Yuma Energy, Inc. - Quarter Report: 2017 June (Form 10-Q)
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
☒ QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2017
☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the
transition period
from to
Commission File Number: 001-37932
Yuma Energy, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
DELAWARE
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)
|
|
|
|
94-0787340
(IRS Employer Identification No.)
|
1177 West Loop South, Suite 1825
Houston, Texas
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
|
|
77027
(Zip Code)
|
|
|
(713) 968-7000
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area
code)
|
|
|
|
|
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed
since last report)
|
|
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such
shorter period that the registrant was required to file such
reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No
☐
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically
and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive
Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405
of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to submit and post such files).
Yes ☒ No ☐
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer,
an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting
company or an emerging growth company. See the
definitions of “large accelerated filer,”
“accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting
company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Larger
accelerated filer ☐
|
Accelerated filer
☐
|
Non-accelerated
filer ☐ (Do not check if a smaller reporting
company)
|
Smaller
reporting company ☒
|
|
Emerging growth
company ☐
|
If an
emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant
has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying
with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided
pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined
in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes ☐ No ☒
At
August 14, 2017, 12,559,608 shares of the registrant’s common
stock, $0.001 par value per share, were outstanding.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
Financial
Statements (unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2017 and December 31,
2016
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the Three and Six Months Ended June
30, 2017 and 2016
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statement of Changes in Equity for the Six Months Ended June 30,
2017
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2017 and
2016
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
to the Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
Item
2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
2.
|
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
3.
|
Defaults
Upon Senior Securities
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
4.
|
Mine
Safety Disclosures
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
5.
|
Other
Information
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
6.
|
Exhibits
|
32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
33
|
1
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking
Statements
Certain
statements contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q may
contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning
of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the
“Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange
Act”). All statements other than statements of historical
facts contained in this report are forward-looking statements.
These forward-looking statements can generally be identified by the
use of words such as “may,” “will,”
“could,” “should,” “project,”
“intends,” “plans,” “pursue,”
“target,” “continue,”
“believes,” “anticipates,”
“expects,” “estimates,”
“predicts,” or “potential,” the negative of
such terms or variations thereon, or other comparable terminology.
Statements that describe our future plans, strategies, intentions,
expectations, objectives, goals or prospects are also
forward-looking statements. Actual results could differ materially
from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements. Readers
should consider carefully the risks described under the “Risk
Factors” section included in our previously filed Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, and other
disclosures contained herein and therein, which describe factors
that could cause our actual results to differ from those
anticipated in forward-looking statements, including, but not
limited to, the following factors:
●
our ability to
repay outstanding loans when due;
●
our limited
liquidity and ability to finance our exploration, acquisition and
development strategies;
●
reductions in the
borrowing base under our credit facility;
●
impacts to our
financial statements as a result of oil and natural gas property
impairment write-downs;
●
volatility and
weakness in commodity prices for oil and natural gas and the effect
of prices set or influenced by actions of the Organization of the
Petroleum Exporting Countries (“OPEC”) and other oil
and natural gas producing countries;
●
our ability to
successfully integrate acquired oil and natural gas businesses and
operations;
●
the possibility
that acquisitions and divestitures may involve unexpected costs or
delays, and that acquisitions may not achieve intended benefits and
will divert management’s time and energy, which could have an
adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or
cash flows;
●
risks in connection
with potential acquisitions and the integration of significant
acquisitions;
●
we may incur more
debt; higher levels of indebtedness make us more vulnerable to
economic downturns and adverse developments in our
business;
●
our ability to
successfully develop our inventory of undeveloped acreage in our
resource plays;
●
our oil and natural
gas assets are concentrated in a relatively small number of
properties;
●
access to adequate
gathering systems, processing facilities, transportation take-away
capacity to move our production to market and marketing outlets to
sell our production at market prices;
●
our ability to
generate sufficient cash flow from operations, borrowings or other
sources to enable us to fund our operations, satisfy our
obligations and seek to develop our undeveloped acreage
positions;
●
our ability to
replace our oil and natural gas reserves;
●
the presence or
recoverability of estimated oil and natural gas reserves and actual
future production rates and associated costs;
●
the potential for
production decline rates for our wells to be greater than we
expect;
●
our ability to
retain key members of senior management and key technical
employees;
2
●
environmental
risks;
●
drilling and
operating risks;
●
exploration and
development risks;
●
the possibility
that our industry may be subject to future regulatory or
legislative actions (including additional taxes and changes in
environmental regulations);
●
general economic
conditions, whether internationally, nationally or in the regional
and local market areas in which we do business, may be less
favorable than we expect, including the possibility that economic
conditions in the United States will worsen and that capital
markets are disrupted, which could adversely affect demand for oil
and natural gas and make it difficult to access
capital;
●
social unrest,
political instability or armed conflict in major oil and natural
gas producing regions outside the United States, such as Africa,
the Middle East, and armed conflict or acts of terrorism or
sabotage;
●
other economic,
competitive, governmental, regulatory, legislative, including
federal, state and tribal regulations and laws, geopolitical and
technological factors that may negatively impact our business,
operations or oil and natural gas prices;
●
the insurance
coverage maintained by us may not adequately cover all losses that
may be sustained in connection with our business
activities;
●
title to the
properties in which we have an interest may be impaired by title
defects;
●
management’s
ability to execute our plans to meet our goals;
●
the cost and
availability of goods and services, such as drilling rigs;
and
●
our dependency on
the skill, ability and decisions of third party operators of the
oil and natural gas properties in which we have a non-operated
working interest.
All
forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their
entirety by the cautionary statements in this section and elsewhere
in this report. Other than as required under applicable securities
laws, we do not assume a duty to update these forward-looking
statements, whether as a result of new information, subsequent
events or circumstances, changes in expectations or otherwise. You
should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking
statements. All forward-looking statements speak only as of the
date of this report or, if earlier, as of the date they were
made.
3
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item
1. Financial Statements.
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
|
June 30,
|
December 31,
|
|
2017
|
2016
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT
ASSETS:
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$543,095
|
$3,625,686
|
Accounts
receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts:
|
|
|
Trade
|
4,330,227
|
4,827,798
|
Officers
and employees
|
42,955
|
68,014
|
Other
|
1,851,776
|
1,757,337
|
Commodity
derivative instruments
|
1,506,706
|
-
|
Prepayments
|
541,965
|
1,063,418
|
Other
deferred charges
|
330,022
|
284,305
|
|
|
|
Total
current assets
|
9,146,746
|
11,626,558
|
|
|
|
OIL
AND GAS PROPERTIES (full cost method):
|
|
|
Proved
properties
|
486,055,239
|
488,723,905
|
Unproved
properties - not subject to amortization
|
5,585,387
|
3,656,989
|
|
|
|
|
491,640,626
|
492,380,894
|
Less:
accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization
|
(416,195,279)
|
(410,440,433)
|
|
|
|
Net
oil and gas properties
|
75,445,347
|
81,940,461
|
|
|
|
OTHER
PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT:
|
|
|
Land,
buildings and improvements
|
1,600,000
|
1,600,000
|
Other
property and equipment
|
2,842,140
|
7,136,530
|
|
4,442,140
|
8,736,530
|
Less:
accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
(1,329,082)
|
(5,349,145)
|
|
|
|
Net
other property and equipment
|
3,113,058
|
3,387,385
|
|
|
|
OTHER
ASSETS AND DEFERRED CHARGES:
|
|
|
Commodity
derivative instruments
|
1,081,480
|
-
|
Deposits
|
467,592
|
467,306
|
Other
noncurrent assets
|
435,810
|
517,201
|
|
|
|
Total
other assets and deferred charges
|
1,984,882
|
984,507
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
ASSETS
|
$89,690,033
|
$97,938,911
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
4
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS– CONTINUED
(Unaudited)
|
June 30,
|
December 31,
|
|
2017
|
2016
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT
LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
Current
maturities of debt
|
$86,558
|
$599,341
|
Accounts
payable, principally trade
|
10,782,653
|
11,009,631
|
Commodity
derivative instruments
|
-
|
1,340,451
|
Asset
retirement obligations
|
388,643
|
376,735
|
Other
accrued liabilities
|
2,449,304
|
2,572,680
|
|
|
|
Total
current liabilities
|
13,707,158
|
15,898,838
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM
DEBT
|
32,000,000
|
39,500,000
|
|
|
|
OTHER
NONCURRENT LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
Asset
retirement obligations
|
9,639,787
|
9,819,648
|
Commodity
derivative instruments
|
-
|
1,215,551
|
Employee
stock awards
|
30,430
|
-
|
|
|
|
Total
other noncurrent liabilities
|
9,670,217
|
11,035,199
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS
AND CONTINGENCIES (Note 14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EQUITY
|
|
|
Series
D convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
($0.001
par value, 7,000,000 authorized, 1,838,927 issued as of June 30,
2017
|
|
|
and
1,776,718 issued as of December 31, 2016, $11.07 per share
liquidation
|
|
|
preference)
|
1,839
|
1,777
|
Common
stock
|
|
|
($0.001
par value, 100 million shares authorized, 12,558,891 issued as
of
|
|
|
June
30, 2017 and 12,201,884 issued as of December 31,
2016)
|
12,559
|
12,202
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
44,958,379
|
43,877,563
|
Treasury
stock at cost (11,900 shares as of June 30, 2017 and -0- shares
as
|
|
|
of
December 31, 2016)
|
(23,270)
|
-
|
Accumulated
earnings (deficit)
|
(10,636,849)
|
(12,386,668)
|
|
|
|
Total
equity
|
34,312,658
|
31,504,874
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY
|
$89,690,033
|
$97,938,911
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
5
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
|
Three
Months Ended
June 30, |
Six
Months Ended
June 30, |
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
REVENUES:
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
of natural gas and crude oil
|
$6,554,704
|
$3,351,956
|
$13,699,128
|
$5,530,888
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
Lease
operating and production costs
|
3,059,124
|
1,091,079
|
5,720,388
|
2,077,776
|
General
and administrative – stock-based
|
|
|
|
|
compensation
|
385,097
|
1,087,471
|
436,832
|
1,284,395
|
General
and administrative – other
|
1,906,629
|
4,270,733
|
4,082,631
|
6,436,247
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
2,763,444
|
2,044,105
|
5,904,384
|
3,832,330
|
Asset
retirement obligation accretion expense
|
141,454
|
55,016
|
280,023
|
107,075
|
Impairment
of oil and gas properties
|
-
|
7,700,296
|
-
|
17,548,183
|
Bad
debt expense
|
73,513
|
12,562
|
73,513
|
15,750
|
Total
expenses
|
8,329,261
|
16,261,262
|
16,497,771
|
31,301,756
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOSS
FROM OPERATIONS
|
(1,774,557)
|
(12,909,306)
|
(2,798,643)
|
(25,770,868)
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER
INCOME (EXPENSE):
|
|
|
|
|
Net
gains (losses) from commodity derivatives
|
2,138,080
|
(745,652)
|
5,694,863
|
(289,338)
|
Interest
expense
|
(482,285)
|
(71,130)
|
(978,376)
|
(113,838)
|
Gain
(loss) on other property and equipment
|
(70,874)
|
-
|
484,768
|
-
|
Other,
net
|
5,659
|
13,465
|
42,067
|
13,465
|
Total
other income (expense)
|
1,590,580
|
(803,317)
|
5,243,322
|
(389,711)
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME
(LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES
|
(183,977)
|
(13,712,623)
|
2,444,679
|
(26,160,579)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax expense (benefit)
|
(20,581)
|
(29,371)
|
5,950
|
(26,769)
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET
INCOME (LOSS)
|
(163,396)
|
(13,683,252)
|
2,438,729
|
(26,133,810)
|
|
|
|
|
|
PREFERRED
STOCK:
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
paid in kind
|
349,300
|
325,869
|
688,910
|
646,148
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET
INCOME (LOSS) ATTRIBUTABLE TO
|
|
|
|
|
COMMON
STOCKHOLDERS
|
$(512,696)
|
$(14,009,121)
|
$1,749,819
|
$(26,779,958)
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME
(LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE:
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
$(0.04)
|
$(1.88)
|
$0.14
|
$(3.60)
|
Diluted
|
$(0.04)
|
$(1.88)
|
$0.14
|
$(3.60)
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEIGHTED
AVERAGE NUMBER OF
|
|
|
|
|
COMMON
SHARES OUTSTANDING:
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
12,235,286
|
7,442,381
|
12,223,337
|
7,448,222
|
Diluted
|
12,235,286
|
7,442,381
|
12,407,996
|
7,448,222
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
6
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
(Unaudited)
|
Preferred Stock
|
Common Stock
|
Additional Paid-in Capital
|
Treasury
Stock
|
Accumulated Deficit
|
Stockholders' Equity
|
||
|
Shares
|
Value
|
Shares
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2016
|
1,776,718
|
$1,777
|
12,201,884
|
$12,202
|
$43,877,563
|
$-
|
$(12,386,668)
|
$31,504,874
|
Net
income
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
2,438,729
|
2,438,729
|
Payment
of Series "D" dividends in kind
|
62,209
|
62
|
-
|
-
|
688,848
|
-
|
(688,910)
|
-
|
Stock
awards vested
|
-
|
-
|
29,729
|
30
|
(30)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted
stock awards issued
|
-
|
-
|
329,491
|
329
|
(329)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted
stock awards forfeited
|
-
|
-
|
(2,213)
|
(2)
|
2
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Amortization
of stock-based compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
392,325
|
-
|
-
|
392,325
|
Treasury
stock - surrendered to settle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
employee
tax liabilities
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(23,270)
|
-
|
(23,270)
|
June 30, 2017
|
1,838,927
|
$1,839
|
12,558,891
|
$12,559
|
$44,958,379
|
$(23,270)
|
$(10,636,849)
|
$34,312,658
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
7
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
|
|
2017
|
2016
|
CASH
FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
Reconciliation
of net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in)
|
|
|
operating
activities:
|
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
$2,438,729
|
$(26,133,810)
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization of property and equipment
|
5,904,384
|
3,832,330
|
Impairment
of oil and gas properties
|
-
|
17,548,183
|
Amortization
of debt issuance costs
|
172,826
|
-
|
Net
deferred income tax benefit
|
-
|
(26,769)
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
436,832
|
1,284,395
|
Settlement
of asset retirement obligations
|
(227,346)
|
(17,890)
|
Accretion
of asset retirement obligation
|
280,023
|
107,075
|
Bad
debt expense
|
73,513
|
15,750
|
Net
(gains) losses from commodity derivatives
|
(5,694,863)
|
289,338
|
Gain
on sales of fixed assets
|
(556,141)
|
-
|
Loss
on write-off of abandoned facilities
|
71,373
|
-
|
Gain
on write-off of liabilities net of assets
|
(34,835)
|
-
|
Changes
in assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
Decrease
in accounts receivable
|
426,945
|
1,273,576
|
(Increase)
decrease in prepaids, deposits and other assets
|
521,167
|
269,522
|
(Decrease)
increase in accounts payable and other current and
|
|
|
non-current
liabilities
|
(923,200)
|
(884,576)
|
|
|
|
NET
CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) OPERATING ACTIVITIES
|
2,889,407
|
(2,442,876)
|
|
|
|
CASH
FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures for oil and gas properties
|
(4,526,587)
|
(8,858,743)
|
Proceeds
from sale of oil and gas properties
|
5,400,563
|
-
|
Proceeds
from sale of other fixed assets
|
641,556
|
-
|
Derivative
settlements
|
550,675
|
1,059,900
|
|
|
|
NET
CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) INVESTING ACTIVITIES
|
2,066,207
|
(7,798,843)
|
|
|
|
CASH
FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
Proceeds
from borrowings
|
-
|
9,000,000
|
Net
repayments on the senior credit facility
|
(7,500,000)
|
-
|
Repayments
of borrowings - insurance financing
|
(512,783)
|
-
|
Debt
issuance costs
|
(2,152)
|
-
|
Treasury
stock repurchases
|
(23,270)
|
(389,740)
|
|
|
|
NET
CASH PROVIDED BY (USED IN) FINANCING ACTIVITIES
|
(8,038,205)
|
8,610,260
|
|
|
|
NET
DECREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
(3,082,591)
|
(1,631,459)
|
|
|
|
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT BEGINNING OF PERIOD
|
3,625,686
|
4,064,094
|
|
|
|
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS AT END OF PERIOD
|
$543,095
|
$2,432,635
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
|
|
Interest
payments (net of interest capitalized)
|
$811,042
|
$113,838
|
Income
tax payments
|
$-
|
$-
|
Supplemental
disclosure of significant non-cash activity:
|
|
|
(Increase)
decrease in capital expenditures financed by accounts
payable
|
$(386,337)
|
$441,393
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
8
YUMA ENERGY, INC.
NOTES TO THE UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
NOTE 1 – Organization and Basis of Presentation
Organization
Yuma Energy, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Yuma” and
collectively with its subsidiaries, the “Company”), is
an independent Houston-based exploration and production company
focused on acquiring, developing and exploring for conventional and
unconventional oil and natural gas resources. Historically, the
Company’s operations have focused on onshore properties
located in central and southern Louisiana and southeastern Texas
where it has a long history of exploration and development
activity, and more recently, the Company has entered the Permian
Basin. In addition, the Company has non-operated positions in the
East Texas Woodbine and the Bakken Shale in North Dakota, and
operated positions in Kern County, California.
On
October 26, 2016, Yuma Energy, Inc., a California corporation
(“Yuma California”), merged (the “Reincorporation
Merger”) with and into Yuma. Pursuant to the Reincorporation
Merger, Yuma California was reincorporated in Delaware as Yuma.
Immediately thereafter, a wholly owned subsidiary of Yuma merged
(the “Davis Merger”) with and into privately-held Davis
Petroleum Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation
(“Davis”). As a result of the Davis Merger, Davis
became a wholly owned subsidiary of Yuma.
Prior
to the Reincorporation Merger, each share of Yuma
California’s existing 9.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable
Preferred Stock (the “Yuma California Series A Preferred
Stock”) was converted into 35 shares of common stock of Yuma
California (“Yuma California Common Stock”). As a
result of the closing of the Reincorporation Merger, each share of
Yuma California Common Stock was converted into one-twentieth of
one share (the “Reverse Stock Split”) of common stock
of Yuma (the “common stock”). As a result of the
Reverse Stock Split, Yuma issued an aggregate of approximately 4.75
million shares of its common stock.
As a
result of the Davis Merger, Yuma issued approximately 7.45 million
shares of its common stock to the former stockholders of
Davis’ common stock. Yuma also issued approximately 1.75
million shares of Series D Convertible Preferred Stock of Yuma
(the “Series D Preferred Stock”) to existing Davis
preferred stockholders. Upon completion of the Reincorporation
Merger and the Davis Merger, there was an aggregate of
approximately 12.2 million shares of common stock outstanding and
1.75 million shares of Series D Preferred Stock
outstanding.
At the
closing of the Davis Merger, Davis appointed a majority of the
board of directors of Yuma. Four out of the five members of
Yuma’s board of directors prior to the closing of the Davis
Merger continued to serve on the board of directors of Yuma, with
one of those four directors having been appointed by Davis. Three
additional directors were appointed by Davis. The Davis Merger was
accounted for as a “reverse acquisition” and a
recapitalization since the former common stockholders of Davis have
control over the combined company through their post-merger 61.1%
ownership of the common stock and majority representation on
Yuma’s board of directors.
The
Davis Merger was accounted for as a business combination in
accordance with ASC 805 Business Combinations (“ASC
805”). ASC 805, among other things, requires assets acquired
and liabilities assumed to be measured at their acquisition date
fair value. Although Yuma was the legal acquirer, Davis was the
accounting acquirer. The historical financial statements are
therefore those of Davis. Hence, the financial statements included
in this report reflect (i) the historical results of Davis prior to
the Davis Merger; (ii) the combined results of the Company
following the Davis Merger; (iii) the acquired assets and
liabilities of Davis at their historical cost; and (iv) the fair
value of Yuma’s assets and liabilities as of the closing of
the Davis Merger.
9
Basis of Presentation
The
accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements of the
Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries have been prepared in
accordance with Article 8-03 of Regulation S-X for interim
financial statements required to be filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The information furnished
herein reflects all adjustments that are, in the opinion of
management, necessary for the fair presentation of the
Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2017,
and December 31, 2016; the Consolidated Statements of Operations
for the three and six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016; the
Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity for the six months
ended June 30, 2017; and the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
for the six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016. The
Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2016 is
derived from the audited consolidated financial statements of the
Company at that date.
The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with the
generally accepted accounting principles of the United States of
America (“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at
the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of
revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results
could differ from those estimates. For further information, see
Note 2 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained
in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2016.
Interim
period results are not necessarily indicative of results of
operations or cash flows for the full year and accordingly, certain
information normally included in financial statements and the
accompanying notes prepared in accordance with GAAP has been
condensed or omitted. These financial statements should be read in
conjunction with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2016. The Company has evaluated events
or transactions through the date of issuance of these unaudited
consolidated financial statements.
When required for comparability, reclassifications are made to the
prior period financial statements to conform to the current year
presentation. Reclassifications include moving COPAS overhead
recoveries from lease operating expenses to general and
administrative expenses, moving certain other revenue to offset
lease operating expense, moving commodity derivative gains (losses)
from expenses to other income (expense), moving regulatory interest
from general and administrative to interest expense, and moving
gain (loss) on other property and equipment from operating expenses
to other income (expense).
Not Yet Adopted
In May 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(“FASB”) issued ASU
2017-09, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic
718): Scope of Modification Accounting.” The purpose of
this update is to provide clarity as to which modifications of
awards require modification accounting under Topic 718, whereas
previously issued guidance frequently resulted in varying
interpretations and a diversity of practice. An entity should
employ modification accounting unless the following are met: (1)
the fair value of the award is the same immediately before and
after the award is modified; (2) the vesting conditions are the
same under both the modified award and the original award; and (3)
the classification of the modified award is the same as the
original award, either equity or liability. Regardless of whether
modification accounting is utilized, award disclosure requirements
under Topic 718 remain unchanged. ASU 2017-09 will be effective for
annual or any interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017.
The Company does not believe adoption of ASU 2017-09 will have a
material impact on its 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,” which provides clarification on how certain cash
receipts and cash payments are presented and classified on the
statement of cash flows. This ASU is effective for annual and
interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017 and is required
to be adopted using a retrospective approach if practicable, with
early adoption permitted. The Company does not expect the adoption
of this ASU to have a material impact on its Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows.
10
In
February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, “Leases,” a
new lease standard requiring lessees to recognize lease assets and
lease liabilities for most leases classified as operating leases
under previous GAAP. The guidance is effective for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2018 with early adoption permitted.
The Company will be required to use a modified retrospective
approach for leases that exist or are entered into after the
beginning of the earliest comparative period in the financial
statements. The Company is currently evaluating the impact, if any,
of adopting this standard on its Consolidated Financial
Statements.
In
January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, “Recognition and
Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities,”
which changes certain guidance related to the recognition,
measurement, presentation and disclosure of financial instruments.
This update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December
15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years.
Early adoption is not permitted for the majority of the update, but
is permitted for two of its provisions. The Company is evaluating
the new guidance, but does not believe that it will materially
impact the Company’s consolidated financial statement
presentation.
In May
2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from
Contracts with Customers (Topic 606).” In March, April, and
May of 2016, the FASB issued rules clarifying several aspects of
the new revenue recognition standard. The new guidance is effective
for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15,
2017. This guidance outlines a new, single comprehensive model for
entities to use in accounting for revenue arising from contracts
with customers and supersedes most current revenue recognition
guidance, including industry-specific guidance. This new revenue
recognition model provides a five-step analysis in determining when
and how revenue is recognized. The new model will require revenue
recognition to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to
customers in an amount that reflects the consideration a company
expects to receive in exchange for those goods and services. The
new standard also requires more detailed disclosures related to the
nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows
arising from contracts with customers. The Company will not early
adopt the standard although early adoption is permitted. The
Company is currently evaluating whether to apply the retrospective
approach or modified retrospective approach with the cumulative
effect recognized as of the date of initial application. The
Company is currently evaluating the impact the standard is expected
to have on its consolidated financial statements by evaluating
current revenue streams and evaluating contracts under the revised
standards.
Recently adopted
The
FASB issued ASU 2017-01, “Business Combinations (Topic 805):
Clarifying the Definition of a Business,” which assists in
determining whether a transaction should be accounted for as an
acquisition or disposal of assets or as a business. This ASU
provides a screen that when substantially all of the fair value of
the gross assets acquired, or disposed of, are concentrated in a
single identifiable asset, or a group of similar identifiable
assets, the set will not be considered a business. If the screen is
not met, a set must include an input and a substantive process that
together significantly contribute to the ability to create an
output to be considered a business. This ASU is effective for
annual and interim periods beginning in 2018 and is required to be
adopted using a prospective approach, with early adoption permitted
for transactions not previously reported in issued financial
statements. The Company adopted this ASU on January 1, 2017, and
expects that the adoption of this ASU could have a material impact
on future consolidated financial statements as future oil and gas
asset acquisitions may not be considered businesses.
The
FASB issued ASU 2016-09, “Compensation—Stock
Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based
Payment Accounting,” which simplifies the accounting for
share-based payment transactions, including the income tax
consequences, classification of awards as either equity or
liabilities, classification on the statement of cash flows, and
accounting for forfeitures. The Company adopted this ASU on January
1, 2017, and does not expect the adoption of this standard to have
a material impact on the Company’s future consolidated
financial statements.
The
FASB issued ASU 2014-15, “Presentation of Financial
Instruments – Going Concern,” which requires management
of an entity to evaluate whether there are conditions or events,
considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the
entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one
year after the date that the financial statements are issued or
available to be issued. This update is effective for annual periods
ending after December 15, 2016. The Company does not expect the
adoption of this standard to have a material impact on the
Company’s consolidated financial statements.
11
NOTE 3 – Asset Impairments
The
Company’s oil and natural gas properties are accounted for
using the full cost method of accounting, under which all
productive and nonproductive costs directly associated with
property acquisition, exploration and development activities are
capitalized. These capitalized costs (net of accumulated DD&A
and deferred income taxes) of proved oil and natural gas properties
are subject to a full cost ceiling limitation. The ceiling limits
these costs to an amount equal to the present value, discounted at
10%, of estimated future net cash flows from estimated proved
reserves less estimated future operating and development costs,
abandonment costs (net of salvage value) and estimated related
future income taxes. In accordance with SEC rules, prices used are
the 12 month average prices, calculated as the unweighted
arithmetic average of the first-day-of-the-month price for each
month within the 12 month period prior to the end of the reporting
period, unless prices are defined by contractual arrangements.
Prices are adjusted for “basis” or location
differentials. Prices are held constant over the life of the
reserves. The Company’s second quarter of 2017 full cost
ceiling calculation was prepared by the Company using (i) $48.95
per barrel for oil, and (ii) $3.01 per MMBTU for natural gas as of
June 30, 2017. If unamortized costs capitalized within the cost
pool exceed the ceiling, the excess is charged to expense and
separately disclosed during the period in which the excess occurs.
Amounts thus required to be written off are not reinstated for any
subsequent increase in the cost center ceiling. During the three
month periods ended June 30, 2017 and 2016, the Company recorded
full cost ceiling impairments after income taxes of $-0- and $7.7
million, respectively. During the six month periods ended June 30,
2017 and 2016, the Company recorded full cost ceiling impairments
after income taxes of $-0- and $17.5 million,
respectively.
NOTE 4 – Asset Retirement Obligations
The
Company has asset retirement obligations (“AROs”)
associated with the future plugging and abandonment of oil and
natural gas properties and related facilities. The accretion of the
ARO is included in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Revisions to the liability typically occur due to changes in the
estimated abandonment costs, well economic lives and the discount
rate.
The
following table summarizes the Company’s ARO transactions
recorded during the six months ended June 30, 2017 in accordance
with the provisions of FASB ASC Topic 410, “Asset Retirement
and Environmental Obligations”:
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
June 30, 2017
|
Asset
retirement obligations at December 31, 2016
|
$10,196,383
|
Liabilities
incurred
|
-
|
Liabilities
settled
|
(99,594)
|
Liabilities
sold
|
(418,527)
|
Accretion
expense
|
280,023
|
Revisions
in estimated cash flows
|
70,145
|
|
|
Asset
retirement obligations at June 30, 2017
|
$10,028,430
|
Based
on expected timing of settlements, $388,643 of the ARO is
classified as current at June 30, 2017.
12
NOTE 5 – Fair Value Measurements
Certain financial instruments are reported at fair value on the
Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Under fair value
measurement accounting guidance, fair value is defined as the
amount that would be received from the sale of an asset or paid for
the transfer of a liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants, i.e., an exit price. To estimate an exit
price, a three-level hierarchy is used. The fair value hierarchy
prioritizes the inputs, which refer broadly to assumptions market
participants would use in pricing an asset or a liability, into
three levels. The Company uses a market valuation approach based on
available inputs and the following methods and assumptions to
measure the fair values of its assets and liabilities, which may or
may not be observable in the market.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments (other than Commodity
Derivative Instruments, see below) – The carrying values of financial instruments,
excluding commodity derivative instruments, comprising current
assets and current liabilities approximate fair values due to the
short-term maturities of these instruments.
Derivatives – The fair
values of the Company’s commodity derivatives are considered
Level 2 as their fair values are based on third-party pricing
models which utilize inputs that are either readily available in
the public market, such as natural gas and oil forward curves and
discount rates, or can be corroborated from active markets or
broker quotes. These values are then compared to the values given
by the Company’s counterparties for reasonableness. The
Company is able to value the assets and liabilities based on
observable market data for similar instruments, which results in
the Company using market prices and implied volatility factors
related to changes in the forward curves. Derivatives are also
subject to the risk that counterparties will be unable to meet
their obligations.
|
Fair value measurements at June 30, 2017
|
|||
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
Quoted prices
|
other
|
Significant
|
|
|
in active
|
observable
|
unobservable
|
|
|
markets
|
inputs
|
inputs
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
(Level 2)
|
(Level 3)
|
Total
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
derivatives – oil
|
$-
|
$2,585,652
|
$-
|
$2,585,652
|
Commodity
derivatives – gas
|
-
|
2,534
|
-
|
2,534
|
Total
assets
|
$-
|
$2,588,186
|
$-
|
$2,588,186
|
|
Fair value measurements at December 31, 2016
|
|||
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
Quoted prices
|
other
|
Significant
|
|
|
in active
|
observable
|
unobservable
|
|
|
markets
|
inputs
|
inputs
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
(Level 2)
|
(Level 3)
|
Total
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
derivatives – oil
|
$-
|
$956,997
|
$-
|
$956,997
|
Commodity
derivatives – gas
|
-
|
1,599,005
|
-
|
1,599,005
|
Total
liabilities
|
$-
|
$2,556,002
|
$-
|
$2,556,002
|
Derivative instruments listed above include swaps and three-way
collars (see Note 6 – Commodity Derivative
Instruments).
Debt – The
Company’s debt is recorded at the carrying amount on its
Consolidated Balance Sheets (see Note 10 – Debt and Interest
Expense). The carrying amount of floating-rate debt approximates
fair value because the interest rates are variable and reflective
of market rates.
Asset Retirement Obligations – The Company estimates the fair value of
AROs upon initial recording based on discounted cash flow
projections using numerous estimates, assumptions and judgments
regarding such factors as the existence of a legal obligation for
an ARO, amounts and timing of settlements, the credit-adjusted
risk-free rate to be used and inflation rates (see Note 4 –
Asset Retirement Obligations). Therefore, the Company has
designated these liabilities as Level 3.
13
NOTE 6 – Commodity Derivative Instruments
Objective and Strategies for Using Commodity Derivative
Instruments – In order to mitigate the effect of
commodity price uncertainty and enhance the predictability of cash
flows relating to the marketing of the Company’s crude oil
and natural gas, the Company enters into crude oil and natural gas
price commodity derivative instruments with respect to a portion of
the Company’s expected production. The commodity derivative
instruments used include futures, swaps, and options to manage
exposure to commodity price risk inherent in the Company’s
oil and natural gas operations.
Futures
contracts and commodity price swap agreements are used to fix the
price of expected future oil and natural gas sales at major
industry trading locations such as Henry Hub, Louisiana for natural
gas and Cushing, Oklahoma for oil. Basis swaps are used to fix or
float the price differential between product prices at one market
location versus another. Options are used to establish a floor
price, a ceiling price, or a floor and ceiling price (collar) for
expected future oil and natural gas sales.
A
three-way collar is a combination of three options: a sold call, a
purchased put, and a sold put. The sold call establishes the
maximum price that the Company will receive for the contracted
commodity volumes. The purchased put establishes the minimum price
that the Company will receive for the contracted volumes unless the
market price for the commodity falls below the sold put strike
price, at which point the minimum price equals the reference price
(e.g., NYMEX) plus the excess of the purchased put strike price
over the sold put strike price.
While
these instruments mitigate the cash flow risk of future reductions
in commodity prices, they may also curtail benefits from future
increases in commodity prices.
The
Company does not apply hedge accounting to any of its derivative
instruments. As a result, gains and losses associated with
derivative instruments are recognized currently in
earnings.
Counterparty Credit Risk – Commodity derivative
instruments expose the Company to counterparty credit risk. The
Company’s commodity derivative instruments are with
Société Générale (“SocGen”) and BP
Energy Company. Commodity derivative contracts are executed under
master agreements which allow the Company, in the event of default,
to elect early termination of all contracts. If the Company chooses
to elect early termination, all asset and liability positions would
be netted and settled at the time of election.
Commodity
derivative instruments open as of June 30, 2017 are provided below.
Natural gas prices are New York Mercantile Exchange
(“NYMEX”) Henry Hub prices, and crude oil prices are
NYMEX West Texas Intermediate (“WTI”).
14
|
2017
|
2018
|
2019
|
|
Settlement
|
Settlement
|
Settlement
|
NATURAL
GAS (MMBtu):
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
|
Volume
|
1,098,912
|
1,725,133
|
373,906
|
Price
|
$3.13
|
$3.00
|
$3.00
|
|
|
|
|
3-way
collars
|
|
|
|
Volume
|
85,806
|
-
|
-
|
Ceiling
sold price (call)
|
$3.39
|
-
|
-
|
Floor
purchased price (put)
|
$3.03
|
-
|
-
|
Floor
sold price (short put)
|
$2.47
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
CRUDE
OIL (Bbls):
|
|
|
|
Swaps
|
|
|
|
Volume
|
67,191
|
195,152
|
156,320
|
Price
|
$52.24
|
$53.17
|
$53.77
|
|
|
|
|
3-way
collars
|
|
|
|
Volume
|
54,289
|
-
|
-
|
Ceiling
sold price (call)
|
$77.00
|
-
|
-
|
Floor
purchased price (put)
|
$60.00
|
-
|
-
|
Floor
sold price (short put)
|
$45.00
|
-
|
-
|
Derivatives for each commodity are netted on the Consolidated
Balance Sheets. The following table presents the fair value and
balance sheet location of each classification of commodity
derivative contracts on a gross basis without regard to
same-counterparty netting:
|
Fair value as of
|
|
|
June 30,
2017
|
December 31,
2016
|
Asset
commodity derivatives:
|
|
|
Current
assets
|
$1,793,070
|
$734,464
|
Noncurrent
assets
|
1,121,217
|
54,380
|
|
2,914,287
|
788,844
|
|
|
|
Liability
commodity derivatives:
|
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
(286,364)
|
(2,074,915)
|
Noncurrent
liabilities
|
(39,737)
|
(1,269,931)
|
|
(326,101)
|
(3,344,846)
|
|
|
|
Total
commodity derivative instruments
|
$2,588,186
|
$(2,556,002)
|
Net gains (losses) from commodity derivatives on the Consolidated
Statements of Operations are comprised of the
following:
|
Three Months Ended June 30,
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
settlements
|
$451,975
|
$524,412
|
$550,675
|
$1,059,900
|
Mark
to market on commodity derivatives
|
1,686,105
|
(1,270,064)
|
5,144,188
|
(1,349,238)
|
Net
gains (losses) from commodity derivatives
|
$2,138,080
|
$(745,652)
|
$5,694,863
|
$(289,338)
|
NOTE 7 – Preferred Stock
The
Company issued an aggregate of 1,754,179 shares of Series D
Preferred Stock as part of the completion of the Davis Merger to
former holders of Series A Preferred Stock, which is convertible
into shares of the Company’s common stock. Each share of
Series D Preferred Stock is convertible into a number of shares of
common stock determined by dividing the original issue price, which
was $11.0741176, by the conversion price, which is currently
$11.0741176. The conversion price is subject to adjustment for
stock splits, stock dividends, reclassification, and certain
issuances of common stock for less than the conversion price. As of
June 30, 2017, the Series D Preferred Stock had a liquidation
preference of approximately $20.4 million and a conversion rate of
$11.0741176 per share. The Series D Preferred Stock provides for
cumulative dividends of 7.0% per annum, payable in-kind. The
Company issued 62,209 shares of Series D Preferred Stock as in-kind
dividends for the six months ended June 30, 2017. The Company does
not have any dividends in arrears at June 30, 2017.
15
NOTE 8 – Stock-Based Compensation
2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan
On
October 26, 2016, Yuma assumed the Yuma California 2014 Long-Term
Incentive Plan (the “2014 Plan”), which was approved by
the shareholders of Yuma California. The shareholders of Yuma
California originally approved the 2014 Plan at the special meeting
of shareholders on September 10, 2014 and the subsequent amendment
to the 2014 Plan at the special meeting of shareholders on October
26, 2016. Under the 2014 Plan, Yuma may grant stock options,
restricted stock awards (“RSAs”), restricted stock
units (“RSUs”), stock appreciation rights
(“SARs”), performance units, performance bonuses, stock
awards and other incentive awards to employees of Yuma and its
subsidiaries and affiliates. Yuma may also grant nonqualified stock
options, RSAs, RSUs, SARs, performance units, stock awards and
other incentive awards to any persons rendering consulting or
advisory services and non-employee directors of Yuma and its
subsidiaries, subject to the conditions set forth in the 2014 Plan.
Generally, all classes of Yuma’s employees are eligible to
participate in the 2014 Plan.
The
2014 Plan provides that a maximum of 2,495,000 shares of common
stock may be issued in conjunction with awards granted under the
2014 Plan. As of the closing of the Reincorporation Merger, there
were awards for approximately 179,165 shares of common stock
outstanding. Awards that are forfeited under the 2014 Plan will
again be eligible for issuance as though the forfeited awards had
never been issued. Similarly, awards settled in cash will not be
counted against the shares authorized for issuance upon exercise of
awards under the 2014 Plan.
The
2014 Plan provides that a maximum of 1,000,000 shares of common
stock may be issued in conjunction with incentive stock options
granted under the 2014 Plan. The 2014 Plan also limits the
aggregate number of shares of common stock that may be issued in
conjunction with stock options and/or SARs to any eligible employee
in any calendar year to 1,500,000 shares. The 2014 Plan also limits
the aggregate number of shares of common stock that may be issued
in conjunction with the grant of RSAs, RSUs, performance unit
awards, stock awards and other incentive awards to any eligible
employee in any calendar year to 700,000 shares.
At June
30, 2017, 942,816 shares of the 2,495,000 shares of common stock
originally authorized under active share-based compensation plans
remained available for future issuance. Yuma generally issues new
shares to satisfy awards under employee share-based payment plans.
The number of shares available is reduced by awards
granted.
The
Company accounts for stock-based compensation in accordance with
FASB ASC Topic 718, “Compensation – Stock
Compensation”. The guidance requires that all
stock-based payments to employees and directors, including grants
of RSUs, be recognized over the requisite service period in the
financial statements based on their fair values.
RSAs,
SARs and Stock Options granted to officers and employees generally
vest in one-third increments over a three-year period, or with
three year cliff vestings, and are contingent on the
recipient’s continued employment. RSAs granted to directors
generally vest in quarterly increments over a one-year
period.
Equity Based Awards – During the three months ended
June 30, 2017, the Company granted 329,491 RSAs, along with 893,617
Stock Options which had an exercise price of $2.56.
Liability Based Awards – During the three months ended
June 30, 2017, the Company granted 1,623,371 SARs which are
liability based, and will be settled in cash. The exercise price
for the SARs was $4.40.
16
Total
share-based compensation expenses recognized for the three months
ended June 30, 2017 and 2016 were $385,097 (none capitalized) and
$1,087,471 (net of capitalized amount of $1,715,810), respectively.
For the six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016, total share-based
compensation expenses recognized were $436,832 (none capitalized)
and $1,284,395 (net of capitalized amount of $1,715,810),
respectively.
NOTE 9 – Earnings Per Common Share
Earnings
per common share – Basic is calculated by dividing net income
(loss) attributable to common shareholders by the weighted average
number of shares of common stock outstanding during the period.
Earnings per common share – Diluted assumes the conversion of
all potentially dilutive securities, and is calculated by dividing
net income (loss) attributable to common shareholders by the sum of
the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding
plus potentially dilutive securities. Earnings per common share
– Diluted considers the impact of potentially dilutive
securities except in periods where their inclusion would have an
anti-dilutive effect. Equity, including the average number of
shares of common stock and per share amounts, has been
retroactively restated to reflect the Davis Merger.
A
reconciliation of earnings per common share is as
follows:
|
Three Months Ended June 30,
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) attributable to common stockholders
|
$(512,696)
|
$(14,009,121)
|
$1,749,819
|
$(26,779,958)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
12,235,286
|
7,442,381
|
12,223,337
|
7,448,222
|
Add
potentially dilutive securities:
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested
restricted stock awards
|
-
|
-
|
184,659
|
-
|
Stock
appreciation rights
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Stock
options
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Series
A preferred stock
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Series
D preferred stock
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Diluted
weighted average common shares outstanding
|
12,235,286
|
7,442,381
|
12,407,996
|
7,448,222
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
$(0.04)
|
$(1.88)
|
$0.14
|
$(3.60)
|
Diluted
|
$(0.04)
|
$(1.88)
|
$0.14
|
$(3.60)
|
17
NOTE 10 – Debt and Interest Expense
Long-term
debt consisted of the following:
|
June 30,
|
December 31,
|
|
2017
|
2016
|
|
|
|
Senior
credit facility
|
$32,000,000
|
$39,500,000
|
Installment
loan due 7/15/17 originating from the financing of
|
|
|
insurance
premiums at 4.38% interest rate
|
86,558
|
599,341
|
Total
debt
|
32,086,558
|
40,099,341
|
Less:
current maturities
|
(86,558)
|
(599,341)
|
Total
long-term debt
|
$32,000,000
|
$39,500,000
|
Senior Credit Facility
In
connection with the closing of the Davis Merger on October 26,
2016, Yuma and three of its subsidiaries, as the co-borrowers,
entered into a credit agreement providing for a $75.0 million
three-year senior secured revolving credit facility (the
“Credit Agreement”) with SocGen, as administrative
agent, SG Americas Securities, LLC (“SG Americas”), as
lead arranger and bookrunner, and the Lenders signatory thereto
(collectively with SocGen, the “Lender”).
The
borrowing base of the credit facility was reaffirmed on May 19,
2017 at $44.0 million and subsequently reduced by $3.5 million to
$40.5 million after the Company completed the sale of certain oil
and gas properties for $5.5 million (prior to purchase price
adjustments). The borrowing base is generally subject to
redetermination on April 1st and October 1st of each year, but the
next redetermination is scheduled for September 15, 2017, as well
as special redeterminations described in the Credit Agreement. The
amounts borrowed under the Credit Agreement bear annual interest
rates at either (a) the London Interbank Offered Rate
(“LIBOR”) plus 3.00% to 4.00% or (b) the prime lending
rate of SocGen plus 2.00% to 3.00%, depending on the amount
borrowed under the credit facility and whether the loan is drawn in
U.S. dollars or Euro dollars. The interest rate for the credit
facility at June 30, 2017 was 4.98% and was based on LIBOR.
Principal amounts outstanding under the credit facility are due and
payable in full at maturity on October 26, 2019. All of the
obligations under the Credit Agreement, and the guarantees of those
obligations, are secured by substantially all of the
Company’s assets. Additional payments due under the Credit
Agreement include paying a commitment fee to the Lender in respect
of the unutilized commitments thereunder. The commitment rate is
0.50% per year of the unutilized portion of the borrowing base in
effect from time to time. The Company is also required to pay
customary letter of credit fees.
The
Credit Agreement contains a number of covenants that, among other
things, restrict, subject to certain exceptions, the
Company’s ability to incur additional indebtedness, create
liens on assets, make investments, enter into sale and leaseback
transactions, pay dividends and distributions or repurchase its
capital stock, engage in mergers or consolidations, sell certain
assets, sell or discount any notes receivable or accounts
receivable, and engage in certain transactions with
affiliates.
In
addition, the Credit Agreement requires the Company to maintain the
following financial covenants: a current ratio of not less than 1.0
to 1.0, a ratio of total debt to earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation, depletion, amortization and exploration expenses
(“EBITDAX”) ratio of not greater than 3.5 to 1.0, a
ratio of EBITDAX to interest expense for the four fiscal quarters
ending on the last day of the fiscal quarter immediately preceding
such date of determination to be not less than 2.75 to 1.0, and
cash and cash equivalent investments together with borrowing
availability under the Credit Agreement of at least $4.0 million.
For fiscal quarters ending prior to and not including the fiscal
quarter ending December 31, 2017, EBITDAX will be calculated using
an annualized EBITDAX and interest expense will be calculated using
an annualized interest expense. Annualized EBITDAX for the
four-fiscal quarter period ending June 30, 2017 will be
deemed to equal EBITDAX for the three-fiscal quarter period
comprising the fiscal quarter ending December 31, 2016,
the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2017 and the fiscal
quarter ending June 30, 2017, multiplied by four-thirds
(4/3). Annualized interest expense for the four-fiscal quarter
period ending June 30, 2017 will be deemed to equal
interest expense for the three-fiscal quarter period comprising the
fiscal quarter ending December 31, 2016, the fiscal
quarter ending March 31, 2017 and the fiscal quarter
ending June 30, 2017, multiplied by four-thirds (4/3).
The Credit Agreement contains customary affirmative covenants and
defines events of default for credit facilities of this type,
including failure to pay principal or interest, breach of
covenants, breach of representations and warranties, insolvency,
judgment default, and a change of control. Upon the occurrence and
continuance of an event of default, the Lender has the right to
accelerate repayment of the loans and exercise its remedies with
respect to the collateral. As of June 30, 2017 and December 31,
2016, the Company was in compliance with the covenants under the
Credit Agreement.
18
NOTE 11 – Stockholders’ Equity
Yuma is authorized to issue up to 100,000,000 shares of common
stock, $0.001 par value per share, and 20,000,000 shares of
preferred stock, $0.001 par value per share. The holders of common
stock are entitled to one vote for each share of common stock,
except as otherwise required by law. The Company has designated
7,000,000 shares of preferred stock as Series D Preferred
Stock.
The Company assumed the 2014 Plan upon the completion of the
Reincorporation Merger as described in Note 8 – Stock-Based
Compensation, which describes outstanding stock options, RSAs and
SARs granted under the 2014 Plan.
NOTE 12 – Income Taxes
The
Company’s effective tax rate for the three months ended June
30, 2017 and 2016 was 11.19% and 0.21%, respectively. The
difference between the statutory federal income taxes calculated
using a U.S. Federal statutory corporate income tax rate of 35% and
the Company’s effective tax rate of 11.19% for the three
months ended June 30, 2017 is primarily related to the valuation
allowance on the deferred tax assets and state income taxes. The
difference between the statutory federal income taxes calculated
using a U.S. Federal statutory corporate income tax rate of 35% and
the Company’s effective tax rate of 0.21% for the three
months ended June 30, 2016 is primarily related to the full
valuation allowance against its Federal and Louisiana net deferred
tax assets.
The
Company’s effective tax rate for the six months ended June
30, 2017 and 2016 was 0.24% and 0.10%, respectively. The difference
between the statutory federal income taxes calculated using a U.S.
Federal statutory corporate income tax rate of 35% and the
Company’s effective tax rate of 0.24% for the six months
ended June 30, 2017 is primarily related to the valuation allowance
on the deferred tax assets. The difference between the statutory
federal income taxes calculated using a U.S. Federal statutory
corporate income tax rate of 35% and the Company’s effective
tax rate of 0.10% for the six months ended June 30, 2016 is
primarily related to the full valuation allowance against its
Federal and Louisiana net deferred tax assets.
As of
June 30, 2017, the Company had federal and state net operating loss
carryforwards of approximately $130.1 million which expire between
2022 and 2037. Of this amount, approximately $61.3 million is
subject to limitation under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended, which could result in some amounts
expiring prior to being utilized. Realization of a deferred tax
asset is dependent, in part, on generating sufficient taxable
income prior to expiration of the loss carryforwards.
The
Company provides for deferred income taxes on the difference
between the tax basis of an asset or liability and its carrying
amount in the financial statements in accordance FASB ASC Topic
740, “Income Taxes”. This difference will result in
taxable income or deductions in future years when the reported
amount of the asset or liability is recovered or settled,
respectively. In recording deferred tax assets, the Company
considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or
all of the deferred income tax asset will be realized. The ultimate
realization of deferred income tax assets, if any, is dependent
upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in
which those deferred income tax assets would be deductible. Based
on the available evidence, the Company has recorded a full
valuation allowance against its net deferred tax
assets.
NOTE 13 – Oil and Gas Asset Sales
On May 23, 2017, the Company announced the sale of certain oil and
natural gas properties for $5.5 million (prior to purchase price
adjustments) located in Brazos County, Texas held by a wholly owned
subsidiary and known as the El Halcón property. The
Company’s El Halcón property consisted of an average
working interest of approximately 10% (1,557 net acres) producing
approximately 140 Boe/d net from 50 Eagle Ford wells and one Austin
Chalk well.
19
NOTE 14 – Commitments and Contingencies
Joint Development Agreement
On
March 27, 2017, the Company entered into a Joint Development
Agreement (“JDA”) with two privately held companies,
both unaffiliated entities, covering an area of approximately 52
square miles (33,280 acres) in Yoakum County, Texas. In connection
with the JDA, the Company has acquired an 87.5% working interest in
approximately 2,491 acres (2,180 net acres) as of June 30, 2017. As
the operator of the property covered by the JDA, the Company is
committed to spend an additional $1.5 million by March 2020. The
Company intends to acquire additional leasehold acreage and begin
drilling its first joint venture well in 2017.
Throughput Commitment Agreement
On
August 1, 2014, Crimson, as operator of the Company’s
Chalktown properties, entered into a throughput commitment with ETC
Texas Pipeline, Ltd. effective April 1, 2015 for a five year
throughput commitment. In connection with the agreement, the
operator and the Company failed to reach the volume commitments in
year two, and the Company anticipates that a shortfall could exist
through the expiration of the five year throughput commitment,
which expires in March 2020. Accordingly, the Company is accruing
the expected volume commitment shortfall amounts based on
production to lease operating expense ("LOE") on a monthly basis.
On a net basis, the Company anticipates accruing approximately
$30,000 in LOE per month, which represents the maximum amounts that
could be owed based upon the contract.
Certain Legal Proceedings
From
time to time, the Company is party to various legal proceedings
arising in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of
lawsuits cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company is not
currently a party to any proceeding that it believes, if determined
in a manner adverse to the Company, could have a potential material
adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations,
or cash flows.
Ontiveros v. Pyramid Oil,
LLC, Yuma Energy, Inc. et al.
In
September 2015, a suit was filed against Yuma and Pyramid Oil LLC
(“Pyramid”), a subsidiary of Yuma, styled Mark A.
Ontiveros and Louise D. Ontiveros, Trustees of The Ontiveros Family
Trust dated March 29, 2007 vs. Pyramid Oil, LLC, et al., Case
Number 15CV02959 in the Superior Court of California, County of
Santa Barbara, Cook Division. This was described in
Yuma’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2016. Pyramid and Texican entered into a Purchase, Sale,
Settlement and Release Agreement dated April 26, 2017, wherein
Pyramid and Texican settled their claims against each other and
Pyramid sold all of its interest in the leases, wells, equipment,
etc. to Texican. Pyramid retained certain P&A and clean-up
obligations on the Ontiveros property. The lawsuit with the
Ontiveros family subsequently was dismissed.
Yuma Energy, Inc. v. Cardno PPI Technology Services, LLC
Arbitration
On May
20, 2015, counsel for Cardno PPI Technology Services, LLC
(“Cardno PPI”) sent a notice of the filing of liens
totaling $304,209 on the Company’s Crosby 14 No. 1 Well and
Crosby 14 SWD No. 1 Well in Vernon Parish, Louisiana. The Company
disputed the validity of the liens and of the underlying invoices,
and notified Cardno PPI that applicable credits had not been
applied. The Company invoked mediation on August 11, 2015 on the
issues of the validity of the liens, the amount due pursuant to
terms of the parties’ Master Service Agreement
(“MSA”), and PPI Cardno’s breaches of the MSA.
Mediation was held on April 12, 2016; no settlement was
reached.
20
On May
12, 2016, Cardno filed a lawsuit in Louisiana state court to
enforce the liens; the Court entered an Order Staying Proceeding on
June 13, 2016, ordering that the lawsuit “be stayed pending
mediation/arbitration between the parties.” On June 17, 2016,
the Company served a Notice of Arbitration on Cardno PPI, stating
claims for breach of the MSA billing and warranty provisions. On
July 15, 2016, Cardno PPI served a Counterclaim for $304,209 plus
attorneys’ fees. The parties are currently engaged in the
arbitrator selection process. Management intends to pursue the
Company’s claims and to defend the counterclaim
vigorously.
Vintage Assets, Inc. v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline, L.L.C. et
al.
On October 24, 2016, Texas Southeastern Gas Gathering Company
("TGG"), a subsidiary of Yuma, was named as a defendant in an
action by Vintage Assets, Inc. in the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana. This was described in
Yuma’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2016. Counsel for plaintiffs has been informed that TGG was
dissolved and terminated as of 2011, and has been furnished with
confirming documentation. Counsel for plaintiffs filed a motion for
dismissal of the claims against TGG without prejudice which was
granted by the Court on June 22, 2017.
The Parish of St. Bernard v. Atlantic Richfield Co., et
al
On
October 13, 2016, two subsidiaries of the Company, Exploration and
Yuma Petroleum Company (“YPC”), were named as
defendants, among several other defendants, in an action by the
Parish of St. Bernard in the Thirty-Fourth Judicial District of
Louisiana. The petition alleges violations of the State and Local
Coastal Resources Management Act of 1978, as amended, in the St.
