U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington,D.C. 20549

Form 10-Q

QUARTERLY REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OFTHEOF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the Quarterly period ended September 30, 2003March 31, 2004

Commission File No. 0-20975

Tengasco, Inc. and Subsidiaries

(ExactnameExact name of small business issuer as specified in its charter)

Tennessee87-0267438
State or other jurisdiction of
Incorporation or organization
         (IRS Employer Identification No.)

Tennessee
State or other jurisdiction of
Incorporation or organization

87-0267438
(IRS Employer Identification No.)

603 Main Avenue, Suite 500, Knoxville, TN 37902

(Address of principal executive offices)

(865-523-1124)
(Issuer’s telephone number, including area code)

Check whether the issuer (1) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the past 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. YesXNo__

State the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s classes of common equity, as of the latest practicable date:12,049,97748,506,977 common shares at September 30, 2003.March 31, 2004.

Transitional Small Business Disclosure Format (check one): Yes ___ No X

TENGASCO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES


TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I.FINANCIAL INFORMATIONPAGE
 
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

* Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2003 (unaudited)March 31, 2004 and 3-4 December 31, 2002 2003
3-4


3
 
*    Consolidated Statements of Loss for the three and six months ended June 30,March 31,
2004 and 2003 and 2002 


5
 
*    Consolidated Statements of Stockholders Equity for the sixthree months
ended June 30, 2003 and 2002March 31, 2004


6
 
*     Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the sixthree months ended June 30,
March 31, 2004 and 2003 and 2002  


7
 
*    Condensed Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
8-14
8
 
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENTSMANAGEMENTS'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATION  OPERATIONS
14-19


12
 
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURE ABOUT MARKET RISK
19-20
13
 
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
20 
14

PART II.

OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS


14
 ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS             21 

ITEM 2. CHANGES IN SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
21-22
15
 
ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES           5. OTHER INFORMATION
22 
16
 
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS           6. EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K
22 

16
 
*    EXHIBITS                                        SIGNATURES
                 23
17
 SIGNATURES                                         EXHIBITS                  24
18

TENGASCO, INC AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

ASSETS

September 30, 2003
December 31, 2002
(Unaudited)
March 31, 2004
(Unaudited)

December 31, 2003
Current Assets:            
Cash and cash equivalents $332,185 $184,130  $3,015,863 $312,666 
Investments  34,500  34,500   60,000  60,000 
Accounts receivable net  795,916  730,667 
Accounts receivable, net  607,126  508,378 
Participants receivable  63,297  70,605   63,304  68,402 
Inventory  262,748  262,748   280,693  280,693 
Current portion of loan fees, net  210,380  323,856   107,956  151,136 
Other 
  67,352  0 

Other current assets  --

  223,003

 
Total current assets  1,766,378  1,606,506   4,134,942  1,604,278 
Oil and gas properties, net (on the basis of  
full cost accounting)  13,096,898  13,864,321   12,662,100  12,989,443 
Completed pipeline facilities, net  15,312,212  15,372,843 
Pipeline facilities, net  15,005,789  15,139,789 
Other property and equipment, net  1,482,202  1,685,950   808,396  870,730 
Loan fees, net of accumulated amortization  0  40,158 
Other  5,213  14,613   86,322
  --
 


 
$     32,697,549
 $      30,604,240
 
 $31,662,903 $32,584,391 



See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statementsstatements.

TENGASCO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

September 30, 2003
December 31, 2002
(Unaudited)
March 31, 2004
(Unaudited)

December 31, 2003
Current Liabilities            
Current maturities of long-term debt $6,724,998 $7,861,245  $4,553,264 $6,127,290 
Accounts payable-trade  839,553  1,396,761   370,310  1,075,948 
Accrued interest payable  167,227  61,141   489,081  835,059 
Accrued dividends payable  470,543  254,389 
Notes payable to related parties  2,234,000  750,000   --  3.709,000 
Other accrued liabilities  627,016  31,805   597,664  18,560 
Current shares subject to mandatory redemption  692,739
  549,344
 
Total current liabilities  6,703,058  12,315,201 
Shares subject to mandatory redemption  5,367,121  5,510,516 
Asset retirement obligations  669,928  668,556 
Long-term debt less current maturities  205,950
  221,635
 
Total liabilities  12,946,057
  18,715,908
 
Stockholders' Equity 
Common stock, $.001 per value, 50,000,000 shares authorized 


  48,507  12,080 
Total current liabilities  11,063,337  10,355,341 
Asset retirement obligations  666,421  0 
Long term debt less current maturities  590,055  1,256,209 


Total liabilities  12,319,813  11,611.550 


Preferred Stock 
Cumulative convertible redeemable preferred; redemption value 
$7,072,000; 70,720 shares outstanding 
  6,884,257  6,762,218 


Stockholders Equity 
Common stock, $.001 per value, 50,000,000 shares authorized, 
12,049,977; 11,444,779 outstanding  12,065  11,460 
Additional paid-in-capital  42,855,693  42,237,276   51,673,801  42,721,290 
Accumulated deficit  (30,147,538) (27,776,726)  (31,880,816) (30,755,038)
Accumulated other comprehensive loss  (115,500) (115,500)  (90,000)
 (90,000)
Treasury stock, at cost  (145,887) (145,887)
Total stockholders' equity  19,751,492
  11,888,332
 


 $      32,697,549
 $      30,604,240
 
Total stockholders equity  12,458,833  14,210,623 


 $31,662,903 $32,584,391 


See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statementsstatements.


TENGASCO, INC. AND SIBSIDIARIESCONSOLIDATED
SIBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF LOSS

For the Three Months Ended
For the Nine Months Ended
September, 30,
(Unaudited)
September 30,
(Unaudited)
For the Three
Months Ended
March 31,2004
(Unaudited)

For the Three
Months Ended
March 31, 2003
(Unaudited)

20032002200320022004
2003
Revenues and other income               
Oil and gas revenues $1,546,453  1,450,133 $4,907,216 $3,859,050  $1,332,350 $1,923,915 
Pipeline transportation revenues  52,749  56,088  145,472  197,333   23,241  47,504 
Interest income  259  1,087  766  2,782   751
  184
 




Total revenues and other income  1,599,461  1,507,308  5,053,454  4,059,165   1,356,342  1,971,603 
Cost and other deductions  
Production costs and taxes  944,019  815,293  2,571,898  2,084,597   871,581  769,909 
Depletion, depreciation and amortization  628,195  756,486  1,887,333  1,731,182   608,164  630,942 
Interest expense  168,420  146,382  462,518  448,046   413,858  153,356 
General and administrative cost  301,794  401,829  1,112,289  1,527,988   288,360  511,337 
Public Relations  954  15,809  29,131  176,098   2,282  4,779 
Professional fees  64,326  93,388  485,270  539,198   297,875
  209,426
 
Total cost and other deductions  2,482,120
  2,279,749
 
Net loss before cumulative effect of change in 
accounting principle  (1,125,778)
 (308,146)
Cumulative Effect of a change in accounting 
principle  --
  (351,204)
Net loss  (1,125,778)
 (659,350)
Dividends on preferred stock  --
  (134,195)
Net loss attributable to common stockholders 




 $(1,125,778)
$(793,545)
Total cost and other deductions  2,107,708  2,229,187  6,548,439  6,507,109 




Net loss  (508,247) (721,879) (1,494,985) (2,447,944)




Dividends on preferred stock  134,194  134,195  402,583  372,595 




Net loss attributable to common shareholders 
Before cumulative effect of a change in 
accounting principle $(642,441)$(856,074)$(1,897,568)$(2,820,539)




Net loss attributable to common stockholders 
per share basic and diluted: 
Operations $(0.06)
$(0.03)
Cumulative effect of a change in accounting  
principle  0  0  (351,204) 0   --
 $(0.03)




Net loss attributable to common shareholders 
 $(642,441)$(856,074)$(2,248,772)$(2,820,539)




Net loss attributable to common shareholders 
per share basic and diluted: 
Operations $(0.05)$(0.08)$(0.16)$(0.26)




Cumulative effect of a change in accounting 
principle  0  0 $(0.03)$0 




Total $(0.05)$(0.08)$(0.19)$(0.26) $(0.06)
$(0.07)




Weighted average shares outstanding  12,047,823  11,365,431  11,919,477  10,933,588   17,723,812
  11,764,321
 




See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statementsstatements.


