Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Epsilon Energy Ltd. 2025 Year-End Earnings Conference Call. All participants will be in a listen-only mode. After today's presentation, there will be an opportunity for questions and answers. Please also note today's event is being recorded. At this time, I would like to turn the floor over to J. Andrew Williamson, CFO. Please go ahead.

Thank you, Operator. And on behalf of the management team, I would like to welcome all of you to today's conference call to review Epsilon Energy Ltd.'s full year and fourth quarter 2025 financial and operational results. Before we begin, I would like to remind you that our comments may include forward-looking statements. It should be noted that a variety of factors could cause Epsilon Energy Ltd.'s actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results or expectations expressed in these forward-looking statements. Today's call may also contain certain non-GAAP financial measures. Please refer to the earnings release that we issued yesterday for disclosures on forward-looking statements and reconciliations of non-GAAP measures. With that, I would like to turn the call over to Jason P. Stabell, our Chief Executive Officer.

Thank you, Andrew. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. With me today are J. Andrew Williamson, our CFO, and Henry Nelson Clanton, our COO. We will be available to answer questions later in the call. Epsilon Energy Ltd. delivered a standout year, growing adjusted EBITDA 75% and production 54% year over year. In the fourth quarter, we closed the acquisition of the PEEP companies, bringing us new production, more than 100 net high rate of return drilling locations, largely held-by-production undeveloped acreage, and a highly experienced Powder River Basin operating team. Through a combination of development drilling and the Peak acquisition, we achieved 69% growth in proved developed producing reserves and an 86% increase in total proved reserves. The Board recently declared our seventeenth consecutive quarterly dividend and renewed the share buyback program covering up to 10% of shares outstanding, underscoring our commitment to returning capital to shareholders. Looking at 2026 to date, our portfolio is performing exceptionally well. In late January, we realized extremely favorable gas pricing in Pennsylvania, generating over $4,800,000 in net natural gas sales in a single week, including sales one day at over $66 per MMBtu. Our current PDP production is approximately 60% hedged for the rest of the year. But importantly, the incremental oil volumes we expect to add through the drill bit starting in the second quarter are unhedged, providing meaningful upside exposure. I would like to add that our past commentary on the acquired Powder River Basin assets has focused on the very attractive high rate of return Parkman inventory. But I need to remind investors that we also acquired several hundred locations in the Niobrara and Mowry formations that are the focus of activity for most of our offset operators in the basin. While the average expected returns in these formations are currently below the Parkman, this inventory represents a material wedge of value that we acquired at less than $250,000 per location. We expect the returns on this inventory to improve dramatically as we scale operations and extend lateral lengths, particularly if oil prices remain at levels above $70. Epsilon Energy Ltd. is now positioned as a unique multiyear organic growth story with strong visibility into per-share growth in EPS, EBITDA, and production over the next few years while maintaining a fixed dividend and targeting an average annual leverage ratio below 1.5x. Thank you for your continued support. I will now turn it over to Andrew and Henry for additional comments.

