XML 70 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.1.9
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

NOTE 15 — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES:

Leases

We lease office facilities in Lafayette and New Orleans, Louisiana, Houston, Texas and New Martinsville and Morgantown, West Virginia under the terms of long-term, non-cancelable leases expiring on various dates through 2025. We also lease certain equipment on our oil and gas properties typically on a month-to-month basis. The minimum net annual commitments under all leases, subleases and contracts with non-cancelable terms in excess of 12 months at December 31, 2014 were as follows:

 

2015

  $1,416   

2016

  1,571   

2017

  1,524   

2018

  1,339   

2019

  1,194   

2020

  1,206   

2021

  879   

2022

  779   

2023

  792   

2024

  805   

2025

  474   

Payments related to our lease obligations for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 were approximately $966, $597 and $894, respectively.

Other Commitments

We are contingently liable to surety insurance companies in the amount of $78,070 relative to bonds issued on our behalf to the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (the “BOEM”), federal and state agencies and certain third parties from which we purchased oil and gas working interests. The bonds represent guarantees by the surety insurance companies that we will operate in accordance with applicable rules and regulations and perform certain plugging and abandonment obligations as specified by applicable working interest purchase and sale agreements.

In connection with our exploration and development efforts, we are contractually committed to the use of drilling rigs and the acquisition of seismic data in the aggregate amount of $352,660 to be incurred over the next four years.

The Oil Pollution Act (the “OPA”) imposes ongoing requirements on a responsible party, including the preparation of oil spill response plans and proof of financial responsibility to cover environmental cleanup and restoration costs that could be incurred in connection with an oil spill. Under the OPA and a final rule adopted by the BOEM in August 1998, responsible parties of covered offshore facilities that have a worst case oil spill of more than 1,000 barrels must demonstrate financial responsibility in amounts ranging from at least $10,000 in specified state waters to at least $35,000 in Outer Continental Shelf waters, with higher amounts of up to $150,000 in certain limited circumstances where the BOEM believes such a level is justified by the risks posed by the operations, or if the worst case oil-spill discharge volume possible at the facility may exceed the applicable threshold volumes specified under the BOEM’s final rule. We do not anticipate that we will experience any difficulty in continuing to satisfy the BOEM’s requirements for demonstrating financial responsibility under the OPA and the BOEM’s regulations.

Litigation

We are named as a party in certain lawsuits and regulatory proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. We do not expect that these matters, individually or in the aggregate, will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

In August 2013, Kimmeridge Energy Exploration Fund, L.P. (“Kimmeridge”) filed a lawsuit against Stone in the 15th Judicial District Court in Lafayette Parish, Louisiana seeking damages in the amount of approximately $18,373 plus interest, costs and attorney fees. Kimmeridge alleges that (1) Stone failed to pay brokerage costs of $1,119 incurred after December 31, 2012 pursuant to a letter of understanding, and (2) Stone owes $17,254 to Kimmeridge by virtue of a letter of intent obligating Stone to negotiate in good faith and close an acquisition involving approximately 33,000 net mineral acres in the Illinois basin. The court granted summary judgment in favor of Stone limiting damages at trial on Kimmeridge’s second claim to $1,000. Accordingly, at this time, total exposure to Stone at trial is $2,119. Stone continues to vigorously defend against both claims. We estimate the potential range of loss upon resolution of this matter to be between $0 and $2,119.