Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Related Matters (Policies)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2016
Organization, Consolidation and Presentation of Financial Statements [Abstract]
Basis of Accounting	The accompanying consolidated financial statements of Rice Energy Operating LLC (“Rice Energy Operating,” the “Company,” “we,” “our,” and “us”) have been prepared by the Company’s management in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”) for financial information and applicable rules and regulations promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). The Company is a subsidiary of Rice Energy Inc. (“Rice Energy”) (NYSE: RICE) and certain administrative and contractual arrangements are managed by Rice Energy and the associated benefits and costs are reflected in our results.
Organization, Operations, Principles of Consolidation, and Noncontrolling Interest	Noncontrolling Interest Noncontrolling interest represents third-party equity ownership of the Partnership and is presented as a component of equity in the consolidated balance sheets. In the consolidated statements of operations, noncontrolling interest reflects the allocation of earnings to third parties. As of December 31, 2016, GP Holdings owned a 28% equity interest in the Partnership. The financial results of the Partnership are consolidated and, after giving effect to the EIG ownership in GP Holdings, the approximate 74% interest in the Partnership is reflected as noncontrolling interest in the consolidated financial statements. See Note 7 for further discussion of noncontrolling interest related to the Partnership. In addition, as of December 31, 2016, the Company consolidates Strike Force Midstream, and records noncontrolling interest related to the ownership interests of Strike Force Midstream attributable to Gulfport Midstream. See Note 15 for further discussion of noncontrolling interest related to Strike Force Midstream. The consolidated financial statements of the Company include the accounts of its wholly-owned subsidiaries. Rice Midstream GP Holdings LP, an indirect subsidiary of the Company (“GP Holdings”), owns a 28% interest in Rice Midstream Partners LP, a subsidiary of the Company, (“RMP” or the “Partnership”). The financial results of the Partnership are consolidated and, after giving effect to EIG’s ownership in GP Holdings, the approximate 74% interest in the Partnership is reflected as noncontrolling interest in the consolidated financial statements. In addition, the Company consolidates Strike Force Midstream LLC (“Strike Force Midstream”), a subsidiary of Midstream Holdings and Gulfport Midstream Holdings LLC (“Gulfport Midstream”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Gulfport Energy Corporation (“Gulfport”), and records a noncontrolling interest related to the ownership interests of Strike Force Midstream attributable to Gulfport Midstream. See Note 15 for further discussion of noncontrolling interest related to Strike Force Midstream. All intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
Nature of Business and Segment Reporting	Segment Reporting Business segments are components of the Company for which separate financial information is produced internally and are subject to evaluation by the Company’s chief operating decision maker in deciding how to allocate resources. The Company reports its operations in three segments: (i) the Exploration and Production segment, (ii) the Rice Midstream Holdings segment and (iii) the Rice Midstream Partners segment. Operating segments are evaluated for their contribution to the Company’s combined results based on operating income. All of the Company’s operating revenues, income from operations and assets are located in the United States. See Note 8 for additional information regarding segment reporting. Nature of Business The Company is an independent natural gas and oil company focused on the acquisition, exploration and development of natural gas, oil and NGL properties in the Appalachian Basin. The Company operates in three business segments, which are managed separately in determining the allocation of the Company’s resources. The Company’s three reporting segments are as follows: Exploration and Production. This segment is engaged in the acquisition, exploration and development of natural gas. Rice Midstream Holdings. This segment is engaged in the gathering and compression of natural gas production in Belmont and Monroe Counties, Ohio. Rice Midstream Partners. This segment is engaged in the gathering and compression of natural gas, oil and NGL production in Washington and Greene Counties, Pennsylvania, and in the provision of water services to support the well completion services of us and third parties in Washington and Greene Counties, Pennsylvania and Belmont County, Ohio. As a result of changes to the Company’s operations in the first quarter of 2016, management evaluated how the Company is organized and operates and identified the Exploration and Production segment, the Rice Midstream Holdings segment and the Rice Midstream Partners segment as separate operating segments. The segments represent components of the Company that engage in activities (a) from which revenue is earned and expenses are incurred; (b) whose operating results are regularly reviewed by the Chief Operating Decision Maker, who makes decisions about resources to be allocated to the segment and (c) for which discrete financial information is available. As a result of the changes to the Company’s operating segments, all prior period information has been revised to reflect the new operating segment structure. Operating segments are evaluated on their contribution to the Company’s consolidated results based on operating income. Other income and expenses, interest and income taxes are managed on a consolidated basis.
