Note 6. Fair Value Measurements

The FASC Fair Value Measurement topic defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date (often referred to as the “exit price”). We utilize market data or assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk and the risks inherent in the inputs to the valuation technique. These inputs can be readily observable, market corroborated or generally unobservable. We primarily apply the income approach for recurring fair value measurements and endeavor to utilize the best available information. Accordingly, we utilize valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs. We are able to classify fair value balances based on the observability of those inputs. The FASC establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurement). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are as follows:


•	Level 1 – Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date.

•

Level 2 – Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets included in Level 1, which are either directly or indirectly observable as of the reported date. Level 2 includes those financial instruments that are valued using models or other valuation methodologies. Instruments in this category include non-exchange-traded oil derivatives that are based on NYMEX pricing and fixed-price swaps that are based on regional pricing other than NYMEX (e.g., Light Louisiana Sweet). Our costless collars and the sold put features of our three-way collars are valued using the Black-Scholes model, an industry standard option valuation model that takes into account inputs such as contractual prices for the underlying instruments, maturity, quoted forward prices for commodities, interest rates, volatility factors and credit worthiness, as well as other relevant economic measures. Substantially all of these assumptions are observable in the marketplace throughout the full term of the instrument, can be derived from observable data or are supported by observable levels at which transactions are executed in the marketplace.

•

Level 3 – Pricing inputs include significant inputs that are generally less observable. These inputs may be used with internally developed methodologies that result in management’s best estimate of fair value. At September 30, 2016, instruments in this category include non-exchange-traded costless collars and three-way collars that are based on regional pricing other than NYMEX (e.g., Light Louisiana Sweet). The valuation models utilized for costless collars and three-way collars are consistent with the methodologies described above; however, the implied volatilities utilized in the valuation of Level 3 instruments are developed using a benchmark, which is considered a significant unobservable input. An increase or decrease of 100 basis points in the implied volatility inputs utilized in our fair value measurement would result in a change of approximately $43 thousand in the fair value of these instruments as of September 30, 2016.

We adjust the valuations from the valuation model for nonperformance risk, using our estimate of the counterparty’s credit quality for asset positions and our credit quality for liability positions. We use multiple sources of third-party credit data in determining counterparty nonperformance risk, including credit default swaps.

The following table sets forth, by level within the fair value hierarchy, our financial assets and liabilities that were accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of the periods indicated:



	Fair Value Measurements Using:
In thousands	Quoted Prices in Active Markets (Level 1)		Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)		Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)		Total
September 30, 2016
Assets
Oil derivative contracts – current	$	—	$	302	$	5	$	307
Total Assets	$	—	$	302	$	5	$	307

Liabilities
Oil derivative contracts – current	$	—	$	73,699	$	530	$	74,229
Total Liabilities	$	—	$	73,699	$	530	$	74,229

December 31, 2015
Assets
Oil derivative contracts – current	$	—	$	90,012	$	52,834	$	142,846
Total Assets	$	—	$	90,012	$	52,834	$	142,846

Since we do not apply hedge accounting for our commodity derivative contracts, any gains and losses on our assets and liabilities are included in “Commodity derivatives expense (income)” in the accompanying Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.

Level 3 Fair Value Measurements

The following table summarizes the changes in the fair value of our Level 3 assets and liabilities for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2016 and 2015:



	Three Months Ended						Nine Months Ended
	September 30,						September 30,
In thousands	2016			2015			2016			2015
Fair value of Level 3 instruments, beginning of period	$	240		$	112,358		$	52,834		$	188,446
Fair value gains (losses) on commodity derivatives	2,402			21,089			(2,134		)	38,872
Receipts on settlements of commodity derivatives	(3,167		)	(50,573		)	(51,225		)	(144,444		)
Fair value of Level 3 instruments, end of period	$	(525	)	$	82,874		$	(525	)	$	82,874

The amount of total gains (losses) for the period included in earnings attributable to the change in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets or liabilities still held at the reporting date	$	891		$	15,332		$	(525	)	$	25,456

We utilize an income approach to value our Level 3 costless collars and three-way collars. We obtain and ensure the appropriateness of the significant inputs to the calculation, including contractual prices for the underlying instruments, maturity, forward prices for commodities, interest rates, volatility factors and credit worthiness, and the fair value estimate is prepared and reviewed on a quarterly basis. The following table details fair value inputs related to implied volatilities utilized in the valuation of our Level 3 oil derivative contracts:



	Fair Value at 9/30/2016 (in thousands)			Valuation Technique	Unobservable Input	Volatility Range
Oil derivative contracts	$	(525	)	Discounted cash flow / Black-Scholes	Volatility of Light Louisiana Sweet for settlement periods beginning after September 30, 2016	20.8%-40.8%

Other Fair Value Measurements

The carrying value of our loans under our Bank Credit Agreement approximate fair value, as they are subject to short-term floating interest rates that approximate the rates available to us for those periods. We use a market approach to determine the fair value of our fixed-rate long-term debt using observable market data. The fair values of our senior secured second lien notes and senior subordinated notes are based on quoted market prices. The estimated fair value of the principal amount of our debt as of September 30, 2016 and December 31, 2015, excluding pipeline financing and capital lease obligations, was $2,010.3 million and $1,119.0 million, respectively, which increase is primarily driven by an increase in quoted market prices. We have other financial instruments consisting primarily of cash, cash equivalents, short-term receivables and payables that approximate fair value due to the nature of the instrument and the relatively short maturities.