility by location, and interest rates, as well as considering executed transactions or broker quotes corroborated by other market data. These broker quotes are based on observable market prices at which transactions could currently be executed. In certain instances where these inputs are not observable for all periods, relationships of observable market data and historical observations are used as a means to estimate fair value. Where observable inputs are available for substantially the full term of the asset or liability, the instrument is categorized in Level 2.
     Our energy derivatives portfolio is largely comprised of exchange-traded products or like products and the tenure of our derivatives portfolio is relatively short with more than 99 percent of the value of our derivatives portfolio expiring in the next 24 months. Due to the nature of the products and tenure, we are consistently able to obtain market pricing. All pricing is reviewed on a daily basis and is formally validated with broker quotes and documented on a monthly basis.
     Certain instruments trade with lower availability of pricing information. These instruments are valued with a present value technique using inputs that may not be readily observable or corroborated by other market data. These instruments are classified within Level 3 when these inputs have a significant impact on the measurement of fair value. The instruments included in Level 3 at December 31, 2010, consist primarily of natural gas index transactions that are used to manage the physical requirements of our Exploration & Production segment.
     Reclassifications of fair value between Level 1, Level 2, and Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy, if applicable, are made at the end of each quarter. No significant transfers in or out of Level 1 and Level 2 occurred during the year ended December 31, 2010. In 2009, certain Exploration & Production options which hedge future sales of production were transferred from Level 3 to Level 2. These options were originally included in Level 3 because a significant input to the model, implied volatility by location, was considered unobservable. Due to increased transparency, this input was considered observable, and we transferred these options to Level 2.
     The following tables present a reconciliation of changes in the fair value of our net energy derivatives and other assets classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
Level 3 Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs
                                         
    Years Ended December 31,  
    2010     2009     2008  
    Net Energy     Net Energy     Other     Net Energy     Other  
    Derivatives     Derivatives     Assets     Derivatives     Assets  
    (Millions)  
Beginning balance
  $ 2     $ 507     $ 7     $ (14 )   $ 10  
Realized and unrealized gains (losses):
                                       
Included in income (loss) from continuing operations
    3       476             88       (3 )
Included in other comprehensive income (loss)
    2       (331 )           486        
Purchases, issuances, and settlements
    (6 )     (477 )     (7 )     (51 )      
Transfers into Level 3
                      3        
Transfers out of Level 3
          (173 )           (5 )      
 
                             
Ending balance
  $ 1     $ 2     $     $ 507     $ 7  
 
                             
Unrealized gains (losses) included in income (loss) from continuing operations relating to instruments still held at December 31
  $     $ 2     $     $     $  
 
                             
     Realized and unrealized gains (losses) included in income (loss) from continuing operations for the above periods are reported in revenues in our Consolidated Statement of Operations.
     The following table presents impairments associated with certain assets that have been measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.
                 
    Total  
    Losses For The  
    Years Ended  
    December 31,  
    2010     2009  
    (Millions)  
Impairments:
               
Goodwill — Exploration & Production (see Note 4)
  $ 1,003 (a)   $  
Producing properties and acquired unproved reserves — Exploration & Production (see Note 4)
    678 (b)     15 (c)
Certain gathering assets — Williams Partners (see Note 4)
    9 (d)      
Venezuelan property — Discontinued Operations (see Note 2)
          211 (e)
Investment in Accroven — Other (see Note 3)
          75 (f)
Cost-based investment — Exploration & Production (see Note 3)
          11 (g)
 
           
 
  $ 1,690     $ 312  
 
           
 
