Item 3. Legal Proceedings

In the ordinary course of business, various legal and regulatory claims and proceedings are pending or threatened against us. While the amounts claimed may be substantial, we are unable to predict with certainty the ultimate outcome of such claims and proceedings. We accrue legal and other direct costs related to loss contingencies when actually incurred. We have established reserves in amounts that we believe to be appropriate for pending matters and, after consultation with counsel and giving appropriate consideration to available insurance, we believe that the ultimate outcome of any pending matter involving us will not materially affect our financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

Environmental Proceedings

Produced Water Release, Washington County, Pennsylvania. In December 2021, we discovered a produced water leak associated with a Gas Processing Unit (GPU) disposal line at one of our well pad sites located in Washington County, Pennsylvania. We self-reported the release to the PADEP spill hotline on December 4, 2021 and initiated cleanup of the released produced water. The initial release was determined to be in excess of one barrel and we entered the remediation project into PADEP's Land Recycling and Environmental Remediation Act 2 Program (Act 2) for voluntary cleanup. In January 2022, we determined the release was larger than initially discovered and we disclosed this information to PADEP on January 14, 2022. Site characterization of the release is ongoing and upon completion, we intend to initiate the remediation according to PADEP's Act 2 guidelines. While we anticipate that the penalties related to this matter will exceed $300,000, we expect that the resolution of this matter will not have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

Other Legal Proceedings

Mary Farr Secrist, et al. v. EQT Production Company, et al., Circuit Court of Doddridge County, West Virginia. On May 2, 2014, royalty owners whose predecessors had entered into a 960-acre lease (the Stout Lease) and several additional leases comprising 6,356-acres (the Cities Services Lease) with EQT Production Company's predecessor, each covering acreage in Doddridge County, West Virginia, filed a complaint in the Circuit Court of Doddridge County, West Virginia. The complaint alleged that EQT Production Company and a number of related companies, including EQT Corporation, EQT Gathering, LLC, EQT Energy, LLC, and EQM Midstream Services, LLC (formerly known as EQT Midstream Services, LLC, the general partner of our former midstream affiliate), underpaid on royalties for gas produced under the leases and took improper post-production deductions from the royalties paid. With respect to the Stout Lease, the plaintiffs also asserted that we committed a trespass by drilling on the leased property, claiming that we had no right under the lease to drill in the Marcellus Shale formation. The plaintiffs also asserted claims for fraud, slander of title, punitive damages, pre-judgment interest and attorneys' fees. The plaintiffs sought more than $100 million in compensatory damages for the trespass claim under the Stout Lease and approximately $20 million for insufficient royalties under both the Stout Lease and the Cities Services Lease, in addition to punitive damages and other relief. On June 27, 2018, the Court held that EQT Production Company and its marketing affiliate EQT Energy, LLC are alter egos of one another and that royalties paid under the leases should have been based on the price of gas produced under the leases when sold to unaffiliated third parties, and not on the price when the gas was sold from EQT Production Company to EQT Energy, LLC. Further, on January 14, 2019, the Court entered an Order granting the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and declaring that we did not have the right to drill in the Marcellus Shale formation under the Stout Lease. The Court also ruled that seven of our wells that have been producing gas under the Stout Lease are trespassing, and that a jury will determine whether the trespass was willful or innocent. On February 27, 2019, we filed a motion seeking permission to immediately appeal the trespass Order to the West Virginia Supreme Court; however, the motion was denied on March 25, 2019, and the Court continued the trial to September 2019. On May 28, 2019, the Court entered an Order excluding certain of our costs that could have otherwise offset any damages for innocent trespass under the Stout Lease. On August 8, 2019, we reached a settlement with the plaintiffs to resolve all claims under the Stout Lease and the Cities Services Lease for $54 million plus lease modifications to address the trespass issue and the calculation of future royalty payments under the leases. We paid $51 million of the settlement in October 2019 and the remaining $3 million of the settlement in January 2020, and the Stout Lease was subsequently amended to address the terms agreed to with the plaintiffs under the settlement. On October 7, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a motion to amend their complaint and to stay entry of an Order of Dismissal. On January 14, 2021, we filed a motion to enforce the settlement agreed to with the plaintiffs and to seek sanctions. All motions are pending.