Table of Contents

 
 
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
þ   ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008
OR
     
o   TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from                      to                     
Commission file number: 000-50394
Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
     
Delaware   20-0153267
(State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)   (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)
     
1313 E. Alton Gloor Blvd., Suite J, Brownsville, Texas   78526
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)   (Zip Code)
Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code: (956) 831-0886
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Units
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasonal issuer as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “accelerated filer” and “large accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
             
Large Accelerated Filer o   Accelerated Filer o   Non-Accelerated Filer o   Smaller Reporting Company þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act) Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the voting units held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was $19,337,586 as of June 30, 2008.
The number of Common Units outstanding on March 30, 2009 was 2,762,463.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
None.
 
 

 

 


 

TABLE OF CONTENTS
         
ITEM   PAGE NO.  
 
       
Part I
       
 
       
    1  
 
       
    20  
 
       
    40  
 
       
    41  
 
       
    42  
 
       
Part II
       
 
       
    43  
 
       
    46  
 
       
    46  
 
       
    66  
 
       
    67  
 
       
    120  
 
       
    120  
 
       
    121  
 
       
Part III
       
 
       
    122  
 
       
    125  
 
       
    129  
 
       
    133  
 
       
    136  
 
       
Part IV
       
 
       
    137  
 
       
  Exhibit 10.60
  Exhibit 10.61
  Exhibit 10.62
  Exhibit 10.63
  Exhibit 10.64
  Exhibit 10.65
  Exhibit 10.66
  Exhibit 10.67
  Exhibit 10.68
  Exhibit 21
  Exhibit 23.1
  Exhibit 23.2
  Exhibit 31.1
  Exhibit 31.2
  Exhibit 32

 

ii


Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
The statements contained in this Annual Report that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This Annual Report contains forward-looking statements that are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control, which may include statements about:
   
the volatility of realized natural gas prices;
 
   
the discovery, estimation, development and replacement of oil and natural gas reserves;
 
   
our business and financial strategy;
 
   
our drilling locations;
 
   
technology;
 
   
our cash flow, liquidity and financial position;
 
   
our production volumes;
 
   
our lease operating expenses, general and administrative costs and finding and development costs;
 
   
the availability of drilling and production equipment, labor and other services;
 
   
our future operating results;
 
   
our prospect development and property acquisitions;
 
   
the marketing of oil and natural gas;
 
   
competition in the oil and natural gas industry and the transportation and terminaling business;
 
   
the impact of weather and the occurrence of natural disasters such as fires, floods, hurricanes, earthquakes and other catastrophic events and natural disasters;
 
   
governmental regulation of the oil and natural gas industry and the transportation and terminaling business;
 
   
required capital expenditures;
 
   
cash distributions and qualified income;
 
   
developments in oil producing and natural gas producing countries; and
 
   
our strategic plans, objectives, expectations and intentions for future operations;
 
   
our ability to restructure the TCW Credit Facility and/or the RZB Note under terms satisfactory to us.
All of these types of statements, other than statements of historical fact included in this Annual Report are forward-looking statements. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as “may,” “could,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “project,” “intend,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “pursue,” “target,” “continue,” the negative of such terms or other comparable terminology.
The forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report are largely based on our expectations, which reflect estimates and assumptions made by our management. These estimates and assumptions reflect our best judgment based on currently known market conditions and other factors. Although we believe such estimates and assumptions to be reasonable, they are inherently uncertain and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that are beyond our control. In addition, management’s assumptions about future events may prove to be inaccurate. Management cautions all readers that the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report are not guarantees of future performance, and we cannot assure any reader that such statements will be realized or the forward-looking events and circumstances will occur. Actual results may differ materially from those anticipated or implied in the forward-looking statements due to factors listed in the “Risk Factors” section and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” section and elsewhere in this Annual Report. All forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report. We do not intend to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

 

iii


Table of Contents

GLOSSARY OF TERMS
As commonly used in the oil and gas industry and as used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the following terms have the following meanings:
Bbl. One stock tank barrel or 42 United States gallons liquid volume.
Bcf. One billion cubic feet.
Bcfe. One billion cubic feet equivalent, determined using a ratio of six Mcf of gas to one Bbl of oil, condensate or natural gas liquids.
Btu. One British thermal unit, which is the heat required to raise the temperature of a one-pound mass of water from 58.5 to 59.5 degrees Fahrenheit.
Development well. A well drilled within the proved area of an oil or gas reservoir to the depth of a stratigraphic horizon known to be productive.
Dry hole or well. A well found to be incapable of producing hydrocarbons in sufficient quantities such that proceeds from the sale of such production would exceed production expenses and taxes.
Field. An area consisting of a single reservoir or multiple reservoirs all grouped on or related to the same individual geological structural feature and/or stratigraphic condition.
FERC. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.
Gross acres or gross wells. The total acres or wells, as the case may be, in which a working interest is owned.
Hp. Horsepower
MBbls. One thousand barrels of oil or other liquid hydrocarbons.
Mcf. One thousand cubic feet.
Mcfe. One thousand cubic feet equivalent, determined using the ratio of six Mcf of gas to one Bbl of oil, condensate or natural gas liquids.
MMBbls. One million barrels of oil or other liquid hydrocarbons.
MMBtu. One million Btus.
MMcf. One million cubic feet.
MMcf/d. One MMcf per day.
MMcfe. One million cubic feet equivalent, determined using a ratio of six Mcf of gas to one Bbl of oil, condensate or natural gas liquids.
MMcfe/d. One MMcfe per day.
MMMBtu. One billion Btus.
Net acres or net wells. The sum of the fractional working interests owned in gross acres or gross wells, as the case may be.
NYMEX. The New York Mercantile Exchange.

 

iv


Table of Contents

Oil. Crude oil, condensate and natural gas liquids.
Productive well. A well that is found to be capable of producing hydrocarbons in sufficient quantities such that proceeds from the sale of such production exceeds production expenses and taxes.
Proved developed reserves. Reserves that can be expected to be recovered through existing wells with existing equipment and operating methods. Additional oil and gas expected to be obtained through the application of fluid injection or other improved recovery techniques for supplementing the natural forces and mechanisms of primary recovery are included in “proved developed reserves” only after testing by a pilot project or after the operation of an installed program has confirmed through production response that increased recovery will be achieved.
Proved reserves. Proved oil and gas reserves are the estimated quantities of gas, natural gas liquids and oil which geological and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions, i.e., prices and costs as of the date the estimate is made. Prices include consideration of changes in existing prices provided only by contractual arrangements, but not on escalations based on future conditions. The definition of proved reserves is in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commission’s definition set forth in Regulation S-X Rule 4-10(a) and its subsequent staff interpretations and guidance.
Proved undeveloped drilling location. A site on which a development well can be drilled consistent with spacing rules for purposes of recovering proved undeveloped reserves.
Proved undeveloped reserves or PUDs. Reserves that are expected to be recovered from new wells on undrilled acreage or from existing wells where a relatively major expenditure is required for recompletion. Reserves on undrilled acreage are limited to those drilling units offsetting productive units that are reasonably certain of production when drilled. Proved reserves for other undrilled units are claimed only where it can be demonstrated with certainty that there is continuity of production from the existing productive formation. Estimates for proved undeveloped reserves are not attributed to any acreage for which an application of fluid injection or other improved recovery technique is contemplated, unless such techniques have been proved effective by actual tests in the area and in the same reservoir.
Recompletion. The completion for production of an existing wellbore in another formation from that which the well has been previously completed.
Reservoir. A porous and permeable underground formation containing a natural accumulation of economically productive oil and/or gas that is confined by impermeable rock or water barriers and is individual and separate from other reserves.
Standardized Measure. Standardized Measure, or standardized measure of discounted future net cash flows relating to proved oil and gas reserve quantities, is the present value of estimated future net revenues to be generated from the production of proved reserves, determined in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (using prices and costs in effect as of the date of estimation) without giving effect to non-property related expenses, such as general and administrative expenses, debt service and future income tax expenses or to depreciation, depletion and amortization, and discounted using an annual discount rate of 10%. Our Standardized Measure does not include future income tax expenses because our reserves are owned by our subsidiary Rio Vista Penny LLC, which is not subject to income taxes.
Successful well. A well capable of producing oil and/or gas in commercial quantities.
Undeveloped acreage. Lease acreage on which wells have not been drilled or completed to a point that would permit the production of commercial quantities of oil and gas regardless of whether such acreage contains proved reserves.
Unproved reserves. Lease acreage on which wells have not been drilled and where it is either probable or possible that the acreage contains reserves.
Working interest. The operating interest that gives the owner the right to drill, produce and conduct operating activities on the property and a share of production.
Workover. Operations on a producing well to restore or increase production

 

v


Table of Contents

PART I
Items 1 and 2. Business and Properties.
Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and its consolidated subsidiaries (not including the General Partner) are hereinafter referred to as “Rio Vista”. When referring to Rio Vista and using phrases such as “we,” “our,” “us,” or the “Company,” our intent is to refer to Rio Vista and its consolidated subsidiaries as a whole or on an entity basis, depending on the context in which the statements are made.
General
Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. (Rio Vista), a Delaware limited partnership, was formed by Penn Octane Corporation (Penn Octane) on July 10, 2003 and was a wholly owned subsidiary of Penn Octane until September 30, 2004, the date that Penn Octane completed a series of transactions that (i) transferred substantially all of its owned pipeline and terminal assets in Brownsville, Texas and Matamoros, Mexico and certain immaterial liabilities to Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. (RVOP), (ii) transferred Penn Octane’s 99.9% interest in RVOP to Rio Vista and (iii) distributed all of its limited partnership interests (Common Units) in Rio Vista to its common stockholders (Spin-Off), resulting in Rio Vista becoming a separate public company. The Common Units represented 98% of Rio Vista’s outstanding capital and 100% of Rio Vista’s limited partnership interests. The remaining 2% represented the General Partner interest. The General Partner interest is solely owned and controlled by Rio Vista GP LLC (General Partner). Our General Partner is 75% owned by Penn Octane and Penn Octane has 100% voting control over the General Partner pursuant to a voting agreement with the other owner of the General Partner. Our General Partner is responsible for the management of Rio Vista. Common unitholders do not participate in the management of Rio Vista.
Our principal executive offices are located at 1313 Alton Gloor, Suite J, Brownsville, Texas 78526, and our telephone number is (956) 831-0886. Our website is located at http://www.riovistaenergy.com.
Historical Assets and Operations
In August 2006, Rio Vista completed the disposition of substantially all of its U.S. LPG assets to TransMontaigne, including the Brownsville, Texas terminal facility and refined products tank farm, together with associated improvements, leases, easements, licenses and permits; an LPG sales agreement; and all of LPG inventory. In December 2007, Rio Vista completed the disposition of its remaining LPG assets to TransMontaigne, including the U.S. portion of the two pipelines from a Brownsville, Texas terminal owned by TransMontaigne to the U.S. border, along with all associated rights-of-way and easements; all of the outstanding equity interests in entities owning interests in the portion of the two pipelines that extend from the U.S. border to Matamoros, Mexico; and all of the rights for indirect control of an entity that owns a terminal site in Matamoros, Mexico. As a result, effective January 1, 2008, Rio Vista no longer operates the assets associated with the LPG business it had historically conducted.

 

1


Table of Contents

Current Assets and Operations
In July 2007, Rio Vista acquired Regional Enterprises, Inc. (Regional), and in November 2007, Rio Vista acquired certain oil and natural gas producing properties and related assets in the State of Oklahoma formerly owned by GM Oil Properties, Inc., Penny Petroleum Corporation and GO LLC. The businesses and assets we acquired in 2007 are described further below under the subheadings “Regional Enterprises” and “Oklahoma assets.” As a result of these acquisitions in 2007, Rio Vista is now focused on the acquisition, development and production of oil and natural gas properties and related midstream assets, and the operation and development of Regional’s business consisting of transportation and terminaling. However, as discussed under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Debt Obligations — TCW Credit Facility,” we may dispose of some of our assets, including our oil and gas properties in Oklahoma, in connection with the restructuring of our debt. Beginning March 1, 2008 Rio Vista operating LLC (Operating) became the operator of the Oklahoma Assets.
Regional Enterprises
In July 2007, Rio Vista acquired the business of Regional Enterprises, Inc., a Virginia corporation. The principal business of Regional is storage, transportation and railcar transloading of bulk liquids, including chemical and petroleum products owned by its customers.
Regional’s principal facilities are located on the James River in Hopewell, Virginia, where it receives bulk chemicals and petroleum products from ships and barges into approximately 10,400,000 gallons of available storage. Regional also receives product from a rail spur which is capable of receiving 15 rail cars at any one time for transloading of chemical and petroleum liquids for delivery throughout the mid-Atlantic region.
Regional utilizes its fleet of 32 tractors and 48 tankers to distribute the various products it receives as well as to perform direct hauling operations on behalf of its customers.
For the year ended December 31, 2008, Regional’s revenues were divided among transportation, storage and transloading as follows:
                 
Year Ended December 31, 2008  
    Revenue     %  
Transportation
  $ 6,687,000       78 %
Storage
    1,543,000       18 %
Transloading
  343,000     4 %
Total
  $ 8,573,000       100 %
             
Transportation . Regional transports a broad range of hazardous and non-hazardous liquid products, including the following: aluminum sulfate solution, sulfuric acid, sodium hydroxide, hydrogen peroxide, ferric chloride, ferric sulfate, hypochlorite solution, hydrochloric acid, ferrous chloride and aqua ammonia. Regional’s transportation services are primarily for the most part short-haul in nature, with an estimated 85% of Regional’s deliveries being made within 150 miles of its Hopewell, Virginia terminal. Virtually all of Regional’s transportation services are provided within the states of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Tennessee, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Regional currently has a fleet of approximately 48 tanker units and 32 tractors dedicated to its transportation services. The majority of tankers are constructed of stainless steel, with 11 being rubber or chlorobutyl lined, which enables them to carry the toughest corrosives. The tanker fleet also includes four aluminum-constructed tanks, which are equipped with vapor recovery. Rio Vista believes that this extensive inventory of tankers enables Regional to service the majority of its customers’ needs. The tractor fleet consists of late model, Western Star and Mack units.

 

2


Table of Contents

Storage . Regional’s Hopewell facility has a total of 15 tanks, six of which have capacities in excess of one million gallons; of these 15 tanks, 13 tanks are for customer utilization. These tanks have a combined storage capacity of approximately 10.4 million gallons. As of December 31, 2008, Regional had two vacant tanks with a combined storage capacity of 76,000 gallons.
Regional’s loading dock is parallel to the main shipping channel with berthing dolphin clusters approximately 210 feet in length. Two six-inch and one ten-inch steel pipelines service the various tanks. All of the tanks are constructed of carbon steel, both insulated and bare skin and some with internal walls lined and unlined. Several tanks and all of the associated piping are equipped with heat via either heat transfer (hot oil) or steam. As of December 31, 2008, Regional stored the following products: two grades of asphalt, asphalt additive, sodium hydroxide, #2 oil and #4 oil.
Regional receives the products it stores by ship, barge, rail and truck. The products Regional stores are owned by its customers. Certain customers for whom Regional provides storage services also use Regional’s transportation services.
There is approximately 2.25 acres of undeveloped acreage at Regional’s Hopewell facility, which could be used to accommodate additional construction of up to an additional 4.2 million gallons of storage capacity.
Transloading . Regional provides transloading services utilizing its rail siding and off-loading facilities to transfer products from railcars to tanker trucks. Open rail access to the Norfolk Southern and CSX rail lines offers competitive rail economics and flexibility for Regional’s customers. Customers who utilize Regional’s transloading services typically do so because either their own rail service is at full capacity or Regional’s strategic location provides them with an important distribution point not available in their own distribution system. Transloading products, either from storage tanks or tankers, in railcar quantities provides a logistical pricing advantage over long-haul transportation in tanker trucks. Steam heat and compressed air is available at each railcar spot.
Regional has two transloading facilities. Regional leases siding tracks and 15 railcar slots at its Hopewell, Virginia facility, with Norfolk Southern conducting switching operations. As of December 31, 2008, Regional had no vacant slots but anticipates acquiring an additional 900 feet of track, which would result in 16 additional rail slots. Regional also has a transloading facility in Johnson City, Tennessee, where it leases siding tracks and six railcar slots. Switching operations for the Johnson City, Tennessee facility are provided by East Tennessee Railway, which services tracks over which both the CSX and Norfolk Southern railroads operate.
Headquarters Facility . Regional has approximately 2,000 square feet of office facilities at its Hopewell, Virginia headquarters from which it provides most of its management, administrative and marketing operations.
Customers . For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, Suffolk Sales, General Chemical Corporation and Kemira Chemicals Canada Inc. accounted for approximately 14% 10% and 12% of Regional’s revenues, respectively, and approximately 19%, 8% and 10% of Regional accounts receivables, respectively with no other individual customer accounting for more than 10% of Regional’s revenues and accounts receivable.
Competition . The terminaling and transportation industry is highly competitive. We encounter strong competition from other independent operators and from companies in acquiring equipment and securing trained personnel. Many of these competitors have financial and technical resources and staffs substantially larger than ours. As a result, our competitors may be able to bid for contracts at rates which are more attractive to customers than our financial or human resources permit.
We are also affected by competition for availability of specialized equipment. Certain trucking equipment, including tankers, require significant lead time and possible higher prices to obtain. Accordingly, we may not be able to bid for additional business which require equipment not currently available to us.
Employees . As of December 31, 2008, Regional had a total of approximately 61 full- and part-time employees, consisting of 28 drivers, 17 terminal operators, two mechanics and 14 office staff.
Environmental and Regulatory . Regional is a licensed contract or common carrier and holds permits with the Hopewell wastewater treatment facility for treatment and disposal of its wastewater generated through rainwater runoff and tanker washing operations. Regional is subject to various laws and regulations, including those relating to labor, maritime, transportation, environment and motor carrier.

 

3


Table of Contents

Tax Structure . Regional’s assets and operations are conducted within a C-Corp for federal income tax purposes, as many of its activities are not considered “Qualified Income”. Rio Vista intends to explore options regarding the reorganization of some or all of its Regional assets that produce qualifying income into a more efficient tax structure.
Other . Regional qualifies as a small business contractor and vendor capable of storing, transporting and supplying bulk chemical and petroleum products on behalf of U.S. government agencies. Regional intends to seek contracts with the Department of Defense and the Defense Energy Support Center based on the proximity of its Hopewell facilities to multiple U.S. military bases.
Oklahoma Assets
In November 2007, Rio Vista Penny LLC (Rio Vista Penny), an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Vista, completed the purchase of assets from G M Oil Properties, Inc., an Oklahoma corporation (GM Oil) and Penny Petroleum Corporation, an Oklahoma corporation (Penny Petroleum) pursuant to which we acquired real and personal property interests in certain oil and gas properties located in Haskell, McIntosh and Pittsburg counties in Oklahoma, including all of the outstanding capital stock of MV Pipeline Company (MV), an Oklahoma corporation.
In addition, in November 2007, Rio Vista GO, LLC (Rio Vista GO) an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Vista, acquired all of the membership interests of GO, LLC, an Oklahoma limited liability company (GO). GO operates an oil and gas pipeline business located in Haskell and Pittsburg counties in Oklahoma.
Exploration and Production Assets . The Oklahoma Assets include approximately 15,100 net acres located in McIntosh, Haskell and Pittsburg counties in Oklahoma. The Oklahoma Assets also include a 25% participation interest on 4,800 acres owned by Concorde Resources. These assets represent a majority interest in 114 wells that we now operate and 24 non-operated wells in the Booch Sand, Hartshorne Cold Bed Methane, Georgia’s Fork and Spiro formations.
Gathering . The Oklahoma Assets also include the wholly-owned and operated 25-mile Brooken pipeline that gathers natural gas from several properties located in Haskell and Pittsburg counties, as well as MV’s wholly-owned and operated 40-mile pipeline that receives natural gas from leases in the Texanna area north of Lake Eufaula and delivers product to the ONEOK intrastate pipeline in McIntosh County, Oklahoma. The pipeline consists of 40 miles of Class I pipelines, a low-pressure gas gathering system and a 3,000 horsepower central compressor station with a capacity of 50 MMcf per day.
Proved Reserves. Our proved reserves at December 31, 2008 were 22.5 Bcf, all of which were gas. Approximately 8.1 Bcf were classified as proved developed, with a total Standardized Measure value of $9.0 million. At December 31, 2008, we operated 114 wells, or 83%, of our 138 productive wells. Our average proved reserves-to-production ratio, or average reserve life, is approximately 82.5 years, based on our December 31, 2008 reserve report and annualized production of current production levels.

 

4


Table of Contents

Core Operating Areas
The long-lived proved producing properties are principally comprised of majority interests in 177 operated wells (63 undeveloped as of December 31, 2008) and 24 non-operated wells located on either side of Lake Eufaula in the “Crouch Area”, the “Texanna Area”, the “Brooken Area” and the “Canadian Area” with production derived primarily from the Booch sand and Hartshorne Coal Bed Methane reservoirs. We also derive a smaller portion of our reserves from the George’s Fork and Spiro reservoirs. Rio Vista estimates that it has an average revenue interest of approximately 56.0% in these leased interests. Characteristics of our reservoirs are as follows:
Booch sand:
   
Acreage surrounding Lake Eufaula has net sand thickness of 25 feet
 
   
Land surrounding the edges and underneath Lake Eufaula has locations with net sand thickness up to 200 feet
 
   
Well potential: 732 MMcf – 827 MMcf per well
Hartshorne coal bed methane:
   
Coal thickness contours ranging from a minimum of 2 feet to over 4 feet in select areas
 
   
Well potential: 514 MMcf – 827 MMcf per well
 

 

5


Table of Contents

The following diagram illustrates the location of the principal fields and pipeline facilities associated with the Oklahoma assets.
(MAP)
T exanna . The Texanna Area, which is located on the north side of Lake Eufaula, is the area where there has been a significant amount of Booch operating history. Historically, over 200 Bcf has been produced from this formation in this area. Our current proved reserves in this region are based on a second Booch formation which overlays the original Booch formation. In addition there is current production from Hartshorne formations.
Crouch. The Crouch Area, which is located on the north side of Lake Eufaula, immediately north of the Texanna Area currently produces from the Booch, Georges Fork, Spiro, Hartshorne and Cromwell formations.
The Texanna and Crouch Areas are located within our MV Pipeline gathering system. The MV pipeline gathers natural gas from leases in the Texanna and Crouch Areas north of Lake Eufaula and delivers to the ONEOK Gas Transportation, LLC (Oneok) intrastate pipeline in McIntosh County. The MV Pipeline is 40 miles in length, Class I, low-pressure gas gathering system and is joined to a 3,000 hp central compressor station with capacity of 50 MMcf/d. This gathering system was originally constructed in 1984, upgraded in 1998 and 2 new compressors were added during 2006.
All of our production associated with the MV Pipeline and Brooken Pipeline (see below) is sold to Clearwater Enterprises LLC (Clearwater). The price we receive (excluding the impact of hedges) is based on the Oneok monthly index price (MV Pipeline production) or the Centerpoint Energy Gas Transmission (CEGT) index less fuel, gathering and compression. The Oneok and CEGT indexes historically trade at an approximate 10% — 30% discount to the NYMEX monthly averages.

 

6


Table of Contents

Brooken. The Brooken Area is located on the south side of Lake Eufaula at the intersection of Haskell, McIntosh and Pittsburg counties. Our proven reserves in this are primarily relate to the Booch sand, and Hartshorne Coal Bed Methane formations. All of the production in this area is gathered by our Brooken pipeline gathering system. The Brooken pipeline is 25 miles long and has a capacity of 10 MMcf/d. The Brooken Pipeline was originally constructed in 1992. All of the production on the Brooken Pipeline connects to the Centerpoint Energy Field Services gathering system and is sold by Clearwater based on the monthly CEGT index less fuel, gathering, and compression.
We also perform limited gas gathering activities for third-parties which utilize our Brooken pipeline system. The fee charged to third-party producers is set by contract and ranges from $0.70 to $0.75 per Mcf plus line loss and any compressor fuel. We aggregate these volumes with our production and sell all the gas through our meters to the same purchasers. These revenues are collected and distributed to the third-party producers in the normal course of our revenue distribution cycle. We do not take any commodity risk associated with third party gas as we buy and sell this production on similarly posted indexes which provide a guaranteed fixed margin. Most of our gas gathering lines are not subject to United States Department of Transportation (US DOT) safety regulations.
Canadian. The Canadian Area is located southwest of the Brooken Area. It is an area characterized by horizontal drilling for the Hartshorne coal beds. These wells typically produce at significantly higher rates and higher ultimate reserve recovery than the wells in the vertical drilling areas. The cost for the horizontal wells is about three times greater than drilling a vertical well for the same Hartshorne target. Most of the wells currently producing in this area are operated by third parties. All of the wells operated and non-operated feed into third party gathering systems. All of the production from this area is sold under sales agreements which provide for prices that are tied to the CEGT monthly and/or beginning of month indexes, less fuel, gathering, compression and marketing fees.
Drilling Activity
During the year ended December 31, 2008, we drilled the following wells:
                             
            Net            
    Working     Revenue            
Well Name   Interest     Interest     Type of well   Net Cost  
Urquhart 2
    100.0 %     82.8 %   Vert. — Coal   $ 152,887  
Brinsfield #3
    92.8 %     75.4 %   Vert. — U. Booch   $ 75,790  
Haskett #2
    99.5 %     81.5 %   Vert. — Coal   $ 175,404  
Groseclos #3V-17
    100.0 %     85.2 %   Vert. — U. Booch   $ 198,191  
Davis B #2
    99.9 %     85.1 %   Vert. — Coal   $ 151,725  
Tom 1A-1
    100.0 %     81.4 %   Vert. — Coal   $ 131,666  
Donna 1
    100.0 %     80.1 %   Vert. — Coal   $ 166,849  
Cannon 1-31
    100.0 %     76.8 %   Vert. — Spiro   $ 740,501  
Belt 2V-24
    100.0 %     81.3 %   Vert. — Savannah   $ 76,577  
Ace #2-36
    51.0 %     41.4 %   Horiz. — Coal   $ 672,412  
The above wells produced a combined 12,595 Mcf (net) during the month of December 2008.
We are currently not drilling any additional wells based on the current economics associated with natural gas in the area of our leased properties and due to our inability to obtain additional sources of funding for drilling.

 

7


Table of Contents

If drilling activity were to resume, we intend to concentrate our drilling activity on lower risk, development properties. The number, types, and location of wells we drill will vary depending on our capital budget, the cost of each well, anticipated production and the estimated recoverable reserves attributable to each well. We currently require additional funding to allow us to complete the remainder of our development program.
We currently estimate that the cost to drill a new vertical well (gross) will be approximately $172,000, and the cost to drill a new horizontal well will be approximately $780,000.
The information contained in this report about past operations of our wells should not be considered indicative of future performance, nor should it be assumed that there is necessarily any correlation between the number of productive wells drilled, quantities of reserves found or economic value. Productive wells are those that produce commercial quantities of oil and gas, regardless of whether they generate a reasonable rate of return. The ability for us to develop a portion or all of the above wells is contingent on our having adequate capital on hand.
As shown in the tables below, as of December 31, 2008, we had 63 proved undeveloped drilling locations (specific drilling locations as to which our independent engineering firm, Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc., assigned proved undeveloped reserves as of such date).
GAS RESERVES BY FIELD
                         
    OPERATED  
            GAS RESERVES-MCF  
    WELLS     GROSS     NET  
FIELD
                       
 
                       
BROOKEN
    22       6,569.530       2,935.658  
CANADIAN
    6       4,330.734       1,272.063  
TEXANNA
    35       13,499.604       10,204.398  
 
                 
 
                       
TOTAL PROVED UNDEVELOPED
    63       24,399.868       14,412.119  
 
                 
GAS RESERVES BY RESERVOIR
                         
    OPERATED  
            GAS RESERVES-MCF  
    WELLS     GROSS     NET  
RESERVOIR
                       
 
                       
BOOCH
    8       6,150.338       4,623.062  
HARTSHORNE COAL
    55       18,249.530       9,789.057  
 
                 
 
                       
TOTAL PROVED UNDEVELOPED
    63       24,399.868       14,412.119  
 
                 

 

8


Table of Contents

Oil and Natural Gas Prices
Our natural gas production is sold to purchasers based on the local monthly index price, which typically is approximately 70% — 90% of the NYMEX monthly average gas prices less any direct costs for transportation, fuel and shrinkage. We recoup certain of the transportation costs that we pay related to our own gathering systems.
We may enter into forward sales contracts to reduce the impact of commodity price volatility on our cash flow from operations. By removing the price volatility from a significant portion of our oil and gas production, we mitigate, but not eliminate, the potential effects of fluctuating oil and gas prices on our cash flow from operations for those periods. We must obtain approval from TCW before we actual enter into any future sales contracts.
Oil and Gas Data
Proved Reserves
Proved oil and gas reserves are the estimated quantities of oil and gas which geological and engineering data demonstrate with reasonable certainty to be recoverable in future years from known reservoirs under existing economic and operating conditions, i.e., prices and costs as of the date the estimate is made. Prices include consideration of changes in existing prices provided by contractual arrangements, but not escalations based on future conditions. For additional information regarding estimates of oil and gas reserves, including estimates of proved and proved developed reserves, the standardized measure of discounted future cash flows and the changes in discounted future cash flows, see Supplementary Oil and Gas Data (Unaudited) in Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”
The following table presents our estimated net proved oil and gas reserves and the present value of our estimated proved reserves at December 31, 2007 and 2008, based on the reserve reports prepared by Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc. The Standardized Measure values shown in the table are not intended to represent the market value of our estimated oil and gas reserves at such dates.
                 
    December 31,  
    2007     2008  
Reserve Data:
               
Estimated net proved reserves:
               
Gas (Bcf)
    35.589       22.494  
Oil (MMbls)
    0.0       0.0  
Total (Bcfe)
    35.589       22.494  
Proved developed (Bcfe)
    12.766       8.082  
Proved undeveloped (Bcfe)
    22.823       14.412  
Proved developed reserves as a % of total proved reserves
    35.87 %     35.93 %
Standardized Measure (in millions) (1)
  $ 41.272     $ 13.305  
Representative Gas Price per MCF (2) :
  $ 5.03     $ 3.60  
     
(1)  
Does not give effect to forward sales related contracts
 
(2)  
Rio Vista sells its production based on monthly average index prices and therefore the price of gas used to determine the Standardized Measure was based on the monthly weighted average price received by Rio Vista for all its production during December 2007 and 2008 regardless of whether Rio Vista was the operator. The weighted average price excludes any impact associated with sales contracts in effect during the period.

 

9


Table of Contents

The data in the above tables are estimates. Oil and gas reserve engineering is inherently a subjective process of estimating underground accumulations of oil and gas that cannot be measured exactly. The accuracy of any reserve estimate is a function of the quality of available data and engineering and geological interpretation and judgment. Accordingly, reserve estimates may vary from the quantities of oil and gas that are ultimately recovered.
Breakdown of Gas Sales — December 2008
                 
    Price        
    Realized (a)     Gas Production  
    (MCF)     (MCF)  
 
               
Total Operated Wells
  $ 3.69       40,488  
Total Non-operated Wells
  $ 2.25       2,688  
Weighted Average Price Realized
  $ 3.60       43,176  
 
               
Relevant Indexes (b)
               
NYMEX December 2008
  $ 6.89          
 
             
Oneok December 2008 Index
  $ 4.80          
 
             
CEGT Index — Daily Average December 2008
  $ 4.64          
 
             
CEGT Index — December 2008
  $ 4.21          
 
             
     
(a)  
Ignores impact of forward sales contracts and includes fuel, compression, gathering charges and marketing
 
(b)  
Excludes fuel, compression, gathering and marketing charges
These reserve estimates are reviewed internally by management, with final approval by our Chairman of the Board. The process performed by Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc. to estimate the December 31, 2008 reserve amounts included their preparation of our estimated reserve quantities, future producing rates, future net revenue and the present value of such future net revenue. The independent engineering firm also prepared our estimates with respect to reserve categorization, using the definitions for proved reserves set forth in Regulation S-X Rule 4-10 (a) and subsequent Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) staff interpretations and guidance. In the conduct of their preparation of the reserve estimates, Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc. did not independently verify the accuracy and completeness of information and data furnished by the Company with respect to ownership interests, oil and gas production, well test data, historical costs of operation and development, product prices, and any agreements relating to current and future operations of the properties and sales of production. However, if in the course of their work, something came to their attention which brought into question the validity or sufficiency of any such information or data, they did not rely on such information or data until they had satisfactorily resolved their questions relating thereto. Their estimates of reserves conform to the guidelines of the SEC, including the criteria of “reasonable certainty,” as it pertains to expectations about the recoverability of reserves in future years, under existing economic and operating conditions. We have not filed reserve estimates with any Federal authority or agency.
Future prices received for production may vary, perhaps significantly, from the prices assumed for purposes of our estimate of Standardized Measure. The Standardized Measure shown should not be construed as the market value of the reserves at the date shown. The 10% discount factor used to calculate Standardized Measure, which is required by Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 69, “Disclosures about Oil and Gas Producing Activities,” is not necessarily the most appropriate discount rate. The Standardized Measure, no matter what discount rate is used, is materially affected by assumptions as to timing of future production, which may prove to be inaccurate.

 

10


Table of Contents

Production and Price History
The following table sets forth information regarding net production of oil and gas and certain price information for the period November 19, 2007 to December 31, 2007 and the year ended December 31, 2008, which are the periods during which we owned the Oklahoma Assets:
                                                 
    November 19, 2007 to December 31, 2007     Year ended December 31, 2008  
            Non-                     Non-        
    Operated     Operated             Operated     Operated        
    Wells     Wells     Total     Wells     Wells     Total  
Production:
                                               
Gas production (Mcf)
    64,391       15,905       80,296       450,395       70,730       521,125  
Oil production (MBbls)
                                   
 
                                   
Total production (Mcfe)
    64,391       15,905       80,296       450,395       70,730       521,125  
 
                                   
Average daily production (Mcfe/d)
    1,056       260       1,316       1,234       194       1,428  
 
                                               
Weighted Average Realized Prices (1),(2) :
                                               
Gas (Mcf)
  $ 5.33     $ 4.23     $ 5.11     $ 5.99     $ 5.38     $ 5.91  
Oil (Bbl)
  $     $     $     $     $     $  
 
                                   
Total (Mcfe)
  $ 5.33     $ 4.23     $ 5.11     $ 5.99     $ 5.38     $ 5.91  
 
                                   
     
(1)  
Includes the effect of realized prices from forward sales contracts.
 
(2)  
The final NYMEX settled price for December 2007 and 2008 was $7.20 (Mcf) and $6.89 (Mcf) before fuel, gathering and compression, respectively.

 

11


Table of Contents

Productive Wells
The following table sets forth information relating to the productive wells in which we owned a working interest as of December 31, 2008. Productive wells consist of producing wells and wells capable of production, including gas wells awaiting pipeline connections to commence deliveries. “Gross” wells refers to the total number of producing wells in which we have an interest, and “net” wells refers to the sum of our fractional revenue interests owned in gross wells.
GAS RESERVES BY FIELD
                                         
    OPERATED  
            NET     GAS RESERVES-MCF     NET REVENUE  
    WELLS     ACRES     GROSS     NET     INTERESTS  
 
                                       
BROOKEN
    39       4,999       6,713.831       4,392.880       65.43 %
CANADIAN
    16       574       3,068.581       1,119.642       36.49 %
CROUCH AREA
    47       6,620       915.424       670.909       73.29 %
TEXANNA
    4       0       347.268       295.630       85.13 %
OTHER
    8       2,242       1,193.858       926.516       77.61 %
 
                             
 
                                       
TOTAL PROVED DEVELOPED
    114       14,435       12,238.962       7,405.577       60.51 %
 
                             
                                         
    NON-OPERATED  
            NET     GAS RESERVES-MCF     NET REVENUE  
    WELLS     ACRES     GROSS     NET     INTERESTS  
 
                                       
BROOKEN
    12       217       523.986       101.864       19.44 %
CANADIAN
    6       199       2,373.143       569.554       24.00 %
CROUCH AREA
    2       0       0       0       0.00 %
TEXANNA
    0       0       0       0       0.00 %
OTHER
    4       160       601.020       5.134       0.85 %
 
                             
 
                                       
TOTAL PROVED DEVELOPED
    24       576       3,498.149       676.552       19.34 %
 
                             
                                         
    TOTAL  
            NET     GAS RESERVES-MCF     NET REVENUE  
    WELLS     ACRES     GROSS     NET     INTERESTS  
 
                                       
BROOKEN
    51       5,216       7,237.817       4,494.744       62.10 %
CANADIAN
    22       773       5,441.724       1,689.196       31.04 %
CROUCH AREA
    49       6,620       915.424       670.909       73.29 %
TEXANNA
    4       0       347.268       295.630       85.13 %
OTHER
    12       2,402       1,794.878       931.650       51.91 %
 
                             
 
                                       
TOTAL PROVED DEVELOPED
    138       15,011       15,737.111       8,082.129       51.36 %
 
                             

 

12


Table of Contents

GAS RESERVES BY RESERVOIR
                                         
    OPERATED  
            NET     GAS RESERVES-MCF     NET REVENUE  
    WELLS     ACRES     GROSS     NET     INTERESTS  
 
                                       
BOOCH
    33       6,072       4,983.136       3,359.632       67.42 %
GEORGES FORK
    33       4,939       231.275       190.753       82.48 %
HARTSHORNE COAL
    27       669       4,254.925       2,187.801       51.42 %
PITTSBURG CBM AREA
    4       54       945.588       492.540       52.09 %
SPIRO
    8       1,721       492.177       379.794       77.17 %
OTHER
    9       980       1,331.861       795.056       59.70 %
 
                             
 
                                       
TOTAL PROVED DEVELOPED
    114       14,435       12,238.962       7,405.576       60.51 %
 
                             
                                         
    NON-OPERATED  
            NET     GAS RESERVES-MCF     NET REVENUE  
    WELLS     ACRES     GROSS     NET     INTERESTS  
 
                                       
BOOCH
    12       217       523.986       101.864       19.44 %
GEORGES FORK
    0       0       0       0       0.00 %
HARTSHORNE COAL
    11       199       2,974.163       574.689       19.32 %
PITTSBURG CBM AREA
    1       160       0               0.00 %
SPIRO
    0       0       0       0       0.00 %
OTHER
    0       0       0       0       0.00 %
 
                             
 
                                       
TOTAL PROVED DEVELOPED
    24       576       3,498.149       676.553       19.34 %
 
                             
                                         
    TOTAL  
            NET     GAS RESERVES-MCF     NET REVENUE  
    WELLS     ACRES     GROSS     NET     INTERESTS  
 
                                       
BOOCH
    45       6,289       5,507.122       3,461.496       62.85 %
GEORGES FORK
    33       4,939       231.275       190.753       82.48 %
HARTSHORNE COAL
    38       868       7,229.088       2,762.490       38.21 %
PITTSBURG CBM AREA
    5       214       945.588       492.540       52.09 %
SPIRO
    8       1,721       492.177       379.794       77.17 %
OTHER
    9       980       1,331.861       795.056       59.70 %
 
                             
 
                                       
TOTAL PROVED DEVELOPED
    138       15,011       15,737.111       8,082.129       51.36 %
 
                             

 

13


Table of Contents

Developed and Undeveloped Acreage
The following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2008, relating to our leasehold acreage:
                                                 
    Developed     Undeveloped     Total  
    Acreage     Acreage     Acreage  
    Gross     Net     Gross     Net     Gross     Net  
Operated
    18,640       14,435       0       0       18,640       14,435  
Non-operated
    2,880       576       0       0       2,880       576  
 
                                   
Total
    21,520       15,011       0       0       21,520       15,011  
 
                                   
Oil and Gas Operational Overview
We seek to be the operator of wells in which we have an interest. Effective March 1, 2008, Rio Vista Penny LLC became the operator of the wells which were previously operated, under a transition operating agreement, by the predecessor entity, GM Oil Properties Inc., from the date of acquisition of the Oklahoma assets through February 28, 2008. As operator, we design and manage the drilling and enhancement activities and supervise operation and maintenance activities on a day-to-day basis. In connection with the acquisition of the Oklahoma Assets, we obtained a completion and drilling rig (which we subsequently sold), and we enter into consulting arrangements with outside third parties to supervise certain aspects of our drilling operations. We plan to enter contracts for additional third-party drilling rigs as needed to carry out our future drilling program. In addition, we utilize drilling, production and reservoir engineers, geologists and other specialists who work to improve production rates, increase reserves and lower the cost of operating our oil and gas properties.
Seasonal weather conditions and lease stipulations can limit our drilling and producing activities and other operations in Oklahoma, and, as a result, we perform the majority of our drilling during the summer months in these areas. These seasonal anomalies can pose challenges for meeting our well drilling objectives and increase competition for equipment, supplies and personnel during the spring and summer months, which could lead to employee shortages, increased costs or delays in operations. The demand for gas typically decreases during the summer months and increases during the winter months. Seasonal anomalies such as mild winters or hot summers sometimes lessen this fluctuation. In addition, certain gas users utilize gas storage facilities and purchase some of their anticipated winter requirements during the summer. This can also lessen seasonal demand fluctuations.
Employees
At December 31, 2008, Rio Vista did not employ any personnel in connection with operation of the Oklahoma Assets. Beginning March 1, 2008, Rio Vista Operating LLC became the operator of the Oklahoma assets and employs approximately six employees, consisting of eight field workers and three office staff personnel as of such date.
Principal Customers
For the year ended December 31, 2008, approximately 68% of our gas production was sold through Clearwater Enterprises LLC (Clearwater) and approximately 22% was sold to Unimark, LLC. Clearwater in turns sells our production to retail customers within proximity of our gathering system. We believe that if we were to lose Clearwater as a customer, we would be able to sell our production to other customers under similar sales terms.

 

14


Table of Contents

Competition
The oil and gas industry is highly competitive. We encounter strong competition from other independent operators and from major oil companies in acquiring properties, contracting for drilling equipment and securing trained personnel. Many of these competitors have financial and technical resources and staffs substantially larger than ours. As a result, our competitors may be able to pay more for desirable leases, or to evaluate, bid for and purchase a greater number of properties or prospects, than our financial or human resources permit.
We are also affected by competition for drilling rigs and the availability of related equipment. In the past, the oil and gas industry has experienced shortages of drilling rigs, equipment, pipe and personnel, which has delayed development drilling and has caused significant price increases. We are unable to predict when, or if, such shortages may occur or how they would affect our drilling program.
Competition is also strong for attractive oil and gas producing properties, undeveloped leases and drilling rights, and we cannot guarantee that we will be able to compete satisfactorily when attempting to make further acquisitions.
Environmental Matters and Regulation
We believe that our properties and operations are in substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations, and our operations to date have not resulted in any material environmental liabilities. To protect against potential environmental risk, we typically obtain Phase I environmental assessments of any properties to be acquired prior to completing each acquisition.
General. Our operations are subject to stringent federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the discharge of materials into the environment or otherwise relating to environmental protection. Our operations are subject to the same environmental laws and regulations as other companies in the oil and gas industry. These laws and regulations may:
   
require the acquisition of various permits before drilling commences;
   
require the installation of expensive pollution control equipment;
   
restrict the types, quantities and concentration of various substances that can be released into the environment in connection with drilling and production activities;
   
limit or prohibit drilling activities on lands lying within wilderness, wetlands and other protected areas;
   
require remedial measures to prevent pollution from former operations, such as pit closure and plugging of abandoned wells;
   
impose substantial liabilities for pollution resulting from our operations; and
   
with respect to operations affecting federal lands or leases, require preparation of a Resource Management Plan, an Environmental Assessment, and/or an Environmental Impact Statement.

 

15


Table of Contents

These laws, rules and regulations may also restrict the rate of oil and gas production below the rate that would otherwise be possible. The regulatory burden on the oil and gas industry increases the cost of doing business and consequently affects profitability. In addition, Congress and federal and state agencies frequently revise environmental laws and regulations, and any changes that result in more stringent and costly waste handling, disposal and clean-up requirements for the oil and gas industry could have a significant impact on our operating costs. We believe that we substantially comply with all current applicable environmental laws and regulations and that our continued compliance with existing requirements will not have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations. However, we cannot predict how future environmental laws and regulations may impact our properties or operations. For the year ended December 31, 2008, we did not incur any material capital expenditures for installation of remediation or pollution control equipment at any of our facilities. We are not aware of any environmental issues or claims that will require material capital expenditures during 2009 or that will otherwise have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
Environmental laws and regulations that have a material impact on the oil and gas industry include the following:
National Environmental Policy Act. Oil and gas production activities on federal lands are subject to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). NEPA requires federal agencies, including the Department of Interior, to evaluate major agency actions having the potential to significantly impact the environment. In the course of such evaluations, an agency will typically prepare an Environmental Assessment to assess the potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of a proposed project and, if necessary, will prepare a more detailed Environmental Impact Statement that may be made available for public review and comment. All of our current development and production activities, as well as proposed development plans, on federal lands require governmental permits that are subject to the requirements of NEPA. This process has the potential to delay the development of oil and gas projects.
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), and comparable state statutes, regulate the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, disposal and cleanup of “hazardous wastes” and the disposal of non-hazardous wastes. Under the auspices of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), individual states administer some or all of the provisions of RCRA, sometimes in conjunction with their own, more stringent requirements. Drilling fluids, produced waters and most of the other wastes associated with the development and production of oil, gas or geothermal energy constitute “solid wastes,” which are regulated under the less stringent non-hazardous waste provisions, but there is no guarantee that the EPA or individual states will not adopt more stringent requirements for the handling of non-hazardous wastes or recategorize some non-hazardous wastes as hazardous for future regulation.
We believe that we are currently in substantial compliance with the requirements of RCRA and related state and local laws and regulations, and that we hold all necessary and up-to-date permits, registrations and other authorizations to the extent that our operations require them under such laws and regulations. Although we do not believe the current costs of managing our wastes as they are presently classified to be significant, any legislative or regulatory reclassification of oil and gas development and production wastes could increase our costs to manage and dispose of such wastes.
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), also known as the “Superfund” law, imposes joint and several liability, without regard to fault or legality of conduct, on persons who are considered to be responsible for the release of a “hazardous substance” into the environment. These persons include the owner or operator of the site where the release occurred and companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substance at the site. Under CERCLA, such persons may be liable for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances that have been released into the environment, for damages to natural resources and for the costs of certain health studies. In addition, it is not uncommon for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property damage allegedly caused by the hazardous substances released into the environment.

 

16


Table of Contents

We currently own, lease, or operate numerous properties that have been used for oil and gas development and production for many years. Although we believe we have utilized operating and waste disposal practices that were standard in the industry at the time, hazardous substances, wastes or hydrocarbons may have been released on or under the properties owned or leased by us, or on or under other locations, including off-site locations, where such substances have been taken for disposal. In addition, some of these properties have been operated by third parties or by previous owners or operators whose treatment and disposal of hazardous substances, wastes or hydrocarbons was not under our control. These properties and the substances disposed or released on them may be subject to CERCLA, RCRA and analogous state laws. Under such laws, we could be required to remove previously disposed substances and wastes, remediate contaminated property or perform remedial plugging or pit closure operations to prevent future contamination.
Water Pollution Control Act. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, and analogous state laws impose restrictions and strict controls on the discharge of pollutants, including produced waters and other oil and gas wastes, into waters of the United States. The discharge of pollutants into regulated waters is prohibited, except in accordance with the terms of a permit issued by the EPA or the relevant state. The Clean Water Act also prohibits the discharge of dredge and fill material in regulated waters, including wetlands, unless authorized by a permit issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Federal and state regulatory agencies can impose administrative, civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance with discharge permits or other requirements of the federal Clean Water Act and analogous state laws and regulations. We believe that we are in substantial compliance with the requirements of the Clean Water Act.
Clean Air Act. The Clean Air Act, and associated state laws and regulations, regulate emissions of various air pollutants through the issuance of permits and the imposition of other requirements. In addition, the EPA has developed, and continues to develop, stringent regulations governing emissions of toxic air pollutants at specified sources. Some of our new facilities may be required to obtain permits before work can begin, and existing facilities may be required to incur capital costs in order to comply with new emission limitations. These regulations may increase the costs of compliance for some facilities, and federal and state regulatory agencies can impose administrative, civil and criminal penalties for non-compliance. We believe that we are in substantial compliance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act.
Oil Pollution Act. The Federal Oil Pollution Act (OPA) requires owners and operators of facilities that could be the source of an oil spill into waters of the U.S. (a term defined to include rivers, creeks, wetlands and coastal waters) to adopt and implement plans and procedures to prevent any such oil spill. OPA also requires affected facility owners and operators to demonstrate that they have at least $35 million in financial resources to pay the costs of cleaning up an oil spill and to compensate any parties damaged by an oil spill. Such financial assurances may be increased to as much as $150 million if a formal assessment indicates such an increase is warranted.
Other Laws and Regulation. The Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (the Protocol) became effective in February 2005. Under the Protocol, participating nations are required to implement programs to reduce emissions of certain gases, typically referred to as greenhouse gases, that are suspected of contributing to global warming. The United States is not currently a participant in the Protocol, and Congress has resisted recent proposed legislation directed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. However, there has been support in various regions of the country for legislation that requires reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, and some states have already adopted legislation addressing greenhouse gas emissions from various sources, primarily power plants. The oil and gas industry is a direct source of certain greenhouse gas emissions, namely carbon dioxide and methane, and future restrictions on such emissions could impact our future operations. Our operations are not adversely impacted by current state and local climate change initiatives and, at this time, it is not possible to accurately estimate how potential future laws or regulations addressing greenhouse gas emissions would impact our business.

 

17


Table of Contents

Other Regulation of the Oil and Gas Industry
The oil and gas industry is extensively regulated by numerous federal, state and local authorities. Legislation affecting the oil and gas industry is under constant review for amendment or expansion, which frequently increases the regulatory burden. In addition, numerous departments and agencies, both federal and state, are authorized by statute to issue rules and regulations binding on the oil and gas industry and its individual members, some of which carry substantial penalties for failure to comply. Although the regulatory burden on the oil and gas industry increases our cost of doing business and, consequently, affects our profitability, these burdens do not affect us any differently or to any greater or lesser extent than they affect other companies in the industry with similar types, quantities and locations of production.
Legislation continues to be introduced in Congress, and development of regulations continues in the Department of Homeland Security and other agencies concerning the security of industrial facilities, including oil and gas facilities. Our operations may be subject to such laws and regulations. Presently, it is not possible to accurately estimate the costs we would incur to comply with any such facility security laws or regulations, but such expenditures could be substantial.
Drilling and Production. Our operations are subject to various types of regulation at the federal, state and local levels. These types of regulation include requiring permits for the drilling of wells, drilling bonds and reports concerning operations. Most states, and some counties and municipalities, in which we operate regulate one or more of the following:
   
the location of wells;
   
the method of drilling and casing wells;
   
rates of production from wells;
   
the surface use and restoration of properties upon which wells are drilled;
   
the plugging and abandoning of wells; and
   
notice to surface owners and other third parties.

 

18


Table of Contents

State laws regulate the size and shape of drilling and spacing of units or proportion of units governing the pooling of oil and gas properties. Some states allow forced pooling or integration of tracts to facilitate development while other states rely on voluntary pooling of lands and leases. In some instances, forced pooling or unitization may be implemented by third parties and may reduce our interest in the unitized properties. In addition, state conservation laws establish maximum rates of production from oil and gas wells, prohibit the venting or flaring of gas and impose requirements regarding the ratability of production. These laws and regulations may limit the amount of oil and gas we can produce from our wells or limit the number of wells or the locations at which we can drill. Moreover, each state typically imposes a production or severance tax with respect to the production and sale of oil, gas and natural gas liquids within its jurisdiction.
Oil and Gas Transportation and Pricing. The availability, terms and cost of transportation significantly affect sales of oil and gas. The interstate transportation and sale of oil and gas are subject to federal regulation, primarily by the FERC, including regulation of the terms, conditions and rates for interstate transportation, storage and various other matters. Federal and state regulations govern the price and terms for access to oil and gas pipeline transportation. The FERC’s regulations for interstate oil and gas transmission in some circumstances may also affect the intrastate transportation of oil and gas.
Although oil and gas prices are currently unregulated, Congress historically has been active in the area of oil and gas regulation. We cannot predict whether new legislation to regulate oil and gas operations might be proposed, what proposals, if any, might actually be enacted by Congress or the various state legislatures, and what effect, if any, the proposals might have on the operations of the underlying properties.
Rio Vista Employees
Rio Vista has no employees. At December 31, 2008, Rio Vista’s subsidiaries employed personnel in connection with the operation of their businesses as described above. The business of Rio Vista is managed by the General Partner. Penn Octane employs all persons, other than Rio Vista’s employees referred to herein, including executive officers, necessary for the operation of Rio Vista’s business.

 

19


Table of Contents

Item 1A. Risk Factors
Limited partner interests are inherently different from capital stock of a corporation, although many of the business risks to which we are subject are similar to those that would be faced by a corporation engaged in a similar business. The following are some of the important factors that could affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and our actual results could differ materially from estimates contained in our forward-looking statements. We may encounter risks in addition to those described below. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us, or that we currently deem to be immaterial, may also adversely impair or offset our business results of operation, financial condition and prospects.
Risks Related to Our Business
We may not have sufficient cash flow from operations to make the quarterly distribution on our common units following establishment of cash reserves and payment of fees and expenses, including reimbursement of expenses to our General Partner.
We may not have sufficient available cash each quarter to make the quarterly distribution of $0.25 per unit or any other amount. Under the terms of our partnership agreement, the amount of cash otherwise available for distribution will be reduced by our operating expenses and the amount of any cash reserve our General Partner establishes to provide for the proper conduct of our business, meet any of our obligations arising from any of our debt instruments, or other agreements, comply with applicable law, and provide funds for distributions to our unitholders and to our General Partner for any one or more of the next four quarters.
The amount of cash we actually generate will depend upon numerous factors related to our business that may be beyond our control, including, among other things, the risks described in these Risk Factors. In addition, the actual amount of cash that we will have available for distribution will depend on other factors, including:
   
the level of our capital expenditures;
 
   
our ability to make borrowings under our revolving credit facilities, if any, to make distributions;
 
   
limitations on our subsidiaries’ ability to make distributions to us under the TCW credit facility, as discussed under Item 7 — “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”;
 
   
sources of cash used to fund acquisitions;
 
   
debt service requirements and restrictions on distributions contained in our existing and future debt agreements;
 
   
interest payments;
 
   
fluctuations in our working capital needs;
   
general and administrative expenses, including expenses we will incur as a result of being a public company;
 
   
cash settlement of commodity derivative contracts;
 
   
timing and collectibility of receivables; and
   
the amount of cash reserves, which we expect to be substantial, established by the General Partner for the proper conduct of our business.

 

20


Table of Contents

Our estimate of the “available cash” as defined in the partnership agreement, is necessary for us to make a distribution on all units at the target distribution rate for each of the four quarters ending December 31, 2009 and is based on assumptions that are inherently uncertain and are subject to significant business, economic, financial, legal, regulatory and competitive risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those estimated.
Our estimate of “available cash” as defined in the partnership agreement, is necessary for us to make a distribution on all units at the target distribution rate for each of the four quarters ending December 31, 2009 and is based on our management’s calculations, and we have not received an opinion or report on it from any independent accountant. This estimate is based on assumptions about development, production, oil and natural gas prices, settlements under commodity derivative contracts, capital expenditures, expenses, borrowings and other matters that are inherently uncertain and are subject to significant business, economic, financial, legal, regulatory and competitive risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those estimated. If any of these assumptions prove to have been inaccurate, our actual results may differ materially from those set forth in our estimates, and we may be unable to make all or part of the initial quarterly distribution on our units.
Our oil and natural gas reserves naturally decline, and we will be unable to sustain distributions at the level of our initial quarterly distribution without making accretive acquisitions or substantial capital expenditures that maintain or grow our asset base.
Our future oil and natural gas reserves, production volumes, cash flow and ability to make distributions depend on our success in developing and exploiting our current reserves efficiently and finding or acquiring additional recoverable reserves economically. We may not be able to develop, find or acquire additional reserves to replace our current and future production at acceptable costs, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and reduce cash available for distribution.
Because our oil and natural gas properties are a depleting asset, we will need to make substantial capital expenditures to maintain and grow our asset base, which will reduce our cash available for distribution. Because the timing and amount of these capital expenditures fluctuate each quarter, we expect to reserve substantial amounts of cash each quarter to finance these expenditures over time. We may use the reserved cash to reduce indebtedness until we make the capital expenditures. Over a longer period of time, if we do not set aside sufficient cash reserves or make sufficient expenditures to maintain our asset base, we will be unable to make distributions at the current level from cash generated from operations and would therefore expect to reduce our distributions.
If our reserves decrease and we do not reduce our distribution, then a portion of the distribution may be considered a return of part of a unitholder’s investment in us as opposed to a return on investment. Also, if we do not make sufficient growth capital expenditures, we will be unable to expand our business operations and will therefore be unable to raise the level of future distributions.
To fund our substantial capital expenditures, we will be required to use cash generated from our operations, additional borrowings or the issuance of additional equity or debt securities, or some combination thereof, which may limit our ability to make distributions at the then-current distribution rate.
The use of cash generated from operations to fund capital expenditures will reduce cash available for distribution to our unitholders. Our ability to obtain bank financing or to access the capital markets for future equity or debt offerings may be limited by our financial condition at the time of any such financing or offering and the covenants in our existing debt agreements, as well as by adverse market conditions resulting from, among other things, general economic conditions and contingencies and uncertainties that are beyond our control. Our failure to obtain the funds for necessary future capital expenditures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and ability to make distributions.
Even if we are successful in obtaining the necessary funds, the terms of such financings could limit our ability to make distributions to our unitholders, either directly or indirectly. For example, our existing credit facility with TCW prohibits our Oklahoma subsidiaries from making any distributions to us unless we meet certain conditions which we do not currently expect to meet. If we are not able to receive sufficient operating cash from our subsidiaries, our ability to make distributions to our unitholders at the then-current distribution rate could be adversely affected.

 

21


Table of Contents

In addition, incurring additional debt may significantly increase our interest expense and financial leverage. Issuing additional common units may result in significant unitholder dilution thereby increasing the aggregate amount of cash required to maintain the then-current distribution rate. Any of these events could limit our ability to make distributions at the then-current distribution rate.
We may not make cash distributions during periods when we record net income.
The amount of cash we have available for distribution depends primarily on our cash flow, including cash from financial reserves, working capital or other borrowings, and not solely on profitability, which will be affected by non-cash items. As a result, we may make cash distributions during periods when we record losses and may not make cash distributions during periods when we record net income.
Oil and natural gas prices are very volatile. A decline in commodity prices will cause a decline in our cash flow from operations, which may force us to reduce our distributions or cease paying distributions altogether.
The oil and natural gas markets are very volatile, and we cannot predict future oil and natural gas prices. Prices for oil and natural gas may fluctuate widely in response to relatively minor changes in the supply of and demand for oil and natural gas, market uncertainty and a variety of additional factors that are beyond our control, such as:
   
our ability to make borrowings under our revolving credit facilities, if any, to make distributions;
 
   
domestic and foreign supply of and demand for oil and natural gas;
 
   
weather conditions;
 
   
overall domestic and global economic conditions;
   
political and economic conditions in oil and natural gas producing countries, including those in the Middle East and South America;
   
actions of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC, and other state-controlled oil companies relating to oil price and production controls;
 
   
impact of the U.S. dollar exchange rates on oil and natural gas prices;
 
   
technological advances affecting energy consumption and energy supply;
 
   
domestic and foreign governmental regulations and taxation;
 
   
the impact of energy conservation efforts;
   
the proximity, capacity, cost and availability of oil and natural gas pipelines and other transportation facilities;
 
   
the availability of refining capacity; and
   
the price and availability of alternative fuels.

 

22


Table of Contents

Our revenue, profitability and cash flow depend upon the prices of and demand for oil and natural gas, and a drop in prices can significantly affect our financial results and impede our growth. In particular, declines in commodity prices will:
   
negatively impact the value of our reserves, because declines in oil and natural gas prices would reduce the amount of oil and natural gas that we can produce economically;
 
   
reduce the amount of cash flow available for capital expenditures;
 
   
limit our ability to borrow money or raise additional capital; and
 
   
impair our ability to make distributions.
If we raise our distribution levels in response to increased cash flow during periods of relatively high commodity prices, we may not be able to sustain those distribution levels during subsequent periods of lower commodity prices.
An increase in the differential between the NYMEX or other benchmark prices of oil and natural gas and the wellhead price we receive could significantly reduce our cash available for distribution and adversely affect our financial condition.
The prices that we receive for our oil and natural gas production sometimes trade at a discount to the relevant benchmark prices, such as NYMEX, that are used for calculating commodity derivative positions. The difference between the benchmark price and the price we receive is called a differential. We cannot accurately predict oil and natural gas differentials. Increases in the differential between the benchmark price for oil and natural gas and the wellhead price we receive could significantly reduce our cash available for distribution and adversely affect our financial condition.
Future price declines may result in a write-down of our asset carrying values, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and limit our ability to borrow and make distributions.
Declines in oil and natural gas prices may result in our having to make substantial downward adjustments to our estimated proved reserves. If this occurs, or if our estimates of development costs increase, production data factors change or development results deteriorate, accounting rules may require us to write down, as a non-cash charge to earnings, the carrying value of our oil and natural gas properties for impairments. If we incur impairment charges in the future, it could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations in the period incurred and on our ability to borrow funds under our revolving credit facility, which in turn may adversely affect our ability to make cash distributions to our unitholders.
Our commodity derivative contract activities could result in financial losses or could reduce our income, which may adversely affect our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
To achieve more predictable cash flow and to reduce our exposure to adverse fluctuations in the prices of oil and natural gas, we may in the future enter into derivative arrangements for a significant portion of our oil and natural gas production that could result in both realized and unrealized commodity derivative losses. The extent of our commodity price exposure is related largely to the effectiveness and scope of our derivative activities. For example, the derivative instruments we utilize are based on posted market prices, which may differ significantly from the actual crude oil, natural gas and NGL prices we realize in our operations.

 

23


Table of Contents

Our actual future production may be significantly higher or lower than we estimate at the time we enter into derivative transactions for such period. If the actual amount is higher than we estimate, we will have greater commodity price exposure than we intended. If the actual amount is lower than the nominal amount that is subject to our derivative financial instruments, we might be forced to satisfy all or a portion of our derivative transactions without the benefit of the cash flow from our sale or purchase of the underlying physical commodity, resulting in a substantial diminution of our liquidity. As a result of these factors, our derivative activities may not be as effective as we intend in reducing the volatility of our cash flows, and in certain circumstances may actually increase the volatility of our cash flows. In addition, our derivative activities are subject to the following risks:
   
a counterparty may not perform its obligation under the applicable derivative instrument; and
   
there may be a change in the expected differential between the underlying commodity price in the derivative instrument and the actual price received, which may result in payments to our derivative counterparty that are not accompanied by our receipt of higher prices from our production in the field.
Our estimated proved reserves are based on many assumptions that may prove to be inaccurate. Any material inaccuracies in these reserve estimates or underlying assumptions will materially affect the quantities and present value of our reserves.
It is not possible to measure underground accumulations of oil or natural gas in an exact way. Oil and natural gas reserve engineering requires subjective estimates of underground accumulations of oil and natural gas and assumptions concerning future oil and natural gas prices, future production levels and operating and development costs. In estimating our level of oil and natural gas reserves, we and our independent reserve engineers make certain assumptions that may prove to be incorrect, including assumptions relating to the level of oil and natural gas prices, future production levels, capital expenditures, operating and development costs, the effects of regulation and availability of funds. If these assumptions prove to be incorrect, our estimates of reserves, the economically recoverable quantities of oil and natural gas attributable to any particular group of properties, the classifications of reserves based on risk of recovery and our estimates of the future net cash flows from our reserves could change significantly.
Our Standardized Measure is calculated using prices and costs in effect as of the date of estimation, less future development, production and income tax expenses, and discounted to reflect the timing of future net revenue in accordance with the rules and regulations of the SEC. Over time, we may make material changes to reserve estimates to take into account changes in our assumptions and the results of actual development and production.
The reserve estimates we make for fields that do not have a lengthy production history are less reliable than estimates for fields with lengthy production histories. A lack of production history may contribute to inaccuracy in our estimates of proved reserves, future production rates and the timing of development expenditures.
The Standardized Measure of our estimated proved reserves is not necessarily the same as the current market value of our estimated proved oil and natural gas reserves. We base the estimated discounted future net cash flows from our estimated proved reserves on prices and costs in effect on the day of estimate.
The timing of both our production and our incurrence of expenses in connection with the development and production of oil and natural gas properties will affect the timing of actual future net cash flows from proved reserves, and thus their actual present value. In addition, the 10% discount factor we use when calculating discounted future net cash flows in compliance with SFAS No. 69, “Disclosures about Oil and Gas Producing Activities,” may not be the most appropriate discount factor based on interest rates in effect from time to time and risks associated with us or the oil and natural gas industry in general.

 

24


Table of Contents

Developing and producing oil and natural gas are costly and high-risk activities with many uncertainties that could adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations and, as a result, our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
The cost of developing, completing and operating a well is often uncertain, and cost factors can adversely affect the economics of a well. Our efforts will be uneconomical if we drill dry holes or wells that are productive but do not produce as much oil and natural gas as we had estimated. Furthermore, our development and producing operations may be curtailed, delayed or canceled as a result of other factors, including:
   
high costs, shortages or delivery delays of rigs, equipment, labor or other services;
 
   
unexpected operational events and/or conditions;
 
   
reductions in oil and natural gas prices;
 
   
increases in severance taxes;
 
   
limitations in the market for oil and natural gas;
 
   
adverse weather conditions and natural disasters;
 
   
facility or equipment malfunctions, and equipment failures or accidents;
 
   
title problems;
 
   
pipe or cement failures and casing collapses;
 
   
compliance with environmental and other governmental requirements;
 
   
environmental hazards, such as natural gas leaks, oil spills, pipeline ruptures and discharges of toxic gases;
 
   
lost or damaged oilfield development and service tools;
 
   
unusual or unexpected geological formations, and pressure or irregularities in formations;
 
   
loss of drilling fluid circulation;
 
   
fires, blowouts, surface craterings and explosions;
 
   
uncontrollable flows of oil, natural gas or well fluids; and
 
   
loss of leases due to incorrect payment of royalties.
If any of these factors were to occur with respect to a particular field, we could lose all or a part of our investment in the field, or we could fail to realize the expected benefits from the field, either of which could materially and adversely affect our revenue and profitability.

 

25


Table of Contents

Shortages of rigs, equipment and crews could delay our operations and reduce our cash available for distribution.
Higher oil and natural gas prices generally increase the demand for rigs, equipment and crews and can lead to shortages of, and increasing costs for, development equipment, services and personnel. Shortages of, or increasing costs for, experienced development crews and oil field equipment and services could restrict our ability to drill the wells and conduct the operations that we currently have planned. Any delay in the development of new wells or a significant increase in development costs could reduce our revenues.
If we do not make acquisitions on economically acceptable terms, our future growth and ability to make or increase distributions will be limited.
Our ability to grow and to increase distributions to unitholders depends in part on our ability to make acquisitions that result in an increase in pro forma available cash per unit. We may be unable to make such acquisitions because we are:
   
unable to identify attractive acquisition candidates or negotiate acceptable purchase contracts with them;
 
   
unable to obtain financing for these acquisitions on economically acceptable terms; or
 
   
outbid by competitors.
If we are unable to acquire properties containing proved reserves, our total level of proved reserves will decline as a result of our production, and we will be limited in our ability to increase or possibly even to maintain our level of cash distributions.
Any acquisitions we complete are subject to substantial risks that could reduce our ability to make distributions to unitholders.
Even if we do make acquisitions that we believe will increase pro forma available cash per unit, these acquisitions may nevertheless result in a decrease in pro forma available cash per unit. Any acquisition involves potential risks, including, among other things:
   
the validity of our assumptions about reserves, future production, revenues, capital expenditures, operating expenses and costs, including synergies;
 
   
an inability to integrate the businesses we acquire successfully;
 
   
a decrease in our liquidity by using a significant portion of our available cash or borrowing capacity to finance acquisitions;
 
   
a significant increase in our interest expense or financial leverage if we incur additional debt to finance acquisitions;
 
   
the assumption of unknown liabilities, losses or costs for which we are not indemnified or for which our indemnity is inadequate;
 
   
the diversion of management’s attention from other business concerns;
 
   
an inability to hire, train or retain qualified personnel to manage and operate our growing business and assets;
 
   
natural disasters;
 
   
the incurrences of other significant charges, such as impairment of goodwill or other intangible assets, asset devaluation or restructuring charges;
 
   
unforeseen difficulties encountered in operating in new geographic areas; and
 
   
customer or key employee losses at the acquired businesses.

 

26


Table of Contents

Our decision to acquire a property will depend in part on the evaluation of data obtained from production reports and engineering studies, geophysical and geological analyses and seismic and other information, the results of which are often inconclusive and subject to various interpretations.
In addition, our reviews of acquired properties are inherently incomplete because it generally is not feasible to perform an in-depth review of the individual properties involved in each acquisition given time constraints imposed by sellers. Even a detailed review of records and properties may not necessarily reveal existing or potential problems, nor will it permit a buyer to become sufficiently familiar with the properties to assess fully their deficiencies and potential. Inspections may not always be performed on every well, and environmental problems, such as groundwater contamination, are not necessarily observable even when an inspection is undertaken.
Due to our lack of geographic diversification, adverse developments in our operating areas would reduce our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
Currently, our only oil and natural gas properties and related assets are located in Oklahoma and the greatest part of Regional’s operations are conducted within a 150-mile radius of its principal facility in southeastern Virginia. Due to our lack of diversification in location, an adverse development in the relevant businesses within our geographic areas would have a significantly greater impact on our results of operations and cash available for distribution to our unitholders than if we maintained more diverse locations.
We may be unable to compete effectively with larger companies, which may adversely affect our ability to generate sufficient revenue to allow us to make distributions to our unitholders.
The oil and natural gas industry is intensely competitive with respect to acquiring prospects and productive properties, marketing oil and natural gas and securing equipment and trained personnel, and we compete with other companies that have greater resources. Many of our competitors are major and large independent oil and natural gas companies, and possess and employ financial, technical and personnel resources substantially greater than ours. Those companies may be able to develop and acquire more prospects and productive properties than our financial or personnel resources permit. Our ability to acquire additional properties and to discover reserves in the future will depend on our ability to evaluate and select suitable properties and to consummate transactions in a highly competitive environment. Many of our larger competitors not only drill for and produce oil and natural gas but also carry on refining operations and market petroleum and other products on a regional, national or worldwide basis. These companies may be able to pay more for oil and natural gas properties and evaluate, bid for and purchase a greater number of properties than our financial or human resources permit. In addition, there is substantial competition for investment capital in the oil and natural gas industry. These larger companies may have a greater ability to continue development activities during periods of low oil and natural gas prices and to absorb the burden of present and future federal, state, local and other laws and regulations. Our inability to compete effectively with larger companies could have a material adverse impact on our business activities, financial condition and results of operations.
We may incur substantial additional debt to enable us to make our quarterly distributions, which may negatively affect our ability to execute our business plan and make future distributions.
We may be unable to make a distribution at the initial distribution rate or the then-current distribution rate without incurring indebtedness. When we borrow to make distributions, we are distributing more cash than we are generating from our operations on a current basis. This means that we are using a portion of our borrowing capacity under our revolving credit facility to make distributions rather than to maintain or expand our operations. If we use borrowings under our revolving credit facility to make distributions for an extended period of time rather than toward funding capital expenditures and other matters relating to our operations, we may be unable to support or grow our business. Such a curtailment of our business activities, combined with our payment of principal and interest on our future indebtedness to make these distributions, will reduce our cash available for distribution on our units and will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. If we borrow to make distributions during periods of low commodity prices and commodity prices remain low, we may have to reduce our distribution in order to avoid excessive leverage.

 

27


Table of Contents

Our future debt levels may limit our flexibility to obtain additional financing and pursue other business opportunities and may affect our ability to make future distributions.
As of December 31, 2008, we had approximately $31.3 million of debt. We may incur additional debt in the future. Our future indebtedness could have important consequences to us, including:
   
our ability to obtain additional financing, if necessary, for working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions or other purposes may be impaired or such financing may not be available on favorable terms;
   
covenants contained in our future debt arrangements may require us to meet financial tests that may affect our flexibility in planning for and reacting to changes in our business, including possible acquisition opportunities;
   
we may need a substantial portion of our cash flow to make principal and interest payments on our indebtedness, reducing the funds that would otherwise be available for operations, future business opportunities and distributions to unitholders; and
   
our debt level may make us more vulnerable than our competitors with less debt to competitive pressures or a downturn in our business or the economy generally.
Our ability to service our indebtedness will depend upon, among other things, our future financial and operating performance, which will be affected by prevailing economic conditions and financial, business, regulatory and other factors, some of which are beyond our control. If our operating results are not sufficient to service our current or future indebtedness, we will be forced to take actions such as reducing distributions, reducing or delaying business activities, acquisitions, investments and/or capital expenditures, selling assets, restructuring or refinancing our indebtedness or seeking additional equity capital or bankruptcy protection. We may not be able to effect any of these remedies on satisfactory terms or at all.
Our operations are subject to operational hazards and unforeseen interruptions for which we may not be adequately insured.
There are a variety of operating risks inherent in our wells, gathering systems, pipelines, transportation, storage, transloading and other facilities, such as leaks, accidents, fires, explosions, mechanical problems, hurricanes, adverse weather conditions, hazardous materials releases, mechanical failures and other events beyond our control, all of which could cause substantial financial losses. Any of these or other similar occurrences could result in the disruption of our operations, substantial repair costs, personal injury or loss of human life, significant damage to property, fines, environmental pollution, impairment of our operations and substantial revenue losses. The location of our facilities near populated areas, including residential areas, commercial business centers and industrial sites, could significantly increase the level of damages resulting from these risks. As a result of the foregoing, we are, and are likely to continue to be, a defendant in various legal proceedings and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business.

 

28


Table of Contents

We are not fully insured against all risks, including development and completion risks that are generally not recoverable from third parties or insurance. In addition, pollution and environmental risks generally are not fully insurable. We may also elect not to obtain insurance if we believe that the cost of available insurance is excessive relative to the perceived risks presented. Losses could, therefore, occur for uninsurable or uninsured risks or in amounts in excess of existing insurance coverage. Moreover, insurance may not be available in the future at commercially reasonable costs and on commercially reasonable terms. Changes in the insurance markets due to terrorist attacks and hurricanes have made it more difficult for us to obtain certain types of coverage. We may not be able to obtain the levels or types of insurance we would otherwise have obtained prior to these market changes, and our insurance may contain large deductibles or fail to cover certain hazards or cover all potential losses. Losses and liabilities from uninsured and underinsured events and delay in the payment of insurance proceeds could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
Our business depends in part on gathering and transportation facilities owned by others. Any limitation in the availability of those facilities could interfere with our ability to market our oil and natural gas production and could harm our business.
The marketability of our oil and natural gas production depends in part on the availability, proximity and capacity of pipelines, oil and natural gas gathering systems and processing facilities. The amount of oil and natural gas that can be produced and sold is subject to curtailment in certain circumstances, such as pipeline interruptions due to scheduled and unscheduled maintenance, excessive pressure, physical damage or lack of available capacity on such systems. The curtailments arising from these and similar circumstances may last from a few days to several months. In many cases, we are provided only with limited, if any, notice as to when these circumstances will arise and their duration. Any significant curtailment in gathering system or pipeline capacity could reduce our ability to market our oil and natural gas production and harm our business.
We have limited control over the activities on properties we do not operate.
Other companies operated approximately 17.4% of our wells on a pro forma basis as of December 31, 2008. We have limited ability to influence or control the operation or future development of these non-operated properties or the amount of capital expenditures that we are required to fund with respect to them. Our dependence on the operator and other working interest owners for these projects and our limited ability to influence or control the operation and future development of these properties could materially adversely affect the realization of our targeted returns on capital in drilling or acquisition activities and lead to unexpected future costs.
We are subject to complex federal, state, local and other laws and regulations that could adversely affect the cost, manner or feasibility of conducting our operations.
Our oil and natural gas exploration and production operations are subject to complex and stringent laws and regulations. Environmental and other governmental laws and regulations have increased the costs to plan, design, drill, install, operate and abandon oil and natural gas wells and related pipeline and processing facilities. In order to conduct our operations in compliance with these laws and regulations, we must obtain and maintain numerous permits, approvals and certificates from various federal, state and local governmental authorities. We may incur substantial costs in order to maintain compliance with these existing laws and regulations. In addition, our costs of compliance may increase if existing laws and regulations are revised or reinterpreted, or if new laws and regulations become applicable to our operations.
Our business is subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations as interpreted and enforced by governmental authorities possessing jurisdiction over various aspects of the exploration for, and production of, oil and natural gas. Failure to comply with such laws and regulations, as interpreted and enforced, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

 

29


Table of Contents

Our pipeline integrity program may subject us to significant costs and liabilities.
As a result of pipeline integrity testing under the Pipeline Safety Improvement Act of 2002, we may incur significant and unanticipated operating and capital expenditures for repairs or upgrades deemed necessary to ensure the continued safe and reliable operation of our pipelines. Furthermore, the Act or an increase in public expectations for pipeline safety may require additional reporting, the replacement of our pipeline segments, additional monitoring equipment and more frequent inspection or testing of our pipeline facilities. Any repair, remediation, preventative or mitigating actions may require significant capital and operating expenditures. Should we fail to comply with the U.S. Department of Transportation rules and related regulations and orders, we could be subject to penalties and fines, which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
Our business would be adversely affected if operations at our terminaling, transportation and distribution facilities experienced significant interruptions. Our business would also be adversely affected if the operations of our customers and suppliers experienced significant interruptions.
Our operations are dependent upon our terminaling and storage facilities and various means of transportation. We are also dependent upon the uninterrupted operations of certain facilities owned or operated by our suppliers and customers. Any significant interruption at these facilities or inability to transport products to or from these facilities or to or from our customers for any reason would adversely affect our results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders or to make principal and interest payments on our debt securities. Operations at our facilities and at the facilities owned or operated by our suppliers and customers could be partially or completely shut down, temporarily or permanently, as the result of any number of circumstances that are not within our control, such as:
   
weather conditions;
 
   
environmental remediations;
 
   
labor difficulties; and
 
   
disruptions in the supply of our products to our facilities or means of transportation.
In addition, terrorist attacks and acts of sabotage could target oil and gas production facilities, refineries, processing plants, terminals and other infrastructure facilities. Any significant interruptions at our facilities, facilities owned or operated by our suppliers or customers, or in the oil and gas industry as a whole caused by such attacks or acts could have a material adverse affect on our results of operations, cash flow and ability to make distributions to our unitholders or to make principal and interest payments on our debt securities.
The occurrence or threat of extraordinary events, including domestic and international terrorist attacks, and laws and regulations related thereto may disrupt our operations and decrease demand for our products and services.
Chemical-related assets, such as those handled at our terminaling and storage facilities, may be at greater risk of future terrorist attacks than other possible targets in the United States. Federal legislation is under consideration that could impose new site security requirements, specifically on chemical facilities, which may increase our overhead expenses. Our business or our customers’ businesses could be adversely affected because of the cost of complying with new security regulations.

 

30


Table of Contents

New federal regulations have already been adopted to increase the security of the transportation of hazardous chemicals in the United States. We believe we have met these requirements but additional federal and local regulations that limit the distribution of hazardous materials are being considered. We store, ship and receive materials that are classified as hazardous. Bans on movement of hazardous materials through certain cities could affect the efficiency of our logistical operations. Broader restrictions on hazardous material movements could lead to additional investment to produce hazardous raw materials and change where and what products we provide and transport.
The occurrence of extraordinary events, including future terrorist attacks and the outbreak or escalation of hostilities, cannot be predicted, and their occurrence can be expected to continue to affect negatively the economy in general, and specifically the markets for our products. The resulting damage from a direct attack on our assets, or assets used by us, could include loss of life and property damage. In addition, available insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover all of the damage incurred or, if available, may be prohibitively expensive.
We are subject to many environmental and safety regulations that may result in significant unanticipated costs or liabilities or cause interruptions in our operations.
Our operations involve the handling, production, transportation, treatment and disposal of materials that are classified as hazardous or toxic and that are extensively regulated by environmental and health and safety laws, regulations and permit requirements. We may incur substantial costs, including fines, damages and criminal or civil sanctions, or experience interruptions in our operations for actual or alleged violations or compliance requirements arising under environmental laws, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Our operations could result in violations of environmental laws, including spills or other releases of hazardous substances to the environment. In the event of a catastrophic incident, we could incur material costs. Furthermore, we may be liable for the costs of investigating and cleaning up environmental contamination on or from our properties or at off-site locations where we disposed of or arranged for the disposal or treatment of hazardous materials. We own or lease a number of properties that have been used to store or distribute refined products for many years. Many of these properties, such as the assets acquired from Regional Enterprises, Inc. in 2007 and the Oklahoma assets, were operated by third parties whose handling, disposal, or release of hydrocarbons and other wastes was not under our control. If significant previously unknown contamination is discovered, or if existing laws or their enforcement change, then the resulting expenditures could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Environmental, health and safety laws, regulations and permit requirements, and the potential for further expanded laws, regulations and permit requirements may increase our costs or reduce demand for our products and thereby negatively affect our business. Environmental permits required for our operations are subject to periodic renewal and may be revoked or modified for cause or when new or revised environmental requirements are implemented. Changing and increasingly strict environmental requirements and the potential for further expanded regulation may increase our costs and can affect the manufacturing, handling, processing, distribution and use of our products. If so affected, our business and operations may be materially and adversely affected. In addition, changes in these requirements may cause us to incur substantial costs in upgrading or redesigning our facilities and processes, including our waste treatment, storage, disposal and other waste handling practices and equipment. For these reasons, we may need to make capital expenditures beyond those currently anticipated to comply with existing or future environmental or safety laws.

 

31


Table of Contents

We store and transport hazardous or volatile chemicals at some of our facilities. If our safety procedures are not effective, an accident involving these other hazardous or volatile chemicals could result in serious injuries or death, or result in the shutdown of our facilities.
We store and transport hazardous chemicals such as aqua ammonia, phosphoric acid, hydrochloric acid and sulfuric acid. An accident involving any of these chemicals could result in serious injuries or death, or evacuation of areas near an accident. An accident could also result in third-party property damage or shutdown of our terminaling facilities, or cause us to expend significant amounts to remediate safety issues or to repair damaged facilities. As a result, an accident involving any of these chemicals could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, liquidity or financial condition.
Risks Inherent in an Investment in Us
The amount of cash distributions that we will be able to distribute to unitholders will be reduced by the costs associated with general and administrative expenses and reserves that our General Partner believes prudent to maintain for the proper conduct of our business and for future distributions.
Before we can pay distributions to our unitholders, we must first pay or reserve cash for our expenses, including capital expenditures and the costs of being a public company and other operating expenses, and we may reserve cash for future distributions during periods of limited cash flows. The amount of cash we have available for distribution to our unitholders will be affected by our level of reserves and expenses. Because of restrictions in our credit agreements and lack of available cash, we have not made distributions for the quarters ended September 30, 2008 and December 31, 2008.
Our General Partner and its affiliates own a controlling interest in us and may have conflicts of interest with us and limited fiduciary duties to us, which may permit them to favor their own interests to the detriment of our unitholders.
Penn Octane Corporation controls our General Partner, which controls us. The managers and officers of our General Partner have a fiduciary duty to manage our General Partner in a manner beneficial to Penn Octane. Furthermore, certain managers and officers of our General Partner may be directors or officers of affiliates of our General Partner, including Penn Octane. Conflicts of interest may arise between Penn Octane and its affiliates, including our General Partner, on the one hand, and us and our unitholders, on the other hand. As a result of these conflicts, our General Partner may favor its own interests and the interests of its affiliates over the interests of our unitholders. These potential conflicts include, among others, the following situations:
   
neither our partnership agreement nor any other agreement requires Penn Octane or its affiliates (other than our General Partner) to pursue a business strategy that favors us. Penn Octane’s directors and officers have a fiduciary duty to make these decisions in the best interests of its unitholders, which may be contrary to our interests;
   
our General Partner is allowed to take into account the interests of parties other than us, such as Penn Octane, in resolving conflicts of interest, which has the effect of limiting its fiduciary duty to our unitholders;
   
Penn Octane is not limited in its ability to compete with us and is only obligated to provide us with the services and personnel required by the Omnibus Agreement;
   
under the terms of our partnership agreement, the doctrine of corporate opportunity, or any analogous doctrine, does not apply to our General Partner or its affiliates (including Penn Octane) and no such person who acquires knowledge of a potential transaction, agreement, arrangement or other matter that may be an opportunity for our partnership will have any duty to communicate or offer such opportunity to us;
   
some officers of our General Partner who provide services to us devote time to affiliates of our General Partner and may be compensated for services rendered to such affiliates;

 

32


Table of Contents

   
our General Partner has limited its liability and reduced its fiduciary duties, and has also restricted the remedies available to our unitholders for actions that, without the limitations, might constitute breaches of fiduciary duty. By purchasing common units, unitholders will be deemed to have consented to some actions and conflicts of interest that might otherwise constitute a breach of fiduciary or other duties under applicable law;
   
our General Partner determines the amount and timing of asset purchases and sales, borrowings, issuances of additional partnership securities and reserves, each of which can affect the amount of cash that is distributed to unitholders;
   
our General Partner may cause us to borrow funds in order to permit the payment of cash distributions;
   
our General Partner intends to limit its liability regarding our contractual and other obligations and, in some circumstances, is entitled to be indemnified by us;
 
   
our General Partner may cause us to purchase common units;
   
our General Partner controls the enforcement of obligations owed to us by our General Partner and its affiliates; and
   
our General Partner decides whether to retain separate counsel, accountants or others to perform services for us.
Penn Octane is not limited in its ability to compete with us, which could limit our ability to acquire additional assets or businesses.
Our partnership agreement does not prohibit Penn Octane from owning assets or engaging in businesses that compete directly or indirectly with us. In addition, Penn Octane may acquire, develop or dispose of additional oil and natural gas properties or other assets in the future, without any obligation to offer us the opportunity to purchase or develop any of those assets.
Penn Octane, which controls our General Partner, has the power to appoint and remove the members of the board of managers of our General Partner.
Because Penn Octane controls our General Partner, it has the ability to elect all of the members of the board of managers of our General Partner. Our General Partner has control over all decisions related to our operations. Furthermore, the goals and objectives of Penn Octane and our General Partner relating to us may not be consistent with those of a majority of the public unitholders.
We are primarily dependent on officers of our General Partner to manage our operations. Failure of such officers to devote sufficient attention to the management and operation of our business may adversely affect our financial results and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.
The officers of our General Partner are primarily responsible for managing our business and operations. We do not maintain key person life insurance policies on any personnel. Although our General Partner has arrangements relating to compensation and benefits, our General Partner does not have any employment contracts or other agreements with such officers binding them to provide services for any particular term. The loss of the services of any of these individuals, including Messrs. Bothwell and Manner could have a material adverse effect on our business and our ability to make distributions to our unitholders.

