SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Policies)

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2017

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the 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. Significant estimates with regard to these financial statements include the fair value determination of acquired assets and liabilities, the estimate of proved oil and gas reserves and related present value estimates of future net cash flows therefrom, the assessment of asset retirement obligations, the estimates of fair value for long-lived assets and goodwill, and the estimate of income taxes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

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, “Fair Value Measurement” (ASC 820), 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, 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).

Apache also uses fair value measurements on a nonrecurring basis when certain qualitative assessments of its assets indicate a potential impairment. The Company recorded no asset impairments in connection with fair value assessments in the third quarter of 2017. For the nine-month period ended September 30, 2017, the Company recorded asset impairments totaling $8 million in connection with fair value assessments.

In 2016, the U.K. government enacted Finance Bill 2016, providing tax relief to exploration and production (E&P) companies operating in the U.K. North Sea. Under the enacted legislation, the U.K. Petroleum Revenue Tax (PRT) rate was reduced to zero from the previously enacted 35 percent rate in effect from January 1, 2016. PRT expense ceased prospectively from that date. During the first quarter of 2017, the Company fully impaired the aggregate remaining value of the recoverable PRT decommissioning asset of $8 million that would have been realized from future abandonment activities. The recoverable value of the PRT decommissioning asset was estimated using the income approach. The expected future cash flows used in the determination were based on anticipated spending and timing of planned future abandonment activities for applicable fields, considering all available information at the date of review. Apache has classified this fair value measurement as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.

Oil and Gas Property

The Company follows the successful efforts method of accounting for its oil and gas property. Under this method of accounting, exploration costs such as exploratory geological and geophysical costs, delay rentals, and exploration overhead are expensed as incurred. All costs related to production, general corporate overhead, and similar activities are expensed as incurred. If an exploratory well provides evidence to justify potential development of reserves, drilling costs associated with the well are initially capitalized, or suspended, pending a determination as to whether a commercially sufficient quantity of proved reserves can be attributed to the area as a result of drilling. This determination may take longer than one year in certain areas depending on, among other things, the amount of hydrocarbons discovered, the outcome of planned geological and engineering studies, the need for additional appraisal drilling activities to determine whether the discovery is sufficient to support an economic development plan, and government sanctioning of development activities in certain international locations. At the end of each quarter, management reviews the status of all suspended exploratory well costs in light of ongoing exploration activities; in particular, whether the Company is making sufficient progress in its ongoing exploration and appraisal efforts or, in the case of discoveries requiring government sanctioning, whether development negotiations are underway and proceeding as planned. If management determines that future appraisal drilling or development activities are unlikely to occur, associated suspended exploratory well costs are expensed.

Acquisition costs of unproved properties are assessed for impairment at least annually and are transferred to proved oil and gas properties to the extent the costs are associated with successful exploration activities. Significant undeveloped leases are assessed individually for impairment based on the Company’s current exploration plans. Unproved oil and gas properties with individually insignificant lease acquisition costs are amortized on a group basis over the average lease term at rates that provide for full amortization of unsuccessful leases upon lease expiration or abandonment. Costs of expired or abandoned leases are charged to exploration expense, while costs of productive leases are transferred to proved oil and gas properties. Costs of maintaining and retaining unproved properties, as well as amortization of individually insignificant leases and impairment of unsuccessful leases, are included in exploration costs in the statement of consolidated operations.

Costs to develop proved reserves, including the costs of all development wells and related equipment used in the production of crude oil and natural gas, are capitalized. Depreciation of the cost of proved oil and gas properties is calculated using the unit-of-production (UOP) method. The UOP calculation multiplies the percentage of estimated proved reserves produced each quarter by the carrying value of those reserves. The reserve base used to calculate depreciation for leasehold acquisition costs and the cost to acquire proved properties is the sum of proved developed reserves and proved undeveloped reserves. The reserve base used to calculate the depreciation for capitalized costs of exploratory wells and development costs is the sum of proved developed reserves only. Estimated future dismantlement, restoration and abandonment costs, net of salvage values, are included in the depreciable cost.

Oil and gas properties are grouped for depreciation in accordance with ASC 932, “Extractive Activities - Oil and Gas.” The basis for grouping is a reasonable aggregation of properties with a common geological structural feature or stratigraphic condition, such as a reservoir or field.

When circumstances indicate that proved oil and gas properties may be impaired, the Company compares unamortized capitalized costs to the expected undiscounted pre-tax future cash flows for the associated assets grouped at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are independent of cash flows of other assets. If the expected undiscounted pre-tax future cash flows, based on Apache’s estimate of future crude oil and natural gas prices, operating costs, anticipated production from proved reserves and other relevant data, are lower than the unamortized capitalized cost, the capitalized cost is reduced to fair value. Fair value is generally estimated using the income approach described in the ASC 820. If applicable, the Company utilizes prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving assets and liabilities that are identical or comparable to the item being measured as the basis for determining fair value. The expected future cash flows used for impairment reviews and related fair value calculations are typically based on judgmental assessments of future production volumes, commodity prices, operating costs, and capital investment plans, considering all available information at the date of review. These assumptions are applied to develop future cash flow projections that are then discounted to estimated fair value, using a discount rate believed to be consistent with those applied by market participants. Apache has classified these fair value measurements as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.

The following table represents non-cash impairments of the carrying value of the Company’s proved and unproved property and equipment for the third quarters and first nine months of 2017 and 2016:



	Quarter Ended September 30,				Nine Months Ended September 30,
	2017		2016		2017		2016
	(In millions)
Oil and Gas Property:
Proved	$	—	$	355	$	—	$	423
Unproved	160		114		214		222

Proved properties impaired during the second and third quarters of 2016 had aggregate fair values of $143 million and $163 million, respectively.

On the statement of consolidated operations, unproved impairments are recorded in exploration expense, and proved impairments are recorded in impairments.

Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements and New Pronouncements Issued But Not Yet Adopted

Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements

Stock Compensation

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting.” ASU 2016-09 simplifies several aspects of accounting for share-based payment transactions including income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and the classification on the statement of cash flows. The guidance was effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company adopted ASU 2016-09 effective January 1, 2017.

Upon adoption, the Company elected to account for forfeitures as they occur rather than estimate expected forfeitures using a modified retrospective transition method. As a result of this election, the Company recorded a cumulative-effect adjustment of $11 million, representing an increase in accumulated deficit, with the offset to paid-in capital. During the first quarter of 2017, the Company recorded a $4 million deferred tax asset related to this adjustment, with the offset to accumulated deficit.

ASU 2016-09 requires excess tax benefits and deficiencies to be recognized prospectively as part of the provision for income taxes rather than paid-in capital. The adoption did not have a material impact on the Company’s accounting of provision for income taxes. ASU 2016-09 also requires excess tax benefits to be presented as a component of operating cash flows rather than financing cash flows. The Company has adopted this requirement prospectively and accordingly, prior periods have not been adjusted. Excess tax benefits were not material for all periods presented.

Additionally, ASU 2016-09 requires that employee taxes paid when an employer withholds shares for tax-withholding purposes be reported as financing activities in the consolidated statements of cash flows, which is how the Company has historically classified these amounts.

Restricted Cash

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash.” ASU 2016-18 requires amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the total beginning and ending amounts for the periods shown on the statement of cash flows. The guidance is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and is required to be adopted using a retrospective approach, with early adoption permitted. The Company adopted ASU 2016-18 in the third quarter of 2017. Other than the change in presentation within the statement of consolidated cash flows, the adoption of ASU 2016-18 did not have an impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

The following table provides a reconciliation of cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash reported within the consolidated balance sheet to the amounts shown in the statement of consolidated cash flows:



	September 30, 2017		December 31, 2016
	(In millions)
Cash and cash equivalents	$	1,846	$	1,377
Restricted cash	96		—
Total cash, cash equivalents, and restricted cash shown in the statement of consolidated cash flows	$	1,942	$	1,377

For information regarding the restricted cash balance, please refer to Note 2—Acquisitions and Divestitures.

New Pronouncements Issued But Not Yet Adopted

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842),” requiring lessees to recognize lease assets and lease liabilities for most leases classified as operating leases under previous U.S. GAAP. The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and the Company will be required to use a modified retrospective approach for leases that exist or are entered into after the beginning of the earliest comparative period in the financial statements. Early adoption is permitted; however, the Company does not intend to early adopt. As part of the assessment to date, the Company has formed an implementation work team and is continuing to evaluate contracts to determine the impact this ASU will have on its consolidated financial statements. At this time, the Company cannot reasonably estimate the financial impact this will have on its consolidated financial statements; however, the Company believes adoption and implementation of this ASU will significantly impact its balance sheet, resulting in an increase in both assets and liabilities relating to its leasing activities.

In May 2014, the FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) issued a joint revenue recognition standard, ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606).” The new standard removes inconsistencies in existing standards, changes the way companies recognize revenue from contracts with customers, and increases disclosure requirements. The codification was amended through additional ASUs and, as amended, requires companies to recognize revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The guidance is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The standard is required to be adopted using either the full retrospective approach, with all prior periods presented adjusted, or the modified retrospective approach, with a cumulative adjustment to retained earnings on the opening balance sheet. The Company continues to make progress on evaluating the accounting implications of this ASU and its assessment of contracts with customers is largely complete. Based on the Company’s evaluation to date, it does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on net earnings, however, the Company is analyzing whether the classification of certain items in revenue and expense will be impacted. The Company continues to evaluate the disclosure requirements, develop accounting policies, and assess changes to the relevant business processes and the control activities within them as a result of the provisions of this ASU. The Company will adopt the new standard on January 1, 2018, utilizing the modified retrospective approach.