CJ 2017 Annual Report

• weather-related damage to facilities and equipment, resulting in suspension of operations; • inability to deliver equipment, personnel and products to job sites in accordance with contract schedules; • increase in the price of insurance; and • loss of productivity. These constraints could also delay our operations, reduce our revenue and materially increase our operating and capital costs. Federal and state legislative and regulatory initiatives relating to hydraulic fracturing could result in increased costs and additional operating restrictions or delays as well as adversely affect demand for our support services. Hydraulic fracturing is an important and common practice that is used to stimulate production of natural gas and/or oil from dense subsurface rock formations. The hydraulic fracturing process involves the injection of water, sand and chemicals under pressure into the formation to fracture the surrounding rock and stimulate production. We commonly perform hydraulic fracturing services for our customers. Hydraulic fracturing typically is regulated by state oil and natural gas commissions, but the EPA has asserted federal regulatory authority pursuant to the SDWA over certain hydraulic fracturing activities involving the use of diesel fuel and issued permitting guidance in February 2014 that applies to such activities. Also, in May 2014, the EPA published an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking under the Toxic Substances and Control Act (“TSCA”) that would require the disclosure of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluids; however, to date no further action has been taken and additional rulemaking under TSCA appears unlikely at this time. In addition, in June 2016, the EPA finalized regulations that prohibit the discharge of wastewater from hydraulic fracturing operations to publicly owned wastewater treatment plants. In December 2016, the EPA released its final report on the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water resources. The final report concluded that “water cycle” activities associated with hydraulic fracturing may impact drinking water resources under some circumstances,” noting that the following hydraulic fracturing water cycle activities and local- or regional-scale factors are more likely than others to result in more frequent or more severe impacts: 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. Since the report did not find a direct link between hydraulic fracturing itself and contamination of groundwater resources, this years-long study report does not appear to provide any basis for further regulation of hydraulic fracturing at the federal level. Various state and local governments have implemented, or are considering, increased regulatory oversight of hydraulic fracturing through additional permit requirements, operational restrictions, disclosure requirements, well construction, and temporary or permanent bans on hydraulic fracturing in certain areas. For example, in May 2013, the Texas Railroad Commission adopted new rules governing well casing, cementing and other standards for ensuring that hydraulic fracturing operations do not contaminate nearby water resources. In addition, state and federal regulatory agencies have recently focused on a possible connection between the disposal of wastewater in underground injection wells and the increased occurrence of seismic activity, and regulatory agencies at all levels are continuing to study the possible linkage between oil and gas activity and induced seismicity. In response to these concerns, regulators in some states are seeking to impose additional requirements on hydraulic fracturing fluid disposal practices, including restrictions on the operations of produced water disposal wells and imposing more stringent requirements on the permitting of such wells. The adoption and implementation of any new laws or regulations that restrict our ability to dispose of produced water gathered from our customer’s activities by limiting volumes, disposal rates, disposal well locations or otherwise, or requiring us to shut down disposal wells, could have a material adverse effect on our fluid transportation business, financial condition and results of operations. Local governments also may seek to adopt ordinances within their jurisdictions regulating the time, place and manner of drilling activities in general or hydraulic fracturing activities in particular or prohibit the performance of well drilling in general or hydraulic fracturing in particular. If new federal, state or local laws or regulations that significantly restrict hydraulic fracturing are adopted, such legal requirements could result in delays, eliminate certain drilling and injection activities and make it more difficult or costly to perform hydraulic fracturing. Any such regulations limiting or prohibiting hydraulic fracturing could result in decreased oil and natural gas exploration and production activities and, therefore, adversely affect demand for our services and our business. Such laws or regulations could also materially increase our costs of compliance and doing business. The adoption of new laws or regulations imposing reporting obligations on, or otherwise limiting, the hydraulic fracturing process could make it more difficult to complete oil and natural gas wells in shale formations, increase our costs of 25