Thanks, Jason. I will start by elaborating on the Peak closing that occurred on 11/14/2025, with the release of the contingent consideration occurring a few days later on the 20th. The BLM permitting issues on the acquired acreage in Converse County were resolved right around closing, and the BLM resumed their approval of drilling permits in the affected area. As it stands now, we have seven approved drilling permits that provide access to that acreage, which we believe holds some of the best inventory we have in the basin. We plan to start to develop there next year with some front-end facilities work this year. Now on to the year-end results. Jason mentioned the year-over-year growth in production and cash flow, which was primarily driven by higher volumes, up 65%, and better pricing with realized prices up over $1 per MMBtu year over year in the Marcellus. With wells coming online in the first quarter that were paid for the prior year, our operator has additional development planned this year and again in 2027 and 2028 at an accelerated pace. We expect the vast majority of these volumes will flow through the Auburn Gathering System when developed, driving strong capital-efficient cash flow growth on our midstream asset over that period. We have several one-off items that impacted earnings this year: transaction costs from the Peak acquisition, which were $6,900,000 in total, although half of these were expenses assumed from Peak that were unrelated to the deal and were adjusted for in the share consideration issued at closing. Also impacting the year were some impairments on our wellbores in Canada and New Mexico. The drivers were the oil strip we were required to use at 12/31/20, which was sub-$60 WTI; downward reserve revisions due to a frac hit in New Mexico—note the New Mexico interests are small with 10% in two wellbores—and, finally, well underperformance in Canada. In Canada, we have spent $11,000,000 over the past two years, including approximately $4,500,000 to earn into a large acreage position of over 100,000 net acres that we believe has great option value, although based on the results observed to date, the area does not currently compete for capital in our portfolio. The major adjustment was the loss on our sale of the Oklahoma assets. We also had a large tax basis there; when you combine cash received at closing with the cash tax savings, the deal generated over 8x the expected cash flow from those assets in 2026, so very accretive on a multiple basis. Also, we had no plans to allocate capital there; with the portfolio we have, it made sense to clear the decks and use those cash proceeds to pay down our debt balance, which we did in the first quarter by $5,000,000. Adjusting for the items I just described, the company earned $92 per share in 2025. We are doing a couple of things to increase liquidity over the next few months given the capital program this year across the portfolio. We are in the market selling an overriding royalty interest package in the Marcellus. We believe we can transact at an accretive multiple. We also have the Colorado office building we acquired with Peak under contract for $3,000,000. Overall, this is an exciting time for the company with several value-enhancing developments that are in progress or will be in the next 12 to 18 months. These include our operated high-return Parkman development in the Powder River Basin, accelerated Barnett development in the Permian, and steady development in the Marcellus with expected increases in gas production and midstream throughput in the 2027–2028 timeframe. We show the potential cash flow impact of some of these things in our first quarter 2026 corporate presentation, which is available on our website. Now to Henry for more detail on our investment plans this year and a look ahead to the next few years.

Thank you, Andrew, and good morning to everybody. I would like to share more detail on our development plans for 2026. Beginning with our newly acquired operating assets in the Powder River Basin in Wyoming, we have initiated completion operations of two two-mile Niobrara DUCs, 0.7 net working interest to Epsilon Energy Ltd. The net CapEx for these two completions is expected to be approximately $6,000,000. This includes the pre-construction buildout of the production facilities to be ready to put the wells into service after flowback. The frac is currently scheduled for Q2. As Jason mentioned earlier, we are focused on the Parkman drilling inventory, with plans to drill three two-mile laterals, 2.8 net, beginning in Q3 with production online in Q4. Net capital for these three wells is expected to be approximately $22,000,000. In preparation for our 2027 and 2028 development plans in the Parkman in Converse County, Wyoming—12 gross wells—we will be building out a water supply and impoundment facility to support this program and drive development costs down. In our Permian Barnett asset, project management and operatorship has changed. Based upon discussions with the new operator, the project development will transition to three-mile laterals with four wells per pad development along a development corridor. In addition to the drilling program, the new operator informs us that planning is underway for a multi-well production battery and a water recycling facility within the main development corridor. We are aligned with the operator and support these changes to the development plan and the facility approach, which is expected to drive cost savings on the wells moving forward. This month, the first three-mile Barnett well was drilled on the position. The completion planning is in progress, and we expect the well online close to midyear. Net CapEx for the drilling and completion of this well is expected to be approximately $4,000,000. Based upon preliminary discussions with the new operator, an additional three wells, 0.75 net, are planned in the second half of the year. We expect this to include two Barnett three-milers offsetting our recently drilled well to minimize parent-child impacts. The third well is expected to be an appraisal test in the Woodford interval. A successful result there will increase our inventory meaningfully. Moving to the Marcellus, development activity is restarting. We have received well proposals for the drilling of five wells, 0.4 net, beginning in early Q2. Completions are currently scheduled for the second half of the year. Net CapEx for these five wells is expected to be approximately $4,000,000. We have also begun LOE optimization efforts in Wyoming. This program includes downsizing gas lift compressors—12 planned—focused efforts to reduce the treating cost per barrel from the production chemicals program, and reducing and optimizing power usage in the field. These efforts are expected to remove fixed costs and improve variable costs without impacting production. Monthly savings for these initiatives are estimated to be $50,000 to $100,000 gross per month. Currently, no 2026 activity is planned in Canada. And finally, to add to what Jason mentioned earlier, the company's total reserves increased to 156 Bcfe due primarily to the 78 Bcfe of additions related to the acquisition of the Powder River Basin assets. For those interested in more details on the year-over-year changes, I would refer you to the detailed reserves reconciliation information provided in the 10-K press release. Now I will turn it back to Jason.

Thanks, guys. Operator, we can now open the lines for questions.

At this time, we will begin the question-and-answer session. To withdraw your questions, you may press star then 2. Please pick up your handset prior to pressing the keys to ensure the best sound quality. Our first question today comes from Anthony Perala from Punch & Associates. Please go ahead with your question.

Hey, morning, guys. Thanks for taking the question here. Just wanted to ask on looking at some of the details you gave around the Peak acquisition timing, and I think you had referenced a $65 oil level for returns and IRRs. Just curious, if we are looking at it through a lens of today—whether it is the kind of front month or even going back to you—the curve is in the mid-seventies going through the back half of 2026. Just curious what returns look like under those oil assumptions rather than $65.

Anthony, Jason here. Thanks for the question. I will let Andrew address that one.

Yes. Thanks for the question, Anthony. So yesterday's forward averaged $77 through year-end 2027. We run price sensitivities on our type curves in $5 increments. So at $75 WTI, returns for our oil-weighted inventory increase meaningfully. I am going to add the Permian stuff alongside the question on the Powder. Barnett three-mile at $65, as mentioned in our corporate presentation, is a 45% IRR with a two-year payout, roughly 3.0x multiple on invested capital. And at $70, those move into the 60% range, with approximately 18-month payouts and 3.5x on the multiple. In the Powder, starting with the Parkman—and that is the focus of our development in the basin over the next 18 to 24 months—again, in the presentation, we talk about the Parkman split into two, the inventory across the two counties. So in Converse, which is the best stuff, a 150% return, 10-month payout, 2.5x. The Campbell County Parkman is in the 45% to 50% range with 20-month payouts. And at $75, those increase for Converse to over 200%, eight-month payouts, 3.0x, and in Campbell, increases to 80%, less than 18 months on the payout and over 2.0x. The largest component of the inventory in the basin in the Powder is the upper Niobrara. We are, at $65, in the 25% to 30% range, three-year payouts and 2.0x. At $75, that increases to 40% to 45%, two-year payout, and 2.5x. And we have 46 net locations there in the Niobrara.

That is really helpful. Interesting, I guess. Between those you can see, but obviously the Parkman stands out. I am curious—it is a good problem to have—but just curious on how you guys look at how capital kind of competes with the variance of you controlling your own destiny with the Parkman and PRB locations, and then having the non-op working interest and kind of dealing with the operator in the Barnett, the new operator.

Yes. I mean, it is going to go highest and best use. Right now, kind of looking at the portfolio, Anthony, we think about it as about 50% of our investment over the next two years is going to be Powder-focused, and then the remainder split between Marcellus and Barnett. So I think, with pricing doing what they do, I do not see a huge change to that. As we mentioned on the call, we are excited about the new operator that we have in the Barnett oil play. It is a large, scaled private operator that has pretty aggressive plans for ramping this year, but really stepping up next year. So we think, in addition to the PRB, that that Barnett asset is going to be a nice source of liquids growth for us. And as Andrew quoted, the returns, in a world $65 plus, those Barnett investments are quite attractive. And I think we get more excited thinking about a three-mile lateral world in the Barnett. We had our first well drilled there that we are going to complete, as we mentioned, mid this year. So I think it is all shaping up how we would have liked. We have got options. We have got our operated position that we can flex up and down depending on macro. We have got a lot of inventory there, Parkman-focused certainly. But as I mentioned, we want to remind people we have also got this pretty deep Niobrara inventory, which is where most of the industry in the PRB is currently focused its capital.

