Fair Value Measurements Sample Clauses

Fair Value Measurements. The Communities report certain assets at fair value on a recurring and non-recurring basis depending on the underlying accounting policy for the particular item. Recurring fair value measures include the Communities’ investment account. These standards require an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs (such as quoted prices in active markets) and minimize the use of unobservable inputs (such as appraisals or valuation techniques) to determine fair value. In addition, the Communities report certain investments using the net asset value per share as determined by investment managers under the so called “practical expedient.” The practical expedient allows net asset value per share to represent fair value for reporting purposes when the criteria for using this method are met. Fair value standards also require the Communities to classify these financial instruments into a three-level hierarchy, based on the priority of inputs to the valuation technique or in accordance with net asset value practical expedient rules, which allow for either Level 2 or Level 3 depending on lock up and notice periods associated with the underlying funds.

Fair Value Measurements. Fair Values – Recurring (1) NGL prices used in the valuation are generally at the lower end of the range in the early years and increase over time. (2) Natural gas prices used in the valuations are generally at the lower end of the range in the early years and increase over time. (3) The producer counterparty to the embedded derivative has the option to renew the gas purchase agreement and the related keep-whole processing agreement for two successive five-year terms after 2022. The embedded gas purchase agreement cannot be renewed without the renewal of the related keep-whole processing agreement. Due to the significant number of years until the renewal options are exercisable and the high level of uncertainty regarding the counterparty’s future business strategy, the future commodity price environment, and the future competitive environment for midstream services in the Southern Appalachian region, management determined that a 50 percent probability of renewal for the first five-year term and 75 percent for the second five-year term are appropriate assumptions. Included in this assumption is a further extension of management’s estimates of future frac spreads through 2032.

Fair Value Measurements. Effective January 1, 2008, we adopted FASB ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, which among other things, requires enhanced disclosures about assets and liabilities carried at fair value. Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. FASB ASC 820 describes three approaches to measuring the fair value of assets and liabilities: the market approach, the income approach and the cost approach, each of which include multiple valuation techniques. The market approach uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities. The income approach uses valuation techniques to measure fair value by converting future amounts, such as cash flows or earnings, into a single present value amount using current market expectations about those future amounts. The cost approach is based on the amount that would currently be required to replace the service capacity of an asset. FASB ASC 820 does not prescribe which valuation technique should be used when measuring fair value and does not prioritize among techniques. FASB ASC 820 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used in applying the various valuation techniques. Inputs broadly refer to the assumptions that market participants use to make pricing decisions, including assumptions about risk. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurement) and lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The three levels of fair value hierarchy are as follows: Level 1— Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities as of the reporting date. As of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, we have no Level 1 measurements. Level 2— Pricing inputs are other than quoted prices in active markets included in either Level 1, which are directly or indirectly observable as of the reporting date. Level 2 includes those financial instruments that are valued using models or other valuation methodologies. These models are primarily industry-standard models that consider various assumptions, including quoted forward prices for commodities, time value, volatility factors, and current market and contractual prices for the underlying instruments, as well as other rel...

Fair Value Measurements. The Company determines the fair values of its financial instruments based on the requirements established in ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements, which provides a framework for measuring fair value in accordance with

Fair Value Measurements. Retirement benefit plans % of % of % of % of

Fair Value Measurements. In September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures. ASC 820 clarifies the definition of fair value, describes methods used to appropriately measure fair value, and expands fair value disclosure requirements, but does not change existing guidance as to whether or not an instrument is carried at fair value. ASC 820 establishes a three-tier fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair values. These tiers include:

Fair Value Measurements. Management is responsible for the determination of the fair value of our financial assets and financial liabilities and the supporting methodologies and assumptions. We employ widely accepted internal valuation models or utilize third-party valuation service providers to gather, analyze, and interpret market information and derive fair values based upon relevant methodologies and assumptions for individual instruments or pools of finance receivables. When our valuation service providers are unable to obtain sufficient market observable information upon which to estimate the fair value for a particular security, we determine fair value either by requesting brokers who are knowledgeable about these securities to provide a quote, which is generally non-binding, or by employing widely accepted internal valuation models. Our valuation process typically requires obtaining data about market transactions and other key valuation model inputs from internal or external sources and, through the use of widely accepted valuation models, provides a single fair value measurement for individual securities or pools of finance receivables. The inputs used in this process include, but are not limited to, market prices from recently completed transactions and transactions of comparable securities, interest rate yield curves, credit spreads, bid-ask spreads, currency rates, and other market-observable information as of the measurement date as well as the specific attributes of the security being valued, including its term, interest rate, credit rating, industry sector, and other issue or issuer-specific information. When market transactions or other market observable data is limited, the extent to which judgment is applied in determining fair value is greatly increased. We assess the reasonableness of individual security values received from our valuation service providers through various analytical techniques. As part of our internal price reviews, assets that fall outside a price change tolerance are sent to our third-party investment manager for further review. In addition, we may validate the reasonableness of fair values by comparing information obtained from our valuation service providers to other third-party valuation sources for selected securities. We measure and classify assets and liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets in a hierarchy for disclosure purposes consisting of three “Levels” based on the observability of inputs available in the market place used t...

Fair Value Measurements. In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157 “Fair Value Measurements.” SFAS No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS No. 157 does not require any new fair value measurements. In February 2008, the FASB amended SFAS No. 157 to exclude SFAS No. 13, “Accounting for Leases.” In addition, the FASB delayed the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for non-financial assets and liabilities to fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2008. The Company adopted the provisions of SFAS 157 related to its financial assets and liabilities on January 1, 2008. 54 Table of Contents SFAS 157 classifies the inputs used to measure fair value into the following hierarchy: Level 1 — Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. Level 2 — Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for similar assets or liabilities, or unadjusted quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, or inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability. Level 3 — Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability. The Company has one asset that is within the provisions of SFAS 157, the interest rate swap derivative asset discussed in Note 7. At December 31, 2008, the fair value of this asset is $2,991 measured at Level 2 fair value on a recurring basis.

Fair Value Measurements. We measure certain financial assets and liabilities at fair value on a recurring basis. Fair value measurements involve significant judgment and estimation, particularly when observable inputs are limited or not available. Management utilizes valuation techniques such as discounted cash flow models, market comparables, and third-party appraisals to determine fair values.