Yuma Energy, Inc. - Quarter Report: 2019 September (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 September 30, 2019
☐ 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
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 ☒
|
|
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 ☒
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title
of each class
|
Trading
Symbol(s)
|
Name of
each exchange on which registered
|
Common Stock, $0.001 par value per share
|
YUMA
|
NYSE American LLC
|
At
November 14, 2019, 1,551,989 shares of the registrant’s
common stock, $0.001 par value per share, were
outstanding.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
2.
|
28
|
||
|
|
|
|
Item
3.
|
36
|
||
|
|
|
|
Item
4.
|
36
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item
1.
|
37
|
||
|
|
|
|
Item
1A.
|
37
|
||
|
|
|
|
Item
2.
|
37
|
||
|
|
|
|
Item
3.
|
37
|
||
|
|
|
|
Item
4.
|
37
|
||
|
|
|
|
Item
5.
|
37
|
||
|
|
|
|
Item
6.
|
38
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
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, 2018, 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:
●
substantial doubt
about our ability to continue as a going concern;
●
our limited
liquidity and ability to finance our exploration, acquisition and
development strategies;
●
no availability to
borrow additional funds 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 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;
●
the possibility
that divestitures may involve unexpected costs or delays, and that
acquisitions, if any, may not achieve intended
benefits;
●
risks in connection
with the integration of potential acquisitions;
●
we may incur more
debt and higher levels of indebtedness could further adversely
impact our ability to continue as a going concern;
●
our ability to
successfully develop our undeveloped reserves;
●
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 reserves and
acreage positions;
●
the ability to meet
our plugging and abandonment obligations in a timely
manner;
●
our ability to
replace our oil and natural gas production or increase our
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;
●
the potential for
mechanical failures and loss of production in our wells and our
inability to restore production due to the cost of remedial
operations exceeding our financial ability;
3
●
our ability to
retain or replace key members of management and technical
employees;
●
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 may decline 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, and acts of
terrorism or sabotage in other areas of the world;
●
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 ability to
participate in oil and natural gas derivative activities and the
effect of our termination of such activities;
●
our insurance
coverage may not adequately cover all losses that we may
sustain;
●
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;
●
unfavorable
outcomes relating to one or more of several litigation matters to
which we are a party;
●
the cost and
availability of goods and services; 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.
4
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item
1.
Financial
Statements.
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
|
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
|
2019
|
2018
|
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT
ASSETS:
|
|
|
Cash
|
$1,451,984
|
$1,634,492
|
Accounts
receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts:
|
|
|
Trade
|
2,639,001
|
3,183,806
|
Other
|
6,685
|
195,774
|
Commodity
derivative instruments, current portion
|
-
|
751,158
|
Prepayments
|
815,007
|
1,152,126
|
Other current
assets
|
256,261
|
256,261
|
|
|
|
Total current
assets
|
5,168,938
|
7,173,617
|
|
|
|
OIL AND GAS
PROPERTIES (full cost method):
|
|
|
Oil and gas
properties - subject to amortization
|
504,529,916
|
504,139,740
|
|
|
|
|
504,529,916
|
504,139,740
|
Less: accumulated
depreciation, depletion, amortization and impairment
|
(451,635,196)
|
(436,642,215)
|
|
|
|
Net oil and gas
properties
|
52,894,720
|
67,497,525
|
|
|
|
OTHER PROPERTY AND
EQUIPMENT:
|
|
|
Assets held for
sale
|
-
|
1,691,588
|
Other property and
equipment
|
1,793,252
|
1,793,397
|
|
1,793,252
|
3,484,985
|
Less: accumulated
depreciation, amortization and impairment
|
(1,459,830)
|
(1,355,639)
|
|
|
|
Net other property
and equipment
|
333,422
|
2,129,346
|
|
|
|
OTHER ASSETS AND
DEFERRED CHARGES:
|
|
|
Commodity
derivative instruments
|
-
|
13,028
|
Deposits
|
151,082
|
467,592
|
Operating
right-of-use leases
|
3,330,297
|
-
|
Other noncurrent
assets
|
79,997
|
79,997
|
|
|
|
Total other assets
and deferred charges
|
3,561,376
|
560,617
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
ASSETS
|
$61,958,456
|
$77,361,105
|
|
|
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated
financial statements.
5
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS– CONTINUED
(Unaudited)
|
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
|
2019
|
2018
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
CURRENT
LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
Current maturities
of debt
|
$335,272
|
$34,742,953
|
Accounts
payable
|
9,011,036
|
8,008,017
|
Asset retirement
obligations
|
128,539
|
128,539
|
Current operating
lease liabilities
|
702,675
|
-
|
Other accrued
liabilities
|
1,701,654
|
1,275,473
|
|
|
|
Total current
liabilities
|
11,879,176
|
44,154,982
|
|
|
|
LONG-TERM
DEBT
|
1,400,000
|
-
|
|
|
|
OTHER NONCURRENT
LIABILITIES:
|
|
|
Asset retirement
obligations
|
11,509,537
|
11,143,320
|
Long-term lease
liability
|
2,868,557
|
-
|
Deferred
rent
|
-
|
250,891
|
Employee stock
awards
|
-
|
40,153
|
|
|
|
Total other
noncurrent liabilities
|
14,378,094
|
11,434,364
|
|
|
|
COMMITMENTS AND
CONTINGENCIES (Notes 2 and 15)
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS'
EQUITY
|
|
|
Series D
convertible preferred stock
|
|
|
($0.001 par value,
7,000,000 authorized, 2,149,986 issued and outstanding
|
|
|
as of September 30,
2019 with a liquidiation preference of $23.4 million,
|
|
|
and 2,041,240
issued and outstanding as of December 31, 2018)
|
2,150
|
2,041
|
Common
stock
|
|
|
($0.001 par value,
100,000,000 authorized, 1,551,989 outstanding as of
|
|
|
September 30, 2019
and 1,558,772 outstanding as of December 31, 2018)
|
1,552
|
1,559
|
Additional paid-in
capital
|
92,200,784
|
58,470,831
|
Treasury stock at
cost (26,516 shares as of September 30, 2019 and
|
|
|
25,368 shares as of
December 31, 2018)
|
(441,044)
|
(439,099)
|
Accumulated
deficit
|
(57,462,256)
|
(36,263,573)
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders'
equity
|
34,301,186
|
21,771,759
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
$61,958,456
|
$77,361,105
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated
financial statements.
6
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
|
Three Months Ended
September 30,
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
REVENUES:
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of natural
gas and crude oil
|
$1,508,788
|
$5,426,855
|
$7,156,881
|
$16,894,968
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
Lease operating and
production costs
|
1,272,325
|
2,465,020
|
5,566,838
|
7,886,613
|
General and
administrative expense
|
1,070,625
|
1,182,880
|
3,970,926
|
4,880,270
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization
|
655,125
|
2,140,310
|
3,279,825
|
6,602,801
|
Asset retirement
obligation accretion expense
|
114,549
|
140,701
|
366,218
|
423,802
|
Impairment of oil
and gas properties
|
-
|
3,397,281
|
11,817,345
|
3,397,281
|
Impairment of long
lived assets
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
176,968
|
Bad debt
expense
|
-
|
85,928
|
-
|
413,395
|
Total
expenses
|
3,112,624
|
9,412,120
|
25,001,152
|
23,781,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOSS FROM
OPERATIONS
|
(1,603,836)
|
(3,985,265)
|
(17,844,271)
|
(6,886,162)
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER INCOME
(EXPENSE):
|
|
|
|
|
Net losses from
commodity derivatives
|
-
|
(873,723)
|
(1,840,683)
|
(4,220,553)
|
Interest
expense
|
(379,086)
|
(637,772)
|
(1,513,891)
|
(1,671,700)
|
Other,
net
|
33
|
43
|
162
|
78,390
|
Total other
expense
|
(379,053)
|
(1,511,452)
|
(3,354,412)
|
(5,813,863)
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME (LOSS)
BEFORE INCOME TAXES
|
(1,982,889)
|
(5,496,717)
|
(21,198,683)
|
(12,700,025)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
- deferred
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME
(LOSS)
|
(1,982,889)
|
(5,496,717)
|
(21,198,683)
|
(12,700,025)
|
|
|
|
|
|
PREFERRED
STOCK:
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid
in-kind
|
412,799
|
385,125
|
1,204,266
|
1,123,559
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME (LOSS)
ATTRIBUTABLE TO
|
|
|
|
|
COMMON
STOCKHOLDERS
|
$(2,395,688)
|
$(5,881,842)
|
$(22,402,949)
|
$(13,823,584)
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME (LOSS) PER
COMMON SHARE:
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
$(1.54)
|
$(3.82)
|
$(14.42)
|
$(9.02)
|
Diluted
|
$(1.54)
|
$(3.82)
|
$(14.42)
|
$(9.02)
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEIGHTED AVERAGE
NUMBER OF
|
|
|
|
|
COMMON SHARES
OUTSTANDING:
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
1,551,988
|
1,539,757
|
1,553,402
|
1,533,221
|
Diluted
|
1,551,988
|
1,539,757
|
1,553,402
|
1,533,221
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated
financial statements.
7
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
For the
Three and Nine Months Ended September 30, 2019 and
2018
(Unaudited)
|
Preferred
Stock
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional Paid-in
Capital
|
Treasury
Stock
|
Accumulated
Deficit
|
Stockholders'
Equity
|
||
|
Shares
|
Value
|
Shares
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
2019
|
2,112,710
|
$2,113
|
1,551,989
|
$1,552
|
$58,322,612
|
$(441,044)
|
$(55,479,367)
|
$2,405,866
|
Net loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1,982,889)
|
(1,982,889)
|
Forgiveness of debt - related
party
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
33,875,122
|
-
|
-
|
33,875,122
|
Payment of Series D dividends
in-kind
|
37,276
|
37
|
-
|
-
|
(37)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Stock awards
vested
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted stock awards
forfeited
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted stock awards
repurchased
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
3,087
|
-
|
-
|
3,087
|
Treasury stock
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
September 30,
2019
|
2,149,986
|
$2,150
|
1,551,989
|
$1,552
|
$92,200,784
|
$(441,044)
|
$(57,462,256)
|
$34,301,186
|
|
Preferred
Stock
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-in Capital
|
Treasury
Stock
|
Accumulated
Deficit
|
Stockholders'
Equity
|
||
|
Shares
|
Value
|
Shares
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
June 30,
2018
|
1,971,072
|
$1,971
|
1,558,914
|
$1,559
|
$57,326,218
|
$(438,890)
|
$(27,135,040)
|
$29,755,818
|
Net loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(5,496,720)
|
(5,496,720)
|
Payment of Series "D" dividends
in-kind
|
34,777
|
35
|
-
|
-
|
385,125
|
-
|
(385,125)
|
35
|
Stock awards
vested
|
-
|
-
|
2,076
|
2
|
(2)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted stock awards
forfeited
|
-
|
-
|
(501)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted stock awards
repurchased
|
-
|
-
|
(722)
|
(1)
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
184,309
|
-
|
-
|
184,309
|
Treasury stock
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(209)
|
-
|
(209)
|
September 30,
2018
|
2,005,849
|
$2,006
|
1,559,767
|
$1,560
|
$57,895,651
|
$(439,099)
|
$(33,016,885)
|
$24,443,233
|
|
Preferred
Stock
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional Paid-in
Capital
|
Treasury
Stock
|
Accumulated
Deficit
|
Stockholders'
Equity
|
||
|
Shares
|
Value
|
Shares
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
2018
|
2,041,240
|
$2,041
|
1,558,772
|
$1,559
|
$58,470,831
|
$(439,099)
|
$(36,263,573)
|
$21,771,759
|
Net loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(21,198,683)
|
(21,198,683)
|
Forgiveness of debt - related
party
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
33,875,122
|
-
|
-
|
33,875,122
|
Payment of Series D dividends
in-kind
|
108,746
|
109
|
-
|
-
|
(109)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Stock awards
vested
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted stock awards
forfeited
|
-
|
-
|
(5,636)
|
(6)
|
6
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted stock awards
repurchased
|
-
|
-
|
(1,147)
|
(1)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1)
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(145,066)
|
(1,945)
|
-
|
(147,011)
|
Treasury stock
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
September 30,
2019
|
2,149,986
|
$2,150
|
1,551,989
|
$1,552
|
$92,200,784
|
$(441,044)
|
$(57,462,256)
|
$34,301,186
|
|
Preferred
Stock
|
Common
Stock
|
Additional
Paid-in Capital
|
Treasury
Stock
|
Accumulated
Deficit
|
Stockholders'
Equity
|
||
|
Shares
|
Value
|
Shares
|
Value
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
2017
|
1,904,391
|
$1,904
|
1,520,167
|
$1,520
|
$55,085,827
|
$(25,278)
|
$(19,193,301)
|
$35,870,672
|
Net loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(12,700,127)
|
(12,700,127)
|
Payment of Series "D" dividends
in-kind
|
101,458
|
102
|
-
|
-
|
1,123,457
|
-
|
(1,123,457)
|
102
|
Stock awards
vested
|
-
|
-
|
65,021
|
65
|
(65)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted stock awards
forfeited
|
-
|
-
|
(942)
|
(1)
|
1
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Restricted stock awards
repurchased
|
-
|
-
|
(24,479)
|
(24)
|
24
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
1,686,407
|
-
|
-
|
1,686,407
|
Treasury stock
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(413,821)
|
-
|
(413,821)
|
September 30,
2018
|
2,005,849
|
$2,006
|
1,559,767
|
$1,560
|
$57,895,651
|
$(439,099)
|
$(33,016,885)
|
$24,443,233
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated
financial statements.