6

TENGASCO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSILIDATEDCONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

(Unaudited)

Common Stock
Shares

Amount
Additional
Paid in Capital

Accumulated Other
Comprehensive Loss

Balance December 31, 2002   11,459,279 $11,460 $42,237,276 $(115,500)   
Net Loss   0  0  0 
Common Stock Issued in Private  
Placements Net of Related Expenses  
    227,275 227 249,773
Common Stock Issued for exercised  
options   94,000  94  46,906 
Common Stock Issued in Conversion of  
Debt   60,528  61  69,538 
Common Stock Issued for Preferred  
Dividend in Arrears   154,824  154  170,155 
Common Stock Issued for Charity   3,571  4  5,710 
Retained Earnings-Accretion of Issue  
Cost on Preferred Stock  
Common Stock Issued for Services   55,000  55  69,945 
Common Stock Issued for Litigation  
Settlement   10,000  10  6,390 
Dividends on Convertible Redeemable  
Preferred Stock   0  0  0 
Cumulative effect of a change in  
accounting principle   0  0  0 
Balance September 30, 2003   12,064,477 $12,065 $42,855,693 $(115,500)





Accumulated
Deficit

Shares

Amount

Total
Balance December 31, 2002  $(27,776,726) (14,500)$(145,887)$14,210,623    
Net Loss   (1,494,985) 0  0  (1,494,985)
Common Stock Issued in Private  
Placements Net of Related Expenses  
    0 0 0 250,000
Common Stock Issued for exercised  
options   0  0  0  47,000 
Common Stock Issued in Conversion o  
Debt   0  0  0  69,599 
Common Stock Issued for Preferred  
Dividend in Arrears      170,309
Common Stock Issued for Charity      5,714
Retained Earnings-Accretion of Issu  
Cost on Preferred Stock   (122,040)   (122,040)
Common Stock Issued for Services   0  0   70,000
Common Stock Issued for Litigation  
Settlement      6,400
Dividends on Convertible Redeemable  
Preferred Stock   (402,583) 0  0  (402,583)
Cumulative effect of a change in  
accounting principle   (351,204) 0  0  (351,204)
Balance September 30, 2003  $(30,147,538) (14,500)$(145,887)$12,458,833 





Common Stock
Shares

Amount
Additional
Paid in Capital

Accumulated Deficit
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive

Total
Balance December 31, 2003   12,064,977 $12,080 $42,721,290 $(30,755,038)$ (90,000)  $11,888,332 
Net Loss   --  --  --  (1,125,778)--   (1,125,778)
Common Stock Issued for exercised  
options   142,000  142  70,858  -- --   71,000 
Common Stock Issued in  
Rights Offering   36,300,000  36,285  8,881,653  -- --   8,917,938 














    48,506,977 $48,507 $51,673,801 $(31,880,816)$ (90,000)  $19,751,492 







See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statementsstatements.


9

TENGASCO, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIESCONSOLIDATED
SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

For the Nine
Months Ended
September 30, 2002

For the Nine
Months Ended
September 30, 2003

(Unaudited)
For the Three
Months Ended
March 31, 2004
(Unaudited)

For the Three
Months Ended
March 31, 2003
(Unaudited)

Operating Activities            
Net Loss $(1,494,985)$(2,447,944) $(1,125,778)$(308,146)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash  
Provided by (used in) operating activities: 
used in operating activities: 
Depletion, depreciation and amortization  1,887,333  1,731,182   608,164  630,942 
Charitable donation, services paid in stock, stock options  122,714  48,620   --  75,714 
Gain on Sale of Equipment  (7,500) -- 
Changes in assets and liabilities  
Accounts receivable  (65,249) (41,340)  (98,748) (411,719)
Participants receivable  7,308  0   5,098  (1,245)
Other Current Assets  223,003  -- 
Other Assets  (86,322) -- 
Accounts payable  (557,208) (5,021)  (705,638) (61,231)
Accrued interest payable  106,086  (9,581)  (345,978) (14,824)
Other accrued liabilities  595,211  0   579,104  (31,805)
Other  (57,952) 0   --
  9,602
 


Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities  543,258  (724,084)


Net cash used in operating activities  (954,595)
 (112,712)
Investing activities  
Additions to property and equipment  0  (154,526)
Net additions to oil and gas properties  (45,312) (1,796,600)  (32,435) 26,800 
Net additions to pipeline facilities  (341,369) (739,162)  --  (37,362)
Decrease in restricted cash  0  120,872 
Other assets  0  19,432 


Net cash used in investing activities  (386,681) (2,549,984)  (32,435)
 (10,562)


Financing activities  
Proceeds from exercise options  71,000  -- 
Repayments of borrowings  (1,742,522) (2,129,256)  (5,526,711) (634,236)
Proceeds from borrowings  1,484,000  1,703,103   228,000  500,000 
Dividends on convertible redeemable preferred stock  0  (350,859)
Proceeds from private placements of common stock  250,000  2,677,000 
Proceeds from private placements of preferred stock  0  1,303,168 
Net proceeds from issuance of common stock  --  250,000 
Net proceeds from rights offering  8,917,938
  --
 


Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities  (8,522) 3,203,156 


Net cash provided by financing activities  3,690,227
  115,764
 
Net change in cash and cash equivalents  148,055  (70,912)  2,703,197  (7,510)
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period  184,130  393,451   312,666
  184,130
 


Cash and cash equivalents, end of period $332,185 $322,539  $      3,015,863
 $      176,620
 


See accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statementsstatements.


Tengasco, Inc. And SubsidiariesCondensed
Subsidiaries

Condensed Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements

(Unaudited)

(1)Basis of Presentation

         The accompanying un-auditedunaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Item 210 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of only normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included. Operating results for the ninethree months ended September 30, 2003March 31, 2004 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ended December 31, 2003.2004. Additionally, deferred income taxes and income tax expense is not reflected in the Company’s financial statements due to the fact that the Company has had recurring losses and deferred tax assets arising from net operating loss carry forwardsgloss carry-forwards have been fully reserved. For further information, refer to the Company’s consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto for the year ended December 31, 20022003 included in the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K.

(2) Going Concern Uncertainty

        The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, which contemplates continuation of the Company as a going concern and assume realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The Company has incurred continuous losses since commencing its operations and has an accumulated deficit of $30,147,538 and a working capital deficit of $9,296,959 as of September 30, 2003. During 2002, the Company was informed by its primary lender that the entire amount of it outstanding credit facility was immediately due and payable, as provided for in the Credit Agreements. These circumstances raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

        The Company has disputed its obligation to make this payment and is attempting to resolve the dispute or to obtain alternate refinancing arrangements to repay this current obligation. There can be no assurance that the Company will be successful in its plans to obtain the financing necessary to satisfy its current obligation.

(3)Earnings Per Share

         In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 128, Earnings“Earnings Per Share,Share”, basic and diluted loss per share are based on 12,047,82317,723,812 and 11,365,43111,764,321 weighted average shares outstanding for the quartersquarter ended September 30, 2003March 31, 2004 and 2002, respectively. Basic and diluted loss per share are based on 11,919,477 and 10,933,588 weighted average shares outstanding for the nine months ended September 30, 2003 and 2002. During the nine month period ended September 30, 2003 and year ended December 31, 2002 potential weighted average stock equivalents outstanding were approximately 1,473,000. These shares are not included2003, respectively.