(a)   Due to a significant decline in forward natural gas prices across all future production periods as of September 30, 2010, we performed an interim impairment assessment of the approximate $1 billion of goodwill at Exploration & Production related to its domestic natural gas production operations (the reporting unit). Forward natural gas prices through 2025 as of September 30, 2010, used in our analysis declined more than 22 percent on average compared to the forward prices as of December 31, 2009. We estimated the fair value of the reporting unit on a stand-alone basis by valuing proved and unproved reserves, as well as estimating the fair values of other assets and liabilities which are identified to the reporting unit. We used an income approach (discounted cash flow) for valuing reserves. The significant inputs into the valuation of proved and unproved reserves included reserve quantities, forward natural gas prices, anticipated drilling and operating costs, anticipated production curves, income taxes, and appropriate discount rates. To estimate the fair value of the reporting unit and the implied fair value of goodwill under a hypothetical acquisition of the reporting unit, we assumed a tax structure where a buyer would obtain a step-up in the tax basis of the net assets acquired. Significant assumptions in valuing proved reserves included reserves quantities of more than 4.4 trillion cubic feet of gas equivalent; forward prices averaging approximately $4.65 per thousand cubic feet of gas equivalent (Mcfe) for natural gas (adjusted for locational differences), natural gas liquids and oil; and an after-tax discount rate of 11 percent. Unproved reserves (probable and possible) were valued using similar assumptions adjusted further for the uncertainty associated with these reserves by using after- tax discount rates of 13 percent and 15 percent, respectively, commensurate with our estimate of the risk of those reserves. In our assessment as of September 30, 2010, the carrying value of the reporting unit, including goodwill, exceeded its estimated fair value. We then determined that the implied fair value of the goodwill was zero. As a result of our analysis, we recognized a full $1 billion impairment charge related to this goodwill.
 
(b)   As of September 30, 2010, we assessed the carrying value of Exploration & Production’s natural gas-producing properties and costs of acquired unproved reserves, for impairments as a result of recent significant declines in forward natural gas prices. Our assessment utilized estimates of future cash flows. Significant judgments and assumptions in these assessments are similar to those used in the goodwill evaluation and include estimates of natural gas reserve quantities, estimates of future natural gas prices using a forward NYMEX curve adjusted for locational basis differentials, drilling plans, expected capital costs, and an applicable discount rate commensurate with risk of the underlying cash flow estimates. The assessment performed at September 30, 2010, identified certain properties with a carrying value in excess of their calculated fair values. As a result, we recorded a $678 million impairment charge in third-quarter 2010 as further described below. Fair value measured for these properties at September 30, 2010, was estimated to be approximately $320 million.
    $503 million of the impairment charge related to natural gas-producing properties in the Barnett Shale. Significant assumptions in valuing these properties included proved reserves quantities of more than 227 billion cubic feet of gas equivalent, forward weighted average prices averaging approximately $4.67 per Mcfe for natural gas (adjusted for locational differences), natural gas liquids and oil, and an after-tax discount rate of 11 percent.
    $175 million of the impairment charge related to acquired          unproved reserves in the Piceance Highlands acquired in 2008. Significant assumptions in valuing these unproved reserves included evaluation of probable and possible reserves quantities, drilling plans, forward natural gas (adjusted for locational differences) and natural gas liquids prices, and an after-tax discount rate of 13 percent.
 
(c)   Fair value measured at December 31, 2009, was $22 million.
 
(d)   Fair value measured at December 31, 2010, was $3 million.
 
(e)   Fair value measured at March 31, 2009, was $106 million. This value was based on our estimates of probability-weighted discounted cash flows that considered (1) the continued operation of the assets considering different scenarios of outcome, (2) the purchase of the assets by PDVSA, (3) the results of arbitration with varying degrees of award and collection, and (4) an after-tax discount rate of 20 percent.
 
(f)   Fair value measured at March 31, 2009, was zero. This value was determined based on a probability-weighted discounted cash flow analysis that considered the deteriorating circumstances in Venezuela.
 
(g)   Fair value measured at March 31, 2009, was zero. This value was based on an other-than-temporary decline in the value of our investment considering the deteriorating financial condition of a Venezuelan corporation in which Exploration & Production has a 4 percent interest.