8
Yuma Energy, Inc.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
|
|
|
2019
|
2018
|
CASH FLOWS FROM
OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
Reconciliation of
net loss to net cash provided by operating activities:
|
|
|
Net
loss
|
$(21,198,683)
|
$(12,700,025)
|
Depreciation,
depletion and amortization of property and equipment
|
3,279,826
|
6,602,801
|
Impairment of long
lived assets
|
-
|
176,968
|
Amortization of
debt issuance costs
|
-
|
340,225
|
Deferred rent
liability, net
|
-
|
18,219
|
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
(145,066)
|
503,738
|
Settlement of asset
retirement obligations
|
-
|
(590,709)
|
Asset retirement
obligation accretion expense
|
366,217
|
423,802
|
Impairment of oil
and gas properties
|
11,817,345
|
3,397,281
|
Bad debt
expense
|
-
|
413,395
|
Net loss from
commodity derivatives
|
1,840,683
|
4,220,553
|
(Gain) loss on
write-off of liabilities net of assets
|
-
|
(103,044)
|
Amortization of
operating right of use lease
|
900,060
|
-
|
Changes in assets
and liabilities:
|
|
|
(Increase) decrease
in accounts receivable
|
733,894
|
1,864,956
|
(Increase) decrease
in prepaids, deposits and other assets
|
653,629
|
546,280
|
(Decrease) increase
in accounts payable and other current and
|
|
|
non-current
liabilities
|
2,253,769
|
(380,292)
|
NET CASH PROVIDED
BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES
|
501,674
|
4,734,148
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM
INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
Capital
expenditures for oil and gas properties
|
(390,032)
|
(7,711,751)
|
Proceeds from sale
of oil and gas properties
|
1,691,588
|
1,127,400
|
Derivative
settlements
|
(46,357)
|
(1,912,521)
|
NET CASH PROVIDED
BY (USED IN) INVESTING ACTIVITIES
|
1,255,199
|
(8,496,872)
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM
FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
Proceeds from
borrowings on senior credit facility
|
-
|
14,300,000
|
Repayment of
borrowings on senior credit facility
|
(1,194,482)
|
(7,000,000)
|
Repayments of
borrowings - insurance financing
|
(742,953)
|
(651,124)
|
Net proceeds
(expenses) from common stock offering
|
-
|
(64,050)
|
Cash paid for
repurchase of restricted stock
|
(1)
|
-
|
Treasury stock
repurchases
|
(1,945)
|
(413,821)
|
NET CASH (USED IN)
PROVIDED BY FINANCING ACTIVITIES
|
(1,939,381)
|
6,171,005
|
|
|
|
NET (DECREASE)
INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
(182,508)
|
2,408,281
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH
EQUIVALENTS AT BEGINNING OF PERIOD
|
1,634,492
|
137,363
|
|
|
|
CASH AND CASH
EQUIVALENTS AT END OF PERIOD
|
$1,451,984
|
$2,545,644
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
|
|
Interest payments
(net of interest capitalized)
|
$9,057
|
$1,324,950
|
Interest
capitalized
|
$-
|
$133,772
|
Supplemental
disclosure of significant non-cash activity:
|
|
|
Change in capital
expenditures financed by accounts payable
|
$187,864
|
$3,922,933
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated
financial statements.
9
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 drilling, developing and producing
both oil and natural gas assets. The Company also has acreage in
the Permian Basin of West Texas (Yoakum County, Texas), with the
potential for additional oil and natural gas reserves. Finally, the
Company has non-operated positions in the East Texas Woodbine and
had operated positions in Kern County, California, which were sold
in April 2019.
Reverse Stock Split
Yuma
filed a Certificate of Amendment to the Amended and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation of Yuma with the Secretary of State of
the State of Delaware, pursuant to which, effective on July 3,
2019, Yuma effected a one-for-fifteen reverse split of its issued
and outstanding shares of common stock (the “Reverse Stock
Split”). The number of authorized shares of common stock did
not change from 100,000,000. Yuma’s authorized shares of
Preferred Stock did not change from 20,000,000.
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 Sheet as of September 30,
2019; the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and
nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018; the Consolidated
Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity for the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018; and the
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the nine months ended
September 30, 2019 and 2018. The Company’s Consolidated
Balance Sheet at December 31, 2018 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 1 in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contained
in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2018.
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, 2018. 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.
The consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going
concern basis; however, see Note 2 – Liquidity and Going
Concern for additional information.
10
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
The accounting standard-setting organizations frequently issue new
or revised accounting rules. The Company regularly reviews new
pronouncements to determine their impact, if any, on the financial
statements.
Accounting Pronouncement Recently Adopted
In February 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update
(“ASU”) 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842): Amendments to the
FASB Accounting Standards Codification (“ASU 2016-02”).
In January 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-01, Leases (Topic
842): Land Easement Practical Expedient for Transition to Topic 842
(“ASU 2018-01”). In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No.
2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements (“ASU
2018-11”). Together, these related amendments to GAAP
represent ASC Topic 842, Leases (“ASC Topic 842”). ASC
Topic 842 requires an entity to recognize an asset and lease
liability for all qualifying leases. Classification of leases as
either a finance or operating lease determines the recognition,
measurement and presentation of expenses. This accounting standards
update also requires certain quantitative and qualitative
disclosures about leasing arrangements.
The new standard was effective for the Company in the first quarter
of 2019 and the Company adopted the new standard using a modified
retrospective approach, with the date of initial application on
January 1, 2019. Consequently, upon transition, the Company
recognized an asset and a lease liability with no retained earnings
impact. The Company is applying the following practical expedients
as provided in ASC Topic 842 which provide elections
to:
●
not
apply the recognition requirements to short-term leases (a lease
that at commencement date has a lease term of 12 months or less and
does not contain a purchase option);
●
not
reassess whether a contract contains a lease, lease classification
and initial direct costs; and
●
not
reassess certain land easements in existence prior to January 1,
2019.
Through the Company’s implementation process, it evaluated
each of its lease arrangements and enhanced its systems to track
and calculate additional information required upon adoption of this
standards update. The Company’s adoption did not have a
material impact on its consolidated balance sheet as of January 1,
2019, with the primary impact relating to the recognition of assets
and operating lease liabilities for operating leases which
represented less than a 5% change to total assets and total
liabilities at the time of adoption.
Adoption of the new standard did not materially impact the
Company’s consolidated statements of operations or
stockholders’ equity. Leases acquired to explore for or use
minerals, oil or natural gas resources, including the right to
explore for those natural resources and rights to use the land in
which those natural resources are contained, are not within the
scope of the standards update (see Note 15 – Commitments and
Contingencies).
NOTE 2 – Liquidity and Going Concern
The
factors and uncertainties described below, as well as other factors
which include, but are not limited to, significant declines in the
Company’s production resulting from mechanical failures and
depletion, the Company’s failure to establish commercial
production on its Permian properties, no available capital to
maintain and develop its properties, and its substantial working
capital deficit of approximately $6.7 million, raise substantial
doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going
concern for the twelve months following the issuance of these
financial statements. The consolidated financial statements have
been prepared on a going concern basis of accounting, which
contemplates continuity of operations, realization of assets, and
satisfaction of liabilities and commitments in the normal course of
business. The consolidated financial statements do not include any
adjustments that might result from the outcome of the going concern
uncertainty.
On
October 26, 2016, Yuma and three of its subsidiaries, as the
co-borrowers (collectively, the “Borrowers”), entered
into a credit agreement providing for a $75.0 million three-year
senior secured revolving credit facility (as amended on May 19,
2017, May 8, 2018, and July 31, 2018, the “Original Credit
Agreement”) with Société Générale
(“SocGen”), as administrative agent, SG Americas
Securities, LLC, as lead arranger and bookrunner, and the lenders
signatory thereto (collectively with SocGen, the “Original
Lender”).
11
On
September 10, 2019, YE Investment LLC (“YEI”), an
affiliate of Red Mountain Capital Partners, LLC (“Red
Mountain”), purchased (the “Debt Purchase”) all
of the outstanding indebtedness and related liabilities under the
Original Credit Agreement totaling approximately $35 million from
the Original Lender. The Debt Purchase included a principal balance
of the credit facility of $32.8 million, plus accrued interest of
$1.3 million, and the release or purchase of losses associated with
the Company’s prior hedging arrangements totaling
approximately $1.1 million. As a result of the Debt Purchase, YEI
became the lender (the “Lender”) under the Original
Credit Agreement.
On
September 16, 2019, the Borrowers and YEI entered into a
forbearance agreement (the “Forbearance Agreement”)
with respect to the Original Credit Agreement. Under the
Forbearance Agreement, YEI agreed that until October 26, 2019 or
the earlier termination of the Forbearance Agreement, to forbear
from exercising its rights and remedies under or in connection with
the Original Credit Agreement against the Borrowers arising from
the certain existing defaults under the Original Credit
Agreement.
On
September 30, 2019, Yuma and certain of its subsidiaries entered
into a Restructuring and Exchange Agreement (the
“Restructuring Agreement”) with Red Mountain, RMCP PIV
DPC, LP, an affiliate of Red Mountain (“DPC PIV”), RMCP
PIV DPC II, LP, an affiliate of Red Mountain (“DPC PIV
II” and together with Red Mountain and DPC PIV, the
“Investors”), and YEI, which provides for (i) the
modification (the “Loan Modification”) of the Original
Credit Agreement; (ii) the exchange (the “Note
Exchange”) of the promissory note evidencing the loans under
the Original Credit Agreement for a convertible note (the
“Convertible Note”) with a principal amount of $1.4
million, an interest rate of 5% per annum, payable monthly
beginning in January 2020, a maturity date of December 31, 2022,
and that is convertible into shares of common stock at a conversion
price of $0.1288668927422 per share, and the related elimination of
a $360,588 outstanding hedge obligation by YEI; and (iii) the
amendment and restatement of the Certificate of Designation of the
Series D Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Certificate of
Designation”) to provide for a reduction of the conversion
price of the Series D convertible preferred stock, $0.001 par value
per share of the Company (the “Series D Preferred
Stock”), from $98.7571635 to $1.44372 per share, and certain
other modifications (the “COD Amendment” and
collectively with the Note Exchange, the
“Transactions”). The $33.9 million forgiveness of debt
with the related party was reflected as additional paid-in capital
in the accompanying financial statements as a result of equity
holdings of the Investors and YEI which exceeded 10% of the
outstanding equity.
Consummation
of the Transactions is subject to several closing conditions,
including (i) approval of the COD Amendment by a majority of the
outstanding voting securities of Yuma; (ii) approval of the
issuance of the shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of
the Convertible Note (the “Resulting Shares”) by a
majority of the voting securities of Yuma represented in person or
by proxy provided that a quorum is present; (iii) approval of the
issuance of the shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of
the shares of Series D Preferred Stock (the “COD
Shares”) by a majority of the voting securities of Yuma
represented in person or by proxy provided that a quorum is
present; (iv) the absence of any injunction or other legal
restraint preventing or making illegal the Transactions; (v) the
accuracy of the representations and warranties and compliance with
their respective covenants of each of Yuma, the Investors and YEI;
(vi) the absence of a material adverse effect on Yuma; (vii) the
execution and delivery of a customary registration rights
agreement; and (viii) the execution and delivery of a customary
board rights agreement. Following the consummation of the
Transaction, there will effectively be a change in control wherein
the Investors and YEI will own approximately 91% of the Company's
outstanding shares on a fully diluted basis.
Also,
in connection with the Restructuring Agreement, Yuma and YEI agreed
to negotiate in good faith an amended and restated credit agreement
(the “A&R Credit Agreement”) providing for an
uncommitted delayed draw term loan with (i) a principal amount of
up to $2.0 million, (ii) an interest rate of 10%, payable monthly,
(iii) a maturity date of September 30, 2022, and (iv) a prepayment
penalty of 10% of the principal amount repaid.
On
September 30, 2019, as part of the Restructuring Agreement, the
Borrowers and YEI entered into a loan modification agreement (the
“Loan Modification Agreement”) which amended the
Original Credit Agreement (as amended and modified by the Loan
Modification Agreement, the “Credit Agreement”), to
among other things, modify the loans outstanding under the Original
Credit Agreement by (i) reducing the outstanding principal balance
from approximately $32.8 million, plus accrued and unpaid interest
and expenses, to $1.4 million with the forgiveness of approximately
$31.4 million plus the accrued and unpaid interest and expenses,
(ii) increasing the interest rate to 10% per annum payable
quarterly until December 31, 2019 and monthly beginning in January
2020, (iii) extending the maturity date to September 30, 2022, (iv)
added an event of default if the Transactions, among other events,
do not occur on or before September 30, 2020, and (v) removed the
requirement that the Borrowers comply with the financial covenants
contained in Section 6.1 of the Original Credit Agreement. The
amount of forgiveness from the reduction in principal balance,
accrued interest, and hedge loss liability has been recorded to
additional paid-in capital.
12
As of
September 30, 2019, the outstanding balance under the Credit
Agreement was $1.4 with no availability for additional borrowing.
All of the obligations under the Credit Agreement, and the
guarantees of those obligations, are secured by substantially all
of the Company’s assets. 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.
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
required under the Original Credit Agreement, the Company
previously entered into hedging arrangements with SocGen and BP
Energy Company (“BP”) pursuant to International Swaps
and Derivatives Association Master Agreements (“ISDA
Agreements”). On March 14, 2019, the Company received a
notice of an event of default under its ISDA Agreement with SocGen
(the “SocGen ISDA”). Due to the default under the
SocGen ISDA, SocGen unwound all of the Company’s hedges with
them. The notice provided for a payment of $335,272 to settle the
Company’s outstanding obligations thereunder related to
SocGen’s hedges, which outstanding amount was acquired by YEI
in the Debt Purchase. On March 19, 2019, the Company received a
notice of an event of default under its ISDA Agreement with BP (the
“BP ISDA”). Due to the default under the BP ISDA, BP
also unwound all of the Company’s hedges with them. The
notice provided for a payment of $749,240 to settle the
Company’s outstanding obligations thereunder related to
BP’s hedges; however, that entire amount was forgiven as part
of the Debt Purchase.
The
Company has initiated several strategic alternatives to mitigate
its limited liquidity (defined as cash on hand and undrawn
borrowing base) and continuing
operating issues, and to provide it with additional working
capital to develop its existing assets.
On
October 22, 2018, the Company retained Seaport Global Securities
LLC, an investment banking firm, to advise the Company on its
strategic and tactical alternatives, including possible
acquisitions and divestitures. On March 1, 2019, the Company hired
a Chief Restructuring Officer, and subsequently on March 28, 2019,
appointed that person as Interim Chief Executive
Officer.
The
Company continues to reduce its operating and general and
administrative costs and has curtailed its planned 2019 capital
expenditures. The Company plans to take further steps to mitigate
its limited liquidity and continuing operating issues, which may
include, but are not limited to, selling additional assets; further
reducing general and administrative expenses; seeking merger and
acquisition related opportunities; and potentially raising proceeds
from capital markets transactions, including the sale of debt or
equity securities. There can be no assurance that the exploration
of strategic alternatives will result in a transaction or otherwise
improve the Company’s limited liquidity and that the Company
will continue as a going concern.
NOTE 3 – Revenue Recognition
Sales of crude oil, condensates, natural gas and natural gas
liquids (“NGLs”) are recognized at the point where
control of the product is transferred to the customer and
collectability is reasonably assured.
The Company records revenue in the month production is delivered to
the purchaser. However, settlement statements for certain natural
gas and NGL sales may not be received for 30 to 90 days after the
date production is delivered, and as a result, the Company is
required to estimate the amount of production delivered to the
purchaser and the price that will be received for the sale of the
product. The Company records the differences between its estimates
and the actual amounts received for product sales in the month that
payment is received from the purchaser. Any identified differences
between its revenue estimates and actual revenue received
historically have not been significant. For the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018, revenue recognized in the
reporting period related to performance obligations satisfied in
prior reporting periods was not material.
13
Gain or loss on derivative instruments is not considered revenue
from contracts with customers. The Company may use financial or
physical contracts accounted for as derivatives as economic hedges
to manage price risk associated with normal sales, or in limited
cases may use them for contracts the Company intends to physically
settle but do not meet all of the criteria to be treated as normal
sales.
The following table presents the Company’s revenues
disaggregated by product source. Sales taxes are excluded from
revenues.
|
Three Months
Ended September 30,
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
Sales of natural
gas and crude oil:
|
|
|
|
|
Crude oil and
condensate
|
$1,223,499
|
$3,090,585
|
$4,504,194
|
$9,360,102
|
Natural
gas
|
203,251
|
1,463,581
|
1,779,154
|
5,030,751
|
Natural gas
liquids
|
82,038
|
872,689
|
873,533
|
2,504,115
|
Total
revenues
|
$1,508,788
|
$5,426,855
|
$7,156,881
|
$16,894,968
|
Transaction Price Allocated to Remaining Performance
Obligations
A significant number of the Company’s product sales are
short-term in nature with a contract term of one year or less. For
those contracts, the Company has utilized the practical expedient
exempting the Company from disclosure of the transaction price
allocated to remaining performance obligations if the performance
obligation is part of a contract that has an original expected
duration of one year or less.
For the Company’s product sales that have a contract term
greater than one year, it has utilized the practical expedient
which states that the Company is not required to disclose the
transaction price allocated to remaining performance obligations if
the variable consideration is allocated entirely to a wholly
unsatisfied performance obligation. Under these sales contracts,
each unit of product generally represents a separate performance
obligation; therefore, future volumes are wholly unsatisfied, and
disclosure of the transaction price allocated to remaining
performance obligations is not required.
Contract Balances
Receivables from contracts with customers are recorded when the
right to consideration becomes unconditional, generally when
control of the product has been transferred to the customer.
Receivables from contracts with customers were $627,459 and
$2,282,200 as of September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018,
respectively, and are reported in trade accounts receivable, net on
the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Company currently has no other
assets or liabilities related to its revenue contracts, including
no upfront or rights to deficiency payments.
NOTE 4 – 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 full cost
ceiling limitation limits these costs to an amount equal to the
present value, discounted at 10%, of estimated future cash flows
from estimated proved reserves less estimated future operating and
development costs, abandonment costs (net of salvage value) and
estimated related future deferred 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 third quarter of 2019 full cost
ceiling calculation was prepared by the Company using (i) $55.87
per barrel for oil, and (ii) $2.82 per MMBTU for natural gas as of
September 30, 2019. 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.
14
Based
on an analysis of the Company’s assets, there was no
impairment for the third quarter of fiscal year 2019. The Company
recorded a full cost ceiling impairment charge of $11.8 million for
the nine-month period ended September 30, 2019. During the three
and nine month periods ended September 30, 2018, the Company
recorded a full cost ceiling impairment charge of $3.4
million.
NOTE 5 – 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 nine months ended September 30, 2019 in
accordance with the provisions of FASB ASC Topic 410, “Asset
Retirement and Environmental Obligations”:
|
Nine Months
Ended
|
|
September 30,
2019
|
Asset retirement
obligations at December 31, 2018
|
$11,271,859
|
Liabilities
incurred
|
-
|
Liabilities
settled
|
-
|
Accretion
expense
|
366,217
|
Revisions in
estimated cash flows
|
-
|
|
|
Asset retirement
obligations at September 30, 2019
|
$11,638,076
|
|
|
Based
on expected timing of settlements, $128,539 of the ARO is
classified as current at September 30, 2019.
NOTE 6 – Fair Value Measurements
Certain financial instruments are reported at fair value on the
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.
15
As previously disclosed, there were no outstanding commodity
derivatives as of September 30, 2019.
|
Fair value
measurements at December 31, 2018
|
|||
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
|
Quoted
prices
|
other
|
Significant
|
|
|
in
active
|
observable
|
unobservable
|
|
|
markets
|
inputs
|
inputs
|
|
|
(Level
1)
|
(Level
2)
|
(Level
3)
|
Total
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity
derivatives – oil
|
$-
|
$922,562
|
$-
|
$922,562
|
Commodity
derivatives – gas
|
-
|
(158,376)
|
-
|
$(158,376)
|
Total
assets
|
$-
|
$764,186
|
$-
|
$764,186
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative instruments listed above are related to swaps (see Note
7 – 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), which approximates fair value.
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 5 –
Asset Retirement Obligations). Therefore, the Company has
designated the initial recording of these liabilities as Level
3.
Assets Held for Sale –
The fair values of property, plant and equipment, classified as
assets held for sale, and related impairments, which are calculated
using Level 3 inputs, are discussed in Note 14 – Divestitures
and Oil and Gas Asset Sales.
NOTE 7 – Commodity Derivative Instruments
As
required under the Original Credit Agreement, the Company
previously entered into hedging arrangements with SocGen and BP
pursuant to ISDA Agreements. On March 14, 2019, the Company
received a notice of an event of default under the SocGen ISDA. Due
to the default under the SocGen ISDA, SocGen unwound all of the
Company’s hedges with them. The notice provided for a payment
of $335,272 to settle the Company’s outstanding obligations
thereunder related to SocGen’s hedges, which amount was
acquired by YEI as part of the Debt Purchase and is included in
current maturities of debt at September 30, 2019. On March 19,
2019, the Company received a notice of an event of default under
its BP ISDA. Due to the default under the BP ISDA, BP also unwound
all of the Company’s hedges with them. The notice provided
for a payment of $749,240 to settle the Company’s outstanding
obligations thereunder related to BP’s hedges; however, that
entire amount was forgiven as part of the Debt
Purchase.
Counterparty Credit Risk – Commodity derivative
instruments expose the Company to counterparty credit risk. The
Company did not have any commodity derivative instruments at
September 30, 2019. Commodity derivative contracts are executed
under ISDA 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.