So, yes. It is kind of funny looking back on when you first took the role, the difference in just investment opportunities—from primarily the Marcellus to now having a lot of different plays that compete for capital. On that Niobrara piece, which, as you lay out, it is probably 2028 before that really competes for capital given just the Parkman inventory. I am curious—like you had said—it seems like people are getting more active there, and it is being proved out more by larger scaled operators. I am curious what you are seeing and hearing from those that are really committing capital to the Niobrara and Mowry right now in the PRB.

Sure. I will start maybe with some general comments, and Henry can fill in anywhere that he sees fit. Yes, around us in Campbell and Converse, there are a number of rigs right now. The big operators—and I will just name a few—Devon, EOG, Continental, Oxy—they are really focusing their capital on the Niobrara. I think what you are seeing there is similar to what you are seeing in other basins. We are going from a two-mile lateral world to—the standard right now in the Niobrara, I think, for this year and forward—is three- to 3.5-mile laterals, which enhances economics quite a bit. We even have an offset operator that we know is planning a four-mile lateral in the Niobrara, or a DSU of four miler. So I think the economics there, as you start to extend laterals, batch drill wells, you are going to see that the Niobrara in the PRB is competing for capital in much larger portfolios of the companies I mentioned. So we are encouraged by that. As we said, we are watching closely. I think our near-term focus is going to remain the Parkman, probably over the next two years. We will have some non-op opportunities in some of these Niobrara wells in some of that offset acreage as well that I think we would be interested in. So I will stop there and let Henry add.

Yes. The only thing I could add to that is, we have got 12 rigs running in Campbell, Converse, and Johnson County around our acreage position, and 10 of those 12 are Niobrara-focused. So that gives you some color on how focused the big guys that Jason mentioned are in allocating their capital.

Great. Thanks, Henry. That is very helpful. Just one final one for me here. If you could add a little bit more color—you had mentioned you are in the market looking at selling an overriding royalty package on the Marcellus assets. Just if you could give some more color to that and just how best to think about that for potential proceeds.

Yes. I am not going to guide on proceeds, but it is a small amount of production. So we are talking somewhere, I think, less than 1,000,000 cubic feet a day of production. It represents a pretty small overall piece of our production. It sits outside of our core Auburn area. These are some overrides we have picked up over the years due to acreage trades with some other area operators. There is pretty robust interest, as we understand it, for override mineral interests, so we are doing a market test to see. We believe, as Andrew mentioned, we are going to have an opportunity to potentially sell it at a pretty attractive multiple. Nothing is locked in there until we get some bids next month and decide if it is something of interest to us or not. But just kind of pruning around the edges on the portfolio. As we talked, we moved the Anadarko assets last year. There was some cash we brought on the balance sheet, but also had some positive after-tax impacts for us. That office building that came in the Peak deal, we thought it made sense to explore sale of that, and as Andrew said, that is $3,000,000 that we have got under contract. So I expect that will close in the second quarter. So, just as we have expanded the portfolio, we are trying to make sure that it is optimized as best as possible, and we are creating opportunities to reinvest in what we think are our best sources of inventory. Feel good about it.

That is great. Thanks for the color. I will get back in the queue.

Thanks, Anthony. To withdraw your questions, you may press 2. It is showing no questions at this time. I would like to turn the conference call back over to Jason for any closing comments.

Nothing to add, Operator, other than to thank everybody for joining us today. And as always, if people have additional questions, feel free to contact us here at the Houston office. Everybody have a good day. Thank you.

With that, ladies and gentlemen, we will conclude today's conference call and presentation. We do thank you for joining. You may now disconnect your lines.