Consequently, we could be subject to additional levels of regulation, operational delays or increased operating costs and could have additional regulatory burdens imposed upon us that could make it more difficult to perform hydraulic fracturing and increase our costs of compliance and doing business. From time to time, for example, legislation has been proposed in Congress to amend the SDWA to require federal permitting of hydraulic fracturing and the disclosure of chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process. Further, the EPA completed a study finding that hydraulic fracturing could potentially harm drinking water resources under adverse circumstances such as injection directly into groundwater or into production wells lacking mechanical integrity. Other governmental reviews have also been recently conducted or are under way that focus on environmental aspects of hydraulic fracturing. At this time, it is uncertain when, or if, the rules will be implemented, and what impact they would have on our operations. Further, legislation to amend the SDWA to repeal the exemption for hydraulic fracturing (except when diesel fuels are used) from the definition of “underground injection” and require federal permitting and regulatory control of hydraulic fracturing, as well as legislative proposals to require disclosure of the chemical constituents of the fluids used in the fracturing process, have been proposed in recent sessions of Congress. Several states and local jurisdictions in which we operate also have adopted or are considering adopting regulations that could restrict or prohibit hydraulic fracturing in certain circumstances, impose more stringent operating standards and/or require the disclosure of the composition of hydraulic fracturing fluids. More recently, federal and state governments have begun investigating whether the disposal of produced water into underground injection wells has caused increased seismic activity in certain areas. For example, in December 2016, the EPA released its final report regarding the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources, concluding that “water cycle” activities associated with hydraulic fracturing may impact drinking water resources under certain circumstances such as water withdrawals for fracturing in times or areas of low water availability, surface spills during the management of fracturing fluids, chemicals or produced water, injection of fracturing fluids into wells with inadequate mechanical integrity, injection of fracturing fluids directly into groundwater resources, discharge of inadequately treated fracturing wastewater to surface waters, and disposal or storage of fracturing wastewater in unlined pits. The results of these studies could lead federal and state governments and agencies to develop and implement additional regulations. In addition, on June 28, 2016, the EPA published a final rule prohibiting the discharge of wastewater from onshore unconventional oil and natural gas extraction facilities to publicly owned wastewater treatment plants. The EPA is also conducting a study of private wastewater treatment facilities (also known as centralized waste treatment (“CWT”) facilities) accepting oil and natural gas extraction wastewater. The EPA is collecting data and information related to the extent to which CWT facilities accept such wastewater, available treatment technologies (and their associated costs), discharge characteristics, financial characteristics of CWT facilities, and the environmental impacts of discharges from CWT facilities. The proliferation of regulations may limit our ability to operate. If the use of hydraulic fracturing is limited, prohibited or subjected to further regulation, these requirements could delay or effectively prevent the extraction of oil and natural gas from formations which would not be economically viable without the use of hydraulic fracturing. This could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Our exploitation and development activities and equipment could be adversely affected by extreme weather conditions, such as hurricanes or freezing temperatures, which may cause a loss of production from temporary cessation of activity from regional power outages or lost or damaged facilities and equipment. Such extreme weather conditions could also impact access to our drilling and production facilities for routine operations, maintenance and repairs and the availability of and our access to, necessary third-party services, such as gathering, processing, compression and transportation services. These constraints and the resulting shortages or high costs could delay or temporarily halt our operations and materially increase our operation and capital costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Studies have found that emission of certain gases, commonly referred to as greenhouse gases (“GHGs”), impact the earth’s climate. The U.S. Congress and various states have been evaluating, and in some cases implementing, climate-related legislation and other regulatory initiatives that restrict emissions of GHGs. On January 20, 2021, President Biden’s first day in office, he signed an executive order on climate action and reconvened an interagency working group to establish interim and final social costs of three GHGs: carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane. Carbon dioxide is released during the combustion of fossil fuels, including oil, natural gas, and NGLs, and methane is a primary component of natural gas. The Biden administration stated it will use updated social cost figures to inform federal regulations and major agency actions and to justify 31 The adoption of climate change legislation or regulations restricting emission of greenhouse gases, investor pressure concerning climate-related disclosures, and lawsuits could result in increased operating costs and reduced demand for the oil and gas we produce as well as reductions in the availability of capital. Extreme weather conditions could adversely affect our ability to conduct drilling, completion and production activities in the areas where we operate.