Use of Estimates	Use of Estimates The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the dates of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could differ from those estimates and changes in these estimates are recorded when known.
Push-Down Accounting	Push-Down Accounting The Company is a direct subsidiary of Rice Energy and has no employees. As such, various employee-related costs such as payroll, stock compensation and incentive unit distributions provided by Rice Energy for the benefit of the Company have been fully allocated to the Company and its subsidiaries. General and administrative expenses incurred by Rice Energy on behalf of the Company have been reflected in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. Additionally, Rice Energy has issued and completed public offerings and the related proceeds are generally contributed to the Company to be utilized to fund capital expenditures and working capital requirements. Rice Energy has also entered certain contracts, such as hedging agreements and debt agreements for the benefit of the Company and as such, the corresponding costs and benefits have been pushed down from Rice Energy to the Company. Amounts associated with the items pushed down from Rice Energy have been recorded within the current and long-term receivable from parent and current and long-term payable to parent captions within the consolidated balance sheet.
Revenue Recognition	Revenue Recognition Sales of natural gas, NGLs and oil are recognized when the products have been delivered to a custody transfer point, persuasive evidence of a sales arrangement exists, the rights and responsibility of ownership pass to the purchaser upon delivery, collection of revenue from the sale is reasonably assured, and the sales price is fixed or determinable. Natural gas is sold by the Company under contracts with the Company’s natural gas marketers. Pricing provisions are generally tied to the Platts Gas Daily market prices. Some transportation costs incurred by the Company are marketed for resale and are not incurred to transport gas produced by the Company’s Exploration and Production segment. These transportation costs are reflected as a deduction from the related firm transportation sales revenue at the time the transportation is provided to the customer. Revenue from the gathering and compression of natural gas and water services is recognized in the month in which the service is provided.
Cash	Cash The Company maintains cash at financial institutions which may at times exceed federally insured amounts. The Company has no accounts that are considered cash equivalents.
Accounts Receivable	Accounts Receivable Accounts receivable are primarily from the Company’s joint interest partners and natural gas marketers. The Company extends credit to parties in the normal course of business based upon management’s assessment of their creditworthiness. A valuation allowance is provided for those accounts for which collection is estimated as doubtful; uncollectible accounts are written off and charged against the allowance. In estimating the allowance, management considers, among other things, how recently and how frequently payments have been received and the financial position of the party.
Property, Plant and Equipment	Property, Plant and Equipment Natural gas properties The Company uses the successful efforts method of accounting for oil and gas producing activities. Costs to acquire mineral interests in oil and gas properties are capitalized as unproved properties, whereas costs to drill and equip exploratory wells that result in proved reserves are capitalized as proved properties. Costs to drill exploratory wells that do not identify proved reserves as well as geological and geophysical costs and costs of carrying and retaining unproved properties are expensed. Capitalized costs of producing oil and gas properties and support equipment directly related to such properties, after considering estimated residual salvage values, are depreciated and depleted by the units of production method. Capitalized costs of unproved properties are evaluated at least annually for recoverability on a prospective basis. This evaluation includes consideration of current economic conditions, changes in development plans or business strategy, expected lease expirations and historical experience. If it is determined that it is unlikely for an unproved property to yield proved reserves prior to lease expiration, an impairment of the respective unproved property is recognized in the period in which that determination is made. For the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company recognized $20.9 million of impairment expense in the consolidated statement of operations related to lease expirations on non-core assets. In addition, for the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company recognized $13.5 million of leasehold write-offs included in exploration expense in the consolidated statement of operations. For the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company recognized $7.3 million of impairment expense in the consolidated statement of operations, primarily the result of changes in the Company’s development plans and lease expirations. Upon the sale of an entire interest in an unproved property for cash, a gain or loss on the sale is recognized, taking into consideration the amount of any recorded impairment if the property had been assessed individually. If a partial interest in an unproved property is sold, the amount received is treated as a reduction of the cost of the interest retained unless the proceeds received are in excess of the cost basis which would result in gain on sale. No significant gains or losses were realized from the sale of unproved properties in the periods presented. Unproved oil and gas properties had a net book value of $2,001.8 million and $1,050.0 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The carrying values of the Company’s proved properties are reviewed periodically when events or circumstances indicate that the remaining carrying amount may not be recoverable. This evaluation is performed at the lowest levels for which there are identifiable cash flows that are largely independent of other groups of assets by comparing estimated undiscounted cash flows to the carrying value and including risk-adjusted probable and possible reserves, if deemed reasonable. Key assumptions utilized in determining the estimated undiscounted future cash flows are generally consistent with assumptions used in the Company’s budgeting and forecasting processes. If the carrying value of proved properties exceeds the estimated undiscounted future cash flows, they are written down to fair value. Fair value of proved properties is estimated by discounting the estimated future cash flows using discount rates and consideration of expected assumptions that would be used by a market participant. During 2016, the Company performed a recoverability test on its proved properties. No impairment was recorded as a result of the recoverability test. Due to the significant decline in commodity prices in 2015, there were indications that the carrying values of certain proved properties may not be fully recoverable when compared to their fair value. The fair value was determined using an income approach based on estimated future production, future commodity prices adjusted for firm transportation and basis differentials, future operating and capital costs, and an assumed discount rate of 12%. As the assumptions used to calculate the estimated fair value were significant unobservable inputs, the valuation of the proved properties was considered to be a Level 3 fair value measurement. The Company determined that the carrying value of Upper Devonian proved properties was not fully recoverable and as a result, for the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company recognized $10.9 million of impairment expense in the consolidated statement of operations to write-down such proved properties to fair value of $7.3 million. For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company did not recognize impairment charges for proved or unproved properties. Midstream properties Midstream property and equipment is recorded at cost and is being depreciated over estimated useful lives on a straight-line basis. Gathering pipelines and compressor stations are depreciated over a useful life of 60 years. Water pipelines, pumping stations and impoundment facilities are depreciated over a useful life of 10 to 15 years. The Company evaluates its long-lived assets for impairment when events and circumstances indicate, in management’s judgment, that the carrying value of such assets may not be recoverable. Long-lived assets assessed for impairment are grouped at the lowest level for which identifiable cash flows are largely independent of the cash flows for other assets and liabilities. Impairment exists when the carrying amount of an asset exceeds estimates of the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the asset. When alternative courses of action to recover the carrying amount of a long-lived asset are under consideration, estimates of future undiscounted cash flows take into account possible outcomes and probabilities of their occurrence. If the carrying amount of the long-lived asset is not recoverable, based on the estimated future undiscounted cash flows, the impairment loss is measured as the excess of the asset’s carrying amount over its estimated fair value, such that the asset’s carrying amount is adjusted to its estimated fair value with an offsetting charge to impairment expense. Fair value represents the estimated price between market participants to sell an asset in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset, based on assumptions a market participant would make. When warranted, management assesses the fair value of long-lived assets using commonly accepted techniques and may use more than one source in making such assessments. Sources used to determine fair value include, but are not limited to, recent third-party comparable sales, internally developed discounted cash flow analyses and analyses from outside advisors. Significant changes, such as changes in contract rates or terms, the condition of an asset, or management’s intent to utilize the asset, generally require management to reassess the cash flows related to long-lived assets. A reduction of carrying value of fixed assets would represent a Level 3 fair value measure. No impairments for such assets have recorded for the years presented herein. During the fourth quarter of 2016, the Company recorded a $20.3 million impairment within the Rice Midstream Holdings segment related to pipeline assets that were decommissioned.