        For the three-month periods ending March 31, 2004 and 2003, the Company had no vested, unexercised, in the computation of the diluted loss per share amount becausemoney options. As the Company was in a net loss position, and their effectany potential common share equivalents would have been antidilutive.anti-dilutive.

         The Company adopted the disclosure provision of the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS or statement) No. 148, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation-Transition and Disclosure”, which amends SFAS No. 123. “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation”, SFAS No. 148 provides alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the fair value based method of accounting for stock- basedstock-based employee compensation, which was originally provided under SFAS No. 123. The Statement also improves the timeliness of disclosures by requiring the information be included in interim, as well as annual, financial statements. The adoption of these disclosure provisions did not have a material effectaffect on the Company’s 2002March 31, 2004 consolidated results of operations, financial position, or cash flows.

         SFAS No. 123 encourages, but does not require, companies to record compensation cost for stock-based employee compensation plans at fair value. The Company has chosen to continue to account for stock-based compensation using the intrinsic value method prescribed in Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25, Accounting“Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,Employees”, and related Interpretations.interpretations. Accordingly, compensation cost for stock options is measured as the excess, if any, of the quoted market price of the Company’s stock at the date of the grant over the amount an employee must pay to acquire the stock. The option price of all the Company’s stock options is equal to the market value of the stock at the grant date. As such, no compensation expense is recorded in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

         Had compensation cost been determined based upon the fair value at the grant date for awards under the stock option plan consistent with the methodology prescribed under SFAS No. 123, the Company’s pro forma net income (loss)loss and net income (loss)loss per share would have differed from the amounts reported as follows:

Three Months
September 30,
2003

Three Months
September 30,
2002

Nine Months
September 30,
2003

Nine Months
September 30,
2002

Year Ended
December 31, 2003

Three Months
March 31, 2003

Three Months
March 31, 2004

Net loss as reported  $(642,441)$(856,074)$(2,248,772)$(2,820,539)  $(2,815,119)$(793,545)$(1,125,778)
Stock-based employee 
compensation expense 
determined under fair value 
basis $(0)$(8,400)$(47,209)$(202,846)




Stock-based employee compensation   
expense determined under fair value
basis
 $(22,650)

$(47,209)$(0)
Pro forma net loss $(642,441)$(864,474)$(2,295,981)$(3,023,385) $(2,837,769)$(840,754)$(1,125,778)
Earning per share:  
Basic and diluted as reported  $(0.24)$(0.07)$(0.06)
 $(0.05)$(0.08)$(0.19)$(0.26)
Basic and diluted pro forma  $(0.24)$(0.07)$(0.06)
 $(0.05)$(0.08)$(0.19)$(0.28)

(4)      (3)            LiquidityNew Accounting Pronouncements:

         A reporting issue has arisen regarding the application of certain provisions of SAFS No. 141 and SFAS No. 142The Company continues to companiesbe in the extracting industries including oil and gas companies. The issue is whether SFAS No. 142 regulates registrants to classify the costs of mineral rights held under lease or other contractual arrangement associated with extracting oil and gas as intangible assets in the balance sheet, apart from other capitalized oil and gas property owned and provide specific footnote disclosures. Historically, the Company had included the costs of such mineral rights associated with extracting oil and gas as a component of oil and gas properties. If it is ultimately determined that SFAS No. 142 requires oil and gas companies to classify cost of mineral rights held under lease or other contractual arrangement associated with extracting oil and gas as a separate intangible asset line item on the balance sheet, the Company would be required to reclassify approximately $453,000 at September 30, 2003 and $346,000 at December 31, 2002, respectively, out of oil and gas properties and into a separate intangible asset line item. The Company’s cash flows and results of operations would not be affected since such intangible assets would continue to be depleted and amortized for impairment in accordance with full cost accounting rules. Further, the Company does not believe the classification of the cost of mineral rights associated with extracting oil and gas as intangible assets would have any impact on compliance with covenants under its debt agreements.

        In June 2001, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 143, “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations “SFAS No. 143 addresses financial accounting and reporting for obligations associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets and the associated asset retirement cost. This statement requires companies to record the present value of obligations associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets in the periods in which it is incurred. The liability is capitalized as part of the related long-lived assets carrying amount. Over time, accretion of the liability is recognized as an operating expense and the capitalized cost is depreciated over the expected useful life of the related asset. The Company’s asset retirement obligations relate primarily to the plugging, dismantlement, removal site reclamation and similar activitiesearly stages of its oil and gas related operating history as it endeavors to expand its operations. Accordingly, the Company has incurred continuous losses through these operating stages and has an accumulated deficit of $31,860,816 and a working capital deficit of $2,448,957 as of March 31, 2004. During 2002, the Company was informed by its primary lender that the entire amount of its outstanding credit facility was immediately due and payable, as provided for in the Credit Agreement. The Company disputed its obligation to make this payment and has resolved the dispute as discussed in Note 10. The Company believes that now that its dispute has been resolved and that it has obtained additional funds through its Rights Offering discussed in Note 9, it will be able to obtain long-term financing to allow the Company to continue drilling and to locate and develop other properties. PriorIf such funding for additional drilling becomes available, the Company plans to adoptiondrill new wells in locations it has identified in Kansas on its existing leases in response to drilling activity in the area, which it believes will establish new areas of this statement,oil production. However, no assurances can be made that such obligations were accrued ratably over the productive livesfinancing will be obtained. The inability of the assets throughCompany to obtain additional long-term financing could impair the Company’s ability to meet its depreciation, depletion and amortization for oil and gas properties without recording a separate liability for such amounts. The impact of applying this statementother obligations as of January 1, 2003 and September 30, 2003 is discussed in footnote 10.they become due.

      (4)            New Accounting Pronouncements

         In April 2002,March 2004, The Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) reached a consensus that mineral rights, as defined in EITF Issue No. 04-02, “Whether Mineral Rights are Tangible or Intangible Asset,” are tangible assets and that they should be removed as examples of intangible assets in SFAS Nos. 141 and 142. The FASB has recently ratified this consensus and directed the Financial Accounting Standards Board issuedFASB staff to amend SFAS No. 145, “RescissionNos. 141 and 142 through the issuance of SFAS No. 4, 44, 64, AmendmentFASB Staff Positions FSP FAS 141-1 and FSP FAS 142-1. Historically the Company has included the cost of SFAS No. 13, and Technical Corrections” (“SFAS 145”). SFAS 4,such mineral rights as tangible assets, which was amended by SFAS 64, required all gains and losses fromis consistent with the extinguishment of debt to be aggregated and, if material, classified as an extraordinary item, net of related income tax effect.EITF’s consensus. As a result of SFAS 145, the criteria in Accounting Principles Board opinion 30 will now be used to classify those gains and losses. SFAS 13 was amended to eliminate an inconsistency between the required accounting for sale-leaseback transactions and the required accounting for certain lease modifications that have economic effects that are similar to sale-leaseback transactions. The adoption of SFAS 145such, EITF 04-02 will not have a current impact on the Company’saffect Tengasco’s consolidated condensed financial statements.

