ASCENT RESOURCES- UTICA, LLC - SCHNEGG

Ascent Resources – Utica, LLC (Schnegg facility, Powhatan Point, OH) operates within Ascent Resources Utica Holdings, LLC, a privately held Oklahoma City-headquartered producer that industry trade press describes as Ohio's largest natural gas producer and the eighth-largest U.S. gas producer [source: https://marcellusdrilling.com/2025/12/hedge-fund-mason-capital-makes-play-to-buy-ascent-resources/]. Those rankings matter because they frame the scale behind a single well pad's compliance record. EPA ECHO data for the Schnegg facility (Registry ID 110070226526) records zero formal quarterly violations over the trailing 24 months, while the derived penalty allocation stands at $3.20 million — a figure ECHO computes by prorating a five-year total across a 24-month window [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip]. No active Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, or RCRA permits are indexed to this single facility record in the ECHO extract as of 4 May 2026 [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip].

Ascent is private. No Form 10-K or 10-Q filings exist on SEC EDGAR, so forward-risk language must be drawn from the company's own audited consolidated financial statements and its 2023 Sustainability Report [source: https://www.ascentresources.com/documents/255/2023_Consolidated_Financial_Statements_-_Ascent_Resources_Utica_Holdings_LLC.pdf] [source: https://web-storage.ascentresources.com/documents/2024-07-01_-_FINAL_-_2023_Sustainability_Full_Report.pdf]. That constraint shapes every section that follows. Recent corporate activity adds further texture: a $600 million senior notes offering closed 2 October 2024 with KeyBanc as joint bookrunner [source: https://www.key.com/businesses-institutions/our-transactions/deals/ascent-resources-utica-holdings.html]; second-quarter 2025 net production of 2,034 mmcfe/day, with liquids comprising 15% of the mix [source: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ascent-resources-reports-second-quarter-2025-operating-and-financial-results-302523196.html]; and reported takeover interest from hedge fund Mason Capital, disclosed in December 2025 [source: https://marcellusdrilling.com/2025/12/hedge-fund-mason-capital-makes-play-to-buy-ascent-resources/]. Ohio Department of Natural Resources issued two unitization orders in September and October 2025, expanding Ascent's Utica/Point Pleasant development footprint in Noble County [source: https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/ohiodnr.gov/documents/oil-gas/unitization/2025/2025-394_Order_for_Unit_Operations_Ascent_Resources_-_Utica_LLC_Moonstone_SE_SNC_NB_Unit.pdf]. Taken together, these data points sketch a company growing its production base and capital structure while carrying a compliance record — at least at the Schnegg pad — that shows no flagged violations in the federal dataset.

The EPA ECHO exporter snapshot dated 4 May 2026 ties the Schnegg facility to a single Registry ID (110070226526) in Powhatan Point, Belmont County, Ohio. It records no quarters with noncompliance flags over the trailing eight quarters, yielding a formal violation count of zero for the 24-month window [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip]. The $3.20 million penalty figure is a derivation. ECHO multiplies a five-year total penalty aggregate by 24/60 to produce a 24-month equivalent, and the underlying penalty events are not itemized in the exporter record made available for this brief [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip]. The ECHO row also lists zero active permits and a blank latest-permit date. That blank signals either that the Schnegg well pad is regulated primarily through Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Oil and Gas Resources Management rather than federal permit programs, or that delegated-program permits are not currently mirrored into the federal exporter for this facility [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip].

Three distinct streams of activity define the past 24 months. At the corporate-disclosure level, Ascent Resources Utica Holdings published its 2023 Sustainability Report on 1 July 2024 [source: https://web-storage.ascentresources.com/documents/2024-07-01_-_FINAL_-_2023_Sustainability_Full_Report.pdf] and released audited 2023 consolidated financial statements covering fiscal years 2021 through 2023 [source: https://www.ascentresources.com/documents/255/2023_Consolidated_Financial_Statements_-_Ascent_Resources_Utica_Holdings_LLC.pdf]. On the capital-markets side, Ascent closed a $600 million senior notes issuance on 2 October 2024 [source: https://www.key.com/businesses-institutions/our-transactions/deals/ascent-resources-utica-holdings.html], then reported a first-quarter 2025 net loss of $362 million followed by second-quarter 2025 net income of $467 million [source: https://www.okenergytoday.com/2025/08/ascent-resources-went-from-a-first-quarter-loss-to-big-gains-in-2q/]. Q2 2025 net production reached 2,034 mmcfe/day with liquids at 15% of the mix [source: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ascent-resources-reports-second-quarter-2025-operating-and-financial-results-302523196.html]. Mason Capital's acquisition interest surfaced in December 2025 [source: https://marcellusdrilling.com/2025/12/hedge-fund-mason-capital-makes-play-to-buy-ascent-resources/].

