On November 7, 2016, the unsecured creditors’ committee in the SunEdison Bankruptcy case filed a motion with the bankruptcy court seeking standing to assert against the Company, on behalf of SunEdison, avoidance claims arising from intercompany transactions between the Company and SunEdison. The Company expects to vigorously contest this standing motion and, if standing is granted, the underlying avoidance claims. Furthermore, the Company initiated settlement discussions with SunEdison to resolve, among other issues, intercompany claims and defenses between the Company and SunEdison. While these settlement discussions have started, there can be no guaranty that a settlement will be reached, the Company believes that a successful settlement could facilitate the Company’s exploration of strategic alternatives. Any settlement would be subject to the approval of the bankruptcy court in the SunEdison Bankruptcy.
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might be necessary should the Company be unable to continue as a going concern.
Our sponsor, SunEdison, Inc., and certain of its affiliates filed for bankruptcy on April 21, 2016. We believe that we have observed formalities and operating procedures to maintain our separate existence, that our assets and liabilities can be readily identified as distinct from those of SunEdison and that we do not rely substantially on SunEdison for funding or liquidity and will have sufficient liquidity to support our ongoing operations. Our contingency planning with respect to the SunEdison Bankruptcy has included and will include, among other things, establishing stand-alone information technology, accounting and other critical systems and infrastructure, establishing separate human resources systems and employee retention efforts, retaining replacement operation and maintenance and asset management services for our power plants from other providers and the pursuit of strategic alternatives.
However, there is a risk that an interested party in the SunEdison Bankruptcy could request that the assets and liabilities of the Company be substantively consolidated with SunEdison and that the Company and/or its assets and liabilities be included in the SunEdison Bankruptcy. While it has not been requested to date and we believe there is no basis for substantive consolidation in our circumstances, we cannot assure you that substantive consolidation will not be requested in the future or that the bankruptcy court would not consider it. Substantive consolidation is an equitable remedy in bankruptcy that results in the pooling of assets and liabilities of the debtor and one or more of its affiliates solely for purposes of the bankruptcy case, including for purposes of distributions to creditors and voting on and treatment under a reorganization plan. Bankruptcy courts have broad equitable powers, and as a result, outcomes in bankruptcy proceedings are inherently difficult to predict.
To the extent the bankruptcy court were to determine that substantive consolidation was appropriate under the Company's facts and circumstances, the assets and liabilities of the Company could be made available to help satisfy the debt or contractual obligations of SunEdison.
There have also been covenant defaults under certain of our project level financing arrangements, mainly because of delays in the delivery of project level audited financial statements and the delay in the filing of the Company’s audited annual financial statements for 2015 on Form 10-K. In addition, in a number of cases the SunEdison Bankruptcy resulted in defaults because SunEdison Debtors have been serving as operation and maintenance and asset management services providers or as guarantors under relevant contracts. We have been working diligently with our lenders to cure or waive instances of default, including through the completion of project level audits and the retention of replacement service providers. However, there can be no assurance that all remaining defaults will be cured or waived. All of our project level financing arrangements are on a non-recourse basis, and therefore these defaults do not directly affect the financial position of the Company. However, if the remaining defaults are not cured or waived, this would continue to restrict the ability of the relevant project companies to make distributions to us, which may affect our ability to meet certain covenants under the Company’s Revolver, or entitle certain project level lenders to demand repayment or enforce their security interests.
Additionally, covenant defaults may occur in the future under the Company’s Revolver and the indenture governing our Senior Notes in the event of further delays in the filing of our periodic reports with the SEC and potential violation of financial covenants. We have amended, or obtained waivers of, the relevant covenants in the Revolver and the indenture governing our Senior Notes to avoid any such defaults as a result of the delays, including by extending the required filing date of our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 through December 26, 2016 and, in the case of the indenture governing our Senior Notes, by extending the required filing dates of our Forms 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2016 and for the quarter ended June 30, 2016 through December 26, 2016 and early March 2017, respectively. There can be no assurance that we will be able to file our periodic reports (including our Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016 or Forms 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, June 30 and September 30, 2016 or any quarters thereafter) with the SEC within the periods currently required under our Revolver and the indenture governing our Senior Notes. The Revolver also contains financial