Interest	Interest The Company capitalizes interest on expenditures for significant exploration and development and midstream projects while activities are in progress to bring the assets to their intended use. Upon completion of construction of the asset, the associated capitalized interest costs are included within our asset base and depleted accordingly.
Goodwill	Goodwill Goodwill is the cost of an acquisition less the fair value of the identifiable net assets of the acquired business. The Company evaluates goodwill for impairment at least annually during the fourth quarter, or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. A reporting unit is an operating segment or a component of an operating segment for which discrete financial information is available and reviewed by management on a regular basis. In 2014, $39.1 million of goodwill was allocated to the Rice Midstream Partners segment as a result of the acquisition of the remaining 50% interest in Alpha Natural Resources, Inc. in its Marcellus joint venture. In 2016, as a result of the Vantage Acquisition, $384.5 million and $455.4 million of goodwill was allocated to the Exploration and Production segment and the Rice Midstream Partners segment, respectively. The Company may first consider qualitative factors to assess whether there are indicators that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit may not exceed its carrying amount. To the extent that such indicators exist, the Company will complete the two-step goodwill impairment test. The Company may also perform the two-step goodwill impairment test at its discretion without performing the qualitative assessment. The first step compares the fair value of a reporting unit to its carrying value. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step is required which compares the implied fair value of the goodwill of a reporting unit to its carrying value. If the carrying value of the goodwill of a reporting unit exceeds its implied fair value, the difference is recognized as an impairment charge. The Company uses a combination of an income and market approach to estimate the fair value of a reporting unit. The fair value estimation process requires considerable judgment and determining the fair value is sensitive to changes in assumptions impacting management’s estimates of future financial results. Although the Company believes the estimates and assumptions used in estimating the fair value are reasonable and appropriate, different assumptions and estimates could materially impact the calculated fair value. Additionally, future results could differ from our current estimates and assumptions. The Company’s fourth quarter 2016 annual test included the assessment of qualitative factors to determine whether it was more likely than not that the fair value of each reporting unit is less than its carrying value. The qualitative assessment encompassed a review of events and circumstances specific to the reporting units with goodwill as well as circumstances specific to the entity as a whole. The Company’s qualitative assessment considered, among other things, factors such as macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, including changes in Rice Energy’s stock price and market multiples, projected financial performance, cost factors, changes in carrying values and other relevant factors. In considering the totality of the qualitative factors assessed, based on the weight of evidence, circumstances did not exist that would indicate it was more likely than not that goodwill was impaired. Accordingly, the Company did not perform a two-step quantitative analysis and no impairment was recorded. For the year ended December 31, 2015, given the overall market conditions, the Company elected the option to default immediately to the first step of the annual goodwill impairment test. The results of the first step indicated that the carrying value of the Exploration and Production reporting unit exceeded its fair value. Due to the result of step one of the annual goodwill impairment test for the Exploration and Production reporting unit, the Company performed the second step of the goodwill impairment analysis comparing the implied fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill to its carrying amount and determined that such goodwill was fully impaired. As a result, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $294.9 million to eliminate the carrying value of goodwill of the Exploration and Production reporting unit at December 31, 2015. Management considered the negative industry and market trends, including the decline in commodity prices and overall market performance of the Company’s peers and the Company, to be the primary reasons of impairment. No impairment was recorded for the year ended December 31, 2014.
Intangible Assets	Intangible Assets Intangible assets are recorded under the acquisition method of accounting at their estimated fair values at the acquisition date. Fair value is calculated as the present value of estimated future cash flows using a risk-adjusted discount rate. The Company’s intangible assets are comprised of customer contracts acquired in our April 2014 acquisition of certain gas gathering assets in eastern Washington and Greene Counties, Pennsylvania. The customer contracts acquired had initial contract terms of 10 years with five and one-year renewal options. The Company calculates amortization of intangible assets using the straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the intangible assets, or 30 years.
Deferred Financing Costs	Deferred Financing Costs Deferred financing costs are amortized on a straight-line basis, which approximates the interest method, over the term of the related agreement.
Asset Retirement Obligations	Asset Retirement Obligations The Company records the fair value of a legal liability for an asset retirement obligation in the period in which it is incurred. For oil and gas properties, this is the period in which an oil or gas well is acquired or drilled. The Company’s retirement obligations relate to the abandonment of oil and gas producing facilities and include costs to reclaim drilling sites and dismantle and reclaim or dispose of water services assets, wells and related structures. Estimates are based on historical experience in plugging and abandoning wells and estimated remaining lives of those wells based on reserve estimates. While components within our gathering systems will be replaced in the ordinary course of business, these systems will continue to exist indefinitely. Therefore, the timing of asset retirement obligations of our gathering systems is uncertain and a reasonable estimate cannot be established due to the lack of sufficient information. When a new liability is recorded, the Company capitalizes the costs of the liability by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. The liability is accreted to its present value each period and the capitalized cost is depreciated over the units of production basis.
Income Taxes	Income Taxes Prior to the change in tax status to a partnership on October 19, 2016, the Company’s income was reported as part of Rice Energy’s consolidated federal tax return and the Company was taxed as a corporation under the Internal Revenue Code, subject to federal income tax at a statutory rate of 35%. During the period of time the Company was taxed as a corporation it accumulated approximately $272.0 million in net deferred tax liabilities. The Company has not reported any income tax benefit or expense for periods subsequent to October 19, 2016 because, as a partnership, the Company is not subject to federal income tax. In addition, the Company wrote off its entire net deferred tax liabilities balance by recording a deferred tax benefit of approximately $272.0 million. In addition, the Company has not reported any income tax benefit or expense for periods prior to the consummation of Rice Energy’s initial public offering (“IPO”) in January 2014 because Rice Drilling B LLC (“Rice Drilling B”), Rice Energy’s accounting predecessor, is a limited liability company that was not and currently is not subject to federal income tax. The reorganization of the Company’s business into a corporation in connection with the closing of Rice Energy’s IPO required the recognition of a deferred tax asset or liability for the initial temporary differences at the time of the IPO. The resulting deferred tax liability of approximately $162.3 million was recorded in capital at the date of the completion of Rice Energy’s IPO as it represents a transaction among shareholders. During the period from January 29, 2014 through October 19, 2016, the following tax accounting policies and estimates were applied: The two-step approach was used for recognizing and measuring tax benefits taken or expected to be taken in a tax return and disclosures regarding uncertainties in income tax positions. Only tax positions that meet the more likely than not recognition threshold are recognized. Based on management’s analysis, the Company did not have any uncertain tax positions as of December 31, 2016. Income taxes were accounted for under the asset and liability method, which requires recognition of deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of events that have been included in the financial statements. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the differences between the financial statements and tax basis of assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates in effect for the year in which differences are expected to be recovered or settled pursuant to the provisions of ASC 740-Income Taxes. The effect of a change in tax rates on deferred tax assets and liabilities is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. The Company will record a valuation allowance if it is deemed more likely than not that all or a portion of its deferred income tax assets will not be realized. In addition, income tax rules and regulations are subject to interpretation and the application of those rules and regulations requires judgment by us and may be challenged by the taxation authorities.
Common Control Transaction	On September 26, 2016, Rice Energy entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement (the “Midstream Purchase Agreement”) by and between Rice Energy and the Partnership. Pursuant to the terms of the Midstream Purchase Agreement, as amended, immediately following the close of the Vantage Acquisition on October 19, 2016, the Partnership acquired from Rice Energy all of the outstanding membership interests of Vantage Energy II Access, LLC and Vista Gathering, LLC (collectively, the “Vantage Midstream Entities”). The Partnership’s acquisition of the Vantage Midstream Entities from Rice Energy is accounted for as a combination of entities under common control at historical cost.
