Archrock (AROC) Risk Analysis

In June 2016, the EPA issued final regulations under the CAA amending the NSPS for the oil and natural gas source category and applying to sources of emissions of methane and VOC from certain processes, activities and equipment that is constructed, modified or reconstructed after September 18, 2015. Specifically, the regulation imposed both methane and VOC standards for several emission sources not previously covered by the NSPS, such as fugitive emissions from compressor stations and pneumatic pumps and methane standards for certain emission sources that are already regulated for VOC, such as equipment leaks at natural gas processing plants. The amendments also established methane standards for a subset of equipment that the NSPS regulates, including reciprocating compressors and pneumatic controllers, and extend the VOC standards to the remaining unregulated equipment. In March 2024, the EPA published even more stringent rules with respect to methane and VOC for new and existing sources, via NSPS Subparts OOOOb and OOOOc, with the OOOOb rules for sources constructed, modified, or reconstructed after December 6, 2022, which became effective on May 7, 2024. The OOOOc rules for existing sources give the States a two-year deadline to develop and submit to EPA plans for addressing emissions from those sources. However, EPA issued a direct interim final rule in July 2025 and a final rule in December 2025 that pushed the substantive deadlines in OOOOb and OOOOc back to January 2027. EPA has also been working on a proposed rule to roll back significant portions of the OOOOb and OOOOc, which rule proposal is in interagency review at the White House Office of Management and Budget and is expected for publication soon. In April 2024, BoLM published a separate final rule, known as the "Waste Prevention, Production Subject to Royalties, and Resource Conservation" rule, to address methane emissions from oil and gas activities on public lands, which became effective on June 10, 2024. The rule is currently stayed pending litigation in North Dakota, Texas, Montana, Wyoming, and Utah. Among the newly adopted methane requirements that may impact our operations are broader applicability to compression equipment relative to the existing rules, increased work practices and inspection requirements and mandates for certain new zero-emissions equipment. Notably, however, in November 2025, BoLM announced that it will not enforce requirements of the rule that carried a December 10, 2025 deadline until December 10, 2026. Both the EPA rules and the BoLM rules are subject to ongoing judicial challenges. Meanwhile, several states - including, most notably, New Mexico and Colorado - have continued to develop their own more stringent methane rules that will or are anticipated to impose additional requirements on the industry. For example, Colorado's Air Quality Control Commission adopted the "Midstream Rule" on December 20, 2024, to address GHG emissions from midstream oil and gas operations, including from natural gas compressor stations. Under the Midstream Rule, midstream facilities were required to begin taking steps to reduce GHG emissions from combustion fuel equipment by February 14, 2025, and are required to meet certain GHG emissions limits by the end of 2030.  The Midstream Rule is subject to ongoing judicial challenges. We do not believe that these rules will have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows, but we cannot yet definitively predict the impact of any revision of the current rules or issuance of new rules, the impact of which could be material. In October 2015, the EPA issued a new NAAQS ozone standard of 70 ppb, which is a tightening from the 75-ppb standard set in 2008. This new standard became effective on December 28, 2015, and the EPA completed designating attainment/non–attainment regions under the revised ozone standard in 2018. In November 2016, the EPA proposed an implementation rule for the 2015 NAAQS ozone standard, but the agency has yet to issue a final implementation rule. State implementation of the revised NAAQS could result in stricter permitting requirements, delay or prohibit our customers' ability to obtain such permits and result in increased expenditures for pollution control equipment, the costs of which could be significant. By law, the EPA must review each NAAQS every five years. In December 2018 and again in December 2020, the EPA announced that it was retaining without revision the 2015 NAAQS ozone standard. In June 2021, the EPA commenced a process for reconsidering the December 2020 decision. In August 2023, the EPA announced a new review of the ozone NAAQS and most recently released reports on December 23, 2024, related to its review. We do not believe continued implementation of the NAAQS ozone standard will have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows, but we cannot yet predict the impact, if any, of any new Federal Implementation Plan involving new NAAQS standards. New environmental regulations and proposals similar to these, when finalized, and any other new regulations requiring the installation of more sophisticated pollution control equipment or the adoption of other environmental protection measures, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Notably, opposition to energy development and infrastructure projects has led to regulatory and judicial challenges to new facilities, including compression facilities, in many states. While we have not directly faced any such challenges to the facilities at which we provide contract operations and know of no pending or threatened efforts targeting those facilities, expanded opposition to energy infrastructure, including facilities at which we provide contract operations or in the future might otherwise have an opportunity to provide contract operations, could potentially give rise to material impacts in the future.

