E. CONTINGENCIES	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2019
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
CONTINGENCIES	NOTE E: CONTINGENCIES Carlton Litigation Since December 2006, Carlton Energy Group, LLC (“Carlton”), an individual, Eurenergy Resources Corporation (“Eurenergy”) and several other entities, including New Concept Energy, Inc., which was then known as CabelTel International Corporation (the “Company”), have been involved in contentious litigation alleging tortuous conduct, breach of contract and other matters and, as to the Company, that it was the alter ego of Eurenergy. The Carlton claims were based upon an alleged tortuous interference with a contract by the individual and Eurenergy related to the right to explore a coal bed methane concession in Bulgaria which had never (and has not to this day) produced any hydrocarbons. At no time during the pendency of this project or since did the Company or any of its officers or directors have any interest whatsoever in the success or failure of the so-called “Bulgaria Project.” However, in the litigation Carlton alleged that the Company was the alter ego of certain of the other defendants, including Eurenergy. During August 2017, the parties to the litigation reached an arrangement, the final terms of which will not be determined until the outcome of an appeal to the Supreme Court. Under the terms of the arrangement, the Company should have no financial responsibility to Carlton, nor should any potential final outcome materially adversely affect the Company, in management’s opinion.

E. CONTINGENCIES

3 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2019

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

NOTE E: CONTINGENCIES

Carlton Litigation

Since December 2006, Carlton Energy Group, LLC (“Carlton”), an individual, Eurenergy Resources Corporation (“Eurenergy”) and several other entities, including New Concept Energy, Inc., which was then known as CabelTel International Corporation (the “Company”), have been involved in contentious litigation alleging tortuous conduct, breach of contract and other matters and, as to the Company, that it was the alter ego of Eurenergy. The Carlton claims were based upon an alleged tortuous interference with a contract by the individual and Eurenergy related to the right to explore a coal bed methane concession in Bulgaria which had never (and has not to this day) produced any hydrocarbons. At no time during the pendency of this project or since did the Company or any of its officers or directors have any interest whatsoever in the success or failure of the so-called “Bulgaria Project.” However, in the litigation Carlton alleged that the Company was the alter ego of certain of the other defendants, including Eurenergy.

During August 2017, the parties to the litigation reached an arrangement, the final terms of which will not be determined until the outcome of an appeal to the Supreme Court. Under the terms of the arrangement, the Company should have no financial responsibility to Carlton, nor should any potential final outcome materially adversely affect the Company, in management’s opinion.