 

33


Table of Contents

Our partnership agreement limits our General Partner’s fiduciary duties to unitholders and restricts the remedies available to unitholders for actions taken by our General Partner that might otherwise constitute breaches of fiduciary duty.
Our partnership agreement contains provisions that reduce the fiduciary standards to which our General Partner would otherwise be held by state fiduciary duty laws. For example, our partnership agreement:
   
permits our General Partner to make a number of decisions in its individual capacity, as opposed to in its capacity as our General Partner. This entitles our General Partner to consider only the interests and factors that it desires, and it has no duty or obligation to give any consideration to any interest of, or factors affecting, us, our affiliates or any limited partner. Examples include the exercise of its rights to transfer or vote the units it owns, the exercise of its registration rights and its determination whether or not to consent to any merger or consolidation of the partnership or amendment to the partnership agreement;
   
provides that our General Partner will not have any liability to us or our unitholders for decisions made in its capacity as a General Partner so long as it acted in good faith;
   
generally provides that affiliated transactions and resolutions of conflicts of interest not approved by the conflicts committee of the board of managers of our General Partner acting in good faith and not involving a vote of unitholders must be “fair and reasonable” to us, as provided by the partnership agreement. In determining whether a transaction or resolution is “fair and reasonable,” our General Partner may consider the totality of the relationships between the parties involved, including other transactions that may be particularly advantageous or beneficial to us;
   
provides that our General Partner and its officers and managers will not be liable for monetary damages to us, our limited partners or assignees for any acts or omissions unless there has been a final and non-appealable judgment entered by a court of competent jurisdiction determining that the General Partner or its officers and managers acted in bad faith or engaged in fraud or willful misconduct or, in the case of a criminal matter, acted with knowledge that the conduct was criminal; and
   
provides that in resolving conflicts of interest, it will be presumed that in making its decision the General Partner or its conflict committee acted in good faith, and in any proceeding brought by or on behalf of any limited partner or us, the person bringing or prosecuting such proceeding will have the burden of overcoming such presumption.
By purchasing a common unit, a unitholder will become bound by the provisions in the partnership agreement, including the provisions discussed above.
Unitholders have limited voting rights and are not entitled to elect our General Partner or its managers.
Unlike the holders of common stock in a corporation, unitholders have only limited voting rights on matters affecting our business and, therefore, limited ability to influence management’s decisions regarding our business. Unitholders will not elect our General Partner or its board of managers on an annual or other continuing basis. The board of managers of our General Partner will be chosen by Penn Octane. Furthermore, if the unitholders are dissatisfied with the performance of our General Partner, they will have little ability to remove our General Partner. As a result of these limitations, the price at which the common units will trade could be diminished because of the absence or reduction of a takeover premium in the trading price.
Even if unitholders are dissatisfied, it would be difficult to remove our General Partner.
The vote of the holders of at least 80% of all outstanding units voting together as a single class is required to remove the General Partner. Therefore, even if the unitholders are dissatisfied it would be difficult to remove our General Partner.

 

34


Table of Contents

Control of our General Partner may be transferred to a third party without unitholder consent.
Our General Partner may transfer its General Partner interest to a third party for any reason without the consent of the unitholders. Furthermore, our partnership agreement does not restrict the ability of Penn Octane, the owner of our General Partner, from transferring all or a portion of its ownership interest in our General Partner to a third party. The new owner of our General Partner would then be in a position to replace the board of managers and officers of our General Partner with its own choices and thereby influence the decisions made by the board of managers and officers.
We may issue additional units, including units that are senior to the common units, without unitholder approval, which would dilute the ownership interests of our existing unitholders.
Our partnership agreement does not limit the number of additional partner interests that we may issue. In addition, we may issue an unlimited number of units that are senior to the common units in right of distribution, liquidation and voting. The issuance by us of additional common units or other equity securities of equal or senior rank will have the following effects:
   
our unitholders’ proportionate ownership interest in us will decrease;
 
   
the amount of cash available for distribution on each unit may decrease;
 
   
the ratio of taxable income to distributions may increase;
 
   
the relative voting strength of each previously outstanding unit may be diminished; and
 
   
the market price of the common units may decline.
Our partnership agreement restricts the voting rights of unitholders, other than our General Partner and its affiliates, owning 20% or more of our common units, which may limit the ability of significant unitholders to influence the manner or direction of management.
Our partnership agreement restricts unitholders’ voting rights by providing that any common units held by a person, entity or group that owns 20% or more of any class of common units then outstanding, other than our General Partner, its affiliates, their transferees and persons who acquired such common units with the prior approval of the board of managers of our General Partner, cannot vote on any matter. Our partnership agreement also contains provisions limiting the ability of unitholders to call meetings or to acquire information about our operations, as well as other provisions limiting unitholders’ ability to influence the manner or direction of management.

 

35


Table of Contents

The liability of our unitholders may not be limited if a court finds that unitholder action constitutes control of our business.
A general partner of a partnership generally has unlimited liability for the obligations of the partnership, except for those contractual obligations of the partnership that are expressly made without recourse to the general partner. Our partnership is organized under Delaware law and we conduct business in a number of other states. The limitations on the liability of holders of limited partner interests for the obligations of a limited partnership have not been clearly established in some of the other states in which we do business. Unitholders could be liable for our obligations as if they were a general partner if:
   
a court or government agency determined that we were conducting business in a state but had not complied with that particular state’s partnership statute; or
   
their right to act with other unitholders to remove or replace the General Partner, to approve some amendments to our partnership agreement or to take other actions under our partnership agreement constitute “control” of our business.
Unitholders may have liability to repay distributions.
Under certain circumstances, unitholders may have to repay amounts wrongfully returned or distributed to them. Under Section 17-607 of the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, we may not make a distribution to unitholders if the distribution would cause our liabilities to exceed the fair value of our assets. Liabilities to partners on account of their partnership interests and liabilities that are non-recourse to the partnership are not counted for purposes of determining whether a distribution is permitted. Delaware law provides that for a period of three years from the date of an impermissible distribution, limited partners who received the distribution and who knew at the time of the distribution that it violated Delaware law will be liable to the limited partnership for the distribution amount. A purchaser of common units who becomes a limited partner is liable for the obligations of the transferring limited partner to make contributions to the partnership that are known to such purchaser of common units at the time it became a limited partner and for unknown obligations if the liabilities could be determined from our partnership agreement.
Unitholders who are not “Eligible Holders” will not be entitled to receive distributions on or allocations of income or loss on their common units and their common units will be subject to redemption.
In order to comply with U.S. laws with respect to the ownership of interests in oil and natural gas leases on federal lands, we have adopted certain requirements regarding those investors who may own our common units. As used herein, an Eligible Holder means a person or entity qualified to hold an interest in oil and natural gas leases on federal lands. As of the date hereof, Eligible Holder means:
   
a citizen of the United States;
 
   
a corporation organized under the laws of the United States or of any state thereof;
 
   
a public body, including a municipality; or
   
an association of United States citizens, such as a partnership or limited liability company, organized under the laws of the United States or of any state thereof, but only if such association does not have any direct or indirect foreign ownership, other than foreign ownership of stock in a parent corporation organized under the laws of the United States or of any state thereof.

 

36


Table of Contents

For the avoidance of doubt, onshore mineral leases or any direct or indirect interest therein may be acquired and held by aliens only through stock ownership, holding or control in a corporation organized under the laws of the United States or of any state thereof. Unitholders who are not persons or entities who meet the requirements to be an Eligible Holder, will not receive distributions or allocations of income and loss on their common units and they run the risk of having their common units redeemed by us at the then-current market price. The redemption price will be paid in cash or by delivery of a promissory note, as determined by our General Partner.
An increase in interest rates may cause the market price of our common units to decline.
Like all equity investments, an investment in our common units is subject to certain risks. In exchange for accepting these risks, investors may expect to receive a higher rate of return than would otherwise be obtainable from lower-risk investments. Accordingly, as interest rates rise, the ability of investors to obtain higher risk-adjusted rates of return by purchasing government-backed debt securities may cause a corresponding decline in demand for riskier investments generally, including yield-based equity investments such as publicly traded limited partner interests. Reduced demand for our common units resulting from investors seeking other more favorable investment opportunities may cause the trading price of our common units to decline.
Risks Related to Tax Matters
Our tax treatment depends on our status as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, as well as our not being subject to a material amount of entity-level taxation by individual states. If the Internal Revenue Service were to treat us as a corporation for federal income tax purposes or we were to become subject to additional entity-level taxation for state tax purposes, then our cash available for distribution would be substantially reduced.
The anticipated after-tax economic benefit of an investment in the common units depends largely on our being treated as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. We have not requested, and do not plan to request, a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service, which we refer to as the IRS, on this or any other tax matter affecting us.
Despite the fact that we are a limited partnership under Delaware law, it is possible in certain circumstances for a partnership such as ours to be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes. Although we do not believe based upon our current operations that we will be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, a change in our business (or a change in current law) could cause us to be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject us to taxation as an entity.
If we were treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, we would pay federal income tax on our taxable income at the corporate tax rate, which is currently a maximum of 35% and would likely pay state income tax at varying rates. Distributions to our unitholders would generally be taxed again as corporate distributions, and no income, gains, losses or deductions would flow through to our unitholders. Because a tax would be imposed upon us as a corporation, our cash available for distribution to our unitholders would be substantially reduced. Therefore, treatment of us as a corporation would result in a material reduction in the anticipated cash flow and after-tax return to the unitholders, likely causing a substantial reduction in the value of our common units.
Current law may change so as to cause us to be treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject us to entity-level taxation. For example, legislation has been proposed that would eliminate partnership tax treatment for certain publicly traded partnerships. Although such legislation would not apply to us as currently proposed, it could be amended prior to enactment in a manner that does apply to us. We are unable to predict whether any of these changes or other proposals will ultimately be enacted. Any such changes could negatively impact the value of an investment in our units.

 

37


Table of Contents

In addition, because of widespread state budget deficits and other reasons, several states, including Texas, are evaluating ways to subject partnerships to entity-level taxation through the imposition of state income, franchise, margin and other forms of taxation. For example, beginning in 2008, we have become subject to a new entity level tax on any portion of our income that is generated in Texas. Specifically, the Texas margin tax is imposed at a maximum effective rate of 0.7% of our gross income that is apportioned to Texas. Imposition of such a tax on us by Texas, or any other state, will reduce the cash available for distribution to our unitholders.
Our partnership agreement provides that if a law is enacted or existing law is modified or interpreted in a manner that subjects us to additional amounts of entity-level taxation, the minimum quarterly distribution amount and the target distribution amounts may be adjusted to reflect the impact of that law on us.
We prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our units each month based upon the ownership of our units on the first business day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders.
We prorate our items of income, gain, loss and deduction between transferors and transferees of our units each month based upon the ownership of our units on the first business day of each month, instead of on the basis of the date a particular unit is transferred. The use of this method may not be permitted under existing Treasury regulations, and, accordingly, our counsel is unable to opine as to the validity of this method. If the IRS were to challenge this method or new Treasury regulations were issued, we may be required to change the allocation of items of income, gain, loss and deduction among our unitholders.
An IRS contest of our federal income tax positions may adversely affect the market for our common units, and the cost of any IRS contest will reduce our cash available for distribution to our unitholders.
We have not requested a ruling from the IRS with respect to our treatment as a partnership for federal income tax purposes or any other matter affecting us. The IRS may adopt positions that differ from the positions we take. It may be necessary to resort to administrative or court proceedings to sustain some or all of our counsel’s conclusions or the positions we take. A court may not agree with all of our counsel’s conclusions or positions we take. Any contest with the IRS may materially and adversely impact the market for our common units and the price at which they trade. In addition, our costs of any contest with the IRS will be borne indirectly by our unitholders and our General Partner because the costs will reduce our cash available for distribution.
Our unitholders may be required to pay taxes on their share of our income even if they do not receive any cash distributions from us.
Because our unitholders will be treated as partners to whom we will allocate taxable income which could be different in amount than the cash we distribute, our unitholders may be required to pay any federal income taxes and, in some cases, state and local income taxes, on their share of our taxable income even if they receive no cash distributions from us. Our unitholders may not receive cash distributions from us equal to their share of our taxable income or even equal to the tax liability that results from that income.

 

38


Table of Contents

Tax gain or loss on disposition of common units could be more or less than expected.
If unitholders sell their common units, they will recognize a gain or loss equal to the difference between the amount realized and their tax basis in those common units. Because distributions in excess of unitholders’ allocable share of our net taxable income decrease their tax basis in their common units, the amount, if any, of such prior excess distributions with respect to the common units they sell will, in effect, become taxable income to them if they sell such units at a price greater than their tax basis in those units, even if the price they receive is less than their original cost. Furthermore, a substantial portion of the amount realized, whether or not representing gain, may be taxed as ordinary income due to potential recapture items, including depletion, intangible drilling costs and depreciation recapture. In addition, because the amount realized includes a unitholder’s share of our nonrecourse liabilities, if our unitholders sell their common units, they may incur a tax liability in excess of the amount of cash they receive from the sale.
Tax-exempt entities and non-U.S. persons face unique tax issues from owning common units that may result in adverse tax consequences to them.
Investment in common units by tax-exempt entities, such as individual retirement accounts (known as IRAs), other retirement plans and non-U.S. persons raises issues unique to them. For example, virtually all of our income allocated to organizations that are exempt from federal income tax, including IRAs and other retirement plans, will be unrelated business taxable income and will be taxable to them. Distributions to non-U.S. persons will be reduced by withholding taxes at the highest applicable effective tax rate, and non-U.S. persons will be required to file United States federal tax returns and pay tax on their share of our taxable income.
We will treat each purchaser of our common units as having the same tax benefits without regard to the actual common units purchased. The IRS may challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of the common units.
Because we cannot match transferors and transferees of common units and because of other reasons, we will take depletion, depreciation and amortization positions that may not conform to all aspects of existing Treasury Regulations. A successful IRS challenge to those positions could adversely affect the amount of tax benefits available to our unitholders. It also could affect the timing of these tax benefits or the amount of gain from the sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of our common units or result in audit adjustments to our unitholders tax returns.
The sale or exchange of 50% or more of our capital and profits interests during any twelve-month period will result in the termination of our partnership for federal income tax purposes.
We will be considered to have terminated our partnership for federal income tax purposes if there is a sale or exchange of 50% or more of the total interests in our capital and profits within a twelve-month period. For example, an exchange of 50% of our capital and profits could occur if, in any twelve-month period, holders of our subordinated and common units sell at least 50% of the interests in our capital and profits. Our termination would, among other things, result in the closing of our taxable year for all unitholders, which would result in us filing two tax returns (and unitholders receiving two Schedule K-1s, for one fiscal year. Our termination could also result in a deferral of depreciation deductions allowable in computing our taxable income. In the case of a unitholder reporting on a taxable year other than a fiscal year ending December 31, the closing of our taxable year may also result in more than twelve months of our taxable income or loss being includable in his taxable income for the year of termination. Our termination currently would not affect our classification as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, but instead, we would be treated as a new partnership for tax purposes. If treated as a new partnership, we must make new tax elections and could be subject to penalties if we are unable to determine that a termination occurred.

 

39


Table of Contents

Unitholders will likely be subject to state and local taxes and tax return filing requirements in states where they do not live as a result of investing in our common units.
In addition to federal income taxes, our unitholders will likely be subject to other taxes, including state and local taxes, unincorporated business taxes and estate, inheritance or intangible taxes that are imposed by the various jurisdictions in which we do business or own property now or in the future, even if they do not live in any of those jurisdictions. Our unitholders will likely be required to file foreign, state and local income tax returns and pay state and local income taxes in some or all of these jurisdictions. Furthermore, our unitholders may be subject to penalties for failure to comply with those requirements. We currently own assets and do business in Oklahoma. Oklahoma currently imposes a personal income tax. As we make acquisitions or expand our business, we may own assets or do business in additional states that impose a personal income tax or that impose entity level taxes to which we could be subject. It is our unitholders’ responsibility to file all United States federal, foreign, state and local tax returns.
A unitholder whose units are loaned to a “short seller” to cover a short sale of units may be considered as having disposed of those units. If so, he would no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those units during the period of the loan and may recognize gain or loss from the disposition.
Because a unitholder whose units are loaned to a “short seller” to cover a short sale of units may be considered as having disposed of the loaned units, he may no longer be treated for tax purposes as a partner with respect to those units during the period of the loan to the short seller and the unitholder may recognize gain or loss from such disposition. Moreover, during the period of the loan to the short seller, any of our income, gain, loss or deduction with respect to those units may not be reportable by the unitholder and any cash distributions received by the unitholder as to those units could be fully taxable as ordinary income. Our counsel has not rendered an opinion regarding the treatment of a unitholder where common units are loaned to a short seller to cover a short sale of common units; therefore, unitholders desiring to assure their status as partners and avoid the risk of gain recognition from a loan to a short seller are urged to modify any applicable brokerage account agreements to prohibit their brokers from loaning their units.
We may adopt certain valuation methodologies that may result in a shift of income, gain, loss and deduction between the General Partner and the unitholders. The IRS may successfully challenge this treatment, which could adversely affect the value of our common units.
When we issue additional units or engage in certain other transactions, we will determine the fair market value of our assets and allocate any unrealized gain or loss attributable to our assets to the capital accounts of our unitholders and the holders of the incentive distribution rights. Our methodology may be viewed as understating the value of our assets. In that case, there may be a shift of income, gain, loss and deduction between certain unitholders and the General Partner, which may be unfavorable to such unitholders. Moreover, subsequent purchasers of common units may have a greater portion of their Internal Revenue Code Section 743(b) adjustment allocated to our tangible assets and a lesser portion allocated to our intangible assets. The IRS may challenge our methods, or our allocation of the Section 743(b) adjustment attributable to our tangible and intangible assets, and allocations of income, gain, loss and deduction between the General Partner and certain of our unitholders.
A successful IRS challenge to these methods or allocations could adversely affect the amount of taxable income or loss being allocated to our unitholders. It also could affect the amount of gain from our unitholders’ sale of common units and could have a negative impact on the value of the common units or result in audit adjustments to our unitholders’ tax returns without the benefit of additional deductions.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.
None.

 

40


Table of Contents

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
Penn Octane, Rio Vista and/or Rio Vista’s subsidiaries were named as defendants in two lawsuits filed in connection with an accident in the town of Lucio Blanco, Mexico on August 11, 2005, involving a tanker truck carrying LPG which was struck by a train resulting in an explosion. None of Penn Octane, Rio Vista or any of Rio Vista’s subsidiaries owned or operated the tanker truck or employed or controlled the driver of the tanker truck. Furthermore, none of Penn Octane, Rio Vista or any of Rio Vista’s subsidiaries owned or had custody of the LPG on the tanker truck at the time and location of the accident.
The tanker truck reportedly took delivery of LPG at the Matamoros Terminal Facility operated under agreement with Rio Vista’s Mexican subsidiaries. According to the lawsuits, after leaving the Matamoros Terminal Facility, the tanker truck was involved in a collision with a train in Lucio Blanco, Mexico, resulting in a tragic explosion that killed and injured several persons and caused significant property damage. Published reports indicate that the truck used a road not approved for large trucks and failed to stop at an unprotected rail crossing, resulting in the collision and explosion. The insurance carrier for the owner of the tanker truck has settled certain claims in Mexico with victims of the accident.
Even though the accident took place in Mexico, these lawsuits were filed in Texas. The first case is captioned Lesly Camacho by Her Mother Dora Adame as Next Friend, et al. vs. Penn Octane International LLC, et al and was filed in the 404 th Judicial District Court for Cameron County, Texas on September 26, 2005. The plaintiffs seek unspecified monetary damages. On August 16, 2006 with the consent of the parties, the Court issued an amended order for temporary injunction for the purpose of preserving relevant evidence. The amended injunction required a subsidiary of Rio Vista to make available for inspection by plaintiffs Rio Vista’s terminal facilities in Brownsville, Texas and Matamoros, Mexico and associated equipment and records. The order also required Rio Vista to give 30 days advance notice to plaintiffs before conducting any alteration, repair, service, work or changes to the facilities or equipment. In addition, the order required Rio Vista to make available its employees for deposition by the plaintiffs and to secure and preserve certain physical evidence believed to be located in Mexico. The Brownsville, Texas terminal facility was sold to TransMontaigne Product Services Inc. on August 22, 2006. In January 2007, this case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Brownsville Division. In July 2007, the case was remanded to the state court in Cameron County, Texas. In August 2007, plaintiffs filed an amended petition alleging that defendants delivered the LPG to an unqualified driver and that defendants failed to properly odorize the LPG before delivery.
In December of 2008, one of the insurance carriers, Ace Insurance, tendered its limit of one million in settlement of all claims brought by American citizens who were injured in the explosion. Those claims were dismissed. The legal damages that can be recovered by the remaining plaintiffs will be governed by Mexican law, which provides limited, scheduled recovery. This is deemed favorable to Rio Vista. Rio Vista’s legal fees and settlement costs were covered by insurance.

 

41


Table of Contents

Since that settlement the remaining insurance carrier was Lexington Insurance Company (Lexington). On December 13, 2007, Lexington Insurance Company (Lexington) filed a declaratory action complaint against Penn Octane, Rio Vista and their related entities in the United States District Court in the Southern District of Texas (Brownsville) requesting the US Federal Court to rule that the plaintiff has no obligation to defend Penn Octane and the Rio Vista related entities in the Camacho litigation based on alleged coverage exceptions. Federal jurisdiction was contested and the case moved to state court. In a subsequent pleading, Lexington assumed the defense of Penn Octane and Rio Vista. However, there remains undetermined the obligation by Lexington to provide indemnification to Penn Octane and Rio Vista from any judgment resulting from the Camacho suit. Cross motions for summary judgment were filed by the parties, and the court ruled that the insurance policy issued by Lexington did cover the incident which occurred in Mexico. Lexington has subsequently filed a Notice of Appeals, and is proceeding to appeal the trial court’s ruling. Nevertheless, Lexington continued to provide a defense to Rio Vista in the Camacho case. As the cash currently stands, the trial court has ruled that insurance coverage does exist to provide coverage in the Camacho case.
The Camacho case is not presently set for trial. It is anticipated that a small group of plaintiffs will be identified by the court, and that group will be set for trial. It is anticipated that the trial group will not be set until the fall of 2009. No judgment following that trial will become final until all plaintiffs have gone to trial.
Management believes the remaining lawsuit against Penn Octane, Rio Vista and/or Rio Vista’s subsidiaries relating to the accident in Lucio Blanco is without merit and, based on the advice of counsel, does not anticipate liability for damages in excess of anticipated insurance coverage. The Company’s insurance carrier is expected to bear the legal fees and expenses in connection with defending this case. If, however, a court found liability on the part of Penn Octane, Rio Vista or their subsidiaries, a judgment or settlement in excess of insurance coverage could have a material adverse effect on Penn Octane’s and Rio Vista’s business, financial condition and results of operations.
On November 20, 2007, Rio Vista, Rio Vista Penny, LLC, Gary Moores, Bill Wood and GM Oil Properties, Inc. (GM) jointly filed an action for declaratory relief against Energy Spectrum Advisors, Inc. (Energy Spectrum) in the District Court of McIntosh County, Oklahoma. This action was filed in response to Energy Spectrum’s assertion that Rio Vista, Rio Vista Penny, LLC, as well as GM owed Energy Spectrum a commission based on Rio Vista Penny, LLC’s November, 2007 purchase of certain assets from GM. Energy Spectrum counterclaimed asserting that Rio Vista and Rio Vista Penny tortiously interfered with the commission agreement between Energy Spectrum and GM. Neither Rio Vista nor Rio Vista Penny were parties to this agreement. Management believes that the Rio Vista entities should have no liability for any commission obligation that GM may owe to Energy Spectrum. However the outcome of litigation cannot reliably be predicted. Discovery in the case is ongoing. No trial date has been set.
On August 19, 2008, Rio Vista, Rio Vista GP LLC, Rio Vista Penny LLC, Jerome B. Richter and Douglas G. Manner (Defendants) were named in a lawsuit filed by Northport Production Company and Eugene A. Viele (Plaintiffs). Mr. Viele is currently a director of Penn Octane Corporation and is also the principal owner of Northport Production Company. Mr. Manner currently serves as a director of Penn Octane Corporation and the General Partner. Plaintiffs allege breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, and fraud in connection with the acquisition of the Oklahoma Assets. Plaintiffs are seeking judgment for compensatory damages of $487,000 and exemplary damages of not less than $200,000 as well as attorneys’ fees and other such relief as may be shown. Discovery is currently pending. Rio Vista believes that the liability, if any, ultimately resulting from this lawsuit should not materially affect its consolidated financial results.
Rio Vista and its subsidiaries are involved with other proceedings, lawsuits and claims in the ordinary course of its business. Rio Vista believes that the liabilities, if any, ultimately resulting from such proceedings, lawsuits and claims should not materially affect its consolidated financial results.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
None.

 

42


Table of Contents

PART II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Unitholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
Rio Vista’s common units began trading on the NASDAQ National Market under the symbol “RVEP” on October 1, 2004.
The following table sets forth the reported high ask and low bid quotations of the common units for the periods indicated. Such quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-ups, mark-downs or commissions and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.
                 
    LOW     HIGH  
 
               
The year ended December 31, 2008:
               
First Quarter
  $ 12.06     $ 17.25  
Second Quarter
    9.36       13.83  
Third Quarter
    8.00       13.00  
Fourth Quarter
    0.65       9.89  
                 
    LOW     HIGH  
 
               
The year ended December 31, 2007:
               
First Quarter
  $ 5.34     $ 9.54  
Second Quarter
    7.80       12.37  
Third Quarter
    10.50       23.00  
Fourth Quarter
    10.05       17.50  
On March 30, 2009, the closing bid price of the common units as reported on the NASDAQ National Market was $0.64 per common unit. On March 30, 2009, Rio Vista had 2,762,463 common units outstanding and approximately 780 holders of record of the common units.
Rio Vista made the following distributions during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008:
                                 
                    Amounts Paid  
Quarter   Payment     Distribution     Common     General  
Ended   Date     Per Unit     Units     Partner  
 
                               
Dec 2006
    01/18/07     $ 0.25     $ 478,000     $ 10,000  
Mar 2007
    05/04/07     $ 0.25     $ 478,000     $ 10,000  
Jun 2007
    07/31/07     $ 0.25     $ 484,000     $ 10,000  
Sep 2007
    11/14/07     $ 0.25     $ 484,000     $ 10,000  
Jun 2005 – Jun 2006 Arrearages
    12/10/07     $ 1.25     $ 2,420,000     $ 49,000  
Dec 2007
    02/14/08     $ 0.25     $ 607,000     $ 12,000  
Mar 2008
    05/16/08     $ 0.25     $ 629,000     $ 13,000  
Jun 2008
    08/14/08     $ 0.25     $ 679,000     $ 14,000  
The amount of the distributions paid through the June 2008 quarterly distribution represents the minimum quarterly distribution required to be made by Rio Vista pursuant to the partnership agreement. Rio Vista has not declared a distribution for the quarters ended September 30, 2008 and December 31, 2008.
Rio Vista does not anticipate making quarterly distributions during the year 2009. (See below under the heading “Distributions of Available Cash”).

 

43


Table of Contents

Recent sales of Unregistered Securities
On February 15, 2007, the board of managers of our General Partner approved the grant of options to purchase a total of 21,250 common units under Rio Vista’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan (2005 Plan). Of the total number of options granted, 5,000 were issued to an executive officer of our General Partner and 16,250 were issued to outside managers of our General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $8.38 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ Stock Market on February 15, 2007. Options granted to the executive officer vest in equal monthly installments over a period of 36 months from the date of grant, become fully vested and exercisable upon a change in control event, and expire five years from the date of grant. Options granted to outside managers are fully vested on the date of grant and expire five years from the date of grant.
On March 21, 2007, the board of managers of our General Partner approved the grant of an option to purchase 20,000 common units of Rio Vista under the 2005 Plan to an executive officer of our General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $7.36 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ Stock Market on March 21, 2007. The options vest in equal monthly installments over a period of 36 months from the date of grant, become fully vested and exercisable upon a change in control event, and expire five years from the date of grant.
On June 29, 2007, the board of managers of our General Partner approved the grant of an option to purchase 75,000 common units of Rio Vista under the 2005 Plan to an executive officer of our General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $11.21 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ Stock Market on June 29, 2007. The options vest in equal monthly installments over a period of 36 months beginning January 1, 2007, become fully vested and exercisable upon a change in control event, and expires five years from the date of grant.
On June 29, 2007, the Board of Managers of our General Partner approved the grant of a restricted unit bonus of 25,000 common units under the 2005 Plan to an executive officer of our General Partner. The restricted unit bonus vested as to 8,334 units on July 1, 2007 and an additional 8,333 units on January 1, 2008, and the remaining units vest on July 1, 2008. In connection with the grant of restricted units, the Board of Managers also approved the payment to the executive officer of one or more cash bonuses in amounts sufficient, on an after-tax basis, to cover all taxes payable by the executive officer with respect the award of restricted units to him.
On July 27, 2007, in connection with the employment agreement with an executive of Regional, Rio Vista agreed to the grant of options to purchase a total of 25,000 common units under the 2005 Plan to the executive. The options will vest over a two year period.
On August 23, 2007, the board of managers of our General Partner approved the grant of options to purchase a total of 8,125 common units under the 2005 Plan to outside managers of our General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $15.15 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ Stock Market on August 23, 2007. Options granted to outside managers are fully vested on the date of grant and expire five years from the date of grant.
On November 19, 2007, in connection with the acquisition of the Oklahoma assets, Rio Vista issued a total of 137,994 common units to the sellers of GO LLC and Penny Petroleum Corp. In addition, on November 19, 2007, Rio Vista issued the TCW Warrant to TCW see note I to the consolidated financial statements.
On November 29, 2007, in connection with a private placement, Rio Vista issued a total of 355,556 common units at a price of $11.25 per share to Standard General Fund L.P., Credit Suisse Management LLC and Structured Finance Americas LLC. The total purchase price of the common units was $4,000,000.

 

44


Table of Contents

On January 23, 2008, the Board of Managers of our General Partner approved the grant of options to purchase a total of 16,250 common units under the 2005 Plan to certain outside members of the Board of Managers of our General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $14.42 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on January 23, 2008. Options granted to outside managers are fully vested on the date of grant and expire five years from the date of grant.
On March 7, 2008, the Board of Managers of our General Partner approved the grant of a unit bonus of 8,812 common units under the 2005 Plan to an executive officer of our General Partner. The amount of units granted was based on the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on March 7, 2008.
On March 7, 2008, a total of 61,875 options to acquire common units of Rio Vista were exercised by holders of such warrants. Total proceeds received from the exercises were $774,000. In addition, on March 7, 2008, 15,625 options to acquire common units of Rio Vista were exercised by a holder through the offset of a severance obligation in connection with that employee’s termination.
On July 23, 2008, a total of 6,378 common units of Rio Vista were issued to CEOcast in connection with a consulting agreement. Based on the closing price of Rio Vista’s common units on July 22, 2008, the total amount recorded as an expense on the issuance date was $80,000.
On July 23, 2008, the board of managers authorized the issuance and sale by Rio Vista of 197,628 of Rio Vista’s common units to Penn Octane at $10.12 per unit, and Penn Octane’s board authorized its purchase of such Rio Vista units at that price, for an aggregate price of approximately $2,000,000.   The price per unit was the closing price for Rio Vista common units on May 30, 2008 as reported by the NASDAQ National Market (see note M to the consolidated financial statements).
On May 28, 2008, Rio Vista and Strategic Growth International (SGI), entered into a one year consulting agreement whereby SGI has agreed to provide public relations consulting services. The agreement could be cancelled after 6 months and was cancelled on October 29, 2008 with an effective date of December 1, 2008. In connection with the agreement, Rio Vista granted SGI 50,000 warrants to purchase common units of Rio Vista at an exercise price of $12.00 per common unit. The warrants cannot be exercised for one year from the date of issuance and the warrants will expire three years from the date of issuance. Total cost recorded at the grant date was $161,000. As a result of the aforementioned cancellation, the number of warrants granted was reduced to 25,000.
During June 2008, the Board of Managers of the General Partner of Rio Vista approved an employment agreement with an officer of the General Partner. Under the terms of the employment agreement, the officer is entitled to receive a grant of 30,000 restricted common units under Rio Vista’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan in accordance with the following vesting schedule: 5,000 common units after the officer has been employed for six months, another 5,000 common units after one year of employment, another 10,000 common units after two years of employment and another 10,000 common units after three years of employment. The common units were granted on October 17, 2008. Total compensation cost recorded under the aforementioned grant was approximately $205,000 of which $34,000 was expensed during the year ended December 31, 2008.
On October 17, 2008, Rio Vista issued an aggregate of 12,939 Rio Vista common units in satisfaction of all liquidated damages due to Standard General. (see note I to the consolidated financial statements).
The above issuances were exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 pursuant to Section 4(2) thereof because the issuances did not involve any public offering of securities.

 

45


Table of Contents

Item 6. Selected Financial Data.
Not applicable.
Item 7 . Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
The following discussion of Rio Vista’s liquidity and capital resources should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements of Rio Vista and related notes thereto appearing elsewhere herein. References to specific years preceded by “fiscal” (e.g. fiscal 2008) refer to Rio Vista’s fiscal year ending December 31.
Overview
Historical Assets and Operations
In August 2006, Rio Vista completed the disposition of substantially all of its U.S. LPG assets to TransMontaigne, including the Brownsville, Texas terminal facility and refined products tank farm, together with associated improvements, leases, easements, licenses and permits; an LPG sales agreement; and all of LPG inventory. In December 2007, Rio Vista completed the disposition of its remaining LPG assets to TransMontaigne, including the U.S. portion of the two pipelines from a Brownsville, Texas terminal owned by TransMontaigne to the U.S. border, along with all associated rights-of-way and easements; all of the outstanding equity interests in entities owning interests in the portion of the two pipelines that extend from the U.S. border to Matamoros, Mexico; and all of the rights for indirect control of an entity that owns a terminal site in Matamoros, Mexico. As a result, effective January 1, 2008, Rio Vista no longer operates the assets associated with the LPG business it had historically conducted.
Current Assets and Operations
In July 2007, Rio Vista acquired Regional and in November 2007, Rio Vista acquired certain oil and natural gas producing properties and related assets in the State of Oklahoma formerly owned by GM Oil Properties, Inc., Penny Petroleum Corporation and GO LLC. As a result of these acquisitions in 2007, Rio Vista is now focused on the acquisition, development and production of oil and natural gas properties and related midstream assets, and the operation and development of Regional’s business consisting of transportation and terminaling. Beginning March 1, 2008, Rio Vista Operating LLC (Operating) became the operator of the Oklahoma Assets.
The above acquisitions were funded by a combination of debt (new and assumed), private placements of Rio Vista common units and proceeds from the sale of Rio Vista’s LPG related assets.  During November 2007, Rio Vista completed a private placement of common units raising gross proceeds of $4.0 million (see note I to the consolidated financial statements).

 

46


Table of Contents

Results of Operations
Because of the sale of the LPG sales business during August 2006, which at that time was our sole business up through the date of the sale, the commencement and sale of our LPG Transportation business during August 2006 and December 2007, respectively, and our rapid growth through the acquisitions of Regional and the Oklahoma Assets during 2007, our historical results of operations and period-to-period comparisons of these results during the years ended 2006, 2007 and 2008 are not that meaningful or indicative of future results.
The results of operations from continuing operations during the years ended December 2007 and 2008 reflect the results associated with the i.) the Transportation and Terminaling Business associated with bulk and petroleum products associated with Regional operations which was acquired during July 2007 and LPG, which was commenced during August 2006 and was sold on December 31, 2007 (including all costs associated with operation of the US-Mexico Pipelines and Matamoros Terminal Facility), ii.) the operation of the Oklahoma Assets, which was acquired during November 2007 and iii.) all indirect income and expenses of Rio Vista.
Continuing Operations
Year Ended December 31, 2008 Compared With Year Ended December 31, 2007
                                         
    YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008  
    Oklahoma     Regional     LPG     Corporate/        
    Assets (a)     Enterprises (b)     Transportation (c)     Other     Total  
 
                                       
Revenues
  $ 5,247,000     $ 8,573,000     $     $ 1,000     $ 13,821,000  
 
                                       
Cost Of Goods Sold
    4,322,000       6,444,000             (8,000 )     10,758,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Gross Profit
    925,000       2,129,000             9,000       3,063,000  
 
                                       
Selling, General And Administrative Expenses
    493,000       1,167,000             3,650,000       5,310,000  
 
                                       
Loss on sale of remaining LPG-related assets
                351,000             351,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Operating Income
    432,000       962,000       (351,000 )     (3,641,000 )     (2,598,000 )
 
                                       
Other Income (Expense)
                                       
 
                                       
Interest Expense
    (2,849,000 )     (631,000 )           (178,000 )     (3,658,000 )
 
                                       
Interest Income
    7,000                   1,000       8,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Income (loss) from Continuing Operations Before Taxes
    (2,410,000 )     331,000       (351,000 )     (3,818,000 )     (6,248,000 )
 
                                       
Provision (Benefit) For Income Taxes
    (103,000 )     66,000                   (37,000 )
 
                             
 
                                       
Income (loss) From Continuing Operations
  $ (2,307,000 )   $ 265,000     $ (351,000 )   $ (3,818,000 )   $ (6,211,000 )
 
                             

 

47


Table of Contents

                                         
    YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007  
    Oklahoma     Regional     LPG     Corporate/        
    Assets (a)     Enterprises (b)     Transportation (c)     Other     Total  
 
                                       
Revenues
  $ 527,000     $ 3,038,000     $ 2,341,000     $     $ 5,906,000  
 
                                       
Cost Of Goods Sold
    390,000       2,399,000       1,971,000       45,000       4,805,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Gross Profit
    137,000       639,000       370,000       (45,000 )     1,101,000  
 
                                       
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
    41,000       363,000       258,000       4,008,000       4,670,000  
 
                                       
Loss on sale of remaining LPG-related assets
                406,000             406,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Operating Income (loss)
    96,000       276,000       (294,000 )     (4,053,000 )     (3,975,000 )
 
                                       
Other Income (Expense)
                                       
 
                                       
Interest Expense
    (275,000 )     (322,000 )     (281,000 )     (7,000 )     (885,000 )
 
                                       
Interest Income
          14,000       1,000       2,000       17,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Loss From Continuing Operations Before Taxes
    (179,000 )     (32,000 )     (574,000 )     (4,058,000 )     (4,843,000 )
 
                                       
Provision (Benefit) For Income Taxes
    (4,000 )     (51,000 )     34,000             (21,000 )
 
                             
 
                                       
Income (loss) From Continuing Operations
  $ (175,000 )   $ 19,000     $ (608,000 )   $ (4,058,000 )   $ (4,822,000 )
 
                             
                                         
    YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2006  
    Oklahoma     Regional     LPG     Corporate/        
    Assets (a)     Enterprises (b)     Transportation (c)     Other     Total  
 
                                       
Revenues
                908,000     $       908,000  
 
                                       
Cost Of Goods Sold
                1,814,000             1,814,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Gross Profit
                (906,000 )           (906,000 )
 
                                       
Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
                183,000       2,666,000       2,849,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Operating Income (loss)
                (1,089,000 )     (2,666,000 )     (3,755,000 )
 
                                       
Other Income (Expense)
                                       
 
                                       
Interest Expense
                (354,000 )     217,000       (137,000 )
 
                                       
Interest Income
                      1,000       1,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Loss From Continuing Operations Before Taxes
                (1,443,000 )     (2,448,000 )     (3,891,000 )
 
                                       
Provision For Income Taxes
                37,000             37,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Loss From Continuing Operations
                (1,480,000 )   $ (2,448,000 )   $ (3,928,000 )
 
                             

 

48


Table of Contents

                                         
    CHANGES YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008 COMPARED
WITH YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007
 
    Oklahoma     Regional     LPG     Corporate/        
    Assets (a)     Enterprises (b)     Transportation (c)     Other     Total  
 
                                       
Revenues
  $ 4,720,000     $ 5,535,000     $ (2,341,000 )   $ 1,000     $ 7,915,000  
 
                                       
Cost Of Goods Sold
    3,932,000       4,045,000       (1,971,000 )     (53,000 )     5,953,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Gross Profit
    788,000       1,490,000       (370,000 )     54,000       1,962,000  
 
                                       
Selling, General And Administrative Expenses
    452,000       804,000       (258,000 )     (358,000 )     640,000  
 
                                       
Loss on sale of remaining LPG-related assets
                (55,000 )           (55,000 )
 
                             
 
                                       
Operating Income (Loss)
    336,000       686,000       (57,000 )     412,000       1,377,000  
 
                                       
Other Income (Expense)
                                       
 
                                       
Interest Expense
    (2,574,000 )     (309,000 )     281,000       (171,000 )     (2,773,000 )
 
                                       
Interest Income
    7,000       (14,000 )     (1,000 )     (1,000 )     (9,000 )
 
                             
Income (loss) From Continuing Operations Before Taxes
    (2,231,000 )     363,000       223,000       240,000       (1,405,000 )
 
                                       
Provision (Benefit) For Income Taxes
    (99,000 )     117,000       (34,000 )           (16,000 )
 
                             
 
                                       
Income (loss) From Continuing Operations
  $ (2,132,000 )   $ 246,000     $ 257,000     $ 240,000     $ (1,389,000 )
 
                             

 

49


Table of Contents

                                         
    CHANGES YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007 COMPARED
WITH YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2006
 
    Oklahoma     Regional     LPG     Corporate/        
    Assets (a)     Enterprises (b)     Transportation (c)     Other     Total  
Revenues
  $ 527,000     $ 3,038,000       1,433,000             4,998,000  
 
                                       
Cost Of Goods Sold
    390,000       2,399,000       157,000       45,000       2,991,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Gross Profit
    137,000       639,000       1,276,000       (45,000 )     2,007,000  
 
                                       
Selling, General And Administrative Expenses
    41,000       363,000       75,000       1,342,000       1,821,000  
 
                                       
Loss on sale of remaining LPG-related assets
                406,000             406,000  
 
                             
 
                                       
Operating Income
    96,000       276,000       795,000       (1,387,000 )     (220,000 )
 
                                       
Other Income (Expense)
                                       
 
                                       
Interest Expense
    (275,000 )     (322,000 )     73,000       (224,000 )     (748,000 )
 
                                       
Interest Income
          14,000       1,000       1,000       16,000  
 
                             
Income From Continuing Operations Before Taxes
    (179,000 )     (32,000 )     869,000       (1,610,000 )     (952,000 )
 
                                       
Provision (Benefit) For Income Taxes
    (4,000 )     (51,000 )     (3,000 )           (58,000 )
 
                             
 
                                       
Income (loss) From Continuing Operations
  $ (175,000 )     19,000       872,000       (1,610,000 )     (894,000 )
 
                             
     
(a)  
Acquired during November 2007
 
(b)  
Acquired during July 2007
 
(c)  
Business commenced in August 2006 and sold December 31, 2007

 

50


Table of Contents

Year Ended December 31, 2008 Compared With Year Ended December 31, 2007
Revenues. Revenues for the year ended December 31, 2008 were $13.8 million and includes the results of Regional and the Oklahoma Assets for the twelve months during 2008. Revenues during the year ended December 31, 2007 were $5.9 million and includes the results of Regional for the period July 28, 2007 to December 31, 2007, the results of the Oklahoma Assets for the period November 19, 2007 to December 31, 2007 and the results of the LPG transportation for the full twelve months. The results for the two periods are not comparative since each period contains different business operations for different periods of time.
During the year ended December 31, 2006, there were only revenues from August 22, 2006, the date that the LPG Transportation business commenced, through December 31, 2006. All revenues prior to August 22, 2006 were derived from Rio Vista’s LPG sales business and were reclassified as discontinued operations.
Cost of goods sold. Cost of goods sold for the year ended December 31, 2008 was $10.8 million and includes the results of Regional and the Oklahoma Assets for the twelve months during 2008. Cost of goods sold during the year ended December 31, 2007 were $4.8 million and includes the costs of goods sold of Regional for the period July 28, 2007 to December 31, 2007, the cost of goods sold of the Oklahoma Assets for the period November 19, 2007 to December 31, 2007 and the cost of goods sold of the LPG transportation for the full twelve months. The results for the two periods are not comparative since each period contains different business operations for different periods of time.
During the year ended December 31, 2006, cost of goods sold consisted of those costs associated with operation of the US – Mexico Pipelines and Matamoros Terminal Facility. All costs associated with Rio Vista’s LPG sales business prior to its sale, except for costs associated with the US – Mexico Pipelines and Matamoros Terminal Facility, which were used for Rio Vista’s LPG transportation business, were reclassified as discontinued operations.
Selling, general and administrative expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses were $5.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. Excluding the selling, general and administrative expenses associated with the acquisitions or sales of Regional, the Oklahoma Assets and/or the LPG Transportation business, the remaining selling, general and administrative expenses were associated with corporate related activities. These selling, general and administrative costs were $3.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2008 compared with $4.0 million during the year ended December 31, 2007. These costs were comprised of indirect selling, general and administrative expenses directly incurred by Rio Vista or allocated by Penn Octane to Rio Vista in accordance with the Omnibus Agreement. The costs consisted of salary related costs, legal, accounting and other professional fees, and other corporate related costs, including insurance, taxes other than income, and public company expenses. Salary related costs allocated by Penn Octane were based on the percentage of time spent by those employees (including executive officers) in performing Rio Vista related matters compared with the overall time spent working by those employees.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
General
As a result of the disposition of the LPG-related businesses in 2006 and 2007 and the acquisition of Regional’s business and the Oklahoma Assets, Rio Vista’s sources of operating cash flows are expected to be derived from the operations of Regional and from the revenues received from the Oklahoma Assets. Although the operations of Regional are expected to be profitable, the cash flows of Regional are subject to payments required under the RZB Note described below under “Debt Obligations” and income taxes payable on Regional’s stand-alone taxable income. Based on the current production levels from the Oklahoma Assets and current prices for oil and gas, there is not expected to be sufficient cash from operations to meet debt service requirements under the TCW Credit Facility described below under “Debt Obligations” unless additional production can be realized. Additional production will require additional capital expenditures to fund drilling expansion opportunities. Rio Vista currently does not have funding available to perform additional development. In addition, Rio Vista projects that monthly cash flows received from the Oklahoma Assets during the months of April through September will be less than during the months of October through March as a result of seasonality. Rio Vista does not expect that the Oklahoma Assets will be a source of generating cash flow for the foreseeable future based on current cash flow levels and the required debt covenants associated with the TCW Credit Facility, which prohibits distributions by Rio Vista’s Oklahoma subsidiaries unless certain conditions are met. Rio Vista is currently in discussions with TCW to restructure the TCW Credit Facility. See “- Debt Obligations – TCW Credit Facility” below.

 

51


Table of Contents

In addition, pursuant to the Omnibus Agreement, Penn Octane is entitled to reimbursement of costs incurred on behalf of Rio Vista, including an allocable share of overhead. As a result, Rio Vista may not have sufficient available cash to pay its separate general and administrative and other operating expenses, debt service and/or minimum quarterly distributions to unitholders unless Rio vista is able to restructure the TCW Credit Facility and the RZB note under terms which would provide an acceptable debt service and cash flow arrangement. In addition, Rio Vista may not distribute sufficient cash to meet the tax obligations of unitholders associated with the ownership of common units.
Rio Vista may obtain additional sources of revenues through the completion of future transactions, including acquisitions and/or dispositions of assets. The ability of Rio Vista to complete future acquisitions may require the use of a portion or substantially all of Rio Vista’s liquid assets, the issuance of additional debt and/or the issuance of additional units. Currently, substantially all of Rio Vista’s assets are pledged or committed to be pledged as collateral on existing debt in connection with the TCW Credit Facility and the RZB Loan Agreement (see below). Accordingly, Rio Vista may be unable to obtain additional financing collateralized by those assets.
At December 31, 2008, Rio Vista had a working capital deficit of approximately $36 million. Rio Vista cannot be certain that future cash flows from Regional’s business or the Oklahoma Assets’ operations and future investments, if any, will be adequate to cover all of its future working capital requirements, including minimum distributions to unitholders.
Distributions of Available Cash
All Rio Vista unitholders have the right to receive distributions from Rio Vista of “available cash” as defined in the partnership agreement in an amount equal to at least the minimum distribution of $0.25 per quarter per unit, plus any arrearages in the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the units from prior quarters subject to any reserves determined by the General Partner. The General Partner has a right to receive a distribution corresponding to its 2% General Partner interest and the incentive distribution rights described below. The distributions are to be paid within 45 days after the end of each calendar quarter. However, Rio Vista is prohibited from making any distributions to unitholders if it would cause an event of default, or an event of default exists, under any obligation of Penn Octane which Rio Vista has guaranteed.
In addition to its 2% General Partner interest, the General Partner is currently the holder of incentive distribution rights which entitle the holder to an increasing portion of cash distributions as described in the partnership agreement. As a result, cash distributions from Rio Vista are shared by the holders of the common units and the General Partner based on a formula whereby the General Partner receives disproportionately more distributions per percentage interest than the holders of the common units as annual cash distributions exceed certain milestones.

 

52


Table of Contents

During July 2008, Penn Octane approved the loan of approximately $700,000 to Rio Vista which amount is included in due to Penn Octane Corporation in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet for the specific purpose of funding Rio Vista’s June 2008 quarterly distribution. Rio Vista made the following distributions during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008:
                                 
                    Amounts Paid  
    Payment     Distribution     Common     General  
Quarter Ended   Date     Per Unit     Units     Partner  
 
Dec 2006
    01/18/07     $ 0.25     $ 478,000     $ 10,000  
Mar 2007
    05/04/07     $ 0.25     $ 478,000     $ 10,000  
Jun 2007
    07/31/07     $ 0.25     $ 484,000     $ 10,000  
Sep 2007
    11/14/07     $ 0.25     $ 484,000     $ 10,000  
Jun 2005 – Jun 2006 Arrearages
    12/10/07     $ 1.25     $ 2,420,000     $ 49,000  
Dec 2007
    02/14/08     $ 0.25     $ 607,000     $ 12,000  
Mar 2008
    05/16/08     $ 0.25     $ 629,000     $ 13,000  
Jun 2008
    08/14/08     $ 0.25     $ 679,000     $ 14,000  
The amount of the distributions paid through the June 2008 quarterly distribution represents the minimum quarterly distribution required to be made by Rio Vista pursuant to the partnership agreement. Rio Vista has not declared a distribution for the quarters ended September 30, 2008 and December 31, 2008.
Debt Obligations
RZB Note
In connection with the acquisition of Regional during July 2007, Rio Vista funded a portion of the acquisition through a loan of $5.0 million (RZB Note) from RZB Finance LLC (RZB) dated July 26, 2007. The RZB Note was due on demand and if no demand, with a one-year maturity. The RZB Note carries a variable annual rate of interest equal to the higher of (a) the rate of interest established from time to time by JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as its “base rate” or its “prime rate,” (7.25% at December 31, 2007), or (b) the weighted average overnight funds rate of the Federal Reserve System plus 0.50%, in each case plus a margin of 4.75% (Base Rate Margin). On July 27, 2008, the RZB Note was amended whereby the maturity date was extended until August 29, 2008. The RZB Note was not paid on August 29, 2008. During December 2008, Rio Vista entered into a third amendment to the RZB Note (Third Amendment). Under the terms of the Third Amendment, the maturity date of the RZB Note was extended to February 27, 2009. In addition, the interest rate calculation was modified to include a cost of funds rate definition in determining the base rate and the Base Rate Margin was increased to 7.0%. Under the terms of the Third Amendment, the net worth of Penn Octane, as defined, is required to be in excess of $3.3 million. In addition, the Third Amendment required Rio Vista to repay $1.0 million of the RZB Note. Effective January 1, 2009, Penn Octane agreed to loan Rio Vista the $1.0 million of cash collateral held by RZB for purpose of making the required payment described above.
During February 2009, Rio Vista entered into a fourth amendment to the RZB Note which extended the maturity date of the RZB Note through March 31, 2009. During March 2009, Rio Vista entered into a fifth amendment to the RZB Note which extends the maturity date of the RZB Note through April 30, 2009. Rio Vista and RZB are currently negotiating an additional extension of the RZB Note (Extended RZB Note). Rio Vista expects that the Extended RZB Note will have a three year maturity, with monthly amortization, and will provide Regional with the ability to make minimum monthly payments to Rio Vista to cover a portion of Rio Vista’s corporate overhead subject to Regional meeting required debt service covenants. In addition, Rio Vista will be required to subordinate repayment of its intercompany loan with Regional and Regional will be required to enter into a control agreement with its banks which will provide RZB with the ability to access Regional’s cash in the event of a default. The Extended RZB Note has not been executed and is subject to due diligence, final loan documents and approval of both parties.
In connection with the RZB Note, Regional granted to RZB a security interest in all of Regional’s assets, including a deed of trust on real property owned by Regional, and Rio Vista delivered to RZB a pledge of the outstanding capital stock of Regional. On July 26, 2007, as a further condition of the Loan Agreement, Penn Octane also entered into a Guaranty & Agreement (Guaranty) with RZB. Pursuant to the Guaranty, Penn Octane agreed to guaranty all of the indebtedness, liabilities and obligations of Rio Vista to RZB under the Loan Agreement and otherwise. The RZB Note is also guaranteed by Regional and RVOP.

 

53


Table of Contents

TCW Credit Facility
The TCW Credit Facility is a $30.0 million senior secured credit facility available to Rio Vista Penny LLC with a maturity date of August 29, 2010. The amount of the initial draw under the facility was $21.7 million, consisting of $16.8 million in assumption of the existing indebtedness in the principal amount of $16.5 million  plus accrued but unpaid interest in the amount of $250,000 owed by GM Oil to TCW, $2.0 million in consideration for TCW to enter into the TCW Credit Facility with Rio Vista Penny and for Rio Vista Penny to purchase an overriding royalty interest (ORRI) held by an affiliate of TCW, and $3.0 million to fund the acquisition of the membership interests of GO by Rio Vista GO. TCW had also approved a plan of development (APOD) for the Oklahoma assets totaling approximately $2.0 million, which was funded during December 2007. The TCW Credit Facility is secured by a first lien on all of the Oklahoma assets and associated production proceeds pursuant to the Note Purchase Agreement, Security Agreement and related agreements, including mortgages of the Oklahoma assets in favor of TCW. The interest rate is 10.5%, increasing an additional 2% if there is an event of default (see below). Payments under the TCW Credit Facility were interest-only until December 29, 2008. The TCW Credit Facility carries no prepayment penalty. Rio Vista ECO LLC (an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Vista and the direct parent of Rio Vista Penny and Rio Vista GO), Rio Vista GO, GO and MV have each agreed to guarantee payment of the Notes payable to the lenders under the TCW Credit Facility.
Under the terms of the Note Purchase Agreement, at any time during the period from May 19, 2008 through November 19, 2009, TCW has the right to demand payment of $2.2 million of debt (Demand Loan). Beginning May 19, 2008, TCW also has the right to convert the outstanding principal amount of the Demand Loan into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to the lesser of $13.33 per unit or 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. Beginning November 19, 2008, TCW has the right to convert the balance of the debt under the TCW Credit Facility into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. The conversion rights of TCW as described above were formalized through the issuance of a warrant by Rio Vista (TCW Warrant). Rio Vista has agreed to file with the SEC a registration statement on Form S-3 covering the common units issued pursuant to the TCW Warrant within 90 days following the first exercise of the TCW Warrant.
Rio Vista Penny and Rio Vista GO, which hold the Oklahoma Assets, are prohibited from making upstream distributions to Rio Vista unless certain conditions are met which currently are not expected to be met in the future. In addition, the TCW Credit Facility requires semi-annual reserve reports by an independent engineer which is used in determining the allowable borrowing base.

 

54


Table of Contents

On September 29, 2009, Rio Vista Penny entered into a First Amendment to the Note Purchase Agreement (First TCW Amendment) with TCW. Under the terms of the First TCW Amendment, TCW agreed to fund Rio Vista Penny an additional $1.0 million under the TCW Credit Facility for certain APOD costs as described in the First TCW Amendment. In addition, under the terms of the First TCW Amendment, the interest rate under the TCW Credit Facility increased from 10.5% per annum to 12.5% per annum beginning July 1, 2008. Under the terms of the First TCW Amendment, TCW agreed to change the period for which a notice to demand repayment from Rio Vista Penny of up to $2.2 million of indebtedness under the TCW Credit Facility from May 19, 2008 to January 1, 2009 and Rio Vista Penny also agreed to extend the demand repayment option on the $2.2 million through the date of maturity of the TCW Credit Facility. In addition, under the terms of the First TCW Amendment, TCW has agreed to waive other defaults identified in the First TCW Amendment which either occurred and/or were existing prior to the date of the First TCW Amendment.
In addition, on September 29, 2008, in connection with the TCW Credit Facility, Rio Vista Penny, Rio Vista, Operating and TCW entered into an Amended and Restated Management Services Agreement (Amended MSA). Under the terms of the Amended MSA, Operating was named as manager of the Oklahoma properties, replacing Northport Production Company, an Oklahoma corporation, which was previously named as manager under the original management services agreement.
Rio Vista Penny and TCW have entered into several letter agreements whereby TCW agreed to extend the payment obligations under the TCW Credit Facility (including the December 2008 principal payment and interest payment due) and other requirements pursuant to the TCW Credit Facility until April 13, 2009 (TCW Waiver). In connection with one of the extensions, TCW agreed to provide Rio Vista with 62 days advance written notice to exercise the TCW Warrant, except for up to 400,000 common units of Rio Vista.
Rio Vista’s management is in discussions with TCW to restructure the TCW Credit Facility.
However, if Rio Vista’s management is unable to restructure the TCW Credit Facility or obtain additional extensions or waivers of its requirements of payment terms and covenants contained in the TCW Credit Facility, then Rio Vista Penny will be in default under the terms of the TCW Credit Facility.
TCW has the right to foreclose against Rio Vista Penny under the terms of the TCW Credit Facility. TCW has no recourse against Rio Vista, except that TCW holds the TCW Warrant, granting it the right, but not the obligation, to convert a portion or all of the value of the debt owing under the TCW Credit Facility, including accrued interest and penalties, into Rio Vista common units at the exercise price defined in the TCW Warrant (approximately 90% of the market value of the common units on the 20 trading days preceding the conversion date).
If TCW converts any amounts owing under the TCW Credit Facility into Rio Vista common units then the current Rio Vista common unit holders will be significantly diluted.
As of December 31, 2008, the net book value Oklahoma Assets were approximately $36.1 million. As a result of a foreclosure, based on December 31, 2008 balances, Rio Vista would record a loss related to the Oklahoma Assets which could approximate $7.8 million. The exercise by TCW of any amount under the TCW Warrant would reduce the amount of the recordable loss by a corresponding amount.
Moores Note
In connection with the purchase of the Penny Assets, Rio Vista issued a promissory note with the principal amount of $500,000 bearing interest at 7% per annum (Moores Note) payable to Gary Moores on May 19, 2008. Under the terms of the Moores Note, beginning February 19, 2008, Gary Moores had the option to convert the outstanding principal and interest of the Moores Note into common units of Rio Vista which option was not exercised and expired on May 19, 2008. The Moores Note was not paid upon maturity.

 

55


Table of Contents

On June 27, 2008, the Moores Note was amended (Amended Moores Note). In connection with the Amended Moores Note, Rio Vista made a principal payment of $100,000, plus accrued interest through that date and the maturity date of the remaining principal balance was extended to November 19, 2008. In addition, the interest rate on the remaining balance of the Moores Note was increased to 10% per annum. Simultaneously with the amendment of the Moores Note, Penny agreed to the sale and transfer of certain goods and chattels to Gary Moores in exchange for $100,000 which was paid through a credit against the outstanding principal balance due under the Moores Note and Penny also received from a company owned by Gary Moores, a used vehicle with nominal value, to be used by Penny for general operations. The Amended Moores Note was not paid upon maturity. In November 2008, Gary Moores filed a civil action against Rio Vista as a result of the non-payment (Civil Action).
On January 20, 2009, the Moores Note was once again amended (Second Amended Moores Note). In connection with the Second Amended Moores Note, Rio Vista agreed to make monthly principal payments of $12,500 plus interest beginning May 10, 2009 and to continue such payments for 5 consecutive months. Each month thereafter, Rio Vista is required to make principal payments of $37,500 plus interest until all amounts due and payable have been paid. In addition, in connection with the Second Amended Moores Note, Gary Moores agreed to dismiss the Civil Action.
Sellers’ Note — Regional
In connection with the Regional acquisition, Regional issued a promissory note in the amount of $1.0 million to be paid in four equal semiannual installments of $250,000 beginning January 27, 2008. Rio Vista recorded a discount of $116,000 (10% effective rate), representing the portion of interest associated with the note, which was to be amortized over the term of the note. During January 2008, the first installment was paid. On July 27, 2008 and January 27, 2009, the second and third installment was due to be paid. Regional did not make the second or third installment payments as it believes that there exists offsets in connection with the acquisition of Regional in excess of the payments. For the period of July 28, 2007 through December 31, 2007 and the year ended December 31, 2008, $37,000 and $72,000, respectively, of the discount was amortized.
Richter Note Payable
On April 15, 2008, Mr. Jerome B. Richter, a former officer of Penn Octane, agreed to loan Rio Vista $575,000 in exchange for a promissory note issued by Rio Vista, guaranteed by Penn Octane (Richter Note Payable) and collateralized by the assets of Rio Vista, subject to the consent of RZB and TCW. Under the terms of the Richter Note Payable, Rio Vista is required to repay the Richter Note Payable on the earlier of (1) the six (6) month anniversary of the Richter Note Payable, which date was extended to November 15, 2008 or (ii) the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of Rio Vista. The Richter Note Payable was not paid on November 15, 2008. Rio Vista and Mr. Richter are negotiating an extension of the due date. The Richter Note Payable accrues interest at an annual rate of 8 percent (8%). Proceeds from the Richter Note Payable were used for working capital.
Leases
Norfolk Southern Leases
On January 1, 2003, Regional (as lessee) entered into a lease agreement with Norfolk Southern Railway Company (as lessor) for approximately 3.1 acres of land which is utilized in connection with Regional’s existing operations at Regional’s facilities in Hopewell, Virginia. The lease includes the right to maintain existing warehouses, storage tanks for handling petroleum and chemical products, and necessary appurtenances. The lease term was January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2005. The lease has not been renewed and may be terminated by either party upon 30 days’ written notice. Rent is $1,500 per month subject to adjustment based on inflation.

 

56


Table of Contents

On August 21, 2003, Regional (as lessee) entered into a siding lease agreement with Norfolk Southern Railway Company (as lessor) for approximately 750 feet of railroad sidings on land which is utilized in connection with Regional’s existing operations at Regional’s facilities in Hopewell, Virginia. The sidings may be used for handling various chemical products. The siding lease began on August 21, 2003 and continues until terminated by either party with 30 days’ written notice. Rent is $4,875 per year, payable in advance.
On June 1, 2007, Regional executed a letter of intent with Norfolk Southern dated May 29, 2007 which provides for the replacement of the foregoing leases through a purchase of approximately 3.5 acres of land and the lease of approximately 1.9 acres of land on a long-term basis. Regional received a letter from Norfolk Southern dated July 26, 2007, approving the purchase of the land and the lease on the terms contained in the letter of intent. Regional is awaiting definitive documents from Norfolk Southern in order to complete the purchase and lease transactions.
Other
Regional has several leases for parking and other facilities which are short term in nature and can be terminated by the lessors or Regional upon giving 60 days notice of cancellation.
Agreements
Gas Service and Sales Agreements
GO entered into an agreement with Clearwater Enterprises, LLC (Clearwater) to provide monthly services in relationship to the Brooken system pipeline. In accordance with terms of the agreement, Clearwater would 1) receive pipeline nominations from the various shippers on the Brooken system. 2) allocate volumes to the wellhead based upon the volumes delivered to the Brooken interconnect 3) prepare gathering and compression fee invoices on behalf of the Company 4) prepare pipeline imbalance and cashout statements. The monthly gathering management fee for these services is $3,000. The agreement is month to month unless and until terminated by either party upon 30 days notice.
Substantially all of the gas sales are made to Clearwater. These gas sales are governed by an agreement that expires in 2009 and continues yearly thereafter, until canceled by either party within thirty day notice.
During March 2008, certain of the Clearwater agreements were amended to name Rio Vista Operating LLC as the contracting party based on Rio Vista Operating LLC’s assumption of operations of the oil and gas properties.
Gas Compression Agreements
GO entered into a one year lease agreement with Hanover Compression Limited Partnership for the use of a compressor. The lease is dated October 11, 2006 and is guaranteed for a minimum of twelve months and continues monthly until cancelled by either party with 30 day notice. Minimum base lease payments of $11,000 plus taxes and are due monthly. The base amount is subject to semi-annual adjustments.
MV entered into a Gas Compression Master Service Agreement with USA Compression Partners, LP on November 1, 2007. This agreement replaces an earlier agreement for gas compression services. The agreement provides for monthly payments of approximately $17,000 per month through August 31, 2009.

 

57


Table of Contents

Consulting Agreement
During November 2005, Penn Octane, Rio Vista and Mr. Richter entered into a consulting agreement whereby Mr. Richter shall served as a special advisor to the board of directors of Penn Octane and the board of managers of the General Partner and provided the following services (Services) to both Penn Octane and Rio Vista: assistance with the sale of all or part of their LPG assets, assistance with other transactions (including restructurings) involving the companies as mutually agreed by the parties and such other services that the companies may reasonably request.
In consideration of the Services rendered by Mr. Richter to the companies, Penn Octane and Rio Vista paid the following fees (Fees) to Mr. Richter: an amount equal to two percent (2%) of (i) the net proceeds, as defined, to the companies resulting from a sale of assets to a third party, and (ii) the net proceeds, as defined, to the companies from sales of LPG to PMI for any calendar month in which such sales exceed the volumes pursuant to the previous agreement with PMI. Amounts expensed pursuant to (i) above (see note D) were $138,000 and have been paid to Mr. Richter.
Mr. Richter’s consulting agreement expired on November 14, 2006.
Rio Vista entered into a consulting agreement (Consulting Agreement) with JBR Capital Resources, Inc. (JBR Capital) regarding consulting services to be rendered by JBR Capital to Rio Vista and to Penn Octane. JBR Capital is controlled by Mr. Richter. The provisions of the Consulting Agreement are effective as of November 15, 2006 (Effective Date). Pursuant to the Consulting Agreement, JBR Capital has agreed to assist Rio Vista and Penn Octane with the potential acquisition and disposition of assets and with other transactions involving Rio Vista or Penn Octane. In exchange for these services, Rio Vista has agreed to pay JBR Capital a fee based on approved services rendered by JBR Capital plus a fee based on the net proceeds to Rio Vista resulting from a sale of assets to a third party introduced to Rio Vista by JBR Capital. For the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, Rio Vista expenses approximately $317,000 and $325,000, respectively in connection with the Consulting Agreement. In addition, in connection with the Regional transaction, JBR Capital earned a fee of $180,000 which fee was expensed. The initial term of the Consulting Agreement was six months and continues to renew for additional six-month terms unless terminated by either party at least 30 days before the end of each term.

 

58


Table of Contents

CEOcast Agreement
Effective July 2, 2007, Rio Vista entered into a consulting agreement with CEOcast, Inc. (CEOcast) whereby CEOcast agreed to render investor relations services to Rio Vista. Under the terms of the CEOcast agreement, CEOcast received cash fees of $7,500 per month and Rio Vista agreed to issue to CEOcast (a) 1,399 of Rio Vista’s fully-paid, non-assessable common units (Common Units) and (b) $75,000 worth of Common Units on March 31, 2008 based on a calculation of units as more fully described in the consulting agreement. The delivery of any Common Units was to be made at the soonest practical date after March 31, 2008, based on the best efforts of Rio Vista. In accordance with the Agreement, during April 2008, Rio Vista provided notice to CEOcast that it would not renew the Agreement upon the expiration in July 2008. In connection with the CEOcast agreement, on July 23, 2008, Rio Vista issued to CEOcast a total of 6,378 Common Units. Based on the closing price of Rio Vista Common Units as of July 23, 2008, the date that the units were issued to CEOcast, Rio Vista recorded additional expense of $80,000 associated with the issuance of the common units.
Strategic Growth International
On May 28, 2008, Rio Vista and SGI entered into a one year consulting agreement whereby SGI agreed to provide public relations consulting services. The agreement could be cancelled after 6 months and was cancelled on October 29, 2008 with an effective date of December 1, 2008. In connection with the agreement, Penn Octane and Rio Vista were each required to pay monthly fees of $9,000 per month. In addition, under the agreement between Rio Vista and SGI, Rio Vista granted SGI 50,000 warrants to purchase common units of Rio Vista at an exercise price of $12.00 per common unit. The warrants cannot be exercised for one year from the date of issuance and the warrants will expire three years from the date of issuance. As a result of the cancellation, the number of warrants issued was reduced to 25,000.
Employment Agreement
During June 2008, the Board of Managers of the General Partner approved an employment agreement with an officer of the General Partner. Under the terms of the employment agreement, the officer is entitled to receive a grant of 30,000 restricted common units under Rio Vista’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan in accordance with the following vesting schedule: 5,000 common units after the officer has been employed for six months, another 5,000 common units after one year of employment, another 10,000 common units after two years of employment and another 10,000 common units after three years of employment. The common units were granted on October 17, 2008. Total compensation cost recorded under the aforementioned grant was approximately $205,000 of which $34,000 was expensed during the year ended December 31, 2008.
Asphalt Agreement
On November 30, 2000, Regional entered into a Storage and Product Handling Agreement with a customer with an effective date of December 1, 2000 (Asphalt Agreement). The Asphalt Agreement provides for the pricing, terms and conditions under which the customer will purchase terminal services and facility usage from Regional for the storage and handling of the customer’s asphalt products. The Asphalt Agreement was amended on October 15, 2002 with an effective date of December 1, 2002 (Amended Asphalt Agreement). The term of the Amended Asphalt Agreement is five years with an option by the customer for an additional five-year renewal term, which the customer exercised in July 2007. After the additional five-year term, the Amended Asphalt Agreement renews automatically for successive one-year terms unless terminated upon 120 days advance written notice by either party. The annual fee payable to Regional for the initial five-year term of the Amended Asphalt Agreement is approximately $500,000, payable in equal monthly installments, subject to adjustments for inflation and certain facility improvements. In exchange for the annual fee, Regional agrees to provide minimum annual throughput of 610,000 net barrels per contract year, with additional volume to be paid on a per barrel basis. During the term of the amended Asphalt Agreement, Regional agrees to provide three storage tanks and certain related equipment to the customer on an exclusive basis as well as access to Regional’s barge docking facility.

 

59


Table of Contents

Fuel Oil Agreement
On November 16, 1998, Regional entered into a Terminal Agreement with a customer with an effective date of November 1, 1998, as amended on April 5, 2001, October 11, 2001 and August 1, 2003 (Fuel Oil Agreement). The Fuel Oil Agreement provides for the pricing, terms and conditions under which Regional will provide terminal facilities and services to the customers for the delivery of fuel oil. The agreement renews automatically for successive one-year terms unless terminated upon 365 days advance written notice by either party. Pursuant to the agreement, as amended, Regional agrees to provide three storage tanks, certain related pipelines and equipment, and at least two tractor tankers to the customer on an exclusive basis, as well as access to Regional’s barge docking facility. In exchange for use of Regional’s facilities and services, the customer pays an annual tank rental amount of approximately $300,000 plus a product transportation fee calculated on a per gallon basis, each subject to annual adjustment for inflation. Regional agrees to deliver a minimum daily quantity of fuel oil on behalf of the customer.
Private Placements
On March 7, 2008, the Board of Managers of the General Partner Rio Vista approved the grant of a unit bonus of 8,812 common units under Rio Vista’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan to an executive officer of the General Partner. The amount of units granted was based on the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on March 7, 2008.
On March 7, 2008, a total of 61,875 options to acquire common units of Rio Vista were exercised by holders of such warrants. Total proceeds received from the exercises were $774,000. In addition, on March 7, 2008, 15,625 options to acquire common units of Rio Vista were exercised by a holder through the offset of a severance obligation in connection with that employee’s termination.
On July 23, 2008, a total of 6,378 common units of Rio Vista were issued to CEOcast in connection with a consulting agreement. Based on the closing price of Rio Vista’s common units on July 22, 2008, the total amount recorded as an expense on the issuance date was $80,000.
On July 23, 2008, the board of managers authorized the issuance and sale by Rio Vista of 197,628 of Rio Vista’s common units to Penn Octane at $10.12 per unit, and Penn Octane’s board authorized its purchase of such Rio Vista units at that price, for an aggregate price of approximately $2,000,000.   The price per unit was the closing price for Rio Vista common units on May 30, 2008 as reported by the NASDAQ National Market (see note L to the consolidated financial statements).
On October 17, 2008, Rio Vista issued an aggregate of 12,939 Rio Vista common units in satisfaction of all liquidated damages due to Standard General. (see note I to the consolidated financial statements).
Unit Warrants
On January 23, 2008, the board of managers of the General Partner approved the grant of options to purchase a total of 16,250 common units under the 2005 Plan to certain outside members of the board of managers of the General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $14.42 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on January 23, 2008. Options granted to outside managers are fully vested on the date of grant and expire five years from the date of grant. These issuances were exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 pursuant to Section 4(2) thereof because the issuances do not involve any public offering of securities.

 

60


Table of Contents

On May 28, 2008, Rio Vista and Strategic Growth International (SGI), entered into a one year consulting agreement whereby SGI has agreed to provide public relations consulting services. The agreement could be cancelled after 6 months and was cancelled on October 29, 2008 with an effective date of December 1, 2008. In connection with the agreement, Rio Vista granted SGI 50,000 warrants to purchase common units of Rio Vista at an exercise price of $12.00 per common unit. The warrants cannot be exercised for one year from the date of issuance and the warrants will expire three years from the date of issuance. Total cost recorded at the grant date was $161,000. As a result of the aforementioned cancellation, the number of warrants granted was reduced to 25,000.
Related Party Transactions
Sale — Purchase of Rio Vista Common Units
At meetings held on May 30, 2008, in connection with the previously disclosed discussions between Rio Vista and the NASDAQ National Market (NASDAQ) regarding Rio Vista’s compliance with NASDAQ’s Marketplace Rule 4450(a)(3) on capital adequacy, the board of managers authorized the issuance and sale by Rio Vista of 197,628 of Rio Vista’s common units to Penn Octane at $10.12 per unit, and Penn Octane’s board authorized its purchase of such Rio Vista units at that price, for an aggregate price of approximately $2.0 million.  Thereafter, Rio Vista’s officers continued to formulate a plan of ongoing compliance with Rule 4450(a)(3) on terms satisfactory to NASDAQ, and notified NASDAQ regarding the proposed issuance of its units.  Rio Vista also filed a listing of additional units notification with NASDAQ (LAS) based on its intention to go forward with the proposed purchase and sale. Following further discussions with NASDAQ, at board meetings on July 15, 2008, the board of managers and the board of directors of Penn Octane confirmed their desire to implement promptly the previously authorized purchase and sale, and the companies agreed to complete the transaction, subject to NASDAQ approval of Rio Vista’s LAS. On July 23, 2008, after the period of review for the LAS passed, the common units were issued to Penn Octane.
Loans to Rio Vista
As of July 23, 2008, Rio Vista off-set $2.0 million owed to Penn Octane against the amounts owed by Penn Octane to acquire Rio Vista common units (see above). In addition, Penn Octane has loaned additional amounts to Rio Vista for the sole purpose of allowing Rio Vista to fund ongoing operations and the June 2008 quarterly distribution.
In connection with the Third Amendment of the RZB Note, Rio Vista was required to repay $1.0 million of the RZB Note. Effective January 1, 2009, Penn Octane loaned Rio Vista $1.0 million of its cash collateral held by RZB for the purpose of funding Rio Vista’s obligation to make the required payment described above.
Realization of Assets
The accompanying consolidated balance sheet has been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, which contemplate continuation of Rio Vista as a going concern. Rio Vista had a loss from continuing operations for the ended December 31, 2007 and 2008 and has a deficit in working capital. Currently, all revenues generated from the Oklahoma Assets are held as collateral against the TCW Credit Facility. The TCW Credit Facility, $150,000 of the Moores Note, the RZB Note, the Sellers’ Note – Regional and the Richter Note Payable total approximately $31.3 million and are all classified as current liabilities. In addition, as a result of extensions, the TCW Credit Facility and the RZB Note will expire during April 2009, unless further extended. In the event such obligations are not satisfactorily restructured or further extended, the TCW Credit Facility and/or the RZB Note will be due immediately (see note G to the consolidated financial statements). The TCW Credit Facility and RZB Note are collateralized by the Oklahoma Assets and the Regional assets, respectively.

 

61


Table of Contents

The Oklahoma Assets and/or the Regional operations currently do not generate sufficient cash flow to pay general and administrative and other operating expenses of Rio Vista and all debt service requirements. The TCW Credit Facility prohibits distributions by Rio Vista’s Oklahoma subsidiaries unless certain conditions are met which currently are not expected to be met in the future. In addition, Rio Vista requires additional funding in order to increase production levels for its Oklahoma Assets.
Substantially all of Rio Vista’s and Penn Octane’s assets are pledged or committed to be pledged as collateral on the TCW Credit Facility, the RZB Note, and the Richter Note Payable, and therefore, both Rio Vista and Penn Octane may be unable to obtain additional financing collateralized by those assets. Penn Octane’s Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on the consolidated financial statements of Penn Octane at December 31, 2008 contained an explanatory paragraph which describes an uncertainty about Penn Octane’s ability to continue as a going concern. If Penn Octane’s and Rio Vista’s cash flows are not adequate to pay their obligations, Penn Octane and/or Rio Vista may be required to raise additional funds to avoid foreclosure by creditors. There can be no assurance that such additional funding will be available on terms attractive to either Penn Octane or Rio Vista or available at all. Under the terms of the TCW Credit Facility, TCW may convert a portion or all of its debt obligations into common units of Rio Vista which may be severely dilutive to existing unitholders and may be a deterrent to future equity financings. If additional amounts cannot be raised, existing debts restructured and cash flow is inadequate, Penn Octane and/or Rio Vista would likely be required to seek other alternatives which could include the sale of assets, closure of operations and/or protection under the U.S. bankruptcy laws.
In view of the matters described in the preceding paragraphs, recoverability of the recorded asset amounts shown in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet is dependent upon the ability of Rio Vista restructure the TCW Credit Facility and the RZB Note and to continue as a going concern. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments related to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should Rio Vista be unable to restructure such debt and to continue in existence.
To provide Rio Vista with the ability it believes necessary to continue in existence, management is taking steps to restructure its existing debt obligations, raise additional debt and/or equity financing, reduce its general and administrative and other operating expenses and sell assets.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
Rio Vista does not have any off-balance sheet arrangements.
Recently Issued Financial Accounting Standards
In February 2007, SFAS No. 159 “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities – including an amendment of FAS 115,” was issued, which allows entities to choose, at specified election dates, to measure eligible financial assets and liabilities at fair value that are not otherwise required to be measured at fair value. If a company elects the fair value option for an eligible item, changes in that item’s fair value in subsequent reporting periods must be recognized in current earnings. SFAS No. 159 also establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to draw comparison between entities that elect different measurement attributes for similar assets and liabilities. SFAS No. 159 is effective for us on January 1, 2008. Rio Vista does not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 159 to have a material impact on its consolidated results of operations, cash flows or financial position.

 

62


Table of Contents

In December 2007, the FASB released SFAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements an amendment of ARB No. 51”, which establishes accounting and reporting standards for the noncontrolling interests in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary. SFAS No. 160 requires consolidated net income to be reported at amounts that include the amounts attributable to both the parent and the noncontrolling interests and requires disclosure, on the face of the consolidated statement of income, of the amounts of consolidated net income attributable to the parent and to the noncontrolling interest. Previously, net income attributable to the noncontrolling interest was reported as an expense or other deduction in arriving at consolidated net income. SFAS No. 160 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. Rio Vista believes the adoption of this statement will not have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.
In March 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 161 (SFAS No. 161), “Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133.” SFAS No. 161 amends and expands the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 133 to provide greater transparency about how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, how derivative instruments and related hedge items are accounted for under SFAS No. 133 and its related interpretations and how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows. SFAS No. 161 requires qualitative disclosures about objectives and strategies for using derivatives, quantitative disclosures about fair value amounts of gains and losses on derivative instruments and disclosures about credit-risk-related contingent features in derivative agreements. SFAS No. 161 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008. Rio Vista does not expect the adoption of the new accounting standard to have an impact on Rio Vista’s financial statements.
In May 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.162 (SFAS No. 162), “The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.” SFAS No. 162 identifies the sources of accounting principles and framework for selecting the principles to be used in the preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental entities that are presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. The hierarchy guidance provided by SFAS No. 162 did not have a significant impact on Rio Vista’s financial statements.
Critical Accounting Policies
The consolidated financial statements of Rio Vista reflect the selection and application of accounting policies which require management to make significant estimates and judgments. See note B to Rio Vista’s consolidated financial statements included in its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies”. Rio Vista believes that the following reflect the more critical accounting policies that affect its financial position and results of operations.
Impairment of long-lived assets — The determination of whether impairment has occurred is based on an estimate of undiscounted cash flows attributable to assets in future periods. If impairment has occurred, the amount of the impairment loss recognized will be determined by estimating the fair value of the assets and recording a loss if the fair value is less than the carrying value. Assessments of impairment are subject to management’s judgments and based on estimates that management is required to make.
Goodwill — Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the estimated fair value of identifiable net assets associated with acquisition transactions. Rio Vista has adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” (FASB 142). Under FASB 142, goodwill is not amortized. Rio Vista is required to make at least an annual test of the fair value of the intangible to determine if impairment has occurred. Rio Vista performs an annual impairment test for goodwill in the fourth quarter of each calendar year.

 

63


Table of Contents

Depreciation and amortization expenses — Property, plant and equipment are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization rates are based on management’s estimate of the future utilization and useful lives of the assets. Should the nature of Rio Vista’s business change our future utilization and useful lives of depreciable and amortizable assets may also change. This could result in increases or decreases in depreciation and amortization expense compared with historical amounts.
Unit-based compensation — Rio Vista utilizes unit-based awards as a form of compensation for employees, officers and managers of our General Partner and to non-employees for goods and services and to acquire or extend debt. Effective January 1, 2006, Rio Vista adopted the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R), “Share-Based Payment” (SFAS 123R) using the modified prospective transition method. Under this method, previously reported amounts should not be restated to reflect the provisions of SFAS 123R. SFAS 123R requires Rio Vista to record compensation expense for all awards granted after the date of adoption, and for the unvested portion of previously granted awards that remain outstanding at the date of adoption. The fair value concepts have not changed significantly in SFAS 123R; however, in adopting this standard, companies must choose among alternative valuation models and amortization assumptions. After assessing alternative valuation models and amortization assumptions, Rio Vista will continue using both the Black-Scholes valuation model and straight-line amortization of compensation expense over the requisite service period for each separately vesting portion of the grant. Rio Vista will reconsider use of this model if additional information becomes available in the future that indicates another model would be more appropriate, or if grants issued in future periods have characteristics that cannot be reasonably estimated using this model.
Allowance for doubtful accounts — The carrying value of trade accounts receivable is based on estimated fair value. The determination of fair value is subject to management’s judgments and is based on estimates that management is required to make. Those estimates are made based on the creditworthiness of customers and payment history. Rio Vista has made no provisions for doubtful accounts since its inception.
We account for oil and gas properties by the successful efforts method.  Leasehold acquisition costs are capitalized when incurred.  If proved reserves are found on an undeveloped property, leasehold cost is transferred to proved properties.  Under this method of accounting, costs relating to the development of proved areas are capitalized when incurred.
Depreciation and depletion of producing oil and gas properties is recorded based on units of production.  Unit rates are computed for unamortized drilling and development costs using proved developed reserves and for acquisition costs using all proved reserves.  SFAS No. 19, Financial Accounting and Reporting for Oil and Gas Producing Companies ” (SFAS 19) requires that acquisition costs of proved properties be amortized on the basis of all proved reserves, developed and undeveloped, and that capitalized development costs (wells and related equipment and facilities) be amortized on the basis of proved developed reserves.  As more fully described in the Supplementary Oil and Gas Data (Unaudited) in Item 8.  “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” our proved reserves at December 31, 2008 were estimated by an independent petroleum engineering firm, Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc.
Geological, geophysical, annual lease rentals and dry hole costs on oil and gas properties relating to unsuccessful wells are charged to expense as incurred.
Upon sale or retirement of complete fields of depreciable or depleted property, the book value thereof, less proceeds or salvage value, is charged or credited to income.  On sale or retirement of an individual well, the proceeds are credited to accumulated depreciation and depletion.

 

64


Table of Contents

In accordance with SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets ,” we assess proved oil and gas properties for possible impairment when events or circumstances indicate that the recorded carrying value of the properties may not be recoverable.  We recognize an impairment loss as a result of a triggering event and when the estimated undiscounted future cash flows from a property are less than the carrying value.  If an impairment is indicated, the cash flows are discounted at a rate approximate to our cost of capital and compared to the carrying value for determining the amount of the impairment loss to record.  Estimated future cash flows are based on management’s expectations for the future and include estimates of oil and gas reserves and future commodity prices and operating costs.  Downward revisions in estimates of reserve quantities or expectations of falling commodity prices or rising operating costs could result in a reduction in undiscounted future cash flows and could indicate property impairment. 
Unproved properties that are individually insignificant are amortized and assessed for impairment on a property-by-property basis.  If considered impaired, costs are charged to expense when such impairment is deemed to have occurred.
Rio Vista’s estimates of proved reserves are based on the quantities of oil and gas that engineering and geological analyses demonstrate, with reasonable certainty, to be recoverable from established reservoirs in the future under current operating and economic parameters.  Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc. prepared a reserve and economic evaluation of all our properties on a well-by-well basis as of December 31, 2008.
Reserves and their relation to estimated future net cash flows impact our depletion and impairment calculations.  As a result, adjustments to depletion and impairment are made concurrently with changes to reserve estimates.  Our reserve estimates and the projected cash flows derived from those estimates are prepared in accordance with SEC guidelines.  The accuracy of our reserve estimates is a function of many factors including the following:  the quality and quantity of available data, the interpretation of that data, the accuracy of various mandated economic assumptions and the judgments of the individuals preparing the estimates.
Rio Vista’s proved reserve estimates are a function of many assumptions, all of which could deviate significantly from actual results.  As such, reserve estimates may materially vary from the ultimate quantities of gas, natural gas liquids and oil eventually recovered.
Gas and oil production revenue and related natural gas liquids revenue are recognized based on actual volumes of gas, oil, and natural gas liquids sold to purchasers. Sales require delivery of the product to the purchaser, passage of title, and probability of collection of purchaser amounts owed. Gas and oil production revenue and related natural gas liquids revenue are reported net of royalties. Rio Vista uses the sales method of accounting for gas imbalances. Gas imbalances result from the gas volumes sold by Rio Vista from a property being different from its actual entitled volumes. Under the sales method, revenues are recognized based on actual volumes of gas sold. The volumes sold may differ from the entitled volumes. Direct operating expenses are recognized on an accrual basis and consist of costs required to operate gas and oil properties, product transportation expenses, and production and property taxes.

 

65


Table of Contents

Gas revenues are recognized based on actual volumes of gas purchased from third-party producers and sold to customers. Sales are recorded only upon the delivery of the product to the purchaser, passage of title, and collectability is reasonably assured. Losses, if any, resulting from imbalances from such sales are recognized currently, and gains, if any, are recognized at final delivery.
Oil and gas is sold by Rio Vista on a monthly basis.  Virtually all of Rio Vista’s contracts’ pricing provisions are tied to a market index, with certain adjustments based on, among other factors, whether a well delivers to a gathering or transmission line, quality of oil and gas, and prevailing supply and demand conditions, so that the price of the oil and gas fluctuate to remain competitive with other available oil and gas suppliers.
We use forward sales contracts to minimize the variability of cash flow from our oil and gas production by reducing our exposure to price fluctuations.  Currently, these transactions consist of fixed price contracts.  We account for these activities pursuant to SFAS 133.  This statement establishes accounting and reporting standards requiring that derivative instruments (including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts) be recorded at fair market value and included in the balance sheet as assets or liabilities.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
Not applicable.

