Commitment and Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2021

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments and Contingencies

Legal Matters

On May 14, 2020 the Company, associated with the predecessor Tengasco entity, received notice of three orders (the “Orders”) issued by the Regional Director of the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (“BSEE”) of the Department of the Interior dated May 13, 2020, stating that the Company, together with a group of several other named parties, were being looked to by the BSEE to perform the decommissioning of facilities on three Gulf of Mexico leases owned by Hoactzin Partners, L. P. (“Hoactzin’) and other lessees due to Hoactzin’s default in its lease obligations to decommission such facilities. No monetary amount was sought or described in the Orders. Hoactzin is controlled by Peter E. Salas, the chairman of Tengasco’s Board of Directors prior to the Merger. Management’s assessment of the likelihood of a loss is remote as the Company believes it has available defenses to the Orders. On August 21, 2020, the bankruptcy court in the Northern District of Texas in Dallas entered an agreed order requiring Hoactzin, the surety on Hoactzin’s bonds, and seven other working interest owners (a group not including the Company) to complete all the necessary decommissioning on all of Hoactzin’s facilities and to prepay all anticipated expenses, including insurance premiums and a contingency reserve, estimated to be necessary to do so. The bankruptcy trustee has reported that all funds to be paid have been received from all parties to the agreed order. Decommissioning is proceeding under the direction of the bankruptcy trustee and approved contractors under the control of the bankruptcy court. Accordingly, it is anticipated that all work contemplated by the Orders will be completed by, and at the expense of, other persons and the relief sought in the Orders for the Company to perform the work will at that time have no impact to the Company.

In response to the announcement that Tengasco and REP LLC were engaging in a business combination, on December 2, 2020 a purported shareholder of Tengasco filed a lawsuit against Tengasco and the members of the Tengasco board of directors in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, captioned Luis A. Nieves Cortes v. Tengasco Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-10111-LAP (which we refer to as the “Cortes complaint”). On December 8, 2020 a purported shareholder of Tengasco filed a lawsuit against Tengasco, the members of the Tengasco board of directors, and Mike Rugen, Tengasco’s CFO/Interim CEO, in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, captioned Sarah King v. Tengasco, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-10343 (which we refer to as the “King complaint”). On December 10, 2020 a purported shareholder of Tengasco filed a lawsuit against Tengasco, the members of the Tengasco board of directors, Antman Sub, LLC and Riley Exploration Permian, LLC in the United States District Court, District of Delaware, captioned Lewis D. Baker v. Tengasco, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-01681-UNA (which we refer to as the “Baker complaint”). On December 31, 2020 a purported shareholder of Tengasco filed a lawsuit against Tengasco and the members of the Tengasco board of directors in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, captioned Lara Gaudio v. Tengasco, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-11114-UA (which we refer to as the “Gaudio complaint”). On February 4, 2021 a purported shareholder of Tengasco filed a lawsuit against Tengasco and the members of the Tengasco board of directors in the United States District Court, District of Colorado, captioned Robert Wilhelm v. Tengasco, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:21-cv-00348 (which we refer to as the “Wilhelm complaint” and together with the Cortes complaint, the King complaint, the Baker complaint, and the Gaudio complaint, the “federal law complaints”). The plaintiffs in the federal law complaints generally claimed that the defendants disseminated a false or misleading registration statement regarding the proposed merger in violation of Section 14(a) and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act and/or Rule 14a-9 promulgated under the Exchange Act. In addition, the plaintiff in the King complaint claims that the individual defendants breached their fiduciary duties of candor and disclosure. The plaintiffs sought, among other things, injunctive relief to prevent consummation of the merger until the alleged disclosure violations were cured, damages in the event the merger was consummated, and an award of attorney's fees and costs. While Tengasco and REP LLC believed the previous disclosures were complete and disagreed with the plaintiffs, Tengasco filed a Form 8-K that included certain additional requested disclosures. Plaintiffs dismissed all of the federal law complaints.

Due to the nature of the Company's business, the Company may at times be subject to claims and legal actions. The Company accrues liabilities when it is probable that future costs will be incurred, and such costs can be reasonably estimated. Such accruals are based on developments to date and the Company’s estimates of the outcomes of these matters. The Company did not recognize any material liability as of March 31, 2021 and September 30, 2020. Management believes it is remote that the impact of such matters will have a materially adverse effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

Environmental Matters

The Company is subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment. These laws, which are often changing, regulate the discharge of materials into the environment and may require the Company to remove or mitigate the environmental effects of the disposal or release of petroleum or chemical

substances at various sites. The Company recorded no environmental liabilities as of March 31, 2021 and September 30, 2020.