XML 25 R13.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.8.0.1
Contingencies and Commitments (Notes)
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Contingencies
Contingencies
Litigation and Regulatory Proceedings
The Company is involved in a number of litigation and regulatory proceedings including those described below. Many of these proceedings are in early stages, and many of them seek or may seek damages and penalties, the amount of which is indeterminate. We estimate and provide for potential losses that may arise out of litigation and regulatory proceedings to the extent that such losses are probable and can be reasonably estimated. Significant judgment is required in making these estimates and our final liabilities may ultimately be materially different. Our total accrued liability in respect of litigation and regulatory proceedings is determined on a case-by-case basis and represents an estimate of probable losses after considering, among other factors, the progress of each case or proceeding, our experience and the experience of others in similar cases or proceedings, and the opinions and views of legal counsel. We account for legal defense costs in the period the costs are incurred.
Regulatory and Related Proceedings. The Company has received DOJ, U.S. Postal Service and state subpoenas seeking information on the Company’s royalty payment practices. On September 19, 2017, the DOJ informed Chesapeake that it had concluded its investigation with no action taken on these matters and matters related to the purchase and lease of oil and natural gas rights. Chesapeake has engaged in discussions with the U.S. Postal Service and state agency representatives and continues to respond to related subpoenas and demands.
On July 10, 2017, Chesapeake, its Benefits Committee, its Investment Committee and certain employees were named as defendants in a purported Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) class action filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma (the “ERISA Lawsuit”). The ERISA Lawsuit alleges violations of Sections 404, 405, 409 and 502 of ERISA with respect to the Company’s common stock held in its Savings and Incentive Stock Bonus Plan (the “Plan”). The lawsuit was dismissed on August 8, 2017.
Business Operations. Chesapeake is involved in various other lawsuits and disputes incidental to its business operations, including commercial disputes, personal injury claims, royalty claims, property damage claims and contract actions.
Regarding royalty claims, Chesapeake and other natural gas producers have been named in various lawsuits alleging royalty underpayment. The suits against us allege, among other things, that we used below-market prices, made improper deductions, used improper measurement techniques and/or entered into arrangements with affiliates that resulted in underpayment of royalties in connection with the production and sale of natural gas and NGL. Plaintiffs have varying royalty provisions in their respective leases, oil and gas law varies from state to state, and royalty owners and producers differ in their interpretation of the legal effect of lease provisions governing royalty calculations. The Company has resolved a number of these claims through negotiated settlements of past and future royalties and has prevailed in various other lawsuits. We are currently defending lawsuits seeking damages with respect to underpayment of royalties in various states, including, but not limited to, Texas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Louisiana and Arkansas. These lawsuits include cases filed by individual royalty owners and putative class actions, some of which seek to certify a statewide class.
Chesapeake is defending numerous lawsuits filed by individual royalty owners alleging royalty underpayment with respect to properties in Texas. These lawsuits, organized for pre-trial proceedings with respect to the Barnett Shale and Eagle Ford Shale, respectively, generally allege that Chesapeake underpaid royalties by making improper deductions, using incorrect production volumes and similar theories. Chesapeake expects that additional lawsuits will continue to be pursued and that new plaintiffs will file other lawsuits making similar allegations.
On December 9, 2015, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, by the Office of Attorney General, filed a lawsuit in the Bradford County Court of Common Pleas related to royalty underpayment and lease acquisition and accounting practices with respect to properties in Pennsylvania. The lawsuit, which primarily relates to the Marcellus Shale and Utica Shale, alleges that Chesapeake violated the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law (UTPCPL) by making improper deductions and entering into arrangements with affiliates that resulted in underpayment of royalties. The lawsuit includes other UTPCPL claims and antitrust claims, including that a joint exploration agreement to which Chesapeake is a party established unlawful market allocation for the acquisition of leases. The lawsuit seeks statutory restitution, civil penalties and costs, as well as temporary injunction from exploration and drilling activities in Pennsylvania until restitution, penalties and costs have been paid and a permanent injunction from further violations of the UTPCPL.
Putative statewide class actions in Pennsylvania and Ohio and purported class arbitrations in Pennsylvania have been filed on behalf of royalty owners asserting various claims for damages related to alleged underpayment of royalties as a result of the Company’s divestiture of substantially all of its midstream business and most of its gathering assets in 2012 and 2013. These cases include claims for violation of and conspiracy to violate the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and for an unlawful market allocation agreement for mineral rights. One of the cases includes claims of intentional interference with contractual relations and violations of antitrust laws related to purported markets for gas mineral rights, operating rights and gas gathering sources.
We believe losses are reasonably possible in certain of the pending royalty cases for which we have not accrued a loss contingency, but we are currently unable to estimate an amount or range of loss or the impact the actions could have on our future results of operations or cash flows. Uncertainties in pending royalty cases generally include the complex nature of the claims and defenses, the potential size of the class in class actions, the scope and types of the properties and agreements involved, and the applicable production years.
The Company is also defending lawsuits alleging various violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act and state antitrust laws. In 2016, putative class action lawsuits were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma and in Oklahoma state courts, and an individual lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court of Kansas, in each case against the Company and other defendants. The lawsuits generally allege that, since 2007 and continuing through April 2013, the defendants conspired to rig bids and depress the market for the purchases of oil and natural gas leasehold interests and properties in the Anadarko Basin containing producing oil and natural gas wells. The lawsuits seek damages, attorney’s fees, costs and interest, as well as enjoinment from adopting practices or plans that would restrain competition in a similar manner as alleged in the lawsuits.
Other Matters
Based on management’s current assessment, we are of the opinion that no pending or threatened lawsuit or dispute relating to the Company’s business operations is likely to have a material adverse effect on its future consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. The final resolution of such matters could exceed amounts accrued, however, and actual results could differ materially from management’s estimates.
Environmental Contingencies
The nature of the oil and gas business carries with it certain environmental risks for Chesapeake and its subsidiaries. Chesapeake has implemented various policies, programs, procedures, training and audits to reduce and mitigate such environmental risks. Chesapeake conducts periodic reviews, on a company-wide basis, to assess changes in our environmental risk profile. Environmental reserves are established for environmental liabilities for which economic losses are probable and reasonably estimable. We manage our exposure to environmental liabilities in acquisitions by using an evaluation process that seeks to identify pre-existing contamination or compliance concerns and address the potential liability. Depending on the extent of an identified environmental concern, Chesapeake may, among other things, exclude a property from the transaction, require the seller to remediate the property to our satisfaction in an acquisition or agree to assume liability for the remediation of the property
Commitments
Commitments
Gathering, Processing and Transportation Agreements
We have contractual commitments with midstream service companies and pipeline carriers for future gathering, processing and transportation of oil, natural gas and NGL to move certain of our production to market. Working interest owners and royalty interest owners, where appropriate, will be responsible for their proportionate share of these costs. Commitments related to gathering, processing and transportation agreements are not recorded as obligations in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.
The aggregate undiscounted commitments under our gathering, processing and transportation agreements, excluding any reimbursement from working interest and royalty interest owners, credits for third-party volumes or future costs under cost-of-service agreements, are presented below.
 