16
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
|
|
|
September 30,
2019
|
December 31,
2018
|
Asset commodity
derivatives:
|
|
|
Current
assets
|
$-
|
$1,031,614
|
Noncurrent
assets
|
-
|
98,530
|
Total asset
commodity derivatives
|
-
|
1,130,144
|
|
|
|
Liability commodity
derivatives:
|
-
|
|
Current
liabilities
|
-
|
(280,456)
|
Noncurrent
liabilities
|
-
|
(85,502)
|
Total liability
commodity derivatives
|
-
|
(365,958)
|
|
|
|
Total commodity
derivative instruments
|
$-
|
$764,186
|
|
|
|
Net losses from commodity derivatives on the Consolidated
Statements of Operations are comprised of the
following:
|
Three Months
Ended September 30,
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
settlements
|
$-
|
$(723,310)
|
$(1,076,497)
|
$(1,912,521)
|
Mark to market on
commodity derivatives
|
-
|
(150,413)
|
(764,186)
|
(2,308,032)
|
Net gains (losses)
from commodity derivatives
|
$-
|
$(873,723)
|
$(1,840,683)
|
$(4,220,553)
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 8 – Preferred 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 $98.7571635 as adjusted for the Reverse Stock Split. 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 September 30, 2019, the
Series D Preferred Stock had a liquidation preference of
approximately $23.8 million. The Series D Preferred Stock provides
for cumulative dividends of 7.0% per annum, payable in-kind. In
payment of the dividend, the Company issued 37,276 and 108,746
shares of Series D Preferred Stock during the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2019, respectively. The Company does not have
any dividends in arrears at September 30, 2019.
NOTE 9 – Stock-Based Compensation
2014 Long-Term Incentive Plan
On
October 26, 2016, Yuma assumed the Yuma Energy, Inc., a California
corporation (“Yuma California”), 2014 Long-Term
Incentive Plan (the “2014 Plan”), which was approved by
the shareholders of Yuma California. Under the 2014 Plan, Yuma
could 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.
At
September 30, 2019, 12,392 shares of the 166,334 shares of common
stock originally authorized under the 2014 Plan remained available
for future issuance. However, upon adoption of the
Company’s 2018 Long-Term Incentive Plan on June 7, 2018, none
of these remaining shares will be issued.
2018 Long-Term Incentive Plan
The
Company’s Board adopted the Yuma Energy, Inc. 2018 Long-Term
Incentive Plan (the “2018 Plan”), and its stockholders
approved the 2018 Plan at the Annual Meeting on June 7, 2018. The
2018 Plan will replace the 2014 Plan; however, the terms and
conditions of the 2014 Plan and related award agreements will
continue to apply to all awards granted under the 2014
Plan.
17
The
2018 Plan expires on June 7, 2028, and no awards may be granted
under the 2018 Plan after that date. However, the terms and
conditions of the 2018 Plan will continue to apply after that date
to all 2018 Plan awards granted prior to that date until they are
no longer outstanding.
Under
the 2018 Plan, the Company may grant stock options, RSAs, RSUs,
SARs, performance units, performance bonuses, stock awards and
other incentive awards to employees or those of the Company’s
subsidiaries or affiliates, subject to the terms and conditions set
forth in the 2018 Plan. The Company 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, subject to the
conditions set forth in the 2018 Plan. Generally, all classes of
the Company’s employees are eligible to participate in the
2018 Plan.
The
2018 Plan provides that a maximum of 266,667 shares of the
Company’s common stock may be issued in conjunction with
awards granted under the 2018 Plan. Shares of common stock
cancelled, settled in cash, forfeited, withheld, or tendered by a
participant to satisfy exercise prices or tax withholding
obligations will be available for delivery pursuant to other
awards. At September 30, 2019, all of the 266,667 shares of common
stock authorized under the 2018 Plan remain available for future
issuance.
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 vesting, 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
September 30, 2019, the Company did not grant any RSAs under the
2014 Plan or the 2018 Plan. As of September 30, 2019, there were no
stock options outstanding and exercisable.
At
September 30, 2019, there were a total of 319 unvested RSAs, with a
weighted average grant-date fair value of $38.40 per
share.
Liability Based Awards – During the three months ended
September 30, 2019, the Company did not grant any liability-based
awards under the 2014 Plan or the 2018 Plan. As of September 30,
2019, there were 3,090 unvested cash-settled SARs with a weighted
average fair value of $0.60 per share.
Share Buy-back – During the three months ended
September 30, 2019, the Company did not purchase any common shares
from employees. During the nine months ended September 30, 2019,
the Company purchased 1,148 common shares from employees at a cost
of $1,945 in satisfaction of employee tax obligations upon the
vesting of RSAs.
Total
share-based compensation expenses recognized for the three months
ended September 30, 2019 and 2018 were$3,087 and $143,214,
respectively. Total share-based compensation expenses recognized
for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018 were
($145,066) and $360,524, respectively. No share-based compensation
was capitalized during 2019 or 2018.
18
NOTE 10 – Debt and Interest Expense
Long-term
debt consisted of the following:
|
September
30,
|
December
31,
|
|
2019
|
2018
|
|
|
|
Senior credit
facility
|
$1,400,000
|
$34,000,000
|
Commodity debt
payable
|
335,272
|
-
|
Installment loan
due 6/23/19 originating from the financing of
|
|
|
insurance premiums
at 6.14% interest rate
|
-
|
742,953
|
Total
debt
|
1,735,272
|
34,742,953
|
Less: current
maturities
|
(335,272)
|
(34,742,953)
|
Total long-term
debt
|
$1,400,000
|
$-
|
|
|
|
Senior Credit Facility
As of
September 30, 2019, the credit facility had an outstanding
principal balance of $1.4 million with no additional availability
for borrowing.
On
October 26, 2016, the Borrowers entered into the Original Credit
Agreement with the Original Lender. The Company’s obligations
under the Credit Agreement are guaranteed by its subsidiaries and
are secured by liens on substantially all of the Company’s
assets, including a mortgage lien on substantially all of the
Company’s oil and natural gas properties.
The
amounts borrowed under the Original Credit Agreement had 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 December 31, 2018 was 6.53% for LIBOR-based debt and
8.50% for prime-based debt. The Loan Modification Agreement
increased the interest rate of the Original Credit Agreement to 10%
payable quarterly until December 31, 2019 and then payable monthly
thereafter. Principal amounts outstanding under the Credit
Agreement are due and payable in full at maturity on September 30,
2022. All of the obligations under the Credit Agreement, and the
guarantees of those obligations, are secured by substantially all
of the Company’s assets.
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 the
Company’s 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.
The
Company did not incur any commitment fees in connection with the
Credit Agreement during the three months ended September 30, 2019
and 2018, respectively, and incurred $-0- and $19,170 in commitment
fees during the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018,
respectively.
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
amount of forgiveness from the reduction in principal balance,
accrued interest, and hedge loss liability, as a result of the Loan
Modification Agreement, has been recorded to additional paid-in
capital. See Note 2 - Liquidity and Going
Concern.
See Note 8 – Preferred Stock, which describes the issuance of
dividends in-kind, and Note 9 – Stock-Based Compensation,
which describes outstanding stock options, RSAs and SARs granted
under the 2014 Plan and the provisions of the 2018 Plan adopted on
June 7, 2018.
19
NOTE 12 – Loss Per Common Share
Loss
per common share – Basic is calculated by dividing net loss
attributable to common stockholders by the weighted average number
of shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Loss per
common share – Diluted assumes the conversion of all
potentially dilutive securities, and is calculated by dividing net
loss attributable to common stockholders by the sum of the weighted
average number of shares of common stock outstanding plus
potentially dilutive securities. Loss per common share –
Diluted considers the impact of potentially dilutive securities
except in periods where their inclusion would have an anti-dilutive
effect.
A
reconciliation of loss per common share is as
follows:
|
Three Months Ended
September 30,
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
attributable to common stockholders
|
$(2,395,688)
|
$(5,881,842)
|
$(22,402,949)
|
$(13,823,584)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average
common shares outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
1,551,988
|
1,539,757
|
1,553,402
|
1,533,221
|
Add potentially
dilutive securities:
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested restricted
stock awards
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Stock appreciation
rights
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Stock
options
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Series D preferred
stock
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Diluted weighted
average common shares outstanding
|
1,551,988
|
1,539,757
|
1,553,402
|
1,533,221
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
$(1.54)
|
$(3.82)
|
$(14.42)
|
$(9.02)
|
Diluted
|
$(1.54)
|
$(3.82)
|
$(14.42)
|
$(9.02)
|
For the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2019, the Company
excluded 319 shares of unvested restricted stock awards and
2,149,986 shares of Series D Preferred Stock in calculating diluted
earnings per share, as the effect was anti-dilutive. For the three
and nine months ended September 30, 2018, the Company excluded
9,821 shares of unvested restricted stock awards, 113,852 stock
appreciation rights, 59,911 stock options, and 2,005,849 shares of
Series D Preferred Stock in calculating diluted earnings per share,
as the effect was anti-dilutive.
NOTE 13 – Income Taxes
The
Company’s effective tax rate was 0.00% for the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018. Differences between the
U.S. federal statutory rate of 21% in 2019 and 2018 and the
Company’s effective tax rates are due to the tax effects of
valuation allowances recorded against the deferred tax
assets.
As of
September 30, 2019, the Company had federal net operating loss
carryforwards of approximately $170.3 million, of which $160.2
million expire between 2026 and 2037. Of this amount, approximately
$59.5 million is subject to limitation under Section 382 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”),
which could result in some amounts expiring prior to being
utilized. The remaining $10.1 million of federal net operating loss
may be carried forward indefinitely. The Company has $87.6 million
of state net operating losses which expire between 2019 and
2038.
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.
20
NOTE 14 – Divestitures and Oil and Gas Asset
Sales
In
April 2019, the Company closed on the sale of its Kern County,
California properties for approximately $1.7 million in net
proceeds. As additional consideration for the sale of the assets,
if the WTI index for oil equals or exceeds $65 in the six months
following closing and maintains that average for twelve consecutive
months, then the buyer shall pay to the Company an additional
$250,000. Under the full cost method of accounting, no gain or loss
was recognized on the sale. The net proceeds were used for the
repayment of borrowings under the credit facility and working
capital.
NOTE 15 – 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 the Permian Basin of Yoakum County,
Texas. In connection with the JDA, the Company now holds a 62.5%
working interest in approximately 4,626 acres (3,192 net acres) as
of September 30, 2019. As the operator of the property covered by
the JDA, the Company is committed as of September 30, 2019 to spend
an additional $241,104 by March 2020.
Throughput Commitment Agreement
On
August 1, 2014, Crimson Energy Partners IV, LLC, as operator of the
Company’s Chalktown properties, in which the Company has a
working interest, entered into a throughput commitment (the
“Commitment”) with ETC Texas Pipeline, Ltd. effective
April 1, 2015 for a five-year throughput commitment. In connection
with the Commitment, the operator and the Company failed to reach
the volume commitments in year two, and the Company anticipates
that a shortfall will exist through the expiration of the five-year
term, which expires in March 2020. Accordingly, the Company is
accruing the expected volume commitment shortfall amounts of
approximately $29,000 per month to lease operating expense
(“LOE”) based on production, which represents the
maximum amounts that could be owed based upon the Commitment. As of
September 30, 2019, $143,470 has been recorded in accrued expense
for the volume commitment shortfall.
Lease Agreements
The Company determines if an arrangement is a lease at inception of
the arrangement. To the extent that the Company determines an
arrangement represents a lease, that lease is classified as an
operating lease or a finance lease. The Company currently does not
have any finance leases. In accordance with ASC Topic 842,
operating leases are capitalized on the Company’s
Consolidated Balance Sheet through an asset and a corresponding
lease liability. Recorded assets represent the Company’s
right to use an underlying asset for the lease term and lease
liabilities represent its obligation to make lease payments arising
from the lease. Short-term leases that have an initial term of one
year or less are not capitalized.
The Company’s operating leases are reflected as right-of-use
lease assets, accrued liabilities-current and operating lease
liabilities on its Consolidated Balance Sheet. Operating lease
assets and liabilities are recognized at the commencement date of
an arrangement based on the present value of lease payments over
the lease term. In addition to the present value of lease payments,
the operating lease asset also includes any lease payments made to
the lessor prior to lease commencement, less any lease incentives
and initial direct costs incurred. Lease expense for operating
lease payments is recognized on a straight-line basis over the
lease term.
Nature of Leases
The Company leases certain office space, field and other equipment
under cancelable and non-cancelable leases to support its
operations. A more detailed description of significant lease types
is included below.
21
Office Agreements
The Company rents office space from third parties, structured with
non-cancelable terms. The Company has concluded its office
agreements represent operating leases with a lease term that equals
the primary non-cancelable contract term. Upon completion of the
primary term, both parties have substantive rights to terminate the
lease. As a result, enforceable rights and obligations do not exist
under the rental agreements subsequent to the primary
term.
Field Equipment and Compressors
The Company rents compressors and other equipment from third
parties in order to facilitate the downstream movement of its
production from its drilling operations to market, typically
structured with a non-cancelable primary term of one to two years,
and continuing thereafter on a month-to-month basis subject to
termination by either party. These compressors and other equipment
are critical to the Company’s ability to sell its production.
The Company has therefore concluded that its compressor and other
equipment rental agreements represent operating leases with a lease
term that extends through the expected life of the field reserves
(as opposed to the primary non-cancelable contract
term).
The Company enters into daywork contracts for
drilling/completion/workover rigs with third parties to support its
activities. The Company has concluded that these arrangements
represent short-term operating leases. The accounting guidance
requires the Company to make an assessment at contract commencement
if it is reasonably certain that it will exercise the option to
extend the term. The Company has determined that it cannot conclude
with reasonable certainty if it will choose to extend the contract
beyond its original term.
Significant Judgments
Discount Rate
The Company’s leases typically do not provide an implicit
rate. Accordingly, it is required to use its incremental borrowing
rate in determining the present value of lease payments based on
the information available at commencement date. The Company’s
incremental borrowing rate reflects the estimated rate of interest
that it would pay to borrow on a collateralized basis over a
similar term an amount equal to the lease payments in a similar
economic environment.
Practical Expedients and Accounting Policy Elections
Certain of the Company’s lease agreements include lease and
non-lease components. For all existing asset classes with multiple
component types, the Company has utilized the practical expedient
that exempts it from separating lease components from non-lease
components. Accordingly, the Company accounts for the lease and
non-lease components in an arrangement as a single lease
component.
In addition, for all of its existing asset classes, the Company has
made an accounting policy election not to apply the lease
recognition requirements to its short-term leases (that is, a lease
that, at commencement, has a lease term of twelve months or less
and does not include an option to purchase the underlying asset
that the Company is reasonably certain to exercise). Accordingly,
the Company recognizes lease payments related to its short-term
leases in its statement of operations on a straight-line basis over
the lease term, which has not changed from the prior recognition.
To the extent that there are variable lease payments, the Company
recognizes those payments in its Statement of Operations in the
period in which the obligation for those payments is
incurred.
The total lease expense for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2019, which is included in general and administrative
expense and lease operating expense, was $210,904 and $665,799,
respectively.
22
Supplemental cash flow information related to the Company’s
operating leases is included in the table below:
|
Nine Months
Ended
|
|
September 30,
2019
|
Cash paid for
amounts included in the measurement of lease
liabilities
|
$665,799
|
|
|
Supplemental balance sheet information related to operating leases
is included in the table below:
|
September
30, 2019
|
Right-of-use
lease assets
|
$3,571,232
|
Accrued
liabilities - current
|
(702,675)
|
Operating
lease liabilities - long-term
|
$2,868,557
|
|
|
The weighted average remaining lease term for the Company’s
operating leases is 6.6 years as of September 30, 2019, with a
weighted average discount rate of 10.5%.
Lease liabilities with enforceable contract terms that are greater
than one-year mature as follows:
|
Operating
|
|
Right-of-use
|
|
Leases
|
Remainder of
2019
|
$188,768
|
2020
|
729,047
|
2021
|
699,517
|
2022
|
703,314
|
2023
|
655,561
|
Thereafter
|
2,344,569
|
Total lease
payments
|
5,320,776
|
Less imputed
interest
|
(1,749,544)
|
Total lease
liability
|
$3,571,232
|
|
|
Certain Legal Proceedings
From
time to time, the Company is party to various legal proceedings
arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company expenses or
accrues legal costs as incurred. A summary of the Company’s
legal proceedings is as follows:
Yuma Energy, Inc. v. Cardno PPI Technology Services, LLC
Arbitration
On May
20, 2015, counsel for Cardno PPI Technology Services, LLC
(“Cardno”) 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 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.
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, stating
claims for breach of the MSA billing and warranty provisions. On
July 15, 2016, Cardno served a Counterclaim for $304,209 plus
attorneys’ fees. The parties selected an arbitrator, and the
arbitration hearing was held on March 29, April 12 and April 13,
2018. The parties submitted closing statements on April 30, 2018,
and the arbitrator issued a Final Arbitration Award (the
“Award”) on April 4, 2019.
The
Award granted the Company a $62,923 credit for Cardno’s
improper billing of insurance charges, and a $127,100 credit for
Cardno’s billing in excess of the contractual prices. After
the credits were applied, Cardno was awarded $114,186 on its claim.
The arbitrator also awarded Cardno $23,676 in prejudgment interest.
On June 29, 2019, Cardno filed its First Amended Petition to
Enforce Liens and on Open Account in the Louisiana proceeding. The
amended pleading seeks, among other things, a judgment on the
arbitration award.
23
The Parish of St. Bernard v. Atlantic Richfield Co., et
al
On
October 13, 2016, two subsidiaries of the Company, Yuma Exploration
and Production Company, Inc. (“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. The case was removed to federal district
court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. A motion to remand was
filed and the Court officially remanded the case on July 6, 2017.
Exceptions for Exploration, YPC and the other defendants were
filed; however, the hearing for such exceptions was continued from
the original date of October 6, 2017 to November 22, 2017. The
November 22, 2017 hearing was continued without date because the
parties agreed the case will be de-cumulated into subcases, but the
details of this are yet to be determined. The case was removed
again on other grounds on May 23, 2018. On May 25, 2018, a Motion
was filed on behalf of certain defendants with the United States
Judicial Panel for Multi District Litigation (“JPMDL”)
for consolidated proceedings for all 41 pending cases filed in
Louisiana with claims that are substantially the same as those in
this case. A 42nd case has been added
as a “tag-along”. In the interim, plaintiffs timely
filed their Motion to Remand in the case. Hearing on the Motion
before the JPMDL was held on July 26, 2018 in Santa Fe, New Mexico,
and the JPMDL denied centralization by Order dated July 31, 2018.
The Order indicates Plaintiffs may be willing to consolidate all
cases pending in the Western District with those in the Eastern
District, although Defendants may not be amenable to same. That did
not occur and this case remained stayed. In the interim, an Order
was issued in another of the coastal cases pending in the Eastern
District of Louisiana lifting the stay and setting a schedule for
briefing for plaintiffs’ motion to remand (Parish of Plaquemines v. Riverwood Production
Company, et al., No. 2:18-cv-05217, Eastern District of Louisiana). Judge
Martin L. C. Feldman is assigned to the Riverwood case and he will be the first
Judge in the Eastern District to decide on the remand, and
presumably the Judges assigned to other cases, including this one,
will follow his decision as relevant and appropriate. Oral argument
on the motion to remand in the Riverwood case has been repeatedly
continued, and was finally held on April 10, 2019. Judge Feldman
ruled on May 28, 2019, remanding the case. His opinion is 64 pages
long and towards the end of the opinion, he notes Defendants have
the right to appeal the federal officer issues. Defendants filed a
motion to stay the remand pending the appeal and Judge Feldman
granted the stay. The Company learned that one of the other Judges
in the Eastern District issued an Order administratively closing
his cases, and then Judge Barbier issued an Order on June 14, 2019
administratively closing this case pending further Order of the
Court. On June 19, 2019, Plaintiffs filed a motion to reopen this
case, for lifting of the stay and requesting that the Court set a
briefing schedule and a submission date for the motion. Defendants
filed an opposition. Judge Barbier summarily denied
Plaintiffs’ motion. The Riverwood case is now with the United
States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and
Defendants/Appellants’ brief was filed on August 28, 2019.
Plaintiffs’/Appellees’ brief was due on October 15,
2019. In the interim Plaintiffs/Appellees are fighting the lower
court’s stay in the appellate court. It is impossible to
predict at this time whether this second removal will keep the case
in federal court. 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 consolidated financial statements.
24
Cameron Parish vs. BEPCO LP, et al & 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 Petroleum Acquisition Corp.
(“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.
Davis has become a party to the Joint Defense and Cost Sharing
Agreements for these cases. Motions to remand were filed and the
Magistrate Judge recommended that the cases be remanded. The
Company was advised that the new District Judge assigned to these
cases is Judge Terry A. Doughty, and on May 9, 2018, Judge Doughty
agreed with the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation and the
cases were remanded to the 38th Judicial District
Court, Cameron Parish, Louisiana. The cases were removed again on
other grounds on May 23, 2018. On May 25, 2018, a Motion was filed
on behalf of certain defendants with the United States Judicial
Panel for Multi District Litigation (“JPMDL”) for
consolidated proceedings for all 41 pending cases filed in
Louisiana with claims that are substantially the same as those in
these cases. A 42nd case has been added
as a “tag-along”. In the interim, plaintiffs timely
filed their Motion to Remand in the cases. Hearing on the Motion
before the JPMDL was held on July 26, 2018 in Santa Fe, New Mexico,
and the JPMDL denied centralization by Order dated July 31, 2018.
The Order indicates Plaintiffs may be willing to consolidate all
cases pending in the Western District with those in the Eastern
District, although Defendants may not be amenable to same. That did
not occur. On October 1, 2018, all of the coastal cases pending in
the Western District of Louisiana, including these cases, were
re-assigned to the newly appointed District Judge, Judge Robert R.
Summerhays. On August 29, 2018, Magistrate Judge Kay signed an
Order providing for staged briefing on the plaintiffs’
motion(s) to remand in all the coastal cases pending in the Western
District, with the lowest numbered case (Parish of Cameron v.
Auster, No. 18-677, Western District of Louisiana) to proceed
first. In response to Defendants’ request for oral argument
in the Auster case, Judge Kay issued an electronic Order on October
18, 2018, denying that request and further stating, “The
issues have been thoroughly briefed and we do not find at this time
that oral argument would be helpful.” As noted above,
Magistrate Judge Kay previously recommended remand of these cases,
which recommendation was adopted by the District Judge then
assigned to the cases. Magistrate Judge Kay issued her Report and
Recommendations recommending remand based on the timeliness of the
second removal. Objections and replies were filed to the same and
the District Judge now assigned to the cases granted and held oral
argument on the objections to Magistrate Judge Kay’s Report
and Recommendations on January 16, 2019. The District Judge has not
yet ruled. In the interim, this Court was apprised by Plaintiffs of
Judge Feldman’s Opinion remanding the Riverwood case, and by the relevant
Defendants of Judge Feldman’s grant of a stay pending the
appeal. It is impossible to predict at this time whether this
second removal will keep the cases in federal court. Insurance is
providing defense to Davis in these lawsuits under a full
reservation of rights. 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 consolidated financial
statements.
Louisiana, et al Escheat Tax Audits
During
2015, 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 and is related to the
years 2000 through 2015. The Company has engaged Ryan, LLC to
represent it in this matter. The exposure related to the audits is
not currently determinable and therefore, no liability has been
recorded on the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
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 (Avanti) that would address
the rule for all through a test case. Exploration’s
case has been stayed pending adjudication of the test case. The
hearing for the Avanti test case was held on November 7, 2017, and
on December 6, 2017, the Board of Tax Appeals rendered judgment in
favor of the taxpayer in the first of these cases. The Department
of Revenue filed an appeal to this decision on January 5, 2018. The
Board of Tax Appeals case record has been lodged at the Louisiana
Third Circuit Court of Appeal in the Avanti test case. Oral
argument was held at the Third Circuit on February 26, 2019. On
April 17, 2019, the Louisiana Third Circuit Court of Appeal
rendered a unanimous decision in the Avanti case affirming the
Board of Tax Appeals decision for the taxpayer. The Louisiana
Department of Revenue did not appeal the Avanti case, which is now
a final decision. The Department of Revenue has dropped its
opposition to the normal standard methodology crude oil producers
were using in reporting their Louisiana severance taxes. This
assessment for Exploration on the crude oil pricing issue (i.e.,
the transportation deduction issue) has been resolved. Yuma is
currently awaiting an updated assessment from the Department of
Revenue.
25
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 aggregate amount of
approximately $500,000 is owed by the Company. The Company is
currently evaluating the merits of the claim, is reviewing the LDWF
analysis, and has now requested that the LDWF revise downward the
amount of area their claims of damages pertain to. At this point in
the regulatory 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
consolidated financial statements.
Miami Corporation – South Pecan Lake Field Area
P&A
The
Company, along with several other exploration and production
companies in the chain of title, received letters in June 2017 from
representatives of Miami Corporation demanding the performance of
well plugging and abandonment, facility removal and restoration
obligations for wells in the South Pecan Lake Field Area, Cameron
Parish, Louisiana. Apache is one of the other companies in the
chain of title, and after taking a field tour of the area, has sent
to the Company, along with BP and other companies in the chain of
title, a proposed work plan to comply with the Miami Corporation
demand. The Company is currently evaluating the merits of the claim
and awaiting further information. At this point in the 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 consolidated financial
statements.
John Hoffman v. Yuma Exploration & Production Company, Inc., et
al
This
lawsuit, filed on June 15, 2018 in Livingston Parish, Louisiana,
against the Company, Precision Drilling and Dynamic Offshore
relates to a slip and fall injury to Mr. Hoffman that occurred on
August 28, 2017. Mr. Hoffman was apparently an employee of a
subcontractor of a contractor performing services for the Company.
Precision has made demand for defense and indemnity against the
Company based on a contract entered into between the parties. The
defense and indemnity demand is being contested, primarily on the
grounds that the defense and indemnity obligation is barred by the
Louisiana Anti-Indemnity Act. The Company believes that its
contractor is responsible for injuries to employees of the
contractor or subcontractor and that their insurance coverage, or
insurance coverage maintained by the Company, should cover damages
awarded to Mr. Hoffman. The Company has notified its insurance
carrier of the lawsuit and has made a demand for indemnification to
Dynamic Offshore. Counsel believes that the claim will be
successfully defended, but even if the defense and indemnity claim
is legally enforceable, there is sufficient insurance in place to
cover the exposure. Accordingly, the defense and indemnity claim
does not represent any direct material exposure to the
Company.
26
Hall-Degravelles, L.L.C. v. Cockrell Oil Corporation, et
al
Avalon Plantation, Inc., et al v. Devon Energy Production Company,
L.P., et al
Avalon Plantation, Inc., et al v. American Midstream, et
al
The
Company, as a successor in interest from another company years ago,
along with 41 other companies in the chain of title, was named as a
defendant in these lawsuits brought in St. Mary Parish, Louisiana.
The substance of each of the petitions is virtually identical. In
each case, the plaintiff(s) are seeking to recover damages to their
property resulting from “oil and gas exploration and
production activities.” The cited grounds for these actions
include La. R.S. 30:29 (providing for restoration of property
affected by oilfield contamination) and C.C. art. 2688
(notification by the lessee to the lessor when leased property is
damaged). The plaintiffs have attempted to have these three cases
consolidated. A hearing on motion to consolidate was held on
January 15, 2019. At that time, Judge Sigur stated from the bench
that he did not have sufficient information to order consolidation.
A judgment to that effect has been signed by the judge. These cases
are in the very early stages. At this point, not all of the named
defendants have filed responsive pleadings. All of the defendants
who have responded at this point have, inter alia, filed exceptions
of vagueness due to the lack of specificity in the petitions which
makes it impossible to determine what action(s) any individual
defendant may have performed which would result in liability to the
plaintiffs. None of these exceptions are currently set for hearing.
The plaintiffs recently filed amended petitions which do not change
the substance of their claims. The plaintiffs requested that
service of these amended petitions be withheld. The Company sold
the leases that appear to be involved in this litigation to Hilcorp
Energy I, L.P. (“Hilcorp”), with an effective date of
September 1, 2016. The conveyance includes an indemnity provision
which appears to transfer liability for this type of damage to
Hilcorp, and the Company has made a demand on Hilcorp for
indemnity. The Company has notified its insurance carrier of the
claim but believes that the suit is without merit. No evaluation of
the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome or associated economic
loss can be made at this early stage, therefore no liability has
been recorded on the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
Vintage Assets, Inc. v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline, L.L.C., et
al
On
September 10, 2018, the Company received a Demand for Defense and
Indemnity from High Point Gas Gathering, L.P. (HPGG) pursuant to
the 2010 Purchase and Sale Agreement between Texas Southeastern Gas
Gathering Company, et al and HPGG, et al. The demand related to a
judgment and permanent injunction entered against HPGG and three
other defendants on May 4, 2018 in the above referenced matter in
the U.S. District Court in the Eastern District of Louisiana. The
Company received a letter dated October 30, 2018 from HPGG
informing it that the May 4, 2018 judgment had been vacated. The
Company has notified its insurance carrier of this matter. No
evaluation of the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome or
associated economic loss can be made at this early stage,
therefore, no liability has been recorded on Company’s
consolidated financial statements.
Texas General Land Office (“GLO”)
On
February 21, 2019, the GLO notified the Company that it would be
conducting an audit of oil and gas production and royalty revenue
for the period of September 2012 to August 2017 related to three of
the Company’s leases located in Chambers County, Texas and
four of the Company’s leases located in Jefferson County,
Texas. The Company is currently working with the GLO to provide the
requested information. The exposure related to the audit is not
currently determinable and therefore, no liability has been
recorded on the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
Sam Banks v. Yuma Energy, Inc.
By
letter dated March 27, 2019, the Company’s Board of Directors
notified Sam L. Banks that it was terminating him as Chief
Executive Officer of the Company pursuant to the terms of his
amended and restated employment agreement dated April 20, 2017 (the
“Employment Agreement”). On April 22, 2019, Mr. Banks
submitted his resignation from the board of directors of the
Company. On March 28, 2019, Mr. Banks, through his legal counsel,
filed a petition (the “Petition”) in the
189th
Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas, naming the Company
as defendant. The Petition alleges a breach of the Employment
Agreement and seeks severance benefits in the amount of
approximately $2.15 million. The Company denies his allegations. On
September 25, 2019, the Company entered into a confidential
settlement agreement with Mr. Banks and the lawsuit has been
dismissed with prejudice.
Allison Renee Romero and M.A. Domatti Management Trust v. Yuma
Energy, Inc. and Davis Petroleum Corp.
This
lawsuit, filed on May 21, 2019 in Cameron Parish, Louisiana against
Yuma and Davis Petroleum Corp. (“DPC”), alleges that
Yuma and DPC contaminated and otherwise damaged two 80-acre parcels
owned by the plaintiffs as the result of Yuma’s and
DPC’s activities related to an oil and gas intrastate field
flowline located on the parcels. The suit alleges that Yuma’s
and DPC’s operation of the flowline, and its ruptures, caused
extensive soil and groundwater contamination of the two parcels.
The suit asks for the costs of restoration, damages for diminution
of the properties’ value and punitive damages, among other
things. The Company is currently receiving coverage related to this
matter from its insurance carrier, and therefore does not
anticipate any material future liability with regard to this
matter. The Company believes, and has so informed the insurance
company’s counsel handling the case, that it has already
remediated the contamination complained of, in accordance with the
State of Louisiana regulations. Discovery is currently proceeding
in this matter. Because the matter is in a very preliminary stage,
the Company cannot evaluate the likelihood of an unfavorable
outcome or whether any liability would be covered by its insurance
policy; as a result, no liability has been recorded on the
Company’s consolidated financial statements.
27
Alliance Offshore, LLC Liens on Certain Wells
On
October 18, 2019, the Company received notice that liens had been
filed against certain of its wells in Cameron Parish and St.
Bernard Parish, Louisiana by Alliance Offshore, LLC
(“Alliance”). The Company is currently investigating
the validity of these claims and will make every effort to have the
liens released in a timely manner. Certain amounts currently owed
to Alliance are recorded as liabilities in the Company’s
consolidated financial statements.
NOTE 16 – Subsequent Events
The
Company is not aware of any subsequent events which would require
recognition or disclosure in its consolidated financial statements,
except as 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,
2018.
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,”
“we,” “us” and “our”), 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 drilling, developing and producing both oil and natural
gas assets. We also have acreage in the Permian Basin of West Texas
(Yoakum County, Texas), with the potential for additional oil and
natural gas reserves. Finally, we have non-operated positions in
the East Texas Woodbine. Our common stock is listed on the NYSE
American under the trading symbol “YUMA.”
Debt Purchase
On
October 26, 2016, Yuma and three of its subsidiaries, as the
co-borrowers (collectively, the “Borrowers”), entered
into a credit agreement providing for a $75.0 million three-year
senior secured revolving credit facility ((as amended on May 19,
2017, May 8, 2018, and July 31, 2018, the “Original Credit
Agreement”) with Société Générale
(“SocGen”), as administrative agent, SG Americas
Securities, LLC, as lead arranger and bookrunner, and the lenders
signatory thereto (collectively with SocGen, the “Original
Lender”).
On
September 10, 2019, YE Investment LLC (“YEI”), an
affiliate of Red Mountain Capital Partners, LLC (“Red
Mountain”), purchased (the “Debt Purchase”) all
of the outstanding indebtedness and related liabilities under the
Original Credit Agreement totaling approximately $35 million from
the Original Lender. The Debt Purchase included a principal balance
of the credit facility of $32.8 million, plus accrued interest of
$1.3 million, and the release or purchase of losses associated with
the Company’s prior hedging arrangements totaling
approximately $1.1 million.
Forbearance Agreement
On
September 16, 2019, the Borrowers and YEI entered into a
forbearance agreement (the “Forbearance Agreement”)
with respect to the Original Credit Agreement. Under the
Forbearance Agreement, YEI agreed that until October 26, 2019 or
the earlier termination of the Forbearance Agreement, to forbear
from exercising its rights and remedies under or in connection with
the Original Credit Agreement against the Borrowers arising from
certain existing defaults under the Original Credit
Agreement.
28
Restructuring Agreement and Modification of Senior Credit
Facility
On
September 30, 2019, Yuma and certain of its subsidiaries entered
into a Restructuring and Exchange Agreement (the
“Restructuring Agreement”) with Red Mountain, RMCP PIV
DPC, LP, an affiliate of Red Mountain (“DPC PIV”), RMCP
PIV DPC II, LP, an affiliate of Red Mountain (“DPC PIV
II” and together with Red Mountain and DPC PIV, the
“Investors”), and YEI, which provides for (i) the
modification (the “Loan Modification”) of the Original
Credit Agreement; (ii) the exchange (the “Note
Exchange”) of the promissory note evidencing the loans under
the Original Credit Agreement for a convertible note (the
“Convertible Note”) with a principal amount of $1.4
million, an interest rate of 5% per annum, payable monthly
beginning in January 2020, a maturity date of December 31, 2022,
and that is convertible in shares of common stock at a conversion
price of $0.1288668927422 per share, and the related elimination of
a $360,588 outstanding hedge obligation by YEI; and (iii) the
amendment and restatement of the Certificate of Designation of the
Series D Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Certificate of
Designation”) to provide for a reduction of the conversion
price of the Series D convertible preferred stock, $0.001 par value
per share of the Company (the “Series D Preferred
Stock”), from $98.7571635 to $1.44372 per share, and certain
other modifications (the “COD Amendment” and
collectively with the Note Exchange, the
“Transactions”). The $33.9 million
forgiveness of debt with the related party was reflected as
additional paid-in capital in the accompanying financial statements
as a result of equity holdings of the Investors and YEI which
exceeded 10% of the outstanding equity.
Consummation of the
Transactions is subject to several closing conditions, including
(i) approval of the COD Amendment by a majority of the outstanding
voting securities of Yuma; (ii) approval of the issuance of the
shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the Convertible
Note (the “Resulting Shares”) by a majority of the
voting securities of Yuma represented in person or by proxy
provided that a quorum is present; (iii) approval of the issuance
of the shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the
shares of Series D Preferred Stock (the “COD Shares”)
by a majority of the voting securities of Yuma represented in
person or by proxy provided that a quorum is present; (iv) the
absence of any injunction or other legal restraint preventing or
making illegal the Transactions; (v) the accuracy of the
representations and warranties and compliance with their respective
covenants of each of Yuma, the Investors and YEI; (vi) the absence
of a material adverse effect on Yuma; (vii) the execution and
delivery of a customary registration rights agreement; and (viii)
the execution and delivery of a customary board rights agreement.
Following the
consummation of the Transaction, there will effectively be a change
in control wherein the Investors and YEI will own approximately 91%
of the Company's outstanding shares on a fully diluted
basis.
Also,
in connection with the Restructuring Agreement, Yuma and YEI agreed
to negotiate in good faith an amended and restated credit agreement
(the “A&R Credit Agreement”) providing for an
uncommitted delayed draw term loan with (i) a principal amount of
up to $2.0 million, (ii) an interest rate of 10%, payable monthly,
(iii) a maturity date of September 30, 2022, and (iv) a prepayment
penalty of 10% of the principal amount repaid.
On
September 30, 2019, as part of the Restructuring Agreement, the
Borrowers and YEI entered into a loan modification agreement (the
“Loan Modification Agreement”) which amended the
Original Credit Agreement (as amended and modified by the Loan
Modification Agreement, the “Credit Agreement”), to
among other things, modify the loans outstanding under the Original
Credit Agreement by (i) reducing the outstanding principal balance
from approximately $32.8 million, plus accrued and unpaid interest
and expenses, to $1.4 million with the forgiveness of approximately
$31.4 million plus the accrued and unpaid interest and expenses,
(ii) increasing the interest rate to 10% per annum payable
quarterly until December 31, 2019 and monthly beginning in January
2020, (iii) extending the maturity date to September 30, 2022, (iv)
added an event of default if the Transactions, among other events,
do not occur on or before September 30, 2020, and (v) removed the
requirement that the Borrowers comply with the financial covenants
contained in Section 6.1 of the Original Credit Agreement. The
amount of forgiveness from the reduction in principal balance,
accrued interest, and hedge loss liability has been recorded to
additional paid-in capital.
As of
September 30, 2019, the outstanding balance under the Credit
Agreement was $1.4 million with no availability for additional
borrowing. All of the obligations under the Credit Agreement, and
the guarantees of those obligations, are secured by substantially
all of our assets.
As
required under the Original Credit Agreement, we previously entered
into hedging arrangements with SocGen and BP Energy Company
(“BP”) pursuant to International Swaps and Derivatives
Association Master Agreements (“ISDA Agreements”). On
March 14, 2019, we received a notice of an event of default under
our ISDA Agreement with SocGen (the “SocGen ISDA”). Due
to the default under the SocGen ISDA, SocGen unwound all of our
hedges with them. The notice provided for a payment of $335,272 to
settle our outstanding obligations thereunder related to
SocGen’s hedges, which amount was acquired by YEI in the Debt
Purchase. On March 19, 2019, we received a notice of an event of
default under our ISDA Agreement with BP (the “BP
ISDA”). Due to the default under the BP ISDA, BP also unwound
all of our hedges with them. The notice provided for a payment of
$749,240 to settle our outstanding obligations thereunder related
to BP’s hedges; however, that entire amount was forgiven as
part of the Debt Purchase.
29
Reverse Stock Split
On July
3, 2019, we effected a reverse stock split where one share of
common stock, $0.001 par value per share, was issued for fifteen
shares of common stock, $0.001 par value per share. The reverse
stock split resulted in 1,551,989 shares of common stock, $0.001
par value per share, issued and outstanding.
Going Concern
The
factors and uncertainties described below, as well as other factors
which include, but are not limited to, declines in our production,
reduction of personnel, our failure to establish commercial
production on our Permian properties, and our substantial working
capital deficit of approximately $6.7 million, raise substantial
doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern for the
twelve months following the issuance of these financial statements.
The Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared on a going
concern basis of accounting, which contemplates continuity of
operations, realization of assets, and satisfaction of liabilities
and commitments in the normal course of business. The Consolidated
Financial Statements do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of the going concern
uncertainty.
Sale of California Properties
On
April 26, 2019 and effective April 1, 2019, we sold all of our
properties in Kern County, California for net proceeds of
approximately $1.7 million. As additional consideration for the
sale of the assets, if the WTI Index for oil equals or exceeds $65
in the six months following the closing and maintains that average
for twelve consecutive months then the buyer agrees to pay us an
additional $250,000. The net proceeds were applied to the repayment
of borrowings under the credit facility and working
capital.
Preferred Stock
As of
September 30, 2019, we had 2,149,986 shares of our Series D
preferred stock outstanding with an aggregate liquidation
preference of approximately $23.8 million and a conversion price of
$98.7571635 per share. If all of our outstanding shares of Series D
preferred stock were converted into common stock, we would need to
issue approximately 241,089 shares of common stock. The Series D
preferred stock is paid dividends in the form of additional shares
of Series D preferred stock at a rate of 7% per annum
(cumulative).
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 nine
months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018, and the average sales
price per unit sold.
|
Three Months
Ended September 30,
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
Production
volumes:
|
|
|
|
|
Crude oil and
condensate (Bbls)
|
20,569
|
42,642
|
72,911
|
137,121
|
Natural gas
(Mcf)
|
103,358
|
500,969
|
661,057
|
1,672,650
|
Natural gas liquids
(Bbls)
|
6,791
|
22,894
|
38,670
|
77,111
|
Total (Boe)
(1)
|
44,586
|
149,031
|
221,757
|
493,007
|
Average prices
realized:
|
|
|
|
|
Crude
oil and condensate (per Bbl)
|
$59.48
|
$72.48
|
$61.78
|
$68.26
|
Natural
gas (per Mcf)
|
$1.97
|
$2.92
|
$2.69
|
$3.01
|
Natural
gas liquids (per Bbl)
|
$12.08
|
$38.12
|
$22.59
|
$32.47
|
(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).
30
Revenues
The
following table presents our revenues for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2019 and 2018.
|
Three Months
Ended September 30,
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
Sales of natural
gas and crude oil:
|
|
|
|
|
Crude oil and
condensate
|
$1,223,499
|
$3,090,585
|
$4,504,194
|
$9,360,102
|
Natural
gas
|
203,251
|
1,463,581
|
1,779,154
|
5,030,751
|
Natural gas
liquids
|
82,038
|
872,689
|
873,533
|
2,504,115
|
Total
revenues
|
$1,508,788
|
$5,426,855
|
$7,156,881
|
$16,894,968
|
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 (sold in April 2019) is based on an
average of specified posted prices, adjusted for gravity and
transportation.
Crude
oil volumes sold were 51.8%, or 22,073 Bbls, lower for the three
months ended September 30, 2019, compared to crude oil volumes sold
during the three months ended September 30, 2018, due primarily to
decreases from the Livingston Field (1,600 Bbls) due to a
malfunctioning ESP pump which was replaced with a jet pump in June
2019, the La Posada Field (1,800 Bbls) due to the shut in of
Thibodeaux #1 and salt water disposal issues that were corrected in
July 2019, the Lac Blanc Field (3,500 Bbls) due to a hole in
production tubing in LP well #2 and a reduced rate from the LP #1,
the Cameron Canal Field (2,000 Bbls) due to sanding up and the
subsequent shut in of EE Broussard, and the Main Pass 4 Field
(1,000 Bbls) due to the shut in of SL 18194 #1 to repair a hole in
the casing. Realized crude oil prices experienced a 17.9% increase
for the three months ended September 30, 2019, compared to the
three months ended September 30, 2018.
Crude
oil volumes sold were 46.8%, or 64,210 Bbls, lower for the nine
months ended September 30, 2019, compared to crude oil volumes sold
during the nine months ended September 30, 2018, due primarily to
decreases from the Livingston Field (6,700 Bbls) due to a
malfunctioning ESP pump which was replaced with a jet pump in June
2019, the La Posada Field (1,800 Bbls) due to the shut in of
Thibodeaux #1 and salt water disposal issues that were corrected in
July 2019, the Lac Blanc Field (8,600 Bbls) due to a hole in
production tubing in LP well #2, the Cameron Canal Field (6,000
Bbls) due to sanding up and the subsequent shut in of EE Broussard,
and the Main Pass 4 Field (3,300 Bbls) due to the shut in of SL
18194 #1 to repair a hole in the casing. Realized crude oil prices
experienced a 9.5% decrease for the nine months ended September 30,
2019, compared to the nine months ended September 30,
2018.
Sale of Natural Gas and Natural Gas Liquids
Our
natural gas is sold under month-to-month contracts with pricing
tied to either first of the month index or a monthly weighted
average of purchaser prices received. Natural gas liquids are sold
under month-to-month or year-to-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 September 30, 2019 compared to the three months
ended September 30, 2018, we experienced a 79.4%, or 397,611 Mcf,
decrease in natural gas volumes sold, and a decrease in natural gas
liquids sold of 70.3%, or 16,103 Bbls. The decreases were due
primarily to decreases from the La Posada Field (58,000 Mcf), the
Lac Blanc Field (224,000 Mcf), and the Cameron Canal Field (59,000
Mcf) due to the reasons listed above. During the same period,
realized natural gas prices decreased by 32.5%, and realized
natural gas liquids prices decreased by 68.3%.
31
For the
nine months ended September 30, 2019 compared to the nine months
ended September 30, 2018, we experienced a 60.5%, or 1,011,593 Mcf,
decrease in natural gas volumes sold, and a decrease in natural gas
liquids sold of 49.9%, or 38,441 Bbls. The decreases were due
primarily to decreases from the La Posada Field (416,000 Mcf), the
Lac Blanc Field (367,000 Mcf), and the Cameron Canal Field (163,000
Mcf) due to the reasons listed above. During the same period,
realized natural gas prices decreased by 10.6%, and realized
natural gas liquids prices decreased by 30.4%.
Expenses
Lease Operating Expenses
Our
lease operating expenses (“LOE”) and LOE per Boe for
the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018, are
set forth below:
|
Three Months
Ended September 30,
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
Lease operating
expenses
|
$854,224
|
$1,609,659
|
$3,947,263
|
$5,165,788
|
Severance, ad
valorem taxes and
|
|
|
|
|
marketing
|
418,101
|
855,361
|
1,619,576
|
2,720,825
|
Total
LOE
|
$1,272,325
|
$2,465,020
|
$5,566,839
|
$7,886,613
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOE per
Boe
|
$28.48
|
$16.54
|
$25.10
|
$16.00
|
LOE per Boe without
severance,
|
|
|
|
|
ad valorem taxes
and marketing
|
$19.12
|
$10.80
|
$17.80
|
$10.48
|
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
48.4% decrease in total LOE for the three months ended September
30, 2019, compared to the three months ended September 30, 2018 was
due to a $437,260 decrease in severance, ad valorem, and marketing,
and a $755,435 decrease in lease operating expense. The decreases
in marketing and operating costs were primarily due to lower
natural gas and NGL sales. LOE per barrel of oil equivalent
increased by 72.2% from the same period of the prior year generally
due to the decrease in volumes noted above.
The
29.4% decrease in total LOE for the nine months ended September 30,
2019, compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2018 was due
to a $1,101,249 decrease in severance, ad valorem, and marketing,
and a $1,218,525 decrease in lease operating expense. The decreases
in marketing and operating costs were primarily due to lower
natural gas and NGL sales. LOE per barrel of oil equivalent
increased by 56.9% from the same period of the prior year generally
due to the decrease in volumes noted above.