Derivative Instruments	The Company recognizes all derivative instruments as either assets or liabilities at fair value per the FASB ASC 815. The Company’s derivative commodity instruments have not been designated as hedges for accounting purposes; therefore, all gains and losses are recognized currently in earnings The Company and Rice Energy use derivative commodity instruments that are placed with major financial institutions whose creditworthiness is regularly monitored. Substantially all of the Company’s and Rice Energy’s derivative counterparties share in the Senior Secured Revolving Credit Facility collateral. The Company and Rice Energy have entered into various derivative contracts to manage price risk and to achieve more predictable cash flows. As a result of the Company’s and Rice Energy’s hedging activities, the Company may realize prices that are greater or less than the market prices that it would have received otherwise.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments	The Company determines the fair value of its financial instruments, which are comprised primarily of derivative instruments, on a recurring basis as these instruments are required to be recorded at fair value for each reporting period. Certain amounts in the Company’s financial statements were measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis including discounts associated with long-term debt. Fair value is based on quoted market prices, where available. If quoted market prices are not available, fair value is based upon models that use as inputs market-based parameters, including but not limited to forward curves, discount rates, broker quotes, volatilities, and nonperformance risk. The Company has categorized its fair value measurements into a three-level fair value hierarchy, based on the priority of the inputs to the valuation technique. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets and liabilities (Level 1) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). The Company’s fair value measurements relating to derivative instruments are included in Level 2. Since the adoption of fair value accounting, the Company has not made any changes to its classification of financial instruments in each category. Items included in Level 3 are valued using internal models that use significant unobservable inputs. Items included in Level 2 are valued using management’s best estimate of fair value corroborated by third-party quotes. The carrying value of cash equivalents, amounts receivable and payable to parent, accounts receivable and accounts payable approximate fair value due to the short maturity of the instruments. The Company’s non-financial assets, such as property, plant and equipment, goodwill and intangible assets are recorded at fair value upon business combination and are remeasured at fair value only if an impairment charge is recognized. To the extent necessary, the Company applies unobservable inputs and management judgment due to the absence of quoted market prices (Level 3) to the valuation methodologies for these non-financial assets. The estimated fair value and gross carrying amount of long-term debt as reported on the consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2016 and 2015 is shown in the table below (refer to Note 4 for details relating to the debt instruments). The fair value was estimated using Level 2 inputs based on rates reflective of the remaining maturity as well as the Company’s financial position.
Litigation	From time to time the Company is party to various legal and/or regulatory proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. While the ultimate outcome and impact to the Company cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company believes that all such matters are without merit and involve amounts which, if resolved unfavorably, either individually or in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. When it is determined that a loss is probable of occurring and is reasonably estimable, the Company accrues an undiscounted liability for such contingencies based on its best estimate using information available at the time. The Company discloses contingencies where an adverse outcome may be material, or in the judgment of management, the matter should otherwise be disclosed.
