EQT: 10-K Risk Factor Changes

In response to findings that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs present an endangerment to public health and the environment, numerous laws and regulations have been adopted, and more are being considered, to regulate the emission of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs. For example, in recent years, the EPA has proposed and adopted amendments to existing rules as well as new rules directed at restricting the amount of methane and other GHG emissions from new and existing oil and natural gas production and natural gas processing and transmission facilities. Additionally, a number of U.S. state and regional efforts have emerged that are aimed at tracking and/or reducing GHG emissions by means of carbon taxes, policies and incentives to encourage the use of renewable energy or alternative low-carbon fuels, the development of GHG incentives, cap-and-trade programs that typically require major sources of GHG emissions, such as electric power plants, to acquire and surrender emission allowances in return for emitting GHGs. Regulations requiring the disclosure of GHG emissions and other climate-related information or information substantiating climate-related claims are also increasingly being adopted or proposed at the federal and state level. However, in February 2026, the EPA issued a pre-publication copy of a final rule to rescind the Endangerment Finding, which has been the foundation for regulating GHG emissions. Without the Endangerment Finding, the EPA may assert that it lacks authority under the CAA to prescribe emissions standards. The potential impact of the final rule, potential subsequent revisions to existing emission standards, and outcome of related litigation remain uncertain. See Item 1., "Business – Regulation – Environmental, Health and Safety Regulations-Climate Change and Regulation of Methane and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions" for more information regarding laws and regulations relating to emissions of methane and other GHGs. At the international level, in December 2015, the 21st Conference of the Parties of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change resulted in nearly 200 countries, including the United States, coming together to develop the Paris Agreement, which calls for the signatories to the agreement to undertake "ambitious efforts" to limit increases in the average global temperature. Although the agreement does not create any binding obligations for nations to limit their GHG emissions, it does require pledges to voluntarily limit or reduce future emissions. In January 2026, the United States withdrew from the Paris Agreement and announced that it will be withdrawing from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Nonetheless, various state and local governments have publicly committed to furthering the goals of the Paris Agreement and many of these initiatives are expected to continue. The full impact of these actions and initiatives remains uncertain at this time. See Item 1., "Business – Regulation – Environmental, Health and Safety Regulations-Climate Change and Regulation of Methane and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions" for more information. It is not possible at this time to predict how legislation or regulations that may be adopted to reduce or restrict methane and other GHG emissions would impact our business. However, any legislation or regulatory programs at the international, federal, state or city levels designed to reduce methane or other GHG emissions could increase the cost of consuming, and thereby reduce demand for, the natural gas, NGLs and oil we produce and our midstream systems service. Existing laws and regulations and any future laws and regulations of this nature, including those imposing reporting obligations, or imposing a tax or fee or otherwise limiting emissions of methane or other GHGs from our equipment and operations could require us to incur costs to comply with such regulations, including costs to monitor and report on GHG emissions, install new equipment to reduce emissions of GHGs associated with our operations, acquire emissions allowances or comply with new regulatory requirements. Substantial limitations or taxes or fees on methane or other GHG emissions, as well as other regulatory incentives or requirements to conserve energy, use alternative sources or reduce GHG emissions in product supply chains, could also adversely affect demand for the natural gas, NGLs and oil we produce and our midstream systems service, stimulate demand for alternative forms of energy that do not rely on combustion of fossil fuels, and lower the value of our reserves. We may also face increased litigation risks arising from climate-related disclosures required by regulations. In addition, enhanced climate disclosure could accelerate the trend of certain stakeholders and lenders restricting or seeking more stringent conditions with respect to their investments in certain carbon-intensive sectors. Consequently, legislation and regulatory programs addressing climate change or methane and other GHG emissions could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. 51 51 51 Table of Contents Table of Contents The regulatory approval process for the construction of new transmission assets is very challenging, and, as demonstrated with MVP Mainline, has resulted in significantly increased costs and delayed targeted in-service dates, and decisions by regulatory and/or judicial authorities in pending or potential proceedings relevant to the development of midstream assets, such as regarding MVP Southgate, MVP Boost and/or other expansions or extensions of MVP Mainline, are likely to impact our or the MVP Joint Venture's ability to obtain or maintain in effect all approvals and authorizations, including as may be necessary to complete certain projects in a timely manner or at all, or our ability to achieve the expected investment returns on the projects. Certain of our projects require regulatory approval from federal, state and/or local authorities prior to and/or in the course of construction, including any extensions from, expansions of or additions to our and the MVP Joint Venture's gathering, transmission and storage systems, as applicable. The approval process for certain projects has become increasingly slower and more difficult, due in part to federal, state and local concerns related to exploration and production, transmission and gathering activities and associated environmental impacts, and the increasingly negative public perception regarding, and opposition to, the oil and gas industry, including major pipeline projects like MVP Mainline, MVP Southgate and MVP Boost. Further, regulatory approvals and authorizations, even when obtained, have increasingly been subject to judicial challenge by activists requesting that issued approvals and authorizations be stayed and vacated. Accordingly, authorizations needed for our or the MVP Joint Venture's projects, including any expansion of MVP Mainline, MVP Southgate, MVP Boost or other extensions, may not be granted or, if granted, such authorizations may include burdensome or expensive conditions or may later be stayed or revoked or vacated, as was repeatedly the case with the construction of MVP Mainline. Significant delays in the regulatory approval process for projects, as well as stays and losses of critical authorizations and permits, should they be experienced, have the potential to significantly increase costs, delay targeted in-service dates and/or affect operations for projects (among other adverse effects), as has happened with MVP Mainline and the originally certificated MVP Southgate project, and could occur in the future in the case of authorizations required for our or the MVP Joint Venture's current or future projects, including in respect of developing expansions or extensions, such as expansion of MVP Mainline, MVP Southgate and MVP Boost. Any such adverse developments and uncertainties could adversely affect our ability, and/or, as applicable, the ability for the MVP Joint Venture and its owners, including us, to achieve expected investment returns, adversely affect our willingness or ability and/or that of our joint venture partners to continue to pursue projects, and/or cause impairments, including to our equity investment in the MVP Joint Venture. We have experienced and may further experience increased opposition with respect to our and the MVP Joint Venture's projects from activists in the form of lawsuits, intervention in regulatory proceedings and otherwise, which could result in adverse impacts to our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In particular, opponents were successful in past challenges with respect to MVP Mainline. Opposition is ongoing regarding MVP Southgate and is expected for future projects, including any expansions of MVP Mainline. If ongoing or future challenges are successful, it could result in significant, adverse impacts to our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Such opposition has made it increasingly difficult to complete projects and place them in service and, following any in service, may also affect operations or affect extensions and/or expansions of projects. Further, such opposition and/or adverse court rulings and regulatory determinations may have the effect of increasing the timeframe on necessary agency action to address actual or perceived concerns in prior adverse court rulings, or may have the effect of increasing the risk that at a future point joint venture partners may elect not to continue to pursue or fund a project, which could, absent additional project sponsors, significantly imperil the ability to complete the project. See also Item 1A., "Risk Factors-Risks Associated with Strategic Transactions – We have entered into joint ventures, and may in the future enter into additional or modify existing joint ventures, that might restrict our operational and corporate flexibility and divert our management's time and our resources. In addition, we exercise no control over joint venture partners and it may be difficult or impossible for us to cause these joint ventures or partners to take actions that we believe would be in our or the joint venture's best interests and these joint ventures are subject to many of the same risks to which we are subject." Challenges to our projects could adversely affect our business (including by increasing the possibility of investor activism), financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. 52 52 52 Table of Contents Table of Contents

In response to findings that emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs present an endangerment to public health and the environment, numerous laws and regulations have been adopted, and more are being considered, to regulate the emission of carbon dioxide, methane and other GHGs. In November 2022 at COP27, the United States agreed, in conjunction with the European Union and a number of other partner countries, to develop standards for monitoring and reporting methane emissions to help create a market for low methane-intensity natural gas. In August 2024, the European Union adopted a regulation to track and reduce methane emissions in the energy sector. See Item 1., "Business-Regulation-Climate Change and Regulation of Methane and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions" for more information. At COP28, nearly 200 countries, including the United States, entered into an agreement that calls for actions towards achieving, at a global scale, a tripling of renewable energy capacity and doubling energy efficiency improvements by 2030. Most recently, at COP29, participants representing 159 countries met and, among other things, agreed on rules to operationalize international carbon markets under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. However, in January 2025, President Trump issued an executive order directing the immediate notice to the United Nations of the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement and all other agreements made under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. The full impact of these actions remains uncertain at this time. In recent years, the EPA has proposed and adopted amendments to existing rules as well as new rules directed at restricting the amount of methane and other GHG emissions from new and existing oil and natural gas production and natural gas processing and transmission facilities. See Item 1., "Business-Regulation-Air Emissions" for more information. These federal rulemakings and regulations could adversely affect our operations and restrict or delay our ability to obtain air permits. 49 49 49 Table of Contents Table of Contents At the U.S. federal level, in November 2021, Congress approved the IRA, a $1 trillion legislative infrastructure package that includes a number of climate-focused spending initiatives, including imposing a fee known as a "waste emission charge" on methane emissions from certain natural gas and oil facilities that are in excess of a specified threshold. In November 2024, the EPA finalized a rule implementing the IRA's waste emissions charge. The final rule includes methodologies for calculating the amount by which a facility's reported methane emissions are below or exceed the waste emissions thresholds and certain exemptions created by the IRA. Further, in May 2024, the EPA finalized revisions to expand the scope of emissions events that are reportable under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program for petroleum and natural gas systems (Subpart W), which may result in an increase in reported methane and other GHG emissions under Subpart W for many operators, including us. The rule took effect on January 1, 2025. The emissions reported under the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program will be the basis for any payments under the IRA's waste emissions charge program. However, petitions for reconsideration to the EPA are pending and litigation in the D.C. Circuit has commenced. Additionally, in January 2025, President Trump issued an executive order directing the heads of all federal agencies to identify and begin the processes to suspend, revise or rescind all agency actions that are unduly burdensome on the identification, development or use of domestic energy resources. As a result, future implementation and enforcement of these rules remains uncertain at this time. Additionally, a number of U.S. state and regional efforts have emerged that are aimed at tracking and/or reducing GHG emissions by means of carbon taxes, policies and incentives to encourage the use of renewable energy or alternative low-carbon fuels, the development of GHG incentives, cap-and-trade programs that typically require major sources of GHG emissions, such as electric power plants, to acquire and surrender emission allowances in return for emitting GHGs. Regulations requiring the disclosure of GHG emissions and other climate-related information or information substantiating climate-related claims are also increasingly being adopted or proposed at the federal and state level. See Item 1., "Business-Regulation-Climate Change and Regulation of Methane and Other Greenhouse Gas Emissions" for more information. It is not possible at this time to predict how legislation or regulations that may be adopted to reduce or restrict methane and other GHG emissions would impact our business. However, any legislation or regulatory programs at the international, federal, state or city levels designed to reduce methane or other GHG emissions could increase the cost of consuming, and thereby reduce demand for, the natural gas, NGLs and oil we produce and our midstream services. Existing laws and regulations and any future laws and regulations of this nature, including those imposing reporting obligations, or imposing a tax or fee or otherwise limiting emissions of methane or other GHGs from our equipment and operations could require us to incur costs to comply with such regulations, including costs to monitor and report on GHG emissions, install new equipment to reduce emissions of GHGs associated with our operations, acquire emissions allowances or comply with new regulatory requirements. Substantial limitations or taxes or fees on methane or other GHG emissions, as well as other regulatory incentives or requirements to conserve energy, use alternative sources or reduce GHG emissions in product supply chains, could also adversely affect demand for the natural gas, NGLs and oil we produce and our midstream services, stimulate demand for alternative forms of energy that do not rely on combustion of fossil fuels, and lower the value of our reserves. We may also face increased litigation risks arising from climate-related disclosures required by regulations. In addition, enhanced climate disclosure could accelerate the trend of certain stakeholders and lenders restricting or seeking more stringent conditions with respect to their investments in certain carbon-intensive sectors. Consequently, legislation and regulatory programs addressing climate change or methane and other GHG emissions could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. 50 50 50 Table of Contents Table of Contents The regulatory approval process for the construction of new transmission assets is very challenging, and, as demonstrated with the MVP, has resulted in significantly increased costs and delayed targeted in-service dates, and decisions by regulatory and/or judicial authorities in pending or potential proceedings relevant to the development of midstream assets, such as regarding the MVP Southgate project and/or expansions or extensions of the MVP, are likely to impact our or the MVP Joint Venture's ability to obtain or maintain in effect all approvals and authorizations, including as may be necessary to complete certain projects in a timely manner or at all, or our ability to achieve the expected investment returns on the projects. Certain of our projects require regulatory approval from federal, state and/or local authorities prior to and/or in the course of construction, including any extensions from, expansions of or additions to our and the MVP Joint Venture's gathering, transmission and storage systems, as applicable. The approval process for certain projects has become increasingly slower and more difficult, due in part to federal, state and local concerns related to exploration and production, transmission and gathering activities and associated environmental impacts, and the increasingly negative public perception regarding, and opposition to, the oil and gas industry, including major pipeline projects like the MVP and MVP Southgate. Further, regulatory approvals and authorizations, even when obtained, have increasingly been subject to judicial challenge by activists requesting that issued approvals and authorizations be stayed and vacated. Accordingly, authorizations needed for our or the MVP Joint Venture's projects, including any expansion of the MVP and the MVP Southgate project or other extensions, may not be granted or, if granted, such authorizations may include burdensome or expensive conditions or may later be stayed or revoked or vacated, as was repeatedly the case with the construction of the MVP. Significant delays in the regulatory approval process for projects, as well as stays and losses of critical authorizations and permits, should they be experienced, have the potential to significantly increase costs, delay targeted in-service dates and/or affect operations for projects (among other adverse effects), as has happened with the MVP and the originally certificated MVP Southgate project and could occur in the future in the case of authorizations required for our or the MVP Joint Venture's current or future projects, including in respect of developing expansions or extensions, such as expansion of the MVP and the MVP Southgate project. Any such adverse developments and uncertainties could adversely affect our ability, and/or, as applicable, the ability for the MVP Joint Venture and its owners, including us, to achieve expected investment returns, adversely affect our willingness or ability and/or that of our joint venture partners to continue to pursue projects, and/or cause impairments, including to our equity investment in the MVP Joint Venture. We have experienced and may further experience increased opposition with respect to our and the MVP Joint Venture's projects from activists in the form of lawsuits, intervention in regulatory proceedings and otherwise, which could result in adverse impacts to our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In particular, opponents were successful in past challenges with respect to the MVP. Opposition is ongoing regarding the MVP Southgate project and is expected for future projects, including any expansions of the MVP. If ongoing or future challenges are successful, it could result in significant, adverse impacts to our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Such opposition has made it increasingly difficult to complete projects and place them in service and, following any in service, may also affect operations or affect extensions and/or expansions of projects. Further, such opposition and/or adverse court rulings and regulatory determinations may have the effect of increasing the timeframe on necessary agency action to address actual or perceived concerns in prior adverse court rulings, or may have the effect of increasing the risk that at a future point joint venture partners may elect not to continue to pursue or fund a project, which could, absent additional project sponsors, significantly imperil the ability to complete the project. See also Item 1A., "Risk Factors – We have entered into joint ventures, and may in the future enter into additional or modify existing joint ventures, that might restrict our operational and corporate flexibility and divert our management's time and our resources. In addition, we exercise no control over joint venture partners and it may be difficult or impossible for us to cause these joint ventures or partners to take actions that we believe would be in our or the joint venture's best interests and these joint ventures are subject to many of the same risks to which we are subject." Challenges to our projects could adversely affect our business (including by increasing the possibility of investor activism), financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. 51 51 51 Table of Contents Table of Contents