The size, nature and complexity of our business make us susceptible to various claims, tax audits, litigation and binding arbitration proceedings. We are currently, and may in the future become, subject to various claims, which, if not resolved within amounts we have accrued, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows, including our ability to pay dividends. Similarly, any claims, even if fully indemnified or insured, could negatively impact our reputation among our customers and the public and make it more difficult for us to compete effectively or obtain adequate insurance in the future. See Part I, Item 3 "Legal Proceedings" of this Form 10-K and Note 16 ("Commitments and Contingencies") to our Financial Statements for additional information regarding certain legal proceedings to which we are a party.

Climate change legislation and regulatory initiatives may arise from a variety of sources, including international, national, regional and state levels of government and associated administrative bodies, seeking to restrict or regulate emissions of GHGs such as carbon dioxide and methane. Congress and various federal and state legislative and regulatory bodies have previously considered legislation to restrict or regulate emissions of GHG. Energy legislation and other initiatives continue to be proposed that may be relevant to GHG emissions issues. For example, the SEC adopted rules in March 2024 that would have mandated extensive disclosure for certain public companies of climate-related data, risks and opportunities, including financial impacts, physical and transition risks, related governance and strategy, and greenhouse gas emissions. The SEC stayed those rules in April 2024, however, and in March 2025 voted not to defend the rules against ongoing legal challenges. Those legal challenges remain in abeyance pending an SEC decision on whether to rescind, repeal, or modify the rules but, in the meantime, the SEC climate rules remain suspended and without effect. Almost half of the states, either individually or through multi–state regional initiatives, have begun to address GHG emissions, primarily through the planned development of emission inventories or regional GHG cap and trade programs. Various states, such as California, Colorado and New York have passed or proposed similar climate change disclosure laws. Although most of the state–level initiatives have to date been focused on large sources of GHG emissions, such as electric power plants, it is possible that smaller sources such as our natural gas–powered compressors could become subject to GHG–related regulation. Depending on the particular program, we could be required to control emissions or to purchase and surrender allowances for GHG emissions resulting from our operations. Our customers or other business partners may require us to provide additional climate-related information if they are also subject to these or additional climate-related disclosure laws or regulations. These actions could result in increased (i) costs to operate and maintain our facilities, (ii) capital expenditures to install new emission controls on our facilities, and (iii) costs to administer and manage any potential GHG emissions regulations or carbon trading or tax programs. Such climate-related disclosure requirements could result in increased compliance costs, and possible litigation and reputational risks if such disclosures are incomplete, inaccurate, misleading or do not otherwise meet the expectations of our stakeholders. Moreover, such requirements may not always be uniform across jurisdictions, which may result in increased complexity and cost for compliance. In addition, we may take voluntary steps to mitigate any impact our operations might have on climate change. As a result, we may experience increases in energy, transportation and raw material costs, capital expenditures or insurance premiums; however, there is no guarantee that such efforts will have the desired effects. The $1 trillion legislative infrastructure package passed by Congress in November 2021 included a number of climate-focused spending initiatives targeted at climate resilience, enhanced response and preparation for extreme weather events, and clean energy and transportation investments. Significant additional legislative action by Congress also occurred in August 2022 with the Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law by the former administration, which provided $391 billion in funding for research and development and incentives for low-carbon energy production methods, carbon capture, and other programs directed at encouraging de-carbonization and addressing climate change. The IRA also amended the Clean Air Act to include a Methane Emissions and Waste Reduction Incentive Program for petroleum and natural gas systems. This program required the EPA to impose a "waste emissions charge" on certain natural gas and oil sources that were already required to report under EPA's GHG Reporting Program. In November 2024, the EPA released its final rule to implement the methane emissions fee with an effective date in January 2025, which was expected to apply to reporting year 2024 emissions.  Twenty-three states have filed a lawsuit challenging the rule, and the change in U.S. presidential administration provides additional uncertainty as to the rule's future.  While the current administration issued an executive order pausing the disbursement of all unspent funds appropriated through the IRA and rolling back these environmental policies implemented during the former administration, with legislative action culminating in the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which eliminated most of the Inflation Reduction Act's incentives and delayed the commencement of the methane waste emissions charge on oil and gas sources by a decade to 2034. Notably, Congress eliminated EPA's regulations in support of the waste emissions charge using the Congressional Review Act effective on March 14, 2025 and, as of September 12, 2025, EPA has proposed to suspend the GHG Reporting Program for oil and gas sources until 2034 and to eliminate such reporting for all other sources. U.S. climate leaders have vowed to continue pressing for climate progress although major new climate legislation seems unlikely in the immediate future. Such legislation, regulations, and initiatives, as well as uncertainty regarding the future success of such regulations and initiatives in reducing demand for oil and gas, could indirectly affect our business and our results of operations by reducing demand for our services. Separately, the EPA has promulgated regulations controlling GHG emissions under its existing CAA authority. The EPA has adopted rules requiring many facilities, including petroleum and natural gas systems, to inventory and report their GHG emissions. As noted above, in September 2025, EPA proposed to suspend those requirements until 2034. In 2025, we did not operate any facilities that were subject to these reporting obligations. In addition, the EPA rules provide air permitting requirements for certain large sources of GHG emissions. The requirement for large sources of GHG emissions to obtain and comply with permits will affect some of our and our customers' largest new or modified facilities going forward but is not expected to cause us to incur material costs. As noted above, the EPA has previously undertaken efforts to regulate emissions of methane, considered a GHG, in the oil and gas sector, and could develop additional, more stringent rules at some point in the future. In an executive order issued in January 2021, the former administration asked the heads of all executive departments and agencies to review and take action to address any federal regulations, orders, guidance documents, policies and any similar agency actions promulgated during the prior administration that may be inconsistent with or present obstacles to the administration's stated goals of protecting public health and the environment, and conserving national monuments and refuges. The executive order also established an Interagency Working Group on the Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases, which is called on to, among other things, capture the full costs of GHG emissions, including the "social cost of carbon," "social cost of nitrous oxide" and "social cost of methane," which are "the monetized damages associated with incremental increases in greenhouse gas emissions," including "changes in net agricultural productivity, human health, property damage from increased flood risk, and the value of ecosystem services." In early 2025, however, the new administration disbanded the Working Group and withdrew all of its published guidance, ordering EPA to review whether and how to use the social cost of carbon in federal permitting and regulatory decisions and directing the agencies in the meantime to follow OMB regulatory analysis guidance from 2003 that is virtually silent on climate. The current administration also released a series of executive orders impacting the energy sector, ranging from declaring a national emergency due to the U.S.'s inadequate energy supply, infrastructure, and prices, to halting wind energy leasing and promoting fossil fuel exploration. These executive orders are already reshaping the current direction of the U.S. climate agenda and have led to rulemaking actions by EPA that are beginning to undo U.S. climate regulation, including a February 12, 2026 final rule overturning the 2009 CAA endangerment finding respecting GHGs and all federal GHG emissions standards for vehicles and engines. At this time, we cannot determine how the current administration will continue to proceed and cannot accurately predict the ensuing impact of climate-related policy shifts on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. At the international level, the U.S. joined the international community at the 21st COP of the UNFCCC in Paris, France, which resulted in the "Paris Agreement," which intended for signatory countries to nationally determine their contributions and set GHG emission reduction goals every five years beginning in 2020. While the Paris Agreement did not impose direct requirements on emitters, national plans to meet its pledge resulted in new regulatory requirements. After withdrawing from the Paris Agreement in November 2020, the U.S. re-entered the Paris Agreement in April 2021 along with a new "nationally determined contribution" that the U.S. would achieve GHG emissions reductions of at least 50% relative to 2005 levels by 2030. In November 2021, at COP26 in Glasgow, the U.S. and European Union jointly announced the launch of the "Global Methane Pledge," by which signatory countries aim to cut global methane pollution at least 30% by 2030 relative to 2020 levels, including "all feasible reductions" in the energy sector. The December 2023 COP28 meeting in Dubai reaffirmed commitments to the Paris Agreement and concluded that the world should move away from fossil fuel energy in a just, orderly, and equitable manner and aim to achieve net zero GHG emissions by 2050, while recognizing a transitional role for fossil fuels. In November 2024, at COP29 in Azerbaijan, countries agreed on the final building blocks that set out how carbon markets will operate under the Paris Agreement, among other outcomes that further indicate the global push to mitigate climate change. However, the current administration issued an executive order in January 2025 that initiated the process to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Agreement and from any commitments made under the UNFCCC.  COP30 took place in Brazil in November 2025 with no official participation or representatives attending from the U.S.  In January 2026, the U.S. officially withdrew from the Paris Agreement.  Just as we cannot fully anticipate the impact of the methane rules discussed above, we also cannot predict whether the withdrawal from or potential future re-entry into the Paris Agreement or other international pledges will result in any particular new federal regulatory requirements or whether such requirements will cause us to incur material costs. Nevertheless, several states and geographic regions in the U.S. have adopted legislation and regulations to reduce emissions of GHGs, including cap and trade regimes and commitments that contribute to meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement. Increasingly, parties have sought to bring suit against various natural gas and oil companies alleging that the companies have been aware of the adverse effects of climate change but defrauded their investors or customers by failing to adequately disclose those impacts. Any such litigation targeting our customers could negatively impact their operations and, in turn, decrease demand for our operations, which could have an adverse impact on our financial condition. In sum, any legislation, regulatory programs or social pressures related to climate change could increase our costs and require substantial capital, compliance, operating and maintenance costs, reduce demand for our services and reduce our access to financial markets. Current, as well as potential future, laws and regulations that limit GHG emissions or that otherwise promote the use of renewable energy over fossil fuel energy sources could increase the cost of our services and, thereby, further reduce demand and adversely affect our sales volumes, revenues and margins.

Many of our customers finance their exploration and production activities through cash flow from operations, the incurrence of debt or the issuance of equity. During times when the oil or natural gas markets weaken, our customers are more likely to experience a downturn in their financial condition. Additionally, some of our midstream customers may provide their gathering, transportation and related services to a limited number of companies in the oil and gas production business. A reduction in borrowing bases under reserve-based credit facilities, the lack of availability of debt or equity financing or other factors that negatively impact our customers' financial condition could result in a reduction in our customers' spending for our products and services, which may result in their cancellation of contracts, the cancellation or delay of scheduled maintenance of their existing natural gas compression equipment, their determination not to enter into new natural gas compression service contracts or their determination to cancel or delay orders for our services. Furthermore, the loss by our midstream customers of their key customers could reduce demand for their services and result in a deterioration of their financial condition, which would in turn decrease their demand for our services. Any such action by our customers would reduce demand for our services. Reduced demand for our services could adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. In addition, in the event of the financial failure of a customer, we could experience a loss on all or a portion of our outstanding accounts receivable associated with that customer.

Some scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHG in the Earth's atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant weather–related effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, droughts, hurricanes, blizzards, floods and other climatic events, in addition to more chronic changes such as shifting temperature, precipitation, and other meteorological patterns. If any of those effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our assets and operations, including, but not limited to, damages to our or our customers' facilities and assets from powerful wind or rising waters. We may experience increased insurance costs, or difficulty obtaining adequate insurance coverage, for our assets in areas subject to more frequent severe weather. We may not be able to recoup these increased costs through the rates we charge our customers. Extreme weather events could cause damage to property or facilities that could exceed our insurance coverage, and our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. Such impacts may be proportionately more severe given the geographical concentration of our operations. These disruptions could further result in evacuation of personnel, curtailment of services, interruption of the transportation of products and materials, and loss of productivity. Another possible consequence of climate change is increased volatility in seasonal temperatures. The market for natural gas and natural gas liquids is generally impacted by periods of colder weather and warmer weather, so any changes in climate could affect the market for those fuels, and thus demand for our services. Increased energy use due to weather changes may require us to invest in additional equipment to serve increased demand. A decrease in energy use due to weather changes may negatively affect our financial condition through decreased revenues. Despite the use of the term "global warming" as a shorthand for climate change, some studies indicate that climate change could cause some areas to experience temperatures substantially colder than their historical averages. As a result, it is difficult to predict how the market for our services could be affected by increased temperature volatility.

Our five most significant customers collectively accounted for 35%, 35% and 33% of our revenues during the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024 and 2023, respectively. Our services are provided to these customers pursuant to contract operations service agreements, which generally have an initial term of 12 to 36 months, or generally up to 60 months for the largest horsepower units in our fleet, and continue thereafter until terminated by either party with 30 days' advance notice. The loss of all or even a portion of the services we provide to these customers, as a result of competition or otherwise, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.