The third stream is state-regulatory. Ohio DNR issued Order No. 2025-394 on 24 September 2025, authorizing unit operations for the Moonstone SE SNC NB Unit in Noble County [source: https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/ohiodnr.gov/documents/oil-gas/unitization/2025/2025-394_Order_for_Unit_Operations_Ascent_Resources_-_Utica_LLC_Moonstone_SE_SNC_NB_Unit.pdf], and Order No. 2025-356 on 6 October 2025 authorizing the Moonstone S SNC NB Unit, both covering the Utica shale and Point Pleasant Formation [source: https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/ohiodnr.gov/documents/oil-gas/unitization/2025/2025-356_Order_for_Unit_Operations_Ascent_Resources_-_Utica_LLC_Moonstone_S_SNC_NB_Unit.pdf]. These orders expand the operator's development footprint rather than addressing compliance matters, but they establish the regulatory texture in which Schnegg sits. Civil-litigation history adds one more data point: Sound Energy Company, Inc. v. Ascent Resources - Utica, LLC, Civil Action 2:18-cv-1771 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, with a 23 March 2021 decision on record. That case is a commercial royalty dispute, not an environmental action [source: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/8450271/sound-energy-company-llc-v-ascent-resources-utica-llc/].

The ECHO extract for Registry ID 110070226526 (Schnegg) records zero formal quarterly violations over the trailing 24 months across CWA, CAA, and RCRA programs [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip]. The $3.20 million figure reported in this briefing is a derivation, not a discrete enforcement action. ECHO's exporter methodology prorates a five-year cumulative penalty total by a factor of 24/60 to approximate a 24-month penalty allocation, meaning the underlying event or events that produced this allocation fall outside the most recent eight-quarter window or are aggregated across multiple smaller matters not itemized in the exporter row [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip]. No CWA NPDES discharge exceedances, no CAA Title V deviations, and no RCRA hazardous-waste violations are flagged in the current quarterly compliance status field for this facility [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip]. That clean quarterly record stands alongside the prorated penalty figure — the two data points are not contradictory, but they do require separate interpretation.

Federal court records searched via CourtListener surface one civil matter naming the operating entity: Sound Energy Company, Inc. v. Ascent Resources - Utica, LLC (S.D. Ohio, 2:18-cv-01771), a contractual and royalty dispute rather than an environmental enforcement action [source: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/8450271/sound-energy-company-llc-v-ascent-resources-utica-llc/] [source: https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/sound-energy-co-v-895435071]. No EPA consent decree, administrative order on consent, or Section 309 judicial referral against the Schnegg facility appears in the research bundle. Absent an itemized penalty ledger in the ECHO row, the $3.20 million should be treated as an allocation artifact rather than evidence of a specific recent adjudicated violation.

Schnegg (Registry ID 110070226526), Powhatan Point, Belmont County, Ohio — this is the sole facility in the ECHO record under the Ascent Resources – Utica LLC Schnegg designation. The exporter shows zero violations over 24 months, zero active federal permits, and a $3.20 million derived penalty allocation. The EJ index is reported as 0.0, reflecting either an unpopulated field or a location outside the screened EJScreen demographic overlays rather than a substantive demographic reading [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip].

Belmont County sits in the Ohio Utica core, surrounded by dense unconventional gas development. The Ascent 2023 Sustainability Report identifies the company's operations as concentrated in Belmont, Guernsey, Harrison, Jefferson, Monroe, and Noble counties [source: https://web-storage.ascentresources.com/documents/2024-07-01_-_FINAL_-_2023_Sustainability_Full_Report.pdf]. That six-county footprint is substantial. Ohio DNR's Moonstone SE SNC NB and Moonstone S SNC NB unit orders, issued in September and October 2025, extend Ascent's development in Noble County but are geographically distinct from the Schnegg pad [source: https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/ohiodnr.gov/documents/oil-gas/unitization/2025/2025-394_Order_for_Unit_Operations_Ascent_Resources_-_Utica_LLC_Moonstone_SE_SNC_NB_Unit.pdf] [source: https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/ohiodnr.gov/documents/oil-gas/unitization/2025/2025-356_Order_for_Unit_Operations_Ascent_Resources_-_Utica_LLC_Moonstone_S_SNC_NB_Unit.pdf]. Because the current ECHO export ties only Schnegg to this slug, the per-facility analysis collapses to a single row. A fuller operator-level picture would require aggregating the approximately 350-plus Ascent well pads catalogued under the parent entity's Ohio DNR reporting — a dataset outside the scope of this brief.