Variable Interest Entities	Pursuant to an evaluation performed upon adoption of ASU 2015-02, “Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis,” the Company concluded that the Partnership, GP Holdings, and Strike Force Midstream each meet the criteria for variable interest entity (“VIE”) classification, as described in further detail below. Rice Midstream Partners LP The Company evaluated the Partnership for consolidation and determined the Partnership to be a VIE. The Company determined that the primary beneficiary of the Partnership is GP Holdings. As of December 31, 2016, Midstream Holdings held a significant indirect interest in the Partnership through (i) its ownership of a 91.75% limited liability partnership interest in GP Holdings, which owned an approximate 28% limited partner interest in the Partnership, and (ii) through ownership of its wholly-owned subsidiary Rice Midstream Management LLC (the “GP”), which holds all of the substantive voting and participating rights in the Partnership. As a result, through this ownership, the Company holds the power to direct the activities of the Partnership that most significantly impact the Partnership’s economic performance and the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits from the Partnership that could potentially be significant to the Partnership. As of December 31, 2016, the Company consolidated the Partnership, recording noncontrolling interest related to the net income of the Partnership attributable to its public unitholders. Rice Midstream GP Holdings LP The Company evaluated GP Holdings for consolidation and determined GP Holdings to be a VIE. The Company determined that the primary beneficiary of GP Holdings is Midstream Holdings. Midstream Holdings holds a 91.75% limited partnership interest in GP Holdings and GP Management holds all of the substantive voting and participating rights to direct the activities of GP Holdings. As a result, through this ownership, the Company holds the power to direct the activities of GP Holdings that most significantly impact GP Holdings’ economic performance and the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits from GP Holdings that could potentially be significant to GP Holdings. As of December 31, 2016, the Company consolidates GP Holdings, recording noncontrolling interest related to the ownership interests of GP Holdings attributable to the Investors. GP Holdings has no significant assets, liabilities or operations other than consolidation of the Partnership. Strike Force Midstream Holdings LLC On February 1, 2016, Strike Force Midstream Holdings LLC (“Strike Force Holdings”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Midstream Holdings, and Gulfport Midstream Holdings entered into an Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement (the “Strike Force LLC Agreement”) of Strike Force Midstream to engage in the natural gas midstream business in approximately 319,000 acres in Belmont and Monroe Counties, Ohio. Under the terms of the Strike Force LLC Agreement, Strike Force Holdings made an initial contribution to Strike Force Midstream of certain pipelines, facilities and rights of way and cash in the amount of $41.0 million in exchange for a 75% membership interest in Strike Force Midstream. Gulfport Midstream made an initial contribution of a gathering system and related assets in exchange for a 25% membership interest in Strike Force Midstream. The assets contributed by Gulfport Midstream have a fair value of $22.5 million, which was determined using Level 3 valuation inputs included in the discounted cash flow method within the income approach. The income approach includes estimates and assumptions related to future throughput volumes, operating costs, capital spending and changes in working capital. Estimating the fair value of these assets required judgment and determining the fair value is sensitive to changes in assumptions. Additionally, on February 1, 2016, Strike Force Midstream and Strike Force Holdings entered into a services agreement whereby Strike Force Holdings will provide all of the services necessary to operate, manage and maintain Strike Force Midstream. The Company evaluated Strike Force Midstream for consolidation and determined Strike Force Midstream to be a VIE. Strike Force Holdings was determined to be the primary beneficiary as a result of its power to direct the activities of Strike Force Midstream that most significantly impact Strike Force Midstream’s economic performance and the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits through its 75% membership interest in Strike Force Midstream. As of December 31, 2016, the Company consolidates Strike Force Midstream, recording noncontrolling interest related to the ownership interests of Strike Force Midstream attributable to Gulfport Midstream.