 
September 30,
2017
 
 
($ in millions)
2017
 
$
331

2018
 
1,096

2019
 
1,062

2020
 
990

2021
 
894

2022 – 2035
 
5,214

Total
 
$
9,587


In addition, we have entered into long-term agreements for certain natural gas gathering and related services within specified acreage dedication areas in exchange for cost-of-service based fees redetermined annually, or tiered fees based on volumes delivered relative to scheduled volumes. Future gathering fees may vary with the applicable agreement.
Drilling Contracts
We have contracts with various drilling contractors to utilize drilling services at market-based pricing. These commitments are not recorded as obligations in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets. As of September 30, 2017, the aggregate undiscounted minimum future payments under these drilling service commitments were approximately $31 million.
Oil, Natural Gas and NGL Purchase Commitments
We commit to purchase oil, natural gas and NGL from other owners in the properties we operate, including owners associated with our remaining volumetric production payment (VPP) transaction. Production purchases under these arrangements are based on market prices at the time of production, and the purchased oil, natural gas and NGL are resold at market prices. See Volumetric Production Payments in Note 9 for further discussion of our VPP transactions.
Net Acreage Maintenance Commitments
Under the terms of our Utica Shale joint venture agreements with Total S.A., we are obligated to extend, renew or replace certain expiring joint leasehold, at our cost, to ensure that the net acreage maintenance level is met as of the December 31, 2017 measurement date.
Other Commitments
As part of our normal course of business, we enter into various agreements providing, or otherwise arranging for, financial or performance assurances to third parties on behalf of our wholly owned guarantor subsidiaries. These agreements may include future payment obligations or commitments regarding operational performance that effectively guarantee our subsidiaries’ future performance.
In connection with acquisitions and divestitures, our purchase and sale agreements generally provide indemnification to the counterparty for liabilities incurred as a result of a breach of a representation or warranty by the indemnifying party and/or other specified matters. These indemnifications generally have a discrete term and are intended to protect the parties against risks that are difficult to predict or cannot be quantified at the time of entering into or consummating a particular transaction. For divestitures of oil and natural gas properties, our purchase and sale agreements may require the return of a portion of the proceeds we receive as a result of uncured title or environmental defects.
Certain of our oil and natural gas properties are burdened by non-operating interests, such as royalty and overriding royalty interests, including overriding royalty interests sold through our VPP transactions. As the holder of the working interest from which these interests have been created, we have the responsibility to bear the cost of developing and producing the reserves attributable to these interests. See Volumetric Production Payments in Note 9 for further discussion of our VPP transactions.
While executing our strategic priorities, we have incurred certain cash charges, including contract termination charges, financing extinguishment costs and charges for unused natural gas transportation and gathering capacity. As we continue to focus on our strategic priorities, we may take certain actions that reduce financial leverage and complexity, and we may incur additional cash and noncash charges.