Coterra Energy (CTRA) 10-K2019 FY Annual report

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20549

The aggregate market value of Common Stock, par value $.10 per share ("Common Stock"), held by non-affiliates as of the last business day of registrant's most recently completed second fiscal quarter (based upon the closing sales price on the New York Stock Exchange on June 28, 2019) was approximately $9.4 billion.

As of February 19, 2020, there were 398,575,510 shares of Common Stock outstanding.

The following are abbreviations and definitions of certain terms commonly used in the oil and gas industry and included within this Annual Report on Form 10-K:

Abbreviations

Definitions

Existing economic conditions include prices and costs at which economic producibility from a reservoir is to be determined. The price shall be the average price during the twelve-month period prior to the ending date of the period covered by the report, determined as an unweighted arithmetic average of the first-day-of-the-month price for each month within such period, unless prices are defined by contractual arrangements, excluding escalations based upon future conditions.

calculated by applying the appropriate year-end statutory federal and state income tax rate with consideration of future tax rates already legislated, to pre-tax future net cash flows, net of the tax basis of the properties involved and utilization of available tax carryforwards related to proved oil and gas reserves.

Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation is an independent oil and gas company engaged in the development, exploitation, exploration and production of oil and gas properties. Our assets are concentrated in areas with known hydrocarbon resources, which are conducive to multi-well, repeatable drilling programs. We operate in one segment, natural gas development, exploitation, exploration and production, in the continental United States. We have offices located in Houston, Texas and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Our objective is to enhance shareholder value through the commodity price cycles by maintaining our disciplined approach to returns-focused capital allocation. While we operate in a cyclical industry, driven by the volatility of commodity prices, we believe that focusing on the following key components of our business strategy positions us to succeed on creating shareholder value through the commodity price cycles.

Refer to "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Non-GAAP Financial Measures" for a discussion and calculation of return on capital employed, free cash flow and finding and development cost, which are non-GAAP financial measures.

Our 2020 capital program is expected to be approximately $575.0 million, a 27 percent reduction from our 2019 capital program of $783.3 million. We reduced our planned capital program as a result of the lower natural gas price environment. We expect to fund these expenditures with our operating cash flow and, if required, cash on hand.

Our operations are primarily concentrated in one unconventional play—the Marcellus Shale in northeast Pennsylvania. Our Marcellus Shale properties represent our primary operating and growth area in terms of reserves, production and capital investment. Our properties are principally located in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania, where we currently hold approximately 173,000 net acres in the dry gas window of the play. Our 2019 net production in the Marcellus Shale was 865 Bcfe, representing substantially all of our total equivalent production for the year. As of December 31, 2019, we had a total of 788.0 net wells in the Marcellus Shale, of which approximately 99.5 percent are operated by us.

During 2019, we invested $773.4 million in the Marcellus Shale and drilled or participated in drilling 94.0 net wells, completed 97.0 net wells and turned in line 97.0 net wells. As of December 31, 2019, we had 26.0 net wells that were either in the completion stage or waiting on completion or connection to a pipeline. We exited 2019 with three drilling rigs operating in the play and plan to exit 2020 with two rigs operating.

In February 2016, we sold certain proved and unproved oil and gas properties in east Texas to a third party for $56.4 million and recognized a $0.5 million gain on sale of assets.

Substantially all of our natural gas is sold at market sensitive prices under both long-term and short-term sales contracts and is subject to seasonal price swings. The principal markets for our natural gas are in the northeastern United States where we sell natural gas to industrial customers, local distribution companies, gas marketers and power generation facilities.

We also incur transportation and gathering expenses to move our natural gas production from the wellhead to our principal markets in the United States. The majority of our natural gas production is transported on third-party gathering systems and interstate pipelines where we have long-term contractual capacity arrangements or use purchaser-owned capacity under both long-term and short-term sales contracts.

To date, we have not experienced significant difficulty in transporting or marketing our natural gas production as it becomes available; however, there is no assurance that we will always be able to transport and market all of our production.

We have entered into various firm sales contracts to deliver and sell natural gas. We believe we will have sufficient production quantities to meet substantially all of our commitments, but may be required to purchase natural gas from third parties to satisfy shortfalls should they occur.

We utilize a part of our firm transportation capacity to deliver natural gas under the majority of these firm sales contracts and have entered into numerous agreements for transportation of our production. Some of these contracts have volumetric requirements which could require monetary shortfall penalties if our production is inadequate to meet the terms. However, we do not believe we have a financial commitment due based on our current proved reserves and production levels from which we can fulfill these obligations.

From time to time, we use derivative financial instruments to manage price risk associated with our natural gas production. While there are many different types of derivatives available, we generally utilize collar, swap and basis swap agreements designed to manage price risk more effectively. The collar arrangements are a combination of put and call options used to establish floor and ceiling prices for a fixed volume of natural gas production during a certain time period. They provide for payments to counterparties if the index price exceeds the ceiling and payments from the counterparties if the index price falls below the floor. The swap agreements call for payments to, or receipts from, counterparties based on whether the index price for the period is greater or less than the fixed price established for the particular period under the swap agreement.

A significant portion of our expected natural gas production for 2020 and beyond is currently unhedged and directly exposed to the volatility in natural gas market prices, whether favorable or unfavorable. We will continue to evaluate the benefit of using derivatives in the future. Please read "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" and "Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk" for further discussion related to our use of derivatives.

Since substantially all of our reserves are natural gas, our reserves are significantly more sensitive to natural gas prices and their effect on the economic productive life of producing properties. Our reserves are based on the 12-month average index price for the respective commodity, calculated as the unweighted arithmetic average for the first day of the month price for each month during the year. Increases in commodity prices may result in a longer economic productive life of a property or result in more economically viable proved undeveloped reserves to be recognized. Decreases in prices may result in negative impacts of this nature.

We utilize various traditional methods to estimate our reserves, including decline curve extrapolations, volumetric calculations and analogies, and in some cases a combination of these methods. In addition, at times we may use seismic interpretations to confirm continuity of a formation in combination with traditional technologies; however, seismic interpretations are not used in the volumetric computation.

Our Senior Vice President, EHS and Engineering is the technical person responsible for our internal reserves estimation process and provides oversight of our corporate reservoir engineering department, which consists of two engineers, and the annual audit of our year-end reserves by Miller and Lents. He has a Bachelor of Science degree in Chemical Engineering, specializing in petroleum engineering, and over 37 years of industry experience with positions of increasing responsibility in operations, engineering and evaluations. He has worked in the area of reserves and reservoir engineering for 28 years and is a member of the Society of Petroleum Engineers.

Our reserves estimation process is coordinated by our corporate reservoir engineering department. Reserve information, including models and other technical data, are stored on secured databases on our network. Certain non-technical inputs used in the reserves estimation process, including commodity prices, production and development costs and ownership percentages, are obtained by other departments and are subject to testing as part of our annual internal control process. We also engage Miller and Lents, independent petroleum engineers, to perform an independent audit of our estimated proved reserves. Upon completion of the process, the estimated reserves are presented to senior management.

Miller and Lents has audited 100 percent of our proved reserves estimates and concluded, in their judgment, we have an effective system for gathering data and documenting information required to estimate our proved reserves and project our future revenues. Further, Miller and Lents has concluded (1) the reserves estimation methods employed by us were appropriate, and our classification of such reserves was appropriate to the relevant SEC reserve definitions, (2) our reserves estimation processes were comprehensive and of sufficient depth, (3) the data upon which we relied were adequate and of sufficient quality, and (4) the results of our estimates and projections are, in the aggregate, reasonable. A copy of the audit letter by Miller and Lents dated January 30, 2020, has been filed as an exhibit to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The technical person primarily responsible for the audit of our reserves estimates at Miller and Lents meets the requirements regarding qualifications, independence, objectivity, and confidentiality set forth in the Standards Pertaining to the Estimating and Auditing of Oil and Gas Reserves Information promulgated by the Society of Petroleum Engineers. Miller and Lents is an independent firm of petroleum engineers, geologists, geophysicists, and petro physicists; they do not own an interest in our properties and are not retained on a contingent fee basis.

At December 31, 2019, we had 4,847 Bcfe of PUD reserves associated with future development costs of $1.8 billion, which represents an increase of 645 Bcfe compared to December 31, 2018. All of our PUD reserves are located in Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. We expect to complete substantially all of our PUD reserves associated with drilled but uncompleted wells by the end of 2020. Future development plans are reflective of the lower commodity price environment and have been established based on expected available cash flows from operations and availability under our revolving credit facility. As of December 31, 2019, all PUD reserves are expected to be drilled and completed within five years of initial disclosure of these reserves, with the exception of two drilled but uncompleted wells. These wells are scheduled to be completed in early 2020, just beyond the five-year period since initial disclosure, and together represent 1.6 percent of our total PUD reserves and less than 1.0 percent of our total proved reserves.

Changes in PUD reserves that occurred during the year were due to:

Our interest in both developed and undeveloped properties is primarily in the form of leasehold interests held under customary mineral leases. These leases provide us the right to develop oil and/or natural gas on the properties. Their primary terms range in length from approximately three to 10 years. These properties are held for longer periods if production is established.

Includes leasehold and mineral fee net acreage of 585,686 and 147,371, respectively, associated with deep formations located in West Virginia and Virginia. Substantially all of this leasehold is held by production from shallower formations that are operated by others.

