NOTE 6 — CONTINGENCIES

Appeal with the Office of Natural Resources Revenue

In 2009, the Company recognized allowable reductions of cash payments for royalties owed to the Office of Natural Resources Revenue (the “ONRR”) for transportation of its deepwater production through subsea pipeline systems owned by the Company. In 2010, the ONRR audited calculations and support related to this usage fee, and ONRR notified the Company that they had disallowed approximately $4.7 million of the reductions taken. As of September 30, 2024, the Company has accrued $5.0 million related to this matter, consisting of $4.7 million for the disallowed reductions and $0.3 million for estimated penalties. The Company disagrees with the position taken by the ONRR and filed an appeal with the ONRR.

The Company has continued to pursue its legal rights and, at present, the case is in front of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana where both parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment and opposition briefs. The Company has filed a Reply in support of its Motion for Summary Judgment, and the government has in turn filed its Reply brief. With briefing now completed, the Company is waiting for the district court’s ruling on the merits.

ONRR Audit of Historical Refund Claims

In 2023, the Company received notification from the ONRR regarding results of an audit performed on the Company’s historical refund claims taken on various properties for alleged royalties owed to the ONRR. The review process is ongoing, and the Company does not believe any accrual is necessary at this time.

Bonding Disputes

On August 14, 2024, the Company filed a complaint seeking declaratory relief (the “Complaint”) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against Endurance Assurance Corporation and Lexon Insurance Company (the “Sompo Sureties”), providers of government-required surety bonds that secure decommissioning obligations the Company may have with respect to certain oil and gas assets of the Company. As described in the Complaint, the Company has paid all premiums associated with the bonds issued by the Sompo Sureties prior to the Complaint and has not suffered a material change to its financial status. Notwithstanding, the Sompo Sureties have issued written demands to the Company requesting the Company provide certain collateral to the Sompo Sureties, which are inconsistent with the requests of other surety entities who are not party to the Complaint. On October 9, 2024, the Sompo Sureties filed an answer and counterclaim alleging breach of contract due to the Company’s failure to provide the collateral demanded by the Sompo Sureties. The Sompo Sureties have issued approximately $55.0 million in surety bonds on behalf of the Company and have requested $7.5 million in cash collateral.

On October 21, 2024, a separate surety entity, U.S. Specialty Insurance Company (“USSIC”) filed a petition in the District Court of Harris County, Texas, alleging, among other things, breach of the indemnity agreement between the Company and USSIC and seeking to compel the Company to provide the collateral demanded by USSIC. On October 25, 2024, the Company filed a notice of removal with the District Court of Harris County, Texas, seeking to remove the case to U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas as a result of the existing Complaint. USSIC has issued approximately $111.0 million in surety bonds on behalf of the Company and has requested $23.0 million in cash collateral.

In each of the above cases, the Company believes that compliance with the collateral demands of the applicable surety entity would be contrary to the demands of other entities that provide government-required surety bonds to the Company. In addition, the Company believes compliance with these collateral demands could prompt escalating collateral requirements. As a result of the foregoing litigation, the Company may be required to provide the collateral demanded by the surety entities, or the Company may be required to or choose to replace the surety bonds provided by the applicable surety with surety bonds from different surety entities. The Company is seeking to negotiate a reasonable resolution with respect to collateral provision amongst the surety entities and other surety entities with conflicting or different collateral requests.

To the extent that the Company is required to fulfil the collateral demands made by the surety entities, or in the event that other surety entities make additional collateral demands, the fulfilment of such demands could be significant and could impact the Company’s liquidity. Please see Part I, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Known Trends and Uncertainties – Surety Bond Collateral of the 2023 Annual Report for additional information.

Contingent Decommissioning Obligations

The Company may be subject to retained liabilities with respect to certain divested property interests by operation of law. Certain counterparties in past divestiture transactions or third parties in existing leases that have filed for bankruptcy protection or undergone associated reorganizations may not be able to perform required abandonment obligations. Due to operation of law, the Company may be required to assume decommissioning obligations for those interests. The Company may be held jointly and severally liable for the decommissioning of various facilities and related wells. The Company no longer owns these assets, nor are they related to current operations.

During the nine months ended September 30, 2024, the Company incurred $12.6 million in costs related to these decommissioning obligations and reassessed the existing decommissioning obligations, recording an additional $23.7 million. As of September 30, 2024, the remaining loss contingency recorded related to the anticipated decommissioning obligations was $29.1 million.

Although it is reasonably possible that the Company could receive state or federal decommissioning orders in the future or be notified of defaulting third parties in existing leases, the Company cannot predict with certainty, if, how or when such orders or notices will be resolved or estimate a possible loss or range of loss that may result from such orders. However, the Company could incur judgments, enter into settlements or revise the Company’s opinion regarding the outcome of certain notices or matters, and such developments could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations in the period in which the amounts are accrued and the Company’s cash flows in the period in which the amounts are paid. To the extent the Company does incur costs associated with these properties in future periods, the Company intends to seek contribution from other parties that owned an interest in the facilities.

Other Claims

In the ordinary course of business, the Company is a party to various pending or threatened claims and complaints seeking damages or other remedies concerning commercial operations and other matters. In addition, claims or contingencies may arise related to matters occurring prior to the Company’s acquisition of properties or related to matters occurring subsequent to the Company’s sale of properties. In certain cases, the Company has indemnified the sellers of properties acquired, and in other cases, has indemnified the buyers of properties sold. The Company is also subject to federal and state administrative proceedings conducted in the ordinary course of business including matters related to alleged royalty underpayments on certain federal-owned properties. Although the Company can give no assurance about the outcome of pending legal and federal or state administrative proceedings and the effect such an outcome may have, the Company believes that any ultimate liability resulting from the outcome of such proceedings, to the extent not otherwise provided for or covered by insurance, will not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity of the Company.