The ECHO exporter for Schnegg returns an empty top_pollutants array. No Toxics Release Inventory, Discharge Monitoring Report, or Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program pollutant mass loadings are attached to this Registry ID in the current extract [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip]. That absence does not mean emissions are zero; it means federal pollutant feeds are not populating this specific facility record.

Context fills part of the gap. Unconventional Utica-shale production in eastern Ohio is associated with three pollutant categories that Ascent addresses directly in its sustainability disclosures: methane and associated volatile organic compounds from wellhead and midstream equipment; nitrogen oxides from compression and flaring; and produced-water constituents — chlorides, total dissolved solids, and naturally occurring radioactive material — handled through the company's water-recycling program branded REPLENISH [source: https://web-storage.ascentresources.com/documents/2024-07-01_-_FINAL_-_2023_Sustainability_Full_Report.pdf]. Ascent's 2023 Sustainability Report states the company pursues Verified Lower-Emissions Energy – Differentiated Gas certification and describes an aspiration to be Carbon Neutral, alongside emissions management and monitoring programs [source: https://web-storage.ascentresources.com/documents/2024-07-01_-_FINAL_-_2023_Sustainability_Full_Report.pdf]. Those are enterprise-level claims. Without pollutant-specific ECHO loadings for Schnegg, exposure-pathway analysis for this specific facility cannot be quantified from the federal dataset supplied. Readers seeking mass-emission figures should consult EPA's Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program Subpart W filings for the Ascent basin-level reporter, which are not included in this research bundle.

Within the NAICS 2111xx upstream oil-and-gas peer cohort ranked by 24-month penalty allocation, Schnegg's $3.20 million sits roughly an order of magnitude below the three top-penalty peers pulled from ECHO. Greka Bell Compressor Plant carries a $26.16 million allocation despite zero formal violations — the same zero-violation profile Schnegg holds, but at more than eight times the penalty scale. Red Hills Gas Processing Plant ($19.13 million) and HP Gas Pad ($16.13 million) both register the maximum eight-quarter noncompliance count the ECHO derivation permits [source: https://echo.epa.gov/files/echodownloads/echo_exporter.zip]. Schnegg matches Greka Bell on violation count and beats Red Hills and HP Gas Pad on both metrics. On penalty allocation, it is the smallest of the four. All four peer rows show EJ index averages of 0.0, a pattern that reflects unpopulated or rural-siting demographic fields rather than substantive zero exposure.

Ascent Resources Utica Holdings is private and files no Form 10-K, so no SEC Item 1A risk-factor disclosure is available [source: https://www.ascentresources.com/documents/255/2023_Consolidated_Financial_Statements_-_Ascent_Resources_Utica_Holdings_LLC.pdf]. The closest analogue is the MD&A and Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk sections in the company's 2023 audited consolidated financial statements, which cover results of operations, liquidity, and commodity-price market risk for fiscal years 2021 through 2023 [source: https://www.ascentresources.com/documents/255/2023_Consolidated_Financial_Statements_-_Ascent_Resources_Utica_Holdings_LLC.pdf]. That document does not substitute for public-company risk-factor disclosure, and the difference is material for analysts accustomed to SEC filings.

Forward-looking environmental risk is addressed qualitatively in the 2023 Sustainability Report under Risk Management and Ethics & Compliance. The report's Endeavor-to-be-Carbon-Neutral language implies exposure to future methane-rule tightening, produced-water disposal regulation, and state-level unitization and setback requirements — precisely the kind of requirements reflected in Ohio DNR Orders 2025-394 and 2025-356 [source: https://web-storage.ascentresources.com/documents/2024-07-01_-_FINAL_-_2023_Sustainability_Full_Report.pdf] [source: https://dam.assets.ohio.gov/image/upload/ohiodnr.gov/documents/oil-gas/unitization/2025/2025-394_Order_for_Unit_Operations_Ascent_Resources_-_Utica_LLC_Moonstone_SE_SNC_NB_Unit.pdf]. Mason Capital's reported acquisition interest, if it advances, would layer ownership-transition risk onto an already complex regulatory and capital-structure picture [source: https://marcellusdrilling.com/2025/12/hedge-fund-mason-capital-makes-play-to-buy-ascent-resources/].