Commitments and Contingencies |
12 Months Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dec. 31, 2019 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Commitments and Contingencies |
Commitments and Contingencies
Minimum Purchase Commitments
The Company has entered into agreements with suppliers that contain minimum purchase obligations. Failure to purchase the minimum amounts may require the Company to pay shortfall fees. However, the minimum quantities set forth in the agreements are not in excess of currently expected future requirements.
Capital Spend Commitments
The Company has entered into agreements with suppliers to acquire capital equipment.
Aggregate future minimum payments under these agreements at December 31, 2019 are as follows (in thousands):
Letters of Credit
The Company has various letters of credit that were issued under the Company's revolving credit facility which is collateralized by substantially all of the assets of the Company. The letters of credit are categorized below (in thousands):
Insurance
The Company has insurance coverage for physical partial loss to its assets, employer’s liability, automobile liability, commercial general liability, workers’ compensation and insurance for other specific risks. The Company has also elected in some cases to accept a greater amount of risk through increased deductibles on certain insurance policies. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the workers' compensation and automobile liability policies required a deductible per occurrence of up to $0.3 million and $0.1 million, respectively. The Company establishes liabilities for the unpaid deductible portion of claims incurred based on estimates. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the workers' compensation and auto liability policies contained an aggregate stop loss of $5.4 million. The Company establishes liabilities for the unpaid deductible portion of claims incurred relating to workers’ compensation and auto liability based on estimates. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, accrued claims were $2.9 million and $4.7 million, respectively.
The Company also has insurance coverage for directors and officers liability. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the directors and officers liability policy had a deductible per occurrence of $1.0 million and an aggregate deductible of $10.0 million. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, the Company did not have any accrued claims for directors and officers liability.
The Company also self-insures its employee health insurance. The Company has coverage on its self-insurance program in the form of a stop loss of $0.2 million per participant and an aggregate stop-loss of $5.8 million for the calendar year ending December 31, 2019. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, accrued claims were $3.0 million and $3.2 million, respectively. These estimates may change in the near term as actual claims continue to develop.
Warranty Guarantees
Pursuant to certain customer contracts in our infrastructure services segment, the Company warrants equipment and labor performed under the contracts for a specified period following substantial completion of the work. Generally, the warranty is for one year or less. No liabilities were accrued as of December 31, 2019 or 2018 and no expense was recognized during the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 or 2017 related to warranty claims. However, if warranty claims occur, the Company could be required to repair or replace warrantied items, which in most cases are covered by warranties extended from the manufacturer of the equipment. In the event the manufacturer of equipment failed to perform on a warranty obligation or denied a warranty claim made by the Company, the Company could be required to pay for the cost of the repair or replacement.
Bonds
In the ordinary course of business, the Company is required to provide bid bonds to certain customers in the infrastructure services segment as part of the bidding process. These bonds provide a guarantee to the customer that the Company, if awarded the project, will perform under the terms of the contract. Bid bonds are typically provided for a percentage of the total contract value. Additionally, the Company may be required to provide performance and payment bonds for contractual commitments related to projects in process. These bonds provide a guarantee to the customer that the Company will perform under the terms of a contract and that the Company will pay subcontractors and vendors. If the Company fails to perform under a contract or to pay subcontractors and vendors, the customer may demand that the surety make payments or provide services under the bond. The Company must reimburse the surety for expenses or outlays it incurs. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, outstanding performance and payment bonds totaled $40.4 million and $22.3 million, respectively. The estimated cost to complete projects secured by the performance and payment bonds totaled $8.0 million as of December 31, 2019. As of December 31, 2018, outstanding bid bonds totaled $3.6 million. The Company did not have any bid bonds outstanding as of December 31, 2019.
Litigation
The Company is routinely involved in state and local tax audits. During 2015, the State of Ohio assessed taxes on the purchase of equipment the Company believes is exempt under state law. The Company appealed the assessment and a hearing was held in 2017. As a result of the hearing, the Company received a decision from the State of Ohio. The Company is appealing the decision and while it is not able to predict the outcome of the appeal, this matter is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
On June 19, 2018, Wendco of Puerto Rico Inc. filed a putative class action lawsuit in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico styled Wendco of Puerto Rico Inc.; Multisystem Restaurant Inc.; Restaurant Operators Inc.; Apple Caribe, Inc.; on their own behalf and in representation of all businesses that conduct business in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico vs. Mammoth Energy Services Inc.; Cobra Acquisitions, LLC; D. Grimm Puerto Rico, LLC, et al. The plaintiffs allege that the defendants caused power outages in Puerto Rico while performing restoration work on Puerto Rico’s electrical network following Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017, thereby interrupting commercial activities and causing economic loss. The Company believes these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the action. However, at this time, the Company is not able to predict the outcome of this lawsuit or whether it will have a material impact on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
On various dates in 2018 and 2019, Cobra was served with four lawsuits from municipalities in Puerto Rico alleging failure to pay municipal license and construction excise taxes. In 2020, five additional municipalities in Puerto Rico filed lawsuits against Cobra making substantially similar allegations. The Government of Puerto Rico's Central Recovery and Reconstruction Office (“COR3”) has noted the unique nature of work executed by entities such as Cobra in Puerto Rico and that taxes, such as those in these matters, may be eligible for reimbursement by the government. Further, COR3 indicated that it is working to develop a solution that will result in payment of taxes owed to the municipalities without placing an undue burden on entities such as Cobra. The Company continues to work with COR3 to resolve these matters. However, at this time, the Company is not able to predict the outcome of these matters or whether they will have a material impact on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
On March 20, 2019, EJ LeJeune, a former employee of ESPADA Logistics and Security Group, LLC and ESPADA Caribbean LLC (together, “ESPADA”) filed a collective and class action complaint in LeJeune v. Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. d/b/a Cobra Energy & ESPADA Logistics and Security Group, LLC, No. 5:19-cv-00286-DAE, in the Western District of Texas. On August 5, 2019, the court granted the plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend his complaint, dismissing Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. as a defendant, adding Cobra Acquisitions LLC (“Cobra”) as a defendant, and adding ESPADA Caribbean LLC and two officers of ESPADA-James Jorrie and Jennifer Gay Jorrie-as defendants. The amended complaint alleges that the defendants jointly employed the plaintiff and all similarly situated workers and failed to pay them overtime as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act and Puerto Rico law. The complaint also alleges the following violations of Puerto Rico law: illegal deductions from workers’ wages, failure to timely pay all wages owed, failure to pay a required severance when terminating workers without just cause, failure to pay for all hours worked, failure to provide required meal periods and failure to pay a statutorily required bonus to eligible workers. The parties have agreed to stay the case until May 31, 2020 in order to conduct a mediation. Mr. LeJeune seeks to represent a class of workers allegedly employed by one or both defendants and paid a flat amount for each day worked regardless of how many hours were worked. The complaint seeks back wages, including overtime wages owed, liquidated damages equal to the overtime wages owed, attorneys’ fees, costs, and pre- and post-judgment interest. Cobra denies that it employed Mr. LeJeune and the putative class members and intends to enforce the indemnification obligations owed to it by ESPADA. At this time, the Company is not able to predict the outcome of these proceedings or whether they will have a material impact on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
On April 16, 2019, a putative class and collective action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, styled Christopher Williams, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Higher Power Electrical, LLC, Cobra Acquisitions LLC, and Cobra Energy LLC. On June 24, 2019, the complaint was amended to replace Mr. Williams with Matthew Zeisset as the named plaintiff. The plaintiffs allege that the Company failed to pay overtime wages to a class of workers in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act and Puerto Rico law. On July 8, 2019, the defendants moved to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims and compel them to arbitration on an individual basis. On August 21, 2019, upon request of the parties, the court stayed proceedings in the lawsuit pending completion of the arbitration proceedings involving Mr. Zeisset and all opt-in plaintiffs. The plaintiff and additional claimants subsequently initiated individual arbitration proceedings which remain pending. In a similar matter, in April 2019, the Company received a demand for arbitration from seven individual claimants alleging the Company failed to pay overtime in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Puerto Rico law. Other claimants have subsequently initiated individual arbitration proceedings as well. All complainants and the respondents have paid the filing fees necessary to initiate the arbitrations. The parties are currently waiting for arbitrators to be assigned to these matters. At this time, the Company is not able to predict the outcome of these proceedings or whether they will have a material impact on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
In June 2019 and August 2019, the Company was served with three class action lawsuits filed in the Western District of Oklahoma. On September 13, 2019, the court consolidated the three lawsuits under the case caption In re Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. Securities Litigation. On November 12, 2019, the plaintiffs filed their first amended complaint against Mammoth Energy Services, Inc., Arty Straehla, and Mark Layton. Pursuant to their first amended complaint, the plaintiffs brought a consolidated putative federal securities class action on behalf of all investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. common stock between October 19, 2017, and June 5, 2019, inclusive. On January 10, 2020, the defendants filed their motion to dismiss the first amended complaint. The Company believes the plaintiffs’ claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the action. However, at this time, the Company is not able to predict the outcome of this lawsuit or whether it will have a material impact on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
In September 2019, four derivative lawsuits were filed, two in the Western District of Oklahoma and two in the District of Delaware, purportedly on behalf of the Company and against its officers and directors. In October 2019, the plaintiffs in the two Oklahoma actions voluntarily dismissed their respective cases, with one plaintiff refiling his action in the District of Delaware. On September 13, 2019, the Delaware court consolidated the three actions under the case caption In re Mammoth Energy Services, Inc. Consolidated Shareholder Litigation. On January 17, 2020, the plaintiffs filed their consolidated amended shareholder derivative complaint on behalf of Nominal Defendant, Mammoth Energy Services, Inc., and against Arty Straehla, Mark Layton, Arthur Amron, Paul V. Heerwagen IV, Marc McCarthy, Jim Palm, Matthew Ross, Arthur Smith, Gulfport Energy Corporation, and Wexford Capital LP. On February 18, 2020, the defendants filed a motion to stay this action. The Company believes the plaintiffs’ claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the action. However, at this time, the Company is not able to predict the outcome of this lawsuit or whether it will have a material impact on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
On September 10, 2019, the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico unsealed an indictment that charged the former president of Cobra Acquisitions LLC with conspiracy, wire fraud, false statements and disaster fraud. Two other individuals were also charged in the indictment. The indictment is focused on the interactions between a former FEMA official and the former president of Cobra. Neither the Company nor any of its subsidiaries were charged in the indictment. The Company is continuing to cooperate with the related investigation. Given the uncertainty inherent in the criminal litigation, it is not possible at this time to determine the potential outcome or other potential impacts that the criminal litigation could have on the Company. PREPA has stated in court filings that it may contend the alleged criminal activity affects Cobra's entitlement to payment under its contracts with PREPA. Subsequent to the indictment, the Company received (i) a preservation request letter from the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) related to documents relevant to an ongoing investigation it is conducting and (ii) a civil investigative demand (“CID”) from the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”), which requests certain documents and answers to specific interrogatories relevant to an ongoing investigation it is conducting. Both the SEC and DOJ investigations relate to the same subjects as those at issue in the criminal matter. The Company is cooperating with both the SEC and DOJ and is not able to predict the outcome of these investigations or if either will have a material impact on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
On September 12, 2019, AL Global Services, LLC (“Alpha Lobo”) filed a second amended third-party petition against the Company in an action styled Jim Jorrie v. Craig Charles, Julian Calderas, Jr., and AL Global Services, LLC v. Jim Jorrie v. Cobra Acquisitions LLC v. ESPADA Logistics & Security Group, LLC, ESPADA Caribbean LLC, Arty Straehla, Ken Kinsey, Jennifer Jorrie, and Mammoth Energy Services, Inc., in the 57th Judicial District in Bexar County, Texas. The petition alleges that the Company should be held vicariously liable under alter ego, agency and respondeat superior theories for Alpha Lobo’s alleged claims against Cobra and Arty Straehla for aiding and abetting, knowing participation in and conspiracy to breach fiduciary duty in connection with Cobra’s execution of an agreement with ESPADA Caribbean, LLC for security services related to Cobra’s work in Puerto Rico. The Company believes these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the action. However, at this time, the Company is not able to predict the outcome of this lawsuit or whether it will have a material impact on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
On September 16, 2019, Cobra filed a lawsuit against Robert Malcom (“Malcom”) and BHI Energy I Power Services LLC in a case styled Cobra Acquisitions v. Robert L. Malcom and BHI Energy I Power Services LLC in the 242nd Judicial District, District Court of Hale County, Texas. Cobra alleges Malcom breached his non-compete and non-solicit obligations contained in the purchase and sale agreement in which Cobra purchased Higher Power from Malcom. On September 16, 2019, the court entered a Temporary Restraining Order enjoining Malcom from competing against Higher Power or soliciting its customers and employees. Subsequently, on October 25, 2019, the court entered a Temporary Injunction enjoining Malcom from competing against Higher Power or soliciting its customers and employees until the time of trial. Cobra is seeking to permanently enjoin Malcom from competing against Higher Power or soliciting its customers and employees, and further seeks damages it incurred as a result of Malcom's breach of his non-compete agreement. On November 3, 2019, Malcom filed his original counter-petition and third-party petition against Cobra, Higher Power, Keith Ellison and Arty Straehla alleging, among other things, breach of contract, conversion, unjust enrichment, tortious interference, retaliation, violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, and conspiracy. The Company moved to dismiss these claims and, on January 24, 2020, after the hearing on the motion to dismiss, Malcom dismissed his claims without prejudice. As a result, at this time the matter poses no liability to Cobra or other Mammoth Inc. entities.
As of December 31, 2019, PREPA owed the Company approximately $227.0 million for services performed, excluding $42.0 million of interest charged on these delinquent balances as of December 31, 2019. The Company believes these receivables are collectible. However, PREPA is currently subject to bankruptcy proceedings, which were filed in July 2017 and are currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico. As a result, PREPA's ability to meet its payment obligations is largely dependent upon funding from the Federal Emergency Management Agency or other sources. On September 30, 2019, the Company filed a motion with the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico seeking recovery of the amounts owed to the Company by PREPA. PREPA filed a motion to stay the Company's motion on the ground that the ongoing criminal proceedings described above against the former president of Cobra and two other individuals may affect the recovery of those amounts. On October 17, 2019, the court granted PREPA’s request to stay the Company's motion and, on February 3, 2020, extended the stay until a status conference to be held on June 17, 2020. In the event PREPA (i) does not have or does not obtain the funds necessary to satisfy its obligations to Cobra under the contracts, (ii) obtains the necessary funds but refuses to pay the amounts owed to the Company or (iii) otherwise does not pay amounts owed to the Company for services performed, the receivable may not be collectible.
On December 18, 2019, Gulfport filed a lawsuit against Stingray Pressure Pumping in the Superior Court of the State of Delaware. Pursuant to the complaint, Gulfport seeks to terminate the October 1, 2014, Amended and Restated Master Services Agreement for Pressure Pumping Services between Gulfport and Stingray Pressure Pumping (“MSA”). In addition, Gulfport alleges breach of contract and seeks damages for alleged overpayments and audit costs under the MSA and other fees and expenses associated with this lawsuit. The Company believes these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the action. However, at this time, the Company is not able to predict the outcome of this lawsuit or whether it will have a material impact on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
On January 21, 2020, Mastec Renewables Puerto Rico, LLC (“Mastec”) filed a lawsuit against Mammoth Inc., and Cobra, in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of Florida. Pursuant to its complaint, Mastec asserts claims against the Company and Cobra for violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, tortious interference and violations of Puerto Rico state laws. Mastec alleges that it sustained injuries to its business and property in the alleged amount of $500 million because of the Company’s and Cobra’s wrongful interference, payment of bribes, and other inducement to a FEMA official in order to secure two infrastructure contracts to aid in the rebuilding of the energy infrastructure in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria. The Company believes these claims are without merit and will vigorously defend the action. However, at this time, the Company is not able to predict the outcome of this lawsuit or whether it will have a material impact on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
The Company is involved in various other legal proceedings in the ordinary course of business. Although the Company cannot predict the outcome of these proceedings, legal matters are subject to inherent uncertainties and there exists the possibility that the ultimate resolution of these matters could have a material impact on the Company's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Defined contribution plan
The Company sponsors a 401(k) defined contribution plan for the benefit of substantially all employees at their date of hire. The plan allows eligible employees to contribute up to 92% of their annual compensation, not to exceed annual limits established by the federal government. The Company makes discretionary matching contributions of up to 3% of an employee’s compensation and may make additional discretionary contributions for eligible employees. For the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018 the Company paid $3.3 million and $5.6 million, respectively, in contributions to the plan. The Company did not pay any contributions for the year ended December 31, 2017.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||