Nature of operations and summary of significant accounting policies | Note 1: Nature of operations and summary of significant accounting policies Nature of operations Chaparral Energy, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively, “we”, “our”, “us”, or the “Company”) are involved in the acquisition, exploration, development, production and operation of oil and natural gas properties. Our properties are located primarily in Oklahoma and Texas. To facilitate our financial statement presentations, we refer to the post-emergence reorganized company in these consolidated financial statements and footnotes as the “Successor” for periods subsequent to March 21, 2017, and to the pre-emergence company as “Predecessor” for periods prior to and including March 21, 2017. As discussed in “Note 3—Chapter 11 reorganization,” we filed voluntary petitions for bankruptcy relief and subsequently operated as debtor in possession, in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, until our emergence from bankruptcy on March 21, 2017. The cancellation of all existing shares outstanding followed by the issuance of new shares in the reorganized Company upon our emergence from bankruptcy caused a related change of control under US GAAP. As a result of the application of fresh start accounting, as well as the effects of the implementation of the Reorganization Plan, the Company’s consolidated financial statements on or after March 21, 2017, are not comparable with the consolidated financial statements prior to that date. Interim financial statements The accompanying unaudited consolidated interim financial statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations of the SEC and do not include all of the financial information and disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) for complete financial statements. These financial statements and the notes thereto should be read in conjunction with our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016. The financial information as of September 30, 2017 (Successor), the three months ended September 30, 2017 (Successor), and 2016 (Predecessor), the periods of March 22, 2017, through September 30, 2017 (Successor) and January 1, 2017, through March 21, 2017 (Predecessor), and the nine months ended September 30, 2016 (Predecessor), is unaudited. The financial information as of December 31, 2016, has been derived from the audited financial statements contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016. In management’s opinion, such information contains all adjustments considered necessary for a fair presentation of the results of the interim periods. The results of operations for the three months ended September 30, 2017 and the periods of March 22, 2017, through September 30, 2017 (Successor), and January 1, 2017, through March 21, 2017 (Predecessor), are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations that will be realized for the year ended December 31, 2017. Cash and cash equivalents We maintain cash and cash equivalents in bank deposit accounts and money market funds which may not be federally insured. As of September 30, 2017, cash with a recorded balance totaling approximately $17,956 was held at JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. We have not experienced any losses in such accounts and believe we are not exposed to any significant credit risk on such accounts. As of December 31, 2016, we had restricted cash of $1,400 which was required to be maintained during the pendency of our bankruptcy. The restricted cash is included in “Cash and cash equivalents” in our consolidated balance sheets. As of September 30, 2017, we no longer had restricted cash. Accounts receivable We have receivables from joint interest owners and oil and natural gas purchasers which are generally uncollateralized. Accounts receivable consisted of the following: Successor Predecessor September 30, December 31, 2017 2016 Joint interests $ 25,868 $ 13,818 Accrued commodity sales 33,279 31,304 Derivative settlements 3,814 — Other 1,581 1,657 Allowance for doubtful accounts (590 ) (553 ) $ 63,952 $ 46,226 Inventories Inventories consisted of the following: Successor Predecessor September 30, December 31, 2017 2016 Equipment inventory $ 2,704 $ 8,165 Commodities 1,503 1,418 Inventory valuation allowance — (2,232 ) $ 4,207 $ 7,351 Oil and natural gas properties Costs associated with unevaluated oil and natural gas properties are excluded from the amortizable base until a determination has been made as to the existence of proved reserves. Unevaluated leasehold costs are transferred to the amortization base with the costs of drilling the related well upon proving up reserves of a successful well or upon determination of a dry or uneconomic well under a process that is conducted each quarter. Furthermore, unevaluated oil and natural gas properties are reviewed for impairment if events and circumstances exist that indicate a possible decline in the recoverability of the carrying amount of such property. The impairment assessment is conducted at least once annually and whenever there are indicators that impairment has occurred. In assessing whether impairment has occurred, we consider factors such as intent to drill; remaining lease term; geological and geophysical evaluations; drilling results and activity; assignment of proved reserves; and economic viability of development if proved reserves are assigned. Upon determination of impairment, all or a portion of the associated leasehold costs are transferred to the full cost pool and become subject to amortization. The processes above are applied to unevaluated oil and natural gas properties on an individual basis or as a group if properties are individually insignificant. Our future depreciation, depletion and amortization rate would increase if costs are transferred to the amortization base without any associated reserves. In the past, the costs associated with unevaluated properties typically related to acquisition costs of unproved acreage. As