Commitments and Contingencies
|3 Months Ended|
Mar. 31, 2021
|Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]|
|Commitments and Contingencies||Commitments and Contingencies
As of March 31, 2021, the total outstanding contractual commitments entered into as part of normal course of business for supply of certain equipment and other assets was approximately $3.0 million. At March 31, 2021, the total remaining commitments, in connection with the lodging arrangement for our crews was approximately $5.5 million.
The Company enters into purchase agreements with its sand suppliers (the "Sand suppliers") to secure supply of sand as part of its normal course of business. The agreements with the Sand suppliers require that the Company purchase a minimum volume of sand, based primarily on a certain percentage of our sand requirements from our customers or in certain situations based on predetermined fixed minimum volumes, otherwise certain penalties (shortfall fees) may be charged. The shortfall fee represents liquidated damages and is based on a fixed price per ton of unpurchased volumes. Our agreements with the Sand suppliers expire at different times prior to December 31, 2025. During the three months ended March 31, 2021 and 2020, no shortfall fee was recorded. One of the Sand suppliers (“SandCo”) we entered into an agreement with to purchase sand (“Texas sand”) has an indirect relationship with a former executive officer of the Company, because beginning in 2018, the Texas sand was sourced from a mine located on land owned by an entity in which the former executive officer of the Company has a 44% noncontrolling equity interest. The total sand purchased from SandCo during the three months ended March 31, 2020 (the period the former executive was associated with the Company) was approximately $5.3 million.
As of March 31, 2021, the Company had issued letters of credit of approximately $3.7 million under the ABL Credit Facility in connection with the Company’s casualty insurance policy.
In September 2019, a complaint, captioned Richard Logan, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. ProPetro Holding Corp., et al., (the “Logan Lawsuit”), was filed against the Company and certain of its then current and former officers and directors in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.
In July 2020, the Logan Lawsuit Lead Plaintiffs Nykredit Portefølje Administration A/S, Oklahoma Firefighters Pension and Retirement System, Oklahoma Law Enforcement Retirement System, Oklahoma Police Pension and Retirement System, and Oklahoma City Employee Retirement System, and additional named plaintiff Police and Fire Retirement System of the City of Detroit, individually and on behalf of a putative class of shareholders who purchased the Company’s common stock between March 17, 2017 and March 13, 2020, filed a third amended class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act, as amended, and Rule l0b-5 promulgated thereunder, and Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, based on allegedly inaccurate or misleading statements, or omissions of material facts, about the Company’s business, operations and prospects against the Company, certain former officers and current and former directors. In August 2020, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the Logan Lawsuit and in September 2020, the plaintiffs filed their opposition. In October 2020, the Company filed its reply brief in support of the motion to dismiss.
In May 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas consolidated two shareholder derivative lawsuits previously filed against the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors into a single lawsuit captioned In re ProPetro Holding Corp. Derivative Litigation (the “Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit”). In August 2020, the plaintiffs in the Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit filed a consolidated complaint alleging (i) breaches of fiduciary duties, (ii) unjust enrichment and (iii) contribution. The plaintiffs did not quantify any alleged damages in their complaint but, in addition to attorneys’ fees and costs, they seek various forms of relief, including (i) damages sustained by the Company as a result of the alleged misconduct, (ii) punitive damages and (iii) equitable relief in the form of improvements to the Company’s governance and controls. In October 2020, the Company and other defendants filed motions to dismiss the Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit and in December 2020, the plaintiffs filed their opposition. In January 2021, the Company and other defendants filed reply briefs in support of the motions to dismiss.
In October 2019, the Company received a letter from the SEC indicating that the SEC had opened an investigation into the Company, which followed the SEC’s issuance of a formal order of investigation, and requesting that the Company provide certain information and documents, including documents related to the Company's expanded audit committee review and related events. The Company has cooperated and expects to continue to cooperate with the SEC's investigation.
We are presently unable to predict the duration, scope or result of the Logan Lawsuit, the Shareholder Derivative Lawsuit, the SEC investigation, or any other related lawsuit or investigation. As of March 31, 2021, no provision was made by the Company in connection with these pending lawsuits and the SEC investigation as the final outcome cannot be reasonably estimated.
The Company is subject to various federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations that establish standards and requirements for protection of the environment. The Company cannot predict the future impact of such standards and requirements, which are subject to change and can have retroactive effectiveness. The Company continues to monitor the status of these laws and regulations. Currently, the Company has not been fined, cited or notified of any environmental violations that would have a material adverse effect upon its financial position, liquidity or capital resources. However, management does recognize that by the very nature of the Company's business, material costs could be incurred in the near term to maintain compliance. The amount of such future expenditures is not determinable due to several factors, including the unknown magnitude of possible regulation or liabilities, the unknown timing and extent of the corrective actions which may be required, the determination of the Company's liability in proportion to other responsible parties and the extent to which such expenditures are recoverable from insurance or indemnification.
In 2020, the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts commenced a routine audit of the Company's motor vehicle and other related fuel taxes for the periods of July 2015 through December 2020. As of December 31, 2020, the audit is still at an early stage and the final outcome cannot be reasonably estimated.
In 2021, the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts completed a routine audit of gross receipts, and sales, excise and use taxes for the periods of July 2015 through December 2018. The net refund to the Company from the sales and excise and use tax audit was approximately $2.1 million, which was recorded as part of other income in our statement of operations during the three months ended March 31, 2021.
The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies.
Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef