Smart Sand (SND) Risk Analysis

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, be the sole and exclusive forum for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers, employees or agents to us or our stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law (the "DGCL"), our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our bylaws, or (iv) any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine, in each such case subject to such Court of Chancery having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants therein. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our capital stock will be deemed to have notice of, and consented to, the provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation described in the preceding sentence. This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder's ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, employees or agents, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and such persons. Alternatively, if a court were to find these provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation inapplicable to, or unenforceable in respect of, one or more of the specified types of actions or proceedings, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Although we recently paid a cash dividend, the timing, declaration, amount and payment of future dividends to stockholders will fall within the discretion of our board of directors. The board's decisions regarding the payment of dividends will depend on many factors, such as our financial condition, earnings, capital requirements, restrictions in the FCB ABL Credit Facility, industry practice, legal requirements, regulatory constraints and other factors that the board deems relevant. Our ability to pay dividends and repurchase shares under our share repurchase program will depend on our ongoing ability to generate cash from operations and access capital markets. We cannot guarantee that we will pay any dividend or make any repurchases of our common stock in the future.

We are required to comply with certain provisions of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Section 404 requires that we document and test our internal control over financial reporting and issue management's assessment of our internal control over financial reporting. This section also requires that our independent registered public accounting firm opine on those internal controls upon our public float exceeding a certain threshold as set forth in the SEC rules. We are evaluating our existing controls against the standards adopted by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. During the course of our ongoing evaluation and integration of the internal control over financial reporting, we may identify areas requiring improvement, and we may have to design enhanced processes and controls to address issues identified through this review. We believe that the out-of-pocket costs, diversion of management's attention from running the day-to-day operations and operational changes caused by the need to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act could be significant. If the time and costs associated with such compliance exceed our current expectations, our results of operations could be adversely affected. If we fail to comply with the requirements of Section 404 or if we or our independent registered public accounting firm identify and report such material weaknesses, the accuracy and timeliness of the filing of our annual and quarterly reports may be materially adversely affected and could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the stock price of our common stock. In addition, a material weakness in the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting could result in an increased chance of fraud and the loss of customers, reduce our ability to obtain financing and require additional expenditures to comply with these requirements, each of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We hold numerous governmental, environmental, mining and other permits, water rights and approvals authorizing operations at our mining and operating facilities. For our extraction and processing in Wisconsin and Illinois, we must obtain permits from various federal, tribal, state and local authorities. For example, at the federal level, a Mine Identification Request (MSHA Form 7000-51) must be filed and obtained before mining commences. If wetlands are impacted, a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is required. At the state level, a series of permits are required related to air quality, wetlands, water quality (waste water, storm water), grading permits, protected species, archeological assessments and high capacity wells in addition to others depending upon site specific factors and operational detail. At the local level, zoning, building, storm water, erosion control, wellhead protection, road usage and access are all regulated and require permitting to some degree. A non-metallic mining reclamation permit is required. Certain permits or approvals may also require consultation with federal, state, tribal, or local authorities. A decision by a governmental agency or other third party to deny or delay issuing a new or renewed permit or approval, or to revoke or substantially modify an existing permit or approval, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Title to, and the area of, mineral properties and water rights may also be disputed. Mineral properties sometimes contain claims or transfer histories that examiners cannot verify. A successful claim that we do not have title to our property or lack appropriate water rights could cause us to lose any rights to explore, develop and extract minerals, without compensation for our prior expenditures relating to such property. Our business may suffer a material adverse effect in the event we have title deficiencies.

Frac sand is a proppant used in the completion and re-completion of oil and natural gas wells to stimulate and maintain oil and natural gas production through the process of hydraulic fracturing. Frac sand is the most commonly used proppant and is less expensive than other proppants, such as resin-coated sand and manufactured ceramics. A significant shift in demand from frac sand to other proppants, or the development of new processes to make hydraulic fracturing more efficient that could replace it altogether, could cause a decline in the demand for the frac sand we produce and result in a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Transportation and logistical operating expenses comprise a significant portion of the costs incurred by our customers to deliver frac sand to the wellhead, which could favor suppliers located in close proximity to the customer. As oil and natural gas prices fluctuate, our customers may shift their focus to different resource plays, some of which may be located in geographic areas that do not have well-developed transportation and distribution infrastructure systems, or seek contracts with additional delivery and pricing alternatives including contracts that sell product on an "as-delivered" basis at the target shale basin. Serving our customers in these less-developed areas presents distribution and other operational challenges that may affect our sales and negatively impact our operating costs and any delays we experience in optimizing our logistics infrastructure or developing additional origination and destination points may adversely affect our ability to renew existing contracts with customers seeking additional delivery and pricing alternatives. Disruptions in transportation services, including shortages of railcars, lack of developed infrastructure, weather-related problems, flooding, drought, accidents, mechanical difficulties, strikes, lockouts, bottlenecks, environmental restrictions or other events could affect our ability to timely and cost effectively deliver to our customers and could temporarily impair the ability of our customers to take delivery and, in certain circumstances, constitute a force majeure event under our customer contracts, permitting our customers to suspend taking delivery of and paying for our frac sand (and in some cases terminating the agreement after a period of time). Additionally, increases in the price of transportation costs, including freight charges, fuel surcharges, transloading fees, terminal switch fees and demurrage costs, could negatively impact operating costs if we are unable to pass those increased costs along to our customers. Accordingly, because we are so dependent on rail infrastructure, if there are disruptions of the rail transportation services utilized by us or our customers, and we or our customers are unable to find alternative transportation providers to transport our products, our business and results of operations could be adversely affected. Further, declining volumes could result in railcar over-capacity, which would lead to railcar storage fees while, at the same time, we would continue to incur lease costs for those railcars in storage. Failure to find long-term solutions to these logistical challenges could adversely affect our ability to respond quickly to the needs of our customers or result in additional increased costs, and thus could negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

In recent years, the U.S. Congress has considered legislation to reduce emissions of GHGs, including methane, a primary component of natural gas, and carbon dioxide, a byproduct of the burning of natural gas. It presently appears unlikely that comprehensive climate legislation will be passed by either house of Congress in the near future, although energy legislation and other regulatory initiatives are expected to be proposed that may be relevant to GHG emissions issues. For example, in August 2022, the U.S. Congress passed, and President Biden signed into law, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 which appropriates significant federal funding for renewable energy initiatives and, for the first time ever, imposes a fee on GHG emissions from certain facilities. In November of 2024, the EPA released its final rule to implement the methane emissions fee with an effective date of January 17, 2025, for reporting year 2024 emissions. Twenty-three states have filed a lawsuit challenging the rule, and the change in U.S. presidential administration provides additional uncertainty as to the rule's future. To the extent the fee is retained and implemented, the emissions fee and funding provisions of the law could increase the operating costs of our customers and accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels, which could in turn adversely affect our business and results of operations. In addition, a number of states are addressing GHG emissions, primarily through the development of emission inventories or regional GHG cap and trade programs. Depending on the particular program, we could be required to control GHG emissions or to purchase and surrender allowances for GHG emissions resulting from our operations. Independent of Congress, the EPA has adopted regulations controlling GHG emissions under its existing authority under the federal CAA. For example, the EPA has adopted regulations under existing provisions of the CAA that, among other things establish construction and operating permit reviews for GHG emissions from certain large stationary sources that are already potential major sources for conventional pollutants. In addition, the EPA has adopted rules requiring the monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions from specified production, processing, transmission and storage facilities in the United States on an annual basis. In addition, in December 2015, over 190 countries, including the United States, reached an agreement to reduce global GHG emissions, also known as the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement entered into force in November 2016 after more than 170 nations, including the United States, ratified or otherwise indicated their intent to be bound by the agreement. While President Trump has initiated action to withdraw the United States from the Paris agreement, this withdrawal is not immediate and may animate stronger actions by various other policymakers. Additionally, several states and geographic regions in the United States have adopted legislation and regulations to reduce emissions of GHGs, including cap and trade regimes and commitments to contribute to meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement. It is not possible at this time to predict the precise timing and effects of climate change or whether additional climate-related legislation, regulations or other measures will be adopted at the local, state, regional, national and international levels. Governmental, scientific and public concern over the threat of climate change arising from GHG emissions has also resulted in increasing political risks in the United States, including climate change-related pledges made by certain candidates elected to public office. The Biden Administration implemented various actions to accelerate the energy transition or otherwise increase the risks and costs associated with fossil fuel production. While President Trump has announced plans to reverse certain of these actions, various states and other policymakers are expected to continue to advance policies to promote a transition away from fossil fuels. To the extent that other countries implement the Paris Agreement or local, state, regional, national or international governments impose other climate change regulations on the oil and natural gas industry, it could have an adverse effect on our business because substantial limitations on GHG emissions could adversely affect demand for the oil and natural gas that is produced by our customers. Litigation risks are also increasing, as a number of entities, including government entities and private groups, have sought to bring suit against oil and natural gas companies in state or federal court, alleging, among other things, that such companies created public nuisances by producing fuels that contributed to climate change. Suits have also been brought against such companies under stockholder and consumer protection laws, alleging that companies have been aware of the adverse effects of climate change but failed to adequately disclose those impacts. To the extent these risks impact our customers, we may experience reduced demand for our proppant. In addition, various policymakers, including the states of California, Illinois, and New York, have adopted or are considering adopting requirements for in-scope companies to disclose certain climate-related information, including on GHG emissions and climate risks. For example, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") issued a proposed rule in March 2022 that will mandate extensive disclosure of climate-related data, risks, GHG emissions, for certain public companies. The SEC issued a final in March 2024. Multiple lawsuits have been filed and in April 2024, the SEC voluntarily stayed the rules pending the outcome of the litigation. It is possible that other climate-related reporting regulations applicable to many U.S. companies will continue to take effect. Additionally, climate change may increase the frequency and intensity of severe weather events and other natural disasters, as well as contribute to chronic changes (such as to meteorological and hydrological patterns) that may also result in various adverse impacts to our or our customers' operations. Finally, in addition to the executive orders discussed above, upon entering office, the Trump Administration issued a series of executive orders that signal a shift in the United States energy, environmental and climate change policy. Among other directives, such executive orders: (i) direct federal agencies to identify and exercise emergency authorities to facilitate conventional energy production, transportation and refining and call for the use of emergency regulations to expedite energy infrastructure projects; (ii) promote energy explorations and production on federal lands and waters; (iii) mandate a review of existing regulations that may burden domestic energy development; and (iv) pause disbursement of funds appropriated through the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The long-term impact of such actions on our customers' operations, if any, is difficult to predict at this time.

Third parties from time to time may initiate litigation against us by asserting that the conduct of our business infringes, misappropriates or otherwise violates intellectual property rights. We may not prevail in any such legal proceedings related to such claims, and our storage systems and related items may be found to infringe, impair, misappropriate, dilute or otherwise violate the intellectual property rights of others. If we are sued for infringement and lose, we could be required to pay substantial damages and/or be enjoined from using or selling the infringing products or technology. Any legal proceeding concerning intellectual property could be protracted and costly regardless of the merits of any claim and is inherently unpredictable and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, regardless of its outcome. If we were to discover that our technologies or products infringe valid intellectual property rights of third parties, we may need to obtain licenses from these parties or substantially re-engineer our products in order to avoid infringement. We may not be able to obtain the necessary licenses on acceptable terms, or at all, or be able to re-engineer our products successfully. If our inability to obtain required licenses for our technologies or products prevents us from selling our products, that could adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations.