ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Our business activities and the value of our securities are subject to significant hazards and risks, including those described below. If any of such events should occur, our business, financial condition, liquidity, and/or results of operations could be materially harmed, and holders and purchasers of our securities could lose part or all of their investments. Additional risks relating to our securities may be included in the prospectuses for securities we issue in the future.
Future economic conditions in the U.S. and certain international markets may materially adversely impact our operating results.
The U.S. and other world economies continue to recover from the global financial crisis and recession that began in 2008. Growth has resumed but is modest and at an unsteady rate. The continuation of current global market conditions, uncertainty or further deterioration, including the economic instability in Europe and certain emerging markets, is likely to have significant long-term effects, including a future global economic growth rate that is slower than in the years leading up to the crisis, and more volatility may occur before any sustainable growth rate is achieved. Global economic growth drives demand for energy from all sources, including fossil fuels. A lower future economic growth rate could result in decreased demand growth for our crude oil and natural gas production as well as lower commodity prices, which would reduce our cash flows from operations and our profitability.
Crude oil and natural gas prices are volatile, and a substantial reduction in these prices could adversely affect our results and the price of our common stock.
Our revenues, operating results, and future rate of growth depend highly upon the prices we receive for our crude oil and natural gas production. Historically, the markets for crude oil and natural gas have been volatile and are likely to continue to be volatile in the future. For example, the NYMEX daily settlement price for the prompt month oil contract in 2013 ranged from a high of $110.53 per barrel to a low of $86.68 per barrel. The NYMEX daily settlement price for the prompt month natural gas contract in 2013 ranged from a high of $4.46 per MMBtu to a low of $3.11 per MMBtu. The market prices for crude oil and natural gas depend on factors beyond our control. These factors include demand for crude oil and natural gas, which fluctuates with changes in market and economic conditions, and other factors, including:
•
worldwide and domestic supplies of crude oil and natural gas;
•
actions taken by foreign oil and gas producing nations;
•
political conditions and events (including instability, changes in governments, or armed conflict) in crude oil or natural gas producing regions;
•
the level of global crude oil and natural gas inventories;
•
the price and level of imported foreign crude oil and natural gas;
•
the price and availability of alternative fuels, including coal and biofuels;
•
the availability of pipeline capacity and infrastructure;
•
the availability of crude oil transportation and refining capacity;
•
weather conditions;
•
electricity generation;
•
domestic and foreign governmental regulations and taxes; and
•
the overall economic environment.
Significant declines in crude oil and natural gas prices for an extended period may have the following effects on our business:
•
limiting our financial condition, liquidity, and/or ability to fund planned capital expenditures and operations;
•
reducing the amount of crude oil and natural gas that we can produce economically;
•
causing us to delay or postpone some of our capital projects;
•
reducing our revenues, operating income, and cash flows;
•
limiting our access to sources of capital, such as equity and long-term debt;
•
a reduction in the carrying value of our crude oil and natural gas properties; or
•
a reduction in the carrying value of goodwill.
Our ability to sell natural gas or oil and/or receive market prices for our natural gas or oil may be adversely affected by pipeline and gathering system capacity constraints and various transportation interruptions.
A portion of our natural gas and oil production in any region may be interrupted, limited, or shut in, from time to time for numerous reasons, including as a result of weather conditions, accidents, loss of pipeline or gathering system access, field labor issues or strikes, or capital constraints that limit the ability of third parties to construct gathering systems, processing facilities, or interstate pipelines to transport our production, or we might voluntarily curtail production in response to market conditions. If a substantial amount of our production is interrupted at the same time, it could temporarily adversely affect our cash flows.
Weather and climate may have a significant adverse impact on our revenues and productivity.
Demand for oil and natural gas are, to a significant degree, dependent on weather and climate, which impact the price we receive for the commodities we produce. In addition, our exploration and development activities and equipment can be adversely affected by severe weather, such as freezing temperatures, hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, storms in the North Sea, or cyclones offshore Australia, which may cause a loss of production from temporary cessation of activity or lost or damaged equipment. Our planning for normal climatic variation, insurance programs, and emergency recovery plans may inadequately mitigate the effects of such weather conditions, and not all such effects can be predicted, eliminated, or insured against.
Our operations involve a high degree of operational risk, particularly risk of personal injury, damage, or loss of equipment, and environmental accidents.
Our operations are subject to hazards and risks inherent in the drilling, production, and transportation of crude oil and natural gas, including:
•
well blowouts, explosions, and cratering;
•
pipeline or other facility ruptures and spills;
•
fires;
•
formations with abnormal pressures;
•
equipment malfunctions;
•
hurricanes, storms, and/or cyclones, which could affect our operations in areas such as on- and offshore the Gulf Coast, North Sea, and Australia, and other natural disasters and weather conditions; and
•
surface spillage and surface or ground water contamination from petroleum constituents, saltwater, or hydraulic fracturing chemical additives.
Failure or loss of equipment as the result of equipment malfunctions, cyber attacks, or natural disasters such as hurricanes, could result in property damages, personal injury, environmental pollution and other damages for which we could be liable. Litigation arising from a catastrophic occurrence, such as a well blowout, explosion, or fire at a location where our equipment and services are used, or ground water contamination from hydraulic
fracturing chemical additives may result in substantial claims for damages. Ineffective containment of a drilling well blowout or pipeline rupture, or surface spillage and surface or ground water contamination from petroleum constituents or hydraulic fracturing chemical additives could result in extensive environmental pollution and substantial remediation expenses. If a significant amount of our production is interrupted, our containment efforts prove to be ineffective or litigation arises as the result of a catastrophic occurrence, our cash flows, and, in turn, our results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
Cyber attacks targeting systems and infrastructure used by the oil and gas industry may adversely impact our operations.
Our business has become increasingly dependent on digital technologies to conduct certain exploration, development and production activities. We depend on digital technology to estimate quantities of oil and gas reserves, process and record financial and operating data, analyze seismic and drilling information, and communicate with our employees and third party partners. Unauthorized access to our seismic data, reserves information or other proprietary information could lead to data corruption, communication interruption, or other operational disruptions in our exploration or production operations. Also, computers control nearly all of the oil and gas distribution systems in the United States and abroad, which are necessary to transport our production to market. A cyber attack directed at oil and gas distribution systems could damage critical distribution and storage assets or the environment, delay or prevent delivery of production to markets and make it difficult or impossible to accurately account for production and settle transactions.
While we have experienced cyber attacks, we have not suffered any material losses relating to such attacks; however, there is no assurance that we will not suffer such losses in the future. Further, as cyber attacks continue to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate any vulnerabilities to cyber attacks.
The additional deepwater drilling laws and regulations, delays in the processing and approval of permits and other related developments in the Gulf of Mexico as well as our other locations resulting from the Deepwater Horizon incident could adversely affect Apache’s business.
In response to the Deepwater Horizon incident in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico in April 2010, and as directed by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) issued new guidelines and regulations regarding safety, environmental matters, drilling equipment, and decommissioning applicable to drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. These new regulations have imposed additional requirements with respect to development and production activities in the Gulf of Mexico and have delayed the approval of applications to drill in both deepwater and shallow-water areas.
Further, at this time, we cannot predict with any certainty what further impact, if any, the Deepwater Horizon incident may have on the regulation of offshore oil and gas exploration and development activity, or on the cost or availability of insurance coverage to cover the risks of such operations. The enactment of new or stricter regulations in the United States and other countries and increased liability for companies operating in this sector could adversely affect Apache’s operations in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico as well as in our other locations.
Our commodity price risk management and trading activities may prevent us from benefiting fully from price increases and may expose us to other risks.
To the extent that we engage in price risk management activities to protect ourselves from commodity price declines, we may be prevented from realizing the benefits of price increases above the levels of the derivative instruments used to manage price risk. In addition, our hedging arrangements may expose us to the risk of financial loss in certain circumstances, including instances in which:
•
our production falls short of the hedged volumes;
•
there is a widening of price-basis differentials between delivery points for our production and the delivery point assumed in the hedge arrangement;
•
the counterparties to our hedging or other price risk management contracts fail to perform under those arrangements; or
•
an unexpected event materially impacts oil and natural gas prices.
The credit risk of financial institutions could adversely affect us.
We have exposure to different counterparties, and we have entered into transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, other investment funds, and other institutions. These transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty. Deterioration in the credit markets may impact the credit ratings of our current and potential counterparties and affect their ability to fulfill their existing obligations to us and their willingness to enter into future transactions with us. We have exposure to financial institutions in the form of derivative transactions in connection with our hedges and insurance companies in the form of claims under our policies. In addition, if any lender under our credit facility is unable to fund its commitment, our liquidity will be reduced by an amount up to the aggregate amount of such lender’s commitment under our credit facility.
We are exposed to counterparty credit risk as a result of our receivables.
We are exposed to risk of financial loss from trade, joint venture, joint interest billing, and other receivables. We sell our crude oil, natural gas, and NGLs to a variety of purchasers. As operator, we pay expenses and bill our non-operating partners for their respective shares of costs. Some of our purchasers and non-operating partners may experience liquidity problems and may not be able to meet their financial obligations. Nonperformance by a trade creditor or non-operating partner could result in significant financial losses.
A downgrade in our credit rating could negatively impact our cost of and ability to access capital.
We receive debt ratings from the major credit rating agencies in the United States. Factors that may impact our credit ratings include debt levels, planned asset purchases or sales, and near-term and long-term production growth opportunities. Liquidity, asset quality, cost structure, product mix, and commodity pricing levels and others are also considered by the rating agencies. A ratings downgrade could adversely impact our ability to access debt markets in the future, increase the cost of future debt, and potentially require us to post letters of credit or other forms of collateral for certain obligations.
Market conditions may restrict our ability to obtain funds for future development and working capital needs, which may limit our financial flexibility.
The credit markets are subject to fluctuation and are vulnerable to unpredictable shocks. We have a significant development project inventory and an extensive exploration portfolio, which will require substantial future investment. We and/or our partners may need to seek financing in order to fund these or other future activities. Our future access to capital, as well as that of our partners and contractors, could be limited if the debt or equity markets are constrained. This could significantly delay development of our property interests.
Our ability to declare and pay dividends is subject to limitations.
The payment of future dividends on our capital stock is subject to the discretion of our board of directors, which considers, among other factors, our operating results, overall financial condition, credit-risk considerations, and capital requirements, as well as general business and market conditions. Our board of directors is not required to declare dividends on our common stock and may decide not to declare dividends.
Any indentures and other financing agreements that we enter into in the future may limit our ability to pay cash dividends on our capital stock, including common stock. In addition, under Delaware law, dividends on capital stock may only be paid from “surplus,” which is defined as the amount by which our total assets exceeds
the sum of our total liabilities, including contingent liabilities, and the amount of our capital; if there is no surplus, cash dividends on capital stock may only be paid from our net profits for the then current and/or the preceding fiscal year. Further, even if we are permitted under our contractual obligations and Delaware law to pay cash dividends on common stock, we may not have sufficient cash to pay dividends in cash on our common stock.
Discoveries or acquisitions of additional reserves are needed to avoid a material decline in reserves and production.
The production rate from oil and gas properties generally declines as reserves are depleted, while related per-unit production costs generally increase as a result of decreasing reservoir pressures and other factors. Therefore, unless we add reserves through exploration and development activities or, through engineering studies, identify additional behind-pipe zones, secondary recovery reserves, or tertiary recovery reserves, or acquire additional properties containing proved reserves, our estimated proved reserves will decline materially as reserves are produced. Future oil and gas production is, therefore, highly dependent upon our level of success in acquiring or finding additional reserves on an economic basis. Furthermore, if oil or gas prices increase, our cost for additional reserves could also increase.
We may not realize an adequate return on wells that we drill.
Drilling for oil and gas involves numerous risks, including the risk that we will not encounter commercially productive oil or gas reservoirs. The wells we drill or participate in may not be productive, and we may not recover all or any portion of our investment in those wells. The seismic data and other technologies we use do not allow us to know conclusively prior to drilling a well that crude or natural gas is present or may be produced economically. The costs of drilling, completing, and operating wells are often uncertain, and drilling operations may be curtailed, delayed, or canceled as a result of a variety of factors including, but not limited to:
•
unexpected drilling conditions;
•
pressure or irregularities in formations;
•
equipment failures or accidents;
•
fires, explosions, blowouts, and surface cratering;
•
marine risks such as capsizing, collisions, and hurricanes;
•
other adverse weather conditions; and
•
increases in the cost of, or shortages or delays in the availability of, drilling rigs and equipment.
Future drilling activities may not be successful, and, if unsuccessful, this failure could have an adverse effect on our future results of operations and financial condition. While all drilling, whether developmental or exploratory, involves these risks, exploratory drilling involves greater risks of dry holes or failure to find commercial quantities of hydrocarbons.
Material differences between the estimated and actual timing of critical events or costs may affect the completion and commencement of production from development projects.
We are involved in several large development projects and the completion of these projects may be delayed beyond our anticipated completion dates. Our projects may be delayed by project approvals from joint venture partners, timely issuances of permits and licenses by governmental agencies, weather conditions, manufacturing and delivery schedules of critical equipment, and other unforeseen events. Delays and differences between estimated and actual timing of critical events may adversely affect our large development projects and our ability to participate in large-scale development projects in the future. In addition, our estimates of future development costs are based on current expectation of prices and other costs of equipment and personell we will need to
implement such projects. Our actual future development costs may be significantly higher than we currently estimate. If costs become too high, our development projects may become uneconomic to us and we may be forced to abandon such development projects.
We may fail to fully identify potential problems related to acquired reserves or to properly estimate those reserves.
Although we perform a review of properties that we acquire that we believe is consistent with industry practices, such reviews are inherently incomplete. It generally is not feasible to review in-depth every individual property involved in each acquisition. Ordinarily, we will focus our review efforts on the higher-value properties and will sample the remainder. However, even a detailed review of records and properties may not necessarily reveal existing or potential problems, nor will it permit us as a buyer to become sufficiently familiar with the properties to assess fully and accurately their deficiencies and potential. Inspections may not always be performed on every well, and environmental problems, such as groundwater contamination, are not necessarily observable even when an inspection is undertaken. Even when problems are identified, we often assume certain environmental and other risks and liabilities in connection with acquired properties. There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of proved oil and gas reserves and future production rates and costs with respect to acquired properties, and actual results may vary substantially from those assumed in the estimates. In addition, there can be no assurance that acquisitions will not have an adverse effect upon our operating results, particularly during the periods in which the operations of acquired businesses are being integrated into our ongoing operations.
The BP Acquisition and/or our liabilities could be adversely affected in the event one or more of the BP entities become the subject of a bankruptcy case.
In light of the extensive costs and liabilities related to the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, there has been public speculation as to whether one or more of the BP entities could become the subject of a case or proceeding under Title 11 of the United States Code or any other relevant insolvency law or similar law (which we collectively refer to as Insolvency Laws). In the event that one or more of the BP entities were to become the subject of such a case or proceeding, a court may find that the three definitive purchase and sale agreements (the “BP Purchase Agreements”) we entered into in connection with our 2010 acquisition of properties from BP (the “BP Properties”) are executory contracts, in which case such BP entities may, subject to relevant Insolvency Laws, have the right to reject the agreements and refuse to perform their future obligations under them. In this event, our ability to enforce our rights under the BP Purchase Agreements could be adversely affected.
Additionally, in a case or proceeding under relevant Insolvency Laws, a court may find that the sale of the BP Properties constitutes a constructive fraudulent conveyance that should be set aside. While the tests for determining whether a transfer of assets constitutes a constructive fraudulent conveyance vary among jurisdictions, such a determination generally requires that the seller received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for such transfer or obligation and the seller was insolvent at the time of the transaction, or was rendered insolvent or left with unreasonably small capital to meet its anticipated business needs as a result of the transaction. The applicable time periods for such a finding also vary among jurisdictions, but generally range from two to six years. If a court were to make such a determination in a proceeding under relevant Insolvency Laws, our rights under the BP Purchase Agreements, and our rights to the BP Properties, could be adversely affected.
Crude oil and natural gas reserves are estimates, and actual recoveries may vary significantly.
There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating crude oil and natural gas reserves and their value. Reservoir engineering is a subjective process of estimating underground accumulations of crude oil and natural gas that cannot be measured in an exact manner. Because of the high degree of judgment involved, the accuracy of any reserve estimate is inherently imprecise, and a function of the quality of available data and the engineering
and geological interpretation. Our reserves estimates are based on 12-month average prices, except where contractual arrangements exist; therefore, reserves quantities will change when actual prices increase or decrease. In addition, results of drilling, testing, and production may substantially change the reserve estimates for a given reservoir over time. The estimates of our proved reserves and estimated future net revenues also depend on a number of factors and assumptions that may vary considerably from actual results, including:
•
historical production from the area compared with production from other areas;
•
the effects of regulations by governmental agencies, including changes to severance and excise taxes;
•
future operating costs and capital expenditures; and
•
workover and remediation costs.
For these reasons, estimates of the economically recoverable quantities of crude oil and natural gas attributable to any particular group of properties, classifications of those reserves and estimates of the future net cash flows expected from them prepared by different engineers or by the same engineers but at different times may vary substantially. Accordingly, reserves estimates may be subject to upward or downward adjustment, and actual production, revenue and expenditures with respect to our reserves likely will vary, possibly materially, from estimates.
Additionally, because some of our reserves estimates are calculated using volumetric analysis, those estimates are less reliable than the estimates based on a lengthy production history. Volumetric analysis involves estimating the volume of a reservoir based on the net feet of pay of the structure and an estimation of the area covered by the structure. In addition, realization or recognition of proved undeveloped reserves will depend on our development schedule and plans. A change in future development plans for proved undeveloped reserves could cause the discontinuation of the classification of these reserves as proved.
Certain of our undeveloped leasehold acreage is subject to leases that will expire over the next several years unless production is established on units containing the acreage.
A sizeable portion of our acreage is currently undeveloped. Unless production in paying quantities is established on units containing certain of these leases during their terms, the leases will expire. If our leases expire, we will lose our right to develop the related properties. Our drilling plans for these areas are subject to change based upon various factors, including drilling results, oil and natural gas prices, the availability and cost of capital, drilling, and production costs, availability of drilling services and equipment, gathering system and pipeline transportation constraints, and regulatory approvals.
We may incur significant costs related to environmental matters.
As an owner or lessee and operator of oil and gas properties, we are subject to various federal, provincial, state, local, and foreign country laws and regulations relating to discharge of materials into, and protection of, the environment. These laws and regulations may, among other things, impose liability on the lessee under an oil and gas lease for the cost of pollution clean-up and other remediation activities resulting from operations, subject the lessee to liability for pollution and other damages, limit or constrain operations in affected areas, and require suspension or cessation of operations in affected areas. Our efforts to limit our exposure to such liability and cost may prove inadequate and result in significant adverse effects to our results of operations. In addition, it is possible that the increasingly strict requirements imposed by environmental laws and enforcement policies could require us to make significant capital expenditures. Such capital expenditures could adversely impact our cash flows and our financial condition.
Our North American operations are subject to governmental risks that may impact our operations.
Our North American operations have been, and at times in the future may be, affected by political developments and by federal, state, provincial, and local laws and regulations such as restrictions on production,
changes in taxes, royalties and other amounts payable to governments or governmental agencies, price or gathering rate controls, and environmental protection laws and regulations. New political developments, laws, and regulations may adversely impact our results of operations.
Pending regulations related to emissions and the impact of any changes in climate could adversely impact our business.
Several countries where we operate, including Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom either tax or assess some form of greenhouse gas (GHG) related fees on our operations. Exposure has not been material to date, although a change in existing regulations could adversely affect our cash flows and results of operations.
In the event the predictions for rising temperatures and sea levels suggested by reports of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change do transpire, we do not believe those events by themselves are likely to impact our assets or operations. However, any increase in severe weather could have a material adverse effect on our assets and operations.
The proposed U.S. federal budget for fiscal year 2014, when released, is expected to include certain provisions that, if passed, will have an adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, and cash flows.
To date, the Office of Management and Budget has not released a summary of the proposed U.S. federal budget for fiscal year 2014. It is anticipated that the proposed budget may recommend the repeal of many tax incentives and deductions that are currently used by U.S. oil and gas companies. These provisions could include the elimination of the ability to fully deduct intangible drilling costs in the year incurred; increases in the taxation of foreign source income; repeal of the manufacturing tax deduction for oil and natural gas companies; and an increase in the geological and geophysical amortization period for independent producers. Should some or all of these provisions become law, our taxes will increase, potentially significantly, which would have a negative impact on our net income and cash flows. This could also cause us to reduce our drilling activities in the U.S. Since none of these proposals have been voted on or become law, we do not know the ultimate impact these proposed changes may have on our business.
Derivatives regulation included in current or proposed financial legislation and rulemaking could impede our ability to manage business and financial risks by restricting our use of derivative instruments as hedges against fluctuating commodity prices.
The Dodd-Frank Act, which was signed into law in July 2010, contains significant derivatives regulation, including a requirement that certain transactions be cleared on exchanges and a requirement to post collateral (commonly referred to as “margin”) for such transactions. The Act provides for a potential exception from these clearing and collateral requirements for commercial end-users and it includes a number of defined terms that will be used in determining how this exception applies to particular derivative transactions and the parties to those transactions. We expect to qualify as a commercial end-user. As required by the Dodd-Frank Act, the Commodities Futures and Trading Commission (CFTC) has promulgated numerous rules to define these terms. In addition, it is possible that the CFTC, in conjunction with prudential regulators, may mandate that financial counterparties entering into swap transactions with end-users must do so with credit support agreements in place, which could result in negotiated credit thresholds above which an end-user must post collateral.
We use derivative instruments with respect to a portion of our expected crude oil and natural gas production in order to reduce the impact of commodity price fluctuations and enhance the stability of cash flows to support our capital investment programs and acquisitions. Given our current investment grade status, our current derivative contracts do not require the posting of margin regardless of the size of our liability positions.
Depending on the rules and definitions adopted by the CFTC and prudential regulators, we could be required to post significant amounts of collateral with our dealer counterparties for derivative transactions. Requirements to post cash collateral could result in negative impacts on our liquidity and financial flexibility and
also cause us to incur additional debt and/or reduce capital investment. In addition, the final CFTC rules may also require the counterparties to our derivative instruments to move some of their derivative activities to a separate entity, which may not be as creditworthy as the current counterparty.
Proposed federal, state, or local regulation regarding hydraulic fracturing could increase our operating and capital costs.
Several proposals are before the U.S. Congress that, if implemented, would either prohibit or restrict the practice of hydraulic fracturing or subject the process to regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. Several states are considering legislation to regulate hydraulic fracturing practices that could impose more stringent permitting, transparency, and well construction requirements on hydraulic-fracturing operations or otherwise seek to ban fracturing activities altogether. Hydraulic fracturing of wells and subsurface water disposal are also under public and governmental scrutiny due to potential environmental and physical impacts, including possible contamination of groundwater and drinking water and possible links to earthquakes. In addition, some municipalities have significantly limited or prohibited drilling activities and/or hydraulic fracturing, or are considering doing so. We routinely use fracturing techniques in the U.S. and other regions to expand the available space for natural gas and oil to migrate toward the wellbore. It is typically done at substantial depths in very tight formations.
Although it is not possible at this time to predict the final outcome of the legislation regarding hydraulic fracturing, any new federal, state, or local restrictions on hydraulic fracturing that may be imposed in areas in which we conduct business could result in increased compliance costs or additional operating restrictions in the U.S.
A deterioration of conditions in Egypt or changes in the economic and political environment in Egypt could have an adverse impact on our business.
In February 2011, the former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak stepped down, and the Egyptian Supreme Council of the Armed Forces took power, announcing that it would remain in power until the presidential and parliamentary elections could be held. In June 2012, Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party was elected as Egypt’s new president. In July 2013, the Egyptian military removed President Morsi from power and installed Egypt’s Chief Justice, Adly Mansour, as acting president of a temporary government, which is seeking to set a schedule for new parliamentary and presidential elections in 2014. In January 2014, Egyptians voted on and overwhelmingly approved a new constitution, and Mr. Mansour announced that the presidential election will be held prior to the parliamentary elections. While the date of the presidential election has not been announced, it is expected to be held by mid-April 2014. Deterioration in the political, economic, and social conditions or other relevant policies of the Egyptian government, such as changes in laws or regulations, export restrictions, expropriation of our assets or resource nationalization, and/or forced renegotiation or modification of our existing contracts with EGPC could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Our operations in Egypt contributed 19 percent of our 2013 production and accounted for 10 percent of our year-end estimated proved reserves. At year-end 2013, 18 percent of our estimated discounted future net cash flows and 8 percent of our net capitalized oil and gas property was attributable to Egypt. These totals reflect our consolidated interests in Egypt including Sinopec’s one-third noncontrolling interest.
International operations have uncertain political, economic, and other risks.
Our operations outside North America are based primarily in Egypt, Australia, the United Kingdom, and Argentina. On a barrel equivalent basis, approximately 42 percent of our 2013 production was outside North America, and approximately 32 percent of our estimated proved oil and gas reserves on December 31, 2013 were located outside North America. As a result, a significant portion of our production and resources are subject to the increased political and economic risks and other factors associated with international operations including, but not limited to:
•
general strikes and civil unrest;
•
the risk of war, acts of terrorism, expropriation and resource nationalization, forced renegotiation or modification of existing contracts;
•
import and export regulations;
•
taxation policies, including royalty and tax increases and retroactive tax claims, and investment restrictions;
•
price control;
•
transportation regulations and tariffs;
•
constrained natural gas markets dependent on demand in a single or limited geographical area;
•
exchange controls, currency fluctuations, devaluation, or other activities that limit or disrupt markets and restrict payments or the movement of funds;
•
laws and policies of the United States affecting foreign trade, including trade sanctions;
•
the possibility of being subject to exclusive jurisdiction of foreign courts in connection with legal disputes relating to licenses to operate and concession rights in countries where we currently operate;
•
the possible inability to subject foreign persons, especially foreign oil ministries and national oil companies, to the jurisdiction of courts in the United States; and
•
difficulties in enforcing our rights against a governmental agency because of the doctrine of sovereign immunity and foreign sovereignty over international operations.
Foreign countries have occasionally asserted rights to oil and gas properties through border disputes. If a country claims superior rights to oil and gas leases or concessions granted to us by another country, our interests could decrease in value or be lost. Even our smaller international assets may affect our overall business and results of operations by distracting management’s attention from our more significant assets. Certain regions of the world in which we operate have a history of political and economic instability. This instability could result in new governments or the adoption of new policies that might result in a substantially more hostile attitude toward foreign investments such as ours. In an extreme case, such a change could result in termination of contract rights and expropriation of our assets. This could adversely affect our interests and our future profitability.
The impact that future terrorist attacks or regional hostilities may have on the oil and gas industry in general, and on our operations in particular, is not known at this time. Uncertainty surrounding military strikes or a sustained military campaign may affect operations in unpredictable ways, including disruptions of fuel supplies and markets, particularly oil, and the possibility that infrastructure facilities, including pipelines, production facilities, processing plants, and refineries, could be direct targets of, or indirect casualties of, an act of terror or war. We may be required to incur significant costs in the future to safeguard our assets against terrorist activities.
Our operations are sensitive to currency rate fluctuations.
Our operations are sensitive to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates, particularly between the U.S. dollar and the Canadian dollar, the Australian dollar, and the British Pound. Our financial statements, presented in U.S. dollars, may be affected by foreign currency fluctuations through both translation risk and transaction risk. Volatility in exchange rates may adversely affect our results of operations, particularly through the weakening of the U.S. dollar relative to other currencies.
We face strong industry competition that may have a significant negative impact on our results of operations.
Strong competition exists in all sectors of the oil and gas exploration and production industry. We compete with major integrated and other independent oil and gas companies for acquisition of oil and gas leases, properties, and reserves, equipment, and labor required to explore, develop, and operate those properties, and
marketing of oil and natural gas production. Crude oil and natural gas prices impact the costs of properties available for acquisition and the number of companies with the financial resources to pursue acquisition opportunities. Many of our competitors have financial and other resources substantially larger than we possess and have established strategic long-term positions and maintain strong governmental relationships in countries in which we may seek new entry. As a consequence, we may be at a competitive disadvantage in bidding for drilling rights. In addition, many of our larger competitors may have a competitive advantage when responding to factors that affect demand for oil and natural gas production, such as fluctuating worldwide commodity prices and levels of production, the cost and availability of alternative fuels, and the application of government regulations. We also compete in attracting and retaining personnel, including geologists, geophysicists, engineers, and other specialists. These competitive pressures may have a significant negative impact on our results of operations.
Our insurance policies do not cover all of the risks we face, which could result in significant financial exposure.
Exploration for and production of crude oil and natural gas can be hazardous, involving natural disasters and other events such as blowouts, cratering, fire and explosion and loss of well control, which can result in damage to or destruction of wells or production facilities, injury to persons, loss of life, or damage to property and the environment. Our international operations are also subject to political risk. The insurance coverage that we maintain against certain losses or liabilities arising from our operations may be inadequate to cover any such resulting liability; moreover, insurance is not available to us against all operational risks.
ITEM 1B.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
As of December 31, 2013, we did not have any unresolved comments from the SEC staff that were received 180 or more days prior to year-end.
ITEM 3.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
The information set forth under “Legal Matters” and “Environmental Matters” in Note 8-Commitments and Contingencies in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements set forth in Part IV, Item 15 of this Form 10-K is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 4.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
None.
PART II
ITEM 5.
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR THE REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
During 2013, Apache common stock, par value $0.625 per share, was traded on the New York and Chicago Stock Exchanges and the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “APA.” The table below provides certain information regarding our common stock for 2013 and 2012. Prices were obtained from The New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Composite Transactions Reporting System. Per-share prices and quarterly dividends shown below have been rounded to the indicated decimal place.
The closing price of our common stock, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange Composite Transactions Reporting System for January 31, 2014 (last trading day of the month), was $80.26 per share. As of January 31, 2014, there were 394,724,983 shares of our common stock outstanding held by approximately 5,000 stockholders of record and 313,000 beneficial owners.
We have paid cash dividends on our common stock for 49 consecutive years through December 31, 2013. In the first quarter of 2014 the Board of Directors approved a 25 percent increase to $0.25 per share for the regular quarterly cash dividend on the Company’s common shares. This increase will apply to the dividend on common shares payable on May 22, 2014, to stockholders of record on April 22, 2014, and subsequent dividends paid. When, and if, declared by our Board of Directors, future dividend payments will depend upon our level of earnings, financial requirements, and other relevant factors.
On July 28, 2010, Apache issued 25.3 million depositary shares, each representing a 1/20th interest in a share of Apache’s 6.00-percent Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock, Series D (Preferred Share), or 1.265 million Preferred Shares. Upon conversion of the outstanding Preferred Shares on August 1, 2013, 14.4 million Apache common shares were issued.
In 1995, under our stockholder rights plan, each of our common stockholders received a dividend of one preferred stock purchase right (a Right) for each 2.310 outstanding shares of common stock (adjusted for subsequent stock dividends and a two-for-one stock split) that the stockholder owned. These Rights were originally scheduled to expire on January 31, 2006. Effective as of that date, the Rights were reset to one right per share of common stock, and the expiration was extended to January 31, 2016.
On February 5, 2014, the Company’s Board of Directors voted to terminate the Company’s stockholder rights plan. As a result of this decision, the Board approved an amendment to the Rights Agreement that will have the effect of terminating the Rights. The amendment will change the expiration date to March 7, 2014, and, thereby, accelerate the expiration of the Rights. The Company expects that the amendment will be fully executed on March 7, 2014.
For a description of the rights, please refer to Note 10-Capital Stock in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements set forth in Part IV, Item 15 of this Form 10-K.
Information concerning securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans is set forth under the caption “Equity Compensation Plan Information” in the proxy statement relating to the Company’s 2014 annual meeting of stockholders, which is incorporated herein by reference.
The following stock price performance graph is intended to allow review of stockholder returns, expressed in terms of the appreciation of the Company’s common stock relative to two broad-based stock performance indices. The information is included for historical comparative purposes only and should not be considered indicative of future stock performance. The graph compares the yearly percentage change in the cumulative total stockholder return on the Company’s common stock with the cumulative total return of the Standard & Poor’s Composite 500 Stock Index and of the Dow Jones U.S. Exploration & Production Index (formerly Dow Jones Secondary Oil Stock Index) from December 31, 2008, through December 31, 2013. The stock performance graph and related information shall not be deemed “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC, nor shall information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each as amended, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference into such filing.
ITEM 6.
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The following table sets forth selected financial data of the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries over the five-year period ended December 31, 2013, which information has been derived from the Company’s audited financial statements. This information should be read in connection with, and is qualified in its entirety by, the more detailed information in the Company’s financial statements set forth in Part IV, Item 15 of this Form 10-K. As discussed in more detail under Item 15, 2013 numbers in the following table reflect a total of $1.2 billion ($613 million net of tax) in non-cash write-downs of the carrying value of the Company’s U.S., North Sea, and Argentine proved oil and gas properties as a result of ceiling test limitations and a non-cash write-down related to the Company’s exit of operations in Kenya. The 2012 numbers reflect a total of $1.9 billion ($1.4 billion net of tax) in non-cash write-downs of the carrying value of the Company’s Canadian proved oil and gas properties. The 2009 numbers reflect a $2.82 billion ($1.98 billion net of tax) non-cash write-down of the carrying value of the Company’s U.S. and Canadian proved oil and gas properties as of March 31, 2009.
For a discussion of significant acquisitions and divestitures, see Note 2-Acquisitions and Divestitures in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements set forth in Part IV, Item 15 of this Form 10-K.
ITEM 7.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Apache Corporation, a Delaware corporation formed in 1954, is an independent energy company that explores for, develops, and produces natural gas, crude oil, and natural gas liquids. We currently have exploration and production interests in six countries: the U.S., Canada, Egypt, Australia, the U.K. North Sea, and Argentina. Apache also pursues exploration interests in other countries that may over time result in reportable discoveries and development opportunities.
The following discussion should be read together with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements set forth in Part IV, Item 15, and the risk factors and related information set forth in Part I, Item 1A, and Part II, Item 7A
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
The primary objective of the following information is to provide forward-looking quantitative and qualitative information about our exposure to market risk. The term market risk relates to the risk of loss arising from adverse changes in oil, gas, and NGL prices, interest rates, or foreign currency and adverse governmental actions. The disclosures are not meant to be precise indicators of expected future losses, but rather indicators of reasonably possible losses. The forward-looking information provides indicators of how we view and manage our ongoing market risk exposures.
Commodity Risk
The Company’s revenues, earnings, cash flow, capital investments and, ultimately, future rate of growth are highly dependent on the prices we receive for our crude oil, natural gas and NGLs, which have historically been very volatile because of unpredictable events such as economic growth or retraction, weather and political climate. In 2013, our average crude oil realizations have remained flat at $101.99 per barrel compared to $102.53 per barrel in 2012. Our average natural gas price realizations decreased 3 percent in 2013 to $3.70 per Mcf from $3.80 per Mcf in 2012.
We periodically enter into derivative positions on a portion of our projected oil and natural gas production through a variety of financial and physical arrangements intended to manage fluctuations in cash flows resulting from changes in commodity prices. Apache typically uses futures contracts, swaps, and options to mitigate commodity price risk. In 2013 approximately 8 percent of our natural gas production and approximately 42 percent of our crude oil production was subject to financial derivative hedges, compared with 13 percent and 13 percent, respectively, in 2012.
On December 31, 2013, the Company had open natural gas derivatives in an asset position with a fair value of $3 million. A 10 percent movement in natural gas prices would move the fair value by approximately $463,000. The Company also had open oil derivatives in a liability position with a fair value of $301 million. A 10 percent increase in oil prices would increase the liability by approximately $476 million, while a 10 percent decrease in prices would move the derivatives to an asset position of $175 million. These fair value changes assume volatility based on prevailing market parameters at December 31, 2013. See Note 3-Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements set forth in Part IV, Item 15 of this Form 10-K.
Interest Rate Risk
The Company considers its interest rate risk exposure to be minimal as a result of fixing interest rates on approximately 99.5 percent of the Company’s debt. At December 31, 2013, total debt included $53 million of floating-rate debt. As a result, Apache’s annual interest costs in 2013 will fluctuate based on short-term interest rates on approximately 0.5 percent of our total debt outstanding at December 31, 2013. A 10 percent change in floating interest rates on year-end floating debt balances would change annual interest expense by approximately $1.6 million.
Foreign Currency Risk
The Company’s cash flow stream relating to certain international operations is based on the U.S. dollar equivalent of cash flows measured in foreign currencies. In Australia, oil production is sold under U.S. dollar contracts, and gas production is sold under a mixture of fixed-price U.S. dollar and Australian dollar contracts. Approximately 40 percent of the costs incurred for Australian operations are paid in U.S. dollars. In Canada, oil
and gas prices and costs, such as equipment rentals and services, are generally denominated in Canadian dollars but are heavily influenced by U.S. markets. Our North Sea production is sold under U.S. dollar contracts, and the majority of costs incurred are paid in British pounds. In Egypt, all oil and gas production is sold under U.S. dollar contracts, and the majority of the costs incurred are denominated in U.S. dollars. Argentine revenues and expenditures are largely denominated in U.S. dollars, but are converted into Argentine pesos at the time of payment. Revenue and disbursement transactions denominated in Australian dollars, Canadian dollars, British pounds, and Argentine pesos are converted to U.S. dollar equivalents based on the average exchange rates during the period.
Foreign currency gains and losses also arise when monetary assets and monetary liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are translated at the end of each month. Currency gains and losses are included as either a component of “Other” under “Revenues and Other” or, as is the case when we re-measure our foreign tax liabilities, as a component of the Company’s provision for income tax expense on the statement of consolidated operations. A 10 percent strengthening or weakening of the Australian dollar, Canadian dollar, British pound, and Argentine peso against the U.S. dollar as of December 31, 2013, would result in a foreign currency net loss or gain, respectively, of approximately $186 million.
Forward-Looking Statements and Risk
This report includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical facts included or incorporated by reference in this report, including, without limitation, statements regarding our future financial position, business strategy, budgets, projected revenues, projected costs and plans, and objectives of management for future operations, are forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements are based on our examination of historical operating trends, the information that was used to prepare our estimate of proved reserves as of December 31, 2013, and other data in our possession or available from third parties. In addition, forward-looking statements generally can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “expect,” “intend,” “project,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “plan,” “believe,” or “continue” or similar terminology. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are reasonable, we can give no assurance that such expectations will prove to have been correct. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from our expectations include, but are not limited to, our assumptions about:
•
the market prices of oil, natural gas, NGLs and other products or services;
•
our commodity derivative and hedging arrangements;
•
the supply and demand for oil, natural gas, NGLs and other products or services;
•
production and reserve levels;
•
drilling risks;
•
economic and competitive conditions;
•
the availability of capital resources;
•
capital expenditure and other contractual obligations;
•
currency exchange rates;
•
weather conditions;
•
inflation rates;
•
the availability of goods and services;
•
legislative or regulatory changes;
•
the impact on our operations due to changes in the Egyptian government;
•
the integration of acquisitions;
•
terrorism or cyber attacks;
•
occurrence of property acquisitions or divestitures;
•
the securities or capital markets and related risks such as general credit, liquidity, market, and interest-rate risks; and
•
other factors disclosed under Items 1 and 2-Business and Properties-Estimated Proved Reserves and Future Net Cash Flows, Item 1A - Risk Factors, Item 7 - Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, Item 7A - Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk and elsewhere in this Form 10-K.
All subsequent written and oral forward-looking statements attributable to the Company, or persons acting on its behalf, are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements. Except as required by law, we assume no duty to update or revise our forward-looking statements based on changes in internal estimates or expectations or otherwise.
ITEM 8.
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
The financial statements and supplementary financial information required to be filed under this Item 8 are presented on pages through in Part IV, Item 15 of this Form 10-K and are incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 9.
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
The financial statements for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, included in this report, have been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, registered public accounting firm, as stated in their audit report appearing herein. There have been no changes in or disagreements with the accountants during the periods presented.
ITEM 9A.
ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
G. Steven Farris, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, in his capacity as principal executive officer, and Thomas P. Chambers, the Company’s Senior Vice President, Finance, in his capacity as principal financial officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2013, the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation and as of the date of that evaluation, these officers concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective, providing effective means to ensure that the information we are required to disclose under applicable laws and regulations is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the Commission’s rules and forms and accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. We also made no changes in internal controls over financial reporting during the quarter ending December 31, 2013, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
We periodically review the design and effectiveness of our disclosure controls, including compliance with various laws and regulations that apply to our operations both inside and outside the United States. We make modifications to improve the design and effectiveness of our disclosure controls and may take other corrective action, if our reviews identify deficiencies or weaknesses in our controls.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting; Attestation Report of the Registered Public Accounting Firm
The management report called for by Item 308(a) of Regulation S-K is incorporated herein by reference to the “Report of Management on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting,” included on Page in Part IV, Item 15 of this Form 10-K.
The independent auditors attestation report called for by Item 308(b) of Regulation S-K is incorporated herein by reference to the “Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm,” included on Page in Part IV, Item 15 of this Form 10-K.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There was no change in our internal controls over financial reporting during the quarter ending December 31, 2013, that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal controls over financial reporting.
ITEM 9B.
ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION
On February 11, 2014, the Company appointed Alfonso Leon as executive vice president and chief financial officer effective as of February 13, 2014, and Thomas P. Chambers ceased service as the chief financial officer as of the close of business on that date, assuming the new position of the Company’s senior vice president, Finance. Continuing through March 1, 2014, Mr. Chambers will continue to perform the functions of Company’s principal financial officer; Mr. Leon will assume the role of principal financial officer effective as of that date.
PART III
ITEM 10.
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
The information set forth under the captions “Nominees for Election as Directors,” “Continuing Directors,” “Executive Officers of the Company,” and “Securities Ownership and Principal Holders” in the proxy statement relating to the Company’s 2014 annual meeting of shareholders (the Proxy Statement) is incorporated herein by reference.
Code of Business Conduct
Pursuant to Rule 303A.10 of the NYSE and Rule 4350(n) of the NASDAQ, we are required to adopt a code of business conduct and ethics for our directors, officers, and employees. In February 2004, the Board of Directors adopted the Code of Business Conduct (Code of Conduct), and revised it in November 2013. The revised Code of Conduct also meets the requirements of a code of ethics under Item 406 of Regulation S-K. You can access the Company’s Code of Conduct on the Governance page of the Company’s website at www.apachecorp.com. Any shareholder who so requests may obtain a printed copy of the Code of Conduct by submitting a request to the Company’s corporate secretary at the address on the cover of this Form 10-K. Changes in and waivers to the Code of Conduct for the Company’s directors, chief executive officer and certain senior financial officers will be posted on the Company’s website within five business days and maintained for at least 12 months. Information on our website or any other website is not incorporated by reference into, and does not constitute a part of, this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
ITEM 11.
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The information set forth under the captions “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” “Summary Compensation Table,” “Grants of Plan Based Awards Table,” “Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End Table,” “Option Exercises and Stock Vested Table,” “Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation Table,” “Employment Contracts and Termination of Employment and Change-in-Control Arrangements” and “Director Compensation Table” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 12.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
The information set forth under the captions “Securities Ownership and Principal Holders” and “Equity Compensation Plan Information” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 13.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
The information set forth under the captions “Certain Business Relationships and Transactions” and “Director Independence” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 14.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
The information set forth under the caption “Independent Auditors” in the Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
ITEM 15.
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a) Documents included in this report:
1. Financial Statements
2. Financial Statement Schedules
Financial statement schedules have been omitted because they are either not required, not applicable or the information required to be presented is included in the Company’s financial statements and related notes.
3. Exhibits
* Filed herewith.
 Management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements required to be filed herewith pursuant to Item 15 hereof.
NOTE: Debt instruments of the Registrant defining the rights of long-term debt holders in principal amounts not exceeding 10 percent of the Registrant’s consolidated assets have been omitted and will be provided to the Commission upon request.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, hereunto duly authorized.
APACHE CORPORATION
/s/ G. STEVEN FARRIS
G. Steven Farris
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, and President
Dated: February 28, 2014
POWER OF ATTORNEY
The officers and directors of Apache Corporation, whose signatures appear below, hereby constitute and appoint G. Steven Farris, P. Anthony Lannie, Alfonso Leon, Thomas P. Chambers, and Rebecca A. Hoyt, and each of them (with full power to each of them to act alone), the true and lawful attorney-in-fact to sign and execute, on behalf of the undersigned, any amendment(s) to this report and each of the undersigned does hereby ratify and confirm all that said attorneys shall do or cause to be done by virtue thereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Name
Title
Date
/s/ G. STEVEN FARRIS
G. Steven Farris
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, and President (principal executive officer)
February 28, 2014
/s/ THOMAS P. CHAMBERS
Thomas P. Chambers
Senior Vice President, Finance
(principal financial officer)
February 28, 2014
/s/ REBECCA A. HOYT
Rebecca A. Hoyt
Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer and Controller
(principal accounting officer)
February 28, 2014
REPORT OF MANAGEMENT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Management of the Company is responsible for the preparation and integrity of the consolidated financial statements appearing in this annual report on Form 10-K. The financial statements were prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States and include amounts that are based on management’s best estimates and judgments.
Management of the Company is responsible for establishing and maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Company’s internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of the consolidated financial statements. Our internal control over financial reporting is supported by a program of internal audits and appropriate reviews by management, written policies and guidelines, careful selection and training of qualified personnel and a written code of business conduct adopted by our Company’s board of directors, applicable to all Company directors and all officers and employees of our Company and subsidiaries.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements and even when determined to be effective, can only provide reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Management assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (1992). Based on our assessment, management believes that the Company maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013.
The Company’s independent auditors, Ernst & Young LLP, a registered public accounting firm, are appointed by the Audit Committee of the Company’s board of directors. Ernst & Young LLP have audited and reported on the consolidated financial statements of Apache Corporation and subsidiaries, and the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. The reports of the independent auditors follow this report on pages and.
/s/ G. Steven Farris
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, and President
(principal executive officer)
/s/ Thomas P. Chambers
Senior Vice President, Finance
(principal financial officer)
/s/ Rebecca A. Hoyt
Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer and Controller
(principal accounting officer)
Houston, Texas
February 28, 2014
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Apache Corporation:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Apache Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, changes in equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Apache Corporation and subsidiaries at December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the consolidated results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Apache Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (1992 framework) and our report dated February 28, 2014, expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Houston, Texas
February 28, 2014
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Apache Corporation:
We have audited Apache Corporation and subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (1992 framework) (the COSO criteria). Apache Corporation and subsidiaries’ management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Report of Management on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
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 (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with U.S. 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 (3) 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.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, Apache Corporation and subsidiaries maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013, based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Apache Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, changes in equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013 of Apache Corporation and subsidiaries, and our report dated February 28, 2014, expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
Houston, Texas
February 28, 2014
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
STATEMENT OF CONSOLIDATED OPERATIONS
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
STATEMENT OF CONSOLIDATED COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
STATEMENT OF CONSOLIDATED CASH FLOWS
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
STATEMENT OF CONSOLIDATED CHANGES IN EQUITY
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of this statement.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Nature of Operations
Apache Corporation (Apache or the Company) is an independent energy company that explores for, develops, and produces natural gas, crude oil, and natural gas liquids. The Company has exploration and production interests in six countries: the United States (U.S.), Canada, Egypt, Australia, the United Kingdom (U.K.) North Sea (North Sea), and Argentina. Apache also pursues exploration interests in other countries that may over time result in reportable discoveries and development opportunities.
1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Accounting policies used by Apache and its subsidiaries reflect industry practices and conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. (GAAP). The Company’s financial statements for prior periods may include reclassifications that were made to conform to the current-year presentation. Significant policies are discussed below.
Principles of Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Apache and its subsidiaries after elimination of intercompany balances and transactions. The Company’s undivided interests in oil and gas exploration and production ventures and partnerships are proportionately consolidated. The Company consolidates all other investments in which, either through direct or indirect ownership, Apache has more than a 50 percent voting interest or controls the financial and operating decisions. Noncontrolling interests represent third-party ownership in the net assets of a consolidated Apache subsidiary and are reflected separately in the Company’s financial statements. For further information, please refer to Note 2 - Acquisitions and Divestitures. Investments in which Apache holds less than 50 percent of the voting interest are typically accounted for under the equity method of accounting, with the balance recorded as a component of “Deferred charges and other” in Apache’s consolidated balance sheet and results of operations recorded as a component of “Other” under “Revenues and Other” in the Company’s statement of consolidated operations.
Use of Estimates
Preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience and various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Apache evaluates its estimates and assumptions on a regular basis. Actual results may differ from these estimates and assumptions used in preparation of its financial statements and changes in these estimates are recorded when known. Significant estimates with regard to these financial statements include the fair value determination of acquired assets and liabilities (see Note 2 - Acquisitions and Divestitures), the estimate of proved oil and gas reserves and related present value estimates of future net cash flows therefrom (see Note 14 - Supplemental Oil and Gas Disclosures), the assessment of asset retirement obligations (see Note 5 - Asset Retirement Obligation), and the estimate of income taxes (see Note 7 - Income Taxes).
Fair Value Measurements
Certain assets and liabilities are reported at fair value on a recurring basis in Apache’s consolidated balance sheet. Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 820-10-35 provides a hierarchy that prioritizes and defines the types of inputs used to measure fair value. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to Level 1 inputs,
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
which consist of unadjusted quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets. Level 2 inputs consist of quoted prices for similar instruments. Level 3 valuations are derived from inputs that are significant and unobservable; hence, these valuations have the lowest priority.
The valuation techniques that may be used to measure fair value include a market approach, an income approach, and a cost approach. A market approach uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities. An income approach uses valuation techniques to convert future amounts to a single present amount based on current market expectations, including present value techniques, option-pricing models, and the excess earnings method. The cost approach is based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of an asset (replacement cost).
Fair value measurements are presented in further detail in Note 3 - Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, Note 6 - Debt, and Note 9 - Retirement and Deferred Compensation Plans.
Cash Equivalents
The Company considers all highly liquid short-term investments with a maturity of three months or less at the time of purchase to be cash equivalents. These investments are carried at cost, which approximates fair value. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, Apache had $1.9 billion and $160 million, respectively, of cash and cash equivalents.
Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
Accounts receivable are stated at the historical carrying amount net of write-offs and an allowance for uncollectible accounts. The carrying amount of Apache’s accounts receivable approximates fair value because of the short-term nature of the instruments. The Company routinely assesses the collectability of all material trade and other receivables. Many of Apache’s receivables are from joint interest owners on properties Apache operates. The Company may have the ability to withhold future revenue disbursements to recover any non-payment of these joint interest billings. The Company accrues a reserve on a receivable when, based on the judgment of management, it is probable that a receivable will not be collected and the amount of any reserve may be reasonably estimated. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had an allowance for doubtful accounts of $96 million and $82 million, respectively.
Inventories
Inventories consist principally of tubular goods and equipment, stated at weighted-average cost, and oil produced but not sold, stated at the lower of cost or market.
Property and Equipment
The carrying value of Apache’s property and equipment represents the cost incurred to acquire the property and equipment, including capitalized interest. Interest costs incurred in connection with qualifying capital expenditures are capitalized and amortized in concurrence with the related assets. For business combinations, property and equipment cost is based on the fair values at the acquisition date.
Oil and Gas Property
The Company follows the full-cost method of accounting for its oil and gas property. Under this method of accounting, all costs incurred for both successful and unsuccessful exploration and development activities, including salaries, benefits, and other internal costs directly identified with these activities, and oil and gas
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
property acquisitions are capitalized. All costs related to production, general corporate overhead, and similar activities are expensed as incurred. Apache capitalized $401 million, $402 million, and $335 million of internal costs in 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively.
Proved properties are amortized on a country-by-country basis using the units of production method (UOP). The UOP calculation multiplies the percentage of estimated proved reserves produced each quarter by the cost of those reserves. The amortization base in the UOP calculation includes the sum of proved property, net of accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization (DD&A), estimated future development costs (future costs to access and develop proved reserves), and asset retirement costs, less related salvage value.
The cost of unproved properties and properties under development are excluded from the amortization calculation until it is determined whether or not proved reserves can be assigned to such properties or until development projects are placed in service. Geological and geophysical costs not associated with specific prospects are recorded to proved property immediately. Unproved properties and properties under development are reviewed for impairment at least quarterly. In countries where proved reserves exist, exploratory drilling costs associated with dry holes are transferred to proved properties immediately upon determination that a well is dry and amortized accordingly. In countries where a reserve base has not yet been established, impairments are charged to earnings and are determined through an evaluation considering, among other factors, seismic data, requirements to relinquish acreage, drilling results, remaining time in the commitment period, remaining capital plan, and political, economic, and market conditions. In 2013, Apache’s statement of consolidated operations includes additional DD&A of $75 million related to exiting operations in Kenya. In 2012, Apache recorded additional DD&A of $28 million related to exiting operations in New Zealand and $15 million of seismic costs incurred in countries where it has no established presence. In 2011, Apache recorded additional DD&A of $60 million related to exiting operations in Chile and $49 million of seismic costs incurred in countries where it has no established presence.
Under the full-cost method of accounting, the net book value of oil and gas properties, less related deferred income taxes, may not exceed a calculated “ceiling.” The ceiling limitation is the estimated after-tax future net cash flows from proved oil and gas reserves, discounted at 10 percent per annum and adjusted for designated cash flow hedges. Future cash outflows associated with settling accrued asset retirement obligations are excluded from the calculation. Estimated future net cash flows are calculated using end-of-period costs and an unweighted arithmetic average of commodity prices in effect on the first day of each of the previous 12 months, held flat for the life of the production, except where prices are defined by contractual arrangements. See Note 14 - Supplemental Oil and Gas Disclosures for a discussion of the calculation of estimated future net cash flows.
Any excess of the net book value of proved oil and gas properties, less related deferred income taxes, over the ceiling is charged to expense and reflected as additional DD&A in the accompanying statement of consolidated operations. Such limitations are imposed separately on a country-by-country basis and are tested quarterly. During 2013, Apache recorded non-cash write-downs of the carrying value of the Company’s proved oil and gas properties totaling $1.1 billion. The after-tax impact of these write-downs was $356 million in the U.S., $139 million in the North Sea, and $118 million in Argentina. Cash flow hedges did not materially affect the 2013 calculations. During 2012, the Company recorded a $1.9 billion ($1.4 billion net of tax) non-cash write-down of the carrying value of the Company’s Canadian proved oil and gas properties. Excluding the effects of cash flow hedges in calculating the ceiling limitation, the write-down for the full year would have been higher by $135 million ($101 million net of tax).
Proceeds from the sale or disposition of oil and gas properties are accounted for as a reduction to capitalized costs unless a significant portion (greater than 25 percent) of the Company’s reserve quantities in a particular country are sold, in which case a gain or loss is recognized in income. No gain or loss was recorded on the Company’s divestitures in 2013, 2012, or 2011.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Gathering, Transmission, and Processing Facilities
Gathering, transmission, and processing facilities totaled $7.0 billion and $6.0 billion at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The Company assesses the carrying amount of its gathering, transmission, and processing facilities whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that their carrying amount may not be recoverable. If the carrying amount of these facilities is less than the sum of the undiscounted cash flows, an impairment loss is recognized for the excess of the carrying value over its fair value. No impairment of gathering, transmission, and processing facilities was recognized during 2013, 2012, or 2011.
Gathering, transmission, and processing facilities, buildings, and equipment are depreciated on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which range from three to 25 years. Accumulated depreciation for these assets totaled $2.1 billion and $1.9 billion at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
Asset Retirement Costs and Obligations
The initial estimated asset retirement obligation related to property and equipment is recorded as a liability at its fair value, with an offsetting asset retirement cost recorded as an increase to the associated property and equipment on the consolidated balance sheet. If the fair value of the recorded asset retirement obligation changes, a revision is recorded to both the asset retirement obligation and the asset retirement cost. Revisions in estimated liabilities can result from changes in estimated inflation rates, changes in service and equipment costs and changes in the estimated timing of an asset’s retirement. Asset retirement costs are depreciated using a systematic and rational method similar to that used for the associated property and equipment. Accretion expense on the liability is recognized over the estimated productive life of the related assets.
Goodwill
Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price of an entity over the estimated fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. The Company assesses the carrying amount of goodwill by testing for impairment annually and when impairment indicators arise. Goodwill totaled $1.4 billion and $1.3 billion at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, goodwill of $163 million and $84 million, respectively, was recorded in the North Sea. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, goodwill of $1.0 billion, $103 million, and $86 million was recorded in the U.S., Canada, and Egypt, respectively. Each country was assessed as a reporting unit, and no impairment of goodwill was recognized during 2013, 2012, or 2011.
Accounts Payable
Included in accounts payable at December 31, 2013 and 2012, are liabilities of approximately $271 million and $255 million, respectively, representing the amount by which checks issued but not presented to the Company’s banks for collection exceeded balances in applicable bank accounts.
Commitments and Contingencies
Accruals for loss contingencies arising from claims, assessments, litigation, environmental and other sources are recorded when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably estimated. These accruals are adjusted as additional information becomes available or circumstances change.
Revenue Recognition and Imbalances
Oil and gas revenues are recognized when production is sold to a purchaser at a fixed or determinable price, when delivery has occurred and title has transferred, and if collectability of the revenue is probable. Cash received relating to future revenues is deferred and recognized when all revenue recognition criteria are met.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Apache uses the sales method of accounting for gas production imbalances. The volumes of gas sold may differ from the volumes to which Apache is entitled based on its interests in the properties. These differences create imbalances that are recognized as a liability only when the properties’ estimated remaining reserves net to Apache will not be sufficient to enable the under-produced owner to recoup its entitled share through production. The Company’s recorded liability is generally reflected in other non-current liabilities. No receivables are recorded for those wells where Apache has taken less than its share of production. Gas imbalances are reflected as adjustments to estimates of proved gas reserves and future cash flows in the unaudited supplemental oil and gas disclosures.
Apache markets its own U.S. natural gas production. Since the Company’s production fluctuates because of operational issues, it is occasionally necessary to purchase third-party gas to fulfill sales obligations and commitments. Both the costs and sales proceeds of this third-party gas are reported on a net basis in oil and gas production revenues. The costs of third-party gas netted against the related sales proceeds totaled $34 million, $27 million, and $28 million, for 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively.
The Company’s Egyptian operations are conducted pursuant to production sharing contracts under which contractor partners pay all operating and capital costs for exploring and developing the concessions. A percentage of the production, generally up to 40 percent, is available to contractor partners to recover these operating and capital costs over contractually defined periods. Cost recovery is reflected in revenue. The balance of the production is split among the contractor partners and the Egyptian General Petroleum Corporation (EGPC) on a contractually defined basis.
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
Apache periodically enters into derivative contracts to manage its exposure to commodity price risk. These derivative contracts, which are generally placed with major financial institutions, may take the form of forward contracts, futures contracts, swaps, or options. The oil and gas reference prices upon which the commodity derivative contracts are based reflect various market indices that have a high degree of historical correlation with actual prices received by the Company for its oil and gas production.
Apache records all derivative instruments, other than those that meet the normal purchases and sales exception, on the balance sheet as either an asset or liability measured at fair value. Changes in fair value are recognized currently in earnings unless specific hedge accounting criteria are met. Gains and losses from the change in fair value of derivative instruments that do not qualify for hedge accounting are reported in current-period income as “Derivative instrument gains (losses), net” under “Revenues and Other” in the statement of consolidated operations. Hedge accounting treatment allows unrealized gains and losses on cash flow hedges to be deferred in other comprehensive income. Realized gains and losses from the Company’s oil and gas cash flow hedges, including terminated contracts, are generally recognized in oil and gas production revenues when the forecasted transaction occurs. If at any time the likelihood of occurrence of a hedged forecasted transaction ceases to be “probable,” hedge accounting treatment will cease on a prospective basis, and all future changes in the fair value of the derivative will be recognized directly in earnings. Amounts recorded in other comprehensive income prior to the change in the likelihood of occurrence of the forecasted transaction will remain in other comprehensive income until such time as the forecasted transaction impacts earnings. If it becomes probable that the original forecasted production will not occur, then the derivative gain or loss would be reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income into earnings immediately. Hedge effectiveness is measured at least quarterly based on the relative changes in fair value between the derivative contract and the hedged item over time, and any ineffectiveness is immediately reported as “Other” under “Revenues and Other” in the statement of consolidated operations.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
General and Administrative Expense
General and administrative expenses are reported net of recoveries from owners in properties operated by Apache and net of amounts related to lease operating activities or capitalized pursuant to the full-cost method of accounting.
Income Taxes
Apache records deferred tax assets and liabilities to account for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been recognized in the financial statements and tax returns. The Company routinely assesses the realizability of its deferred tax assets. If the Company concludes that it is more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized, the tax asset is reduced by a valuation allowance. Numerous judgments and assumptions are inherent in the determination of future taxable income, including factors such as future operating conditions (particularly as related to prevailing oil and gas prices) and changing tax laws.
Apache does not recognize U.S. deferred income taxes on the unremitted earnings of its foreign subsidiaries that are deemed to be indefinitely reinvested. When such earnings are no longer deemed permanently reinvested, Apache recognizes the appropriate deferred or current income tax liabilities.
Foreign Currency Transaction Gains and Losses
The U.S. dollar is the functional currency for each of Apache’s international operations. The functional currency is determined country-by-country based on relevant facts and circumstances of the cash flows, commodity pricing environment and financing arrangements in each country. Foreign currency transaction gains and losses arise when monetary assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are remeasured to their U.S. dollar equivalent at the exchange rate in effect at the end of each reporting period. Foreign currency gains and losses also arise when revenue and disbursement transactions denominated in a country’s local currency are converted to a U.S. dollar equivalent based on the average exchange rates during the reporting period.
Foreign currency transaction gains and losses related to current taxes payable and deferred tax assets and liabilities are recorded as components of the provision for income taxes. In 2013, Apache recorded a tax benefit of $154 million, including current and deferred taxes. In 2012 and 2011, the Company recorded tax expense of $16 million and a tax benefit of $66 million, respectively. For further discussion, please refer to Note 7 - Income Taxes. All other foreign currency transaction gains and losses are reflected in “Other” under Revenues and Other in the statement of consolidated operations. The Company’s other foreign currency gains and losses netted to a loss in 2013 of $30 million and gains in 2012 and 2011 of $24 million and $4 million, respectively.
Insurance Coverage
The Company recognizes an insurance receivable when collection of the receivable is deemed probable. Any recognition of an insurance receivable is recorded by crediting and offsetting the original charge. Any differential arising between insurance recoveries and insurance receivables is recorded as a capitalized cost or as an expense, consistent with its original treatment.
Earnings Per Share
The Company’s basic earnings per share (EPS) amounts have been computed based on the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding for the period. Diluted EPS reflects the potential dilution, using the treasury stock method, which assumes that options were exercised and restricted stock was
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
fully vested. The diluted EPS calculations for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2013, includes weighted-average shares of common stock from the assumed conversion of Apache’s convertible preferred stock. For the year ended December 31, 2012, the diluted EPS calculation excludes shares related to the assumed conversion of the convertible preferred stock as such conversion would have been anti-dilutive.
Stock-Based Compensation
The Company accounts for stock-based compensation under the fair value recognition provisions of ASC Topic 718, “Compensation - Stock Compensation.” The Company grants various types of stock-based awards including stock options, nonvested restricted stock units, and performance-based awards. Additionally, the Company also grants cash-based stock appreciation rights. These plans and related accounting policies are defined and described more fully in Note 10 - Capital Stock. Stock compensation awards granted are valued on the date of grant and are expensed, net of estimated forfeitures, over the required service period.
ASC Topic 718 also requires that benefits of tax deductions in excess of recognized compensation cost be reported as financing cash flows rather than as operating cash flows. The Company classified $1 million, $4 million, and $32 million as financing cash inflows in 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively.
Treasury Stock
The Company follows the weighted-average-cost method of accounting for treasury stock transactions.
New Pronouncements Issued But Not Yet Adopted
In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-11, which requires entities to present unrecognized tax benefits as a decrease in a net operating loss, similar tax loss, or tax credit carryforward if certain criteria are met. The guidance will eliminate the diversity in practice in the presentation of unrecognized tax benefits but will not alter the way in which entities assess deferred tax assets for realizability. ASU No. 2013-11 is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2013. The Company will apply all changes prospectively and does not expect the adoption of this amendment to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.
In February 2013, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2013-04, which increases disclosures for certain liability arrangements. The guidance requires an entity that is joint and severally liable to measure the obligation as the sum of the amount the entity has agreed with co-obligors to pay and any additional amount it expects to pay on behalf of one or more co-obligors. Required disclosures include a description of the nature of the arrangement, how the liability arose, the relationship with co-obligors and the terms and conditions of the arrangement. ASU No. 2013-04 is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2013. The Company does not expect the adoption of this amendment to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.
2. ACQUISITIONS AND DIVESTITURES
2014 Activity
Argentina Divestiture
On February 12, 2014, Apache Corporation and its subsidiaries announced an agreement to sell all of its operations in Argentina to YPF Sociedad Anónima for cash consideration of $800 million plus the assumption of $52 million of bank debt as of June 30, 2013. As of December 31, 2013, Apache’s net assets in Argentina totaled approximately $1.3 billion, and the Company expects to recognize a loss associated with this transaction upon closing. The transaction is expected to close in the first quarter of 2014.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
2013 Activity
Egypt Partnership
On November 14, 2013, Apache completed the sale of a one-third minority participation in its Egypt oil and gas business to a subsidiary of Sinopec International Petroleum Exploration and Production Corporation (Sinopec). Apache received cash consideration of $2.95 billion after customary closing adjustments. Apache continues to operate its Egypt upstream oil and gas business. The effective date of the agreement is January 1, 2013.
Apache recorded $1.9 billion of the proceeds as a non-controlling interest, which is reflected as a separate component of equity in the Company’s consolidated balance sheet. This represents one-third of Apache’s net book value of its Egypt holdings at the time of the transaction. The remaining proceeds were recorded as additional paid-in capital. Included in “Net income including noncontrolling interest” for the year ended December 31, 2013, is net income attributable to Sinopec’s interest totaling $56 million.
Gulf of Mexico Shelf Divestiture
On September 30, 2013, Apache completed the sale of its Gulf of Mexico Shelf operations and properties to Fieldwood Energy LLC (Fieldwood), an affiliate of Riverstone Holdings. Under the terms of the agreement, Apache received cash consideration of $3.7 billion, and Fieldwood assumed $1.5 billion of discounted asset abandonment liabilities. Additionally, Apache retained 50 percent of its ownership interest in all exploration blocks and in horizons below production in developed blocks. The effective date of the agreement is July 1, 2013. Apache’s net book value of oil and gas properties was reduced by approximately $4.6 billion of proved property costs and $473 million of unproved property costs as a result of the transaction.
Canada LNG Project
In February 2013, Apache completed a transaction with Chevron Canada Limited (Chevron Canada) under which each company became a 50 percent owner of the Kitimat LNG plant, the Pacific Trail Pipelines Limited Partnership (PTP), and 644,000 gross undeveloped acres in the Horn River and Liard basins. Chevron Canada will operate the LNG plant and pipeline while Apache Canada will continue to operate the upstream assets. Apache’s net proceeds from the transaction were $396 million after post-closing adjustments, and no gain or loss was recorded.
Other Activity
During 2013 Apache completed $307 million of other oil and gas property sales and $215 million of oil and gas property acquisitions.
2012 Activity
Cordillera Energy Partners III, LLC Acquisition
On April 30, 2012, Apache completed the acquisition of Cordillera Energy Partners III, LLC (Cordillera), a privately-held exploration and production company, in a stock and cash transaction. Cordillera’s properties included approximately 312,000 net acres in the Granite Wash, Tonkawa, Cleveland, and Marmaton plays in western Oklahoma and the Texas Panhandle.
Apache issued 6,272,667 shares of common stock and paid approximately $2.7 billion of cash to the sellers as consideration for the transaction. The transaction was accounted for using the acquisition method of
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
accounting, which requires, among other things, that assets acquired and liabilities assumed be recognized at their fair values as of the acquisition date. The following table summarizes the final estimates of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the acquisition.
(1) Goodwill was the excess of the consideration transferred over the net assets recognized and represents the future economic benefits arising from assets acquired that could not be individually identified and separately recognized. Goodwill is not deductible for tax purposes.
Yara Pilbara Holdings Pty Limited Acquisition
On January 31, 2012, a subsidiary of Apache Energy Limited completed the acquisition of a 49 percent interest in Yara Pilbara Holdings Pty Limited (YPHPL, formerly Burrup Holdings Limited) for $439 million, including working capital adjustments. The transaction was funded with debt. Yara Australia Pty Ltd (Yara) owns the remaining 51 percent of YPHPL and operates the plant. The investment in YPHPL is accounted for under the equity method of accounting, with the balance recorded as a component of “Deferred charges and other” in Apache’s consolidated balance sheet and results of operations recorded as a component of “Other” under “Revenues and other” in the Company’s statement of consolidated operations.
2011 Activity
Mobil North Sea Limited Acquisition
On December 30, 2011, Apache completed the acquisition of Mobil North Sea Limited (Mobil North Sea). The assets acquired include: operated interests in the Beryl, Nevis, Nevis South, Skene, and Buckland fields; operated interest in the Beryl/Brae gas pipeline and the SAGE gas plant; non-operated interests in the Maclure, Scott, and Telford fields; and Benbecula (west of Shetlands) exploration acreage. This acquisition was funded with existing cash on hand.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
The transaction was accounted for using the acquisition method of accounting. The following table summarizes the final estimates of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the acquisition.
(1) Goodwill was the excess of the consideration transferred over the net assets recognized and represents the future economic benefits arising from assets acquired that could not be individually identified and separately recognized. Goodwill is not deductible for tax purposes.
Acquisitions, Divestitures, and Transition Expenses
In 2013, Apache recorded $33 million of investment banking fees and other costs associated with divestitures during the year. In 2012, the Company recorded $31 million of expenses reflecting costs related to our 2011 acquisition of Mobil North Sea and our 2012 acquisition of Cordillera. In 2011, Apache recorded $20 million of expenses primarily for separation and other costs related to the merger with Mariner Energy, Inc. (Mariner) and the acquisition of Mobil North Sea.
3. DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES
Objectives and Strategies
The Company is exposed to fluctuations in crude oil and natural gas prices on the majority of its worldwide production. Apache manages the variability in its cash flows by occasionally entering into derivative transactions on a portion of its crude oil and natural gas production. The Company utilizes various types of derivative financial instruments, including swaps and options, to manage fluctuations in cash flows resulting from changes in commodity prices.
Counterparty Risk
The use of derivative instruments exposes the Company to counterparty credit risk, or the risk that a counterparty will be unable to meet its commitments. To reduce the concentration of exposure to any individual counterparty, Apache utilizes a diversified group of investment-grade rated counterparties, primarily financial institutions, for its derivative transactions. As of December 31, 2013, Apache had derivative positions with 14 counterparties. The Company monitors counterparty creditworthiness on an ongoing basis; however, it cannot predict sudden changes in counterparties’ creditworthiness. In addition, even if such changes are not sudden, the Company may be limited in its ability to mitigate an increase in counterparty credit risk. Should one of these counterparties not perform, Apache may not realize the benefit of some of its derivative instruments resulting from lower commodity prices.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
The Company executes commodity derivative transactions under master agreements that have netting provisions that provide for offsetting payables against receivables. In general, if a party to a derivative transaction incurs a material deterioration in its credit ratings, as defined in the applicable agreement, the other party has the right to demand the posting of collateral, demand a transfer, or terminate the arrangement. The Company’s net derivative liability position at December 31, 2013, represents the aggregate fair value of all derivative instruments with credit-risk-related contingent features that are in a net liability position. The Company has not provided any collateral to any of its counterparties as of December 31, 2013.
Derivative Instruments
As of December 31, 2013, Apache had the following open crude oil derivative positions which have not been designated as cash flow hedges:
As of December 31, 2013, Apache had the following open natural gas derivative positions which have been designated as cash flow hedges:
Subsequent to December 31, 2013, Apache entered into additional natural gas derivatives not designated as cash flow hedges totaling 55.9 million MMBtu for 2014. These contracts are settled against NYMEX Henry Hub and various Inside FERC indices, with a weighted average fixed price of $4.35.
Fair Value Measurements
Apache’s commodity derivative instruments consist of variable-to-fixed price commodity swaps and options. The fair values of the Company’s derivative instruments are not actively quoted in the open market. The Company uses a market approach to estimate the fair values of its derivative instruments, utilizing commodity futures price strips for the underlying commodities provided by a reputable third party. These valuations are Level 2 inputs.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
The following table presents the Company’s derivative assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
(1) The derivative fair values are based on analysis of each contract on a gross basis, even where the legal right of offset exists.
All derivative instruments are reflected as either assets or liabilities at fair value in the consolidated balance sheet. These fair values are recorded by netting asset and liability positions where counterparty master netting arrangements contain provisions for net settlement. The fair market value of the Company’s derivative assets and liabilities and their locations on the consolidated balance sheet are as follows:
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Derivative Activity Recorded in Statement of Consolidated Operations
The following table summarizes the effect of derivative instruments on the Company’s statement of consolidated operations:
Unrealized gains and losses for derivative activity recorded in the statement of consolidated operations is reflected in the statement of consolidated cash flows as a component of “Other” in “Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities.”
Derivative Activity in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
As of December 31, 2013, a portion of the Company’s derivative instruments were designated as cash flow hedges. A reconciliation of the components of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in the statement of consolidated changes in equity related to Apache’s cash flow hedges is presented in the table below:
Unrealized net gains on existing cash flow hedges as of December 31, 2013 will be realized in earnings through mid-2014, in the same period as the related sales of natural gas and crude oil production occur; however, estimated and actual amounts may vary materially as a result of changes in market conditions.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
4. OTHER CURRENT LIABILITIES
The following table provides detail of the Company’s other current liabilities at December 31, 2013 and 2012:
5. ASSET RETIREMENT OBLIGATION
The following table describes changes to the Company’s asset retirement obligation (ARO) liability for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012:
The ARO liability reflects the estimated present value of the amount of dismantlement, removal, site reclamation, and similar activities associated with Apache’s oil and gas properties. The Company utilizes current retirement costs to estimate the expected cash outflows for retirement obligations. The Company estimates the ultimate productive life of the properties, a risk-adjusted discount rate, and an inflation factor in order to determine the current present value of this obligation. To the extent future revisions to these assumptions impact the present value of the existing ARO liability, a corresponding adjustment is made to the oil and gas property balance.
During 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded $481 million and $592 million, respectively, in abandonment liabilities resulting from Apache’s active exploration and development capital program. Liabilities settled primarily relate to individual properties, platforms, and facilities plugged and abandoned during the period.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
6. DEBT
Overview
All of the Company’s debt is senior unsecured debt and has equal priority with respect to the payment of both principal and interest. The indentures for the notes described below place certain restrictions on the Company, including limits on Apache’s ability to incur debt secured by certain liens and its ability to enter into certain sale and leaseback transactions. Upon certain changes in control, all of these debt instruments would be subject to mandatory repurchase, at the option of the holders. None of the indentures for the notes contain prepayment obligations in the event of a decline in credit ratings.
During 2013, Apache repaid the $500 million aggregate principal amount of 5.25 percent notes that matured on April 15, 2013 and the $400 million aggregate principal amount of 6.00 percent notes that matured on September 15, 2013 by borrowing under our commercial paper program.
In November 2013 the Company announced a cash tender offer to purchase up to $850 million aggregate principal amount of five series of its outstanding notes. On December 20, 2013, the Company accepted for purchase $669 million principal amount of its 2.625 percent notes due 2023 and $181 million principal amount of its 3.25 percent notes due 2022. Apache paid the holders an aggregate of approximately $811 million in cash reflecting principal, the discount to par, and accrued and unpaid interest.
In December 2013, Apache Finance Canada Corporation (Apache Finance Canada) fully redeemed $350 million principal amount of its 4.375 percent notes due in 2015. The notes were redeemed pursuant to the provisions of the note’s indenture. Apache paid the holders an aggregate of approximately $371 million in cash reflecting principal, the premium to par, and accrued and unpaid interest.
The Company recorded a net gain on extinguishment of debt totaling $16 million in connection with the cash tender offer and redemption of Apache Finance Canada notes.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
The following table presents the carrying value of the Company’s debt at December 31, 2013 and 2012:
(1) These notes are redeemable, as a whole or in part, at Apache’s option, subject to a make-whole premium. The remaining notes and debentures are not redeemable.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Debt maturities as of December 31, 2013, excluding discounts, are as follows:
Fair Value
The Company’s debt is recorded at the carrying amount, net of unamortized discount, on its consolidated balance sheet. The carrying amount of the Company’s commercial paper and uncommitted credit facilities and overdraft lines approximate fair value because the interest rates are variable and reflective of market rates. Apache uses a market approach to determine the fair value of its fixed-rate debt using estimates provided by an independent investment financial data services firm (a Level 2 fair value measurement).
Money Market and Overdraft Lines of Credit
The Company has certain uncommitted money market and overdraft lines of credit that are used from time to time for working capital purposes. As of December 31, 2013, a total of $53 million was drawn on facilities in Argentina and Canada. As of December 31, 2012, a total of $91 million was drawn on facilities in the U.S., Argentina, and Canada.
Unsecured Committed Bank Credit Facilities
As of December 31, 2013, the Company had unsecured committed revolving syndicated bank credit facilities totaling $3.3 billion, of which $1.0 billion matures in August 2016 and $2.3 billion matures in June 2017. The facilities consist of a $1.7 billion facility and a $1.0 billion facility for the U.S., a $300 million facility in Australia, and a $300 million facility in Canada. In July 2013, we amended our $1.0 billion U.S. credit facility to conform certain representations, covenants, and events of default to those in our $1.7 billion U.S. credit facility. The amendments did not affect the amount or repayment terms of the $1.0 billion U.S. facility. As of December 31, 2013, aggregate available borrowing capacity under the Company’s credit facilities was $3.3 billion. The committed credit facilities are used to support Apache’s commercial paper program.
At the Company’s option, the interest rate for the facilities is based on a base rate, as defined, or the London Inter-bank Offered Rate (LIBOR) plus a margin determined by the Company’s senior long-term debt rating. The $1.7 billion credit facility also allows the Company to borrow under competitive auctions.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
At December 31, 2013, the margin over LIBOR for committed loans was 0.875 percent on the $1.0 billion U.S. credit facility and 0.90 percent on each of the $1.7 billion U.S. credit facility, the $300 million Australian credit facility, and the $300 million Canadian credit facility. The Company also pays quarterly facility fees of 0.125 percent on the total amount of the $1.0 billion U.S. facility and 0.10 percent on the total amount of the other three facilities. The facility fees vary based upon the Company’s senior long-term debt rating.
The financial covenants of the credit facilities require the Company to maintain a debt-to-capitalization ratio of not greater than 60 percent at the end of any fiscal quarter. At December 31, 2013, the Company’s debt-to-capitalization ratio was 22 percent.
The negative covenants include restrictions on the Company’s ability to create liens and security interests on its assets, with exceptions for liens typically arising in the oil and gas industry, purchase money liens, and liens arising as a matter of law, such as tax and mechanics’ liens. The Company may incur liens on assets located in the U.S. and Canada of up to 5 percent of the Company’s consolidated assets, or approximately $3.1 billion as of December 31, 2013. There are no restrictions on incurring liens in countries other than the U.S. and Canada. There are also restrictions on Apache’s ability to merge with another entity, unless the Company is the surviving entity, and a restriction on its ability to guarantee debt of entities not within its consolidated group.
The facilities do not permit the lenders to accelerate payments or refuse to lend based on unspecified material adverse changes. The credit facility agreements do not have drawdown restrictions or prepayment obligations in the event of a decline in credit ratings. However, the agreements allow the lenders to accelerate payments and terminate lending commitments if Apache, or any of its U.S. or Canadian subsidiaries, defaults on any direct payment obligation in excess of the stated thresholds noted in the agreements or has any unpaid, non-appealable judgment against it in excess of the stated thresholds noted in the agreements.
The Company was in compliance with the terms of the credit facilities as of December 31, 2013.
Commercial Paper Program
The Company has available a $3.0 billion commercial paper program, which generally enables Apache to borrow funds for up to 270 days at competitive interest rates. The commercial paper program is fully supported by available borrowing capacity under committed credit facilities. Our 2013 weighted-average interest rate for commercial paper was 0.38 percent. If the Company is unable to issue commercial paper following a significant credit downgrade or dislocation in the market, the Company’s committed credit facilities, which expire in 2016 and 2017, are available as a 100 percent backstop. The Company used proceeds from divestitures to repay commercial paper and at year end had no outstanding balance. At December 31, 2012, the Company had $489 million in commercial paper outstanding.
Subsidiary Notes - Apache Finance Canada
Apache Finance Canada has approximately $300 million of publicly-traded notes due in 2029 that are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by Apache. For further discussion of subsidiary debt, please see Note 16 - Supplemental Guarantor Information.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Financing Costs, Net
The following table presents the components of Apache’s financing costs, net:
The Company has $59 million of debt discounts as of December 31, 2013, which will be charged to interest expense over the life of the related debt issuances. Discount amortization of $3 million, $3 million, and $2 million were recorded as interest expense in 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively.
As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had approximately $73 million and $70 million, respectively, of unamortized deferred loan costs associated with its various debt obligations. These costs are included in deferred charges and other in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet and are being charged to financing costs and expensed over the life of the related debt issuances.
7. INCOME TAXES
Income before income taxes is composed of the following:
The total provision for income taxes consists of the following:
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
A reconciliation of the tax on the Company’s income before income taxes and total tax expense is shown below:
The net deferred tax liability consists of the following:
The Company has recorded a valuation allowance against the net deferred tax asset in Argentina and Canada and against certain state net operating losses. The Company has assessed the future potential realization of these deferred tax assets and has concluded that it is more likely than not that these deferred tax assets will not be realized based on current economic conditions. In 2013, 2012, and 2011, the Company increased its valuation allowance by $232 million, $359 million, and $7 million, respectively.
On November 14, 2013, the Company completed the formation of its strategic partnership with Sinopec, whereby the Company received $2.95 billion in exchange for a one-third minority participation interest in
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Apache’s Egypt oil and gas business. As a result of the transaction, the Company reassessed its position with respect to certain current year untaxed foreign earnings to treat the reinvestment of these earnings as not permanent in duration. As such, the Company recorded a $225 million deferred tax charge on current year foreign earnings deemed not permanently reinvested. The Company repatriated approximately $643 million of cash from foreign subsidiaries and utilized net operating losses to offset any U.S. current income tax expense.
The Company considers the undistributed earnings of its foreign subsidiaries to be permanently reinvested, as it has no current intention to repatriate these earnings. As such, deferred income taxes are not provided for temporary differences of approximately $17 billion at December 31, 2013, representing unremitted earnings of subsidiaries outside the United States intended to be permanently reinvested. Upon an actual or deemed distribution of these earnings in the form of dividends or otherwise, the Company may be subject to U.S. income taxes and foreign withholding taxes. It is not practicable, however, to estimate the amount of taxes that may be payable on the eventual remittance of these earnings after consideration of available foreign tax credits. Presently, limited foreign tax credits are available to reduce the U.S. taxes on such amounts if repatriated.
On December 31, 2013, the Company had net operating losses as follows:
The Company has a federal net operating loss carryforward of $2.3 billion. Included in the federal net operating loss carryforward is $520 million of federal net operating losses related to the 2010 merger with Mariner and $183 million of federal net operating losses related to the Cordillera acquisition. The Mariner and Cordillera net operating loss carryforwards are subject to annual limitations under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code. The Company also has $186 million of capital loss carryforwards in Canada, which have an indefinite carryover period.
The tax benefits of carryforwards are recorded as assets to the extent that management assesses the utilization of such carryforwards to be “more likely than not.” When the future utilization of some portion of the carryforwards is determined to not meet the “more likely than not” standard, a valuation allowance is provided to reduce the tax benefits from such assets. As discussed above, the Company does not believe the utilization of the Argentine net operating losses, Canadian capital losses, and certain state net operating losses to be “more likely than not.” As such, a valuation allowance was provided against these deferred tax assets.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
The Company accounts for income taxes in accordance with ASC Topic 740, “Income Taxes,” which prescribes a minimum recognition threshold a tax position must meet before being recognized in the financial statements. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows:
The Company records interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits as a component of income tax expense. Each quarter the Company assesses the amounts provided for and, as a result, may increase (expense) or reduce (benefit) the amount of interest and penalties. During the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011 the Company recorded tax expense of $1 million, $5 million, and $6 million, respectively, for interest and penalties. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had approximately $1 million and $5 million, respectively, accrued for payment of interest and penalties.
The Company is under IRS audit for 2011 and 2012 and under audit in various states as well as in most of the Company’s foreign jurisdictions as part of its normal course of business. In 2013, the Company reached an agreement with the IRS regarding an audit of the 2009 and 2010 tax years. There was no change in the Company’s unrecognized tax benefit as a result of the 2009 and 2010 IRS settlement. In 2012, the Company reached an agreement with the IRS Administrative Appeals office regarding the audits of tax years 2004 through 2008. As a result of this agreement, the Company reduced its 2012 unrecognized tax benefit by $65 million. The resolution of unagreed tax issues in the Company’s open tax years cannot be predicted with absolute certainty, and differences between what has been recorded and the eventual outcomes may occur. The Company believes that it has adequately provided for income taxes and any related interest and penalties for all open tax years.
Apache and its subsidiaries are subject to U.S. federal income tax as well as income tax in various states and foreign jurisdictions. The Company’s uncertain tax positions are related to tax years that may be subject to examination by the relevant taxing authority. Apache’s earliest open tax years in its key jurisdictions are as follows:
8. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Legal Matters
Apache is party to various legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business, including litigation and governmental and regulatory controls. The Company has an accrued liability of approximately $10 million for all
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
legal contingencies that are deemed to be probable of occurring and can be reasonably estimated. Apache’s estimates are based on information known about the matters and its experience in contesting, litigating, and settling similar matters. Although actual amounts could differ from management’s estimate, none of the actions are believed by management to involve future amounts that would be material to Apache’s financial position, results of operations, or liquidity after consideration of recorded accruals. For material matters that Apache believes an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible, the Company has disclosed the nature of the matter and a range of potential exposure, unless an estimate cannot be made at this time. It is management’s opinion that the loss for any other litigation matters and claims that are reasonably possible to occur will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or liquidity.
Argentine Environmental Claims
In connection with the acquisition from Pioneer Natural Resources (Pioneer) in 2006, the Company acquired a subsidiary of Pioneer in Argentina (PNRA) that is involved in various administrative proceedings with environmental authorities in the Neuquén Province relating to permits for and discharges from operations in that province. In addition, PNRA was named in a lawsuit initiated against oil companies operating in the Neuquén basin entitled Asociación de Superficiarios de la Patagonia v YPF S.A., et. al., originally filed on August 21, 2003, in the Argentine National Supreme Court of Justice. The plaintiffs, a private group of landowners known as ASSUPA, have also named the national government and several provinces as third parties. The lawsuit alleges injury to the environment generally by the oil and gas industry. The plaintiffs principally seek from all defendants, jointly, (i) the remediation of contaminated sites, of the superficial and underground waters, and of soil that allegedly was degraded as a result of deforestation, (ii) if the remediation is not possible, payment of an indemnification for the material and moral damages claimed from defendants operating in the Neuquén basin, of which PNRA is a small portion, (iii) adoption of all the necessary measures to prevent future environmental damages, and (iv) the creation of a private restoration fund to provide coverage for remediation of potential future environmental damages. Much of the alleged damage relates to operations by the Argentine state oil company, which conducted oil and gas operations throughout Argentina prior to its privatization, which began in 1990. ASSUPA in 2012 asserted similar lawsuits and claims against numerous oil and gas producers relating to other geographic areas of Argentina, including claims against a Company subsidiary relating to the Austral basin. While the plaintiffs will seek to make all oil and gas companies jointly liable for each other’s actions in each of these lawsuits, Company subsidiaries will defend on an individual basis and attempt to require the plaintiffs to delineate damages by company. Company subsidiaries intend to defend each case vigorously. It is not certain exactly what the courts will do in these matters as the lawsuit relating to the Neuquén basin is the first of its kind. While it is possible Company subsidiaries may incur liabilities related to the environmental claims, no reasonable prediction can be made as the Company subsidiaries’ exposure related to these lawsuits is not currently determinable.
Argentine Tariff
Enargas, an autonomous entity that functions under the Argentine Ministry of Economy, issued administrative orders pursuant to national executive Decree No. 2067/2008 creating a tariff charge on all fuel gas used by oil and gas producers in field operations effective December 1, 2011. The tariff charge, which is applicable to the operations of Company affiliates in Argentina, totaled approximately $39.5 million since inception, of which $11 million has been paid. The Company’s affiliates have initiated legal proceedings in the Provinces of Neuquén and Tierra del Fuego challenging the Enargas tariff charge and have obtained temporary injunctive relief that prohibits the collection of the charges pending final rulings on the merits of the legal challenges.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
U.S. Royalty Litigation
In Foster v. Apache Corporation, Civil Action No. CIV-10-0573-HE, in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, on August 20, 2012, the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma denied plaintiff’s motion for class certification. The plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration, which was also denied, and petitioned the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to accept an appeal of the District Court’s ruling denying class certification. The plaintiff withdrew the petition to appeal following decisions on July 8, 2013, by the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit to vacate District Court class certification orders in two unrelated lawsuits - Wallace B. Roderick Revocable Living Trust v. XTO Energy, Inc., No. 12-3176, and Chieftain Royalty Company v. XTO Energy, Inc., No. 12-7047. The plaintiff and Apache recently filed a joint stipulation to dismiss the Foster lawsuit with prejudice, which concludes the matter.
Louisiana Restoration
Numerous surface owners have filed claims or sent demand letters to various oil and gas companies, including Apache, claiming that, under either expressed or implied lease terms or Louisiana law, they are liable for damage measured by the cost of restoration of leased premises to their original condition as well as damages from contamination and cleanup, regardless of the value of the underlying property. Because the Company has continuing operations in Louisiana, from time-to-time restoration lawsuits and claims are resolved by the Company for amounts that are not material to the Company while new lawsuits and claims are asserted against the Company. With respect to each of the pending lawsuits and claims, the amount claimed is not currently determinable or is not material, except that in a lawsuit captioned Ardoin Limited Partnership et al. v. Meridian Resources & Exploration et al., Case No.10-18692, in the District Court of Cameron Parish, Louisiana, the plaintiffs’ expert opined that the cost to restore plaintiffs’ property would be approximately $61 million. Prior to trial the court granted Apache’s motions to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims against Apache. Plaintiffs then settled with the other defendant in the case, BP America, Inc. (BP). BP has demanded that Apache indemnify it for the amount of its settlement with plaintiffs, which is not material to Apache. Apache has rejected BP’s indemnity claim and, further, Apache has demanded that Wagner Oil Company (which purchased Apache’s interest in the subject property) indemnify Apache from and against BP’s claim.
On July 24, 2013, a lawsuit captioned Board of Commissioners of the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority - East v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company et al., Case No. 2013-6911 was filed in the Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana, in which plaintiff on behalf of itself and as the board governing the levee districts of Orleans, Lake Borgne Basin, and East Jefferson alleges that Louisiana coastal lands have been damaged as a result of oil and gas industry activity, including a network of canals for access and pipelines. The plaintiff seeks damages and injunctive relief in the form of abatement and restoration based on claims of negligence, strict liability, natural servitude of drain, public nuisance, private nuisance, and breach of contract - third party beneficiary. Apache has been indiscriminately named as one of approximately 100 defendants in the lawsuit. Defendant Chevron U.S.A., Inc. filed a notice to remove the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, civil action No. 13-5410. The overall exposure related to this lawsuit is not currently determinable. While an adverse judgment against Apache might be possible, Apache intends to vigorously defend the case.
On November 8, 2013, the Parish of Plaquemines in Louisiana filed three lawsuits against the Company and other oil and gas producers alleging that certain of defendants’ oil and gas exploration, production, and transportation operations in specified fields were conducted in violation of the State and Local Coastal Resources Management Act of 1978, as amended, and applicable regulations, rules, orders, and ordinances promulgated or adopted thereunder by the State of Louisiana or the Parish of Plaquemines. The plaintiff alleges that defendants
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
caused substantial damage to land and water bodies located in the coastal zone of Louisiana. The plaintiff seeks, among other things, unspecified damages for alleged violations of applicable state law within the coastal zone, the payment of costs necessary to clear, re-vegetate, detoxify, and otherwise restore the subject coastal zone as near as practicable to its original condition, and actual restoration of the coastal zone to its original condition. The lawsuits were all filed in Division A of the 25th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Plaquemines, State of Louisiana, and are captioned as follows: Parish of Plaquemines v. Rozel Operating Company et al., Docket No. 60-996; Parish of Plaquemines v. Apache Oil Corporation et al., Docket No. 61-000; and Parish of Plaquemines v. HHE Energy Company et al., Docket No. 60-983. Defendants have filed notices to remove the cases to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, civil action Nos. 13-6722, 13-6711, and 13-6735. The plaintiff has moved to remand each of the lawsuits to state court, and plaintiff’s motions are pending. Many similar lawsuits have been filed against other oil and gas producers in the Parish of Plaquemines and in other Parishes across south Louisiana. The overall exposure related to these lawsuits is not currently determinable. While an adverse judgment against Apache might be possible, Apache intends to vigorously defend the cases.
The overall exposure related to these lawsuits and claims is not currently determinable. While an adverse judgment against Apache is possible, Apache intends to actively defend the cases.
Hurricane-Related Litigation
On May 27, 2011, a lawsuit captioned Comer et al. v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:11-cv-220 HS0-JMR, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, was filed in which certain named residents of Mississippi, as plaintiffs, alleged that the oil, coal, and chemical industries are responsible for global warming, which they claim caused or increased the effect of Hurricane Katrina, allegedly resulting among other things in economic losses and increased insurance premiums. Plaintiffs sought class certification, damages for losses sustained, a declaration that state law tort claims are not pre-empted by federal law, and punitive and exemplary damages. Apache was one of numerous defendants. The District Court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ claims. Plaintiffs appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which affirmed dismissal of the suit. Plaintiffs did not appeal further, thus concluding the matter. A similar action filed by Comer et al. was previously dismissed in 2011.
Australia Gas Pipeline Force Majeure
In June 2008, Company subsidiaries reported a pipeline explosion that interrupted deliveries of natural gas to customers under various long-term contracts. Company subsidiaries believe that the event was a force majeure, and as a result, the subsidiaries and their joint venture participants declared force majeure under those contracts.
On December 16, 2009, a natural gas customer, Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd (Burrup Fertilisers), filed a lawsuit on behalf of itself and certain of its underwriters at Lloyd’s of London and other insurers, against the Company and its subsidiaries in Texas state court, in a case captioned Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd v. Apache Corporation, Apache Energy Limited, and Apache Northwest Pty Ltd, Cause No. 2009-79834, in the District Court of Harris County, Texas. The lawsuit concerned the interruption of deliveries of natural gas to Burrup Fertilisers following the pipeline explosion. Burrup Fertilisers and its underwriters asserted claims for negligence, breach of contract, alter ego, single business enterprise, res ipsa loquitur, and gross negligence/exemplary damages, and sought to recover unspecified actual damages, cost of repair and replacement, exemplary damages, lost profits, loss of business goodwill, value of the gas lost under the Gas Supply and Purchase Agreement (GSA), interest, and court costs. On March 22, 2013, Burrup Fertilisers agreed to dismiss its
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Texas lawsuit based on Apache Corporation’s motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens. Accordingly, the District Court entered an agreed order dismissing Burrup Fertilisers’ Texas lawsuit on the ground of forum non conveniens. By its terms, the order of dismissal does not prevent Burrup Fertilisers from re-filing its lawsuit in the civil courts of Western Australia.
On March 24, 2011, another natural gas customer, Alcoa of Australia Limited (“Alcoa”) filed a lawsuit captioned Alcoa of Australia Limited vs. Apache Energy Limited, Apache Northwest Pty Ltd, Tap (Harriet) Pty Ltd, and Kufpec Australia Pty Ltd, Civ. 1481 of 2011, in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The lawsuit concerns the interruption of deliveries of natural gas to Alcoa under two long-term contracts. Alcoa challenges the declaration of force majeure and the validity of the liquidated damages provisions in the contracts. Alcoa asserts claims based on breach of contract, statutory duties, and duty of care. Alcoa seeks approximately $158 million AUD in general damages or, alternatively, approximately $5.7 million AUD in liquidated damages. On June 20, 2012, the Supreme Court struck out Alcoa’s claim that the liquidated damages provisions under two long-term contracts are unenforceable as a penalty and also struck out Alcoa’s claim for damages for breach of statutory duty. On September 17, 2013, the Western Australia Court of Appeal dismissed the Company subsidiaries’ appeal concerning Alcoa’s remaining tort claim for economic loss. On October 15, 2013, the Company subsidiaries applied to the High Court of Australia for leave to appeal. The applications for leave to appeal are pending. If the High Court does not grant leave to appeal at this time, all of the Company subsidiaries’ defenses remain intact for further proceedings at the trial court level.
On October 31, 2013, a third natural gas customer, Barrick (Plutonic) Limited (“Barrick”), filed a lawsuit captioned Barrick (Plutonic) Limited v. Apache Energy Limited, Apache Northwest Pty Ltd, Harriet (Onyx) Pty Ltd, and Kufpec Australia Pty Ltd , Civ. 2656 of 2013, in the Supreme Court of Western Australia. The lawsuit concerns the interruption of gas deliveries to Barrick under certain gas supply contracts. Barrick asserts tort claims against the Company’s subsidiaries and seeks approximately $19 million USD in general damages, including for alleged lost gold production at the Plutonic mine in Western Australia.
The Company and its subsidiaries do not believe that the Burrup Fertilisers, Alcoa, and Barrick claims have merit and will vigorously pursue their defenses against such claims.
Other customers have threatened to file suit challenging the declaration of force majeure under their contracts. At least one third party that is not a customer has also threatened to file suit. Contract prices under customer contracts are significantly below current prices for natural gas in Australia. In the event it is determined that the pipeline explosion was not a force majeure, Company subsidiaries believe that liquidated damages should be the extent of the damages under those long-term contracts with such provisions. Approximately 90 percent of the natural gas volumes sold by Company subsidiaries under long-term contracts have liquidated damages provisions. Contractual liquidated damages under the long-term contracts with such provisions would not be expected to exceed $50 million AUD exclusive of interest. This is a reduction from the previous estimate of $200 million AUD. No assurance can be given that customers would not assert claims in excess of contractual liquidated damages, and exposure related to such claims (or any claims by non-customers) is not currently determinable. While an adverse judgment against Company subsidiaries (and the Company, in the case of Burrup Fertilisers) is possible, the Company and Company subsidiaries do not believe any such claims would have merit and plan to vigorously pursue their defenses against any such claims.
In December 2008, the Senate Economics Committee of the Parliament of Australia released its findings from public hearings concerning the economic impact of the gas shortage following the explosion on Varanus Island and the government’s response. The Committee concluded, among other things, that the macroeconomic impact to Western Australia will never be precisely known, but cited to a range of estimates from $300 million
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
AUD to $2.5 billion AUD consisting in part of losses alleged by some parties who have long-term contracts with Company subsidiaries (as described above), but also losses alleged by third parties who do not have contracts with Company subsidiaries (but who may have purchased gas that was re-sold by customers or who may have paid more for energy following the explosion or who lost wages or sales due to the inability to obtain energy or the increased price of energy). A timber industry group, whose members do not have a contract with Company subsidiaries, has announced that it intends to seek compensation for its members and their subcontractors from Company subsidiaries for $20 million AUD in losses allegedly incurred as a result of the gas supply shortage following the explosion. In Johnson Tiles Pty Ltd v. Esso Australia Pty Ltd [2003] VSC 27 (Supreme Court of Victoria, Gillard J presiding), which concerned a 1998 explosion at an Esso natural gas processing plant at Longford in East Gippsland, Victoria, the Court held that Esso was not liable for $1.3 billion AUD of pure economic losses suffered by claimants that had no contract with Esso, but was liable to such claimants for reasonably foreseeable property damage which Esso settled for $32.5 million AUD plus costs. In reaching this decision the Court held that third-party claimants should have protected themselves from pure economic losses, through the purchase of insurance or the installation of adequate backup measures, in case of an interruption in their gas supply from Esso. While an adverse judgment against Company subsidiaries is possible if litigation is filed, Company subsidiaries do not believe any such claims would have merit and plan to vigorously pursue their defenses against any such claims. Exposure related to any such potential claims is not currently determinable.
On October 10, 2008, the Australia National Offshore Petroleum Safety Authority (NOPSA) released a self-titled “Final Report” of the findings of its investigation into the pipeline explosion, prepared at the request of the Western Australian Department of Industry and Resources (DoIR). NOPSA concluded in its report that the evidence gathered to date indicates that the main causal factors in the incident were: (1) ineffective anti-corrosion coating at the beach crossing section of the 12-inch sales gas pipeline, due to damage and/or dis-bondment from the pipeline; (2) ineffective cathodic protection of the wet-dry transition zone of the beach crossing section of the 12-inch sales gas pipeline; and (3) ineffective inspection and monitoring by Company subsidiaries of the beach crossing and shallow water section of the 12-inch sales gas pipeline. NOPSA further concluded that the investigation identified that Apache Northwest Pty Ltd and its co-licensees may have committed offenses under the Petroleum Pipelines Act 1969, Sections 36A & 38(b) and the Petroleum Pipelines Regulations 1970, Regulation 10, and that some findings may also constitute non-compliance with pipeline license conditions.
On May 28, 2009, the Department of Mines and Petroleum (DMP) filed a prosecution notice in the Magistrates Court of Western Australia, charging Apache Northwest Pty Ltd and its co-licensees with failure to maintain a pipeline in good condition and repair under the Petroleum Pipelines Act 1969, Section 38(b). The maximum fine associated with the alleged offense was $50,000 AUD. The Company subsidiary did not believe that the charge had merit and vigorously pursued its defenses, resulting in the dismissal of the prosecution notice by the Magistrates Court of Western Australia on March 29, 2012.
NOPSA stated in its report that an application for renewal of the pipeline license (the “pipeline license”) covering the area of the Varanus Island facility was granted in May 1985 with 21 years validity, and an application for renewal of the pipeline license was submitted to DoIR by Company subsidiaries in December 2005 and remained pending at the time NOPSA issued its report. The application by Apache Northwest, Kufpec Australia Pty Ltd, and Tap (Harriet) Pty Ltd for renewal and variation of the pipeline license covering the area of the Varanus Island facility was granted on April 19, 2011, by the DMP. The period of the pipeline license is 21 years commencing April 20, 2011.
Company subsidiaries disagree with NOPSA’s conclusions and believe that the NOPSA report was premature, based on an incomplete investigation, and misleading. In a July 17, 2008, media statement, DoIR acknowledged, “The pipelines and Varanus Island facilities have been the subject of an independent validation
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
report [by Lloyd’s Register] which was received in August 2007. NOPSA has also undertaken a number of inspections between 2005 and the present.” These and numerous other inspections, audits and reviews conducted by top international consultants and regulators did not identify any warnings that the pipeline had a corrosion problem or other issues that could lead to its failure. Company subsidiaries believe that the explosion was not reasonably foreseeable, and was not within the reasonable control of Company’s subsidiaries or able to be reasonably prevented by Company subsidiaries.
On January 9, 2009, the governments of Western Australia and the Commonwealth of Australia announced a joint inquiry to consider the effectiveness of the regulatory regime for occupational health and safety and integrity that applied to operations and facilities at Varanus Island and the role of DoIR, NOPSA, and the Western Australian Department of Consumer and Employment Protection. The joint inquiry’s report was published in June 2009.
On May 8, 2009, the government of Western Australia announced that the DMP would carry out “the final stage of investigations into the Varanus Island gas explosion.” Inspectors were appointed under the Petroleum Pipelines Act to coordinate the final stage of the investigations. That report, prepared by the inspectors in June 2009, was made public by the State government on May 24, 2012. Company subsidiaries disagree with the inspectors’ June 2009 conclusions. Two other government reports were not published by the State and were not referenced by the inspectors. The Magistrates Court of Western Australia subsequently ordered that both such reports could be released on the basis that the inspectors’ June 2009 report “came with some limitations” and the two other government reports “together were part and parcel if not the main reason or the only reasoncertainly a significant contribution to the reason for the matter not proceeding to prosecution and trial.” In the first such report, the State’s senior investigator said in February 2009 that the prospects of a successful prosecution of Apache for failing to maintain the pipeline “would be slight.” In the second such report, the State’s lead corrosion expert concluded in July 2011 that Apache “had reasonable grounds to believe that the pipeline was in good repair” prior to the explosion.
Breton Lawsuit
On October 4, 2011, plaintiffs filed suit in Breton Energy, L.L.C. et al. v. Mariner Energy Resources, Inc., et al., Case 4:11-cv-03561, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division, seeking compensation from defendants for allegedly depriving plaintiffs of rights to hydrocarbons in a reservoir described by plaintiffs as a common reservoir in West Cameron Blocks 171 and 172 offshore Louisiana in the Gulf of Mexico. In their original petition plaintiffs named, among others, Mariner Energy, Inc. and certain of its affiliates as defendants. On December 12, 2011, plaintiffs filed an amended petition to add as defendants Apache Corporation and Apache Shelf, Inc. as successors to the Mariner interests. On September 27, 2012, the court dismissed plaintiffs’ claims on various grounds, including for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, while granting plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint within 30 days. On October 29, 2012, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint. On May 28, 2013, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims and entered judgment in favor of the defendants. On June 3, 2013, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The appeal is pending. The exposure related to the re-filed lawsuit is not currently determinable. While an adverse judgment against Apache is possible, Apache intends to vigorously defend the case.
Escheat Audits
The State of Delaware, Department of Finance, Division of Revenue (Unclaimed Property), has notified numerous companies, including Apache Corporation, that the State will examine its books and records and those of its subsidiaries and related entities to determine compliance with the Delaware Escheat Laws. The review is
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
being conducted by Kelmar Associates on behalf of the State of Delaware. At least 30 other states have retained their own consultants and have sent similar notifications. The scope of each state’s audit varies. The State of Delaware advises, for example, that the scope of its examination will be for the period 1981 through the present. It is possible that one or more of the audits could extend to all 50 states. The exposure related to the audits is not currently determinable.
Burrup-Related Gas Supply Lawsuits
On May 19, 2011, a lawsuit captioned Pankaj Oswal et al. v. Apache Corporation, Cause No. 2011-30302, in the District Court of Harris County, Texas, was filed in which plaintiffs asserted claims against the Company under the Australian Trade Practices Act. Following a hearing on March 22, 2013, the District Court on April 5, 2013, granted Apache Corporation’s motion to dismiss on the ground of forum non conveniens and entered an order dismissing the Texas lawsuit. On or about October 11, 2013, a statement of claim captioned Pankaj Oswal v. Apache Corporation, No. WAD 389/2013, in the Federal Court of Australia, District of Western Australia, General Division, was filed in which plaintiff Oswal once again asserts claims against the Company under the Australian Trade Practices Act. The Western Australia lawsuit is one of a number of legal actions involving the Burrup Fertilisers ammonia plant in Western Australia (the Burrup plant) founded by Oswal. Oswal’s shares, and those of his wife, together representing 65 percent of Burrup Holdings Limited (BHL, which owns Burrup Fertilisers), were offered for sale by externally-appointed administrators in Australia as a result of events of default on loans made to the Oswals by the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd (ANZ). In the Western Australia lawsuit, plaintiff Oswal alleges, among other things, that the Company induced him to make investments covering construction cost overruns on the ammonia plant that was completed in 2006. Plaintiff Oswal seeks damages in the amount of $491 million USD. The Company believes that the claims are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them.
The Texas and Western Australia lawsuits relate to a pending action filed by Tap (Harriet) Pty Ltd (Tap) against Burrup Fertilisers Pty Ltd et al., Civ. 2329 of 2009, in the Supreme Court of Western Australia (the “Tap action”), seeking a declaratory judgment regarding its contractual rights and obligations under a gas sales agreement between Burrup Fertilisers and the Harriet Joint Venture (comprised of a Company subsidiary and two joint venture partners, Tap and Kufpec Australia Pty Ltd).
As part of the sale process described above, on January 31, 2012, a Company affiliate acquired a 49 percent interest in YPHPL, while Yara Australia Pty Ltd (Yara) increased its interest in YPHPL from 35 percent to 51 percent. Yara operates the ammonia plant and is proceeding with development of a technical ammonium nitrate (TAN) plant in the Burrup Peninsula region of Western Australia to be developed by a consortium including YPHPL. A Company affiliate’s existing agreement to supply gas to the ammonia plant has been modified (with, among other things, new pricing, delivery quantities, and term). YPHPL share ownership, and the modified gas supply agreement, continues to be the subject of ongoing litigation in Australia with third parties, including Pankaj and Radhika Oswal. Two such cases directly involve the Company or certain of its subsidiaries. In a case captioned Radhika Oswal v. Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ) et al., No. SCI 2011 4653, in the Supreme Court of Victoria, the defendants include a Company affiliate. The Court has denied plaintiff’s application seeking to amend her statement of claim in order to add parties as defendants to the proceedings, including the Company and certain of its other subsidiaries. Similarly, in a companion case captioned Pankaj Oswal v. Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ) et al., No. SCI 2012 01995, in the Supreme Court of Victoria, the Court has also denied plaintiff’s application seeking to amend his statement of claim in order to add parties as defendants to the proceedings, including the Company and certain of its subsidiaries. The plaintiffs, either in their original claims or in their proposed amended claims, seek to set aside the YPHPL share sale, void the modified gas sale agreement, and recover unspecified damages. The plaintiffs’ in both cases have sought leave to appeal the Court’s denial of their applications. The new gas supply
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
agreement resolves counterclaims by Burrup Fertilisers against Apache and its affiliate in the Tap action. A Company subsidiary purchased Tap, which then modified its agreement to supply gas to the ammonia plant and resolved both Tap’s claims against Burrup Fertilisers and Burrup Fertilisers’ counterclaims against Tap in the Tap action. If Kufpec does not settle the remaining claims in the Tap action, it is expected that the trial court in the Tap action will issue its ruling in respect of phase 1 of those proceedings, which was tried in September 2011 and concerned construction of the original gas supply agreement.
Environmental Matters
The Company, as an owner or lessee and operator of oil and gas properties, is subject to various federal, provincial, state, local, and foreign country laws and regulations relating to discharge of materials into, and protection of, the environment. These laws and regulations may, among other things, impose liability on the lessee under an oil and gas lease for the cost of pollution clean-up resulting from operations and subject the lessee to liability for pollution damages. In some instances, the Company may be directed to suspend or cease operations in the affected area. We maintain insurance coverage, which we believe is customary in the industry, although we are not fully insured against all environmental risks.
Apache manages its exposure to environmental liabilities on properties to be acquired by identifying existing problems and assessing the potential liability. The Company also conducts periodic reviews, on a Company-wide basis, to identify changes in its environmental risk profile. These reviews evaluate whether there is a probable liability, the amount, and the likelihood that the liability will be incurred. The amount of any potential liability is determined by considering, among other matters, incremental direct costs of any likely remediation and the proportionate cost of employees who are expected to devote a significant amount of time directly to any possible remediation effort. As it relates to evaluations of purchased properties, depending on the extent of an identified environmental problem, the Company may exclude a property from the acquisition, require the seller to remediate the property to Apache’s satisfaction, or agree to assume liability for the remediation of the property. The Company’s general policy is to limit any reserve additions to any incidents or sites that are considered probable to result in an expected remediation cost exceeding $300,000. Any environmental costs and liabilities that are not reserved for are treated as an expense when actually incurred. In Apache’s estimation, neither these expenses nor expenses related to training and compliance programs are likely to have a material impact on its financial condition.
As of December 31, 2013, the Company had an undiscounted reserve for environmental remediation of approximately $93 million. Apache is not aware of any environmental claims existing as of December 31, 2013 that have not been provided for or would otherwise have a material impact on its financial position or results of operations. There can be no assurance however, that current regulatory requirements will not change or past non-compliance with environmental laws will not be discovered on the Company’s properties.
On May 25, 2011, a panel of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEMRE, as it was then known) published a report dated May 23, 2011, and titled “OCS G-2580, Vermilion Block 380 Platform A, Incidents of Noncompliance.” The report concerned the BOEMRE’s investigation of a fire on the Vermilion 380 A platform located in the Gulf of Mexico. At the time of the incident, Mariner operated the platform. A small amount of hydrocarbons spilled from the platform into the surrounding water as a result of the incident, and 13 workers were rescued after evacuating the platform. The BOEMRE concluded in its investigation that the fire was caused by Mariner’s failure to adequately maintain or operate the platform’s heater-treater in a safe condition. The BOEMRE also identified other safety deficiencies on the platform. On December 27, 2011, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE, successor to BOEMRE) issued several Incidents of Non-Compliance, which may provide the basis for the assessment of civil penalties against Mariner. The Company’s subsidiary
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Apache Deepwater LLC, which acquired Mariner effective November 10, 2010, filed an appeal on August 31, 2012, contesting several of the Incidents of Non-Compliance. It is management’s opinion that any loss arising from this matter will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or liquidity.
On June 1, 2013, Apache Canada Ltd. discovered a leak of produced water from a below ground pipeline in the Zama Operations area in northern Alberta. The pipeline was associated with a produced water disposal well. The spill resulted in approximately 97 thousand barrels of produced water being released to the marsh land environment. The applicable government agencies were immediately notified of the event and the line was shut down. Apache Canada Ltd. investigated the leak while conducting clean up and monitoring activities in the affected area and communicating with appropriate parties, including regulatory and First Nation representatives. The investigation revealed a pinhole feature in the outer polyethylene liner of the composite flex line. While the exposure related to this incident is not currently determinable, the Company does not expect the economic impact of this incident to have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or liquidity.
Contractual Obligations
At December 31, 2013, contractual obligations for drilling rigs, purchase obligations, firm transportation agreements, and long-term operating leases are as follows:
(1) Includes day-rate and other contractual agreements with third party service providers for use of drilling, completion, and workover rigs.
(2) Includes contractual obligations to buy or build oil and gas plants and facilities, LNG facilities, seismic and drilling work program commitments, take-or-pay contracts, and hydraulic fracturing services agreements.
(3) Relates to contractual obligations for capacity rights on third-party pipelines.
(4) Includes office and other building rentals and related equipment leases.
(5) Includes commitments required to retain acreage and commitments associated with floating production storage and offloading vessels (FPSOs), compressors, helicopters, and boats.
The table above includes leases for buildings, facilities, and related equipment with varying expiration dates through 2035. Net rental expense was $81 million, $76 million, and $64 million for 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
9. RETIREMENT AND DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLANS
Apache Corporation provides retirement benefits to its U.S. employees through the use of multiple plans: a 401(k) savings plan, a money purchase retirement plan, a non-qualified retirement/savings plan, and a non-qualified restorative retirement savings plan. The 401(k) savings plan provides participating employees the ability to elect to contribute up to 50 percent of eligible compensation, as defined, to the plan with the Company making matching contributions up to a maximum of 8 percent of each employee’s annual eligible compensation. In addition, the Company annually contributes 6 percent of each participating employee’s annual eligible compensation to a money purchase retirement plan. The 401(k) savings plan and the money purchase retirement plan are subject to certain annually-adjusted, government-mandated restrictions that limit the amount of employee and Company contributions. For certain eligible employees, the Company also provides a non-qualified retirement/savings plan or a non-qualified restorative retirement savings plan. These plans allow the deferral of up to 50 percent of each employee’s base salary, up to 75 percent of each employee’s annual bonus (that accepts employee contributions) and the Company’s matching contributions in excess of the government mandated limitations imposed in the 401(k) savings plan and money purchase retirement plan.
Vesting in the Company’s contributions in the 401(k) savings plan, the money purchase retirement plan, the non-qualified retirement savings plan and the non-qualified restorative retirement savings plan occurs at the rate of 20 percent for every completed year of employment. Upon a change in control of ownership, immediate and full vesting occurs.
Additionally, Apache Energy Limited, Apache Canada Ltd., and Apache North Sea Limited maintain separate retirement plans, as required under the laws of Australia, Canada, and the U.K., respectively.
The aggregate annual cost to Apache of all U.S. and International savings plans, the money purchase retirement plan, non-qualified retirement/savings plan, and non-qualified restorative retirement savings plan was $123 million, $117 million, and $93 million for 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively.
Apache also provides a funded noncontributory defined benefit pension plan (U.K. Pension Plan) covering certain employees of the Company’s North Sea operations in the U.K. The plan provides defined pension benefits based on years of service and final salary. The plan applies only to employees who were part of the BP North Sea’s pension plan as of April 2, 2003, prior to the acquisition of BP North Sea by the Company effective July 1, 2003.
Additionally, the Company offers postretirement medical benefits to U.S. employees who meet certain eligibility requirements. Eligible participants receive medical benefits up until the age of 65, provided the participant remits the required portion of the cost of coverage. The plan is contributory with participants’ contributions adjusted annually. The postretirement benefit plan does not cover benefit expenses once a covered participant becomes eligible for Medicare.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
The following tables set forth the benefit obligation, fair value of plan assets and funded status as of December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, and the underlying weighted average actuarial assumptions used for the U.K. Pension Plan and U.S. postretirement benefit plan. Apache uses a measurement date of December 31 for its pension and postretirement benefit plans.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
As of December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, the accumulated benefit obligation for the U.K. Pension Plan was $160 million, $139 million, and $119 million, respectively.
Apache’s defined benefit pension plan assets are held by a non-related trustee who has been instructed to invest the assets in an equal blend of equity securities and low-risk debt securities. The Company intends that this blend of investments will provide a reasonable rate of return such that the benefits promised to members are provided. The U.K. Pension Plan policy is to target an ongoing funding level of 100 percent through prudent investments and includes policies and strategies such as investment goals, risk management practices, and permitted and prohibited investments. A breakout of previous allocations for plan asset holdings and the target allocation for the Company’s plan assets are summarized below:
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
The plan’s assets do not include any direct ownership of equity or debt securities of Apache. The fair value of plan assets is based upon unadjusted quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets, which is a Level 1 fair value measurement. The following tables present the fair values of plan assets for each major asset category based on the nature and significant concentration of risks in plan assets at December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012:
(1) This category comprises U.K. equities, which are benchmarked against the FTSE All-Share Index.
(2) This category includes overseas equities, which comprises 85 percent global equities benchmarked against the MSCI World Index and 15 percent emerging markets benchmarked against the MSCI Emerging Markets Index, both of which have a performance target of 2 percent per annum over the benchmark over a rolling three-year period.
(3) This category includes U.K. Government bonds: 33 percent benchmarked against iBoxx Sterling Overall Index, with a performance target of 0.75 percent per annum over the benchmark over a rolling three-year period; and 67 percent against the FTSE Actuaries Government Securities Index-Linked Over 5 Years Index.
(4) This category comprises U.K. corporate bonds: 50 percent benchmarked against the iBoxx Sterling Overall Non Gilt index with a performance target of 0.75 percent per annum over the benchmark over a rolling three-year period; and 50 percent benchmarked against the iBoxx Sterling Overall Non Gilt Index with a performance target of 0.75 percent per annum over the benchmark over a rolling five year period.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS- (Continued)
The expected long-term rate of return on assets assumptions are derived relative to the yield on long-dated fixed-interest bonds issued by the U.K. government (gilts). For equities, out performance relative to gilts is assumed to be 3.5 percent per year.
The following tables set forth the components of the net periodic cost and the underlying weighted average actuarial assumptions used for the pension and postretirement benefit plans as of December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011:
Assumed health care cost trend rates affect amounts reported for postretirement benefits. A one-percentage-point change in assumed health care cost trend rates would have the following effects:
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Apache expects to contribute approximately $6 million to its pension plan and $1 million to its postretirement benefit plan in 2014. The following benefit payments, which reflect expected future service, as appropriate, are expected to be paid:
10. CAPITAL STOCK
Common Stock Outstanding
Net Income per Common Share
A reconciliation of the components of basic and diluted net income per common share for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011 is presented in the table below.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
The diluted EPS calculation excludes options and restricted shares that were anti-dilutive totaling 4.9 million, 4.4 million, and 2.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2012, 14.3 million shares related to the assumed conversion of the Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock were also anti-dilutive.
Stock Repurchase Program
In May 2013, Apache’s Board of Directors authorized the purchase of up to 30 million shares of the Company’s common stock, valued at approximately $2 billion when first announced. Shares may be purchased either in the open market or through privately held negotiated transactions. The Company initiated the buyback program on June 10, 2013, with the repurchase of 2,924,271 shares at an average price of $85.47 during the month of June. During the fourth quarter of 2013, 8,297,648 shares were repurchased at an average price of $90.08. An additional 2,393,917 shares were purchased subsequent to December 31, 2013 at an average cost of $84.67. The Company anticipates that further purchases will primarily be made with proceeds from asset dispositions, but the Company is not obligated to acquire any specific number of shares.
Common Stock Dividend
The Company paid common stock dividends of $0.77 per share in 2013, $0.66 per share in 2012, and $0.60 per share in 2011.
Stock Compensation Plans
The Company has several stock-based compensation plans, which include stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, and conditional restricted stock unit plans. On May 5, 2011, the Company’s shareholders approved the 2011 Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan (the 2011 Plan), which is intended to provide eligible employees with equity-based incentives. The 2011 Plan provides for the granting of Incentive Stock Options, Non-Qualified Stock Options, Performance Awards, Restricted Stock, Restricted Stock Units, Stock Appreciation Rights, or any combination of the foregoing. A total of 27.3 million shares were authorized and available for grant under the 2011 Plan as of December 31, 2013. Previously approved plans remain in effect solely for the purpose of governing grants still outstanding that were issued prior to approval of the 2011 Plan. All new grants are issued from the 2011 Plan.
For 2013, 2012, and 2011, stock-based compensation expensed was $136 million, $167 million, and $113 million ($94 million, $119 million, and $73 million after tax), respectively. Costs related to the plans are capitalized or expensed based on the nature of each employee’s activities. A description of the Company’s stock-based compensation plans and related costs follows:
Stock Options
As of December 31, 2013, officers and employees held options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock under one or more of the employee stock option plans adopted in 2000 and 2005 (collectively, the Stock Option Plans), as well as the 2007 Omnibus Equity Compensation Plan (the 2007 Plan), and the 2011 Plan
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
discussed above (together, the Omnibus Plans). New shares of Company stock will be issued for employee stock option exercises; however, under the 2000 Stock Option Plan, shares of treasury stock are used for employee stock option exercises to the extent treasury stock is held. Under the Stock Option Plans and the Omnibus Plans, the exercise price of each option equals the closing price of Apache’s common stock on the date of grant. Options generally become exercisable ratably over a four-year period and expire 10 years after granted. The Omnibus Plans and all of the Stock Option Plans, except for the 2000 Stock Option Plan, were submitted to and approved by the Company’s shareholders.
A summary of stock options issued and outstanding under the Stock Option Plans and the Omnibus Plans is presented in the table and narrative below:
(1) As of December 31, 2013, the weighted average remaining contractual life for options outstanding, expected to vest, and exercisable is 6.1 years, 8.2 years, and 4.7 years, respectively. The aggregate intrinsic value of options outstanding, expected to vest, and exercisable at year-end was $43 million, $7 million, and $34 million, respectively. The weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted during the years 2013, 2012, and 2011 was $23.18, $26.41, and $42.20, respectively.
The fair value of each stock option award is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. Assumptions used in the valuation are disclosed in the following table. Expected volatilities are based on historical volatility of the Company’s common stock and other factors. The expected dividend yield is based on historical yields on the date of grant. The expected term of stock options granted represents the period of time that the stock options are expected to be outstanding and is derived from historical exercise behavior, current trends, and values derived from lattice-based models. The risk-free rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant.
The intrinsic value of options exercised during 2013, 2012, and 2011 was approximately $4 million, $12 million and $50 million, respectively. The cash received from exercise of options during 2013 was approximately
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
$24 million. The Company realized an additional tax benefit of approximately $1.5 million for the amount of intrinsic value in excess of compensation cost recognized in 2013. As of December 31, 2013, the total compensation cost related to non-vested options not yet recognized was $60 million, which will be recognized over the remaining vesting period of the options.
Stock Appreciation Rights
For some non-executive employees, the Company issued stock appreciation rights (SARs) in lieu of stock options. The SARs vest ratably over four years and are settled in cash upon exercise throughout their ten-year life. In 2012, the Company issued 180,555 SARs with a weighted-average exercise price of $82.63 under the 2011 Omnibus Plan. As of December 31, 2013, a total of 316,127 SARs were outstanding, of which 201,552 were exercisable. Since SARs are cash-settled, the Company records compensation expense based on the fair value of the SARs at the end of each period. As of year-end, the weighted-average fair value of SARs outstanding was $33.41 based on the Black-Scholes valuation methodology using assumptions comparable to those discussed above. During 2013, 237,288 SARs were exercised. The aggregate of cash payments made to settle SARs was $11 million.
Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units
The Company has restricted stock and restricted stock unit plans for eligible employees including officers. The programs created under the Omnibus Plans have been approved by Apache’s Board of Directors. In 2013, the Company awarded 3,098,029 restricted stock units at a weighted-average per-share market price of $82.95. In 2012 and 2011, the Company awarded 1,219,886 and 887,851 restricted stock units at a weighted-average per-share market price of $85.67 and $124.16, respectively. The value of the stock issued was established by the market price on the date of grant and is being recorded as compensation expense ratably over the vesting terms. During 2013, 2012, and 2011, $82 million ($53 million after tax), $74 million ($48 million after tax), and $76 million ($49 million after tax), respectively, was charged to expense. In 2013, 2012, and 2011, $30 million, $25 million, and $28 million was capitalized, respectively. As of December 31, 2013, there was $242 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to 3,952,539 unvested restricted stock units. The weighted-average remaining life of unvested restricted stock units is approximately 1.3 years.
The fair value of the awards vested during 2013, 2012 and 2011 was approximately $88 million, $114 million, and $85 million, respectively. A summary of restricted stock activity for the year ended December 31, 2013, is presented below.
Conditional Restricted Stock Units
To provide long-term incentives for Apache employees to deliver competitive returns to the Company’s stockholders, the Company has granted conditional restricted stock units to eligible employees. The ultimate number of shares awarded from these conditional restricted stock units is based upon measurement of total
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
shareholder return of Apache common stock as compared to a designated peer group during a three-year performance period. Should any restricted stock units be awarded at the end of the three-year performance period, 50 percent of restricted stock units awarded will immediately vest, and an additional 25 percent will vest on succeeding anniversaries of the end of the performance period. Grants from two conditional restricted stock unit programs were outstanding at December 31, 2013, as described below:
•
In November 2010 the Company’s Board of Directors approved the 2011 Performance Program, pursuant to the 2007 Plan. In January 2011 eligible employees received initial conditional restricted stock unit awards totaling 585,811 units. Based on measurement of total shareholder return relative to the designated peer group at December 31, 2013, zero shares were awarded and all unvested conditional restricted stock units were cancelled. Upon cancellation, all remaining unamortized expense related to these awards was immediately amortized.
•
In January 2012 the Company’s Board of Directors approved the 2012 Performance Program, pursuant to the 2011 Plan. In January 2012 eligible employees received initial conditional restricted stock unit awards totaling 851,985 units. A total of 710,686 units were outstanding at December 31, 2013, from which a minimum of zero and a maximum of 1,776,715 units could be awarded.
•
In January 2013 the Company’s Board of Directors approved the 2013 Performance Program, pursuant to the 2011 Plan. In January 2013 eligible employees received initial conditional restricted stock unit awards totaling 1,232,176 units. In May 2013, the Company’s Board of Directors cancelled 918,016 awards under the 2013 Performance Program for nonexecutive employees. A total of 310,091 awards were outstanding at December 31, 2013, from which a minimum of zero and a maximum of 775,228 units could be awarded.
The fair value cost of the awards was estimated on the date of grant and is being recorded as compensation expense ratably over the vesting terms. During 2013, 2012, and 2011, $27 million ($17 million after tax), $47 million ($31 million after tax), and $12 million ($8 million after tax), respectively, was charged to expense. During 2013, 2012, and 2011, $13 million, $21 million, and $5 million was capitalized, respectively. As of December 31, 2013, there was $47 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to 1,020,777 unvested conditional restricted stock units. The weighted-average remaining life of the unvested conditional restricted stock units is approximately 2.1 years.
(1) The fair value of each conditional restricted stock unit award is estimated as of the date of grant using a Monte Carlo simulation with the following assumptions used for all grants made under the plan: (i) a three-year continuous risk-free interest rate; (ii) a constant volatility assumption based on the historical realized stock price volatility of the Company and the designated peer group; and (iii) the historical stock prices and expected dividends of the common stock of the Company and its designated peer group.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Preferred Stock
The Company has 10,000,000 shares of no par preferred stock authorized, of which 25,000 shares have been designated as Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock (the Series A Preferred Stock). The Company’s 6.00 percent Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock, Series D (the Series D Preferred Stock) were converted to Apache common shares in August 2013.
Series A Preferred Stock
In December 1995, the Company declared a dividend of one right (a Right) for each 2.31 shares (adjusted for subsequent stock dividends and a two-for-one stock split) of Apache common stock outstanding on January 31, 1996. Each full Right entitles the registered holder to purchase from the Company one ten-thousandth (1/10,000) of a share of Series A Preferred Stock at a price of $100 per one ten-thousandth of a share, subject to adjustment. The Rights are exercisable 10 calendar days following a public announcement that certain persons or groups have acquired 20 percent or more of the outstanding shares of Apache common stock or 10 business days following commencement of an offer for 30 percent or more of the outstanding shares of Apache’s outstanding common stock (flip-in event); each Right will become exercisable for shares of Apache’s common stock at 50 percent of the then-market price of the common stock. If a 20-percent shareholder of Apache acquires Apache, by merger or otherwise, in a transaction where Apache does not survive or in which Apache’s common stock is changed or exchanged (flip-over event), the Rights become exercisable for shares of the common stock of the Company acquiring Apache at 50 percent of the then-market price for Apache common stock. Any Rights that are or were beneficially owned by a person who has acquired 20 percent or more of the outstanding shares of Apache common stock and who engages in certain transactions or realizes the benefits of certain transactions with the Company will become void. If an offer to acquire all of the Company’s outstanding shares of common stock is determined to be fair by Apache’s board of directors, the transaction will not trigger a flip-in event or a flip-over event. The Company may also redeem the Rights at $.01 per Right at any time until 10 business days after public announcement of a flip-in event. These Rights were originally scheduled to expire on January 31, 2006. Effective as of that date, the Rights were reset to one right per share of common stock and the expiration was extended to January 31, 2016.
On February 5, 2014, the Company’s Board of Directors voted to terminate the Company’s stockholder rights plan. As a result of this decision, the Board approved an amendment to the Rights Agreement that will have the effect of terminating the Rights. The amendment will change the expiration date to March 7, 2014 and, thereby, accelerate the expiration of the Rights. The Company expects that the amendment will be fully executed on March 7, 2014.
Series D Preferred Stock
On July 28, 2010, Apache issued 25.3 million depositary shares, each representing a 1/20th interest in a share of Apache’s 6.00-percent Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock, Series D (Preferred Share), or 1.265 million Preferred Shares. Upon conversion of the outstanding Preferred Shares on August 1, 2013, 14.4 million Apache common shares were issued.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
11. ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
Components of accumulated other comprehensive loss include the following:
(1) Currency translation adjustments resulting from translating the Canadian subsidiaries’ financial statements into U.S. dollar equivalents, prior to adoption of the U.S. dollar as their functional currency, were reported separately and accumulated in other comprehensive income (loss).
12. MAJOR CUSTOMERS
In 2013, 2012, and 2011, purchases by Royal Dutch Shell plc and its subsidiaries accounted for 24 percent, 20 percent, and 11 percent, respectively, of the Company’s worldwide oil and gas production revenues. In 2011, purchases by the Vitol Group accounted for 13 percent of the Company’s worldwide oil and gas production revenues.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
13. BUSINESS SEGMENT INFORMATION
Apache is engaged in a single line of business. Both domestically and internationally, the Company explores for, develops, and produces natural gas, crude oil and natural gas liquids. At December 31, 2013, the Company had production in six countries: the United States, Canada, Egypt, Australia, the U.K. North Sea, and Argentina. Apache also pursues exploration interests in other countries that may over time result in reportable discoveries and development opportunities. Financial information for each country is presented below:
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
14. SUPPLEMENTAL OIL AND GAS DISCLOSURES (Unaudited)
Oil and Gas Operations
The following table sets forth revenue and direct cost information relating to the Company’s oil and gas exploration and production activities. Apache has no long-term agreements to purchase oil or gas production from foreign governments or authorities.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
(1) This amount only reflects DD&A of capitalized costs of oil and gas proved properties and, therefore, does not agree with DD&A reflected on Note 13 - Business Segment Information.
(2) Only reflects amounts directly related to oil and gas producing properties and, therefore, does not agree with taxes other than income reflected on Note 13 - Business Segment Information.
(3) 2013 includes a noncontrolling interest in Egypt.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Costs Incurred in Oil and Gas Property Acquisitions, Exploration, and Development Activities
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Capitalized Costs
The following table sets forth the capitalized costs and associated accumulated depreciation, depletion, and amortization, including impairments, relating to the Company’s oil and gas production, exploration, and development activities:
Costs Not Being Amortized
The following table sets forth a summary of oil and gas property costs not being amortized at December 31, 2013, by the year in which such costs were incurred. There are no individually significant properties or significant development projects included in costs not being amortized. The majority of the evaluation activities are expected to be completed within five to ten years.
Oil and Gas Reserve Information
Proved oil and gas reserves are the estimated quantities of natural gas, crude oil, condensate, and natural gas liquids (NGLs) that geological and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing conditions, operating conditions, and government regulations. Estimated proved developed oil and gas reserves can be expected to be recovered through existing wells with existing equipment and operating methods. The Company reports all estimated proved reserves held under production-sharing arrangements utilizing the “economic interest” method, which excludes the host country’s share of reserves.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
Estimated reserves that can be produced economically through application of improved recovery techniques are included in the “proved” classification when successful testing by a pilot project or the operation of an active, improved recovery program using reliable technology establishes the reasonable certainty for the engineering analysis on which the project or program is based. Economically producible means a resource which generates revenue that exceeds, or is reasonably expected to exceed, the costs of the operation. Reasonable certainty means a high degree of confidence that the quantities will be recovered. Reliable technology is a grouping of one or more technologies (including computational methods) that has been field-tested and has been demonstrated to provide reasonably certain results with consistency and repeatability in the formation being evaluated or in an analogous formation. In estimating its proved reserves, Apache uses several different traditional methods that can be classified in three general categories: 1) performance-based methods; 2) volumetric-based methods; and 3) analogy with similar properties. Apache will, at times, utilize additional technical analysis such as computer reservoir models, petrophysical techniques, and proprietary 3-D seismic interpretation methods to provide additional support for more complex reservoirs. Information from this additional analysis is combined with traditional methods outlined above to enhance the certainty of our reserve estimates.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of proved reserves and projecting future rates of production and timing of development expenditures. The reserve data in the following tables only represent estimates and should not be construed as being exact.
(1) 2013 includes proved reserves of 45 MMbbls as of December 31, 2013 attributable to a noncontrolling interest in Egypt.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
(1) 2013 includes proved reserves of 271 Bcf as of December 31, 2013 attributable to a noncontrolling interest in Egypt.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
(1) 2013 includes total proved reserves of 90 MMboe attributable to a noncontrolling interest in Egypt.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
During 2013, Apache added 6 MMboe of estimated proved reserves through purchases of minerals in-place. We sold 355 MMboe through several divestiture transactions which included the majority of our Gulf of Mexico Shelf properties and certain fields in Canada. During 2013, Apache also added 389 MMboe from extensions, discoveries and other additions. In the U.S., the Company recorded 254 MMboe primarily associated with drilling successes in the Permian and Anadarko basins, which added 150 MMboe and 65 MMboe, respectively; 20 MMboe from appraisal drilling in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico; and 19 MMboe from various drilling programs in other U.S. regions. In Canada, additions of 74 MMboe were primarily a result of drilling activity for liquids-rich gas targets in the Kaybob field area, horizontal drilling in our House Mountain waterflood units, extensions of the Glauconitic trend in our West 5 area and shallow oil drilling in Brownfield and Consort field areas. Egypt contributed 51 MMboe from exploration and appraisal activity in the West Kalabsha, Shushan, Khalda and Ras Kanayes concessions along with continued development of the Razzak, Abu Gharadig and Meghar fields. Australia, Argentina and North Sea regions contributed 11 MMboe from their combined drilling programs.
Approximately 10 percent of Apache’s year-end 2013 estimated proved developed reserves are classified as proved not producing. These reserves relate to zones that are either behind pipe, or that have been completed but not yet produced, or zones that have been produced in the past, but are not now producing because of mechanical reasons. These reserves are considered to be a lower tier of reserves than producing reserves because they are frequently based on volumetric calculations rather than performance data. Future production associated with behind pipe reserves is scheduled to follow depletion of the currently producing zones in the same wellbores. Additional capital may have to be spent to access these reserves. The capital and economic impact of production timing are reflected in this Note 14, under “Future Net Cash Flows.”
Future Net Cash Flows
Future cash inflows as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 were calculated using an unweighted arithmetic average of oil and gas prices in effect on the first day of each month in the respective year, except where prices are defined by contractual arrangements. Operating costs, production and ad valorem taxes and future development costs are based on current costs with no escalation.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
The following table sets forth unaudited information concerning future net cash flows for proved oil and gas reserves, net of income tax expense. Income tax expense has been computed using expected future tax rates and giving effect to tax deductions and credits available, under current laws, and which relate to oil and gas producing activities. This information does not purport to present the fair market value of the Company’s oil and gas assets, but does present a standardized disclosure concerning possible future net cash flows that would result under the assumptions used.
(1) Estimated future net cash flows before income tax expense, discounted at 10 percent per annum, totaled approximately $45.4 billion and $48.2 billion as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
(2) Includes discounted future net cash flows of approximately $1.95 billion in 2013 attributable to a noncontrolling interest in Egypt.
The following table sets forth the principal sources of change in the discounted future net cash flows:
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
15. SUPPLEMENTAL QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (Unaudited)
(1) The sum of the individual quarterly net income per common share amounts may not agree with year-to-date net income per common share as each quarterly computation is based on the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during that period.
(2) In 2013, operating expenses include non-cash write-downs of the Company’s oil and gas properties totaling $659 million, net of tax, in the U.S., North Sea, and Argentina regions and also the Company’s exit of operations in Kenya. In 2012, the Company recorded a $1.4 billion, net of tax, non-cash write-down of the carrying value of the Company’s Canadian proved oil and gas properties.
16. SUPPLEMENTAL GUARANTOR INFORMATION
In December 1999, Apache Finance Canada issued approximately $300 million of publicly-traded notes due in 2029, which are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by Apache. The following condensed consolidating financial statements are provided as an alternative to filing separate financial statements.
Apache Finance Canada has been fully consolidated in Apache’s consolidated financial statements. As such, these condensed consolidating financial statements should be read in conjunction with the financial statements of Apache Corporation and subsidiaries and notes thereto, of which this note is an integral part.
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Year Ended December 31, 2012
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
For the Year Ended December 31, 2011
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2013
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2012
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the Year Ended December 31, 2011
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 2013
APACHE CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - (Continued)
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATING BALANCE SHEET
December 31, 2012
Board of Directors
Officers
G. Steven Farris
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, and President
Apache Corporation
Randolph M. Ferlic, M.D.(1)
Founder and Former President,
Surgical Services of the Great Plains, P.C.
Eugene C. Fiedorek(1)
Private Investor, Co-Founder and Former President
and Managing Director, EnCap Investments L.C.
A.D. Frazier, Jr.(2)(4)
President, Georgia Oak Partners
Chansoo Joung(1)(3)
Senior Advisor and Former Partner,
Warburg Pincus LLC
George D. Lawrence(2)
Private Investor; Former Chief Executive Officer,
The Phoenix Resource Companies, Inc.
John E. Lowe(2)(4)
Former Executive Vice President,
ConocoPhillips
William C. Montgomery(2)(3)
Managing Director, Quantum Energy Partners
Amy H. Nelson
President and Founder, Greenridge Advisors, LLC
Rodman D. Patton(1)
Former Managing Director,
Merrill Lynch Energy Group
Charles J. Pitman(3)(4)
Former Regional President - Middle East/
Caspian/Egypt/India, BP Amoco plc
G. Steven Farris
Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, and President
John J. Christmann
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer - North America
Thomas E. Voytovich
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer - International
Michael S. Bahorich
Executive Vice President and Chief Technology Officer
Rodney J. Eichler
Executive Advisor to the Chairman; Chief Executive Officer - Kitimat
Margery M. Harris
Executive Vice President - Human Resources
P. Anthony Lannie
Executive Vice President and General Counsel
Alfonso Leon
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
W. Kregg Olson
Executive Vice President - Corporate Reservoir Engineering
Thomas P. Chambers
Senior Vice President, Finance
Matthew W. Dundrea
Senior Vice President - Treasury and Administration
Robert J. Dye
Senior Vice President - Global Communication and Corporate Affairs
Janine J. McArdle
Senior Vice President - Gas Monetization
Sarah B. Teslik
Senior Vice President - Policy and Governance
Jon A. Graham
Vice President - Environmental, Health and Safety
Rodney A. Gryder
Vice President - Audit
Rebecca A. Hoyt
Vice President - Chief Accounting Officer and Controller
Aaron S.G. Merrick
Vice President - Information Technology
Urban F. O’Brien
Vice President - Government Affairs
F. Brady Parish, Jr
Vice President - Investor Relations
Jon W. Sauer
Vice President - Tax
Cheri L. Peper
Corporate Secretary
(1) Audit Committee
(2) Management Development and Compensation Committee
(3) Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee
(4) Stock Plan Committee
Shareholder Information
Stock Data
The Company has paid cash dividends on its common stock for 49 consecutive years through December 31, 2013. Future dividend payments will depend upon the Company’s level of earnings, financial requirements and other relevant factors.
Apache common stock is listed on the New York and Chicago stock exchanges and the NASDAQ National Market (symbol APA). At December 31, 2013, the Company’s shares of common stock outstanding were held by approximately 5,000 shareholders of record and 327,000 beneficial owners. Also listed on the New York Stock Exchange are Apache Finance Canada’s 7.75% notes, due 2029 (symbol APA/29).
Corporate Offices
One Post Oak Central
2000 Post Oak Boulevard
Suite 100
Houston, Texas 77056-4400
(713) 296-6000
Independent Public Accountants
Ernst & Young LLP
Five Houston Center
1401 McKinney Street, Suite 1200
Houston, Texas 77010-2007
Stock Transfer Agent and Registrar
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Attn: Shareowner Services
P.O. Box 64854
South St. Paul, Minnesota 55164-0854
(651) 450-4064 or (800) 468-9716
Communications concerning the transfer of shares, lost certificates, dividend checks, duplicate mailings, or change of address should be directed to the stock transfer agent. Shareholders can access account information on the web site: www.shareowneronline.com
Dividend Reinvestment Plan
Shareholders of record may invest their dividends automatically in additional shares of Apache common stock at the market price. Participants may also invest up to an additional $25,000 in Apache shares each quarter through this service. All bank service fees and brokerage commissions on purchases are paid by Apache. A prospectus describing the terms of the Plan and an authorization form may be obtained from the Company’s stock transfer agent, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Direct Registration
Shareholders of record may hold their shares of Apache common stock in book-entry form. This eliminates costs related to safekeeping or replacing paper stock certificates. In addition, shareholders of record may request electronic movement of book-entry shares between your account with the Company’s stock transfer agent and your broker. Stock certificates may be converted to book-entry shares at any time. Questions regarding this service may be directed to the Company’s stock transfer agent, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Annual Meeting
Apache will hold its annual meeting of shareholders on Thursday, May 15, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. in the Ballroom, Hilton Houston Post Oak, 2001 Post Oak Boulevard, Houston, Texas. Apache plans to web cast the annual meeting live; connect through the Apache web site: www.apachecorp.com
Stock Held in “Street Name”
The Company maintains a direct mailing list to ensure that shareholders with stock held in brokerage accounts receive information on a timely basis. Shareholders wanting to be added to this list should direct their requests to Apache’s Public and International Affairs Department, 2000 Post Oak Boulevard, Suite 100, Houston, Texas, 77056-4400, by calling (713) 296-6157 or by registering on Apache’s web site: www.apachecorp.com
Form 10-K Request
Shareholders and other persons interested in obtaining, without cost, a copy of the Company’s Form 10-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission may do so by writing to Cheri L. Peper, Corporate Secretary, 2000 Post Oak Boulevard, Suite 100, Houston, Texas, 77056-4400.
Investor Relations
Shareholders, brokers, securities analysts, or portfolio managers seeking information about the Company are welcome to contact F. Brady Parish, Jr., Vice President of Investor Relations, at (713) 296-6472.
Members of the news media and others seeking information about the Company should contact Apache’s Public and International Affairs Department at (713) 296-7276.
Web site: www.apachecorp.com
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
* Filed herewith.
 Management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements required to be filed herewith pursuant to Item 15 hereof.
NOTE: Debt instruments of the Registrant defining the rights of long-term debt holders in principal amounts not exceeding 10 percent of the Registrant’s consolidated assets have been omitted and will be provided to the Commission upon request.