Bernard Parish. The Company has notified its insurance
carrier of the lawsuit. Management intends to defend the
plaintiffs’ claims vigorously. At this point in the
legal process, no evaluation of the likelihood of an unfavorable
outcome or associated economic loss can be made; therefore no
liability has been recorded on the Company’s books. The case
has been removed to federal district court for the Eastern District
of Louisiana. A motion to remand has been filed, but has not yet
been ruled upon.
Davis - Cameron Parish vs. BEPCO LP, et al & Davis - Cameron
Parish vs. Alpine Exploration Companies, Inc.,
et al.
The
Parish of Cameron, Louisiana, filed a series of lawsuits against
approximately 190 oil and gas companies alleging that the
defendants, including Davis, have failed to clear, revegetate,
detoxify, and restore the mineral and production sites and other
areas affected by their operations and activities within certain
coastal zone areas to their original condition as required by
Louisiana law, and that such defendants are liable to Cameron
Parish for damages under certain Louisiana coastal zone laws for
such failures; however, the amount of such damages has not been
specified. Two of these lawsuits, originally filed February 4, 2016
in the 38th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Cameron,
State of Louisiana, name Davis as defendant, along with more than
30 other oil and gas companies. Both cases have been removed to
federal district court for the Western District of Louisiana. The
Company denies these claims and intends to vigorously defend them.
Motions to remand have been filed but have not yet been ruled
upon.
Louisiana, et al. Escheat Tax Audits
The
States of Louisiana, Texas, Minnesota, North Dakota and Wyoming
have notified the Company that they will examine the
Company’s books and records to determine compliance with each
of the examining state’s escheat laws. The review is being
conducted by Discovery Audit Services, LLC. The Company has engaged
Ryan, LLC to represent it in this matter. The exposure related to
the audits is not currently determinable.
21
Louisiana Severance Tax Audit
The
State of Louisiana, Department of Revenue, notified Exploration
that it was auditing Exploration’s calculation of its
severance tax relating to Exploration’s production from
November 2012 through March 2016. The audit relates to the
Department of Revenue’s recent interpretation of
long-standing oil purchase contracts to include a disallowable
“transportation deduction,” and thus to assert that the
severance tax paid on crude oil sold during the contract term was
not properly calculated. The Department of Revenue sent a
proposed assessment in which they sought to impose $476,954 in
additional state severance tax plus associated penalties and
interest. Exploration engaged legal counsel to protest
the proposed assessment and request a hearing. Exploration
then entered a Joint Defense Group of operators challenging similar
audit results. Since the Joint Defense Group is challenging
the same legal theory, the Board of Tax Appeals proposed to hear a
motion brought by one of the taxpayers that would address the rule
for all through a test case. Exploration’s case has
been stayed pending adjudication of the test case set for hearing
on November 7, 2017.
Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries
The
Company received notice from the Louisiana Department of Wildlife
and Fisheries (“LDWF”) in July 2017 stating that
Exploration has open Coastal Use Permits (“CUPs”)
located within the Louisiana Public Oyster Seed Grounds dating back
from as early as November 1993 and through a period ending in
November 2012. The majority of the claims relate to permits
that were filed from 2000 to 2005. Pursuant to the conditions
of each CUP, LDWF is alleging that damages were caused to the
oyster seed grounds and that compensation of an amount of
approximately $500,000 is owed by the Company. The Company is
currently evaluating the merits of the claim and is reviewing the
LDWF analysis.
Miami Corporation – South Pecan Lake Field Area
P&A
The
Company, along with several other E&P companies in the chain of
title, received letters from representatives of Miami Corporation
demanding the performance of well P&A, facility removal and
restoration obligations for wells in the South Pecan Lake Field
Area, Cameron Parish, Louisiana. The Company is currently
evaluating the merits of the claim.
NOTE 15 – Subsequent Events
The
Company is not aware of any subsequent events which would require
recognition or disclosure in the financial statements, except as
already recognized or disclosed in the Company’s filings with
the SEC.
Item
2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations.
The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition
and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the
accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements and
related notes thereto, included in Part I, Item 1 of this Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q and should further be read in conjunction with
our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2016.
Statements in this
discussion may be forward-looking. These forward-looking statements
involve risks and uncertainties, including those discussed below,
which cause actual results to differ from those expressed. For more
information, see “Cautionary Statement Regarding
Forward-Looking Statements” in Item 1 above.
Overview
Yuma
Energy, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Yuma” and
collectively with its subsidiaries, the “Company”), is
an independent Houston-based exploration and production company
focused on acquiring, developing and exploring for conventional and
unconventional oil and natural gas resources. Historically, our
operations have focused on onshore properties located in central
and southern Louisiana and southeastern Texas where we have a long
history of developing, drilling and producing both oil and natural
gas assets and more recently, we have entered the Permian Basin. In
addition, we have non-operated positions in the East Texas Woodbine
and the Bakken Shale in North Dakota, and operated positions in
Kern County, California. Our common stock is listed on the NYSE
American under the trading symbol “YUMA.”
22
Entry into the Permian Basin
We
recently entered into the Permian Basin through a joint venture
with two privately held energy companies whereby we have
established an Area of Mutual Interest (“AMI”) covering
approximately 33,280 acres in Yoakum County, Texas, located in the
Northwest Shelf of the Permian Basin. The primary target within the
AMI will be the San Andres formation, which has been one of the
largest producing formations in Texas to date. As of June 30, 2017,
we held an 87.5% working interest in approximately 2,491 acres
(2,180 net acres) within the AMI and intend to apply horizontal
drilling technology to the San Andres formation which we believe
will result in increased reserves and production on a per well
basis. This activity is commonly referred to as Horizontal San
Andres Play, and in certain areas, referred to as a Residual Oil
Zone Play due to the presence of residual oil zone fairways with
substantial recoverable hydrocarbon resources in place. Currently,
we are the operator of the joint venture and intend to acquire
additional leases offsetting existing acreage. We intend to spud
our first joint venture well in 2017, as well as acquire additional
acreage within the AMI.
Sale of Certain Non-Core Oil and Gas Properties
On
May 23, 2017, we announced the sale of certain oil and natural gas
properties for $5.5 million (prior to purchase price adjustments)
located in Brazos County, Texas held by a wholly owned subsidiary
and known as the El Halcón property. Our El Halcón
property consisted of an average working interest of approximately
10% (1,557 net acres) producing approximately 140 Boe/d net from 50
Eagle Ford wells and one Austin Chalk well.
Reincorporation and Davis Merger
On
October 26, 2016, Yuma Energy, Inc., a California corporation
(“Yuma California”), merged with and into Yuma
resulting in the reincorporation from California to Delaware (the
“Reincorporation Merger”). In connection with the
Reincorporation Merger, Yuma California converted each outstanding
share of its 9.25% Series A Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock
(the “Yuma California Series A Preferred Stock”), into
35 shares of its common stock (the “Yuma California Common
Stock”), and then each share of Yuma California Common Stock
was exchanged for one-twentieth of one share of common stock of
Yuma (the “common stock”). Immediately after the
Reincorporation Merger on October 26, 2016, a wholly owned
subsidiary of Yuma merged (the “Davis Merger”) with and
into Davis Petroleum Acquisition Corp., a Delaware corporation
(“Davis”), in exchange for approximately 7,455,000
shares of common stock and 1,754,179 shares of Series D Convertible
preferred stock (the “Series D preferred stock”). The
Series D preferred stock had an aggregate liquidation preference of
approximately $19.4 million and a conversion rate of $11.0741176
per share at the closing of the Davis Merger, and will be paid
dividends in the form of additional shares of Series D preferred
stock at a rate of 7% per annum. As a result of the Davis Merger,
the former holders of Davis common stock received approximately
61.1% of the then outstanding common stock of Yuma and thus
acquired voting control. Although Yuma was the legal acquirer, for
financial reporting purposes the Davis Merger was accounted for as
a reverse acquisition of Yuma by Davis.
The
Davis Merger was accounted for as a business combination in
accordance with ASC 805 Business Combinations (“ASC
805”). ASC 805, among other things, requires assets acquired
and liabilities assumed to be measured at their acquisition date
fair value. Although Yuma was the legal acquirer, Davis was the
accounting acquirer. The historical financial statements are
therefore those of Davis. Hence, the financial statements included
in this report reflect (i) the historical results of Davis prior to
the Davis Merger; (ii) the combined results of the Company
following the Davis Merger; (iii) the acquired assets and
liabilities of Davis at their historical cost; and (iv) the fair
value of Yuma’s assets and liabilities as of the closing of
the Davis Merger.
23
Results of Operations
Production
The
following table presents the net quantities of oil, natural gas and
natural gas liquids produced and sold by us for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016, and the average sales price
per unit sold.
|
Three Months Ended June 30,
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
Production
volumes:
|
|
|
|
|
Crude
oil and condensate (Bbls)
|
66,242
|
39,297
|
142,640
|
74,015
|
Natural
gas (Mcf)
|
786,111
|
646,020
|
1,685,538
|
1,046,385
|
Natural
gas liquids (Bbls)
|
35,092
|
20,117
|
68,566
|
50,379
|
Total (Boe) (1)
|
232,353
|
167,084
|
492,129
|
298,792
|
Average
prices realized:
|
|
|
|
|
Crude
oil and condensate (per Bbl)
|
$47.14
|
$44.07
|
$48.65
|
$37.45
|
Natural
gas (per Mcf)
|
$3.29
|
$1.95
|
$3.05
|
$1.96
|
Natural
gas liquids (per Bbl)
|
$24.05
|
$17.87
|
$23.61
|
$14.16
|
(1)
Barrels of oil
equivalent have been calculated on the basis of six thousand cubic
feet (Mcf) of natural gas equal to one barrel of oil equivalent
(Boe).
Revenues
The
following table presents our revenues for the three and six months
ended June 30, 2017 and 2016.
|
Three Months Ended June 30,
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
Sales
of natural gas and crude oil:
|
|
|
|
|
Crude
oil and condensate
|
$3,122,848
|
$1,731,952
|
$6,938,780
|
$2,771,640
|
Natural
gas
|
2,587,968
|
1,260,500
|
5,141,410
|
2,046,110
|
Natural
gas liquids
|
843,888
|
359,504
|
1,618,938
|
713,138
|
Total
revenues
|
$6,554,704
|
$3,351,956
|
$13,699,128
|
$5,530,888
|
Sale of Crude Oil and Condensate
Crude
oil and condensate are sold through month-to-month evergreen
contracts. The price for Louisiana production is tied to an index
or a weighted monthly average of posted prices with certain
adjustments for gravity, Basic Sediment and Water
(“BS&W”) and transportation. Generally, the index
or posting is based on customary industry spot prices. Pricing for
our California properties is based on an average of specified
posted prices, adjusted for gravity and
transportation.
Crude
oil volumes were 26,945 barrels, or 68.6%, higher for the three
months ended June 30, 2017 compared to crude oil volumes sold
during the three months ended June 30, 2016, due primarily to the
Davis Merger, as Yuma California’s properties from prior to
the merger contributed 44,971 barrels of oil to the June 30, 2017
total sales volumes. Offsetting this increase were decreases in the
Cameron Canal field (8,909 barrels) and El Halcón field (6,653
barrels), which was divested during the quarter. Realized crude oil
prices experienced a 7.0% increase from the three months ended June
30, 2016 compared to the three months ended June 30,
2017.
