XML 26 R11.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.20.4
CONCENTRATIONS, SIGNIFICANT CUSTOMERS, COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
 12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2020
Concentrations, Significant Customers, Commitments And Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
CONCENTRATIONS, SIGNIFICANT CUSTOMERS, COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES CONCENTRATIONS, SIGNIFICANT CUSTOMERS, COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
The Company has concentrated credit risk for cash by maintaining deposits in one bank.  These balances are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation up to $250,000.  From time to time during the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company’s cash balances exceeded the federally insured limits. No losses have been incurred relating to this concentration.
For the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, the Company’s revenues and receivables were comprised of the following customer concentrations:
20202019
% of
Revenues		% of
Receivables		% of
Revenues		% of
Receivables
Customer 133%12%40%36%
Customer 210%12%8%14%
At December 31, 2020 and 2019, and for the years then ended, the Company's segment revenues were comprised of the following customer concentrations:
% of Revenue by Segment 2020% of Revenue by Segment 2019
Black OilRefiningRecoveryBlack OilRefiningRecovery
Customer 154 %— %— %47 %— %— %
Customer 216 %— %— %10 %— %— %
Customer 3— %— %— %10 %— %— %
As of and for the year ended December 31, 2020, the Company had one vendor which accounted for 24% of total purchases and 26% of total payables. No vendor represented 10% or more of total purchases or payables as of and for the year ended December 31, 2019.

The Company’s revenue, profitability and future rate of growth are substantially dependent on prevailing prices for petroleum-based products. Historically, the energy markets have been very volatile, and there can be no assurance that these prices will not be subject to wide fluctuations in the future. A substantial or extended decline in such prices could have a material adverse
effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, cash flows, and access to capital and on the quantities of petroleum-based products that the Company can economically produce.
Business commitment:

On June 5, 2016, the Company and Penthol LLC reached an agreement for the Company to act as Penthol's exclusive agent to market and promote Group III base oil from the United Arab Emirates to the United States. The Company also agreed to provide logistical support. The start-up date was July 25, 2016, with a 5-year term through 2021. Over the Company's objection, Penthol terminated the Agreement effective January 19, 2021. The Company and Penthol are currently involved in litigation involving such termination and related matters as described below.


Litigation:
The Company, in its normal course of business, is involved in various other claims and legal action. In the opinion of management, the outcome of these claims and actions will not have a material adverse impact upon the financial position of the Company. We are currently party to the following material litigation proceedings:
Vertex Refining LA, LLC ("Vertex Refining LA"), the wholly-owned subsidiary of Vertex Operating was named as a defendant, along with numerous other parties, in five lawsuits filed on or about February 12, 2016, in the Second Parish Court for the Parish of Jefferson, State of Louisiana, Case No. 121749, by Russell Doucet et. al., Case No. 121750, by Kendra Cannon et. al., Case No. 121751, by Lashawn Jones et. al., Case No. 121752, by Joan Strauss et. al. and Case No. 121753, by Donna Allen et. al. The suits relate to alleged noxious and harmful emissions from our facility located in Marrero, Louisiana. The suits seek damages for physical and emotional injuries, pain and suffering, medical expenses and deprivation of the use and enjoyment of plaintiffs’ homes. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves and oppose the relief sought in the complaints, provided that at this stage of the litigation, the Company has no basis for determining whether there is any likelihood of material loss associated with the claims and/or the potential and/or the outcome of the litigation.

On November 17, 2020, Vertex filed a lawsuit against Penthol LLC (“Penthol”) in the District Court for the 61st Judicial District, Harris County, Texas (Cause No. 2020-65269), for breach of contract and simultaneously sought a Temporary Injunction enjoining Penthol from, among other things, circumventing Vertex in violation of the terms of that certain June 5, 2016 Sales Representative and Marketing Agreement entered into between Vertex Operating and Penthol (the “Penthol Agreement”). On February 8, 2021, Penthol filed a complaint against Vertex Operating with the Federal District Court for the Southern District of Texas Houston Division; Civil Action No. 4:21-CV-416 (the “Complaint”). Because the issues raised in the Complaint largely mirror those in the then pending state court action in the District Court of Harris County Texas, 61st Judicial District Court, the state court action was removed to federal court and combined with the pending federal court action. Penthol’s Complaint seeks damages from Vertex Operating for alleged violations of the Sherman Act, breach of contract, business disparagement, and misappropriation of trade secrets under the Defend Trade Secrets Act and Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act. Penthol is seeking a declaration that the Penthol Agreement is invalid, unenforceable and was terminated on January 27, 2021, or that Penthol’s actions are excused due to Vertex’s breach of such agreement; that Vertex has materially breached the agreement; an injunction that prohibits enforcement of the agreement, Vertex from using Penthol’s trade secrets, and requires Vertex to return any of Penthol’s trade secrets; awards of actual, treble, consequential and exemplary damages, attorneys’ fees and costs of court; and other relief to which it may be entitled. Vertex contends the claims made by Penthol are completely without merit, and that the termination of the Penthol Agreement was wrongful and resulted in damages to Vertex that it will seek to recover. Further, Vertex contends that the termination of the Penthol Agreement by Penthol constitutes a breach by Penthol under the express terms of the Penthol Agreement, and that Vertex remains entitled to payment of the amounts due Vertex under the Penthol Agreement for unpaid commissions and unpaid performance incentives. On March 2, 2021, Vertex filed a Motion to Dismiss Penthol's lawsuit with the court. Vertex plans to seek the recovery of its legal fees and costs incurred in enforcing its rights under the terms of the Penthol Agreement.Vertex disputes Penthol’s allegations of wrongdoing and intends to vigorously defend itself in this matter.

We cannot predict the impact (if any) that any of the matters described above may have on our business, results of operations, financial position, or cash flows. Because of the inherent uncertainties of such matters, including the early stage and lack of specific damage claims in the Penthol matter, we cannot estimate the range of possible losses from them (except as otherwise indicated).

Related Parties
The Company has a Related Party Transaction committee including at least two independent directors who review and pre-approve all related party transactions.From time to time, the Company consults with a related party law firm. During the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, we paid $62,185 and $100,683, respectively, to such law firm for services rendered.