a result of fresh start accounting, a substantial portion of the carrying value of our unevaluated properties are the result of a fair value increase to reflect the value of our acreage in our STACK play (see “Note 4—Fresh start accounting”). The costs of unevaluated oil and natural gas properties consisted of the following: Successor Predecessor September 30, December 31, 2017 2016 Leasehold acreage $ 584,765 $ 15,455 Capitalized interest (1) 1,239 1,894 Wells and facilities in progress of completion 13,881 3,004 Total unevaluated oil and natural gas properties excluded from amortization $ 599,885 $ 20,353 ________________________________ (1) As of September 30, 2017, this amount reflects the cumulative interest capitalized on the historical acquisition cost of leasehold acreage subsequent to our establishing opening balances under fresh start accounting. Interest is not capitalized on amounts related to the fair value increase to leasehold acreage as a result of applying fresh start accounting. Ceiling Test. In accordance with the full cost method of accounting, the net capitalized costs of oil and natural gas properties are not to exceed their related PV-10 value, net of tax considerations, plus the cost of unproved properties not being amortized. Our estimates of oil and natural gas reserves as of September 30, 2017, and the related PV-10 value, were prepared using an average price for oil and natural gas on the first day of each month for the prior twelve months as required by the SEC. As discussed in “Note 4—Fresh start accounting,” the application of fresh start accounting to our balance sheet on March 21, 2017, resulted in the carrying value of our oil and natural gas properties being restated based on their fair value. Income taxes We recorded income tax expense during the Successor and Predecessor periods in 2017 to reflect our obligation for current Texas margin tax on gross revenues less certain deductions. We did not record any net deferred tax benefit in the Successor or Predecessor periods in 2017 as any deferred tax asset arising from the benefit is reduced by a valuation allowance. A valuation allowance for deferred tax assets, including net operating losses, is recognized when it is more likely than not that some or all of the benefit from the deferred tax asset will not be realized. To assess that likelihood, we use estimates and judgment regarding our future taxable income, as well as the jurisdiction in which such taxable income is generated, to determine whether a valuation allowance is required. Such evidence can include our current financial position, our results of operations, both actual and forecasted, the reversal of deferred tax liabilities, and tax planning strategies as well as the current and forecasted business economics of our industry. As of the bankruptcy emergence date of March 21, 2017, we were in a net deferred tax asset position and based on our anticipated operating results in subsequent quarters, we project being in a net deferred tax asset position at December 31, 2017. We believe it is more likely than not that these deferred tax assets will not be realized, and accordingly, recorded a full valuation allowance against our net deferred tax assets as of March 21, 2017, and as of September 30, 2017. We will continue to evaluate whether the valuation allowance is needed in future reporting periods. The valuation allowance will remain until we can determine that the net deferred tax assets are more likely than not to be realized. Future events or new evidence which may lead us to conclude that it is more likely than not that our net deferred tax assets will be realized include, but are not limited to, cumulative historical pre-tax earnings, improvements in oil prices, and taxable events that could result from one or more transactions. The valuation allowance does not prevent future utilization of the tax attributes if we recognize taxable income. As long as we conclude that the valuation allowance against our net deferred tax assets is necessary, we likely will not have any additional deferred income tax expense or benefit. The benefit of an uncertain tax position taken or expected to be taken on an income tax return is recognized in the consolidated financial statements at the largest amount that is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination by the relevant taxing authority. Interest and penalties, if any, related to uncertain tax positions would be recorded in interest expense and other expense, respectively. There were no uncertain tax positions at September 30, 2017, and December 31, 2016. As described in “Note 3—Chapter 11 reorganization,” elements of the Reorganization Plan provided that our indebtedness related to Senior Notes and certain general unsecured claims were exchanged for Successor common stock in settlement of those claims. Absent an exception, a debtor recognizes cancellation of indebtedness income (“CODI”) upon discharge of its outstanding indebtedness for an amount of consideration that is less than its adjusted issue price. The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“IRC”), provides that a debtor in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy case may exclude CODI from taxable income but must reduce certain of its tax attributes by the amount of any CODI realized as a result of the consummation of a plan of reorganization. The amount of CODI realized by a taxpayer is determined based on the fair market value of the consideration received by the creditors in settlement of outstanding indebtedness. As a result of the market value of equity upon emergence from Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, the estimated amount of CODI is approximately $61,000, which will reduce the value of the Company’s net operating losses. The actual reduction in tax attributes does not occur until the first day of the Company’s tax year subsequent to the date of emergence, or January 1, 2018. The reduction of net operating losses is expected to be fully offset by a corresponding decrease in valuation allowance. The IRC provides an annual limitation with respect to the ability of a corporation to utilize its tax attributes, as well as certain built-in-losses, against future taxable income in the event of a change in ownership. Emergence from Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings resulted in a change in ownership for purposes of the IRC Section 382. We analyzed alternatives available within the IRC to taxpayers in Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings in order to minimize the impact of the ownership change and CODI on our tax attributes. Upon filing our 2017 U.S. Federal income tax return, we plan to elect an available alternative which would likely result in the Company experiencing a limitation that subjects existing tax attributes at emergence to an IRC Section 382 limitation that could result in some or all of the remaining net operating loss carryforwards expiring unused. However, we will continue to evaluate the remaining available alternatives which would not subject existing tax attributes to an IRC Section 382 limitation. Joint Venture On September 25, 2017, we entered into a drilling joint venture with BCE Roadrunner LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bayou City Energy Management, LLC (“BCE”) to fund further development of our 110,000-acre STACK position, which will allow us to accelerate our development plans in both Canadian and Garfield counties, Oklahoma. Under the Joint Development Agreement (“JDA”), BCE will fund 100 percent of our drilling, completion and equipping costs associated with 30 joint venture STACK wells, subject to average well cost caps that vary by well-type across location and targeted formations, approximately between $3,400 and $4,000 per gross well. The JDA wells, which will be drilled and operated by us, include 17 wells in Canadian County and 13 wells in Garfield County. We have the ability to expand the partnership to drill additional wells in the future. In exchange for funding, BCE will receive wellbore-only interest in each well totaling an 85% carve-out working interest from our original working interest (and we retain 15%) until the program reaches a 14% internal rate of return. Once achieved, ownership interest in all wells will revert such that we will own a 75% working interest and BCE will retain a 25% working interest. We will retain all acreage and reserves outside of the wellbore, with both parties paying their working interest share of lease operating expenses. Liability management Liability management expenses, which were incurred in the prior year, include third party legal and professional service fees incurred from our activities to restructure our debt and in preparation for our bankruptcy petition. As a result of our Chapter 11 petition, such expenses, to the extent that they are incremental and directly related to our bankruptcy reorganization, are reflected in “Reorganization items” in our consolidated statements of operations. Cost reduction initiatives Cost reduction initiatives include expenses related to our efforts to reduce our capital, operating and administrative costs in response to the depressed commodity pricing environment. The expense consists of costs for one-time severance and termination benefits in connection with our reductions in force and third party legal and professional services we have engaged to assist in our cost savings initiatives as follows: Successor Predecessor Three months Three months ended ended September 30, 2017 September 30, 2016 One-time severance and termination benefits $ 30 $ 89 Professional fees 4 — Total cost reduction initiatives expense $ 34 $ 89 Successor Predecessor Period from Period from March 22, 2017 January 1, 2017 Nine months through through ended September 30, 2017 March 21, 2017 September 30, 2016 One-time severance and termination benefits $ 142 $ 608 $ 3,125 Professional fees 13 21 103 Total cost reduction initiatives expense $ 155 $ 629 $ 3,228 Recently adopted accounting pronouncements In May 2017, the FASB issued authoritative guidance which provides clarification on determining which changes to the terms and conditions of share-based payment awards require an entity to apply modification accounting. The guidance is effective for fiscal years, including interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted in any interim period. The guidance should be applied prospectively to an award modified on or after the adoption date. We adopted this guidance on July 1, 2017, with no material impact to our financial statements or results of operations. In March 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance with the objective to simplify several aspects of the accounting for share-based payments, including accounting for income taxes when awards vest or are settled, statutory withholdings and accounting for forfeitures. Classification of these aspects on the statement of cash flows is also addressed. We have adopted this guidance, which was effective for fiscal periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods thereafter, in the current quarter, with no material impact to our financial statements or results of operation. We did not have any previously unrecognized excess tax benefits that required an adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings under the modified retrospective transition method required by the guidance. In March 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that clarifies that the assessment of whether an embedded contingent put or call option in a financial instrument is clearly and closely related to the debt host requires only an analysis of the four-step decision sequence described in Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging (“ASC 815”). We adopted this guidance, which was effective for fiscal periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods thereafter, in the current quarter, with no material impact to our financial statements or results of operations. In August 2014, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that required entities to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about their ability to continue as a going concern and required additional disclosures if certain criteria were met. The guidance was adopted on December 31, 2016, and other than discussions regarding our emergence from bankruptcy and the related exit financing in “Note 3—Chapter 11 reorganization” and “Note 6—Debt”, there were no additional required disclosures as contemplated by this guidance. Recently issued accounting pronouncements In May 2014, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that supersedes previous revenue recognition requirements and requires entities to recognize revenue in a way that depicts the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The updated guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within that reporting period and it will be adopted by us on January 1, 2018. The new standard allows for either full retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied to all periods presented in the financial statements, or modified retrospective adoption, meaning the standard is applied only to the most current period presented. During 2015 and 2016, the FASB released further updates that, among others, provided supplemental guidance and clarification to this topic including clarification on principal vs. agent considerations and identifying performance obligations and licensing. We have completed an assessment of our marketing contracts covering a majority portion of our revenue. Based on this assessment, we do not expect the new guidance to have a material impact on prior and future net income. However, we expect the guidance to impact our classification of certain costs for gathering, transportation and processing of gas as part of the transaction price rather than reported expense. Accordingly, we are continuing to evaluate the effect that the new guidance will have on our consolidated financial statements and related disclosures, with a more focused analysis on these expenses. In January 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that amends existing requirements on the classification and measurement of financial instruments. The standard principally affects accounting for equity investments and financial liabilities where the fair value option has been elected. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods thereafter. Early adoption of certain provisions is permitted. We do not expect this guidance to materially impact our financial statements or results of operations. In February 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance significantly amending the current accounting for leases. Under the new provisions, all lessees will report a right-of-use asset and a liability for the obligation to make payments for all leases with the exception of those leases with a term of 12 months or less. Furthermore, all leases will fall into one of two categories: (i) a financing lease or (ii) an operating lease. Lessor accounting remains substantially unchanged with the exception that no leases entered into after the effective date will be classified as leveraged leases. For sale leaseback transactions, a sale will only be recognized if the criteria in the new revenue recognition standard are met. For public business entities, this guidance is effective for fiscal periods beginning after December 15, 2018 and interim periods thereafter, and should be applied using a modified retrospective approach. Early adoption is permitted. Based on an assessment of our current operating leases, which are predominantly comprised of leases for CO 2 In June 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance which modifies the measurement of expected credit losses of certain financial instruments. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020, however early adoption is permitted for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. The updated guidance impacts our financial statements primarily due to its effect on our accounts receivables. Our history of accounts receivable credit losses almost entirely relates to receivables from joint interest owners in our operated oil and natural gas wells. Based on this history and on mitigating actions we are permitted to take to offset potential losses such as netting past due amounts against revenue and assuming title to the working interest, we do not expect this guidance to materially impact our financial statements or results of operations. In August 2016, the FASB issued authoritative guidance which provides clarification on how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified on the statement of cash flows. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and is required to be adopted using a retrospective approach if practicable. Early adoption is permitted. We do not expect this guidance to have a material impact on our consolidated statement of cash flows. In January 2017, the FASB issued authoritative guidance that changes the definition of a business to assist entities with evaluating when a set of transferred assets and activities constitutes a business. The guidance requires an entity to evaluate if substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or a group of similar identifiable assets; if so, the set of transferred assets and activities is not a business. The guidance also requires a business to include at least one substantive process and narrows the definition of outputs by more closely aligning it with how outputs are described under updated revenue recognition guidance. The guidance is effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those years. For all other entities, it is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted. We expect that adoption of the new guidance may reduce the likelihood that a future transaction would be accounted for as a business combination although such a determination may require a greater degree of judgment. |