New Accounting Pronouncements	New Accounting Pronouncements In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606).” The FASB created Topic 606 which supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in Topic 605, “Revenue Recognition,” and most industry-specific guidance throughout the Industry Topics of the Codification. ASU 2014-09 will enhance comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities, industries and capital markets compared to existing guidance. Additionally, ASU 2014-09 will reduce the number of requirements which an entity must consider in recognizing revenue, as this update will replace multiple locations for guidance. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) - Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing.” In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-11, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815) – Rescission of SEC Guidance Because of Accounting Standards Updates 2014-09 and 2014-16 Pursuant to Staff Announcements at the March 3, 2016 EITF Meeting” and ASU 2016-12, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) – Narrow Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients.” These updates do not change the core principle of the guidance in Topic 606 (as amended by ASU 2014-09), but rather provide further guidance with respect to the implementation of ASU 2014-09. The effective date for ASU 2016-10, 2016-11, 2016-12 and ASU 2014-09, as amended by ASU 2015-14, is for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those years. In preparation for the adoption of the new standard in the fiscal year beginning January 2018, the Company has obtained representative samples of contracts and other forms of agreements with its customers and are evaluating the provisions contained therein in light of the five-step model specified by the new guidance. That five-step model includes: (1) determination of whether a contract-an agreement between two or more parties that creates legally enforceable rights and obligations-exists; (2) identification of the performance obligations in the contract; (3) determination of the transaction price; (4) allocation of the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract; and (5) recognition of revenue when (or as) the performance obligation is satisfied. The Company anticipates adopting the standard using the modified retrospective approach at adoption. The Company will be evaluating individual customer contracts within each of our business segments as we continue to evaluate the impact of the adoption of this standard. In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, “Disclosures of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern,” which specifies the responsibility an entity’s management has to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. The new guidance is effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company has adopted ASU 2014-15 in the fourth quarter of 2016 and has determined that substantial doubt does not exist about its ability to continue as a going concern. In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU, 2015-03, “Interest—Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplification of Debt Issuance Costs.” ASU 2015-03 was issued to simplify the presentation of debt issuance costs by requiring debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of the related debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. ASU 2015-03 is effective for periods beginning after December 15, 2015. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-15, “Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements.” ASU 2015-15 clarifies the guidance in ASU 2015-03 regarding presentation and subsequent measurement of debt issuance costs related to line-of-credit arrangements. The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) staff announced they would not object to an entity deferring and presenting debt issuance costs as an asset and subsequently amortizing the deferred debt issuance costs ratably over the term of the line-of-credit arrangement, regardless of whether there are any outstanding borrowings on the line-of-credit arrangement. The Company adopted ASU 2015-03 in the first quarter of 2016 and presents debt issuance costs associated with its Notes as a deduction from the carrying amount of the Notes. The Company also adopted ASU 2015-15 in the first quarter and presents debt issuance costs associated with the Company’s revolving credit facilities as deferred financing costs, net in its consolidated balance sheets. The Company has retrospectively applied the guidance in ASU 2015-03 and ASU 2015-15, which resulted in the reclassification of $21.4 million of deferred financing costs related to the Notes from deferred financing costs, net, to long-term debt on the consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2015. In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842).” ASU 2016-02 requires, among other things, that lessees recognize the following for all leases (with the exception of short-term leases) at the commencement date: (i) a lease liability, which is a lessee’s obligation to make lease payments arising from a lease, measured on a discounted basis; and (ii) a right-of-use asset, which is an asset that represents the lessee’s right to use, or control the use of, a specified asset for the lease term. The new guidance is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. The amendments should be applied at the beginning of the earliest period presented using a modified retrospective approach with earlier application permitted as of the beginning of an interim or annual reporting period. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the new guidance on its consolidated financial statements. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting.” ASU 2016-09 affects entities that issue share-based payment awards to their employees. ASU 2016-09 is designed to simplify several aspects of accounting for share-based payment award transactions, which include: (i) income tax consequences, (ii) classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, (iii) classification on the statement of cash flows and (iv) forfeiture rate calculations. The updated guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption of the update is permitted. The Company plans to adopt ASU 2016-09 in the first quarter of 2017. The Company does not anticipate that this guidance will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments.” ASU 2016-15 clarifies and provides specific guidance on eight cash flow classification issues that are not currently addressed by current GAAP and thereby reduce the current diversity in practice. ASU 2016-15 is effective for public business entities for annual periods, including interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017, with early application permitted. The Company does not anticipate that this guidance will have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements. In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, “Intangibles — Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment.” This ASU eliminates Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test which previously required measurement of any goodwill impairment loss by comparing the implied fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. Under the new standard, an entity should perform its annual, or interim, goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount and recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value, without exceeding the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. The provisions of this ASU are effective for fiscal years, and any interim goodwill impairment tests within those fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted for interim or annual goodwill impairment tests performed on testing dates after January 1, 2017. A reporting entity should apply the amendment on a prospective basis. The Company plans to adopt ASU 2017-04 in the first quarter of 2017.

Rice Energy Operating LLC 10-K