 

66


Table of Contents


Table of Contents

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Managers of Rio Vista GP LLC,
General Partner of Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and its subsidiaries (Rio Vista) as of December 31, 2007 and 2008, and the related consolidated statements of operations, Partners’ Capital, and cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2008. These financial statements are the responsibility of Rio Vista’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Rio Vista as of December 31, 2007 and 2008, and the consolidated results of their operations and their consolidated cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2008 in conformity with United States generally accepted accounting principles.
We have also audited Schedule II of Rio Vista for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2008. In our opinion, this schedule presents fairly, in all material respects, the information required to be set forth therein.
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that Rio Vista will continue as a going concern. As discussed in note O to the consolidated financial statements, conditions exist which raise substantial doubt about Rio Vista’s ability to continue as a going concern including 1) Rio Vista’s ability to generate sufficient cash flow to pay its expenses and its current debt obligations as they become due and 2) Rio Vista’s dependence on Penn Octane to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to these matters are also described in note O. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments related to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should Rio Vista be unable to continue in existence.
/s/ BURTON McCUMBER & CORTEZ, L.L.P.
Brownsville, Texas
April 3, 2009

 

68


Table of Contents

Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
December 31,

ASSETS
                 
    2007     2008  
Current Assets
               
Cash
  $ 3,450,000     $ 292,000  
Restricted cash
    26,000        
Trade accounts receivable (less allowance for doubtful accounts of $0 at 2007 and 2008)
    1,446,000       1,662,000  
Deferred tax assets
          99,000  
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
    408,000       584,000  
 
           
Total current assets
    5,330,000       2,637,000  
Oil and gas properties and related equipment (successful efforts method) — net
    26,197,000       28,243,000  
Property, plant and equipment – net
    12,762,000       12,414,000  
Other non-current assets
          14,000  
Goodwill
    5,121,000       5,121,000  
 
           
Total assets
  $ 49,410,000     $ 48,429,000  
 
           
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

 

69


Table of Contents

Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS – CONTINUED
December 31,

LIABILITIES AND PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
                 
    2007     2008  
Current Liabilities
               
Current maturities of long-term debt
  $ 3,361,000     $ 25,594,000  
Short-term debt
    5,493,000       5,575,000  
Due to Penn Octane Corporation, net
    347,000       778,000  
Accounts payable
    2,086,000       2,451,000  
Taxes payable
    618,000       921,000  
Accrued liabilities
    1,476,000       2,852,000  
 
           
Total current liabilities
    13,381,000       38,171,000  
Commitments and contingencies
           
Long-term debt, less current maturities, net of discount
    21,250,000       150,000  
Deferred income taxes
    3,238,000       2,909,000  
Partners’ Capital
               
Common units
    11,310,000       7,054,000  
General Partner’s equity
    231,000       145,000  
 
           
Total partners’ capital
    11,541,000       7,199,000  
 
           
Total liabilities and partners’ capital
  $ 49,410,000     $ 48,429,000  
 
           
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

 

70


Table of Contents

Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
                 
    Year ended     Year ended  
    December 31,     December 31,  
    2007     2008  
Revenues
  $ 5,906,000     $ 13,821,000  
Cost of goods sold
    4,805,000       10,758,000  
 
           
 
               
Gross profit
    1,101,000       3,063,000  
Selling, general and administrative expenses and other
               
Legal and professional fees
    1,516,000       1,579,000  
Salaries and payroll related expenses
    1,444,000       1,767,000  
Other
    1,710,000       1,964,000  
Loss on sale of remaining LPG-related assets
    406,000       351,000  
 
           
 
    5,076,000       5,661,000  
 
           
 
               
Operating loss from continuing operations
    (3,975,000 )     (2,598,000 )
Other income (expense)
               
Interest expense
    (885,000 )     (3,658,000 )
Interest income
    17,000       8,000  
 
           
Loss before taxes
    (4,843,000 )     (6,248,000 )
Benefit for income taxes
    21,000       37,000  
 
           
 
               
Net loss
  $ (4,822,000 )   $ (6,211,000 )
 
           
 
               
Net loss allocable to the partners
  $ (4,822,000 )   $ (6,211,000 )
Less General Partner’s interest in net loss
    (96,000 )     (124,000 )
 
           
Net loss allocable to the common units
  $ (4,726,000 )   $ (6,087,000 )
 
           
 
               
Net loss per common unit
  $ (2.40 )   $ (2.34 )
 
           
 
               
Weighted average common units outstanding
    1,971,799       2,599,168  
 
           
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

 

71


Table of Contents

Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
                                 
                            Total  
    Common Units     General     Partners’  
    Units     Amount     Partner     Capital  
Balance as of December 31, 2006
    1,910,656       14,739,000       301,000       15,040,000  
 
                               
Net loss
          (4,726,000 )     (96,000 )     (4,822,000 )
Issuance of equity
    518,550       5,664,000       116,000       5,780,000  
Cost associated with issuance of equity
          (294,000 )     (6,000 )     (300,000 )
Cash distribution to partners
          (4,342,000 )     (89,000 )     (4,431,000 )
Beneficial conversion feature
          25,000             25,000  
Unit based compensation
          245,000       4,000       249,000  
 
                       
 
                               
Balance as of December 31, 2007
    2,429,206     $ 11,311,000     $ 230,000     $ 11,541,000  
 
                               
Net loss
          (6,087,000 )     (124,000 )     (6,211,000 )
Issuance of equity
    333,257       3,476,000       72,000       3,548,000  
Registration costs
          (308,000 )     (6,000 )     (314,000 )
Cash distribution to partners
          (1,916,000 )     (39,000 )     (1,955,000 )
Contribution from the General Partner
          116,000       2,000       118,000  
Unit-based compensation
          436,000       9,000       445,000  
Other
          26,000       1,000       27,000  
 
                       
 
                               
Balance as of December 31, 2008
    2,762,463     $ 7,054,000     $ 145,000     $ 7,199,000  
 
                       
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

 

72


Table of Contents

Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and Subsidiaries
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
                 
    Year ended     Year ended  
    December 31,     December 31,  
    2007     2008  
Cash flows from operating activities:
               
Net loss
  $ (4,822,000 )   $ (6,211,000 )
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
               
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
    1,129,000       2,158,000  
Unit-based payment expense
    343,000       479,000  
Amortization of loan discount related to detachable warrants issued
    37,000       72,000  
Beneficial conversion
    7,000       18,000  
Loss on sale of remaining LPG-related assets
    406,000       351,000  
Gain on sale of assets
          (20,000 )
Other
          (25,000 )
Changes in current assets and liabilities:
               
Trade accounts receivable
    (169,000 )     (216,000 )
Prepaid and other current assets
    110,000       (5,000 )
Trade accounts payable
    2,083,000       365,000  
Due to/from Penn Octane Corporation, net
    1,587,000       431,000  
Accrued and other liabilities
    (237,000 )     1,166,000  
U.S. and foreign taxes payable
    215,000       303,000  
 
           
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
    689,000       (1,134,000 )
Cash flows from investing activities:
               
Capital expenditures
    (137,000 )     (3,858,000 )
Proceeds from the sale of the remaining LPG-related assets
    9,187,000        
Costs to acquire Regional Enterprises, Inc.
    (8,399,000 )      
Costs to acquire Oklahoma assets
    (10,070,000 )      
Other non-current assets
    11,000       (14,000 )
 
           
Net cash used in investing activities
    (9,408,000 )     (3,872,000 )
Cash flows from financing activities:
               
Payment on TransMontaigne Note
    (1,000,000 )      
Issuance of equity, net
    3,704,000       2,774,000  
Cash distributions to partners
    (4,431,000 )     (1,955,000 )
Issuance of debt
    10,000,000        
Capital contribution
          118,000  
Payment of debt
          (350,000 )
Short-term debt
          1,575,000  
Cost of registration
          (314,000 )
 
           
Net cash provided by financing activities
    8,273,000       1,848,000  
 
           
Net decrease in cash
    (446,000 )     (3,158,000 )
Cash at beginning of period
    3,896,000       3,450,000  
 
           
Cash at end of period
  $ 3,450,000     $ 292,000  
 
           
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information:
               
Cash paid during the year for:
               
Interest
  $ 1,287,000     $ 3,468,000  
 
           
U.S. and foreign taxes
  $ 30,000     $  
 
           
Supplemental disclosures of noncash transactions:
               
Notes issued in acquisition
  $ 1,500,000     $  
 
           
Units issued in acquisition
  $ 1,500,000     $  
 
           
TCW Credit Facility
  $ 18,700,000     $  
 
           
Unit based compensation
  $ 249,000     $ 445,000  
 
           
Units issued for compensation and penalties
  $ 280,000     $ 774,000  
 
           
Beneficial conversion feature
  $ 7,000     $ 18,000  
 
           
Exchange of assets for note reduction
  $     $ 100,000  
 
           
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

 

73


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE A — ORGANIZATION
Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. (Rio Vista), a Delaware limited partnership, was formed by Penn Octane Corporation (Penn Octane) on July 10, 2003 and was a wholly owned subsidiary of Penn Octane until September 30, 2004, the date that Penn Octane completed a series of transactions that (i) transferred substantially all of its owned pipeline and terminal assets in Brownsville, Texas and Matamoros, Mexico and certain immaterial liabilities to Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. (RVOP) (ii) transferred Penn Octane’s 99.9% interest in RVOP to Rio Vista and (iii) distributed all of its limited partnership interests (Common Units) in Rio Vista to its common stockholders (Spin-Off), resulting in Rio Vista becoming a separate public company. The Common Units represented 98% of Rio Vista’s outstanding capital and 100% of Rio Vista’s limited partnership interests. The remaining 2% represented the General Partner interest. The General Partner is Rio Vista GP LLC (General Partner) (see note I — General Partner Interest) and is 75% owned by Penn Octane and Penn Octane has 100% voting control over the General Partner pursuant to a voting agreement with the other owner of the General Partner. Common unitholders do not participate in the management of Rio Vista. The General Partner is entitled to receive distributions from Rio Vista on its General Partner interest and additional incentive distributions (see Liquidity and Capital Resources — Distributions of Available Cash) as provided in Rio Vista’s partnership agreement. The General Partner has sole responsibility for conducting Rio Vista’s business and for managing Rio Vista’s operations in accordance with the partnership agreement. The General Partner does not receive a management fee in connection with its management of Rio Vista’s business, but is entitled to be reimbursed for all direct and indirect expenses incurred on Rio Vista’s behalf.
In August 2006, Rio Vista completed the disposition of substantially all of its U.S. LPG assets to TransMontaigne, including the Brownsville, Texas terminal facility and refined products tank farm, together with associated improvements, leases, easements, licenses and permits; an LPG sales agreement; and all LPG inventory (Rio Vista Restated PSA). In December 2007, Rio Vista completed the disposition of its remaining LPG assets to TransMontaigne, including the U.S. portion of the two pipelines from a Brownsville, Texas terminal owned by TransMontaigne to the U.S. border, along with all associated rights-of-way and easements; all of the outstanding equity interests in entities owning interests in the portion of the two pipelines that extend from the U.S. border to Matamoros, Mexico; and all of the rights for indirect control of an entity that owns a terminal site in Matamoros, Mexico. As a result, effective January 1, 2008, Rio Vista no longer operates the assets associated with the LPG business it had historically conducted.
In July 2007, Rio Vista acquired Regional Enterprises, Inc. (Regional) and in November 2007, Rio Vista acquired certain oil and natural gas producing properties and related assets in the State of Oklahoma formerly owned by GM Oil Properties, Inc., Penny Petroleum Corporation and GO LLC (GO). The businesses and assets acquired in 2007 are described further in note E. As a result of these acquisitions in 2007, Rio Vista is now focused on the acquisition, development and production of oil and natural gas properties and related midstream assets, and the operation and development of Regional’s business consisting of transportation and terminaling. Beginning March 1, 2008, Rio Vista Operating LLC (Operating) became the operator of the Oklahoma Assets.

 

74


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE A — ORGANIZATION — Continued
The above acquisitions were funded by a combination of debt (new and assumed), private placements of Rio Vista common units and proceeds from the sale of Rio Vista’s LPG related assets. During November 2007, Rio Vista completed a private placement of common units raising gross proceeds of $4,000,000 (see Note I).
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include Rio Vista and its United States subsidiaries including RVOP, Rio Vista Operating GP LLC, Rio Vista Penny LLC, GO, MV Pipeline Company (MV), Operating, Regional, and Penn Octane International, L.L.C., and its Mexican subsidiaries, Penn Octane de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. (PennMex) and Termatsal, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Termatsal) and its consolidated affiliate, Tergas, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Tergas). The Mexican subsidiaries were sold on December 31, 2007. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions are eliminated.
In accordance with the guidance of the SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108 which Rio Vista adopted in September 2006, Rio Vista corrected an immaterial misstatements in its December 31, 2007 financial statements related to errors in the over accrual of interest expense, legal expense and under expensed insurance expense in the net amount of $79,000 and a net overstatement on the consolidated balance sheet in the amount of $79,000.
NOTE B — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
A summary of the significant accounting policies consistently applied in the preparation of the accompanying consolidated financial statements are as follows.
1. Inventories
Inventories were stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost was determined on the first-in, first-out method.
2. Oil and Gas Properties
Rio Vista accounts for oil and gas properties by the successful efforts method. Leasehold acquisition costs are capitalized. If proved reserves are found on an undeveloped property, leasehold costs are transferred to proved properties. Under this method of accounting, costs relating to the development of proved areas are capitalized when incurred.
Depreciation and depletion of producing oil and gas properties is recorded based on units of production. Unit rates are computed for unamortized drilling and development costs using proved developed reserves and for unamortized acquisition costs using all proved reserves. Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 19, as amended, “Financial Accounting and Reporting by Oil and Gas Producing Companies” (SFAS 19) requires that acquisition costs of proved properties be amortized on the basis of all proved reserves, developed and undeveloped, and that capitalized development costs (wells and related equipment and facilities) be amortized on the basis of proved developed reserves.
Proved reserves are estimated by an independent petroleum engineering firm and are subject to future revisions based on availability of additional information.

 

75


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE B — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Continued
2. Oil and Gas Properties — Continued
Geological, geophysical, annual lease rentals and exploratory dry hole costs on oil and gas properties relating to unsuccessful exploratory wells are charged to expense as incurred.
Upon sale or retirement of complete fields of depreciable or depleted property, the book value thereof, less proceeds or salvage value, is charged or credited to income. On sale or retirement of an individual well the proceeds are credited to accumulated depreciation and depletion.
In accordance with SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” Rio Vista assess proved oil and gas properties for possible impairment when events or circumstances indicate that the recorded carrying value of the properties may not be recoverable (see note B4).
Unproved properties are assessed for impairment on a property-by-property basis. If considered impaired, costs are charged to expense when such impairment is deemed to have occurred. Rio Vista has no unproved properties at December 31, 2008.
3. Contracts and Derivative Instruments
Rio Vista seeks to enter into contracts for the future sale of a portion of its existing production based on favorable price levels. As of December 31, 2008, these transactions were in the form of contracts to sell a certain amount of production at a fixed price. Rio Vista marks these contracts to market if losses are anticipated on the contracts.
Rio Vista has adopted SFAS 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities”, which requires that all derivative financial instruments be recognized in the financial statements and measured at fair value regardless of the purpose or intent for holding them. Changes in the fair value of derivative financial instruments are either recognized periodically in income or partner’s capital (as a component of comprehensive income), depending on whether the derivative is being used to hedge changes in fair value or cash flows. In April 2003, the FASB issued SFAS No. 149, “Amendment of Statement 133 on Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities”. SFAS No. 149 amends and clarifies financial accounting and reporting for derivative instruments and hedging activities. As of December 31, 2008, Rio Vista had no derivative financial instruments.
4. Property, Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment are recorded at historical cost. After being placed into service, assets are depreciated using the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives as follows:
         
Terminal Facility and improvements
  5–30 years
Pipelines
  30 years
Automotive equipment
  5–20 years
Machinery and equipment
  5–10 years
Office equipment
  3–10 years
Maintenance and repair costs are charged to expense as incurred.

 

76


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE B — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Continued
4. Property, Plant and Equipment — Continued
In August 2001 Statement SFAS No. 144 was issued. SFAS No. 144 supersedes the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 121 “Accounting for the Impairment of Long-lived Assets and for Long-lived Assets to be Disposed Of”. SFAS No. 144 requires Rio Vista to review long-lived assets and certain identifiable intangibles for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. If it is determined that an impairment has occurred, the amount of the impairment is charged to operations.
5. Income Taxes
Rio Vista is a public limited partnership and is not subject to federal or state income taxes. However, some of Rio Vista’s operating subsidiaries are subject to foreign and U.S. corporate income taxes as follows:
Rio Vista’s U.S. corporate subsidiaries account for deferred taxes in accordance with SFAS 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes”. Under the liability method specified therein, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities as measured by the enacted tax rates which will be in effect when these differences reverse. Deferred tax expense is the result of changes in deferred tax assets and liabilities. The principal types of differences between assets and liabilities for financial statement and income tax purposes are asset cost basis differences and depreciation.
Mexican subsidiaries:
Rio Vista’s Mexican subsidiaries were taxed on their income directly by the Mexican government and file their own separate income tax returns in Mexico. Rio Vista’s Mexican subsidiaries elected pass-through treatment for U.S. income tax purposes. Accordingly, the income/loss of Rio Vista’s Mexican subsidiaries was included in the U.S. partnership income tax return of Rio Vista. The holders of the common units and General Partner interest were entitled to their proportionate share of any tax credits resulting from any income taxes paid to the Mexican government. The Mexican subsidiaries were disposed of in December 2007.
Regional and MV:
Regional and MV are taxed as U.S. corporations. A valuation allowance is provided when it is determined that it is more likely than not that a portion of a deferred tax asset balance will not be realized. Prior to November 1, 2004, Regional used the cash basis of accounting for determining taxable income and MV uses the cash basis of accounting for determining taxable income.
6. ( Loss) Income Per Common Unit
Net (loss) income per common unit is computed on the weighted average number of common units outstanding in accordance with SFAS 128, “Earnings Per Share”. During periods in which Rio Vista incurs losses from continuing operations, giving effect to common unit equivalents is not included in the computation as it would be antidilutive.

 

77


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE B — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Continued
7. Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the cash flow statement, Rio Vista considers cash in banks and securities purchased with a maturity of three months or less to be cash equivalents.
8. Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires Rio Vista to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
9. Fair Value of Financial Instruments
SFAS 107, “Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments”, requires the disclosure of fair value information about financial instruments, whether or not recognized on the balance sheet, for which it is practicable to estimate the value. SFAS 107 excludes certain financial instruments from its disclosure requirements. Accordingly, the aggregate fair value amounts are not intended to represent the underlying value of Rio Vista. The carrying amounts of cash and cash equivalents, current receivables and payables approximate fair value because of the short-term nature of these instruments. Notes payable bear market rates of interest.
10. Unit-Based Payment
Rio Vista may issue warrants to purchase common units to non-employees for goods and services and to acquire or extend debt. Rio Vista applies the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123R “Share-Based Payment” (SFAS 123R) and Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 14 “Accounting for Convertible Debt and Debt Issued with Stock Purchase Warrants” (APB 14) to account for such transactions. SFAS 123R requires that such transactions be accounted for at fair value. If the fair value of the goods and services or debt related transactions are not readily measurable, the fair value of the warrants is used to account for such transactions.
Rio Vista utilizes unit-based awards as a form of compensation for employees, officers, manager and consultants of the General Partner. During the quarter ended March 31, 2006, Rio Vista adopted the provisions of SFAS 123R for unit-based payments to employees using the modified prospective application transition method. Under this method, previously reported amounts should not be restated to reflect the provisions of SFAS 123R. SFAS 123R requires measurement of all employee unit-based payment awards using a fair-value method and recording of such expense in the consolidated financial statements over the requisite service period. The fair value concepts have not changed significantly in SFAS 123R; however, in adopting this standard, companies must choose among alternative valuation models and amortization assumptions. After assessing alternative valuation models and amortization assumptions, Rio Vista will continue using both the Black-Scholes valuation model and straight-line amortization of compensation expense over the requisite service period for each separately vesting portion of the grant. Rio Vista will reconsider use of this model if additional information becomes available in the future that indicates another model would be more appropriate, or if grants issued in future periods have characteristics that cannot be reasonably estimated using this model. Previously, Rio Vista had applied the provisions of Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees” (APB 25) and related interpretations and elected to utilize the disclosure option of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation” (SFAS 123). Rio Vista recorded unit-based payment expense for employees and non-employees of $249,000 ($0.12 per common unit) and $445,000 ($0.17 per common unit) for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, respectively, under the fair-value provisions of SFAS 123R.

 

78


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE B — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Continued
11. Revenue Recognition
LPG Transportation Fees and Regional:
Rio Vista recorded revenue only upon the actual gallons of LPG delivered to its customers at either the Matamoros Terminal Facility or Brownsville Terminal Facility at the agreed upon price per gallon.
Rio Vista recorded revenue under its LPG Transportation Agreement (see Note D) when gallons of LPG were delivered to customers designated by TransMontaigne at the Matamoros Terminal Facility.
Regional records revenue for storage, transportation and transloading as the services are performed and delivery occurs.
Revenues for LPG transportation fees and Regional are recorded based on the following criteria:
  (1)  
Persuasive evidence of an arrangement existed and the price is determined
 
  (2)  
Delivery occurred
 
  (3)  
Collectability is reasonably assured
Oil & Gas Revenues:
Sales of Natural Gas
Gas and oil production revenue and related natural gas liquids revenue are recognized based on actual volumes of gas, oil, and natural gas liquids sold to purchasers. Sales require delivery of the product to the purchaser, passage of title, and probability of collection of purchaser amounts owed. Gas and oil production revenue and related natural gas liquids revenue are reported net of royalties. Rio Vista uses the sales method of accounting for gas imbalances. Gas imbalances result from the gas volumes sold by Rio Vista from a property being different from its actual entitled volumes. Under the sales method, revenues are recognized based on actual volumes of gas sold. The volumes sold may differ from the entitled volumes. Direct operating expenses are recognized on an accrual basis and consist of costs required to operate gas and oil properties, product transportation expenses, and production and property taxes.
Gas revenues are recognized based on actual volumes of gas purchased from third party producers and sold to customers. Sales are recorded only upon the delivery of the product to the purchaser, passage of title, and collectability is reasonably assured. Losses, if any, resulting from imbalances from such sales are recognized currently, and gains, if any, are recognized at final delivery.
Oil and gas is sold by Rio Vista on a monthly basis. Virtually all of the Company’s contracts’ pricing provisions are tied to a market index, with certain adjustments based on, among other factors, whether a well delivers to a gathering or transmission line, quality of oil and gas, and prevailing supply and demand conditions, so that the price of the oil and gas fluctuate to remain competitive with other available oil and gas suppliers.
Gathering fees
Gas gathering fees are recorded as the services are performed and delivery has occurred and collectibility is reasonably assured.

 

79


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE B — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Continued
12. Foreign Currency Translation
Rio Vista followed FASB No. 52 “Foreign Currency Translation” in consolidation of the Mexican subsidiaries, whose functional currency was the US dollar. Non monetary balance sheet items and related revenue and expense were remeasured using historical rates. Monetary balance sheet items and related revenue and expense were remeasured using exchange rates in effect at the balance sheet dates.
13. Reclassifications
Certain reclassifications have been made to prior year balances to conform to the current presentation.
14. Trade Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
Trade accounts receivable are accounted for at fair value. Trade accounts receivable do not bear interest and are short-term in nature. An allowance for doubtful accounts for trade accounts receivable is established when the fair value is less than the carrying value. Trade accounts receivable are charged to the allowance when it is determined that collection is remote.
15. Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities
During 2004, Rio Vista adopted Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 46, “Consolidation of Variable Entities” (FIN 46), which was amended by FIN 46R. This interpretation of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51, “Consolidated Financial Statements”, addresses consolidation by business enterprises of variable interest entities (VIE) that do not have sufficient equity investment at risk to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support. FIN 46R requires the beneficiary of a VIE to consolidate in its financial statements the assets, liabilities and results of operations of the VIE. Tergas, a former affiliate of Rio Vista, was a VIE and therefore, its assets, liabilities and results of operations were included in the accompanying consolidated financial statements of Rio Vista for the year ended December 31, 2007.
16. Guarantees
In November 2002, the Financial Accounting Standards board issued Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 45 “Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others” (FIN 45). This interpretation requires guarantors to disclose certain information about guarantees of indebtedness of others. In addition, under certain circumstances, those guarantees may result in such debts being recorded in the guarantor’s financial statements.

 

80


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE B — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Continued
17. Environmental Matters
Rio Vista is subject to various federal, state and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment. Rio Vista has established procedures for the ongoing evaluation of its operations, to identify potential environmental exposures and to comply with regulatory policies and procedures.
Rio Vista accounts for environmental contingencies in accordance with SFAS No. 5 “Accounting for Contingencies.” Environmental expenditures that relate to current operations are expensed or capitalized as appropriate. Expenditures that relate to an existing condition caused by past operations, and do not contribute to current or future revenue generation, are expensed. Liabilities for environmental contingencies are recorded when environmental assessments and/or clean-ups are probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated. Rio Vista maintains insurance which may cover in whole or in part certain types of environmental contingencies. For the year ended December 31, 2008, Rio Vista had no environmental contingencies requiring specific disclosure or the recording of a liability.
18. Asset Retirement Obligations
Rio Vista accounts for asset retirement obligations in accordance with SFAS No. 143, “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations” (SFAS 143). In accordance with SFAS 143, estimated asset retirement costs are recognized when the obligation is incurred, and are amortized over proved developed reserves using the units of production method. Asset retirement costs are estimated by Rio Vista using existing regulatory requirements and anticipated future inflation rates. Rio Vista had no estimated asset retirement obligations at December 31, 2008.
19. Segment Information
Rio Vista reports segment information in accordance with SFAS No. 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information” (SFAS 131). Under SFAS 131, all publicly traded companies are required to report certain information about the operating segments, products, services and geographical areas in which they operate and their major customers. Operating segments are components of Rio Vista for which separate financial information is available that is evaluated regularly by management in deciding how to allocate resources and assess performance. This information is reported on the basis that it is used internally for evaluating segment performance. Rio Vista operates as two business segments: Transportation and Terminaling business and the Oil and Gas business (see note Q).
20. Fair Value
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements,” (SFAS 157), which establishes a framework for reporting fair value and expands disclosures about fair value measurements, SFAS 157 was effective for Rio Vista on January 1, 2008, with the exception that the applicability of SFAS 157’s fair value measurement requirements to nonfinancial assets and liabilities that are not required or permitted to be recognized or disclosed at fair value on a recurring basis has been delayed by the FASB for one year.

 

81


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE B — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Continued
21. Business Combinations
In December 2007, the FASB released Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 141(R), Business Combinations (revised 2007) (SFAS 141(R)), which changes many well-established business combination accounting practices and significantly affects how acquisition transactions are reflected in the financial statements. Additionally, SFAS 141(R) will affect how companies negotiate and structure transactions, model financial projections of acquisitions and communicate to unitholders. SFAS 141(R) must be applied prospectively to business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2008.
Under SFAS 141(R), contingent consideration or earn outs will be recorded at their fair value at the acquisition date. Except in bargain purchase situations, contingent considerations typically will result in additional goodwill being recognized. Contingent consideration classified as an asset or liability will be adjusted to fair value at each reporting date through earnings until the contingency is resolved.
These estimates are subject to change upon the finalization of the valuation of certain assets and liabilities and may be adjusted in accordance with SFAS 141(R).
In accordance with SFAS 141(R), acquisition transaction costs, such as certain investment banking fees, due diligence costs and attorney fees are to be recorded as a reduction of earnings in the period they are incurred. Prior to the effective date, SFAS 141(R), acquisition transaction costs were included in the cost of the acquired business.
22. Goodwill
Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the estimated fair value of identifiable net assets associated with acquisition transactions. Rio Vista has adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets” (FASB 142). Under FASB 142, goodwill is not amortized. Rio Vista is required to make at least an annual test of the fair value of the intangible to determine if impairment has occurred. Rio Vista performs an annual impairment test for goodwill in the fourth quarter of each calendar year.

 

82


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE C — LOSS PER COMMON UNIT
The following tables present reconciliations from net loss from continuing operations per common unit to loss from continuing operations per common unit assuming dilution (see note J for the warrants):
                         
    For the year ended December 31, 2007  
    Loss     Units     Per-Unit  
    (Numerator)     (Denominator)     Amount  
Net loss from continuing operations available to the common units
  $ (4,726,000 )                
Basic EPS
                       
Net loss available to the common units
    (4,726,000 )     1,971,799     $ (2.40 )
 
                     
Effect of Dilutive Securities
                       
Warrants
                   
Diluted EPS
                       
Net loss available to the common units
    N/A       N/A       N/A  
                         
    For the year ended December 31, 2008  
    Loss     Units     Per-Unit  
    (Numerator)     (Denominator)     Amount  
Net loss from continuing operations available to the common units
  $ (6,087,000 )                
Basic EPS
                       
Net loss available to the common units
    (6,087,000 )     2,599,168     $ (2.34 )
 
                     
Effect of Dilutive Securities
                       
Warrants
                   
Diluted EPS
                       
Net loss available to the common units
    N/A       N/A       N/A  

 

83


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE D — DISPOSITIONS
SALE OF LPG ASSETS / DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS
On August 22, 2006, Rio Vista completed the sale and assignment to TransMontaigne of certain LPG assets, including the Brownsville Terminal Facility, the refined products tank farm and associated leases, and LPG inventory, wherever located (collectively, the Brownsville Terminal Assets) and assignment of the 2006 PMI agreement (Brownsville Terminal Assets and the 2006 PMI agreement collectively, the Rio Vista Sold Assets) pursuant to an amended and restated purchase and sale agreement (Rio Vista Restated PSA). The Rio Vista Restated PSA replaced the previous purchase and sale agreement entered into between Rio Vista and TransMontaigne on August 15, 2005. Rio Vista retained its owned pipelines located in the United States, including land, leases and rights of way and 100% of the outstanding stock of its Mexican subsidiaries. Rio Vista’s Mexican subsidiaries and consolidated affiliate own pipelines in Mexico and the Matamoros Terminal Facility, including land and rights of way (collectively, the Retained Assets).
Also on August 22, 2006, Penn Octane completed the sale and assignment to TransMontaigne of all of Penn Octane’s LPG assets, including assignment of the lease of its leased pipeline (Leased Pipeline) and the Exxon Supply Contract (Penn Octane Sold Assets) pursuant to an amended and restated purchase and sale agreement (Penn Octane Restated PSA). The terms of the Penn Octane Restated PSA were substantially similar to the original purchase and sale agreement entered into between Penn Octane and TransMontaigne on August 15, 2005. Penn Octane retained assets related to its Fuel Sales Business, and its interest in the General Partner.
Under the Rio Vista Restated PSA and the related transportation agreement between Rio Vista and TransMontaigne dated August 22, 2006 (LPG Transportation Agreement), TransMontaigne agreed to exclusively use the services and Retained Assets of Rio Vista on a fee basis for purposes of transportation of LPG to be delivered into northeastern Mexico and/or LPG sold pursuant to the existing PMI agreement. Rio Vista agreed not to transport LPG through Rio Vista’s Retained Assets in Mexico except on behalf of TransMontaigne, subject to certain conditions. TransMontaigne agreed to use the Retained Assets pursuant to the LPG Transportation Agreement which began on August 22, 2006 and ran for the term of the existing PMI agreement between TransMontaigne and PMI, as extended from time to time thereafter. Rio Vista received a fee for all LPG transported on behalf of TransMontaigne through the Retained Assets. In addition, under the Rio Vista Restated PSA and the related pipeline services agreement between Rio Vista and TransMontaigne dated August 22, 2006 (U.S. Pipeline Services Agreement), TransMontaigne agreed to provide routine and non-routine operation and maintenance services, as defined, for the U.S. portion only of Rio Vista’s pipelines between Brownsville, Texas and Matamoros, Mexico. TransMontaigne agreed to provide the routine services at its sole cost and expense. For the non-routine services, Rio Vista agreed to reimburse TransMontaigne for all costs actually incurred in performing the services and all materials and supplies provided in connection with such services, plus 15%.

 

84


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE D — DISPOSITION — Continued
SALE OF LPG ASSETS / DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS — Continued
The sale of the Rio Vista Sold Assets constituted a disposal of a business in accordance with FAS 144. Accordingly, the financial statements reflect the results associated with the Sold Assets prior to the sale as discontinued operations in the accompanying financial statements. Costs related to the Retained Assets, consisting of depreciation expense and the expenses related to the US-Mexico Pipelines and Matamoros Terminal Facility have been included in costs of goods sold since these costs have continued to be incurred in connection with the LPG Transportation Agreement.
SALE OF REMAINING LPG ASSETS
On December 27, 2007, RVOP and RVOP’s wholly-owned subsidiary, Penn Octane International, LLC, entered into a definitive Purchase and Sale Agreement (the Purchase and Sale Agreement) with a wholly-owned subsidiary (TMOC Corp.) and two affiliates (TLP MEX L.L.C. and RAZORBACK L.L.C.) of TransMontaigne Partners L.P. (collectively, TLP) regarding TLP’s acquisition of RVOP’s remaining liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) assets. The Purchase and Sale Agreement was effective as of December 26, 2007. The transaction closed on December 31, 2007. The Purchase and Sale Agreement was executed pursuant to the letter of intent between RVOP and TLP dated September 12, 2007 and amended December 4, 2007.
Pursuant to the Purchase and Sale Agreement, subject to its terms and conditions, TLP agreed to purchase from RVOP: (a) the United States portion of the two pipelines from the Brownsville, Texas terminal owned by TLP to the United States border (the US Pipelines) with all associated rights-of-way and easements (the US Easements); (b) all of the outstanding equity interests of PennMex, which holds the Mexican energy regulatory commission (CRE) permit, and Termatsal, which owns the portion of the two pipelines that extend from the US border to Matamoros, Mexico (the Mexican Pipelines); and (c) all of RVOP’s rights for indirect control of Tergas, which owns the Matamoros, Mexico terminal site (the Mexican Terminal). PennMex and Termatsal are 100% owned subsidiaries of RVOP and Tergas is an affiliate of RVOP, and each of the three companies (collectively, the Included Subsidiaries) is organized under the laws of Mexico. The US Pipelines, the US Easements, the Included Subsidiaries, the Mexican Pipelines and the Mexican Terminal, are collectively referred to as the “LPG Assets.”
The total purchase price for the LPG Assets was $10,825,000, subject to adjustment as provided in the Purchase and Sale Agreement. TLP previously paid to RVOP deposits totaling $8,000,000 (the Deposits) which was credited to the purchase price at closing. The remaining $2,825,000 was paid at closing, subject to adjustments and less a holdback of $500,000 (Holdback) as security for RVOP’s indemnification obligations under the Purchase and Sale Agreement. In addition, RVOP’s existing $1,000,000 promissory note (the Existing Loan) payable to TransMontaigne Product Services Inc. (TPSI), an affiliate of TLP, was paid from the proceeds at closing. Prior to the execution of the Purchase and Sale Agreement, and until the closing, RVOP provided LPG transportation services to TLP or its affiliates under the terms of an LPG Transportation Agreement with TPSI.

 

85


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE D — DISPOSITION — Continued
SALE OF REMAINING LPG ASSETS — Continued
On December 31, 2008, Rio Vista received a claim from TransMontaigne related to the Holdback diligence deductions and working capital adjustment, pursuant to the Purchase and Sale Agreement. TransMontaigne claims a $316,000 working capital adjustment and $1,373,000 in connection with the indemnification obligations included in the Purchase and Sale Agreement. Rio Vista is working with TransMontaigne to define the scope of the adjustments to an amount which Rio Vista considers to be more realistic. Any amount which may subsequently be agreed to by TransMontaigne and Rio Vista shall first be charged to the $500,000 Holdback, and also is subject to the $1,000,000 limitation of indemnification. As of December 31, 2008, Rio Vista has provided a charge of $351,000 to provide for these adjustments, in addition to the Holdback. Rio Vista’s management and its legal counsel believe that the amount of the TransMontaigne claim will be resolved within the amounts already provided.
In connection with the sale of the LPG Assets to TLP, RVOP and TPSI agreed to terminate the LPG Transportation Agreement and the U.S. Pipeline Service Agreement as of such closing date.
NOTE E — ACQUISITIONS
REGIONAL
On July 27, 2007, Rio Vista entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (Merger Agreement) with Regional Enterprises, Inc., a Virginia corporation (New Regional), Regional Enterprizes, Inc., a Virginia corporation (Old Regional), the shareholders of Old Regional and W. Gary Farrar, Jr. The Merger Agreement provided for Rio Vista to acquire the business of Old Regional by means of a merger of Old Regional into New Regional, a newly-formed, wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Vista (the Regional Acquisition). The principal business of Regional is storage, transportation and railcar transloading of bulk liquids, including chemical and petroleum products owned by its customers. The total consideration pursuant to the Merger Agreement was $9,000,000, of which Rio Vista paid $8,000,000 in cash, less certain working capital and other adjustments and subject to certain amounts held in escrow, with the remaining $1,000,000 to be paid in four equal semiannual installments beginning six months from the date of the Regional Acquisition (Sellers’ Note-Regional). Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Rio Vista was entitled to net working capital of Old Regional of $500,000, subject to adjustments. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, a total of $1,500,000 was placed into escrow to secure certain indemnification obligations of the former shareholders of Old Regional. Rio Vista funded the Regional Acquisition through a loan of $5,000,000 (RZB Note) from RZB Finance LLC (RZB) and the remaining amounts due at closing were paid from available working capital. (see Note G).
Regional’s principal facilities are located on the James River in Hopewell, Virginia, where it receives bulk chemicals and petroleum products from ships and barges into approximately 10,400,000 gallons of available storage. Regional also receives product from a rail spur which is capable of receiving 15 rail cars at any one time for transloading of chemical and petroleum liquids for delivery throughout the mid-Atlantic region.
Regional utilizes its fleet of 32 tractors and 48 tankers to distribute the various products it receives as well as to perform direct hauling operations on behalf of its customers.
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008, Suffolk Sales, General Chemical Corporation and Kemira Chemicals Canada Inc. accounted for approximately 14% 10% and 12% of Regional’s revenues, respectively, and approximately 19%, 8% and 10% of Regional’s accounts receivable, respectively, with no other individual customer accounting for more than 10% of Regional’s revenues and accounts receivable.

 

86


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE E — ACQUISITIONS — Continued
REGIONAL — Continued
The accompanying consolidated balance sheet includes goodwill in the amount of $5,121,000 resulting from the acquisition.
OKLAHOMA ASSETS
On November 19, 2007, Rio Vista Penny LLC (Rio Vista Penny), an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Vista, entered into a Note Purchase Agreement, Promissory Notes, Security Agreement, Common Unit Purchase Warrant and related agreements with TCW Asset Management Company (TAMCO) as agent and TCW Energy Fund X investors as holders (the TCW Noteholders) (TAMCO and the TCW Noteholders collectively, TCW) in connection with a first lien senior credit facility (the TCW Credit Facility) between TCW and Rio Vista Penny. The purpose of the TCW Credit Facility was to provide financing of the acquisition of certain of the assets of GM Oil Properties, Inc., an Oklahoma corporation (GM Oil) and assets of Penny Petroleum Corporation, an Oklahoma corporation (Penny Petroleum) by Rio Vista Penny and the acquisition of the membership interests of GO, by Rio Vista GO LLC (Rio Vista GO), an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Vista. The assets of GM Oil, Penny Petroleum and GO are collectively referred to as the “Oklahoma assets.”
GM Oil Properties Inc.
On November 19, 2007, Rio Vista Penny completed the purchase of assets from GM Oil pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement between Rio Vista Penny and GM Oil dated as of October 1, 2007, as amended on November 16, 2007 (the Amended GM Agreement). The assets acquired pursuant to the Amended GM Agreement consist of the real and personal property interests of GM Oil in certain oil and gas properties located in Haskell, McIntosh and Pittsburg counties in Oklahoma, including approximately 33.33% of the outstanding capital stock of MV (collectively, the GM Assets). The total purchase price for the GM Assets was paid by assumption of the TCW Credit Facility in the amount of $16,750,000 (including $250,000 of unpaid interest included in the TCW Credit Facility plus payment of additional accrued but unpaid interest in the amount of $340,000). The TCW Credit Facility is payable to the TCW Noteholders and is administered by TAMCO as agent pursuant to the TCW Credit Facility. No cash or equity consideration was paid to GM Oil or its shareholders as part of the purchase price of the GM Assets.
Penny Petroleum Corporation
On November 19, 2007, Rio Vista Penny completed the purchase of assets from Penny Petroleum pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement between Rio Vista Penny, Penny Petroleum and Gary Moores (a shareholder of Penny Petroleum), dated as of October 1, 2007, as amended on October 25 and November 16, 2007 (the Amended Penny Agreement). The assets acquired pursuant to the Amended Penny Agreement consisted of the real and personal property interests of Penny Petroleum in certain oil and gas properties located in McIntosh, Pittsburg and Haskell counties in Oklahoma, including approximately 66.66% of the outstanding capital stock of MV (collectively, the Penny Assets).
The total purchase price paid for the Penny Assets was $7,400,000, consisting of cash, a promissory note and equity interests in Rio Vista. The cash portion of the purchase price was $6,400,000, together with a promissory note with the principal amount of $500,000 bearing interest at 7% per annum (the Moores Note) payable to Gary Moores on May 19, 2008. Beginning February 19, 2008, Gary Moores had the option to convert the outstanding principal and interest of the Moores Note into common units of Rio Vista which option was not exercised and expired on May 19, 2008. The equity portion of the purchase price was paid by delivery of 45,998 common units of Rio Vista (the Penny Units).

 

87


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE E — ACQUISITIONS — Continued
OKLAHOMA ASSETS — Continued
GO LLC
On November 19, 2007, Rio Vista GO completed the purchase of membership interests of GO pursuant to the Membership Interest Purchase and Sale Agreement between Rio Vista GO, GO, Outback Production Inc. (Outback) (the owner of all of the outstanding membership interests of GO), and Gary Moores and Bill Wood (each a shareholder of Outback), dated as of October 2, 2007, as amended on November 16, 2007 (the Amended GO Agreement). The total purchase price paid for the membership interests of GO was $4,000,000, consisting of cash and equity interests in Rio Vista. The cash portion of the purchase price was $3,000,000. The equity portion of the purchase price was paid by delivery of 91,996 common units of Rio Vista (the GO Units) to Gary Moores and Bill Wood.
On the date the GO Registration Statement is declared effective by the SEC (the Registration Date), if the closing price of Rio Vista’s common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market (the Registration Date Price) is less than 80% of $10.87 (the Minimum Price), Rio Vista GO will deliver to Outback either (i) additional common units of Rio Vista (the Additional GO Units) in such number as necessary so that the total value of the GO Units and the Additional GO Units, in each case based on the Registration Date Price, is at least 80% of the value of the Purchase Price Units based on the Minimum Price or (ii) additional cash (the Additional Cash) in such amount as necessary so that the total value of the GO Units, based on the Registration Date Price, together with the Additional Cash, is at least 80% of the value of the GO Units based on the Minimum Price. In lieu of delivery of Additional GO Units or Additional Cash to supplement the GO Units, Rio Vista GO has the alternate option to pay the entire value of the GO Units based on the Minimum Price in cash (the All Cash Payment). Upon delivery of the All Cash Payment to the seller, all GO Units shall be returned to Rio Vista GO and/or cancelled by Rio Vista.
NOTE F — PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT
                 
    December 31,     December 31,  
    2007     2008  
Oklahoma:
               
Pipelines and equipment
  $ 6,756,000     $ 7,417,000  
 
           
 
               
Regional:
               
Land
    237,000       237,000  
Terminal and improvements
    3,825,000       4,084,000  
Automotive equipment
    2,438,000       2,644,000  
 
           
 
    6,500,000       6,965,000  
 
           
 
               
 
    13,256,000       14,382,000  
Less: accumulated depreciation and amortization
    (494,000 )     (1,968,000 )
 
           
 
  $ 12,762,000     $ 12,414,000  
 
           

 

88


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE F — PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT — Continued
On June 26, 2008, MV Pipeline and Concorde Resources Corporation (Concorde) entered into a pipeline construction and transportation agreement whereby MV granted the right to Concorde to construct gathering lines to connect Concorde wells to the MV transportation system. In connection with the agreement, MV has agreed to waive any transportation fees with respect to any gas which flows through the MV transportation system from these newly constructed gathering systems until such time that Concorde has received 200% of the costs associated with the construction of the gathering lines based on the usual rate charged by MV for transportation of product through its system.
Depreciation expense of property, plant and equipment from operations totaled $1,071,000 and $1,489,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, respectively.
Costs Incurred in Oil and Gas Property Acquisition, Exploration and Development Activities
Costs incurred in oil and gas property development for the year ended December 31, 2008 are presented below:
         
Development costs of leased properties:
  $ 2,549,000  
Capitalized pipeline infrastructure costs:
  $ 568,000  
Development costs include costs incurred to gain access to and prepare development well locations for drilling, to drill and equip development wells and to provide facilities to extract, treat and gather oil and gas.
Rio Vista capitalizes costs related to drilling and development of oil and gas properties for specific activities related to drilling its wells, which includes site preparation, drilling labor, meter installation, pipeline connection and site reclamation.

 

89


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE G — DEBT OBLIGATIONS
                 
    December 31,     December 31,  
    2007     2008  
 
RZB Note
  $ 5,000,000     $ 5,000,000  
Moores Note
    493,000        
Richter Note Payable
          575,000  
 
           
 
  $ 5,493,000     $ 5,575,000  
 
           
 
               
Long-term debt obligations were as follows:
               
 
               
TCW Credit Facility
  $ 23,689,000     $ 24,700,000  
Sellers’ Note — Regional
    922,000       744,000  
Moores Note
          300,000  
 
           
 
    24,611,000       25,744,000  
Less current portion
    3,361,000       25,594,000  
 
           
 
  $ 21,250,000     $ 150,000  
 
           
Maturities of long-term debt are as follows:
         
2009
  $ 25,594,000  
2010
    150,000  
2011
     
2012
     
2013
     
Thereafter
     
 
     
 
  $ 25,744,000  
 
     
RZB Note
In connection with the acquisition of Regional during July 2007, Rio Vista funded a portion of the acquisition through a loan of $5,000,000 (RZB Note) from RZB Finance LLC (RZB) dated July 26, 2007. The RZB Note was due on demand and if no demand, with a one-year maturity. The RZB Note carries a variable annual rate of interest equal to the higher of (a) the rate of interest established from time to time by JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as its “base rate” or its “prime rate,” (7.25% at December 31, 2007), or (b) the weighted average overnight funds rate of the Federal Reserve System plus 0.50%, in each case plus a margin of 4.75% (Base Rate Margin). On July 27, 2008, the RZB Note was amended whereby the maturity date was extended until August 29, 2008. The RZB Note was not paid on August 29, 2008. During December 2008, Rio Vista entered into a third amendment to the RZB Note (Third Amendment). Under the terms of the Third Amendment, the maturity date of the RZB Note was extended to February 27, 2009. In addition, the interest rate calculation was modified to include a cost of funds rate definition in determining the base rate and the Base Rate Margin was increased to 7.0%. Under the terms of the Third Amendment, the net worth of Penn Octane, as defined, is required to be in excess of $3,300,000. In addition, the Third Amendment required Rio Vista to repay $1,000,000 of the RZB Note. Effective January 1, 2009, Penn Octane agreed to loan Rio Vista the $1,000,000 of cash collateral held by RZB for purpose of making the required payment described above.

 

90


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE G — DEBT OBLIGATIONS — Continued
RZB Note — Continued
During February 2009, Rio Vista entered into a fourth amendment to the RZB Note which extended the maturity date of the RZB Note through March 31, 2009. During March 2009, Rio Vista entered into a fifth amendment to the RZB Note which extends the maturity date of the RZB Note through April 30, 2009. Rio Vista and RZB are currently negotiating an additional extension of the RZB Note.
In connection with the RZB Note, Regional granted to RZB a security interest in all of Regional’s assets, including a deed of trust on real property owned by Regional, and Rio Vista delivered to RZB a pledge of the outstanding capital stock of Regional. On July 26, 2007, as a further condition of the Loan Agreement, Penn Octane also entered into a Guaranty & Agreement (Guaranty) with RZB. Pursuant to the Guaranty, Penn Octane agreed to guaranty all of the indebtedness, liabilities and obligations of Rio Vista to RZB under the Loan Agreement and otherwise. The RZB Note is also guaranteed by Regional and RVOP.
Moores Note
In connection with the purchase of the Penny Assets, Rio Vista issued a promissory note with the principal amount of $500,000 bearing interest at 7% per annum (Moores Note) payable to Gary Moores on May 19, 2008. Under the terms of the Moores Note, beginning February 19, 2008, Gary Moores had the option to convert the outstanding principal and interest of the Moores Note into common units of Rio Vista which option was not exercised and expired on May 19, 2008. The Moores Note was not paid upon maturity.
On June 27, 2008, the Moores Note was amended (Amended Moores Note). In connection with the Amended Moores Note, Rio Vista made a principal payment of $100,000, plus accrued interest through that date and the maturity date of the remaining principal balance was extended to November 19, 2008. In addition, the interest rate on the remaining balance of the Moores Note was increased to 10% per annum. Simultaneously with the amendment of the Moores Note, Penny agreed to the sale and transfer of certain goods and chattels to Gary Moores in exchange for $100,000 which was paid through a credit against the outstanding principal balance due under the Moores Note and Penny also received from a company owned by Gary Moores, a used vehicle with nominal value, to be used by Penny for general operations. The Amended Moores Note was not paid upon maturity. In November 2008, Gary Moores filed a civil action against Rio Vista as a result of the non-payment (Civil Action).
On January 20, 2009, the Moores Note was once again amended (Second Amended Moores Note). In connection with the Second Amended Moores Note, Rio Vista agreed to make monthly principal payments of $12,500 plus interest beginning May 10, 2009 and to continue such payments for 5 consecutive months. Each month thereafter, Rio Vista is required to make principal payments of $37,500 plus interest until all amounts due and payable have been paid. In addition, in connection with the Second Amended Moores Note, Gary Moores agreed to dismiss the Civil Action.

 

91


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE G — DEBT OBLIGATIONS — Continued
Richter Note Payable
On April 15, 2008, Mr. Jerome B. Richter, a former officer of Penn Octane, agreed to loan Rio Vista $575,000 in exchange for a promissory note issued by Rio Vista, guaranteed by Penn Octane (Richter Note Payable) and collateralized by the assets of Rio Vista, subject to the consent of RZB and TCW. Under the terms of the Richter Note Payable, Rio Vista is required to repay the Richter Note Payable on the earlier of (1) the six (6) month anniversary of the Richter Note Payable, which date was extended to November 15, 2008 or (ii) the sale of all or substantially all of the assets of Rio Vista. The Richter Note Payable was not paid on November 15, 2008. Rio Vista and Mr. Richter are negotiating an extension of the due date. The Richter Note Payable accrues interest at an annual rate of 8 percent (8%). Proceeds from the Richter Note Payable were used for working capital.
TCW Credit Facility
The TCW Credit Facility is a $30,000,000 senior secured credit facility available to Rio Vista Penny LLC with a maturity date of August 29, 2010. The amount of the initial draw under the facility was $21,700,000, consisting of $16,750,000 in assumption of the existing indebtedness in the principal amount of $16,500,000 plus accrued but unpaid interest in the amount of $250,000 owed by GM Oil to TCW, $1,950,000 in consideration for TCW to enter into the TCW Credit Facility with Rio Vista Penny and for Rio Vista Penny to purchase an overriding royalty interest (ORRI) held by an affiliate of TCW, and $3,000,000 to fund the acquisition of the membership interests of GO by Rio Vista GO. TCW also approved a plan of development (APOD) for the Oklahoma assets totaling approximately $2,000,000, which was funded during December 2007. The TCW Credit Facility is secured by a first lien on all of the Oklahoma assets and associated production proceeds pursuant to the Note Purchase Agreement, Security Agreement and related agreements, including mortgages of the Oklahoma assets in favor of TCW. The interest rate is 10.5%, increasing an additional 2% if there is an event of default (see below). Payments under the TCW Credit Facility were interest-only until December 29, 2008. The TCW Credit Facility carries no prepayment penalty. Rio Vista ECO LLC (an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Vista and the direct parent of Rio Vista Penny and Rio Vista GO), Rio Vista GO, GO and MV have each agreed to guarantee payment of the Notes payable to the lenders under the TCW Credit Facility.
Under the terms of the Note Purchase Agreement, at any time during the period from May 19, 2008 through November 19, 2009, TCW had the right to demand payment of $2,200,000 of debt (Demand Loan). Beginning May 19, 2008, TCW also has the right to convert the outstanding principal amount of the Demand Loan into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to the lesser of $13.33 per unit or 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. Beginning November 19, 2008, TCW has the right to convert the balance of the debt under the TCW Credit Facility into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. The conversion rights of TCW as described above were formalized through the issuance of a warrant by Rio Vista (TCW Warrant). Rio Vista has agreed to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) a registration statement on Form S-3 covering the common units issued pursuant to the TCW Warrant within 90 days following the first exercise of the TCW Warrant.
Rio Vista Penny and Rio Vista GO, which hold the Oklahoma Assets, are prohibited from making upstream distributions to Rio Vista unless certain conditions are met. In addition, the TCW Credit Facility requires semi-annual reserve reports by an independent engineer which is used in determining the allowable borrowing base.

 

92


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE G — DEBT OBLIGATIONS — Continued
TCW Credit Facility — Continued
On September 29, 2008, Rio Vista Penny entered into a First Amendment to the Note Purchase Agreement (First TCW Amendment) with TCW. Under the terms of the First TCW Amendment, TCW agreed to fund Rio Vista Penny an additional $1,000,000 under the TCW Credit Facility for certain APOD costs as described in the First TCW Amendment. In addition, under the terms of the First TCW Amendment, the interest rate under the TCW Credit Facility increased from 10.5% per annum to 12.5% per annum beginning July 1, 2008. Under the terms of the First TCW Amendment, TCW agreed to change the period for which a notice to demand repayment from Rio Vista Penny of up to $2,200,000 of indebtedness under the TCW Credit Facility from May 19, 2008 to January 1, 2009 and Rio Vista Penny also agreed to extend the demand repayment option on the $2,200,000 through the date of maturity of the TCW Credit Facility. In addition, under the terms of the First TCW Amendment, TCW has agreed to waive other defaults identified in the First TCW Amendment which either occurred and/or were existing prior to the date of the First TCW Amendment.
In addition, on September 29, 2008, in connection with the TCW Credit Facility, Rio Vista Penny, Rio Vista, Operating and TCW entered into an Amended and Restated Management Services Agreement (Amended MSA). Under the terms of the Amended MSA, Operating was named as manager of the Oklahoma properties, replacing Northport Production Company, an Oklahoma corporation, which was previously named as manager under the original management services agreement.
Rio Vista Penny and TCW entered into several letter agreements whereby TCW agreed to extend the payment obligations under the TCW Credit Facility (including the December 2008 principal payment and interest payment due) and other requirements pursuant to the TCW Credit Facility until April 13, 2009 (TCW Waiver). In connection with one of the extensions, TCW agreed to provide Rio Vista with 62 days advance written notice to exercise the TCW Warrant, except for up to 400,000 common units of Rio Vista.
Sellers’ Note — Regional
In connection with the Regional acquisition, Regional issued a promissory note in the amount of $1,000,000 to be paid in four equal semiannual installments of $250,000 beginning January 27, 2008. Rio Vista recorded a discount of $116,000 (10% effective rate), representing the portion of interest associated with the note, which was to be amortized over the term of the note. During January 2008, the first installment was paid. On July 27, 2008 and January 27, 2009, the second and third installment was due to be paid. Regional did not make the second or third installment payments as it believes that there exists offsets in connection with the acquisition of Regional in excess of the payments. For the period of July 28, 2007 through December 31, 2007 and the year ended December 31, 2008, $37,000 and $72,000, respectively, of the discount was amortized.
Beneficial Conversion Features
In connection with the issuance of the Moores Note and TCW Credit Facility, Rio Vista recorded a beneficial conversion feature as interest expense and debt discount for the difference between the carrying amount of the debt obligations and the estimated fair value of the common units to be issued upon conversion in the amount of $25,000. The amortization of the debt discount totaled approximately $7,000 and $18,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, respectively.

 

93


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE H — INCOME TAXES
The tax effects of temporary differences and carryforwards that give rise to deferred tax assets and liabilities for Regional and MV were as follows at:
                                 
    December 31, 2007     December 31, 2008  
    Assets     Liabilities     Assets     Liabilities  
 
Depreciation
  $     $ 1,180,000     $ 66,000     $ 2,096,000  
Asset basis differences
          1,973,000       143,000       1,022,000  
Accrued Expenses
    4,000       85,000       55,000        
Net operating loss carryforward
    87,000             44,000        
 
                       
 
    91,000       3,238,000       308,000       3,118,000  
 
                               
Less: valuation allowance
    91,000                    
 
                       
 
  $     $ 3,238,000     $ 308,000     $ 3,118,000  
 
                       
                 
    December 31, 2007     December 31, 2008  
 
Net Deferred Tax Assets (Current)
  $     $ 99,000  
Net Deferred Tax Assets (Non-Current)
           
Net Deferred Tax Liabilities (Current)
           
Net Deferred Tax Liabilities (Non-Current)
  $ 3,238,000     $ 2,909,000  
Tax Expense for Regional, MV, and the Mexican entities was as follows at:
                 
    December 31,     December 31,  
    2007     2008  
 
Current Tax Expense
  $ 125,000     $ 312,000  
State Tax Expense
    23,000       37,000  
Deferred Tax Benefit
    (203,000 )     (386,000 )
Mexican Tax Expense
    34,000        
 
           
 
               
Total
  $ (21,000 )   $ (37,000 )
 
           
Net operating loss carryforwards for MV Pipeline expire in the following tax years:
         
2027
  $ 63,000  
2028
    53,000  
 
     
 
       
 
  $ 116,000  
 
     
U.S. and State income taxes were entirely associated with the taxable subsidiaries of Rio Vista, Regional, MV, and the Mexican entities.
Rio Vista established a valuation allowance on its deferred tax assets in 2007 reducing them to the value management felt was more likely than not to be realized.

 

94


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE H — INCOME TAXES — Continued
In June 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes — an Interpretation of SFAS No. 109” (FIN 48). FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in tax positions recognized in a company’s financial statements in accordance with SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes.” FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of the tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. Rio Vista adopted FIN 48 effective January 1, 2007.
The tax years that remain open to examination are 2003 — 2008 for foreign jurisdictions, and 2004-2008 for domestic entities.
Rio Vista’s Mexican subsidiaries incurred income tax expense in Mexico on their taxable income. The Mexican subsidiaries were sold in December 2007 (see note D). Although Rio Vista no longer owns its Mexican subsidiaries, adjustments by the taxing authorities for the years open to examination are subject to the indemnification provision of the purchase agreement entered into with TransMontaigne.
A reconciliation of the U.S. Federal statutory tax rate to Rio Vista’s effective tax rate is as follows:
                 
    December 31,     December 31,  
    2007     2008  
Net loss from continuing operations
  $ (4,843,000 )   $ (6,248,000 )
Financial statement income taxed at partner level
    4,682,000       6,003,000  
 
           
Loss from Regional and MV
    (161,000 )     (245,000 )
Income tax benefit at statutory rate (38%)
    (61,000 )     (93,000 )
 
               
Reconciling items:
               
Mexican taxes
    34,000        
Permanent differences and other
    6,000       56,000  
 
           
 
               
Benefit for income taxes
  $ (21,000 )   $ (37,000 )
 
           
Rio Vista is taxed as a partnership under Code Section 701 of the Internal Revenue Code. All of Rio Vista’s subsidiaries except for Regional and MV are taxed at the partner level, therefore, Rio Vista has no U.S. income tax expense or liability. The Partnership’s significant basis differences between the tax bases and the financial statement bases of its assets and liabilities are the cost basis and depreciation differences of the depreciable assets and deferred compensation costs on unexercised warrants. The net reversal of cost basis and depreciation differences vary considerably from limited partner to limited partner due to allocations under Section 734 and 743 of the Internal Revenue Code. The deferred compensation cost for tax purposes is $700,000. Compensation expense may or may not be recognized for tax purposes depending on the exercise of related warrants prior to their expiration.

 

95


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE I — PARTNERS’ CAPITAL
Common Units
On June 29, 2007, the Board of Managers of the General Partner approved the grant of a restricted unit bonus of 25,000 common units under Rio Vista’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan to an executive officer of the General Partner. The restricted unit bonus vested as to 8,334 units on July 1, 2007, an additional 8,333 units on January 1, 2008, and an additional 8,333 units on July 1, 2008. In connection with the grant of restricted units, the Board of Managers also approved the payment to the executive officer of one or more cash bonuses in amounts sufficient, on an after-tax basis, to cover all taxes payable by the executive officer with respect to the award of restricted units granted to him. Total compensation recorded under the aforementioned grant of units as they vested totaled $280,000.
On November 19, 2007, in connection with the acquisition of the Oklahoma assets, Rio Vista issued a total of 137,994 common units of Rio Vista to the sellers of GO and Penny Petroleum.
During June 2008, the Board of Managers of the General Partner of Rio Vista approved an employment agreement with an officer of the General Partner. Under the terms of the employment agreement, the officer is entitled to receive a grant of 30,000 restricted common units under Rio Vista’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan in accordance with the following vesting schedule: 5,000 common units after the officer has been employed for six months, another 5,000 common units after one year of employment, another 10,000 common units after two years of employment and another 10,000 common units after three years of employment. The common units were granted on October 17, 2008. Total compensation cost recorded under the aforementioned grant was approximately $205,000 of which $34,000 was expensed during the year ended December 31, 2008.
Private Placement of Common Units
On November 29, 2007, Rio Vista and Rio Vista GP LLC (Rio Vista GP), entered into a Unit Purchase Agreement with Standard General Fund L.P., Credit Suisse Management LLC and Structured Finance Americas LLC (collectively, Purchasers) dated effective as of November 29, 2007 (the Unit Purchase Agreement). Pursuant to the terms of the Unit Purchase Agreement, Rio Vista agreed to sell, and the Purchasers agreed to purchase, a total of 355,556 common units of Rio Vista (Common Units) at a price of $11.25 per unit in a private placement exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (Securities Act). The total purchase price of the Common Units was $4,000,000. Rio Vista agreed to pay expenses of counsel to the Purchasers in an amount not to exceed $100,000. Rio Vista used the net proceeds from the sale of the Common Units for general working capital purposes, including repayment of indebtedness. Rio Vista agreed not to offer or sell any of its equity securities (including equity securities of subsidiaries) for a period of 12 months following the closing date without first offering such securities to the Purchasers, which shall have the right to purchase up to 30% of such securities.

 

96


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE I — PARTNERS’ CAPITAL — Continued
Private Placement of Common Units — Continued
On December 3, 2007, Rio Vista and Standard General entered into a Registration Rights Agreement (Registration Rights Agreement) pursuant to which Rio Vista agreed to provide to the Purchasers registration rights with respect to the Common Units. Pursuant to the Registration Rights Agreement, Rio Vista agreed to file, within 90 days after the closing date for the sale of the Common Units, a shelf registration statement under the Securities Act to permit the public resale of the Common Units from time to time, including resale on a delayed or continuous basis as permitted by Rule 415 under the Securities Act. Rio Vista agreed to use its best efforts to cause the registration statement to become effective on or before the date of filing of Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 but no later than April 14, 2008. On February 13, 2008, Rio Vista filed a Form S-3 with the SEC. On August 1, 2008, the Form S-3 was declared effective. Rio Vista was required to pay liquidated damages to the holders of the Common Units for the period of time that the registration statement was not declared effective beginning April 14, 2008 as to all of the Common Units. In general, the amount of such damages equaled 1% of the purchase price of the unregistered Common Units for each period of 30 days for which such units remained unregistered. Rio Vista recorded a charge for liquidated damages of $144,000 and in lieu of a cash payment, Rio Vista agreed to issue additional common units, at a discount of 5% to the average closing price for such units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market for the 10 trading days immediately preceding each thirty day delay in the S-3 becoming effective. On October 17, 2008, Rio Vista issued an aggregate of 12,939 Rio Vista common units in satisfaction of all liquidated damages due.
On March 7, 2008, the Board of Managers of the General Partner Rio Vista approved the grant of a unit bonus of 8,812 common units under Rio Vista’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan to an executive officer of the General Partner. The amount of units granted was based on the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ Stock Market on March 7, 2008.
On March 7, 2008, a total of 61,875 options to acquire common units of Rio Vista were exercised by holders of such warrants. Total proceeds received from the exercises were $774,000. In addition, on March 7, 2008, 15,625 options to acquire common units of Rio Vista were exercised by a holder through the offset of a severance obligation in connection with that employee’s termination.
On July 23, 2008, a total of 6,378 common units of Rio Vista were issued to CEOcast in connection with a consulting agreement. Based on the closing price of Rio Vista’s common units on July 22, 2008, the total amount recorded as an expense on the issuance date was $80,000.
On July 23, 2008, the board of managers authorized the issuance and sale by Rio Vista of 197,628 of Rio Vista’s common units to Penn Octane at $10.12 per unit, and Penn Octane’s board authorized its purchase of such Rio Vista units at that price, for an aggregate price of approximately $2,000,000. The price per unit was the closing price for Rio Vista common units on May 30, 2008 as reported by the Nasdaq Global Market (see note M).

 

97


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE I — PARTNERS’ CAPITAL — Continued
Private Placement of Common Units — Continued
The common units represent limited partner interests in Rio Vista. The holders of common units are entitled to participate in Rio Vista’s distributions and exercise the rights or privileges available to limited partners under the partnership agreement. The holders of common units have only limited voting rights on matters affecting Rio Vista. Holders of common units have no right to elect the General Partner or its managers on an annual or other continuing basis. Penn Octane elects the managers of the General Partner. Although the General Partner has a fiduciary duty to manage Rio Vista in a manner beneficial to Rio Vista and its unitholders, the managers of the General Partner also have a fiduciary duty to manage the General Partner in a manner beneficial to Penn Octane and the other owners of the General Partner. The General Partner generally may not be removed except upon the vote of the holders of at least 80% of the outstanding common units; provided, however, if at any time any person or group, other than the General Partner and its affiliates, or a direct or subsequently approved transferee of the General Partner or its affiliates, acquires, in the aggregate, beneficial ownership of 20% or more of any class of units then outstanding, that person or group will lose voting rights on all of its units and the units may not be voted on any matter and will not be considered to be outstanding when sending notices of a meeting of unitholders, calculating required votes, determining the presence of a quorum or for other similar purposes. In addition, the partnership agreement contains provisions limiting the ability of holders of common units to call meetings or to acquire information about Rio Vista’s operations, as well as other provisions limiting the holders of common units ability to influence the manner or direction of management.
General Partner Interest
The General Partner of Rio Vista owns a 2% General Partner interest in Rio Vista. On July 1, 2006, Penn Octane’s 100% interest in the General Partner was decreased to 50% as a result of the exercise by Shore Capital LLC (Shore Capital), an affiliate of Mr. Richard Shore Jr., former president of Penn Octane and former chief executive officer of Rio Vista, and by Mr. Jerome B. Richter, of options to each acquire 25% of the General Partner (General Partner Options). The exercise price for each option was approximately $82,000. Mr. Richter’s option was amended to permit payment of the exercise price by surrender of Penn Octane common stock having a fair market value equal to the exercise price. Mr. Richter paid the exercise price for his option by surrender of 136,558 shares of Penn Octane common stock. In connection with the exercise of the General Partner Options, Penn Octane retained voting control of the General Partner pursuant to a voting agreement with each of Shore Capital and Mr. Richter. In December 2006, Shore Capital transferred its interest in the General Partner to Shore Trading LLC, an affiliated entity (Shore Trading). Shore Trading was also a party to the voting agreement with Penn Octane.
On February 6, 2007, Penn Octane entered into a purchase option agreement with Shore Trading that provided Penn Octane with the option to purchase the 25% interest in the General Partner held by Shore Trading. Penn Octane exercised its option on July 19, 2007 and acquired the 25% interest for a total cost of $1,400,000.
The General Partner generally has unlimited liability for the obligations of Rio Vista, such as its debts and environmental liabilities, except for those contractual obligations of Rio Vista that are expressly made without recourse to the General Partner.

 

98


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE I — PARTNERS’ CAPITAL — Continued
Distributions of Available Cash
All Rio Vista unitholders have the right to receive distributions from Rio Vista of “available cash” as defined in the partnership agreement in an amount equal to at least the minimum distribution of $0.25 per quarter per unit, plus any arrearages in the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the units from prior quarters subject to any reserves determined by the General Partner. The General Partner has a right to receive a distribution corresponding to its 2% General Partner interest and the incentive distribution rights described below. The distributions are to be paid within 45 days after the end of each calendar quarter. However, Rio Vista is prohibited from making any distributions to unitholders if it would cause an event of default, or an event of default exists, under any obligation of Penn Octane which Rio Vista has guaranteed.
In addition to its 2% General Partner interest, the General Partner is currently the holder of incentive distribution rights which entitled the holder to an increasing portion of cash distributions as described in the partnership agreement. As a result, cash distributions from Rio Vista are shared by the holders of the common units and the General Partner interest based on a formula whereby the General Partner receives disproportionately more distributions per percentage interest than the holders of the common units as annual cash distributions exceed certain milestones.
During July 2008, Penn Octane approved the loan of approximately $700,000 to Rio Vista which amount is included in due to Penn Octane Corporation in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet for the specific purpose of funding Rio Vista’s June 2008 quarterly distribution. Rio Vista made the following distributions during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008:
                                 
                    Amounts Paid  
    Payment     Distribution     Common     General  
Quarter Ended     Date     Per Unit     Units     Partner  
 
Dec 2006
    01/18/07     $ 0.25     $ 478,000     $ 10,000  
Mar 2007
    05/04/07     $ 0.25     $ 478,000     $ 10,000  
Jun 2007
    07/31/07     $ 0.25     $ 484,000     $ 10,000  
Sep 2007
    11/14/07     $ 0.25     $ 484,000     $ 10,000  
Jun 2005 – Jun 2006 Arrearages
    12/10/07     $ 1.25     $ 2,420,000     $ 49,000  
Dec 2007
    02/14/08     $ 0.25     $ 607,000     $ 12,000  
March 2008
    05/16/08     $ 0.25     $ 629,000     $ 13,000  
June 2008
    08/14/08     $ 0.25     $ 679,000     $ 14,000  
Rio Vista has not declared a distribution for the quarters ended September 30, 2008 and December 31, 2008.
NOTE J — UNIT WARRANTS
Options and Warrants
Rio Vista has no U.S. employees and is managed by its General Partner. Rio Vista applies SFAS 123R for warrants granted to employees and managers of the General Partner and for warrants issued to acquire goods and services from non-employees.

 

99


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE J — UNIT WARRANTS — Continued
TCW Warrant
Under the terms of the Note Purchase Agreement, TCW has the right to convert the outstanding principal amount of the Demand Loan into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to the lesser of $13.33 per unit or 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. In addition, TCW has the right to convert any balance of the debt under the TCW Credit Facility other than the Demand Loan into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. The conversion rights of TCW as described above were formalized through the issuance of a warrant by Rio Vista (TCW Warrant). At December 31, 2008, the outstanding balance owing under the TCW Credit Facility was approximately $24,700,000 plus accrued interest since September 29, 2008.
Equity Incentive Plan
On March 9, 2005, the board of managers of the General Partner approved the Rio Vista 2005 Equity Incentive Plan (2005 Plan). The 2005 Plan permits the grant of common unit options, common unit appreciation rights, restricted common units and phantom common units to any person who is an employee (including to any executive officer) or consultant of Rio Vista or the General Partner or any affiliate of Rio Vista or the General Partner. The 2005 Plan provides that each outside manager of the General Partner shall be granted a common unit option once each fiscal year for not more than 5,000 common units, in an equal amount as determined by the board of managers. The aggregate number of common units authorized for issuance as awards under the 2005 Plan is 750,000. The 2005 Plan shall remain available for the grant of awards until March 9, 2015, or such earlier date as the board of managers may determine. The 2005 Plan is administered by the compensation committee of the board of managers. In addition the board of managers may exercise any authority of the compensation committee under the 2005 Plan. Under the terms of the partnership agreement and applicable rules of the NASDAQ National Market, no approval of the 2005 Plan by the common unitholders of Rio Vista was required.
On February 15, 2007, the board of managers of the General Partner approved the grant of options to purchase a total of 21,250 common units under the 2005 Plan. Of the total number of options granted, 5,000 were issued to an executive officer of the General Partner and 16,250 were issued to outside managers of the General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $8.38 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on February 15, 2007. Options granted to the executive officer vest in equal monthly installments over a period of 36 months from the date of grant, become fully vested and exercisable upon a change in control event, and expire five years from the date of grant. Options granted to outside managers are fully vested on the date of grant and expire five years from the date of grant. Total compensation to be recorded under the aforementioned grant of option as they vest totals approximately $51,000.
On March 21, 2007, the board of managers of the General Partner approved the grant of an option to purchase 20,000 common units of Rio Vista under the 2005 Plan to an executive officer of the General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $7.36 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on March 21, 2007. The options vest in equal monthly installments over a period of 36 months from the date of grant, become fully vested and exercisable upon a change in control event, and expire five years from the date of grant. Total compensation to be recorded under the aforementioned grant of options as they vest totals approximately $44,000.

 

100


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE J — UNIT WARRANTS — Continued
Equity Incentive Plan — Continued
On June 15, 2007, in connection with the Board Consulting Agreement with Mr. Richard R. Canney (see note K), Rio Vista granted Mr. Canney an option to purchase 26,963 common units of Rio Vista. The exercise price for the option is $11.14 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on June 15, 2007. The Board Consulting Agreement was terminated by Mr. Canney effective September 30, 2007 resulting in the termination of the option.
On June 29, 2007, the board of managers of the General Partner Rio Vista approved the grant of an option to purchase 75,000 common units of Rio Vista under the 2005 Plan to an executive officer of the General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $11.21 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on June 29, 2007. The unit option vests in equal monthly installments over a period of 36 months beginning January 1, 2007, becomes fully vested and exercisable upon a change in control event, and expires five years from the date of grant. Total compensation to be recorded under the aforementioned grant of options as they vest totals $294,000.
In connection with the employment agreement with an executive of Regional, Rio Vista granted options to purchase a total of 25,000 common units under the 2005 Plan to the executive. The exercise price for the options is $16.66 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on July 27, 2007. The options vest over a two year period.
On August 23, 2007, the board of managers of the General Partner approved the grant of options to purchase a total of 8,125 common units under the 2005 Plan to outside managers of the General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $15.15 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on August 23, 2007. Options granted to outside managers are fully vested on the date of grant and expire five years from the date of grant. Total compensation to be recorded under the aforementioned grant of options as they vest totals approximately $58,000.
On January 23, 2008, the board of managers of the General Partner approved the grant of options to purchase a total of 16,250 common units under the 2005 Plan to certain outside members of the board of managers of the General Partner. The exercise price for the options is $14.42 per unit, which was the average of the high and low sale prices for Rio Vista common units as reported by the NASDAQ National Market on January 23, 2008. Options granted to outside managers are fully vested on the date of grant and expire five years from the date of grant.
On May 28, 2008, Rio Vista and Strategic Growth International (SGI), entered into a one year consulting agreement whereby SGI agreed to provide public relations consulting services. The agreement could be cancelled after 6 months and was cancelled on October 29, 2008 with an effective date of December 1, 2008. In connection with the agreement, Rio Vista granted SGI 50,000 warrants to purchase common units of Rio Vista at an exercise price of $12.00 per common unit. The warrants cannot be exercised for one year from the date of issuance and the warrants will expire three years from the date of issuance. Total cost recorded at the grant date was $161,000. As a result of the aforementioned cancellation, the number of warrants granted was reduced to 25,000.

 

101


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE J — UNIT WARRANTS — Continued
Equity Incentive Plan — Continued
The amount of total compensation not yet recognized as of December 31, 2008 was $120,000. Such amounts will be recognized over the remaining life of the grants.
For warrants granted to non-employees of the General Partner, Rio Vista applies the provisions of SFAS 123R to determine the fair value of the warrants issued. No warrants were granted to non-employees of the General Partner for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008.
A summary of the status of Rio Vista’s warrants for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008 and changes during the years ending on these dates are presented below:
                                 
    2007     2008  
            Weighted             Weighted  
            Average             Average  
Warrants   Shares     Exercise Price     Shares     Exercise Price  
Outstanding at beginning of year
    209,719     $ 10.64       349,094     $ 10.90  
 
                               
Granted
    149,375       11.42       66,250       12.59  
 
                               
Exercised
                (61,875 )     12.51  
Expired
    (10,000 )     13.23       (171,802 )     10.42  
 
                           
Outstanding at end of year
    349,094       10.90       181,667       11.41  
 
                           
 
                               
Warrants exercisable at end of year
    254,663               146,685          
The intrinsic value of warrants exercised during the year ended December 31, 2007 and 2008 was $0.00 and $123,000, respectively.
The following table depicts the weighted-average exercise price and weighted average fair value of warrants granted during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, by the relationship of the exercise price of the warrants granted to the market price on the grant date:
                                 
    2007     2008  
    For warrants granted     For warrants granted  
    Weighted     Weighted     Weighted     Weighted  
Exercise price compared to   Average     Average     Average     Average  
market price on grant date   Fair Value     Exercise Price     Fair Value     Exercise Price  
 
Equals market price
  $ 4.30     $ 11.42     $ 6.22     $ 14.42  
Exceeds market price
                3.23       12.00  
Less than market price
                       
The fair value of each warrant grant was estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following weighted-average assumptions used for grants in the year ended December 31, 2007, dividend yield of 12.5%, 13.0%, 9.3%, 6.1% and 6.5%; expected volatility of 81.9%, 82.2%, 80.8%, 84.1% and 84.4%; risk-free interest rate of 4.25%, 4.64%, 4.72%, 4.72% and 4.94%; and expected life of 5 years.

 

102


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE J — UNIT WARRANTS — Continued
Equity Incentive Plan — Continued
The fair value of each warrant grant was estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the following weighted-average assumptions used for grants in the year ended December 31, 2008, dividend yield of 6.9%, 10.0%; expected volatility of 82.1%, 82.6%; risk-free interest rate of 2.91%, 3.52; and expected life of 3 to 5 years.
The following table summarizes information about the warrants outstanding at December 31, 2008:
                                         
    Warrants Outstanding             Warrants Exercisable  
        Weighted                    
    Number     Average     Weighted     Number     Weighted  
    Outstanding at     Remaining     Average     Exercisable at     Average  
    December 31,     Contractual     Exercise     December 31,     Exercise  
Range of Exercise Prices   2008     Life     Price     2008     Price  
 
$5.00 to $12.42
    143,750       3.20 years     $ 10.37       108,768     $ 10.43  
 
$12.51 to $16.66
    37,917       3.85       15.38       37,917       15.38  
 
                                   
 
                                       
 
    181,667       3.34     $ 11.41       146,685     $ 11.71  
 
                                   
A summary of the status of nonvested warrants as of December 31, 2008 and changes during the year ended December 31, 2008 is presented below:
                 
            Weighted  
            Average Grant-  
Nonvested warrants   Shares     Date Fair Value  
 
               
Nonvested at January 1, 2008
    88,130     $ 11.67  
Granted
           
Vested
    (41,689 )     11.57  
Forfeited
    (11,459 )     16.66  
 
             
Nonvested at December 31, 2008
    34,982     $ 10.17  
 
             
NOTE K — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Legal Proceedings
Penn Octane, Rio Vista and/or Rio Vista’s subsidiaries were named as defendants in two lawsuits filed in connection with an accident in the town of Lucio Blanco, Mexico on August 11, 2005, involving a tanker truck carrying LPG which was struck by a train resulting in an explosion. None of Penn Octane, Rio Vista or any of Rio Vista’s subsidiaries owned or operated the tanker truck or employed or controlled the driver of the tanker truck. Furthermore, none of Penn Octane, Rio Vista or any of Rio Vista’s subsidiaries owned or had custody of the LPG on the tanker truck at the time and location of the accident.

 

103


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE K — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES — Continued
Legal Proceedings — Continued
The tanker truck reportedly took delivery of LPG at the Matamoros Terminal Facility operated under agreement with Rio Vista’s Mexican subsidiaries. According to the lawsuits, after leaving the Matamoros Terminal Facility, the tanker truck was involved in a collision with a train in Lucio Blanco, Mexico, resulting in a tragic explosion that killed and injured several persons and caused significant property damage. Published reports indicate that the truck used a road not approved for large trucks and failed to stop at an unprotected rail crossing, resulting in the collision and explosion. The insurance carrier for the owner of the tanker truck has settled certain claims in Mexico with victims of the accident.
Even though the accident took place in Mexico, these lawsuits were filed in Texas. The first case is captioned Lesly Camacho by Her Mother Dora Adame as Next Friend, et al. vs. Penn Octane International LLC, et al and was filed in the 404 th Judicial District Court for Cameron County, Texas on September 26, 2005. The plaintiffs seek unspecified monetary damages. On August 16, 2006 with the consent of the parties, the Court issued an amended order for temporary injunction for the purpose of preserving relevant evidence. The amended injunction required a subsidiary of Rio Vista to make available for inspection by plaintiffs Rio Vista’s terminal facilities in Brownsville, Texas and Matamoros, Mexico and associated equipment and records. The order also required Rio Vista to give 30 days’ advance notice to plaintiffs before conducting any alteration, repair, service, work or changes to the facilities or equipment. In addition, the order required Rio Vista to make available its employees for deposition by the plaintiffs and to secure and preserve certain physical evidence believed to be located in Mexico. The Brownsville, Texas terminal facility was sold to TransMontaigne Product Services Inc. on August 22, 2006. In January 2007, this case was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Brownsville Division. In July 2007, the case was remanded to the state court in Cameron County, Texas. In August 2007, plaintiffs filed an amended petition alleging that defendants delivered the LPG to an unqualified driver and that defendants failed to properly odorize the LPG before delivery.
In December of 2008, one of the insurance carriers, Ace Insurance, tendered its limit of one million in settlement of all claims brought by American citizens who were injured in the explosion. Those claims were dismissed. The legal damages that can be recovered by the remaining plaintiffs will be governed by Mexican law, which provides limited, scheduled recovery. This is deemed favorable to Rio Vista. Rio Vista’s legal fees and settlement costs were covered by insurance.
Since that settlement the remaining insurance carrier was Lexington Insurance Company (Lexington). On December 13, 2007, Lexington Insurance Company (Lexington) filed a declaratory action complaint against Penn Octane, Rio Vista and their related entities in the United States District Court in the Southern District of Texas (Brownsville) requesting the US Federal Court to rule that the plaintiff has no obligation to defend Penn Octane and the Rio Vista related entities in the Camacho litigation based on alleged coverage exceptions. Federal jurisdiction was contested and the case moved to state court. In a subsequent pleading, Lexington assumed the defense of Penn Octane and Rio Vista. However, there remains undetermined the obligation by Lexington to provide indemnification to Penn Octane and Rio Vista from any judgment resulting from the Camacho suit. Cross motions for summary judgment were filed by the parties, and the court ruled that the insurance policy issued by Lexington did cover the incident which occurred in Mexico. Lexington has subsequently filed a Notice of Appeals, and is proceeding to appeal the trial court’s ruling. Nevertheless, Lexington continued to provide a defense to Rio Vista in the Camacho case. As the cash currently stands, the trial court has ruled that insurance coverage does exist to provide coverage in the Camacho case.

 

104


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE K — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES — Continued
Legal Proceedings — Continued
The Camacho case is not presently set for trial. It is anticipated that a small group of plaintiffs will be identified by the court, and that group will be set for trial. It is anticipated that the trial group will not be set until the fall of 2009. No judgment following that trial will become final until all plaintiffs have gone to trial.
Management believes the remaining lawsuit against Penn Octane, Rio Vista and/or Rio Vista’s subsidiaries relating to the accident in Lucio Blanco is without merit and, based on the advice of counsel, does not anticipate liability for damages in excess of anticipated insurance coverage. The Company’s insurance carrier is expected to bear the legal fees and expenses in connection with defending this case. If, however, a court found liability on the part of Penn Octane, Rio Vista or their subsidiaries, a judgment or settlement in excess of insurance coverage could have a material adverse effect on Penn Octane’s and Rio Vista’s business, financial condition and results of operations.
On November 20, 2007, Rio Vista, Rio Vista Penny, LLC, Gary Moores, Bill Wood and GM Oil Properties, Inc. (GM) jointly filed an action for declaratory relief against Energy Spectrum Advisors, Inc. (Energy Spectrum) in the District Court of McIntosh County, Oklahoma. This action was filed in response to Energy Spectrum’s assertion that Rio Vista, Rio Vista Penny, LLC, as well as GM owed Energy Spectrum a commission based on Rio Vista Penny, LLC’s November, 2007 purchase of certain assets from GM. Energy Spectrum counterclaimed asserting that Rio Vista and Rio Vista Penny tortiously interfered with the commission agreement between Energy Spectrum and GM. Neither Rio Vista nor Rio Vista Penny were parties to this agreement. Management believes that the Rio Vista entities should have no liability for any commission obligation that GM may owe to Energy Spectrum. However the outcome of litigation cannot reliably be predicted. Discovery in the case is ongoing. No trial date has been set.
On August 19, 2008, Rio Vista, Rio Vista GP LLC, Rio Vista Penny LLC, Jerome B. Richter and Douglas G. Manner (Defendants) were named in a lawsuit filed by Northport Production Company and Eugene A. Viele (Plaintiffs). Mr. Viele is currently a director of Penn Octane Corporation and is also the principal owner of Northport Production Company. Mr. Manner currently serves as a director of Penn Octane Corporation and the General Partner. Plaintiffs allege breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, and fraud in connection with the acquisition of the Oklahoma Assets. Plaintiffs are seeking judgment for compensatory damages of $487,000 and exemplary damages of not less than $200,000 as well as attorneys’ fees and other such relief as may be shown. Discovery is currently pending. Rio Vista believes that the liability, if any, ultimately resulting from this lawsuit should not materially affect its consolidated financial results.
Rio Vista and its subsidiaries are involved with other proceedings, lawsuits and claims in the ordinary course of its business. Rio Vista believes that the liabilities, if any, ultimately resulting from such proceedings, lawsuits and claims should not materially affect its consolidated financial results.

 

105


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE K — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES — Continued
Leases
Norfolk Southern Leases
On January 1, 2003, Regional (as lessee) entered into a lease agreement with Norfolk Southern Railway Company (as lessor) for approximately 3.1 acres of land which is utilized in connection with Regional’s existing operations at Regional’s facilities in Hopewell, Virginia. The lease includes the right to maintain existing warehouses, storage tanks for handling petroleum and chemical products, and necessary appurtenances. The lease term was January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2005. The lease has not been renewed and may be terminated by either party upon 30 days’ written notice. Rent is $1,500 per month subject to adjustment based on inflation.
On August 21, 2003, Regional (as lessee) entered into a siding lease agreement with Norfolk Southern Railway Company (as lessor) for approximately 750 feet of railroad sidings on land which is utilized in connection with Regional’s existing operations at Regional’s facilities in Hopewell, Virginia. The sidings may be used for handling various chemical products. The siding lease began on August 21, 2003 and continues until terminated by either party with 30 days’ written notice. Rent is $4,875 per year, payable in advance.
On June 1, 2007, Regional executed a letter of intent with Norfolk Southern dated May 29, 2007 which provides for the replacement of the foregoing leases, through a purchase of approximately 3.5 acres of land and the lease of approximately 1.9 acres of land on a long-term basis. Regional received a letter from Norfolk Southern dated July 26, 2007, approving the purchase of the land and the lease on the terms contained in the letter of intent. Regional is awaiting definitive documents from Norfolk Southern in order to complete the purchase and lease transactions.
Other
Regional has several leases for parking and other facilities which are short term in nature and can be terminated by the lessors or Regional upon giving sixty days notice of cancellation.
Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. entered into a lease for office space for administrative purposes in Plano, Texas starting August 2008 for a period of 37 months. Rent of $7,000 plus utilities is payable each month. Future rents are $84,000 for year ended 2009 and 2010 and $56,000 for the year ended 2011.
Rent expense for all operating leases was $83,000 and $75,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, respectively.

 

106


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE K — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES — Continued
Agreements
Asphalt Agreement
On November 30, 2000, Regional entered into a Storage and Product Handling Agreement with a customer with an effective date of December 1, 2000 (Asphalt Agreement). The Asphalt Agreement provides for the pricing, terms and conditions under which the customer will purchase terminal services and facility usage from Regional for the storage and handling of the customer’s asphalt products. The Asphalt Agreement was amended on October 15, 2002 with an effective date of December 1, 2002 (Amended Asphalt Agreement). The term of the Amended Asphalt Agreement is five years with an option by the customer for an additional five-year renewal term, which the customer exercised in July 2007. After the additional five-year term, the Amended Asphalt Agreement renews automatically for successive one-year terms unless terminated upon 120 days advance written notice by either party. The annual fee payable to Regional for the initial five-year term of the Amended Asphalt Agreement is approximately $500,000, payable in equal monthly installments, subject to adjustments for inflation and certain facility improvements. In exchange for the annual fee, Regional agrees to provide minimum annual throughput of 610,000 net barrels per contract year, with additional volume to be paid on a per barrel basis. During the term of the amended Asphalt Agreement, Regional agrees to provide three storage tanks and certain related equipment to the customer on an exclusive basis as well as access to Regional’s barge docking facility.
Fuel Oil Agreement
On November 16, 1998, Regional entered into a Terminal Agreement with a customer with an effective date of November 1, 1998, as amended on April 5, 2001, October 11, 2001 and August 1, 2003 (Fuel Oil Agreement). The Fuel Oil Agreement provides for the pricing, terms and conditions under which Regional will provide terminal facilities and services to the customers for the delivery of fuel oil. The agreement renews automatically for successive one-year terms unless terminated upon 365 days advance written notice by either party. Pursuant to the agreement, as amended, Regional agrees to provide three storage tanks, certain related pipelines and equipment, and at least two tractor tankers to the customer on an exclusive basis, as well as access to Regional’s barge docking facility. In exchange for use of Regional’s facilities and services, the customer pays an annual tank rental amount of approximately $300,000 plus a product transportation fee calculated on a per gallon basis, each subject to annual adjustment for inflation. Regional agrees to deliver a minimum daily quantity of fuel oil on behalf of the customer.
Gas Service and Sales Agreements
GO entered into an agreement with Clearwater Enterprises, LLC (Clearwater) to provide monthly services in relationship to the Brooken system pipeline. In accordance with terms of the agreement, Clearwater would i) receive pipeline nominations from the various shippers on the Brooken system. ii) allocate volumes to the wellhead based upon the volumes delivered to the Brooken interconnect iii) prepare gathering and compression fee invoices on behalf of the Company iv) prepare pipeline imbalance and cashout statements. The monthly gathering management fee for these services is $3,000. The agreement is month to month unless and until terminated by either party upon 30 days notice.
For the year ended December 31, 2008, approximately 68% of our gas production was sold through Clearwater and approximately 22% was sold to Unimark, LLC. In addition, approximately 82% of the oil and gas segment trade accounts receivables were from Clearwater. These gas sales are governed by an agreement that expires in 2009 and continues yearly thereafter, until canceled by either party within thirty day notice.

 

107


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE K — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES — Continued
Agreements — Continued
Gas Compression Agreements
GO entered into a one year lease agreement with Hanover Compression Limited Partnership for the use of a compressor. The lease is dated October 11, 2006 and is guaranteed for a minimum of twelve months and continues monthly until cancelled by either party with 30 day notice. Minimum base lease payments of $11,000 plus taxes and are due monthly. The base amount is subject to semi-annual adjustments.
MV entered into a Gas Compression Master Service Agreement with USA Compression Partners, LP on November 1, 2007. This agreement replaces an earlier agreement for gas compression services. The agreement provides for monthly payments of approximately $17,000 per month through August 31, 2009.
Consulting Agreement
During November 2005, Penn Octane, Rio Vista and Mr. Richter entered into a consulting agreement whereby Mr. Richter shall served as a special advisor to the board of directors of Penn Octane and the board of managers of the General Partner and provided the following services (Services) to both Penn Octane and Rio Vista: assistance with the sale of all or part of their LPG assets, assistance with other transactions (including restructurings) involving the companies as mutually agreed by the parties and such other services that the companies may reasonably request.
In consideration of the Services rendered by Mr. Richter to the companies, Penn Octane and Rio Vista paid the following fees (Fees) to Mr. Richter: an amount equal to two percent (2%) of (i) the net proceeds, as defined, to the companies resulting from a sale of assets to a third party, and (ii) the net proceeds, as defined, to the companies from sales of LPG to PMI for any calendar month in which such sales exceed the volumes pursuant to the previous agreement with PMI. Amounts expensed pursuant to (i) above (see note D) were $138,000 and have been paid to Mr. Richter.
Mr. Richter’s consulting agreement expired on November 14, 2006.
Rio Vista entered into a consulting agreement (Consulting Agreement) with JBR Capital Resources, Inc. (JBR Capital) regarding consulting services to be rendered by JBR Capital to Rio Vista and to Penn Octane. JBR Capital is controlled by Mr. Richter. The provisions of the Consulting Agreement are effective as of November 15, 2006 (Effective Date). Pursuant to the Consulting Agreement, JBR Capital has agreed to assist Rio Vista and Penn Octane with the potential acquisition and disposition of assets and with other transactions involving Rio Vista or Penn Octane. In exchange for these services, Rio Vista has agreed to pay JBR Capital a fee based on approved services rendered by JBR Capital plus a fee based on the net proceeds to Rio Vista resulting from a sale of assets to a third party introduced to Rio Vista by JBR Capital. For the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, Rio Vista expensed approximately $317,000 and $325,000, respectively in connection with the Consulting Agreement. In addition, in connection with the Regional transaction, JBR Capital earned a fee of $180,000 which fee was expensed. The initial term of the Consulting Agreement was six months and continues to renew for additional six-month terms unless terminated by either party at least 30 days before the end of each term.

 

108


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE K — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES — Continued
Richard R. Canney
On June 15, 2007, Penn Octane and Rio Vista entered into the Board Consulting Agreement regarding consulting services to be rendered by Mr. Canney to Penn Octane and to Rio Vista. Pursuant to the Board Consulting Agreement, Mr. Canney has agreed to assist Penn Octane and Rio Vista with the potential acquisition and disposition of assets, obtaining financing, other transactions, and recommending candidates for management and board service. In exchange for these services, Penn Octane and Rio Vista paid Mr. Canney a combined total monthly fee of $12,500, inclusive of all fees payable in connection with Mr. Canney’s services as a director and chairman of the board of Penn Octane and Rio Vista, retroactive to November 1, 2006. The monthly fee was paid equally by Penn Octane and Rio Vista. During August 2007, Mr. Canney provided notice to Rio Vista of the termination of the Board Consulting Agreement effective September 30, 2007.
CEOcast
Effective July 2, 2007, Rio Vista entered into a consulting agreement with CEOcast, Inc. (CEOcast) whereby CEOcast agreed to render investor relations services to Rio Vista. Under the terms of the CEOcast agreement, CEOcast received cash fees of $7,500 per month and Rio Vista agreed to issue to CEOcast (a) 1,399 of Rio Vista’s fully-paid, non-assessable common units (Common Units) and (b) $75,000 worth of Common Units on March 31, 2008 based on a calculation of units as more fully described in the consulting agreement. The delivery of any Common Units was to be made at the soonest practical date after March 31, 2008, based on the best efforts of Rio Vista. In accordance with the Agreement, during April 2008, Rio Vista provided notice to CEOcast that it would not renew the Agreement upon the expiration in July 2008. In connection with the CEOcast agreement, on July 23, 2008, Rio Vista issued to CEOcast a total of 6,378 Common Units. Based on the closing price of Rio Vista Common Units as of July 23, 2008, the date that the units were issued to CEOcast, Rio Vista recorded additional expense of $80,000 associated with the issuance of the common units.
Strategic Growth International
On May 28, 2008, Rio Vista and SGI entered into a one year consulting agreement whereby SGI agreed to provide public relations consulting services. The agreement could be cancelled after 6 months and was cancelled on October 29, 2008 with an effective date of December 1, 2008. In connection with the agreement, Rio Vista was required to pay monthly fees of $9,000 per month. In addition, under the agreement between Rio Vista and SGI, Rio Vista granted SGI 50,000 warrants to purchase common units of Rio Vista at an exercise price of $12.00 per common unit. The warrants cannot be exercised for one year from the date of issuance and the warrants will expire three years from the date of issuance. As a result of the cancellation, the number of warrants issued was reduced to 25,000.
Concentrations of Credit Risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject Rio Vista to credit risk include cash balances at banks which at times exceed the federal deposit insurance.

 

109


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE K — COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES — Continued
Partnership Tax Treatment and Mexican Subsidiaries, Regional and MV Income Taxes
Rio Vista, excluding Regional and MV, is not a taxable entity for U.S. tax purposes (see below) and incurs no U.S. Federal income tax liability. Regional and MV are corporations and as such are subject to U.S. Federal and State corporate income tax. Each unitholder of Rio Vista is required to take into account that unitholder’s share of items of income, gain, loss and deduction of Rio Vista in computing that unitholder’s federal income tax liability, even if no cash distributions are made to the unitholder by Rio Vista. Distributions by Rio Vista to a unitholder are generally not taxable unless the amount of cash distributed is in excess of the unitholder’s adjusted basis in Rio Vista.
Section 7704 of the Internal Revenue Code (Code) provides that publicly traded partnerships shall, as a general rule, be taxed as corporations despite the fact that they are not classified as corporations under Section 7701 of the Code. Section 7704 of the Code provides an exception to this general rule for a publicly traded partnership if 90% or more of its gross income for every taxable year consists of “qualifying income” (Qualifying Income Exception). For purposes of this exception, “qualifying income” includes income and gains derived from the exploration, development, mining or production, processing, refining, transportation (including pipelines) or marketing of any mineral or natural resource. Other types of “qualifying income” include interest (other than from a financial business or interest based on profits of the borrower), dividends, real property rents, gains from the sale of real property, including real property held by one considered to be a “dealer” in such property, and gains from the sale or other disposition of capital assets held for the production of income that otherwise constitutes “qualifying income”. Non qualifying income which is held and taxed through a taxable entity (such as Regional), is excluded from the calculation in determining which the publicly traded partnership meets the qualifying income test.
Rio Vista estimates that more than 90% of its gross income (excluding Regional) is “qualifying income”. No ruling has been or will be sought from the IRS and the IRS has made no determination as to Rio Vista’s classification as a partnership for federal income tax purposes or whether Rio Vista’s operations generate a minimum of 90% of “qualifying income” under Section 7704 of the Code.
If Rio Vista was classified as a corporation in any taxable year, either as a result of a failure to meet the Qualifying Income Exception or otherwise, Rio Vista’s items of income, gain, loss and deduction would be reflected only on Rio Vista’s tax return rather than being passed through to Rio Vista’s unitholders, and Rio Vista’s net income would be taxed at corporate rates.
If Rio Vista was treated as a corporation for federal income tax purposes, Rio Vista would pay tax on income at corporate rates, which is currently a maximum of 35%. Distributions to unitholders would generally be taxed again as corporate distributions, and no income, gains, losses, or deductions would flow through to the unitholders. Because a tax would be imposed upon Rio Vista as a corporation, the cash available for distribution to unitholders would be substantially reduced and Rio Vista’s ability to make minimum quarterly distributions would be impaired. Consequently, treatment of Rio Vista as a corporation would result in a material reduction in the anticipated cash flow and after-tax return to unitholders and therefore would likely result in a substantial reduction in the value of Rio Vista’s common units.
Current law may change so as to cause Rio Vista to be taxable as a corporation for federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject Rio Vista to entity-level taxation. The partnership agreement provides that, if a law is enacted or existing law is modified or interpreted in a manner that subject Rio Vista to taxation as a corporation or otherwise subjects Rio Vista to entity-level taxation for federal, state or local income tax purposes, then the minimum quarterly distribution amount and the target distribution amount will be adjusted to reflect the impact of that law on Rio Vista.

 

110


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE L — OIL AND GAS SALES CONTRACTS
Rio Vista sells oil and gas in the normal course of its business and considers the use of forward sales contracts in the form of guaranteed fixed prices to minimize the variability in forecasted cash flows due to price movements in oil and gas.
At December 31, 2008, Rio Vista had the following contracts in place:
         
Date   Terms
-   January 2009 – March 2009:   1.0 MMcf/d @ $8.61/Mcf (MV Pipeline production)
-   January 2009 – March 2009:   0.5 MMcf/d @ $8.61/Mcf (Brooken Pipeline production)
The contracts in place at December 31, 2008 covered substantially all of Rio Vista’s current production.
During January 2009, Rio Vista entered into an agreement to sell its February 2009 and March 2009 sales contracts. In connection with the settlement of the contracts, Rio Vista received approximately $400,000. As a result of the above, beginning February 1, 2009, none of Rio Vista’s oil and gas production is subject to forward sales contracts.
NOTE M — RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
The General Partner has a legal duty to manage Rio Vista in a manner beneficial to Rio Vista’s unitholders. This legal duty originates in statutes and judicial decisions and is commonly referred to as a “fiduciary” duty. Because of Penn Octane’s ownership and control of the General Partner, Penn Octane’s officers and managers of the General Partner also have fiduciary duties to manage the business of the General Partner in a manner beneficial to Penn Octane and its stockholders.
The partnership agreement limits the liability and reduces the fiduciary duties of the General Partner to the unitholders. The partnership agreement also restricts the remedies available to unitholders for actions that might otherwise constitute breaches of the General Partner’s fiduciary duty.
Sale — Purchase of Rio Vista Common Units
At meetings held on May 30, 2008, in connection with the previously disclosed discussions between Rio Vista and the NASDAQ National Market (NASDAQ) regarding Rio Vista’s compliance with NASDAQ’s Marketplace Rule 4450(a)(3) on capital adequacy, the Board of Managers of the General Partner authorized the issuance and sale by Rio Vista of 197,628 of Rio Vista’s common units to Penn Octane at $10.12 per unit, and Penn Octane’s board authorized its purchase of such Rio Vista units at that price, for an aggregate price of approximately $2,000,000. Thereafter, Rio Vista’s officers continued to formulate a plan of ongoing compliance with Rule 4450(a)(3) on terms satisfactory to NASDAQ, and notified NASDAQ regarding the proposed issuance of its units. Rio Vista also filed a listing of additional units notification with NASDAQ (LAS) based on its intention to go forward with the proposed purchase and sale. Following further discussions with NASDAQ, at board meetings on July 15, 2008, the Board of Managers of the General Partner and the Board of Directors of Penn Octane confirmed their desire to implement promptly the previously authorized purchase and sale, and the companies agreed to complete the transaction, subject to NASDAQ approval of Rio Vista’s LAS. On July 23, 2008, after the period of review for the LAS passed, the common units were issued to Penn Octane.

 

111


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE M — RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS — Continued
Loans To Rio Vista
As of July 23, 2008, Rio Vista offset $2,000,000 owed to Penn Octane against the amounts owed by Penn Octane to acquire Rio Vista common units (see above). In addition, Penn Octane has loaned additional amounts to Rio Vista for the sole purpose of allowing Rio Vista to fund ongoing operations and the June 2008 quarterly distribution.
In connection with the Third Amendment of the RZB Note, Rio Vista was required to repay $1,000,000 of the RZB Note. Effective January 1, 2009, Penn Octane loaned Rio Vista $1,000,000 of its cash collateral held by RZB for the purpose of funding Rio Vista’s obligation to make the required payment described above.
Omnibus Agreement
In connection with the Spin-Off, Penn Octane entered into an Omnibus Agreement with Rio Vista that governs, among other things, indemnification obligations among the parties to the agreement, related party transactions and the provision of general administration and support services by Penn Octane.
The Omnibus Agreement prohibits Rio Vista from entering into any material agreement with Penn Octane without the prior approval of the conflicts committee of the board of managers of the General Partner. For purposes of the Omnibus Agreement, a material agreement is any agreement between Rio Vista and Penn Octane that requires aggregate annual payments in excess of $100,000.
The Omnibus Agreement may be amended by written agreement of the parties; provided, however that it may not be amended without the approval of the conflicts committee of the General Partner if the amendment would adversely affect the unitholders of Rio Vista. The Omnibus Agreement has an initial term of five years that automatically renews for successive five-year terms and, other than the indemnification provisions, will terminate if Rio Vista is no longer an affiliate of Penn Octane.
Under the terms of the Omnibus Agreement, Penn Octane charged Rio Vista $686,000 and $762,000 for expenses during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, respectively.

 

112


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE N — 401K
Regional sponsors a defined contribution retirement plan (401(k) Plan) covering all eligible employees effective November 1, 1988. The 401(k) Plan allows eligible employees to contribute, subject to Internal Revenue Service limitations on total annual contributions, up to 60% of their compensation as defined in the 401(k) plan, to various investment funds. Regional matches, on a discretionary basis, 50% of the first 6% of employee compensation. Furthermore, Regional may make additional contributions on a discretionary basis at the end of the Plan year for all eligible employees. Regional made no discretionary contributions from the acquisition of Regional to December 31, 2008.
NOTE O — REALIZATION OF ASSETS
The accompanying consolidated balance sheet has been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, which contemplate continuation of Rio Vista as a going concern. Rio Vista had a loss from continuing operations for the ended December 31, 2007 and 2008 and has a deficit in working capital. Currently, all revenues generated from the Oklahoma Assets are held as collateral against the TCW Credit Facility. The TCW Credit Facility, $150,000 of the Moores Note, the RZB Note, the Sellers’ Note — Regional and the Richter Note Payable total approximately $31,319,000 and are all classified as current liabilities. In addition, as a result of extensions, the TCW Credit Facility and the RZB Note will expire during April 2009, unless further extended. In the event such obligations are not satisfactorily restructured or further extended, the TCW Credit Facility and/or the RZB Note will be due immediately (see note G). The TCW Credit Facility and RZB Note are collateralized by the Oklahoma Assets and the Regional assets, respectively.
The Oklahoma Assets and/or the Regional operations currently do not generate sufficient cash flow to pay general and administrative and other operating expenses of Rio Vista and all debt service requirements. The TCW Credit Facility prohibits distributions by Rio Vista’s Oklahoma subsidiaries unless certain conditions are met which currently are not expected to be met. In addition, Rio Vista requires additional funding in order to increase production levels for its Oklahoma Assets.
Substantially all of Rio Vista’s and Penn Octane’s assets are pledged or committed to be pledged as collateral on the TCW Credit Facility, the RZB Note, and the Richter Note Payable, and therefore, both Rio Vista and Penn Octane may be unable to obtain additional financing collateralized by those assets. Penn Octane has provided financing and management to Rio Vista, and guarantees the RZB note. As a result, Rio Vista is dependent on Penn Octane. Penn Octane’s Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on the consolidated financial statements of Penn Octane at December 31, 2008 contained an explanatory paragraph which describes an uncertainty about Penn Octane’s ability to continue as a going concern. If Penn Octane’s and Rio Vista’s cash flows are not adequate to pay their obligations, Penn Octane and/or Rio Vista may be required to raise additional funds to avoid foreclosure by creditors. There can be no assurance that such additional funding will be available on terms attractive to either Penn Octane or Rio Vista or available at all. Under the terms of the TCW Credit Facility, TCW may convert a portion or all of its debt obligations into common units of Rio Vista which may be severely dilutive to existing unitholders and may be a deterrent to future equity financings. If additional amounts cannot be raised, existing debts restructured and cash flow is inadequate, Penn Octane and/or Rio Vista would likely be required to seek other alternatives which could include the sale of assets, closure of operations and/or protection under the U.S. bankruptcy laws.

 

113


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE O — REALIZATION OF ASSETS — Continued
In view of the matters described in the preceding paragraphs, recoverability of the recorded asset amounts shown in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet is dependent upon the ability of Rio Vista restructure the TCW Credit Facility and the RZB Note and to continue as a going concern. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments related to the recoverability and classification of recorded asset amounts or amounts and classification of liabilities that might be necessary should Rio Vista be unable to restructure such debt and to continue in existence.
To provide Rio Vista with the ability it believes necessary to continue in existence, management is taking steps to restructure its existing debt obligations, raise additional debt and/or equity financing, reduce its general and administrative and other operating expenses and sell assets.
NOTE P — SUPPLEMENTARY OIL AND GAS DATA (Unaudited)
(A)  
Costs Incurred in Oil and Gas Property Acquisition, Exploration and Development Activities
Costs incurred in oil and gas property acquisition and development are presented below:
                 
    Year Ended     Year Ended  
    December 31,     December 31,  
    2007     2008  
    (in thousands)     (in thousands)  
 
Property acquisition costs:
               
Proved
  $ 26,255     $  
Unproved
           
Development costs
          2,549  
Gas compression and pipelines
            568  
 
           
Total costs incurred
  $ 26,255     $ 3,117  
 
           
Property acquisition costs include costs incurred to purchase, lease, or otherwise acquire a property. Development costs include costs incurred to gain access to and prepare development well locations for drilling, to drill and equip development wells and to provide facilities to extract, treat and gather oil and gas.
Rio Vista capitalizes costs related to drilling and development of oil and gas properties for specific activities related to drilling its wells, which include site preparation, drilling labor, meter installation, pipeline connection and site reclamation. There were no drilling and development costs during the year ended December 31, 2007 (acquisition of Oklahoma Assets occurred in November 2007).

 

114


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE P — SUPPLEMENTARY OIL AND GAS DATA (Unaudited)
(B)  
Oil and Gas Capitalized Costs
Aggregate capitalized costs related to oil and gas production activities with applicable accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization are presented below:
                 
    December 31,     December 31,  
    2007     2008  
    (in thousands)     (in thousands)  
 
Proved properties:
               
Leasehold, equipment and drilling
  $ 26,255     $ 28,962  
 
               
Less accumulated depreciation, depletion and amortization
    (58 )     (719 )
 
           
Net capitalized costs
  $ 26,197     $ 28,243  
 
           
(C)  
Results of Oil and Gas Producing Activities
The results of operations for oil and gas producing activities (excluding corporate overhead and interest costs) are presented below:
                 
    Year Ended     Year Ended  
    December 31,     December 31,  
    2007     2008  
    (in thousands)     (in thousands)  
 
Revenues:
               
Oil and gas sales
  $ 396     $ 4,506  
Gain (loss) on oil and gas derivatives
           
 
           
Net oil and gas sales
    396       4,506  
 
           
Expenses:
               
Production costs
    212       2,503  
Depreciation, depletion and amortization
    58       669  
 
           
Total expenses
    270       3,172  
 
           
Results of operations for oil and gas producing activities (excluding corporate overhead and interest costs)
  $ 126     $ 1,334  
 
           
Production costs include those costs incurred to operate and maintain productive wells and related equipment, including such costs as labor, repairs, maintenance, materials, supplies, fuel consumed, insurance and other production taxes. In addition, production costs include administrative expenses applicable to support equipment associated with these activities.

 

115


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE P — SUPPLEMENTARY OIL AND GAS DATA (Unaudited) — Continued
(D)  
Net Proved Oil and Gas Reserves
The net proved reserves of oil and gas of Rio Vista have been estimated by an independent petroleum engineering firm, Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc., at December 31, 2007 and 2008. These reserve estimates have been prepared in compliance with the SEC rules based on year-end prices. An analysis of the change in estimated net quantities of oil and gas reserves, as reported December 31, 2007 and current estimates as of December 31, 2008 are shown below:
                         
    Year Ended December 31, 2008  
    Gas (Bcf)     Oil (MMbls)     Total (Bcfe)  
Net Proved developed and undeveloped reserves:
                       
Beginning of year
    35.589             35.589  
Revisions of previous estimates
    (13.979 )           (13.979 )
Extensions and discoveries
    1.405             1.405  
Production
    (.521 )           (.521 )
 
                 
End of year
    22.494             22.494  
 
                 
Net Proved developed reserves:
                       
Beginning of year
    12.766             12.766  
 
                 
End of year
    8.082             8.082  
 
                 
(E)  
Standardized Measure of Discounted Future Net Cash Flows and Changes Therein Relating to Proved Reserves — Continued
Summarized in the following table is information for Rio Vista with respect to the standardized measure of discounted future net cash flows relating to proved reserves as estimated by an independent petroleum engineering firm, Lee Keely and Associates, Inc., at December 31, 2007 and 2008. Future cash inflows are computed by applying year-end prices relating to Rio Vista’s proved reserves to the year-end quantities of those reserves. Future production, development, site restoration and abandonment costs are derived based on current costs assuming continuation of existing economic conditions. There are no future income tax expenses because Rio Vista is a nontaxable entity.

 

116


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE P — SUPPLEMENTARY OIL AND GAS DATA (Unaudited) — Continued
(E)  
Standardized Measure of Discounted Future Net Cash Flows and Changes Therein Relating to Proved Reserves — Continued
The following represents changes in the standard measure of discounted future net cash flows estimated during the year ended December 31, 2008 from the December 31, 2007 estimated amounts (amounts in thousands):
                         
    Year ended December 31,        
    2008     2007     Change  
 
                       
Future cash inflows
  $ 80,979     $ 179,015     $ (98,036 )
Future production costs
    (31,338 )     (63,693 )     32,355  
Future development costs
    (8,831 )     (10,891 )     2,060  
 
                 
 
                       
Future cash flows before income taxes
  $ 40,810     $ 104,431     $ (63,621 )
 
                 
 
                       
Future net cash flows before income, taxes, discounted at 10%
  $ 13,304     $ 41,272     $ (27,968 )
 
                 
 
                       
Future net gas price (Mcf)
  $ 3.60     $ 5.03     $ (1.43 )
 
                 
It is necessary to emphasize that the data presented should not be viewed as representing the expected cash flow from, or current value of, existing proved reserves since the computations are based on a large number of estimates and arbitrary assumptions. Reserve quantities cannot be measured with precision and their estimation requires many judgmental determinations and frequent revisions. The required projection of production and related expenditures over time requires further estimates with respect to pipeline availability, rates of demand and governmental control. Actual future prices and costs are likely to be substantially different from the current prices and costs utilized in the computation of reported amounts. Any analysis or evaluation of the reported amounts should give specific recognition to the computational methods utilized and the limitations inherent therein.

 

117


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE Q — SEGMENT INFORMATION
Rio Vista has the following reportable segments: Transportation and Terminaling and Oil and Gas. The Transportation and Terminaling segment transports bulk liquids, including chemical and petroleum products, by truck and provides terminaling and storage services and the Oil and Gas segment produces, transports and sells oil and gas.
The accounting policies used to develop segment information correspond to those described in the summary of significant accounting policies. Segment profit (loss) is based on gross profit (loss) from operations before selling, general and administrative expenses, other income (expense) and income tax. The reportable segments are distinct business units operating in similar industries. They are separately managed, with separate marketing and distribution systems. The following information about the segments is for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007. The LPG Transportation segment commenced August 22, 2006 and the oil and gas segment commenced November 19, 2007.
                         
    Transportation and              
Year ended December 31, 2008:   Terminaling     Oil and Gas     Totals  
 
                       
Revenues from external customers
    8,573,000       5,247,000       13,820,000  
Interest expense
    931,000       2,849,000       3,780,000  
Interest income
          7,000       7,000  
Depreciation and amortization
    996,000       1,145,000       2,141,000  
Segment gross profit
    2,129,000       925,000       3,054,000  
Segment assets
    11,891,000       36,239,000       48,130,000  
Segment liabilities
    4,465,000       28,623,000       33,088,000  
Expenditure for segment assets
    463,000       3,451,000       3,914,000  
 
                       
Reconciliation to Consolidated Amounts:
                       
 
                       
Revenues
                       
Total revenues for reportable segments
          $ 13,820,000          
Elimination of intersegment revenues
                     
Other revenues
            1,000          
 
                     
Total consolidated revenues
          $ 13,821,000          
 
                     
 
                       
Profit (loss)
                       
Total gross profit (loss) for reportable segments
            3,054,000          
Other gross profits (loss)
            9,000          
Selling, general and administrative expense
            (5,661,000 )        
Interest and Fuel Products financing expense
            (3,658,000 )        
Interest income
            8,000          
Elimination of intersegment profits
                     
Unallocated amounts
                       
Corporate headquarters expense
                     
Other expenses
                     
 
                     
 
                       
Consolidated income from continuing operations before income tax
          $ (6,248,000 )        
 
                     
 
                       
Assets
                       
Total assets for reportable segments
            48,130,000          
Other assets
            299,000          
Corporate headquarters
                     
Other unallocated amounts
                     
 
                     
Total consolidated assets
          $ 48,429,000          
 
                     

 

118


Table of Contents

RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE Q — SEGMENT INFORMATION — Continued
                         
    Transportation and              
Year ended December 31, 2007:   Terminaling     Oil and Gas     Totals  
 
                       
Revenues from external customers
    5,379,000       527,000       5,906,000  
Interest expense
    603,000       275,000       878,000  
Interest income
    15,000             15,000  
Depreciation and amortization
    1,033,000       96,000       1,129,000  
Segment gross profit (loss)
    1,009,000       137,000       1,146,000  
Segment assets
    13,881,000       35,368,000       49,249,000  
Segment liabilities
    6,391,000       21,604,000       27,995,000  
Expenditure for segment assets
    125,000             125,000  
 
                       
Reconciliation to Consolidated Amounts:
                       
 
                       
Revenues
                       
Total revenues for reportable segments
          $ 5,906,000          
Elimination of intersegment revenues
                     
 
                     
Total consolidated revenues
          $ 5,906,000          
 
                     
 
                       
Profit (loss)
                       
Total gross profit (loss) for reportable segments
            1,146,000          
Other gross profit (loss)
            (45,000 )        
Selling, general and administrative expense
            (5,076,000 )        
Interest and Fuel Products financing expense
            (885,000 )        
Interest income
            17,000          
Elimination of intersegment profits
                     
Unallocated amounts
                       
Corporate headquarters expense
                     
Other expenses
                     
 
                     
 
                       
Consolidated income from continuing operations before income tax
          $ (4,843,000 )        
 
                     
 
                       
Assets
                       
Total assets for reportable segments
            49,249,000          
Other assets
            161,000          
Corporate headquarters
                     
Other unallocated amounts
                     
 
                     
Total consolidated assets
          $ 49,410,000          
 
                     

 

119


Table of Contents

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
Item 9A(T). Controls and Procedures
Disclosure controls are procedures that are designed with the objective of ensuring that information required to be disclosed in our reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act), such as this Form 10-K, is reported in accordance with the rules of the SEC. Disclosure controls are also designed with the objective of ensuring that such information is accumulated appropriately and communicated to management, including the chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as appropriate, to allow for timely decisions regarding required disclosures.
As of the end of the period covered by this report, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our General Partner’s management, including our General Partner’s chief executive officer/chief financial officer and our General Partner’s controller, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e).
During 2007 and the first three months of 2008, our General Partners’ accounting department consisted of only the controller, an accounting clerk, who worked solely with our Fuel Products business, and the chief financial officer. In late 2006, our General Partner’s chief executive officer resigned and the chief financial officer assumed both the duties of the chief executive officer and the chief financial officer. Prior to his departure, the former chief executive officer provided some additional controls over financial reporting and accounting, although the internal control environment was still limited. Thus, the material weakness was compounded when the chief financial officer began functioning in a dual capacity beginning in 2006. In March 2008, the accounting clerk resigned. Such a limited number of financial and accounting personnel makes segregation of duties difficult.
In November 2007, we acquired the Oklahoma Assets and began accounting for the entities owning those assets and conducting those operations. We have only one accountant in Oklahoma who performs almost all accounting functions related to those assets and operations under the supervision of the chief financial officer until May 2008 and thereafter under the supervision of a newly hired (see following paragraph) assistant to the chief financial officer. Regional, which was acquired in July 2007, has sufficient accounting personnel to provide adequate internal controls over financial reporting for that subsidiary’s separate financial statements, but such personnel are not involved directly with consolidated financial reporting of the Company.
In May 2008, Penn Octane hired an assistant to the chief financial officer to provide additional assistance with internal accounting responsibilities and financial reporting related to the Oklahoma Assets and the entities owning those assets and conducting those operations. The newly hired assistant has previous oil and gas experience. In June 2008, our General Partner hired a vice president, who is primarily responsible for overseeing the operations of our oil and gas properties. Despite the additional personnel, our General Partner’s internal control environment is limited in such a manner that there is less than the desired internal control over financial reporting and accounting, except as it relates to Regional and therefore, a system of checks and balances is lacking. As a result of this material weakness, our management concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2008.

 

120


Table of Contents

Our General Partner continues to seek solutions to improve internal control over financial reporting. However because there are currently limited financial resources, our General Partner does not expect to immediately be able to take additional steps to improve its internal control over financial reporting. In particular, our General Partner may not be able to complete its intended goal of implementing a new accounting software system which would provide enhanced internal controls over financial reporting as well as to provide for multiple user access, timely access to accounting information and additional data security. Furthermore, our General Partner may be limited in its ability to attract and/or retain qualified employees.
During the year ended December 31, 2008, there were no other changes in our internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
We believe our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly present in all material respects our financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles.
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management of the General Partner is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Rio Vista’s internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). Rio Vista’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that:
   
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of Rio Vista;
 
   
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP, and that receipts and expenditures of Rio Vista are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of Rio Vista; and
 
   
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of Rio Vista’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. In addition, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
As required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, management assessed the effectiveness of Rio Vista’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework.
Based on its assessment and those criteria, management concluded that the Rio Vista’s disclosure controls and procedures over financial reporting were not effective as of December 31, 2008.
This annual report does not include an attestation report of Rio Vista’s registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by Rio Vista’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to temporary rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit Rio Vista to provide only management’s report in this annual report.
Item 9B. Other Information
None.

 

121


Table of Contents

PART III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
Rio Vista does not have directors, managers or officers. The board of managers and officers of Rio Vista GP LLC, the General Partner of Rio Vista (General Partner), a subsidiary of Penn Octane, perform all management functions for Rio Vista. Officers of the General Partner are appointed by its board of managers. The officers of the General Partner are paid directly by Penn Octane. Other than distributions attributable to its General Partner interest and incentive distribution rights, the General Partner does not receive a management fee or other compensation in connection with its management of Rio Vista’s business. Pursuant to the Omnibus Agreement, Penn Octane is entitled to receive reimbursement for all direct and indirect expenses it or the General Partner incurs on Rio Vista’s behalf, including general and administrative expenses. The indirect expenses include an allocation of the salaries and benefit costs related to employees (including executive officers) of Penn Octane who provide services to Rio Vista based on actual time spent performing services between Penn Octane and the General Partner. The General Partner has sole responsibility for conducting Rio Vista’s business and for managing Rio Vista’s operations.
Set forth below is certain information concerning the board of managers and executive officers of the General Partner:
Managers of Rio Vista GP LLC
The following table shows information for the board of managers of the General Partner. The members of the General Partner’s conflicts committee, audit committee and compensation committee are Murray J. Feiwell, Richard R. Canney and Douglas G. Manner.
                     
                Manager
Name of Manager       Age       Position with the General Partner   Since
 
Douglas G. Manner
    53     Manager and Chairman of the Board     2004  
 
Richard R. Canney
    54     Manager     2004  
 
Murray J. Feiwell
    71     Manager     2004  
 
Bruce I. Raben
    55     Manager     2008  
 
Nicholas J. Singer
    29     Manager     2008  
All managers hold office until their successors are duly elected and qualified or until their earlier resignation or removal.
Douglas G. Manner was elected as a member of the board of managers of the General Partner in August 2004. Mr. Manner was a former CEO of Westside Energy Corporation, an oil and gas company based in Texas until June 2008. Prior to joining Westside Energy Corporation, Mr. Manner was the Senior Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Kosmos Energy, LLC, a private oil and gas exploration company. Prior to Kosmos Energy, Mr. Manner served as President and Chief Operating Officer of White Stone Energy since August 2002. For the two years prior to joining White Stone Energy, Mr. Manner was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Mission Resources and Chairman of the Board of one of Mission’s predecessor companies, Bellwether Exploration. Prior to joining Bellwether, Mr. Manner was employed by Ryder Scott Petroleum Engineers for fifteen years and by Gulf Canada Resources Limited. Mr. Manner is a member of the board of directors of Blizzard Energy, Inc., an oil and gas company based in Alberta, Canada; Resolute Energy Inc., an oil and gas company based in Alberta, Canada and Cordero Energy Inc., an oil and gas company based in Alberta, Canada. Mr. Manner holds a B.S. degree in mechanical engineering from Rice University. In January 2008, Mr. Manner was also elected to the board of directors of Penn Octane Corporation, an affiliate of Rio Vista.

 

122


Table of Contents

Richard R. Canney was elected as a member of the board of managers of the General Partner in August 2004. Since 1997, Mr. Canney has been employed in the mergers and acquisitions and new ventures division of Shell Oil Company in Houston, Texas. Prior to joining Shell, Mr. Canney was a Director and Managing Partner of Corporacion Mercantil Internacional, S.A. de C.V. in Mexico City. From 1994 to 1996, Mr. Canney was a professor of finance at Instituto Tecnologico Autonomo de Mexico in Mexico City. Mr. Canney earned a Masters of Business Administration from the University of Chicago in June 1989. Mr. Canney is also Chairman of the Board of Penn Octane.
Murray J. Feiwell was elected as a member of the board of managers of the General Partner in August 2004. From 1986 until January 1, 2007, Mr. Feiwell served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Feiwell & Hannoy, P.C., a law firm located in Indianapolis, Indiana, that specializes in general civil practice, bankruptcy and creditors’ rights, real estate and foreclosure, general business and commercial law. From 1997 until January 1, 2007, Mr. Feiwell also served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Statewide Title Company, a title company located in Indianapolis, Indiana. Mr. Feiwell earned a J.D. from the University of Michigan in 1963. Mr. Feiwell retired from the practice of law on January 1, 2007.
Bruce I. Raben was elected as a member of the board of managers of the General Partner in January 2008. Mr. Raben is a founding Partner of Hudson Capital Advisors, LLC, a provider of investment banking advisory, placement and capital raising services formed in 2004. From 1979 until 1990, Mr. Raben worked at Drexel Burnham Lambert, an investment banking firm. From 1990 through 1995, he was an executive vice president with Jeffries & Company, an investment banking firm. From 1995 until 2002, Mr. Raben served as a managing director of CIBC World Markets, an investment banking firm. He continued to serve as a consultant to CIBC in 2003. Mr. Raben has previously served on the boards of numerous public and private companies. Mr. Raben currently serves as a member of the Board of Directors of Penn Octane.
Nicholas J. Singer was elected as a member of the board of managers of the General Partner in January 2008. Mr. Singer is a Co-Managing Member of Standard General Management LLC, an investment management firm based in New York City. Before joining Standard General Management LLC in 2007, Mr. Singer was a Founding Partner at Cyrus Capital Partners during 2005 and 2006. Prior to joining Cyrus Capital Partners, he was a senior research analyst and principal at Och-Ziff Capital Management from 2002 until 2005. Concurrent with his election to the board of managers of Rio Vista, Mr. Singer was also elected to the board of directors of Penn Octane.
Information Regarding The Board Of Managers
The business of Rio Vista is managed under the direction of the board of managers of Rio Vista GP LLC. The board conducts its business through meetings of the board and its committees. During 2008, the board held eight meetings, and the audit committee held four meetings. No member of the board attended less than 75% of the meetings of the board and committees of which he was a member.
The board of managers currently consists of five members, none of whom are members of the management of either Rio Vista GP LLC or Penn Octane. The board has determined that all of its managers, Messrs. Manner, Canney, Feiwell, Raben and Singer, meet the independence requirements under the rules of the NASDAQ National Market. As a result, although not required by NASDAQ rules applicable to limited partnerships, the majority of the board of managers is comprised of independent managers.
Communication with the Board of Managers
Unitholders and other interested parties may communicate with the board of managers or the Chairman of the Board of our General Partner by sending written communication in an envelope addressed to “Board of Managers” or “Chairman of the Board of Managers” in care of Company Secretary, Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., 1313 E. Alton Gloor Blvd., Suite J, Brownsville, TX 78526.

 

123


Table of Contents

Audit Committee
Our General Partner’s audit committee (Audit Committee) consists of Mr. Canney (Chairman), Mr. Feiwell, and Mr. Manner. Mr. Canney and Mr. Manner are considered “audit committee financial experts” as defined in applicable rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The board has determined that all three members of the audit committee meet the audit committee independence requirements under the rules of the NASDAQ National Market. The board of managers has adopted a written charter for the audit committee, which is available on Rio Vista’s website of http://www.riovistaenergy.com .
The audit committee reviews and reports to the board on various auditing and accounting matters, including the quality, objectivity and performance of Rio Vista’s internal and external accountants and auditors, the adequacy of its financial controls and the reliability of financial information reported to the public. The audit committee met four times in 2008.
Compensation Committee
Rio Vista GP LLC has a compensation committee composed of managers whom the board has determined to be independent consisting of Messrs. Canney, Feiwell and Manner. The board of managers has adopted a written charter for the compensation committee.
Conflicts Committee
Rio Vista’s partnership agreement provides for a conflicts committee composed of the managers whom the board of mangers of the General Partner has determined to be independent. The conflicts committee reviews and makes recommendations relating to potential conflicts of interest between Rio Vista and its subsidiaries, on the one hand, and the General Partner and its affiliates (including Penn Octane), on the other hand. The members of the conflicts committee are Messrs. Feiwell, Canney, and Manner.
Executive Officers of the General Partner
The names of the General Partner’s executive officer and certain information about him are set forth below:
                     
                Officer
Name of Executive Officer      Age      Position with General Partner   Since
 
                   
Ian T. Bothwell
    49     Acting Chief Executive Officer, Acting President, Vice President, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary     2003  
Ian T. Bothwell was elected Treasurer of the General Partner in 2003. In 2004, Mr. Bothwell was elected to serve as Chief Financial Officer, Vice President and Assistant Secretary of the General Partner. He was elected Vice President, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer, and Assistant Secretary of Penn Octane in October 1996. In November 2006, he was appointed Acting Chief Executive Officer and Acting President of the General Partner and of Penn Octane. He also served as a director of Penn Octane from March 1997 until July 2004. Since July 1993, Mr. Bothwell has been a principal of Bothwell & Asociados, S.A. de C.V., a Mexican management consulting and financial advisory company that was founded by Mr. Bothwell in 1993 and specializes in financing infrastructure projects in Mexico. Mr. Bothwell also serves as Chief Executive Officer of B & A Eco-Holdings, Inc., a company originally formed to purchase certain of Penn Octane’s compressed natural gas assets.
Code of Business Conduct
The General Partner has adopted a code of conduct that applies to the General Partner’s executive officers, including its principal executive officer, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer. This code charges the executive officers of the General Partner with responsibilities regarding honest and ethical conduct, the preparation and quality of the disclosures in the documents and reports Rio Vista files with the SEC and compliance with applicable laws, rules and regulations.

 

124


Table of Contents

Compliance under Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires the General Partner’s managers and executive officers, and persons who own more than 10% of a registered class of Rio Vista’s equity securities, to file initial reports of ownership and reports of changes in ownership with the SEC. Such persons are required by the SEC to furnish Rio Vista with copies of all Section 16(a) forms they file. Based solely on its review of the copies of Forms 3, 4 and 5 filed with the SEC, Rio Vista believes that all managers and officers of the General Partner and 10% unitholders of Rio Vista complied with such filing requirements.
Item 11. Executive Compensation.
Rio Vista does not have any directors, managers or officers. The board of managers and officers of the General Partner perform all management functions for Rio Vista. Officers of the General Partner are appointed by its board of managers. The officers of the General Partner currently hold the same positions as the officers of Penn Octane. All officers of the General Partner are paid directly by Penn Octane. Pursuant to the Omnibus Agreement, Penn Octane is entitled to receive reimbursement for all direct and indirect expenses it or the General Partner incurs on Rio Vista’s behalf, including general and administrative expenses. The direct expenses include the salaries and benefit costs related to employees of Penn Octane who provide services to Rio Vista. The General Partner has sole discretion in determining the amount of these expenses.
Compensation from Penn Octane
The table below sets forth a summary of compensation paid for the last three years to those employees of Penn Octane who served as the General Partner’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and its other three most highly compensated executive officers whose total annual salary and bonus exceeded $100,000 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The General Partner had only one such person. The General Partner’s executive officers are paid by Penn Octane. The services rendered by the executive officers to the General Partner are provided pursuant to the terms of the Omnibus Agreement for which Rio Vista pays Penn Octane for its allocable portion of general and administrative expenses incurred by Penn Octane, including expenses for services rendered by Penn Octane employees, for the benefit of Rio Vista.
Penn Octane’s compensation to executive management was administered by the compensation committee of the board of directors of Penn Octane. As of December 31, 2008, the compensation committee of Penn Octane was comprised of three directors, each of whom are outside directors. The compensation committee who reports to the board of directors of Penn Octane on all compensation matters concerning Penn Octane’s executive officers, including Penn Octane’s Chief Executive Officers, Chief Financial Officer and Penn Octane’s other executive officers (collectively, with the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, the Named Executive Officers). In determining annual compensation, including bonus, and other incentive compensation to be paid to the Named Executive Officers, the compensation committee considers several factors, including overall performance of the Named Executive Officers (measured in terms of financial performance of Penn Octane, opportunities provided to Penn Octane, responsibilities, quality of work and/or tenure with Penn Octane), and considers other factors, including retention and motivation of the Named Executive Officers and the overall financial condition of Penn Octane. The Named Executive Officers receive compensation in the form of cash and Penn Octane equity.
Compensation from Rio Vista
The compensation committee of the General Partner does not approve the cash or equity compensation paid by Penn Octane to the Named Executive Officers. The compensation committee of the General Partner has the ability to recommend the issuance of equity instruments of Rio Vista or other compensation to the Named Executive Officers in connection with their service to Rio Vista.

 

125


Table of Contents

Summary Compensation Table
The following table sets forth annual and all other compensation to Mr. Bothwell, our General Partner’s only executive officer in 2006, 2007 and 2008, for services rendered in all capacities to both Penn Octane and Rio Vista and its subsidiaries during each of the periods indicated. This information includes the dollar values of base salaries, bonus awards, the number of stock awards granted and certain other compensation, if any, whether paid or deferred. Rio Vista does not grant stock appreciation rights or other long-term compensation plans for employees.
                                                                         
                                                    Changes in              
                                                    Pension Value              
                                                    and Nonqualified              
                                            Non-Equity     Deferred              
                            Stock     Option     Incentive Plan     Compensation     All Other        
Name and Principal Position   Year     Salary ($)     Bonus ($)     Awards ($)     Awards ($)     Compensation ($)     Earnings ($)     Compensation ($)     Total ($)  
 
                                                                       
Ian T. Bothwell
    2008       220,000       156,000 (6)     237,000 (5)                             613,000  
Acting Chief Executive
    2007       219,000       58,000       93,000 (4)     309,000 (2)                 88,000   (3)     767,000  
Officer, Acting President,
    2006       180,000       70,000                                     250,000  
Chief Financial Officer, Vice-President, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary (1)
                                                                       
 
     
(1)  
Mr. Bothwell was appointed Acting President and Acting Chief Executive Officer of Penn Octane and the General Partner in November 2006.
 
(2)  
Represents warrants to purchase 180,000 shares of common stock of Penn Octane valued using SFAS 123(R) granted on June 29, 2007, exercise price of $0.70 and vest over 36 months.
 
(3)  
Represents warrants to purchase 100,000 common units of Rio Vista valued using SFAS 123(R) (see note J to the consolidated financial statements).
 
(4)  
Represents 8,334 common units granted.
 
(5)  
Represents 16,666 common units granted.
 
(6)  
Represents bonus accrued, not paid.
Neither Penn Octane nor the General Partner has an employment agreement with Mr. Bothwell.

 

126


Table of Contents

Outstanding Equity Awards at December 31, 2008
The following table sets forth the number of options outstanding as of December 31, 2008 for the General Partner’s sole executive officer. Mr. Bothwell did not hold any stock awards at December 31, 2008.
Option Awards
                                         
                    Equity Incentive              
    Number of     Number of     Plan Awards:              
    Securities     Securities     Number of              
    Underlying     Underlying     Securities              
    Unexercised     Unexercised     Underlying              
    Options     Options     Unexercised     Option     Option  
    Exercisable     Unexercisable     Unearned Options     Exercise     Expiration  
Name   (#)     (#)     (#)     Price ($)     Date  
 
Ian T. Bothwell
    3,128             1,872       8.38       2/14/2012  
Ian T. Bothwell
    11,890             8,110       7.36       3/20/2012  
Ian T. Bothwell
    50,000             25,000       11.21       6/28/2012  
Termination and Change in Control
Rio Vista’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan and the associated form of option agreement provide for acceleration of vesting of outstanding options in connection with the following events: a merger or consolidation in which Rio Vista and/or the General Partner is not the surviving entity; the sale, transfer or other disposition of at least 75% of the total assets of Rio Vista and/or the General Partner; the complete liquidation or dissolution of Rio Vista and/or the General Partner; a reverse merger in which Rio Vista and/or the General Partner is the surviving entity but (i) the Common Units outstanding immediately prior to such merger are converted or exchanged into other property by virtue of the merger, or (ii) in which securities possessing more than 50% of the total combined voting power of Rio Vista’s and/or the General Partner’s outstanding securities are transferred to persons different from those who held such securities immediately prior to such merger; the acquisition by any person of beneficial ownership of securities possessing more than 50% of the total combined voting power of Rio Vista’s and/or the General Partner’s outstanding securities; or a change in the composition of the board of managers of the General Partner over a period of 12 months or less such that a majority of the managers ceases, by reason of one or more contested elections for manager, to be comprised of individuals who are continuing managers (as defined in the form of option agreement).
In the event of a change in control, Mr. Bothwell’s unvested warrants would immediately vest. The exercise price of the warrants held Mr. Bothwell at December 31, 2008 were out of the money. Accordingly the benefit to Mr. Bothwell in the event of a change in control, would be zero.

 

127


Table of Contents

Compensation of Managers
The following table lists all compensation to managers during the year ended December 31, 2008.
Manager Compensation
                                                         
                                    Change in              
                                    Pension Value              
                                    and              
    Fee Earned                     Non-Equity     Nonqualified     All Other        
    or Paid in     Stock     Option     Incentive Plan     Deferred     Compen-        
    Cash     Awards     Awards     Com-pensation     Compensation     sation     Total  
Name   ($) (1)     ($)     ($)     ($)     Earnings     ($)     ($)  
 
Douglas G. Manner (4)
    50,000             15,000 (2)                       65,000  
Murray J. Feiwell (5)
    40,000             12,000 (3)                       52,000  
Richard R. Canney (6)
    40,000             12,000 (3)                       52,000  
Nicholas J. Singer
    39,000                                     39,000  
Bruce I. Raben
    39,000                                     39,000  
     
(1)  
Amounts represent fees paid for the quarter ended March 2008 and amounts earned for the quarters ended June 30, 2008, September 30, 2008 and December 31, 2008.
 
(2)  
Amounts represent warrants to purchase 6,250 common units of Rio Vista valued using SFAS 123(R).
 
(3)  
Amounts represent warrants to purchase 5,000 common units of Rio Vista valued using SFAS 123(R).
 
(4)  
14,375 warrants to purchase common units of Rio Vista as of December 31, 2008.
 
(5)  
12,500 warrants to purchase common units of Rio Vista as of December 31, 2008.
 
(6)  
13,750 warrants to purchase common units of Rio Vista as of December 31, 2008.
On April 10, 2007, the board of managers of the General Partner approved a form of Chairman Services Agreement and Manager Services Agreement. Pursuant to these agreements, the non-employee chairman of the board of managers of the General Partner receives annual cash compensation of $50,000, payable quarterly, and an annual grant of options to purchase 6,250 of our common units. Other non-employee managers of our General Partner receive annual cash compensation of $40,000, payable quarterly, and an annual grant of options to purchase 5,000 of our common units.

 

128


Table of Contents

Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Unitholder Matters.
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
The following table sets forth the number of common units of Rio Vista beneficially owned as of March 30, 2009 by each person known by Rio Vista to own beneficially more than 5% of the outstanding common units of Rio Vista (Common Units).
                 
    Amount and        
    Nature of        
    Beneficial        
Name and Address of Beneficial Owner   Ownership (1)     Percent of Class  
 
Jerome B. Richter
    603,722 (2)     21.85 %
335 Tomahawk Drive,
Palm Desert, CA 92211
               
 
               
TCW Asset Management Company
    400,000 (5)     12.65 %
865 South Figueroa Street, Suite 1800
Los Angeles, CA 90017
               
 
               
Swank Group, LLC, Swank Energy Income
    264,447 (3)     9.57 %
Advisors, L.P. and Jerry V. Swank
3300 Oak Lawn Ave., Suite 650,
Dallas, TX 75219
               
 
               
Standard General L.P.,
    217,493 (4)     7.87 %
Standard General Fund, L.P., Soohyung Kim
and Nicholas J. Singer
650 Madison Avenue, 26 th Floor
New York, NY 10022
               
 
               
Penn Octane Corporation
    197,628 (6)     7.15 %
77-530 Enfield Lane, Bldg D
Palm Desert, CA 92211
               

 

129


Table of Contents

 
     
(1)  
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and generally includes voting or investment power with respect to securities. Common units which are purchasable under warrants which are currently exercisable, or which will become exercisable no later than 60 days after March 30, 2009, are deemed outstanding for computing the percentage of the person holding such warrants but are not deemed outstanding for computing the percentage of any other person. Except as indicated by footnote and subject to community property laws where applicable, the persons named in the table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all common units shown as beneficially owned by them.
 
(2)  
Includes 4,730 common units owned by Mr. Richter’s spouse.
 
(3)  
Swank Group, LLC serves as the General Partner of Swank Energy Income Advisors, L.P. (Advisor) and may direct the Advisor to direct the vote and disposition of the 264,447 common units of Rio Vista held by the Cushing Fund, L.P and/or Swank MLP Conveyance Fund, L.P (collectively, Swank Funds). The Advisor is the General Partner of the Swank Funds. The principal of Swank Group, LLC, Mr. Jerry V. Swank, may direct the vote and disposition of the 264,447 common units of Rio Vista held by the Swank Funds.
 
(4)  
Standard General, Mr. Kim and Mr. Singer do not directly own any of the common units. By reason of the provisions of Rule 13d-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each of Standard General, Mr. Kim and Mr. Singer may be deemed to own beneficially 217,493 common units (constituting approximately 7.87% of the common units outstanding). Each of Standard General, Mr. Kim and Mr. Singer disclaim direct beneficial ownership of any of the securities.
 
(5)  
Under the terms of the Note Purchase Agreement, TCW has the right to convert the outstanding principal amount of the Demand Loan into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to the lesser of $13.33 per unit or 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. In addition, TCW has the right to convert any balance of the debt under the TCW Credit Facility other than the Demand Loan into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. The conversion rights of TCW as described above were formalized through the issuance of a warrant by Rio Vista (TCW Warrant). At March 30, 2009, the outstanding balance owing under the TCW Credit Facility was approximately $24,700,000 plus accrued interest from September 29, 2008. In connection with the execution of the TCW Waiver on February 28, 2009, TCW agreed that it would not exercise its right to purchase more than 400,000 common units of Rio Vista pursuant to the TCW Warrant (subject to adjustment as provided for in the TCW Warrant) without providing at least 62 days prior written notice to Rio Vista. As a result, the amount of beneficial ownership reflected herein is based on what TCW is able to exercise of the TCW Warrant as of March 30, 2009. The TCW Waiver expires on April 13, 2009. If the TCW Waiver is not extended and/or additional restrictions concerning the exercise of the TCW Warrant are not made, TCW would then be able to exercise up to full amount of the TCW Warrant. Based on an exercise price of $0.70 per common unit of Rio Visa (90% of the 20-day average trading price of Rio Vista preceding March 30, 2009) and the ability to convert $24,700,000 of indebtedness pursuant to the Note Purchase Agreement, TCW could acquire up to 35,285,714 common units of Rio Vista.
 
(6)  
Penn Octane Corporation is the owner of a 75% interest in the General Partner of Rio Vista (100% voting interest).

 

130


Table of Contents

The following table sets forth the number of common units of Rio Vista beneficially owned as of March 30, 2009 by each manager of the General Partner, each Named Executive Officer, and all managers and Named Executive Officers as a group. The address of each person in the table below is c/o Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., 1313 E. Alton Gloor Blvd., Suite J, Brownsville, Texas 78526.
                 
    Amount and Nature of        
    Beneficial        
Name of Beneficial Owner   Ownership (1)     Percent of Class  
 
               
Nicholas J. Singer
    217,493 (2)     7.87 %
Ian T. Bothwell
    118,488 (3)     4.17 %
Murray J. Feiwell
    20,635 (4)     *  
Douglas G. Manner
    19,375 (5)     *  
Richard R. Canney
    13,750 (6)     *  
Bruce I. Raben
    5,735       *  
All Managers and Named Executive Officers as a group (6 persons)
    395,476 (7)     13.72 %
 
     
*  
Less than 1%
 
(1)  
Beneficial ownership is determined in accordance with the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission and generally includes voting or investment power with respect to securities. Common units which are purchasable under warrants which are currently exercisable, or which will become exercisable no later than 60 days after March 30, 2009, are deemed outstanding for computing the percentage of the person holding such warrants but are not deemed outstanding for computing the percentage of any other person. Except as indicated by footnote and subject to community property laws where applicable, the persons named in the table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all common units shown as beneficially owned by them.
 
(2)  
Standard General, Mr. Kim and Mr. Singer do not directly own any of the common units. By reason of the provisions of Rule 13d-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each of Standard General, Mr. Kim and Mr. Singer may be deemed to own beneficially 217,493 common units (constituting approximately 7.87% of the common units outstanding). Each of Standard General, Mr. Kim and Mr. Singer disclaim direct beneficial ownership of any of the securities.
 
(3)  
Includes 79,876 common units issuable upon exercise of common unit purchase warrants exercisable within 60 days from March 30, 2009.
 
(4)  
Includes 12,500 common units issuable upon exercise of common unit purchase warrants exercisable within 60 days from March 30, 2009.
 
(5)  
Includes 14,375 common units issuable upon exercise of common unit purchase warrants exercisable within 60 days from March 30, 2009.
 
(6)  
Includes 13,750 common units issuable upon exercise of common unit purchase warrants exercisable within 60 days from March 30, 2009.
 
(7)  
Includes 120,501 common units issuable upon exercise of common unit purchase warrants exercisable within 60 days from March 30, 2009.

 

131


Table of Contents

Equity Compensation Plans
The following table provides information concerning Rio Vista’s equity compensation plans as of December 31, 2008 (2) .
                         
                    Number of securities  
            Weighted-average     remaining available for  
    Number of securities to     exercise price of     future issuance under  
    be issued upon exercise     outstanding options,     equity compensation  
    of outstanding options,     warrants and rights     plans (excluding securities  
    warrants and rights     (per unit)     reflected in column (a))  
Plan category   (a)     (b)     (c)  
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders
                 
 
                       
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders (1)
    181,667     $ 11.41       389,247  
 
                   
 
                       
Total
    181,667     $ 11.41       389,247  
 
                   
     
(1)  
Under the terms of the partnership agreement and applicable rules of the NASDAQ National Market, no approval by the unitholders of Rio Vista was required.
 
(2)  
On March 9, 2005, the board of managers of the General Partner approved the Rio Vista 2005 Equity Incentive Plan (2005 Plan). The 2005 Plan permits the grant of common unit options, common unit appreciation rights, restricted common units and phantom common units to any person who is an employee (including to any executive officer) or consultant of Rio Vista or the General Partner or any affiliate of Rio Vista or the General Partner. The 2005 Plan provides that each outside manager of the General Partner shall be granted a common unit option once each fiscal year for not more than 5,000 common units, in an equal amount as determined by the board of managers of the General Partner. The aggregate number of common units authorized for issuance as awards under the 2005 Plan is 750,000. The 2005 Plan shall remain available for the grant of awards until March 9, 2015, or such earlier date as the board of managers may determine. The 2005 Plan is administered by the compensation committee of the board of managers of the General Partner. In addition, the board of managers may exercise any authority of the compensation committee under the 2005 Plan. Under the terms of the partnership agreement and applicable rules of the NASDAQ National Market, no approval of the 2005 Plan by the common unitholders of Rio Vista was required.

 

132


Table of Contents

Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
General Partner Options
The General Partner of Rio Vista owns a 2% General Partner interest in Rio Vista. On July 1, 2006, Penn Octane’s 100% interest in the General Partner was decreased to 50% as a result of the exercise by Shore Capital LLC (Shore Capital), an affiliate of Mr. Richard Shore Jr., former president of Penn Octane and former chief executive officer of Rio Vista, and by Mr. Jerome B. Richter, of options to each acquire 25% of the General Partner (General Partner Options). The exercise price for each option was approximately $82,000. Mr. Richter’s option was amended to permit payment of the exercise price by surrender of Penn Octane common stock having a fair market value equal to the exercise price. Mr. Richter paid the exercise price for his option by surrender of 136,558 shares of Penn Octane common stock. In connection with the exercise of the General Partner Options, Penn Octane retained voting control of the General Partner pursuant to a voting agreement with each of Shore Capital and Mr. Richter. In December 2006, Shore Capital transferred its interest in the General Partner to Shore Trading LLC, an affiliated entity (Shore Trading). Shore Trading is also a party to the voting agreement with Penn Octane.
On February 6, 2007, Penn Octane entered into a purchase option agreement with Shore Trading that provided Penn Octane with the option to purchase the 25% interest in the General Partner held by Shore Trading. Penn Octane exercised its option on July 19, 2007 and acquired the 25% interest for a total cost of $1,400,000.
Consulting Agreement
Rio Vista entered into a consulting agreement (Consulting Agreement) with JBR Capital Resources, Inc. (JBR Capital) regarding consulting services to be rendered by JBR Capital to Rio Vista and to Penn Octane. JBR Capital is controlled by Mr. Richter. The provisions of the Consulting Agreement are effective as of November 15, 2006 (Effective Date). Pursuant to the Consulting Agreement, JBR Capital has agreed to assist Rio Vista and Penn Octane with the potential acquisition and disposition of assets and with other transactions involving Rio Vista or Penn Octane. In exchange for these services, Rio Vista has agreed to pay JBR Capital a fee based on approved services rendered by JBR Capital plus a fee based on the net proceeds to Rio Vista resulting from a sale of assets to a third party introduced to Rio Vista by JBR Capital. For the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, Rio Vista expensed approximately $317,000 and $325,000, respectively, in connection with the Consulting Agreement. In addition, in connection with the Regional transaction, JBR Capital earned a fee of $180,000 which fee was expensed. The initial term of the Consulting Agreement was six months and continues to renew for additional six-month terms unless terminated by either party at least 30 days before the end of each term.
Private Placement of Common Units
On November 29, 2007, Rio Vista and Rio Vista GP LLC (Rio Vista GP), entered into a Unit Purchase Agreement with Standard General Fund L.P., Credit Suisse Management LLC and Structured Finance Americas LLC (collectively, Purchasers) dated effective as of November 29, 2007 (the Unit Purchase Agreement). Pursuant to the terms of the Unit Purchase Agreement, Rio Vista agreed to sell, and the Purchasers agreed to purchase, a total of 355,556 common units of Rio Vista (Common Units) at a price of $11.25 per share in a private placement exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (Securities Act). The total purchase price of the Common Units is $4,000,000. Rio Vista agreed to pay expenses of counsel to the Purchasers in an amount not to exceed $100,000. Rio Vista used the net proceeds from the sale of the Common Units for general working capital purposes, including repayment of indebtedness. Rio Vista agreed not to offer or sell any of its equity securities (including equity securities of subsidiaries) for a period of 12 months following the closing date without first offering such securities to the Purchasers, which shall have the right to purchase up to 30% of such securities. The Unit Purchase Agreement contains customary representations, warranties and covenants of the parties and is subject to customary conditions to closing, including approval for listing of the Common Units on the NASDAQ National Market.

 

133


Table of Contents

On November 19, 2007, Rio Vista Penny LLC (Rio Vista Penny), an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Vista, entered into a Note Purchase Agreement, Promissory Notes, Security Agreement, Common Unit Purchase Warrant and related agreements with TCW Asset Management Company (TAMCO) as agent and TCW Energy Fund X investors as holders (the TCW Noteholders) (TAMCO and the TCW Noteholders collectively, TCW) in connection with a first lien senior credit facility (the TCW Credit Facility) between TCW and Rio Vista Penny. The purpose of the TCW Credit Facility was to provide financing of the acquisition of certain of the assets of GM Oil Properties, Inc., an Oklahoma corporation (GM Oil) and assets of Penny Petroleum Corporation, an Oklahoma corporation (Penny Petroleum) by Rio Vista Penny and the acquisition of the membership interests of GO, by Rio Vista GO LLC (Rio Vista GO), an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Rio Vista. The assets of GM Oil, Penny Petroleum and GO are collectively referred to as the “Oklahoma assets.”
Under the terms of the Note Purchase Agreement, TCW has the right to convert the outstanding principal amount of the Demand Loan into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to the lesser of $13.33 per unit or 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. In addition, TCW has the right to convert any balance of the debt under the TCW Credit Facility other than the Demand Loan into common units of Rio Vista at a price equal to 90% of the 20-day average trading price of such units preceding the election to convert. The conversion rights of TCW as described above were formalized through the issuance of a warrant by Rio Vista (TCW Warrant). At December 31, 2008, the outstanding balance owing under the TCW Credit Facility was approximately $24,700,000 plus accrued interest since September 29, 2008.
Sale — Purchase of Rio Vista Common Units
At meetings held on May 30, 2008, in connection with the previously disclosed discussions between Rio Vista and the NASDAQ National Market (NASDAQ) regarding Rio Vista’s compliance with NASDAQ’s Marketplace Rule 4450(a)(3) on capital adequacy, the Board of Managers of the General Partner authorized the issuance and sale by Rio Vista of 197,628 of Rio Vista’s common units to Penn Octane at $10.12 per unit, and Penn Octane’s board authorized its purchase of such Rio Vista units at that price, for an aggregate price of approximately $2,000,000. Thereafter, Rio Vista’s officers continued to formulate a plan of ongoing compliance with Rule 4450(a)(3) on terms satisfactory to NASDAQ, and notified NASDAQ regarding the proposed issuance of its units. Rio Vista also filed a listing of additional units notification with NASDAQ (LAS) based on its intention to go forward with the proposed purchase and sale. Following further discussions with NASDAQ, at board meetings on July 15, 2008, the Board of Managers of the General Partner and the Board of Directors of Penn Octane confirmed their desire to implement promptly the previously authorized purchase and sale, and the companies agreed to complete the transaction, subject to NASDAQ approval of Rio Vista’s LAS. On July 23, 2008, after the period of review for the LAS passed, the common units were issued to Penn Octane.
Loans to Rio Vista
As of July 23, 2008, Rio Vista offset $2,000,000 owed to Penn Octane against the amounts owed by Penn Octane to acquire Rio Vista common units (see above). In addition, Penn Octane has loaned additional amounts to Rio Vista for the sole purpose of allowing Rio Vista to fund ongoing operations and the June 2008 quarterly distribution.
In connection with the Third Amendment of the RZB Note, Rio Vista was required to repay $1,000,000 of the RZB Note. Effective January 1, 2009, Penn Octane loaned Rio Vista $1,000,000 of its cash collateral held by RZB for the purpose of funding Rio Vista’s obligation to make the required payment described above.
Omnibus Agreement with Penn Octane
Pursuant to the Omnibus Agreement, Penn Octane is entitled to reimbursement for all direct and indirect expenses it or the General Partner incurs on Rio Vista’s behalf, including general and administrative expenses.

 

134


Table of Contents

Under the Omnibus Agreement, Penn Octane provides the General Partner with corporate staff and support services in connection with its management and operation of the assets of Rio Vista. These services include management and centralized corporate functions, such as accounting, treasury, engineering, information technology, insurance, administration of employee benefit and incentive compensation plans and other corporate services. Penn Octane is reimbursed for the costs and expenses it incurs in rendering these services using a percentage calculated based on the time spent by Penn Octane’s employees on Rio Vista’s business. Each Penn Octane employee involved with Rio Vista activities accounts for his or her time each month related to Rio Vista as a percentage of his or her total time worked. The General Partner calculates the general and administrative expenses that are allocated to Rio Vista using the cumulative percentage. Administrative and general expenses directly associated with providing services to Rio Vista (such as legal and accounting services) are not included in the above allocation of indirect costs; such expenses are charged directly to Rio Vista.
Distributions
All Rio Vista unitholders have the right to receive distributions from Rio Vista of “available cash” as defined in the partnership agreement in an amount equal to at least the minimum distribution of $0.25 per quarter per unit, plus any arrearages in the payment of the minimum quarterly distribution on the units from prior quarters subject to any reserves determined by the General Partner. The General Partner has a right to receive a distribution corresponding to its 2% General Partner interest and its incentive distribution rights. During 2008, Rio Vista made $39,103 of distributions to the General Partner.
Indemnification Agreement
On April 10, 2007, the Board of Managers of the General Partner approved a form of Indemnification Agreement for the managers and officers of the General Partner. The agreement provides for indemnification against liabilities in the event of legal proceedings brought by a third party or by or in the right of the General Partner. The agreement also provides for advancement of expenses to an indemnified manager or officer.
Manager Independence
The board of managers is currently composed of five members, none of whom are members of the management of either Rio Vista GP LLC or Penn Octane. The board has determined that all five of its managers, Messrs. Canney, Feiwell, Raben, Singer and Manner, meet the independence requirements under the rules of the NASDAQ National Market. As a result, although not required by NASDAQ rules applicable to limited partnerships, the majority of the board of managers is comprised of independent managers.
The Company’s audit committee (Audit Committee) consists of Mr. Canney (Chairman), Mr. Feiwell, and Mr. Manner. The board has determined that all three members of the audit committee meet the audit committee independence requirements under the rules of the NASDAQ Stock Market.

 

135


Table of Contents

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
Rio Vista has been billed as follows for the professional services of Burton McCumber & Cortez, L.L.P. rendered during the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008:
                 
    2007     2008  
 
               
Audit Fees
  $ 540,000     $ 630,000  
 
               
Audit — Related Fees
  $ 118,000 (1)   $  
 
               
Tax Fees
  $ 44,000 (2)   $ 89,000  
 
               
All Other Fees (3)
  $ 4,000     $ 9,000  
 
     
(1)  
Represents fees related to the LPG asset sale.
 
(2)  
Represents fees related to the Mexican subsidiaries.
 
(3)  
Represents fees billed for tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning services.
The General Partner’s audit committee approves the engagement of our independent auditor to perform audit-related services. The audit committee does not formally approve specific amounts to be spent on non-audit related services which in the aggregate do not exceed amounts to be spent on audit-related services. In determining the reasonableness of audit fees, the audit committee considers historical amounts paid and the scope of services to be performed. The audit committee has determined that the professional services rendered by our accountants are compatible with maintaining the principal accountant’s independence. The audit committee gave prior approval to all audit services in 2007 and 2008.

 

136


Table of Contents

PART IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
  a.  
Financial Statements and Financial Statement Schedules.
The following documents are filed as part of this report:
  (1)   Consolidated Financial Statements:
 
      Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P.
 
Report of Independent Public Accounting Firm
 
Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2007 and 2008
 
Consolidated Statements of Operations for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2008
 
Consolidated Statement of Partners’ Capital for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2008
 
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2008
 
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
  (2)   Financial Statement Schedules:
 
      Schedule II — Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
b. Exhibits.

 

137


Table of Contents

The following Exhibits are incorporated by reference to previously filed reports, as noted:
         
Exhibit No.
       
 
  2.1    
Distribution Agreement, dated September 16, 2004, by and among Penn Octane Corporation, Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and its Subsidiaries. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.2    
Amended and Restated Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated August 15, 2006, by and between Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. and TransMontaigne Product Services Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006, filed on November 20, 2006, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.3    
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated July 27, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., Regional Enterprises, Inc., Regional Enterprizes, Inc. (also known as Regional Enterprises, Inc.); the shareholders; and W. Gary Farrar, Jr.. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.4    
Articles of Merger of Regional Enterprises, Inc. and Regional Enterprizes, Inc., dated July 27 2007. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.5    
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated October 1, 2007, by and between Rio Vista Penny LLC and G M Oil Properties, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 26, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.6    
Amendment to Asset Purchase Agreement, dated November 16, 2007, by and between Rio Vista Penny LLC and G M Oil Properties, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 26, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.7    
Asset Purchase Agreement, dated as of October 1, 2007, by and between Rio Vista Penny LLC, Penny Petroleum Corporation and Gary Moores. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 26, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.8    
Amendment to Asset Purchase Agreement, dated October 25, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., Rio Vista Penny LLC, Penny Petroleum Corporation and Gary Moores. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 26, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.9    
Second Amendment to Asset Purchase Agreement, dated November 16, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., Rio Vista Penny LLC, Penny Petroleum Corporation and Gary Moores. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 26, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.10    
Stock Purchase Agreement, dated October 2, 2007, by and between Rio Vista GO, GO LLC, Outback Production Inc., Gary Moores and Bill Wood. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 26, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.11    
Amendment to Membership Interest Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated November 16, 2007, by and between Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., Rio Vista GO LLC, Outback Production Inc., GO LLC, and Gary Moores and Bill Wood. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on November 26, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  2.12    
Purchase and Sale Agreement, dated December 26, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P., Penn Octane International, LLC, TMOC Corp., TLP MEX L.L.C. and RAZORBACK L.L.C. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on January 3, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).

 

138


Table of Contents

         
Exhibit No.
       
 
  3.1    
Certificate of Limited Partnership of Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., filed July 10, 2003. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  3.2    
Amendment of Certificate of Limited Partnership of Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., filed September 17, 2003. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, filed on November 22, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  3.3    
First Amended and Restated Limited Partnership Agreement of Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., dated September 16, 2004. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  3.4    
First Amendment to the First Amended and Restated Agreement of Limited Partnership of Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., dated October 26, 2005. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, filed on November 21, 2005, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  3.5    
Certificate of Formation of Rio Vista GP LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  3.6    
Rio Vista GP LLC Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement, dated September 16, 2004. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  3.7    
First Amendment to Amended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of Rio Vista GP LLC, dated October 2, 2006. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, filed on April 6, 2006, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  4.1    
Specimen Unit Certificate for Common Units. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  4.2    
Forms of Warrants to Purchase Common Units to be issued to Penn Octane warrant holders. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.1    
Contribution, Conveyance and Assumption Agreement, dated September 16, 2004, by and among Penn Octane Corporation, Rio Vista GP LLC, Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., Rio Vista Operating GP LLC and Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.2    
Omnibus Agreement, dated September 16, 2004, by and among Penn Octane Corporation, Rio Vista GP LLC, Rio Vista Energy Partners, L.P. and Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.3    
Amendment No. 1 to Omnibus Agreement, dated September 16, 2004, by and among Penn Octane Corporation, Rio Vista GP LLC, Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, filed on November 22, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.4    
Purchase Contract, dated October 1, 2004, by and between Penn Octane Corporation and Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).

 

139


Table of Contents

         
Exhibit No.
       
 
  10.5    
Form of Unit Purchase Option between Penn Octane Corporation and Shore Capital LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.6    
Form of Unit Purchase Option between Penn Octane Corporation and Jerome B. Richter. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.7    
Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. Unit Option Agreement, dated July 10, 2003, granted to Shore Capital LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.8    
Form of RVGP Voting Agreement by and among Rio Vista GP LLC, Penn Octane Corporation and the members of Rio Vista GP LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Registration Statement on Form 10, filed August 26, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.9    
Conveyance Agreement, dated September 30, 2004 from Penn Octane Corporation in favor of Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, filed on November 22, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.10    
Guaranty & Agreement between Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and RZB Finance LLC, dated September 15, 2004. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, filed on November 22, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.11    
Guaranty & Agreement, dated September 15, 2004, between Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. and RZB Finance LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, filed on November 22, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.12    
General Security Agreement, dated September 15, 2004, between Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and RZB Finance LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, filed on November 22, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.13    
General Security Agreement, dated September 15, 2004, between Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. and RZB Finance LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, filed on November 22, 2004, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.14 *  
Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. 2005 Equity Incentive Plan (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004, filed on April 12, 2005, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.15    
Promissory Note, dated August 15, 2005, between Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. and TransMontaigne Product Services Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, filed on August 19, 2005, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.16    
Security Agreement, dated August 15, 2005, between Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. and TransMontaigne Product Services Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, filed on August 19, 2005, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.17    
Amended and Restated Consulting Agreement, dated November 15, 2005, by and among Penn Octane Corporation, Rio Vista Energy Partners and Jerome B. Richter. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005, filed on November 21, 2005, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.18    
Unit Purchase Option, dated February 6, 2007, between Shore Trading LLC and Penn Octane Corporation. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on April 17, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).

 

140


Table of Contents

         
Exhibit No.
       
 
  10.19    
Consent to Transfer of Units, Acknowledgement of Representation, and Waiver of Conflicts, dated February 6, 2007, by and among Penn Octane Corporation, Rio Vista GP LLC and Shore Trading LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on April 17, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.20    
Consulting Agreement entered into on March 5, 2007, with an effective date of November 15, 2006 by and between Penn Octane Corporation and Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and JBR Capital Resources, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on April 17, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.21    
Letter Agreement, dated March 5, 2007, by and between Penn Octane Corporation, Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and JBR Capital Resources, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on April 17, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.22 *  
Form of Rio Vista GP LLC Chairman Services Agreement. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on April 17, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.23 *  
Form of Rio Vista GP LLC Managers Services Agreement. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on April 17, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.24 *  
Form of Rio Vista GP LLC Manager and Officer Indemnification Agreement. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on April 17, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.25 *  
Form of Nonqualified Unit Option Agreement under the 2005 Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. Equity Incentive Plan. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, filed on April 17, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.26    
Consulting Agreement, dated November 1, 2006, by and among Penn Octane Corporation And Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and Ricardo Rodriguez Canney. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.27    
Consulting Agreement, dated July 2, 2007, by and between Rio Vista Energy Partners, L.P. and CEOcast, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).

 

141


Table of Contents

         
Exhibit No.
       
 
  10.28    
Employment and Non-Competition Agreement, dated July 27, 2007, by and between Regional Enterprises, Inc. and W. Gary Farrar, III. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.29    
Escrow Agreement, dated July 27, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., Regional Enterprises, Inc., W. Gary Farrar, Jr., and First Capital Bank. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.30    
Loan Agreement, dated July 26, 2007, by and between Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., and RZB Finance LLC (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.31    
Guaranty and Agreement, dated July 26, 2007, by and between Regional Enterprises, Inc., and RZB Finance LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.32    
Guaranty and Agreement, dated July 26, 2007, by and between Penn Octane Corporation, and RZB Finance LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.33    
Guaranty and Agreement, dated July 26, 2007, by and between Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. and RZB Finance LLC Dated As Of July 26, 2007. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.34    
$5,000,000 Promissory Note, dated July 26, 2007, issued by Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. to RZB Finance LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.35    
General Security Agreement, dated July 26, 2007, by and between RZB Finance LLC and Regional Enterprises, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.36    
Pledge Agreement, dated July 26, 2007, by and between: Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., and RZB Finance LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.37    
First Amendment to Line Letter, dated July 26, 2007, by and between RZB Finance LLC and Penn Octane Corporation. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.38    
Debt Assumption Agreement, dated July 26, 2007, by and between Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and Regional Enterprises, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.39    
$5,000,000 Debt Assumption Note, dated July 26, 2007, issued by Regional Enterprises, Inc. to Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.40    
$2,500,000 Promissory Note, dated July 26, 2007, issued by Regional Enterprises, Inc. to Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.41    
Environmental Indemnity Agreement, dated July 26, 2007, by and between Regional Enterprises, Inc. and RZB Finance LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).

 

142


Table of Contents

         
Exhibit No.
       
 
  10.42    
Reaffirmation of Security Agreements, dated July 26, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., Penn Octane Corporation Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P., and RZB Finance LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, filed on August 20, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.43    
Binding Letter of Intent, dated September 12, 2007, by and between TransMontaigne Partners L.P. and Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, filed on November 19, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.44    
Restated and Amended Promissory Note, dated September 12, 2007, by and between Rio Vista Operating Partnership L.P. and TransMontaigne Product Services, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, filed on November 19, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.45    
Restated and Amended Security Agreement, dated September 12, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Operating Partnership, L.P., TransMontaigne Product Services, Inc. and TransMontaigne Partners L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, filed on November 19, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.46    
First Priority Equity Interest Pledge Agreement, dated September 12, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Operating Partnership, L.P., Penn Octane International, LLC, TransMontaigne Product Services, Inc. and TransMontaigne Partners L.P., with the acknowledgment of Penn Octane de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, filed on November 19, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.47    
First Priority Equity Interest Pledge Agreement, dated September 12, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Operating Partnership, L.P., Penn Octane International, LLC, TransMontaigne Product Services, Inc. and TransMontaigne Partners L.P., with the acknowledgment of Termatsal, S. de R.L. de C.V. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, filed on November 19, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.48    
Assignment Agreement, dated September 12, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Operating Partnership, L.P., TransMontaigne Partners L.P. and TransMontaigne Product Services, Inc. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, filed on November 19, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.49    
Unit Purchase Agreement, dated November 29, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., Rio Vista GP LLC, Standard General Fund L.P., Credit Suisse Management LLC and Structured Finance Americas LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on December 4, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.50    
Registration Rights Agreement, dated December 3, 2007, by and among Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., Rio Vista GP LLC, Standard General Fund L.P., Credit Suisse Management LLC and Structured Finance Americas LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Current Report on Form 8-K, filed on December 4, 2007, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.51    
Note Purchase Agreement between Rio Vista Penny LLC, TCW Asset Management Company and TCW Energy Fund X Investors dated November 19, 2007. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, filed on April 15, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.52    
Guaranty made as of November 19, 2007 by Rio Vista Eco LLC, Rio Vista GO LLC, GO LLC and MV Pipeline Company in favor of TCW Asset Management Company as administrative agent for Holders. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, filed on April 15, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).

 

143


Table of Contents

         
Exhibit No.
       
 
  10.53    
Security Agreement dated as of November 19, 2007 by Rio Vista Penny LLC in favor of TCW Asset Management Company, as administrative agent. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, filed on April 15, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.54    
Assumption Agreement dated November 19, 2007 by and among GM Oil Properties, Inc., Rio Vista Penny LLC, TCW Asset Management Company, as administrative agent and the holders party to the Note Purchase Agreement. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, filed on April 15, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.55    
Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. Common Unit Purchase Warrant issued to TCW Energy Funds X Holdings, L.P. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, filed on April 15, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.56    
Promissory note dated November 19, 2007 issued by Rio Vista to Gary Moores. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, filed on April 15, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.57    
First Amendment to Note Purchase Agreement dated as of September 29, 2008 by and among Rio Vista Penny LLC, TCW Asset Management Company, and the Holders party to the Original Note Purchase Agreement. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, filed on November 17, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.58    
Amended and Restated Management Services Agreement, dated and effective as of September 29, 2008, is made by and among Rio Vista Operating LLC, Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., and Rio Vista Penny LLC. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, filed on November 17, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).
       
 
  10.59    
Promissory Note dated April 15, 2008 between Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P. and Jerome B. Richter. (Incorporated by reference to Rio Vista’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2008, filed on November 17, 2008, SEC File No. 000-50394).

 

144


Table of Contents

The following Exhibits are filed as part of this report:
         
Exhibit No.
       
 
  10.60    
Amendment to Promissory note dated June 27, 2008 issued by Rio Vista to Gary Moores.
       
 
  10.61    
Second Amendment to Promissory note dated January 20, 2009 issued by Rio Vista to Gary Moores.
       
 
  10.62    
Second Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of July 2008 between RZB Finance LLC and Rio Vista.
       
 
  10.63    
Third Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of December 2008 between RZB Finance LLC and Rio Vista.
       
 
  10.64    
Fourth Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of February 28, 2009 between RZB Finance LLC and Rio Vista.
       
 
  10.65    
Fifth Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of March 31, 2009 between RZB Finance LLC and Rio Vista.
       
 
  10.66    
Letter agreement to extend payments and other requirements pursuant to Note Purchase Agreement dated December 30, 2008 between Rio Vista Penny LLC and TCW Asset Management Company.
       
 
  10.67    
Letter agreement to extend payments and other requirements pursuant to Note Purchase Agreement dated February 28, 2009 between Rio Vista Penny LLC and TCW Asset Management Company.
       
 
  10.68    
Letter agreement to extend payments and other requirements pursuant to Note Purchase Agreement dated March 23, 2009 between Rio Vista Penny LLC and TCW Asset Management Company.
       
 
  21    
Subsidiaries of the Registrant
       
 
  23.1    
Consent of Burton McCumber & Cortez, L.L.P.
       
 
  23.2    
Consent of Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc.
       
 
  31.1    
Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) / 15d — 14(a) of the Exchange Act
       
 
  31.2    
Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) / 15d — 14(a) of the Exchange Act
       
 
  32    
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes — Oxley Act of 2002
     
*  
indicates management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.
All of the Exhibits are available from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov . In addition, Rio Vista will furnish a copy of any Exhibit upon payment of a fee (based on the estimated actual cost which shall be determined at the time of the request) together with a request addressed to Ian T. Bothwell, Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., 1313 E. Alton Gloor Blvd., Suite J, Brownsville, TX 78526.

 

145


Table of Contents

Schedule II
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
                                         
    Balance at     Charged to                      
    Beginning of     Costs and     Charged to             Balance at End  
Description   Period     Expenses     Other Accounts     Deductions     of Period  
 
                                       
Year ended December 31, 2008
                                       
 
                                       
Allowance for doubtful accounts
  $     $     $     $     $  
 
                                       
Year ended December 31, 2007
                                       
 
                                       
Allowance for doubtful accounts
  $     $     $     $     $  

 

146


Table of Contents

SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
             
    RIO VISTA ENERGY PARTNERS L.P.    
 
           
 
  By:   RIO VISTA GP LLC, GENERAL PARTNER    
 
           
April 14, 2009
  By:   /s/ Ian T. Bothwell
 
Ian T. Bothwell
   
 
      Acting Chief Executive Officer, Acting    
 
      President, Vice-President, Chief Financial    
 
      Officer, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary    
 
      (Principal, Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer)    
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated. Each capacity refers to the signer’s position with Rio Vista GP LLC, the General Partner of the registrant.
         
Signature   Title   Date
 
       
/s/ Ian T. Bothwell
 
  Ian T. Bothwell
Acting Chief Executive Officer, Acting President, Vice-President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Assistant Secretary (Principal, Executive, Financial and Accounting Officer)
  April 14, 2009
 
       
/s/ Richard R. Canney
 
  Richard R. Canney Manager    April 14, 2009
 
       
/s/ Murray J. Feiwell
 
  Murray J. Feiwell Manager    April 14, 2009
 
       
/s/ Douglas G. Manner
 
  Douglas G. Manner Manager    April 14, 2009
 
       
/s/ Nicholas J. Singer
 
  Nicholas J. Singer Manager    April 14, 2009
 
       
/s/ Bruce I. Raben
 
  Bruce I. Raben Manager    April 14, 2009

 

147


Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX
         
Exhibit No.
       
 
  10.60    
Amendment to Promissory note dated June 27, 2008 issued by Rio Vista to Gary Moores.
       
 
  10.61    
Second Amendment to Promissory note dated January 20, 2009 issued by Rio Vista to Gary Moores.
       
 
  10.62    
Second Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of July 2008 between RZB Finance LLC and Rio Vista.
       
 
  10.63    
Third Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of December 2008 between RZB Finance LLC and Rio Vista.
       
 
  10.64    
Fourth Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of February 28, 2009 between RZB Finance LLC and Rio Vista.
       
 
  10.65    
Fifth Amendment to Loan Agreement dated as of March 31, 2009 between RZB Finance LLC and Rio Vista.
       
 
  10.66    
Letter agreement to extend payments and other requirements pursuant to Note Purchase Agreement dated December 30, 2008 between Rio Vista Penny LLC and TCW Asset Management Company.
       
 
  10.67    
Letter agreement to extend payments and other requirements pursuant to Note Purchase Agreement dated February 28, 2009 between Rio Vista Penny LLC and TCW Asset Management Company.
       
 
  10.68    
Letter agreement to extend payments and other requirements pursuant to Note Purchase Agreement dated March 23, 2009 between Rio Vista Penny LLC and TCW Asset Management Company.
       
 
  21    
Subsidiaries of the Registrant
       
 
  23.1    
Consent of Burton McCumber & Cortez, L.L.P.
       
 
  23.2    
Consent of Lee Keeling and Associates, Inc.
       
 
  31.1    
Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) / 15d — 14(a) of the Exchange Act
       
 
  31.2    
Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) / 15d — 14(a) of the Exchange Act
       
 
  32    
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes — Oxley Act of 2002
     
*  
indicates management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

 

148

Rio Vista Energy Partners (NASDAQ:RVEP)
Historical Stock Chart
From Apr 2024 to May 2024 Click Here for more Rio Vista Energy Partners Charts.
Rio Vista Energy Partners (NASDAQ:RVEP)
Historical Stock Chart
From May 2023 to May 2024 Click Here for more Rio Vista Energy Partners Charts.