In the event that production is not established or we take no action to extend or renew the terms of our leases, our net undeveloped acreage that will expire over the next three years as of December 31, 2019 is 78,534, 13,747 and 3,998 for the years ending December 31, 2020, 2021 and 2022, respectively.

We believe that we have satisfactory title to all of our producing properties in accordance with generally accepted industry standards. Individual properties may be subject to burdens such as royalty, overriding royalty, carried, net profits, working and other outstanding interests customary in the industry. In addition, interests may be subject to obligations or duties under applicable laws or burdens such as production payments, ordinary course liens incidental to operating agreements and for current taxes or development obligations under oil and gas leases. As is customary in the industry in the case of undeveloped properties, preliminary investigations of record title are made at the time of lease acquisition. Complete investigations are made prior to the consummation of an acquisition of producing properties and before commencement of drilling operations on undeveloped properties.

The oil and gas industry is highly competitive and we experience strong competition in our primary producing areas. We primarily compete with integrated, independent and other energy companies for the sale and transportation of our natural gas production to marketing companies and end users. Furthermore, the oil and gas industry competes with other energy industries that supply fuel and power to industrial, commercial and residential consumers. Many of these competitors have greater financial, technical and personnel resources. The effect of these competitive factors cannot be predicted.

Price, contract terms, availability of rigs and related equipment and quality of service, including pipeline connection times and distribution efficiencies affect competition. We believe that our extensive acreage position and our access to gathering and pipeline infrastructure in Pennsylvania, along with our expected activity level and the related services and equipment that we have secured for the upcoming years, enhance our competitive position over other producers who do not have similar systems or services in place.

During the year ended December 31, 2019, three customers accounted for approximately 17 percent, 16 percent and 16 percent of our total sales. During the year ended December 31, 2018, two customers accounted for approximately 20 percent and 11 percent of our total sales. During the year ended December 31, 2017, two customers accounted for approximately 18 percent and 11 percent of our total sales. We do not believe that the loss of any of these customers would have a material adverse effect on us because alternative customers are readily available.

Demand for natural gas has historically been seasonal, with peak demand and typically higher prices occurring during the winter months.

Exploration and production operations are subject to various types of regulation at the federal, state and local levels. This regulation includes requiring permits to drill wells, maintaining bonding requirements to drill or operate wells, and regulating the location of wells, the method of drilling and casing wells, the surface use and restoration of properties on which wells are drilled, and the plugging and abandoning of wells. Our operations are also subject to various conservation laws and regulations. These include the regulation of the size of drilling and spacing units or proration units, the density of wells that may be drilled in a given field and the unitization or pooling of oil and natural gas properties. Some states allow the forced pooling or integration of tracts to facilitate exploration while other states rely on voluntary pooling of lands and leases. In addition, state conservation laws establish maximum rates of production from oil and natural gas wells, generally prohibiting the venting or flaring of natural gas and imposing certain requirements regarding the ratability of production. The effect of these regulations is to limit the amounts of oil and natural gas we can produce from our wells, and to limit the number of wells or the locations

Federal legislation and regulatory controls have historically affected the price of the natural gas we produce and the manner in which our production is transported and marketed. Under the Natural Gas Act of 1938 (NGA), the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA), and the regulations promulgated under those statutes, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) regulates the interstate sale for resale of natural gas and the transportation of natural gas in interstate commerce, although facilities used in the production or gathering of natural gas in interstate commerce are generally exempted from FERC jurisdiction. Effective beginning in January 1993, the Natural Gas Wellhead Decontrol Act deregulated natural gas prices for all “first sales” of natural gas, which definition covers all sales of our own production. In addition, as part of the broad industry restructuring initiatives described below, the FERC granted to all producers such as us a “blanket certificate of public convenience and necessity” authorizing the sale of natural gas for resale without further FERC approvals. As a result of this policy, all of our produced natural gas is sold at market prices, subject to the terms of any private contracts that may be in effect. In addition, under the provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (2005 Act), the NGA was amended to prohibit any forms of market manipulation in connection with the purchase or sale of natural gas. Pursuant to the 2005 Act, the FERC established regulations intended to increase natural gas pricing transparency by, among other things, requiring market participants to report their gas sales transactions annually to the FERC. The 2005 Act also significantly increased the penalties for violations of the NGA and NGPA and the FERC’s regulations thereunder up to $1,000,000 per day per violation. This maximum penalty authority established by statute has been and will continue to be adjusted periodically for inflation. As of December 31, 2019, the maximum penalty amount was $1,269,500 per day per violation. In 2010, the FERC issued Penalty Guidelines for the determination of civil penalties and procedure under its enforcement program.

Our production and gathering facilities are not subject to FERC jurisdiction; however, our natural gas sales prices nevertheless continue to be affected by intrastate and interstate gas transportation regulation because the cost of transporting the natural gas once sold to the consuming market is a factor in the prices we receive. Beginning with Order No. 436 in 1985 and continuing through Order No. 636 in 1992 and Order No. 637 in 2000, the FERC has adopted a series of rulemakings that have significantly altered the transportation and marketing of natural gas. These changes were intended by the FERC to foster competition by, among other things, requiring interstate pipeline companies to separate their wholesale gas marketing business from their gas transportation business, and by increasing the transparency of pricing for pipeline services. The FERC has also established regulations governing the relationship of pipelines with their marketing affiliates, which essentially require that designated employees function independently of each other, and that certain information not be shared. The FERC has also implemented standards relating to the use of electronic data exchange by the pipelines to make transportation information available on a timely basis and to enable transactions to occur on a purely electronic basis.

In light of these statutory and regulatory changes, most pipelines have divested their natural gas sales functions to marketing affiliates, which operate separately from the transporter and in direct competition with all other merchants. Most pipelines have also implemented the large‑scale divestiture of their natural gas gathering facilities to affiliated or non-affiliated companies. Interstate pipelines are required to provide unbundled, open and nondiscriminatory transportation and transportation‑related services to producers, gas marketing companies, local distribution companies, industrial end users and other customers seeking such services. As a result of the FERC requiring natural gas pipeline companies to separate marketing and transportation services, sellers and buyers of natural gas have gained direct access to pipeline transportation services, and are better able to conduct business with a larger number of counterparties. We believe these changes generally have improved our access to markets while, at the same time, substantially increasing competition in the natural gas marketplace. We cannot predict what new or different regulations the FERC and other regulatory agencies may adopt, or what effect subsequent regulations may have on our activities. Similarly, we cannot predict what proposals, if any, that affect the oil and natural gas industry might actually be enacted by Congress or the various state legislatures and what effect, if any, such proposals might have on us. Further, we cannot predict whether the recent trend toward federal deregulation of the natural gas industry will continue or what effect future policies will have on our sale of gas.

We use derivative financial instruments such as collar, swap and basis swap agreements to attempt to more effectively manage price risk due to the impact of changes in commodity prices on our operating results and cash flows. Following enactment of the Dodd‑Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd‑Frank Act) in July 2010, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has promulgated regulations to implement statutory requirements for swap transactions, including certain options. The CFTC regulations are intended to implement a regulated market in which most swaps are

Sales of crude oil and NGLs are not regulated and are made at market prices. However, the price received from the sale of these products is affected by the cost of transporting the products to market. Much of that transportation is through interstate common carrier pipelines, which are regulated by the FERC under the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA). FERC requires that pipelines regulated under the ICA file tariffs setting forth the rates and terms and conditions of service and that such service not be unduly discriminatory or preferential.

Effective January 1, 1995, the FERC implemented regulations generally grandfathering all previously approved interstate transportation rates and establishing an indexing system for those rates by which adjustments are made annually based on the rate of inflation, subject to certain conditions and limitations. These regulations may increase or decrease the cost of transporting crude oil and NGLs by interstate pipeline, although the annual adjustments may result in decreased rates in a given year. Every five years, the FERC must examine the relationship between the annual change in the applicable index and the actual cost changes experienced in the oil pipeline industry. In December 2015, to implement this required five‑year re‑determination, the FERC established an upward adjustment in the index to track oil pipeline cost changes and determined that the Producer Price Index for Finished Goods plus 1.23 percent should be the oil pricing index for the five‑year period beginning July 1, 2016. The result of indexing is a “ceiling rate” for each rate, which is the maximum at which the pipeline may set its interstate transportation rates. A pipeline may also file cost‑of‑service based rates if rate indexing will be insufficient to allow the pipeline to recover its costs. Rates are subject to challenge by protest when they are filed or changed. For indexed rates, complaints alleging that the rates are unjust and unreasonable may only be pursued if the complainant can show that a substantial change has occurred since the enactment of Energy Policy Act of 1992 in either the economic circumstances of the pipeline or in the nature of the services provided that were a basis for the rate. There is no such limitation on complaints alleging that the pipeline’s rates or terms and conditions of service are unduly discriminatory or preferential. We are unable to predict with certainty the effect upon us of these periodic reviews by the FERC of the pipeline index, or any potential future challenges to pipelines' rates.

U.S. laws and regulations applicable to our operations include those controlling the discharge of materials into the environment, requiring removal and cleanup of materials that may harm the environment or otherwise relating to the protection of the environment.

We generate some hazardous wastes that are subject to the Federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and comparable state statutes, as well as wastes that are exempt from such regulation. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has limited the disposal options for certain hazardous wastes. It is possible that certain wastes currently exempt from treatment as hazardous wastes may in the future be designated as hazardous wastes under RCRA or other applicable statutes. For example, in December 2016, the EPA and environmental groups entered into a consent decree to address the EPA’s alleged failure to timely assess the need to regulate exploration and production related oil and gas wastes exempt from regulation as hazardous wastes under RCRA under Subtitle D applicable to non-hazardous solid waste. The consent decree required the EPA to propose a rulemaking by March 2019 for revision of certain Subtitle D criteria regulations pertaining to oil and gas wastes or to sign a determination that revision of the regulations is not necessary. In April 2019, the EPA issued its determination that based on its review, including consideration of state regulatory programs, it was not necessary at the time to revise Subtitle D regulations to address the management of oil and gas wastes. In the future, we could be subject to more rigorous and costly disposal requirements than we encounter today.

Some of our producing wells and associated facilities are subject to restrictive air emission limitations and permitting requirements. In 2012, the EPA published final New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) that amended the existing NSPS and NESHAP standards for oil and gas facilities and created new NSPS standards for oil and natural gas production, transmission and distribution facilities. In June 2016, the EPA published a final rule that updates and expands the NSPS by setting additional emissions limits for volatile organic compounds and regulating methane emissions for new and modified sources in the oil and gas industry. In addition, in June 2017, the EPA proposed a two year stay of certain requirements contained in June 2016 rule and in November 2017 issued a notice of data availability in support of the stay proposal and provided a 30-day comment period on the information provided. In March 2018, the EPA published a final rule that amended two narrow provisions of the NSPS including removing the requirement for completion of delayed repair during emergency or unscheduled vent blowdowns. The EPA also published a final rule in June 2016 concerning aggregation of sources that affects source determinations for air permitting in the oil and gas industry. In September 2019, the EPA published a proposal to rescind the 2012 and 2016 NSPS rules applicable to sources in the transmission and storage segment of the oil and gas industry and to rescind the methane requirements applicable to sources in the production and processing segments. In its September 2019 proposal, as an alternative, the EPA proposed the rescission of all of the new source performance standards applicable to all oil and natural gas sources in the source category without otherwise undoing the 2012 and 2016 NSPS rules. In October 2015, the EPA adopted a lower national ambient air quality standard for ozone. The revised standard could result in additional areas being designated as ozone non-attainment, which could lead to requirements for additional emissions control equipment and the imposition of more stringent permit requirements on facilities in those areas. The EPA completed its final area designations under the new ozone standard in July 2018. If we are unable to comply with air pollution regulations or to obtain permits for emissions associated with our operations, we could be required to forego construction, modification or certain operations. These regulations may also increase compliance costs for some facilities we own or operate, and result in administrative, civil and/or criminal penalties for non-compliance. Obtaining permits may delay the development of our oil and natural gas projects, including the construction and operation of facilities.

or pass through a significant portion of our costs related to complying with current and future regulations relating to climate change and GHGs, it could materially affect our operations and financial condition. To the extent financial markets view climate change and GHG emissions as a financial risk, this could negatively impact our cost of, and access to, capital. Future legislation or regulations adopted to address climate change could also make our products more or less desirable than competing sources of energy. Please read “Risk Factors-Climate change and climate change legislative and regulatory initiatives could result in increased operating costs and decreased demand for the oil and natural gas that we produce” in Item 1A.

We make available free of charge through our website, www.cabotog.com, our annual reports on Form 10‑K, quarterly reports on Form 10‑Q, current reports on Form 8‑K, and all amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Information on our website is not a part of this report. In addition, the SEC maintains an Internet site at www.sec.gov that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information filed by us.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines, Corporate Bylaws, Audit Committee Charter, Compensation Committee Charter, Corporate Governance and Nominations Committee Charter, Code of Business Conduct and Safety and Environmental Affairs Committee Charter are available on our website at www.cabotog.com, under the “Governance” section of “About Cabot.” Requests can also be made in writing to Investor Relations at our corporate headquarters at Three Memorial City Plaza, 840 Gessner Road, Suite 1400, Houston, Texas 77024.

Wide fluctuations in commodity prices may result from relatively minor changes in the supply of and demand for natural gas and oil, market uncertainty and a variety of additional factors that are beyond our control. These factors include but are not limited to the following:

These factors and the volatile nature of the energy markets make it impossible to predict the future commodity prices. If commodity prices remain low or continue to decline significantly for a sustained period of time, the lower prices may cause us

Our growth is materially dependent upon the success of our drilling program. Drilling for natural gas and oil involves numerous risks, including the risk that no commercially productive reservoirs will be encountered. The cost of drilling, completing and operating wells is substantial and uncertain, and drilling operations may be curtailed, delayed or canceled as a result of a variety of factors beyond our control, including:

Our future drilling activities may not be successful and, if unsuccessful, such failure will have an adverse effect on our future results of operations and financial condition. Our overall drilling success rate or our drilling success rate within a particular geographic area may decline. We may be unable to lease or drill identified or budgeted prospects within our expected time frame, or at all. We may be unable to lease or drill a particular prospect because, in some cases, we identify a prospect or drilling location before seeking an option or lease rights in the prospect or location. Similarly, our drilling schedule may vary from our capital budget. The final determination with respect to the drilling of any scheduled or budgeted wells will be dependent on a number of factors, including:

These projects may not be successfully developed and the wells, if drilled, may not encounter reservoirs of commercially productive natural gas or oil.

Reserve engineering is a subjective process of estimating underground accumulations of natural gas and oil that cannot be measured in an exact manner. The process of estimating quantities of proved reserves is complex and inherently imprecise, and the reserve data included in this document are only estimates. The process relies on interpretations of available geologic, geophysical, engineering and production data. The extent, quality and reliability of this technical data can vary. The process also requires certain economic assumptions, some of which are mandated by the SEC, such as commodity prices. Additional assumptions include drilling and operating expenses, capital expenditures, taxes and availability of funds. Furthermore, different reserve engineers may make different estimates of reserves and cash flows based on the same data.

Results of drilling, testing and production subsequent to the date of an estimate may justify revising the original estimate. Accordingly, initial reserve estimates often vary from the quantities of natural gas and oil that are ultimately recovered, and such variances may be material. Any significant variance could reduce the estimated quantities and present value of our reserves.

As of December 31, 2019, approximately 38 percent of our estimated proved reserves (by volume) were undeveloped. These reserve estimates reflect our plans to make capital expenditures for estimated future development costs of $1.8 billion to convert our PUD reserves into proved developed reserves. The estimated future development costs associated with our PUD reserves may not equal our actual costs, development may not occur as scheduled and results may not be as estimated. If we choose not to develop our PUD reserves, or if we are not otherwise able to successfully develop them, we will be required to remove them from our reported proved reserves. In addition, under the SEC’s reserve reporting rules, because PUD reserves generally may be booked only if they relate to wells scheduled to be drilled within five years of the date of booking, we may be required to remove any PUD reserves that are not developed within this five-year time frame.

You should not assume that the present value of future net cash flows from our proved reserves is the current market value of our estimated reserves. In accordance with SEC requirements, we base the estimated discounted future net cash flows from our proved reserves on the 12-month average index price for the respective commodity, calculated as the unweighted arithmetic average for the first day of the month price for each month and costs in effect on the date of the estimate, holding the prices and costs constant throughout the life of the properties. Actual future prices and costs may differ materially from those used in the net present value estimate, and future net present value estimates using then current prices and costs may be significantly less than the current estimate. In addition, the 10 percent discount factor we use when calculating discounted future net cash flows for reporting requirements in compliance with the applicable accounting standards may not be the most appropriate discount factor based on interest rates in effect from time to time and risks associated with us or the oil and gas industry in general.

The value of our oil and gas properties depends on commodity prices. Declines in these prices as well as increases in development costs, changes in well performance, delays in asset development or deterioration of drilling results may result in our having to make material downward adjustments to our estimated proved reserves, and could result in an impairment charge and a corresponding write-down of the carrying amount of our oil and natural gas properties. Because substantially all of our reserves are natural gas, changes in natural gas prices have a more significant impact on our financial results.

We evaluate our oil and gas properties for impairment on a field-by-field basis whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate a property's carrying amount may not be recoverable. We compare expected undiscounted future cash flows to the net book value of the asset. If the future undiscounted expected cash flows, based on our estimate of future commodity prices, operating costs and anticipated production from proved reserves and risk-adjusted probable and possible reserves, are lower than the net book value of the asset, the capitalized cost is reduced to fair value. Commodity pricing is estimated by using a combination of assumptions management uses in its budgeting and forecasting process as well as historical and current prices adjusted for geographical location and quality differentials, as well as other factors that management believes will impact realizable prices. In the event that commodity prices decline, there could be a significant revision in the future.

Our producing properties are geographically concentrated in the Marcellus Shale in northeast Pennsylvania. At December 31, 2019 substantially all of our proved developed reserves and equivalent production were attributable to our properties located in the Marcellus Shale. As a result of this concentration, we may be disproportionately exposed to the impact of regional supply and demand factors, state and local political forces and governmental regulation, processing or transportation capacity constraints, market limitations, severe weather events, water shortages or other conditions or interruption of the processing or transportation of oil, natural gas or NGLs in the region. 

In general, the production rate of oil and gas properties declines as reserves are depleted, with the rate of decline depending on reservoir characteristics. Unless we successfully replace the reserves that we produce, our reserves will decline, eventually resulting in a decrease in natural gas production and lower revenues and cash flow from operations. Our future production is, therefore, highly dependent on our level of success in finding or acquiring additional reserves. We may not be

Our reserve report estimates that production from our proved developed reserves as of December 31, 2019 will decrease at a rate of 13 percent, 26 percent, 18 percent and 14 percent during 2020, 2021, 2022 and 2023, respectively. Future development of proved undeveloped and other reserves currently not classified as proved developed producing will impact these rates of decline. Because of higher initial decline rates from newly developed reserves, we consider this pattern to be fairly typical.

Exploration, development and exploitation activities involve numerous risks that may result in, among other things, dry holes, the failure to produce natural gas and oil in commercial quantities and the inability to fully produce discovered reserves.

We make and expect to make substantial capital expenditures in connection with our development and production projects. We rely upon access to both our revolving credit facility and longer-term capital markets as sources of liquidity for any capital requirements not satisfied by cash flow from operations or other sources. Future challenges in the global financial system, including the capital markets, may adversely affect our business and our financial condition. Our ability to access the capital markets may be restricted at a time when we desire, or need, to raise capital, which could have an impact on our flexibility to react to changing economic and business conditions. Adverse economic and market conditions could adversely affect the collectability of our trade receivables and cause our commodity hedging counterparties to be unable to perform their obligations or to seek bankruptcy protection. Future challenges in the economy could also lead to reduced demand for natural gas which could have a negative impact on our revenues.

As of December 31, 2019, we had approximately $1.2 billion of debt outstanding and we may incur additional indebtedness in the future. Increases in our level of indebtedness may:

In addition, the margins we pay under our revolving credit facility depend on our leverage ratio. Accordingly, increases in the amount of our indebtedness without corresponding increases in our consolidated EBITDAX, or decreases in our EBITDAX without a corresponding decrease in our indebtedness, may result in an increase in our interest expense.

Our debt agreements also require compliance with covenants to maintain specified financial ratios. If commodity prices deteriorate from current levels or continue for an extended period, it could lead to reduced revenues, cash flow and earnings, which in turn could lead to a default due to lack of covenant compliance. Because the calculations of the financial ratios are made as of certain dates, the financial ratios can fluctuate significantly from period to period. A prolonged period of lower commodity prices could further increase the risk of our inability to comply with covenants to maintain specified financial ratios. In order to provide a margin of comfort with regard to these financial covenants, we may seek to reduce our capital expenditures, sell non-strategic assets or opportunistically modify or increase our derivative instruments to the extent permitted under our debt agreements. In addition, we may seek to refinance or restructure all or a portion of our indebtedness. We cannot provide assurance that we will be able to successfully execute any of these strategies, and such strategies may be unavailable on favorable terms or at all. For more information about our debt agreements, please read “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Financial Condition - Capital Resources and Liquidity.”

The borrowing base under our revolving credit facility is currently $3.2 billion, and lender commitments under our revolving credit facility are $1.5 billion. The borrowing base is redetermined annually under the terms of our revolving credit facility on April 1. In addition, either we or the banks may request an interim redetermination twice a year or in conjunction with certain acquisitions or sales of oil and gas properties. Our borrowing base may decrease as a result of lower commodity prices, operating difficulties, declines in reserves, lending requirements or regulations, the issuance of new indebtedness or for any other reason. In the event of a decrease in our borrowing base due to declines in commodity prices or otherwise, our ability to borrow under our revolving credit facility may be limited and we could be required to repay any indebtedness in excess of the redetermined borrowing base. In addition, we may be unable to access the equity or debt capital markets, including the market for senior unsecured notes, to meet our obligations, including any such debt repayment obligations.

Our future growth prospects are dependent upon our ability to identify optimal strategies for our business. In developing our business plan, we considered allocating capital and other resources to various aspects of our businesses including well-development (primarily drilling), reserve acquisitions, exploratory activity, corporate items and other alternatives. We also considered our likely sources of capital. Notwithstanding the determinations made in the development of our 2020 plan, business opportunities not previously identified periodically come to our attention, including possible acquisitions and dispositions. If we fail to identify optimal business strategies, or fail to optimize our capital investment and capital raising opportunities and the use of our other resources in furtherance of our business strategies, our financial condition and growth rate may be adversely affected. Moreover, economic or other circumstances may change from those contemplated by our 2020 plan, and our failure to recognize or respond to those changes may limit our ability to achieve our objectives.

Negative public perception regarding us and/or our industry resulting from, among other things, concerns raised by advocacy groups about hydraulic fracturing, oil spills, greenhouse gas or methane emissions and explosions of natural gas transmission lines, may lead to increased regulatory scrutiny, which may, in turn, lead to new state and federal safety and environmental laws, regulations, guidelines and enforcement interpretations. These actions may cause operational delays or restrictions, increased operating costs, additional regulatory burdens and increased risk of litigation. Moreover, governmental authorities exercise considerable discretion in the timing and scope of permit issuance and the public may engage in the permitting process, including through intervention in the courts. Negative public perception could cause the permits we need to conduct our operations to be withheld, delayed, or burdened by requirements that restrict our ability to profitably conduct our business.

The sale of our natural gas production depends on a number of factors beyond our control, including the availability and capacity of transportation and processing facilities. We deliver our natural gas production primarily through gathering systems and pipelines that we do not own. The lack of available capacity on these systems and facilities could reduce the price offered for our production or result in the shut-in of producing wells or the delay or discontinuance of development plans for properties. Third-party systems and facilities may be unavailable due to market conditions or mechanical or other reasons. In addition, at current commodity prices, construction of new pipelines and building of such infrastructure may be slower to build out. To the extent these services are unavailable, we would be unable to realize revenue from wells served by such facilities until suitable arrangements are made to market our production. Our failure to obtain these services on acceptable terms could materially harm our business.

For example, the Marcellus Shale wells we have drilled to date have generally reported very high initial production rates. The amount of natural gas being produced in the area from these new wells, as well as natural gas produced from other existing wells, may exceed the capacity of the various gathering and intrastate or interstate transportation pipelines currently available. In such an event, this could result in wells being shut in or awaiting a pipeline connection or capacity and/or natural gas being sold at much lower prices than those quoted on NYMEX or than we currently project, which would adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows.

Our operations are subject to extensive federal, state and local laws and regulations, including drilling, permitting and safety laws and regulations and those relating to the generation, storage, handling, emission, transportation and discharge of materials into the environment. These laws and regulations can adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of doing business. Many laws and regulations require permits for the operation of various facilities, and these permits are subject to revocation, modification and renewal. Governmental authorities have the power to enforce compliance with their regulations, and violations could subject us to fines, injunctions or both. These laws and regulations have increased the costs of planning, designing, drilling, installing and operating natural gas and oil facilities, and new laws and regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing laws and regulations could further increase these costs. In addition, we may be liable for environmental damages caused by previous owners or operators of property we purchase or lease. Risks of substantial costs and liabilities related to environmental compliance issues are inherent in natural gas and oil operations. For example, we could be required to install expensive pollution control measures or limit or cease activities on lands located within wilderness, wetlands or other environmentally or politically sensitive areas. Failure to comply with these laws also may result in the suspension or termination of our operations and subject us to administrative, civil and criminal penalties as well as the imposition of corrective action orders. It is possible that other developments, such as stricter environmental laws and regulations, and claims for damages to property or persons resulting from natural gas and oil production, would result in substantial costs and liabilities.

Successful property acquisitions require an assessment of a number of factors beyond our control. These factors include estimates of recoverable reserves, exploration potential, future commodity prices, operating costs, production taxes and potential environmental and other liabilities. These assessments are complex and inherently imprecise. Our review of the properties we acquire may not reveal all existing or potential problems. In addition, our review may not allow us to fully assess the potential deficiencies of the properties. We do not inspect every well, and even when we inspect a well we may not discover structural, subsurface, or environmental problems that may exist or arise.

There may be threatened or contemplated claims against the assets or businesses we acquire related to environmental, title, regulatory, tax, contract, litigation or other matters of which we are unaware, which could materially and adversely affect our production, revenues and results of operations. We often assume certain liabilities, and we may not be entitled to contractual indemnification for pre-closing liabilities, including environmental liabilities, and our contractual indemnification may not be effective. At times, we acquire interests in properties on an "as is" basis with limited representations and warranties and limited remedies for breaches of such representations and warranties. In addition, significant acquisitions can change the nature of our operations and business if the acquired properties have substantially different operating and geological characteristics or are in different geographic locations than our existing properties.

The integration of the businesses and properties we may acquire could be difficult, and may divert management's attention and financial resources away from our existing operations. These difficulties include:

The process of integrating our operations could cause an interruption of, or loss of momentum in, the activities of our business. Members of our management may be required to devote considerable amounts of time to this integration process, which will decrease the time they will have to manage our existing business. If management is not able to effectively manage the integration process, or if any significant business activities are interrupted as a result of the integration process, our business could suffer.

Our business involves a variety of operating risks, including:

Any of these events could result in injury or loss of human life, loss of hydrocarbons, significant damage to or destruction of property, environmental pollution, regulatory investigations and penalties, suspension or impairment of our operations and substantial losses to us.

We maintain insurance against some, but not all, operating risks and losses. We do not carry business interruption insurance. In addition, pollution and environmental risks generally are not fully insurable. The occurrence of an event not fully covered by insurance could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

Other companies operate some of the properties in which we have an interest. As of December 31, 2019, non-operated wells represented approximately nine percent of our total owned gross wells, or approximately one percent of our owned net wells. We have limited ability to influence or control the operation or future development of these non-operated properties, including compliance with environmental, safety and other regulations, or the amount of capital expenditures that we are required to fund with respect to them. The failure of an operator of our wells to adequately perform operations, an operator's breach of the applicable agreements or an operator's failure to act in ways that are in our best interest could reduce our production and revenues. Our dependence on the operator and other working interest owners for these projects and our limited ability to influence or control the operation and future development of these properties could materially adversely affect the realization of our targeted returns on capital in drilling or acquisition activities and lead to unexpected future costs.

Competition in the natural gas and oil industry is intense. Major and independent natural gas and oil companies actively bid for desirable natural gas and oil properties, as well as for the capital, equipment and labor required to operate and develop these properties. Our competitive position is affected by price, contract terms and quality of service, including pipeline connection times, distribution efficiencies and reliable delivery record. Many of our competitors have financial and technological resources and exploration and development budgets that are substantially greater than ours. These companies

From time to time, when we believe that market conditions are favorable, we use financial derivative instruments to manage price risk associated with our natural gas production. While there are many different types of derivatives available, we generally utilize collar, swap and basis swap agreements to manage price risk more effectively.

The collar arrangements are put and call options used to establish floor and ceiling prices for a fixed volume of production during a certain time period. They provide for payments to counterparties if the index price exceeds the ceiling and payments from the counterparties if the index price falls below the floor. The swap agreements call for payments to, or receipts from, counterparties based on whether the index price for the period is greater or less than the fixed price established for that period when the swap is put in place. These arrangements limit the benefit to us of increases in prices. In addition, these arrangements expose us to risks of financial loss in a variety of circumstances, including when:

The CFTC has promulgated regulations to implement statutory requirements for swap transactions. These regulations are intended to implement a regulated market in which most swaps are executed on registered exchanges or swap execution facilities and cleared through central counterparties. While we believe that our use of swap transactions exempt us from certain regulatory requirements, the changes to the swap market due to increased regulation could significantly increase the cost of entering into new swaps or maintaining existing swaps, materially alter the terms of new or existing swap transactions and/or reduce the availability of new or existing swaps. If we reduce our use of swaps as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act and regulations, our results of operations may become more volatile and our cash flows may be less predictable.

We will continue to evaluate the benefit of utilizing derivatives in the future. Please read "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" in Item 7 and "Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk" in Item 7A for further discussion concerning our use of derivatives.

Water is an essential component of oil and natural gas production during the drilling, and in particular, hydraulic fracturing, process. Our inability to locate sufficient amounts of water, or dispose of or recycle water used in our exploration and production operations, could adversely impact our operations. For water sourcing, we first seek to use non-potable water supplies for our operational needs. In certain areas, there may be insufficient local aquifer capacity to provide a source of water for drilling activities. Water must then be obtained from other sources and transported to the drilling site. An inability to secure sufficient amounts of water or to dispose of or recycle the water used in our operations could adversely impact our operations in certain areas. The imposition of new environmental regulations could further restrict our ability to conduct operations such as hydraulic fracturing by restricting the disposal of things such as produced water and drilling fluids.

Most of our exploration and production operations depend on the use of hydraulic fracturing to enhance production from oil and gas wells. This technology involves the injection of fluids—usually consisting mostly of water but typically including small amounts of several chemical additives—as well as sand or other proppants into a well under high pressure in order to create fractures in the rock that allow oil or gas to flow more freely to the wellbore. Most of our wells would not be economical without the use of hydraulic fracturing to stimulate production from the well. Hydraulic fracturing operations have historically been overseen by state regulators as part of their oil and gas regulatory programs; however, the EPA has asserted federal regulatory authority over certain hydraulic fracturing activities involving diesel under the Safe Drinking Water Act and has released permitting guidance for hydraulic fracturing activities that use diesel in fracturing fluids in those states where the EPA is the permitting authority, including Pennsylvania. As a result, we may be subject to additional permitting requirements for hydraulic fracturing operations as well as various restrictions on those operations. These permitting requirements and restrictions could result in delays in operations at well sites as well as increased costs to make wells productive. Several candidates in the 2020 United States presidential campaign have indicated that they would support federal government efforts to limit or prohibit hydraulic fracturing. In addition, from time to time, legislation has been introduced, but not enacted, in Congress that would provide for federal regulation of hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act and require the public disclosure of certain information regarding the chemical makeup of hydraulic fracturing fluids. If enacted, this legislation could establish an additional level of regulation and permitting at the federal, state or local levels, and could make it easier for third parties opposed to the hydraulic fracturing process to initiate legal proceedings based on allegations that specific chemicals used in the fracturing process could adversely affect the environment, including groundwater, soil or surface water. In March 2015, the Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management issued a final rule to regulate hydraulic fracturing on public and Indian land; however, these rules were rescinded by rule in December 2017. We voluntarily disclose on a well-by-well basis the chemicals we use in the hydraulic fracturing process at www.fracfocus.org.

In addition, state and federal regulatory agencies recently have focused on a possible connection between the operation of injection wells used for oil and gas waste disposal and seismic activity. Similar concerns have been raised that hydraulic fracturing may also contribute to seismic activity. When caused by human activity, such events are called induced seismicity. In March 2016, the United States Geological Survey identified six states with the most significant hazards from induced seismicity, including Oklahoma, Kansas, Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, and Arkansas. In light of these concerns, some state regulatory agencies have modified their regulations or issued orders to address induced seismicity. Certain environmental and other groups have also suggested that additional federal, state and local laws and regulations may be needed to more closely regulate the hydraulic fracturing process. We cannot predict whether additional federal, state or local laws or regulations applicable to hydraulic fracturing will be enacted in the future and, if so, what actions any such laws or regulations would require or prohibit. Increased regulation and attention given to induced seismicity could lead to greater opposition to, and litigation concerning, oil and gas activities utilizing hydraulic fracturing or injection wells for waste disposal, which could have an adverse effect on oil and natural gas production activities, including operational delays or increased operating costs in the production of oil and natural gas from developing shale plays, or could make it more difficult to perform hydraulic fracturing.

On August 16, 2012, the EPA published final rules that establish new air emission control requirements for natural gas and NGL production, processing and transportation activities, including NSPS to address emissions of sulfur dioxide and volatile organic compounds, and NESHAPS to address hazardous air pollutants frequently associated with gas production and processing activities. In June 2016, the EPA published a final rule that updates and expands the NSPS by setting additional emissions limits for volatile organic compounds and regulating methane emissions for new and modified sources in the oil and gas industry. In June 2017, the EPA proposed a two year stay of certain requirements contained in the June 2016 rule and in November 2017 issued a notice of data availability in support of the stay proposal and provided a 30-day comment period on the information provided. In March 2018, the EPA published a final rule that amended two narrow provisions of the NSPS, removing the requirement for completion of delayed repair during emergency or unscheduled vent blowdowns. A 2016 information collection request made to oil and natural gas facilities by the EPA in connection with its intention at the time to regulate methane emissions from existing sources were withdrawn in March 2017. The EPA also published a final rule in June 2016 concerning aggregation of sources that affects source determinations for air permitting in the oil and gas industry.

Compliance with these requirements, especially the new methane regulation, may require modifications to certain of our operations or increase the cost of new or modified facilities, including the installation of new equipment to control emissions at the well site that could result in significant costs, including increased capital expenditures and operating costs, and could adversely impact our business. Similarly, aggregating our oil and gas facilities for permitting could result in more complex, costly, and time consuming air permitting. Particularly in regard to obtaining pre-construction permits, the final aggregation rule could add costs and cause delays in our operations.

In addition to these federal legislative and regulatory proposals, some states in which we operate, such as Pennsylvania, and certain local governments have adopted, and others are considering adopting, regulations that could restrict hydraulic fracturing in certain circumstances, including requirements regarding chemical disclosure, casing and cementing of wells, withdrawal of water for use in high-volume hydraulic fracturing of horizontal wells, baseline testing of nearby water wells, and restrictions on the type of additives that may be used in hydraulic fracturing operations. For example, New York issued a statewide ban on hydraulic fracturing in June 2015. In addition, Pennsylvania's Act 13 of 2012 became law on February 14, 2012 and amended the state's Oil and Gas Act to, among other things, increase civil penalties and strengthen the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection's (PaDEP) authority over the issuance of drilling permits. Although the Pennsylvania Supreme Court struck down portions of Act 13 that made statewide rules on oil and gas preempt local zoning rules, this could lead to additional local restrictions on oil and gas activity in the state. In addition, if existing laws and regulations with regard to hydraulic fracturing are revised or reinterpreted or if new laws and regulations become applicable to our operations through judicial or administrative actions, our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be adversely affected. For example, a Pennsylvania state trial court in 2018 refused to apply the established common law rule of capture in a case concerning claims of trespass by hydraulic fracturing. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court heard the appeal of this ruling and on January 22, 2020 affirmed the rule of capture and remanded the case to the Pennsylvania state trial court for further proceedings. Depending on the ultimate outcome at the Pennsylvania state trial court, this case could still have a material impact on our operations.

We use a significant amount of water in our hydraulic fracturing operations. Our inability to locate sufficient amounts of water, or dispose of or recycle water used in our operations, could adversely impact our operations. Moreover, new environmental initiatives and regulations could include restrictions on our ability to conduct certain operations such as hydraulic fracturing or disposal of waste, including, but not limited to, produced water, drilling fluids and other wastes associated with the exploration, development or production of natural gas. Compliance with environmental regulations and permit requirements governing the withdrawal, storage and use of surface water or groundwater necessary for hydraulic fracturing of wells may increase our operating costs and cause delays, interruptions or termination of our operations, the extent of which cannot be predicted, all of which could have an adverse effect on our operations and financial condition. For example, in April 2011, PaDEP called on all Marcellus Shale natural gas drilling operators to voluntarily cease by May 19, 2011 delivering wastewater to those centralized treatment facilities that were grandfathered from the application of PaDEP's Total Dissolved Solids regulations. In June 2016, the EPA published final pretreatment standards for disposal of wastewater produced from shale gas operations to publicly owned treatment works. The regulations were developed under the EPA's Effluent Guidelines Program under the authority of the Clean Water Act. In response to these actions, operators including us have begun to rely more on recycling of flowback and produced water from well sites as a preferred alternative to disposal.

A number of federal agencies are analyzing, or have been requested to review, a variety of environmental issues associated with hydraulic fracturing practices. For example, the EPA conducted a study of the potential environmental effects of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water and groundwater. The EPA released its final report in December 2016. It concluded that hydraulic fracturing activities can impact drinking water resources under some circumstances, including large volume spills and inadequate mechanical integrity of wells. This study and other studies that may be undertaken by the EPA or other federal agencies could spur initiatives to further regulate hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, or other statutory and/or regulatory mechanisms.

Legislation to regulate GHG emissions has periodically been introduced in the U.S. Congress and such legislation may be proposed or adopted in the future. In addition, the EPA has adopted regulations addressing GHG emissions. In 2009 and 2010, the EPA adopted rules requiring the monitoring, reporting and recordkeeping of GHG emissions from specified sources in the United States, including onshore and offshore oil and natural gas production facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of CO2e per year. Since 2012, we have been required to report our GHG emissions to the EPA each year in March under these rules and have submitted our annual reports in compliance with the deadline. In 2015, the EPA finalized rules adding additional sources to the scope of the GHG monitoring and reporting requirements, including gathering and boosting facilities as well as completions and workovers from hydraulically fractured oil wells, and adding well identification reporting requirements for

The threat of terrorism and the impact of military and other action have caused instability in world financial markets and could lead to increased volatility in prices for natural gas and oil, all of which could adversely affect the markets for our operations. Acts of terrorism, including cybersecurity threats to gain unauthorized access to sensitive information or to render data or systems unusable, could be directed against companies operating in the United States. The U.S. government has issued public warnings that indicate energy assets might be specific targets of terrorist organizations. These developments have subjected our operations to increased risk and, depending on their ultimate magnitude, could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our business and the oil and gas industry in general have become increasingly dependent on digital data, computer networks and connected infrastructure, including technologies that are managed by third-party providers on whom we rely to help us collect, host or process information. We depend on this technology to record and store financial data, estimate quantities of natural gas and crude oil reserves, analyze and share operating data and communicate internally and externally. Computers

Cyber-attacks are becoming more sophisticated and include, but are not limited to, malicious software, phishing, ransomware, attempts to gain unauthorized access to data, and other electronic security breaches that could lead to disruptions in critical systems, unauthorized release of confidential or otherwise protected information and corruption of data. Unauthorized access to our seismic data, reserves information, customer or employee data or other proprietary or commercially sensitive information could lead to data corruption, communication interruption, or other disruptions in our exploration or production operations or planned business transactions, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations. If our information technology systems cease to function properly or our cybersecurity is breached, we could suffer disruptions to our normal operations, which may include drilling, completion, production and corporate functions. A cyber-attack involving our information systems and related infrastructure, or that of our business associates, could result in supply chain disruptions that delay or prevent the transportation and marketing of our production, non-compliance leading to regulatory fines or penalties, loss or disclosure of, or damage to, our or any of our customer’s or supplier’s data or confidential information that could harm our business by damaging our reputation, subjecting us to potential financial or legal liability, and requiring us to incur significant costs, including costs to repair or restore our systems and data or to take other remedial steps.

In addition, certain cyber incidents, such as surveillance, may remain undetected for an extended period, and our systems and insurance coverage for protecting against such cybersecurity risks may not be sufficient. As cyber-attackers become more sophisticated, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to protect our business or remediate the damage from cyber-attacks. Furthermore, the continuing and evolving threat of cyber-attacks has resulted in increased regulatory focus on prevention, and we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities. To the extent we face increased regulatory requirements, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to meet such requirements.

The regulatory environment surrounding data protection laws is uncertain. Complying with varying jurisdictional requirements could increase the costs and complexity of compliance, and violations of applicable data protection laws can result in significant penalties. A determination that there have been violations of applicable data protection laws could expose us to significant damage awards, fines and other penalties that could materially harm our business and reputation.

Any failure, or perceived failure, by us to comply with applicable data protection laws could result in proceedings or actions against us by governmental entities or others, subject us to significant fines, penalties, judgments and negative publicity, require us to change our business practices, increase the costs and complexity of compliance, and adversely affect our business. As noted above, we are also subject to the possibility of security and privacy breaches, which themselves may result in a violation of these laws. Additionally, the acquisition of a company that is not in compliance with applicable data protection laws may result in a violation of these laws.

On December 22, 2017, the U.S. enacted legislation referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the Tax Act). The Tax Act significantly changed U.S. corporate income tax laws beginning, generally, in 2018. Refer to Note 11 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Income Taxes, for a discussion on the impact of the Tax Act on us. There exist various uncertainties and ambiguities in the application of certain provisions of the Tax Act. In the absence of guidance, we have used what we believe are reasonable interpretations and assumptions in applying the Tax Act. It is possible that the Internal Revenue Service could issue subsequent regulations or other guidance or take positions on audit that differ from our prior interpretations and assumptions, which could adversely impact our financial position, results of operations, and cash flows.

While the Tax Act maintained many of the tax incentives and deductions that are used by U.S. oil and gas companies, including the percentage depletion allowance for oil and natural gas companies, the ability to fully deduct intangible drilling costs in the year incurred, and the current amortization period of geological and geophysical expenditures for independent producers, the U.S. tax law is always subject to change. Periodically, legislation is proposed to repeal these industry tax incentives and deductions, and/or to impose new industry taxes. In addition, various states are still determining if and to what extent they will conform to the Tax Act. Further, many states are currently in deficits, and have been enacting laws eliminating or limiting certain deductions, carryforwards, and credits in order to increase tax revenue.

Should the U.S. or the states publish guidance or pass tax legislation limiting any currently allowed tax incentives and deductions, our taxes would increase, potentially significantly, which would have a negative impact on our net income and cash

Our charter authorizes our Board of Directors to set the terms of preferred stock. In addition, Delaware law contains provisions that impose restrictions on business combinations with interested parties. Our bylaws prohibit the calling of a special meeting by our stockholders and place procedural requirements and limitations on stockholder proposals at meetings of stockholders. Because of these provisions of our charter, bylaws and Delaware law, persons considering unsolicited tender offers or other unilateral takeover proposals may be more likely to negotiate with our Board of Directors rather than pursue non-negotiated takeover attempts. As a result, these provisions may make it more difficult for our stockholders to benefit from transactions that are opposed by an incumbent Board of Directors.

The Delaware General Corporation Law allows corporations to limit available relief for the breach of directors' duty of care to equitable remedies such as injunction or rescission. Our charter limits the liability of our directors to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law. Specifically, our directors will not be personally liable for monetary damages for any breach of their fiduciary duty as a director, except for liability:

This limitation may have the effect of reducing the likelihood of derivative litigation against directors, and may discourage or deter stockholders or management from bringing a lawsuit against directors for breach of their duty of care, even though such an action, if successful, might otherwise have benefited our stockholders.

None.

The information set forth under the heading "Legal Matters" in Note 9 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K is incorporated by reference in response to this item.

From time to time we receive notices of violation from governmental and regulatory authorities in areas in which we operate relating to alleged violations of environmental statutes or the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. While we cannot predict with certainty whether these notices of violation will result in fines and/or penalties, if fines and/or penalties are imposed, they may result in monetary sanctions, individually or in the aggregate, in excess of $100,000.

Not applicable.

All officers are elected annually by our Board of Directors. All of the executive officers have been employed by Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation for at least the last five years, except for Mr. Charles E. Dyson II and Mr. Julius Leitner.

Mr. Dyson joined the Company as the Director of Information Services in October 2015 and was promoted to Vice President of Information Services in February 2018.  Prior to joining the Company, he served as the Director of Infrastructure and Support Services at Transocean Offshore Deepwater Drilling, Inc. Mr. Dyson holds a Bachelor of Business Administration degree in Finance from Texas A&M University. 

Mr. Leitner joined the Company as Vice President, Marketing in July 2017. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Leitner held various positions with Shell Energy North America (US) L.P., including Director of Northeast Trading, Director of Producer Services, and Senior Originator, from July 1996 through July 2017. Mr. Leitner holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Biology from Boston College and a Masters of Business Administration from the Mays Business School of Texas A&M University.

Our common stock is listed and principally traded on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol "COG."

As of February 1, 2020, there were 345 registered holders of our common stock.

_______________________________________________________________________________

The following graph compares our common stock performance (COG) with the performance of the Standard & Poor's 500 Stock Index and the Dow Jones U.S. Exploration & Production Index for the period December 2014 through December 2019. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in our common stock and in each index was $100 on December 31, 2014 and that all dividends were reinvested.

The performance graph above is furnished and not filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) and will not be incorporated by reference into any registration statement filed under the Securities Act of 1933 unless specifically identified therein as being incorporated therein by reference. The performance graph is not soliciting material subject to Regulation 14A of the Exchange Act.

The following discussion is intended to assist you in understanding our results of operations and our present financial condition. Our Consolidated Financial Statements and the accompanying Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this Annul Report on Form 10-K contain additional information that should be referred to when reviewing this material.

Financial and operating results for the year ended December 31, 2019 compared to the year ended December 31, 2018 are as follows:

We account for our derivative instruments on a mark-to-market basis with changes in fair value recognized in operating revenues in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. As a result of these mark-to-market adjustments associated with our derivative instruments, we will experience volatility in our earnings due to commodity price volatility. Refer to “Impact of Derivative Instruments on Operating Revenues” below and Note 6 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for more information.

A decline in commodity prices could result in the future reduction of our borrowing base and related commitments under our revolving credit facility. Unless commodity prices decline significantly from current levels, we do not believe that any such reductions would have a significant impact on our ability to service our debt and fund our drilling program and related operations.

We strive to manage our debt at a level below the available credit line in order to maintain borrowing capacity. Our revolving credit facility includes a covenant limiting our total debt. We believe that, with internally generated operating cash flow, cash on hand and availability under our revolving credit facility, we have the capacity to finance our spending plans.

At December 31, 2019, we were in compliance with all restrictive financial covenants for both our revolving credit facility and senior notes. Refer to Note 5 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further details regarding restrictive covenants.

Our working capital is substantially influenced by the variables discussed above and fluctuates based on the timing and amount of borrowings and repayments under our revolving credit facility, repayments of debt, the timing of cash collections and payments on our trade accounts receivable and payable, respectively, payment of dividends, repurchases of our securities and changes in the fair value of our commodity derivative activity. From time to time, our working capital will reflect a deficit, while at other times it will reflect a surplus. This fluctuation is not unusual. At December 31, 2019 and 2018, we had a working capital surplus of $240.2 million and $257.3 million, respectively. We believe we have adequate liquidity and availability under our revolving credit facility to meet our working capital requirements over the next twelve months.

During 2019 and 2018, we repurchased 25.5 million shares of our common stock for $488.5 million and 38.5 million shares of our common stock for $904.1 million, respectively. During 2019 and 2018, we paid dividends of $145.5 million ($0.35 per share) and $111.4 million ($0.25 per share) on our common stock, respectively.

On an annual basis, we generally fund most of our capital expenditures, excluding any significant property acquisitions, with cash generated from operations and, if required, borrowings under our revolving credit facility. We budget these expenditures based on our projected cash flows for the year.

Amounts related to our asset retirement obligations are not included in the above table due to the uncertainty regarding the actual timing of such expenditures. The total amount of our asset retirement obligations at December 31, 2019 was $72.1 million. Refer to Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further details.

We have no off-balance sheet debt or other similar unrecorded obligations.

Our significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. The preparation of the Consolidated Financial Statements, which is in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, requires management to make certain estimates and judgments that affect the amounts reported in our financial statements and the related disclosures of assets and liabilities. The following accounting policies are our most critical policies requiring more significant judgments and estimates. We evaluate our estimates and assumptions on a regular basis. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Successful Efforts Method of Accounting

We follow the successful efforts method of accounting for our oil and gas producing activities. Acquisition costs for proved and unproved properties are capitalized when incurred. Judgment is required to determine the proper classification of wells designated as developmental or exploratory, which will ultimately determine the proper accounting treatment of costs incurred. Exploration costs, including geological and geophysical costs, the costs of carrying and retaining unproved properties and exploratory dry hole costs are expensed. Development costs, including costs to drill and equip development wells and successful exploratory drilling costs to locate proved reserves, are capitalized.

Oil and Gas Reserves

The process of estimating quantities of proved reserves is inherently imprecise, and the reserves data included in this document is only an estimate. The process relies on interpretations and judgment of available geological, geophysical, engineering and production data. The extent, quality and reliability of this technical data can vary. The process also requires certain economic assumptions, some of which are mandated by the SEC, such as commodity prices. Additional assumptions include drilling and operating expenses, capital expenditures, taxes and availability of funds. Any significant variance in the interpretations or assumptions could materially affect the estimated quantity and value of our reserves and can change substantially over time. Periodic revisions to the estimated reserves and future cash flows may be necessary as a result of reservoir performance, drilling activity, commodity prices, fluctuations in operating expenses, technological advances, new geological or geophysical data or other economic factors. Accordingly, reserve estimates are generally different from the quantities ultimately recovered. We cannot predict the amounts or timing of such future revisions.

Our reserves estimate has been prepared by our petroleum engineering staff and audited by Miller and Lents, independent petroleum engineers, who in their opinion determined the estimates presented to be reasonable in the aggregate. For more information regarding reserve estimation, including historical reserve revisions, refer to the Supplemental Oil and Gas Information to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in Item 8.

Our rate of recording depreciation, depletion and amortization (DD&A) expense is dependent upon our estimate of proved and proved developed reserves, which are utilized in our unit-of-production calculation. If the estimates of proved reserves were to be reduced, the rate at which we record DD&A expense would increase, reducing net income. Such a reduction in reserves may result from lower market prices, which may make it uneconomic to drill and produce higher cost fields. A five percent positive or negative revision to proved reserves would result in a decrease of $0.02 per Mcfe and an increase of $0.02 per Mcfe, respectively, on our DD&A rate. This estimated impact is based on current data, and actual events could require different adjustments to our DD&A rate.

In addition, a decline in proved reserve estimates may impact the outcome of our impairment test under applicable accounting standards. Due to the inherent imprecision of the reserve estimation process, risks associated with the operations of proved producing properties and market sensitive commodity prices utilized in our impairment analysis, management cannot determine if an impairment is reasonably likely to occur in the future.

Oil and Gas Properties

We evaluate our proved oil and gas properties for impairment on a field-by-field basis whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate an asset's carrying amount may not be recoverable. We compare expected undiscounted future cash flows to the net book value of the asset. If the future undiscounted expected cash flows, based on our estimate of future commodity prices, operating costs and anticipated production from proved reserves and risk-adjusted probable and possible reserves, are lower than the net book value of the asset, the capitalized cost is reduced to fair value. Commodity pricing is

Unproved oil and gas properties are assessed periodically for impairment on an aggregate basis through periodic updates to our undeveloped acreage amortization based on past drilling and exploration experience, our expectation of converting leases to held by production and average property lives. Average property lives are determined on a geographical basis and based on the estimated life of unproved property leasehold rights. Historically, the average property life in each of the geographical areas has not significantly changed and generally range from three to five years. The commodity price environment may impact the capital available for exploration projects as well as development drilling.

As these properties are developed and reserves are proved, the remaining capitalized costs are subject to depreciation and depletion. If the development of these properties is deemed unsuccessful and the properties are abandoned or surrendered, the capitalized costs related to the unsuccessful activity are expensed in the year the determination is made. The rate at which the unproved properties are written off depends on the timing and success of our future exploration and development program.

Asset Retirement Obligations

The majority of our asset retirement obligations (ARO) relate to the plugging and abandonment of oil and gas wells. We record the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation in the period in which it is incurred, with the associated asset retirement cost capitalized as part of the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. The recognition of an asset retirement obligation requires management to make assumptions that include estimated plugging and abandonment costs, timing of settlements, inflation rates and discount rate. In periods subsequent to initial measurement, the asset retirement cost is depreciated using the units-of-production method, while increases in the discounted ARO liability resulting from the passage of time (accretion expense) are reflected as depreciation, depletion and amortization expense.

Derivative Instruments

Under applicable accounting standards, the fair value of each derivative instrument is recorded as either an asset or liability on the balance sheet. At the end of each quarterly period, these instruments are marked-to-market. The change in fair value of derivatives not designated as hedges are recorded as a component of operating revenues in gain (loss) on derivative instruments in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.

Our derivative contracts are measured based on quotes from our counterparties or internal models. Such quotes and models have been derived using an income approach that considers various inputs including current market and contractual prices for the underlying instruments, quoted forward commodity prices, basis differentials, volatility factors and interest rates for a similar length of time as the derivative contract term, as applicable. These estimates are derived from or verified using relevant NYMEX futures contracts or are compared to multiple quotes obtained from counterparties for reasonableness. The determination of fair value also incorporates a credit adjustment for non-performance risk. We measure the non-performance risk of our counterparties by reviewing credit default swap spreads for the various financial institutions with which we have derivative transactions, while our non-performance risk is evaluated using a market credit spread provided by one of our banks.

Our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity can be significantly impacted by changes in the market value of our derivative instruments due to volatility of commodity prices, both NYMEX and basis differentials.

Income Taxes

We make certain estimates and judgments in determining our income tax expense for financial reporting purposes. These estimates and judgments include the calculation of certain deferred tax assets and liabilities that arise from differences in the timing and recognition of revenue and expenses for tax and financial reporting purposes and estimating reserves for potential adverse outcomes regarding tax positions that we have taken. We account for the uncertainty in income taxes using a recognition and measurement threshold for tax positions taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. The tax benefit from an uncertain tax position is recognized when it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained upon examination by taxing authorities based on technical merits of the position. The amount of the tax benefit recognized is the largest amount of the benefit that has a greater than 50 percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement. The effective tax rate and the tax basis of assets and liabilities reflect management's estimates of the ultimate outcome of various tax uncertainties.

We believe all of our deferred tax assets, net of any valuation allowances, will ultimately be realized, taking into consideration our forecasted future taxable income, which includes consideration of future operating conditions specifically related to commodity prices. If our estimates and judgments change regarding our ability to realize our deferred tax assets, our tax provision could increase in the period it is determined that it is more likely than not it will not be realized.

Our effective tax rate is subject to variability as a result of factors other than changes in federal and state tax rates and/or changes in tax laws which could affect us. Our effective tax rate is affected by changes in the allocation of property, payroll and revenues among states in which we operate. A small change in our estimated future tax rate could have a material effect on current period earnings.

Contingency Reserves

A provision for contingencies is charged to expense when the loss is probable and the cost is estimable. The establishment of a reserve is based on an estimation process that includes the advice of legal counsel and subjective judgment of management. In certain cases, management's judgment is based on the advice and opinions of legal counsel and other advisors, the interpretation of laws and regulations, which can be interpreted differently by regulators and courts of laws, our experience and the experiences of other companies dealing with similar matters, and our decision on how we intend to respond to a particular matter. Actual losses can differ from estimates for various reasons, including those noted above. We monitor known and potential legal, environmental and other contingencies and make our best estimate based on the information we have. Future changes in facts and circumstances not currently foreseeable could result in the actual liability exceeding the estimated ranges of loss and amounts accrued.

Stock-Based Compensation

We account for stock-based compensation under the fair value method of accounting in accordance with applicable accounting standards. Under the fair value method, compensation cost is measured at the grant date for equity-classified awards and remeasured each reporting period for liability-classified awards based on the fair value of an award and is recognized over the service period, which is generally the vesting period. To calculate fair value, we use either a Monte Carlo or Black-Scholes valuation model, as determined by the specific provisions of the award. The use of these models requires significant judgment with respect to expected life, volatility and other factors. Stock-based compensation cost for all types of awards is included in general and administrative expense in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. Refer to Note 14 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a full discussion of our stock-based compensation.

Refer to Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, "Summary of Significant Accounting Policies," for a discussion of recently adopted accounting pronouncements.

Refer to Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, "Summary of Significant Accounting Policies," for a discussion of new accounting pronouncements that affect us.

Our operations are subject to various types of regulation by federal, state and local authorities. Refer to the "Other Business Matters" section of Item 1 for a discussion of these regulations.

The majority of our production is sold at market prices. Generally, if the related commodity index declines, the price that we receive for our production will also decline. Therefore, the amount of revenue that we realize is determined by certain factors that are beyond our control. However, management may mitigate this price risk on a portion of our anticipated production with the use of financial commodity derivatives, including collars and swaps to reduce the impact of sustained lower pricing on our revenue. Under both arrangements, there is also a risk that the movement of index prices may result in our inability to realize the full benefit of an improvement in market conditions.

We reported net income for 2019 of $681.1 million, or $1.64 per share, compared to net income for 2018 of $557.0 million, or $1.25 per share. The increase in net income was primarily due to lower operating expenses and interest expense and higher earnings on equity method investments. These increases were partially offset by lower operating revenues and higher income tax expense.

The increase in natural gas revenues of $104.1 million was due to higher production partially offset by lower natural gas prices. The increase in production was a result of an increase in our drilling and completion activities in the Marcellus Shale.

Total costs and expenses from operations decreased by $211.6 million from 2018 to 2019. The primary reasons for this fluctuation are as follows:

During 2019, we recognized a net aggregate loss of $1.5 million primarily due to the conveyance of certain remaining properties related to the sale of our Eagle Ford Shale assets. During 2018, we recognized a net aggregate loss of $16.3 million primarily due to the sale of our Eagle Ford Shale assets, partially offset by a gain on the sale of oil and gas properties in the Haynesville Shale.

Interest expense decreased $18.2 million primarily due to $14.1 million lower interest expense resulting from the repayment of $237.0 million of our 6.51% weighted-average senior notes, which matured in July 2018 and $67.0 million of our 9.78% senior notes that matured in December 2018 and a $6.2 million decrease related to income tax reserves. These decreases were partially offset by $3.6 million of lower interest income.

Income tax expense increased $78.1 million due to higher pretax income and a higher effective tax rate. The effective tax rates for 2019 and 2018 were 24.3 percent and 20.2 percent, respectively. The increase in the effective tax rate is primarily due to the impact of non-recurring discrete items recorded during 2019 compared to 2018.

Excluding the impact of any discrete items, we expect our 2020 effective income tax rate to be approximately 23.0 percent. However, this rate may fluctuate based on a number of factors, including but not limited to changes in enacted federal and/or state rates that occur during the year, changes in our executive compensation and the amount of excess tax benefits on stock-based compensation, as well as changes in the composition and location of our asset base, our employees and our customers.

We reported net income for 2018 of $557.0 million, or $1.25 per share, compared to net income for 2017 of $100.4 million, or $0.22 per share. The increase in net income was primarily due to higher operating revenues, lower operating expenses and higher earnings on equity method investments, partially offset by higher income tax expense.

For additional information on the comparison of the results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2018 compared to the year ended December 31, 2017, refer to Management's Discussion and Analysis included in the Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018.

We report our financial results in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP). However, we believe certain non-GAAP performance measures may provide financial statement users with additional meaningful comparisons between current results and results of prior periods. In addition, we believe these measures are used by analysts and others in the valuation, rating and investment recommendations of companies within the oil and natural gas exploration and production industry. The reconciliations of GAAP financial measures to non-GAAP financial measures presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are shown below.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Our primary market risk is exposure to natural gas prices. Realized prices are mainly driven by spot market prices for North American natural gas production, which can be volatile and unpredictable.

Our risk management strategy is designed to reduce the risk of commodity price volatility for our production in the natural gas markets through the use of financial commodity derivatives. A committee that consists of members of senior management oversees our risk management activities. Our financial commodity derivatives generally cover a portion of our production and provide only partial price protection by limiting the benefit to us of increases in prices, while protecting us in the event of price declines. Further, if any of our counterparties defaulted, this protection might be limited as we might not receive the full benefit of our financial commodity derivatives. Please read the discussion below as well as Note 6 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a more detailed discussion of our derivative instruments.

Periodically, we enter into financial commodity derivatives, including collar, swap and basis swap agreements, to protect against exposure to commodity price declines related to our natural gas production. Our credit agreement restricts our ability to enter into financial commodity derivatives other than to hedge or mitigate risks to which we have actual or projected exposure or as permitted under our risk management policies and not subjecting us to material speculative risks. All of our financial derivatives are used for risk management purposes and are not held for trading purposes. Under the collar agreements, if the index price rises above the ceiling price, we pay the counterparty. If the index price falls below the floor price, the counterparty pays us. Under the swap agreements, we receive a fixed price on a notional quantity of natural gas in exchange for paying a variable price based on a market-based index.

The amounts set forth in the table above represent our total unrealized derivative position at December 31, 2019 and exclude the impact of non-performance risk. Non-performance risk is considered in the fair value of our derivative instruments that are recorded in our Consolidated Financial Statements and is primarily evaluated by reviewing credit default swap spreads for the various financial institutions with which we have derivative contracts, while our non-performance risk is evaluated using a market credit spread provided by one of our banks.

A significant portion of our expected natural gas production for 2020 and beyond is currently unhedged and directly exposed to the volatility in natural gas market prices, whether favorable or unfavorable.

During 2019, natural gas basis swaps covered 63.8 Bcf, or seven percent of natural gas production at an average price of $2.32 per Mcf. Natural gas swaps covered 226.1 Bcf, or 26 percent, of natural gas production at a weighted-average price of $3.30 per Mcf.

We are exposed to market risk on financial commodity derivative instruments to the extent of changes in market prices of natural gas. However, the market risk exposure on these derivative contracts is generally offset by the gain or loss recognized upon the ultimate sale of the commodity. Although notional contract amounts are used to express the volume of natural gas agreements, the amounts that can be subject to credit risk in the event of non-performance by third parties are substantially smaller. Our counterparties are primarily commercial banks and financial service institutions that management believes present minimal credit risk and our derivative contracts are with multiple counterparties to minimize our exposure to any individual counterparty. We perform both quantitative and qualitative assessments of these counterparties based on their credit ratings and credit default swap rates where applicable. We have not incurred any losses related to non-performance risk of our counterparties and we do not anticipate any material impact on our financial results due to non-performance by third parties. However, we cannot be certain that we will not experience such losses in the future.

The preceding paragraphs contain forward-looking information concerning future production and projected gains and losses, which may be impacted both by production and by changes in the future commodity prices. Refer to “Forward-Looking Information” for further details.

The estimated fair value of other financial instruments is the amount at which the instrument could be exchanged currently between willing parties. The carrying amounts reported in the Consolidated Balance Sheet for cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash approximate fair value due to the short-term maturities of these instruments.

We use available market data and valuation methodologies to estimate the fair value of debt. The fair value of debt is the estimated amount we would have to pay a third party to assume the debt, including a credit spread for the difference between the issue rate and the period end market rate. The credit spread is our default or repayment risk. The credit spread (premium or discount) is determined by comparing our senior notes and revolving credit facility to new issuances (secured and unsecured) and secondary trades of similar size and credit statistics for both public and private debt. The fair value of all senior notes and the revolving credit facility is based on interest rates currently available to us.

Opinions on the Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Cabot Oil & Gas Corporation and its subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity and of cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2019, including the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). We also have audited the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2019 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2019, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the COSO.

Basis for Opinions

The Company's management is responsible for these consolidated financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express opinions on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud, and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.

Our audits of the consolidated financial statements included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.