General and Administrative Expenses
Our
general and administrative (“G&A”) expenses for the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2019 and 2018, are
summarized as follows:
|
Three Months
Ended September 30,
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
General and
administrative:
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
$3,087
|
$143,214
|
$(145,066)
|
$503,738
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
1,067,538
|
1,129,218
|
4,115,992
|
5,109,731
|
Capitalized
|
-
|
(89,552)
|
-
|
(733,199)
|
Net
other
|
1,067,538
|
1,039,666
|
4,115,992
|
4,376,532
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net general and
administrative expenses
|
$1,070,625
|
$1,182,880
|
$3,970,926
|
$4,880,270
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
G&A
Other primarily consists of overhead expenses, employee
remuneration and professional and consulting fees. We capitalize
certain G&A expenditures relating to oil and natural gas
acquisition, exploration and development activities following the
full cost method of accounting. During the second half of 2018, we
stopped capitalizing overhead due to the departure of our
exploration staff and a lack of development activity.
For the
three months ended September 30, 2019, net G&A expenses were
9.5%, or $112,255, lower than the amount for the same period in
2018. Variances include a decrease in salaries and stock-based
compensation of $554,337 and $140,127, respectively, offset by an
increase in consulting fees of $300,440 and an increase in legal
fees of $208,170. The decrease in stock-based compensation was
primarily a result of the reevaluation of liability-based Stock
Appreciation Rights and the forfeiture of various stock awards
since the prior period.
For the
nine months ended September 30, 2019, net G&A expenses were
18.6%, or $909,344, lower than the amount for the same period in
2018. Variances include a decrease in directors’ fees of
$127,500, a decrease in salaries and stock-based compensation of
$1,095,256 and $648,804, respectively, a decrease in group
insurance costs of $174,741, and a decrease in termination benefits
of $169,825, offset by an increase in consulting fees of $927,629
and an increase in legal fees of $331,474. The decrease in
stock-based compensation was primarily a result of the reevaluation
of liability-based Stock Appreciation Rights and the forfeiture of
various stock awards since the prior period.
Depreciation, Depletion and Amortization
Our
depreciation, depletion and amortization (“DD&A”)
for oil and gas properties (excluding DD&A related to other
property, plant and equipment) for the three and nine months ended
September 30, 2019 and 2018, is summarized as follows:
|
Three Months
Ended September 30,
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
DD&A
|
$743,028
|
$2,124,566
|
$3,279,825
|
$6,506,589
|
|
|
|
|
|
DD&A per
Boe
|
$14.79
|
$14.26
|
$16.66
|
$13.20
|
|
|
|
|
|
DD&A decreased
by 65.0% and 49.6%, respectively, for the three and nine months
ended September 30, 2019 compared to the same periods in 2018,
primarily as a result of the decrease in the net quantities of
crude oil and natural gas sold.
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, excluding gains or losses from derivatives.
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. Based on a thorough analysis of our assets,
there was no impairment for the third quarter of fiscal year 2019.
We recorded a full cost ceiling impairment charges of $11.8 million
for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2019. During the
three and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2018, we recorded
a full cost ceiling impairment charge of $3.4 million. 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.
33
Interest Expense
Our
interest expense for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2019 and 2018, is summarized as follows:
|
Three Months
Ended September 30,
|
Nine Months
Ended September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
Interest
expense
|
$379,086
|
$637,772
|
$1,513,891
|
$1,805,472
|
Interest
capitalized
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(133,772)
|
Net
|
$379,086
|
$637,772
|
$1,513,891
|
$1,671,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank
debt
|
$1,400,000
|
$35,000,000
|
$1,400,000
|
$35,000,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
(net of amounts capitalized) decreased $258,686 and $157,809,
respectively, for the three and nine months ended September 30,
2019 over the same periods in 2018 as a result of the purchase of
our credit facility and the forbearance of interest, lower amounts
outstanding under our credit facility during the three and nine
months ended September 30, 2019, and no capitalized interest in the
three and nine months ended September 30, 2019, compared to the
same period in 2018. For a more complete narrative of the purchase
of our credit facility and the forbearance of interest expense,
refer to Note 10 – Debt and Interest Expense in the Notes to
the Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part I
of this report.
Income Tax Expense
The
following summarizes our income tax expense (benefit) and effective
tax rates for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019
and 2018:
|
Three Months Ended
September 30,
|
Nine Months Ended
September 30,
|
||
|
2019
|
2018
|
2019
|
2018
|
Consolidated net
income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
before income
taxes
|
$(1,982,889)
|
$(5,496,717)
|
$(21,198,683)
|
$(12,700,025)
|
Income tax expense
(benefit)
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
$-
|
Effective tax
rate
|
0.00%
|
0.00%
|
0.00%
|
0.00%
|
Differences between
the U.S. federal statutory rate of 21% in 2019 and 2018 and our
effective tax rates are due to the tax effects of valuation
allowances recorded against our deferred tax assets and state
income taxes. Refer to Note 13 – Income Taxes in the Notes to
the Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part I
of this report.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
The
factors and uncertainties described below raise substantial doubt
about our ability to continue as a going concern. Our primary and
potential sources of liquidity include cash on hand, cash from
operating activities, 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 and we
are currently unhedged on our oil and gas production. We incurred
net losses attributable to common shareholders for the years ended
December 31, 2018 and 2017 and for the first three quarters of
2019. At September 30, 2019, our total current liabilities exceed
our total current assets. Additionally, we have extremely limited
liquidity and have suffered recurring losses from operations. In
addition, we are subject to a number of factors that are beyond our
control, including commodity prices, production declines and other
factors that could affect our liquidity and ability to continue as
a going concern.
We
continue to experience mechanical issues on various well sites
including the previously reported Lac Blanc #2, Lac Blanc #1 and
Broussard #2. These negative impacts on our rates of
production directly reduce our operating cash flow. Field
level operating cash flows prior to these issues were approximately
$750,000 per month and, assuming no repairs take place, are
currently projected to be approximately $300,000. Our
prognosis to repair the Lac Blanc #2 is estimated to cost
$3,200,000 net, that if successful, should provide significant
production and return an estimated $400,000 per month to field
level operating cash flows. While we anticipate returning a
number of these wells to production, there is no assurance we can
fund the work based on our current severe liquidity
constraints. Actual results could differ from the estimates,
and the differences could be significant, as we continue to
evaluate repair alternatives.
34
As of
September 30, 2019, we had $1.4 million outstanding under the
Credit Agreement with no availability for additional
borrowing.
During
the first quarter of 2019, we agreed to sell our Kern County,
California properties for $2.1 million in gross proceeds and the
buyer’s assumption of certain plugging and abandonment
liabilities of approximately $864,000. We closed this sale on April
26, 2019 and received net proceeds of approximately $1.7 million.
As additional consideration for the sale of the assets, if WTI
Index for oil equals or exceeds $65 in the six months following
closing and maintains that average for twelve consecutive months
then buyer agreed to pay us an additional $250,000. The net
proceeds were applied to the repayment of borrowings under the
credit facility and working capital.
We have
initiated several strategic alternatives to mitigate our limited
liquidity (defined as cash on hand and undrawn borrowing base), our
financial covenant compliance issues, and to provide us with
additional working capital to develop our existing
assets.
During
the last quarter of 2018, we retained Seaport Global Securities LLC
(“Seaport”) as our exclusive financial advisor and
investment banker in connection with identifying and potentially
implementing various strategic alternatives to improve our
liquidity issues and the possible disposition, acquisition or
merger of the Company or our assets. In addition, prior to the
retention of Seaport, we retained Energy Advisors Group to sell
select properties of the Company. On March 1, 2019, we hired a
Chief Restructuring Officer, and subsequently on March 28, 2019,
appointed that person Interim Chief Executive Officer.
We plan
to take further steps to mitigate our limited liquidity, which may
include, but are not limited to, selling additional assets; further
reducing general and administrative expenses; seeking merger and
acquisition related opportunities; and potentially raising proceeds
from capital markets transactions, including the sale of debt or
equity securities. There can be no assurance that the exploration
of strategic alternatives will result in a transaction or otherwise
improve our limited liquidity.
The
factors and uncertainties described in Note 2 – Liquidity and
Going Concern in the Notes to the Unaudited Consolidated Financial
Statements included in Part I of this report raise substantial
doubt about our ability to continue as a going
concern.
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Net
cash provided by operating activities was $501,674 for the nine
months ended September 30, 2019, compared to net cash provided by
operating activities of $4,734,148 during the same period in 2018.
This decrease was primarily caused by a decrease in revenue as a result of decreased
production.
The primary sources of variability in our cash
flows from operating activities is fluctuations in volumes and
commodity prices as well as sales volume changes. Our cash flows
from operating activities are also dependent on the costs related
to continued operations. The impairment of oil and gas
properties also impacted the cash provided by operating
activities.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
During
the nine months ended September 30, 2019, cash provided by
investing activities totaled $1,255,199, primarily from the
proceeds from the sale of certain oil and gas facilities of
$1,691,588, offset by the payment of net capital expenditures of
$390,032.
35
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
We
expect to finance future development 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 nine months ended September 30, 2019, we had net cash used in
financing activities of $1,939,381. Of that amount, $1,945 of
treasury stock was repurchased in connection with the satisfaction
of tax obligations upon the vesting of employees’ restricted
stock awards, and $742,953 was used for payments on our insurance
financing. In addition, we had repayments of long-term debt of
$1,194,482 from the proceeds from the sale of our Kern County,
California properties.
As of
September 30, 2019, we had no remaining availability on our Credit
Agreement. We had a cash balance of $1,451,984 at September 30,
2019.
Hedging Activities
Current Commodity Derivative Contracts
Historically, we
have sought 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.
There are no commodity derivative instruments open as of September
30, 2019.
As
required under the Credit Agreement, we previously entered into
hedging arrangements with SocGen and BP pursuant to ISDA
Agreements. On March 14, 2019, we received a notice of an event of
default under our SocGen ISDA. Due to the default under the SocGen
ISDA, SocGen unwound all of our hedges with them. The notice
provides for a payment of $335,272 to settle our outstanding
obligations thereunder related to SocGen’s hedges, which
amount was acquired by YEI in the Debt Purchase and is included in
the current maturities of debt at September 30, 2019. On March 19,
2019, we received a notice of an event of default under our BP
ISDA. Due to the default under the ISDA Agreement, BP also unwound
all of our hedges with them. The notice provides for a payment of
$749,240 to settle our outstanding obligations thereunder related
to BP’s hedges; however, that entire amount was forgiven as
part of the Debt Purchase.
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 Interim Chief
Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer, 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
September 30, 2019, we carried out an evaluation, under the
supervision and with the participation of our management, including
our Interim Chief Executive Officer and Interim 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 Interim Chief Executive
Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer concluded that, as of
September 30, 2019 our disclosure controls and procedures were
effective.
Changes in internal control over financial
reporting.
During
the three month period ended September 30, 2019, there were no
changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) that have
materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect,
our internal control over financial reporting.
36
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 15 – 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 a
discussion of our legal proceedings.
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, 2018 on Form 10-K, which could
materially affect our business, financial condition or future
results. The risks described in our 2018 Annual Report on Form 10-K
may not be the only risks facing our Company. There are no material
changes to the risk factors as disclosed in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2018. 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.
None.
Item
3.
Defaults upon Senior Securities.
None.
Item
4.
Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not
Applicable.
Item
5.
Other Information.
None.
37
Item
6.
Exhibits.
EXHIBIT INDEX
FOR
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2019.
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
Incorporated by Reference
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
Exhibit No.
|
|
Description
|
|
Form
|
|
SEC File No.
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
Filing Date
|
|
Filed Herewith
|
|
Furnished Herewith
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Certification
of the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X
|
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
Certification
of the Interim Chief Executive Officer and Interim 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
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
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/
Anthony C. Schnur
|
|
|
|
Name:
|
|
Anthony
C. Schnur
|
|
Date:
November 14, 2019
|
|
Title:
|
|
Interim
Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer), Interim
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Accounting Officer) and Chief
Restructuring Officer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39