Crude
oil volumes increased by 68,625 barrels, or 92.7%, for the six
months ended June 30, 2017 compared to the same period in 2016, due
primarily to the Davis Merger, as Yuma California’s
properties from prior to the merger contributed 91,931 barrels of
oil to the period’s total sales volumes. Offsetting this
increase were decreases in the El Halcón field (10,828
barrels) and the Chalktown field (7,911 barrels). Realized crude
oil prices experienced a 29.9% increase from the six months ended
June 30, 2016 compared to the six months ended June 30,
2017.
24
Sale of Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids
Our
natural gas is sold under multi-year contracts with pricing tied to
either first of the month index or a monthly weighted average of
purchaser prices received. Natural gas liquids are also sold under
multi-year contracts usually tied to the related natural gas
contract. Pricing is based on published prices for each product or
a monthly weighted average of purchaser prices
received.
For the
three months ended June 30, 2017 compared to the three months ended
June 30, 2016, we experienced a 140,091 Mcf, or 21.7%, increase in
natural gas volumes sold and an increase in natural gas liquids
sold of 14,975 barrels, or 74.4%. The increase was due primarily to
the Davis Merger, as Yuma California’s properties contributed
336,319 Mcf to the June 30, 2017 total sales volumes, as well as an
increase in the LacBlanc field (28,903 Mcf). Offsetting this
increase were decreases in the Cameron Canal field (192,496 Mcf)
and Chalktown field (28,773 Mcf). Realized natural gas prices
experienced a 68.7% increase from the three months ended June 30,
2016 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2017.
For the
six months ended June 30, 2017, natural gas volumes increased by
639,153 Mcf, or 61.1%, and natural gas liquids increased by 18,187
barrels, or 36.1%. The increase was due primarily to the Davis
Merger, as Yuma California’s properties contributed 737,678
Mcf to the period’s total sales volumes. Offsetting this
increase were decreases in the Chalktown field (63,608 Mcf) and
Cameron Canal field (34,951 Mcf). Realized natural gas prices
experienced a 55.6% increase from the six months ended June 30,
2016 compared to the six months ended June 30, 2017.
Expenses
Lease Operating Expenses
Our
lease operating expenses (“LOE”) and LOE per Boe for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016, are set
forth below:
|
Three Months Ended June 30,
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
Lease
operating expenses
|
$1,844,896
|
$597,966
|
$3,542,804
|
$1,227,954
|
Severance,
ad valorem taxes and
|
|
|
|
|
marketing
|
1,214,228
|
493,113
|
2,177,584
|
849,822
|
Total
LOE
|
$3,059,124
|
$1,091,079
|
$5,720,388
|
$2,077,776
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOE
per Boe
|
$13.17
|
$6.53
|
$11.62
|
$6.95
|
LOE
per Boe without severance,
|
|
|
|
|
ad
valorem taxes and marketing
|
$7.94
|
$3.58
|
$7.20
|
$4.11
|
LOE
includes all costs incurred to operate wells and related
facilities, both operated and non-operated. In addition to direct
operating costs such as labor, repairs and maintenance, equipment
rentals, materials and supplies, fuel and chemicals, LOE also
includes severance taxes, product marketing and transportation
fees, insurance, ad valorem taxes and operating agreement allocable
overhead.
The
180.4% increase in total LOE for the three months ended June 30,
2017 compared to the three months ended June 30, 2016 was due to
the Davis Merger, as Yuma California’s properties contributed
$1,656,853 to the total LOE for the quarter. The LOE related to the
Davis properties increased by $311,192, primarily due to the
transportation and marketing charges for the Chalktown field. LOE
per barrel of oil equivalent increased by 101.7% from the same
period of the prior year generally due to Yuma California’s
properties having higher per unit operating costs than the Davis
properties.
For the
six months ended June 30, 2017, total LOE increased by 175.3%
compared to the same period in 2016. The increase was due to the
Davis Merger, as Yuma California’s properties contributed
$3,317,262 to the total LOE for the quarter. The LOE related to the
Davis properties increased by $325,350 primarily due to the
transportation and marketing charges for the Chalktown field. LOE
per barrel of oil equivalent increased by 67.2% from the same
period of the prior year generally due to Company properties having
higher per unit operating costs than the Davis
properties.
25
General and Administrative Expenses
Our
general and administrative (“G&A”) expenses for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2017 and 2016, are summarized
as follows:
|
Three Months Ended June 30,
|
Six Months Ended June 30,
|
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
General
and administrative:
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
$385,097
|
$2,803,281
|
$436,832
|
$3,000,205
|
Capitalized
|
-
|
(1,715,810)
|
-
|
(1,715,810)
|
Net
stock-based compensation
|
385,097
|
1,087,471
|
436,832
|
1,284,395
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
2,329,938
|
5,101,865
|
4,926,860
|
7,641,828
|
Capitalized
|
(423,309)
|
(831,132)
|
(844,229)
|
(1,205,581)
|
Net
other
|
1,906,629
|
4,270,733
|
4,082,631
|
6,436,247
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
general and administrative expenses
|
$2,291,726
|
$5,358,204
|
$4,519,463
|
$7,720,642
|
G&A
Other primarily consists of overhead expenses, employee
remuneration and professional and consulting fees. We capitalize
certain G&A expenditures when they satisfy the criteria for
capitalization under GAAP as relating to oil and natural gas
acquisition, exploration and development activities following the
full cost method of accounting.
For the
three months ended June 30, 2017, net G&A expenses of
$2,291,726, were 57.2% lower than the amount for the same period in
2016. The decrease in G&A expenses was primarily attributed to
a decrease in stock-based compensation of $702,374, a decrease in
salaries and severance amounts of $2,172,507, and a decrease in
other merger-related costs of $345,157, all associated with the
2016 Davis Merger.
For the
six months ended June 30, 2017, net G&A expenses of $4,519,463
were 41.5% lower than the amount for the same period in 2016. This
decrease was primarily due to a $847,563 decrease in stock-based
compensation, a decrease in salaries and severance amounts of
$1,821,857, and a decrease in other merger-related costs of
$789,290, all associated with the 2016 Davis Merger.
Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization
Our
depreciation, depletion and amortization (“DD&A”)
for oil and gas properties for the three and six months ended June
30, 2017 and 2016, is summarized as follows:
|
Three Months Ended
June 30,
|
Six Months Ended
June 30,
|
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
DD&A
|
$2,763,444
|
$2,044,105
|
$5,904,384
|
$3,832,330
|
|
|
|
|
|
DD&A
per Boe
|
$11.89
|
$12.23
|
$12.00
|
$12.83
|
DD&A increased
by 35.2% and 54.1% for the three and six months ended June 30,
2017, respectively, compared to the same periods in 2016, primarily
as a result of the increase in the net quantities of crude oil and
natural gas sold.
26
Impairment of Oil and Natural Gas Properties
We
utilize the full cost method of accounting to account for our oil
and natural gas exploration and development activities. Under this
method of accounting, we are required on a quarterly basis to
determine whether the book value of our oil and natural gas
properties (excluding unevaluated properties) is less than or equal
to the “ceiling,” based upon the expected after tax
present value (discounted at 10%) of the future net cash flows from
our proved reserves. Any excess of the net book value of our oil
and natural gas properties over the ceiling must be recognized as a
non-cash impairment expense. We recorded a full cost ceiling test
impairment of $-0- and $7.7 million for the three months ended June
30, 2017 and 2016, respectively. For the six months ended June 30,
2017 and 2016, we recorded a full cost ceiling test impairment of
$-0- and $17.5 million. The impact of low commodity prices that
adversely affected estimated proved reserve volumes and future
estimated revenues was the primary contributor to the ceiling
impairments. Changes in production rates, levels of reserves,
future development costs, transfers of unevaluated properties, and
other factors will determine our actual ceiling test calculation
and impairment analyses in future periods.
If
prices remain at current levels, subject to numerous factors and
inherent limitations, and all other factors remain constant, the
Company does not expect to incur a non-cash full cost impairment
during the third quarter of 2017. There are numerous uncertainties
inherent in the estimation of proved reserves and accounting for
oil and natural gas properties in future periods. Our estimated
third quarter 2017 full cost ceiling calculation has been prepared
by substituting (i) $49.61 per barrel for oil, and (ii) $3.01 per
MMBtu for natural gas for the expected realized prices as of
September 30, 2017. The forecasted average realized price was based
on the average realized price for sales of crude oil, natural gas
liquids and natural gas on the first calendar day of each month for
the first 11 months and an estimate for the twelfth month based on
a quoted forward price. Changes to our reserves and future
production were made due to changing the effective date of the
evaluation from June 30, 2017 to September 30, 2017. All other
inputs and assumptions have been held constant. Accordingly, this
estimate accounts for the impact of more current commodity prices
in the third quarter of 2017 utilized in our full cost ceiling
calculation.
Interest Expense
Our
interest expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2017
and 2016, is summarized as follows:
|
Three Months Ended
June 30,
|
Six Months Ended
June 30,
|
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
Interest
expense
|
$549,871
|
$71,130
|
$1,090,512
|
$113,838
|
Interest
capitalized
|
(67,586)
|
-
|
(112,136)
|
-
|
Net
|
$482,285
|
$71,130
|
$978,376
|
$113,838
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank
debt
|
$32,000,000
|
$9,000,000
|
$32,000,000
|
$9,000,000
|
Interest expense
(net of amounts capitalized) increased $411,155 and $864,538 for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2017, respectively, over
the same periods in 2016 as a result of higher borrowings following
the Davis Merger on October 26, 2016.
For a
more complete narrative of interest expense, and terms of our
credit agreement, refer to Note 10 – Debt and Interest
Expense in the Notes to the Unaudited Consolidated Financial
Statements included in Part I of this report.
27
Income Tax Expense
The
following summarizes our income tax expense (benefit) and effective
tax rates for the three and six months ended June 30, 2017 and
2016:
|
Three Months Ended
June 30,
|
Six Months Ended
June 30,
|
||
|
2017
|
2016
|
2017
|
2016
|
Consolidated
net income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
before
income taxes
|
$(183,977)
|
$(13,712,623)
|
$2,444,679
|
$(26,160,579)
|
Income
tax expense (benefit)
|
$(20,581)
|
$(29,371)
|
$5,950
|
$(26,769)
|
Effective
tax rate
|
11.19%
|
0.21%
|
0.24%
|
0.10%
|
Differences between
the U.S. federal statutory rate of 35% and our effective tax rates
are due to the tax effects of valuation allowances recorded against
our deferred tax assets, state income taxes, and non-deductible
expenses. Refer to Note 12 – Income Taxes in the Notes to the
Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part I of
this report.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our
primary and potential sources of liquidity include cash on hand,
cash from operating activities, borrowings under our revolving
credit facility, proceeds from the sales of assets, and potential
proceeds from capital market transactions, including the sale of
debt and equity securities. Our cash flows from operating
activities are subject to significant volatility due to changes in
commodity prices, as well as variations in our production. We are
subject to a number of factors that are beyond our control,
including commodity prices, our bank’s determination of our
borrowing base, production declines, and other factors that could
affect our liquidity and ability to continue as a going
concern.
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Net
cash provided by operating activities was $2,889,407 for the six
months ended June 30, 2017 compared to $2,442,876 in cash used
during the same period in 2016. This increase was primarily caused
by increased revenue as a result of higher sales volumes due to the
Davis Merger and realized commodity prices, offset by increases in
LOE. Funds were also used for changes in assets and liabilities
including a decrease of $923,200 in accounts payable and other
liabilities.
One of
the primary sources of variability in our cash flows from operating
activities is fluctuations in commodity prices, the impact of which
we partially mitigate by entering into commodity derivatives. Sales
volume changes also impact cash flow. Our cash flows from operating
activities are also dependent on the costs related to continued
operations.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
During
the six months ended June 30, 2017, we had a total of $2,066,207 of
cash provided by investing activities. Of that, $5,175,063 was
related to proceeds from the sale of the El Halcón Field
offset by $1,001,444 related to the SL 18090 #2 well to establish
production from the SIPH-D1 zone and $744,401 spent on lease
acquisition costs related to our Permian Basin acquisition. In
addition, $844,229 was capitalized G&A related to land,
geological and geophysical costs.
During
the six months ended June 30, 2016, cash used in investing
activities included $7,798,843 of capital expenditures, a majority
of which were related to the drilling and completion of the EE
Broussard #1.
28
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
We
expect to finance future acquisition, development and exploration
activities through available working capital, cash flows from
operating activities, sale of non-strategic assets, and the
possible issuance of additional equity/debt securities. In
addition, we may slow or accelerate the development of our
properties to more closely match our projected cash
flows.
During
the six months ended June 30, 2017, we had net cash used in
financing activities of $8,038,205. Of that amount, $7,500,000 was
used for repayments on our credit facility and $512,783 was used
for payments on our insurance financing.
During
the six months ended June 30, 2016, we had borrowing under our
credit facility of $9,000,000.
At June
30, 2017, we had a $40.5 million borrowing base under our credit
facility with $32.0 million advanced, leaving a borrowing capacity
of $8.5 million.
Other
than our credit facility, we had debt of $86,558 at June 30, 2017
from installment loans financing oil and natural gas property
insurance premiums. We had a cash balance of $543,095 at June 30,
2017.
Credit Facility
In
connection with the closing of the Davis Merger on October 26,
2016, Yuma and three of its subsidiaries, as the co-borrowers,
entered into a credit agreement providing for a $75.0 million
three-year senior secured revolving credit facility (the
“Credit Agreement”) with SocGen, as administrative
agent, SG Americas Securities, LLC (“SG Americas”), as
lead arranger and bookrunner, and the Lenders signatory thereto
(collectively with SocGen, the “Lender”).
The
borrowing base of the credit facility was reaffirmed on May 19,
2017 at $44.0 million and subsequently reduced by $3.5 million to
$40.5 million after we completed the sale of certain oil and gas
properties for $5.5 million (prior to purchase price adjustments).
The borrowing base is generally subject to redetermination on April
1st and October 1st of each year, but the next redetermination is
scheduled for September 15, 2017, as well as special
redeterminations described in the Credit Agreement. The amounts
borrowed under the Credit Agreement bear annual interest rates at
either (a) the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”)
plus 3.00% to 4.00% or (b) the prime lending rate of SocGen plus
2.00% to 3.00%, depending on the amount borrowed under the credit
facility and whether the loan is drawn in U.S. dollars or Euro
dollars. The interest rate for the credit facility at June 30, 2017
was 4.98% and was based on LIBOR. Principal amounts outstanding
under the credit facility are due and payable in full at maturity
on October 26, 2019. All of the obligations under the Credit
Agreement, and the guarantees of those obligations, are secured by
substantially all of our assets. Additional payments due under the
Credit Agreement include paying a commitment fee to the Lender in
respect of the unutilized commitments thereunder. The commitment
rate is 0.50% per year of the unutilized portion of the borrowing
base in effect from time to time. We are also required to pay
customary letter of credit fees.
The
Credit Agreement contains a number of covenants that, among other
things, restrict, subject to certain exceptions, our ability to
incur additional indebtedness, create liens on assets, make
investments, enter into sale and leaseback transactions, pay
dividends and distributions or repurchase its capital stock, engage
in mergers or consolidations, sell certain assets, sell or discount
any notes receivable or accounts receivable, and engage in certain
transactions with affiliates.
In
addition, the Credit Agreement requires us to maintain the
following financial covenants: a current ratio of not less than 1.0
to 1.0, a ratio of total debt to earnings before interest, taxes,
depreciation, depletion, amortization and exploration expenses
(“EBITDAX”) ratio of not greater than 3.5 to 1.0, a
ratio of EBITDAX to interest expense for the four fiscal quarters
ending on the last day of the fiscal quarter immediately preceding
such date of determination to be not less than 2.75 to 1.0, and
cash and cash equivalent investments together with borrowing
availability under the Credit Agreement of at least $4.0 million.
For fiscal quarters ending prior to and not including the fiscal
quarter ending December 31, 2017, EBITDAX will be calculated using
an annualized EBITDAX and interest expense will be calculated using
an annualized interest expense. Annualized EBITDAX for the
four-fiscal quarter period ending June 30, 2017 will be
deemed to equal EBITDAX for the three-fiscal quarter period
comprising the fiscal quarter ending December 31, 2016,
the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2017 and the fiscal
quarter ending June 30, 2017, multiplied by four-thirds
(4/3). Annualized interest expense for the four-fiscal quarter
period ending June 30, 2017 will be deemed to equal
interest expense for the three-fiscal quarter period comprising the
fiscal quarter ending December 31, 2016, the fiscal
quarter ending March 31, 2017 and the fiscal quarter
ending June 30, 2017, multiplied by four-thirds (4/3).
The Credit Agreement contains customary affirmative covenants and
defines events of default for credit facilities of this type,
including failure to pay principal or interest, breach of
covenants, breach of representations and warranties, insolvency,
judgment default, and a change of control. Upon the occurrence and
continuance of an event of default, the Lender has the right to
accelerate repayment of the loans and exercise its remedies with
respect to the collateral. As of June 30, 2017 and December 31,
2016, we were in compliance with the covenants under the Credit
Agreement.
29
Hedging Activities
Current Commodity Derivative Contracts
We seek
to reduce our sensitivity to oil and natural gas price volatility
and secure favorable debt financing terms by entering into
commodity derivative transactions which may include fixed price
swaps, price collars, puts, calls and other derivatives. We believe
our hedging strategy should result in greater predictability of
internally generated funds, which in turn can be dedicated to
capital development projects and corporate
obligations.
Fair Market Value of Commodity Derivatives
|
June 30, 2017
|
December 31, 2016
|
||
|
Oil
|
Natural Gas
|
Oil
|
Natural Gas
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
$1,546,865
|
$(40,159)
|
$-
|
$-
|
Noncurrent
|
$1,038,787
|
$42,693
|
$-
|
$-
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
$-
|
$-
|
$(24,140)
|
$(1,316,311)
|
Noncurrent
|
$-
|
$-
|
$(932,857)
|
$(282,694)
|
Assets
and liabilities are netted within each commodity on the
Consolidated Balance Sheets. For the balances without netting,
refer to Note 6 – Commodity Derivative Instruments in Item 1
of this report.
The
fair market value of our commodity derivative contracts in place at
June 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016 were $2,588,186 and
($2,556,002), respectively.
Off Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do
not have any off balance sheet arrangements, special purpose
entities, financing partnerships or guarantees (other than our
guarantee of our wholly owned subsidiary’s credit
facility).
Item
3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk.
We are
a smaller reporting company as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act and are not required to provide the information under
this Item.
Item
4. Controls and Procedures.
Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures.
We
maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to
ensure that information required to be disclosed in our Exchange
Act reports is accurately recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules
and forms, and that such information is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and
evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management
recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well
designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of
achieving the desired control objectives, and management
necessarily applied its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit
relationship of possible controls and procedures.
As of
June 30, 2017, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision
and with the participation of our management, including our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness
of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e)). Based on
that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer concluded that, as of June 30, 2017 our disclosure controls
and procedures were effective.
Changes in internal control over financial
reporting.
There
were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting
that occurred during the three month period ended June 30, 2017
that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
30
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item
1. Legal Proceedings.
From
time to time, we are a party to various legal proceedings arising
in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of these
matters cannot be predicted with certainty, we are not currently a
party to any proceeding that we believe, if determined in a manner
adverse to us, could have a potential material adverse effect on
our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. See
Note 14 – Commitments and Contingencies in the Notes to the
Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements under Part I, Item 1 of
this report, which is incorporated herein by reference, for
material matters that have arisen since the filing of our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2016.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
In
addition to the other information set forth in this report, you
should carefully consider the factors discussed in Part 1,
“Item 1A – Risk Factors” in our Annual Report for
the year ended December 31, 2016 on Form 10-K, which could
materially affect our business, financial condition or future
results. The risks described in our 2016 Annual Report on Form 10-K
may not be the only risks facing our Company. There are no updates
to our risk factors as disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2016. Additional risks and
uncertainties not currently known to us or that we currently deem
to be immaterial may materially adversely affect our business,
financial condition and/or operating results.
Item
2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of
Proceeds.
|
of Shares
|
Price Paid
|
Announced Plans or
|
Purchased Under the Plans or
|
|
Purchased (1)
|
Per Share
|
Programs
|
Programs
|
April 2017
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
May 2017
|
10,791
|
$1.77
|
-
|
-
|
June 2017
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1)
All of the shares
were surrendered by employees (via net settlement) in satisfaction
of tax obligations upon the vesting of restricted stock awards. The
acquisition of the surrendered shares was not part of a publicly
announced program to repurchase shares of our common
stock.
Item
3. Defaults upon Senior Securities.
None.
Item
4. Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not
Applicable.
Item
5. Other Information.
None.
31
Item
6. Exhibits.
EXHIBIT INDEX
FOR
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2017.
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
Incorporated by
Reference
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
Exhibit
No.
|
|
Description
|
|
Form
|
|
SEC File
No.
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
Filing
Date
|
|
Filed
Herewith
|
|
Furnished
Herewith
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Certification
of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Certification
of the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Certification
of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Certification
of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
101.INS
|
|
XBRL
Instance Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
101.SCH
|
|
XBRL
Schema Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
101.CAL
|
|
XBRL
Calculation Linkbase Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
101.DEF
|
|
XBRL
Definition Linkbase Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
101.LAB
|
|
XBRL
Label Linkbase Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
101.PRE
|
|
XBRL
Presentation Linkbase Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the
requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant
has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
YUMA ENERGY, INC.
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By:
|
|
/s/ Sam
L. Banks
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
|
Sam L.
Banks
|
|
Date:
August 14, 2017
|
|
Title:
|
|
Chief
Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By:
|
|
/s/
James J. Jacobs
|
|
Date:
August 14, 2017
|
|
Name:
|
|
James
J. Jacobs
|
|
|
|
Title:
|
|
Chief
Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
|
|
33