         In July 2002,During December 2003, the FASB issued SFASInterpretation No. 146, Accounting for Cost Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities. The standard46R, “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities” (“FIN 46”), which requires companies to recognize cost associated with exit or disposal activities when they are incurred rather than at the dateconsolidation of commitment to an exit or disposal plan. Examples of cost covered by the standard include lease termination costs and certain employee severance costsentities that are associated with restructuring, discontinued operation, plant closing, or other exit or disposal activity. Previous accounting guidance was provided by EITF Issue No. 94-3, “Liability Recognition for Certain Employee Termination Benefits and Other Costs to Exit an Activity (including Certain Costs Incurred in a Restructuring).” Statement 146 replaces Issue 94-3. Statement 146 isdetermined to be applied prospectivelyvariable interest entities (“VIE’s”). An entity is considered to exitbe a VIE when either (i) the entity lacks sufficient equity to carry on its principal operations, (ii) the equity owners of the entity cannot make decisions about the entity’s activities or disposal activities initiated after December 31, 2002.(iii) the entity’s equity neither absorbs losses or benefits from gains. The Company does not currently have any plans for exit or disposal activities,owns no interests in variable interest entities, and therefore doesthis new interpretation has not expect this standard to have a material effect onaffected the Company’s consolidated financial statements upon adoption.

        In November 2002, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation (“FIN”) No. 45. “Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others”, which clarifies disclosure and recognition/measurement requirements related to certain guarantees. The disclosure requirements are effective for financial statements issued after December 15, 2002 and here cognition/measurement requirements are effective on a prospective basis for guarantees issued or modified after December 31, 2002. The application of the requirements of FIN 45 did not have an impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

        In December 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based compensation — Transition and Disclosure — an amendment of FASB Statement No. 123 (“Statement 148”). This amendment provides two additional methods of transition for a voluntary change to the fair value based method of accounting for stock-based employee compensation. Additionally, more prominent disclosures in both annual and interim financial statements are required for stock-based employee compensation. The transition guidance and annual disclosure provisions of Statement 148 are effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2002. The interim disclosure provisions are effective for financial reports containing financial statements for interim periods beginning after December 15, 2002. The adoption of Statement 148 did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

        In January 2003, the FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. (FIN) 46, “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities.” This interpretation of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51 “Consolidated Financial Statements” consolidation by business enterprises of variable interest entities, which possess certain characteristics. The Interpretation requires that if a business enterprise has a controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity, the assets, liabilities, and results of the activities of the variable interest entity must be included in the consolidated financial statements with those of the business enterprise. This Interpretation applies immediately to variable interest entities created after January 31, 2003 and to variable interest entities in which an enterprise obtains an interest after that date. The Company does not have any ownership in any variable interest entities.

         In May 2003, the FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 150, “Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Characteristics of both Liabilities and Equity” (“SFAS 150”). SFAS No. 150 requires three typesestablishes standards for how an issuer classifies and measures in its statement of freestandingfinancial position certain financial instruments to be classified aswith characteristics of both liabilities in statements ofand equity and it requires that an issuer classify a financial position. One type is mandatory redeemable shares, which the issuing company is obligated to buy back in exchange for cash or other assets. A second type, which includes put options and forward purchase contracts, involves instruments that do or may require the issuer to buy back some ofinstrument within its shares in exchange for cash or other assets. The third type of instrument is obligations that can be settled with shares, the monetary value of which is fixed, tied solely or predominately to a variable suchscope as a market index, or varies inversely with the value of the issuer’s shares. The majority of the guidance inliability. SFAS No. 150 iswas effective for all financial instruments entered into or modified after May 31, 2003 for public companies. Restatement is not permitted. Adoption of this standard during 2003 resulted in a reclassification to a liability and otherwise is effective at the beginningrestatement of the first interimCompany’s assets to restricted fair values of the Company’s Series A, B and C preferred stock subject to mandatory redemption. Accordingly, for the year ended December 31, 2003, the Company recognized cumulative gain from a change in accounting principle of approximately $1,247,000. This cumulative gain results from the difference between the carrying amount of the preferred shares and the fair value of the shares after adoption. Accretion totaling $354,735 has been recognized as interest expense for the period beginning after June 15,from July 1, 2003 through December 31, 2003. In accordance with SFAS No. 150, the Company adopted this standard on July 1, 2003. Adoptionfirst quarter of SFAS No. 150 did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position and results of operations.2004, $134,194.50 was recognized as interest expense.

(5)Letter of Credit Agreement

         On November 8, 2001, the Company signed a credit facility with the Energy Finance Division of Bank One, N.A. in Houston, Texas whereby Bank One extended to the Company a revolving line of credit of up to $35 million. The initial borrowing base under the facility was $10 million. The interest rate is the Bank One base rate plus one-quarter percent.

         On November 9, 2001, funds from this credit line were used to (1) refinance existing indebtedness on the Company’s Kansas properties, (2) to repay the internal financing provided by directors and shareholders on the Company’s completed 65-mile Tennessee intrastate pipeline system, (3) to repay a note payable to Spoonbill, Inc., (4) to repay a purchase money note due to M.E. Ratliff, who at the time was the Company’s chief executive officerChief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors, for purchase by the Company of a drilling rig and related equipment, (5) to repay in full the remaining principal of the working capital loan due December 31, 2001 to Edward W.T. Gray III, who at that time was a director of the Company. All of these obligations incurred interest at a rate substantially greater than the rate being charged by Bank One under the Creditcredit facility.

         On April 5, 2002, the Company received a notice from Bank One stating that it had redetermined and reduced the borrowing base under the Credit Agreement by $6,000,000 to $3,101,766. Bank One demanded that the Company pay the $6,000,000 within thirty days of the notice. The Company filed a lawsuit in Federal Court to prevent Bank One fromform exercising any rights under the Credit Agreement. The Company has been paying $200,000 per month toward the outstanding balance of the credit facility and any accrued interest until this situation is resolved.facility. As of May1, 2004, the outstanding balance due to Bank One under the Credit Agreement was $ 4,101,796.66. On May 13, 2004 the Company entered into an agreement, settling its lawsuit with Bank One. See note 2.Note 10, Bank One Litigation Settlement.

(6)Notes PayableSupplemental Disclosure of Non Cash Investing and Financing Activities:

         DuringFrom December 2002 through December 9, 2003, Dolphin Offshore Partners, L.P. (“Dolphin”) acquired a total of an 85% undivided interest in the three months ended March 31, 2003,Company’s Tennessee and Kansas pipelines as collateral for a series of seven loans. In the first five of these transactions totaling $1,650,000, Peter E. Salas, a Director of the Company converted $60,000and the general partner and controlling person of debtDolphin, negotiated the terms of the loans directly with management, which terms were approved by management in view of the Company’s immediate needs, financial condition and $9,600prospective alternatives and under circumstances in which Dolphin was not generally engaged in the business of accruedlending money. These loans were made on terms that management believes were at least as favorable to the Company as it could have obtained through arms-length negotiations with unaffiliated third parties. The Company’s Board approved the sixth and seventh loans on December 3 and 9, 2003, in the amounts of $225,000 and $250,000, respectively, with no participation by Mr. Salas in the meeting or the vote, which was unanimous by the seven other Directors present at the meeting. In addition, the Company has entered into a continuing security agreement, which was approved by the Board with no participation by Mr. Salas in the meeting or vote, which was unanimous by the seven other Directors present at the meeting, providing the terms of Dolphin’s security interest owed to holderscollateralizing all of convertible notes into 60,528 shares of common stock.its loans.

         During the six months ended June 30,On December 24, 2003, the Company converted $170,309 of accrued dividends payable into 154,824 shares of common stock.

        During the three months ended March 31, 2003, the Company issued 55,000 shares of common stock for payment for consulting services performed in the amount of $70,000.

        During the three months ended March 31, 2003, the Company donated 3,571 shares of stock as a charitable contribution valued at $5,710.

        During the three months ended March 31, 2003 the Company capitalized $260,191 into oil and gas properties associated with estimated future asset retirement obligations.

        During the three months ended September 30, 2003 the Company issued 10,000 shares of common stock for a litigation settlement. The stock value on date of issue was $16,400.

(7) Notes Payable

        On February 3, 2003 and February 28, 2003, Dolphin Offshore Partners, LP which owns more than 10% of the Company’s outstanding common stock and whose general partner, Peter E. Salas, is a Director of the Company, loaned the Company the sum of $250,000 on each such date (cumulatively, $500,000)$1,000,000 which the Companywas used to pay the principal and interest due to Bank One for February and March 2003 and for working capital needs. On May 20, 2003 an additional loan of $834,000 was loaned by a combination of Dolphin ($750,000) and Jeffrey R. Bailey who is a Directorto pay all interest and President ($84,000)principal in full of the Company. On August 6, 2003 an additional1998 convertible loan of $150,000 was loanedto the Company refereed to as the Lutheran note then being held by Dolphin. Each of these loansseveral persons. This loan is evidenced by a separate promissory note each bearing interest at the rate of 12% per annum, with payments of interest only payable quarterly and the principal balance payable on JanuaryApril 4, 2004. Each ofThe obligations under the February and March 2003 promissory notes isloan are secured by an undivided 10% interest in the Company’s pipelines.Tennessee and Kansas pipelines and the security agreement referred to above.

        On February 2, 2004, Dolphin loaned the Company the sum of $225,000 which was used for making payment of principal and interest to Bank One for February, 2004. This loan is evidenced by a separate promissory note bearing interest at the rate of 12% per annum, with payments of interest only payable quarterly and the principal balance payable on April 4, 2004. The May 20, 2003 loans provides Dolphin with a 30% interest and Bailey with a 3.36%obligations under the loan are secured by an undivided interest in the Company’s pipelines. The August note providesTennessee and Kansas pipelines and the security agreement referred to above. All notes payable to Dolphin with a 6%and secured by an interest in the Company’s pipelines.pipelines were repaid on March 30, 2004 from the proceed received by the Company from its Rights Offering.

(8)(7)            Litigation Settlements Reclassifications

        Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current period’s presentation.

(9) Law Suit Settlement

         On April 2, 2003 and by agreed order filed May 5, 2003, all claims were settled and the lawsuit was dismissed in C.H. Fenstermaker & Associates, Inc. v. Tengasco, Inc.: No. 3:01-CV-283, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, at Knoxville. The settlement provides that the amount claimed to be owed by the Company to Caddum was reduced to $297,000 which is to be paid by note due May 1, 2004, with interest only payable monthly at an annual interest rate of 4.75 percent. This note was repaid on March 31, 2004, from the proceeds received by the Company from its Rights Offering.

        On May 10, 2004 the Court entered its final order approving the fairness of the settlement to the class, dismissing the action pursuant to a Settlement Stipulation, and fully releasing the claims of the class members in Paul Miller v. M. E. Ratliff and Tengasco, Inc.,Number 3:02-CV-644 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee. This action sought certification of a class action to recover on behalf of a class of all persons who purchased shares of the Company’s common stock between August 1, 2001 and April 23, 2002, unspecified damages allegedly caused by violations of the federal securities laws. In January, 2004 all parties reached a settlement subject to court approval. On April 29, 2004, a final hearing for approval of the settlement was held. The Court entered its order approving the settlement on May 10, 2004. Class members may file their claims against the settlement fund through July 15, 2004. The fund will be disbursed in accordance with the claims filed. Under the settlement, the Company paid into a settlement fund the amount of $37,500 to include all costs of administration, contributed 150,000 shares of stock of Miller Petroleum, Inc. owned by the Company and will issue 300,000 warrants to purchase a share of the Company’s common stock for a period of three years from date of issue at $1 per share subject to adjustments. All expenses including attorney’s fees are to be paid out of these settlement funds.

(10)(8)            Cumulative Effect of a Change Inin Accounting Principle

         Effective January 1, 2003, the Company implemented the requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 143 (SFAS 143), “Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations”. Among other things, SFAS 143 requires entities to record a liability and corresponding increase in long-lived assets for the present value of material obligations associated with the retirement of tangible long-lived assets. Over the passage of time, accretion of the liability is recognized as an operation expense and the capitalized cost is depleted over the estimated useful life of the related asset. Additionally, SFAS No. 143 requires that upon initial application of these standards, the Company must recognize a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle corresponding to the accumulated accretion and depletion expense that would have been recognized had this standard been applied at the time the long-lived assets were acquired or constructed. The Company’s asset retirement obligations relate primarily to the plugging, dismantling and removal of wells drilled to date.

         Using a credit-adjusted risk fee rate of 12%, an estimated useful life of wells ranging from 30-40 years, and estimated plugging and abandonment cost ranging from $5,000 per well to $10,000 per well, the Company has recorded a non-cash charge related to the cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle of $351,204 in its statement of operations. Oil and gas properties were increased by $260,191, which represents the present value of all future obligations to retire the wells at January 1, 2003, net of accumulated depletion on this cost through that date. A corresponding obligation totaling $611,395 has also been recorded as of January 1, 2003.

(9)            Rights Offering

         For the nine month period ended September 30,On October 17, 2003, the Company recorded accretionfiled a Registration Statement on Form S-1 with the Securities and depletion expenses of $77,952 associated with this liability and its corresponding asset. These expenses are included in depletion, deprecation, and amortization inExchange Commission (“SEC”). On February 13, 2004, the consolidated statements of loss. HadSEC deemed the provisions of this statement been reflected in the financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2002, an asset retirement obligation of $476,536 would have been recorded as of January 1, 2002.Registration Statement on Form S-1 effective.

         The following isRights Offering was a roll-forwarddistribution to the holders of activity impacting the asset retirement obligationCompany’s common stock outstanding at the record date, February 27, 2004, at no charge, of nontransferable subscription rights at the rate of one right to purchase three shares of the Company’s common stock for each share of common stock owned at the nine months ended September 30, 2003:subscription price of $0.75 in the aggregate, or $0.25 per each share purchased. 

Balance, January 1, 2003:  $611,395 
Accretion expense through September 30, 2003   55,026 

Balance, September 30, 2003  $666,421 

        Each subscription right, in addition to the right to purchase three shares of common stock, carried with it an over-subscription privilege. The over-subscription privilege provided stockholders that exercise all of their basic subscription privileges with the opportunity to purchase those shares that were not purchased by other stockholders through the exercise of their basic subscription privileges, at the same subscription price per share.  In no event could any subscriber purchase shares of the Company’s common stock in the offering that, when aggregated with all of the shares of the Company’s common stock otherwise owned by the subscriber and his, her or its affiliates, would immediately following the closing represent more than 50% of the Company’s issued and outstanding shares. 

        As provided in the Rights Offering, 7,029,604 rights were exercised pursuant to the basic subscription privilege, resulting in the purchase of 21,088,812 shares at $0.25 per share for gross proceeds to the Company of $5,272,203 resulting from the basic subscription privilege. A total of 15,211,118 rights were exercised pursuant to the oversubscription privilege, resulting in additional gross proceeds to the Company of $3,802,797. Of the shares purchased pursuant to the Rights Offering 14,966,344 shares were purchased by Directors, Officers and owners of 10% of the Company’s outstanding common stock.

        At the time the Rights Offering closed on March 18, 2004 all 36.3 million shares offered had been subscribed and, as a result, the Company raised approximately $9.1 million. The total number of shares subscribed actually exceeded the 36.3 million shares available for issuance under the offering. Consequently, all shares subscribed for under the basic privilege were issued and the number of shares issued under the over-subscription privilege was proportionately reduced to equal the number of remaining shares. The allocation and issuance of the oversubscribed shares was made by Mellon Investor Services, the Company’s subscription agent who also returned payments for those over-subscribed shares that were not available.

        The net proceeds of the Rights Offering have been used to pay non-bank indebtedness in the aggregate amount of approximately $6 million (including up to $3,850,000 in principal amount plus accrued interest owed by the Company to Dolphin) and to pay $1,157,00 as a portion of the Company’s settlement with Bank One. The balance of the net proceeds will be used for working capital purposes, including the drilling of additional wells.At December 31, 2003, the Company incurred costs in connection with the Rights Offering of $223,003, which are reflected in the consolidated balance sheet in other current assets. This asset was offset against gross proceeds in March 2004, when such proceeds were received by the Company.

(10)            Bank One Litigation Settlement

        As of May 1, 2004, the principal amount owed by the Company under the credit facility with Bank One signed on November 8, 2001 was $4,101,601.61. On Thursday, May 13, 2003, the Company and the Bank One executed a written agreement resolving all claims against each other. Pursuant to that agreement, the Company agreed to pay the sum of $3,657,000 to the Bank by May 18, 2004, in full satisfaction of its obligations to the Bank and to immediately release all claims against the Bank and to dismiss the litigation. In turn, Bank One agreed to immediately release all its claims against the Company, dismiss the litigation and to execute releases of its liens on all of the Company’s properties securing the credit facility upon receipt of the agreed payment. Bank One retained a right to seek specific performance of the May 13, 2004 agreement if payment were not made by May 18, 2004 and to recover attorney’s fees if such relief were sought. The Company and the Bank each agreed to bear all of its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees incurred to date.

        On May 18, 2004, the Company paid Bank One, the agreed upon settlement in the amount of $3,657,000. The funds were obtained from proceeds of a bridge loan from Dolphin Offshore Partners, LP (“Dolphin”) (the managing partner of Dolphin is Peter E. Salas, a member of the Board of Directors), in the principal amount of $2,500,000 bearing interest at 12% per annum and payable interest only monthly beginning June 18, 2004 with the principal amount due May 20, 2005. The loan is secured by a first lien on the Company’s Tennessee and Kansas producing properties and the Tennessee pipeline. The balance of the settlement amount of $1,157,000 was paid from funds available to the Company from the proceeds of the rights offering. Upon receipt this payment, an agreed order signed by the Company and the Bank dismissing all claims in litigation was filed with the court on May 20, 2004 and entry by the court is anticipated immediately. No hearing or approval of the settlement by tbe court is required.

      ITEM 2 MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

                      b.ResultsResults of Operations and Financial Condition

Kansas

         During the first ninethree months of 2003,2004, the Company produced and sold 94,78229,635 barrels of oil and 196,37367,582 Mcf of natural gas from its Kansas Properties comprised of 149 producing oil wells and 59 producing gas wells. The first ninethree months production of 94,78229,635 barrels of oil compares to 106,68332,807 barrels produced in the first ninethree months of 2002.2003. The first ninethree months production of 196,37367,582 Mcf of gas compares to 214,85964,438 Mcf produced in the first ninethree months of 2002.2003. In summary, the first ninethree months production reflected expected continued stable production levels from the Kansas Properties, which have been in production for many years. The decrease in oil production reflects a normal decline curve for the Kansas properties. This decline has not been offset by additional drilling and well work-overs due to the Bank One litigation. The revenues from the Kansas properties were $2,959,430$999,707 in the first ninethree months of 2003 as2004 compared to $2,438,136$1,165,422 in 2002. The increase in revenues is due to a significant increase in the price of oil and gas for 2003.

                      Tennessee

         During the first ninethree months of 2003,2004, the Company produced gas from 23 wells in the Swan Creek field, which it sold to its two industrial customers in Kingsport, Tennessee BAE SYSTEMS Ordnance Systems Inc. as operator of the Holston Army Ammunition Plant (“BAE”) andto Eastman Chemical Company (“Eastman”).

         Natural gas production from the Swan Creek field for the first ninethree months of 20032004 was an average of 1.195 million cubic feet617 Mcf per day during that period as compared to 2.114 million cubic feet1,241 Mcf per day in the first ninethree months of 2002.2003. The first ninethree months production reflected expected natural decline in production from the existing Swan Creek gas wells which were first brought into production in mid-2001 upon completion of the Company’s pipeline. This natural decline is normal for any producing well, and this decline as experienced on existing wells in Swan Creek was not unexpected; however, volumes were not replaced as expected. In order for overall field production to remain steady or grow, new wells must be brought online. Any of the new wells drilled by the Company would also experience the same harmonic (i.e. a relatively steep initial decline curve followed by longer periods of relatively flat or stable production) decline as does every natural well in a formation similar to the Knox formation, so continuous drilling is vital to maintaining or increasing earlier levels of production. No new gas wells have been drilled by the Company to date in 2003 because it does no have the funds necessary for such drilling, due to the destabilized lending arrangements caused by the actions of Bank One and ongoing litigation regarding that matter. The Company anticipates that the natural decline of production from existing wells is now predictable in Swan Creek, that the total volume of the Company’s reserves remains largely intact, and that these reserves can be extracted through existing wells and also by steady additional drilling brought on by reliable financial arrangements to fund drilling. Upon conclusion of the Bank One litigation, the Company is hopeful that additional or replacement financing may more easily be obtainable to allow drilling to increase; however, no assurances can be made that such financing will be obtained. See, Liquidity and Capital Resources discussion, below.unexpected.

Comparison of the Nine MonthsQuarters Ending September 30March 31, 2004 and 2003 and 2002

         The Company recognized $5,053,454$1,332,350 in oil and gas revenues from its Kansas Properties and the Swan Creek Field during the first ninethree months of 20032004 compared to $4,059,165$1,923,915 in the first ninethree months of 2002.2003. The increasedecrease in revenues was due to a decrease in production from Kansas and Swan Creek oil sales and from gas sales in Swan Creek. Kansas gas sales also declined by approximately $130,297 due to an increaseunusually high price received in price from oil and gas sales. Oil prices to date inMarch of 2003 have averaged $28.60of $8.64 per barrel in 2003Mcf, as compared to $22.98$4.11 in 2002. Gas prices to date in 2003 have averaged $5.31 per Mcf in 2003 as compared to $2.89 for 2002. The Swan Creek Field produced 322,739 Mcf and 570,883 Mcf in the first nine months of 2003 and 2002, respectively. This decrease was due to natural declines in production which could not be offset as the Company did not have the funds to continue drilling new wells, due to it’s dispute with it’s primary lender, Bank One NA.2004. The decrease in pipeline transportation revenues is directly related to the decrease in gas volumes.volumes in Swan Creek.

         The Company realized a net loss attributable to common shareholders of $2,248,772 (($.19)$1,125,778 ($0.06) per share of common stock), during the first ninethree months of 20032004 compared to a net loss in the first ninethree months of 20022003 to common shareholders of $2,820,539 (($.26)$793,545 ($0.07) per share of common stock). A non-cash charge of $351,204 was recognized as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle during the first quarter of 2003 relating to the implementation of SFAS 143.

         Production costs and taxes in the first ninethree months of 20032004 of $2,571,898 were consistent with production costs and taxes of $2,084,597$871,581 increased from $769,909 in the first ninethree months of 2002.2003. The difference of $487,301$101,672 was due to a reclassification of insurance cost relatingrelated to field activities of $148,098$98,369 from G&A to productiongeneral and administrative costs. The increaseAn additional $20,633 was paid in production costs in 2003 was also due to the fact that the Company’s field personnel cost was capitalized as the Company was drilling new wells in 2002, as compared to 2003 when all employees were working to maintain production. Field salaries in Swan Creek were $209,563 in the first nine months of 2003. The remaining increase is due to increased property taxes on the pipeline because it has been assessed at a higher value after completion.in Kansas.

         Depreciation, Depletion,depletion, and Amortizationamortization expense for the first ninethree months of 20032004 was $1,887,333$608,164 compared to $1,731,182$630,942 in the first ninethree months of 2002. The December 31, 2002, Ryder Scott reserve reports were used as a basis for the 2003 estimate. The Company reviews its depletion analysis and industry oil and gas prices on a quarterly basis to ensure that the depletion estimate is reasonable. The depletion taken in the first nine months of 2003 was $1,072,926 as compared to $1,019,138 in the first nine months of 2002. The Company also amortized $153,633 of loan fees relating to the Bank One note and convertible notes, in 2003 as compared to $129,540 in 2002. The remaining increase relates to the implementation of SFAS No. 143 as explained in footnote 10.2003.

         During the first ninethree months the Company reduced it general and administrative costs significantlyby $222,977 from 2002 by2003.This was due to the amount of $415,699.insurance reclassifications. Management has also made an effort ofto control costcosts in every aspect of its operations. Some of these cost reductions included the closing of the Company’s New York office andoperations, including a reduction in personnel from 20022003 levels. The Company’s public relation costs were reduced by $146,967 from 2002, as the Company continues cost cutting measures.

         Professional fees, in the first ninethree months of 20032004 have remained at a high level, primarily due to costs incurred for legal and accounting services as a result of the Bank One lawsuit and the class action lawsuit.

         Interest expense for the first quarter of 2004 increased from the first quarter of 2003 to $413,858 from $153,356. The increase was due to the issuance of notes to Dolphin during the first quarter of 2004. These notes were paid on March 20, 2004. Dividends on preferred stock have increased from $372,595 in 2002 to $402,583 in 2003 as a result of the increaseCompany’s Preferred Stock in the amount of preferred stock outstanding from preferred stock sold pursuant to private placements during$134,194 were recognized as interest expense in the secondfirst quarter of 2002.

Comparison of the Quarters Ending September 30 2003 and 2002

        The Company recognized $1,599,461 in oil and gas revenues from its Kansas Properties and the Swan Creek Field during the third quarter of 2003 compared to $1,507,308 in the third quarter of 2002. The increase in revenues was due to an increase in price from oil and gas sales. Oil prices to date in 2003 averaged $27.82 per barrel in 2003 as compared to $25.77 in 2002. Gas prices to date in 2003 averaged $4.71 per Mcf in 2003 as compared to $3.06 for 2002. The Swan Creek Field produced 115,683 Mcf and 162,290 Mcf in the third quarter of 2003 and 2002, respectively. This decrease was due to natural declines in production which could not be offset as the Company did not have the funds to continue drilling new wells, due to it’s dispute with it’s primary lender, Bank One. The decrease in pipeline transportation revenues is directly related to the decrease in gas volumes.

        The Company realized a net loss attributable to common shareholders of $642,441 (($.05) per share of common stock) during the third quarter of 2003 compared to a net loss in the third quarter of 2002 to common shareholders of $856,074 (($.08) per share of common stock).

        Production costs and taxes in the third quarter of 2003 of $944,019 increased from $815,293 in the third quarter of 2002. The increase in production cost in 2003 was also2004 due to the fact that partCompany’s adoption of SFAS 150, discussed in Note 4 of the Company’s field personnel cost was capitalized as the Company was drilling new wells in 2002, as comparedCondensed Notes to 2003 when all employees were working to maintain production. Field salaries in Swan Creek were $57,345 in the third quarter of 2003. The remaining increase relates to a higher property tax on the Company’s completed pipeline.Consolidated Financial Statements.

        Depreciation, Depletion, and Amortization expense for the third quarter of 2003 was $628,195 compared to $756,486 in the third quarter of 2002. The December 31, 2002, Ryder Scott reserve reports were used as a basis for the 2003 estimate. The Company reviews its depletion analysis and industry oil and gas prices on a quarterly basis to ensure that the depletion estimate is reasonable. The depletion taken in the third quarter of 2003 was $357,642 as compared to $519,138 in the third quarter of 2002. The Company also amortized $51,211 of loan fees relating to the Bank One note and convertible notes, in 2003 as compared to $43,180 in 2002.

        During the third quarter the Company reduced its general and administrative costs significantly from 2002 by the amount of $100,035. Management has made an effort to control costs in every aspect of its operations. Some of these cost reductions included the closing of the Company’s New York office and a reduction in personnel from 2002 levels. The Company’s public relations costs were reduced by $14,855 from 2002, as the Company continues cost cutting measures.

        Professional fees, in the third quarter of 2003 have remained at a high level, primarily due to cost incurred for legal and accounting services as a result of the Bank One lawsuit and the class action against the Company.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

         On November 8, 2001, the Company signed a credit facility agreement (the “Credit Agreement”) with the Energy Finance Division of Bank One, N.A. in Houston Texas.Texas (“Bank One”). The Company instituted litigation in May 2002 based on certain actions taken by Bank One under the agreement.

         In November 2002, the Company and Bank One concluded a series of meetings and correspondence by reaching preliminary agreement upon the basic terms of a potential settlement. Any settlement is conditioned upon execution of final settlement documents, and the parties agreed to attempt to close the settlement by November 29, 2002. The principal element of the settlement proposal is for the Bank and the Company to enter into an amended and restated agreement for a new term loan to replace the prior revolving credit facility. As of the date of this report, the Company and Bank One continue to negotiate the terms of a mutually satisfactory settlement agreement.

        Even if the Company concludes a settlement with Bank One, the Company does not anticipate that it will be able to borrow any additional sums from Bank One. To fund additional drilling and to provide additional working capital, the Company would be required to pursue other options. Such options include debt financing, sale of equity interests in the Company, a joint venture arrangement, and/or the sale of oil and gas interest. The inability of the Company to obtain the necessary cash funding on a timely basis will have an unfavorable effect on the Company’s financial condition and will require the Company to materially reduce the scope of its operating activities.

The harmful effects upon operations of the Company caused by the actions of Bank One and the ongoing litigation with Bank One have beenwere dramatic. First, the action of Bank One had the effect of totally cutting off any additional funds to the Company to support Company operations. Further, the funds loaned to the Company by Bank One have been usedwere to refinance the Company’s indebtedness and no funds were then available to pay this large repayment obligation to Bank One, even if such action by the Bank washad been proper, which the Company has vigorously and continually denied. The principal reason the Company had entered into the Bank One credit agreement was to provide for additional funds to promote the growth of the Company. Consequently, as a result of Bank One’s unwarranted actions no additional funds under the credit facility agreement have beenwere available for additional drilling that the Company had anticipated performing in the Swan Creek Field in 2002 and 2003, which were critical to the development of that Field. In order for overall field production to remain steady or grow in a field such as the Swan Creek Field, new wells must be brought online. Since 2002 only two gas wells have been added by the Company due to the destabilized lending arrangements caused by the actions of Bank One and ongoing litigation.2003.

         Second, the existence of the dispute with Bank One, compounded by the fact that an effect of Bank One’s action was to cause the Company’s auditors to indicate that theirthere was an uncertainty over the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern, has significantly discouraged other institutioninstitutional lenders from considering a variety of additional or replacement financing options for drilling and other purposes that may have ordinarily been available to the Company. Third, the dispute has caused Bank One to fail to grant permission under the existing loan agreements with the Company to permit the Company to formulate drilling programs involving potential third party investors that may have permitted additional drilling to occur. Finally, thethis dispute has caused the Company to incur significant legal fees to protect the Company’s rights.

         Although no assurances can be made,On May 13, 2004, the Company resolved its dispute with Bank One. See, Part II, Item 1, Legal Proceedings. The Company believes that now that its dispute has been resolved it will either be able to resolve the Bank One dispute or obtain additional or replacementlong term financing to allow the Company to continue drilling and to increase,locate and once new wells are drilled, production from the Swan Creek Field will increase.develop other properties. However, no assurances can be made that such financing will be obtained or that overall produced volumes will increase.obtained.

         Similarly, whenWhen funding for additional drilling becomes available, the Company plans to drill wells in five new locations it has identified in Ellis and Rush Counties, Kansas on its existing leases in response to drilling activity in the area establishing new areas of oil production. Although the Company successfully drilled the Dick No. 7 well in Kansas in 2001 and completed the well as an oil well, it haswas not been able to drill any new wells in Kansas in 2002 or 2003 due to lack of funds available for such drilling caused by the Bank One situation. As with Tennessee, theThe Company is hopeful now that once the Bank One matter ishas been resolved that it will soon be able to obtain financing necessary to resume drilling and well work-overs in Kansas to maximize production from the Kansas Properties.

Critical Accounting Policies

        The methods, estimates and judgments the Company’s management uses in applying Company accounting policies may have a significant effect on the results the Company reports in its financial statements. The estimates and judgments in applying those accounting policies which may have the most significant effect on the Company’s financial statements and operating results include: determinations of impairment of long-lived assets. Please refer to “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition Critical Accounting Policies” in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002, for a more complete description of the Company’s critical accounting policies.

ITEM 3 QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURE ABOUT MARKET RISK

Commodity Risk

         The Company’s major market risk exposure is in the pricing applicable to its oil and gas production. Realized pricing is primarily driven by the prevailing worldwide price for crude oil and spot prices applicable to natural gas production. Historically, prices received for oil and gas production have been volatile and unpredictable and price volatility is expected to continue. Monthly oil price realizations ranged from a low of $18.56$23.44 per barrel to a high of $27.49$33.60 per barrel during 2002.2003. Gas price realizations ranged from a monthly low of $1.91$3.69 per Mcf to a monthly high of $4.01$9.11 per Mcf during the same period. The Company did not enter into any hedging agreements in 2003 or the first quarter of 2004, to limit exposure to oil and gas price fluctuations.

Interest Rate Risk

         At December 31, 2002,2003, the Company had debt outstanding of approximately $9.9 million.$16.1 million including, as of that date, $5.1 million owed on its revolving credit facility with Bank One. The interest rate on the Bank One revolving credit facility of $7.5 million is variable based on the financial institution’s prime rate plus 0.25%. The Company’s remaining debt of $2.4$11 million has fixed interest rates ranging from 6% to 11.95%12%. As a result, the Company’s annual interest costcosts in 20022003 fluctuated based on short termshort-term interest rates on approximately 78%32% of its total debt outstanding at December 31,2002.31, 2003. The impact on interest expense and the Company’s cash flows of a 10%10 percent increase in the financial institution’sBank One’s prime rate (approximately 0.5 basis points) would be approximately $32,000;$22,000, assuming borrowed amounts under the Bank One credit facility remainremained at $7.5 million.the same amount owed as of December 31, 2003. The Company did not have any open derivative contracts relating to interest rates at September 30,December 31, 2003.

Forward-Looking Statements and Risk

         Certain statements in this report, including statements of the future plans, objectives, and expected performance of the Company, are forward-looking statements that are dependent upon certain events, risks and uncertainties that may be outside the Company’s control, and which could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated. Some of these include, but are not limited to, the market prices of oil and gas, economic and competitive conditions, inflation rates, legislative and regulatory changes, financial market conditions, political and economic uncertainties of foreign governments, future business decisions, and other uncertainties, all of which are difficult to predict.

         There are numerous uncertainties inherent in estimating quantities of proved oil and gas reserves and in projecting future rates of production and the timing of development expenditures. The total amount or timing of actual future production may vary significantly from reserves and production estimates. The drilling of exploratory or developmental wells can involve significant risks, including those related to timing, success rates and cost overruns. Lease and rig availability, complex geology and other factors can also affect these risks. Additionally, fluctuations in oil and gas prices, or a prolonged period of low prices, may substantially adversely affect the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

                ITEM 4 CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

         The Company’sCompany maintains disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Company in reports that it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including the Company's Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, have evaluatedas appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. In designing and evaluating the effectiveness of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures, (as suchmanagement recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and management necessarily is definedrequired to apply its judgment in Rules 13 a-14(c)evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and 15d-14(c) under the Securities Exchange Actprocedures. As of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) as the end of the period covered by this quarterly report, (the “Evaluation Date”).and under the supervision and with the participation of the management, including its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, management evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of these disclosure controls and procedures. Based on suchthis evaluation such officers haveand subject to the foregoing, the Company's Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that as of the Evaluation Date, the Company’sCompany's disclosure controls and procedures arewere effective in alerting them onreaching a timely basis to material information relating to the Company (including the Company’s consolidated subsidiaries) required to be includedreasonable level of assurance of achieving management’s desired controls and procedures objectives.

        There have been no changes in the Company’s reports filedCompany's internal controls over financial reporting that occurred during the Company's most recent fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or submitted underare reasonably likely to affect, the Exchange Act.Company's internal control over financial reporting.

        As part of a continuing effort to improve the Company's business processes management is evaluating its internal controls and may update certain controls to accommodate any modifications to its business processes or accounting procedures.

Changes in Internal Controls

         During the period covered by this quarterly report, there have not been any changes in the Company’s internal controls that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect, The Company'sthe Company’s internal controls over financial reporting.

                PART II OTHER INFORMATION

                ITEM 1 LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

         To the knowledge of management, no federal, state or local governmental agency is presently contemplating any proceeding against the Company that would have a result materially adverse to the Company. To the knowledge of management, no director, executive officer or affiliate of the Company or owner of record or beneficially of more than 5% of the Company’s common stock is a party adverse to the Company or had a material interest adverse to the Company in any proceeding.

    1.       Tengasco, Inc., Tengasco Land and Mineral Corporation and Tengasco Pipeline Corporation v. James E. LarkinBank One, NA, Docket No. 2:02-CV-118 in the Eastern District of Tennessee, Northeastern Division at Greeneville.


        On November 8, 2001, the Company signed a credit facility with Bank One, N.A. in Houston, Texas whereby Bank One extended to the Company a revolving line of credit of up to $35 million. The initial borrowing base under the facility was $10 million.

        On April 5, 2002, the Company received a notice from Bank One stating that it had re-determined and Kathleen A. O’Connor, No. 4929J, Circuit Courtreduced the then-existing borrowing base under the Credit Agreement by $6,000,000 to $3,101,777. Bank One demanded that the Company pay the $6,000,000 within thirty days. On May 2, 2002, the Company filed suit in federal court to restrain Bank One from taking any steps pursuant to its Credit Agreement to enforce its demand that the Company reduce its loan obligation or else be deemed in default and for Hawkins County, Tennessee. This wasdamages resulting from the wrongful demand. The Company sought a condemnation proceeding broughtjury trial and actual damages sustained by Tengasco Pipeline Corporation to acquireit as a right of way for a 3000-foot long portion of Phase Iresult of the Company’s pipelinewrongful demand, in Hawkins County, TN. The rightthe amount of way was appraised at $4,000. The landowners contested$51,000,000 plus punitive damages in the appraised valueamount of $100 million.

        On July 1, 2002, Bank One filed its answer and counterclaim, alleging that its actions were proper under the terms of the propertyCredit Agreement, and claimed incidental damagesin the counterclaim, seeking to fishponds there, despiterecover all amounts it alleges to be owed under the Credit Agreement, including principal, accrued interest, expenses and attorney’s fees in the approximate amount of $9 million. The Company continued to pay the sum of $200,000 per month of principal due under the original terms of the Credit Agreement, plus interest.

        As of May 1, 2004, the principal amount owed by the Company under the credit facility, with Bank One was $4,101,601.61. On Thursday, May 13, 2003, the Company and Bank One executed a lack of evidence of any fish farm business actually having been operated on the property or of any losseswritten agreement resolving all claims against each other. Pursuant to such a business. By counterclaim, the landowners sought $867,585 in compensatory damages and $2.6 million in punitive damages under various legal theories. The Court ordered the parties to conduct a second mediation session, which session occurred on June 2, 2003. At the mediation, settlement was reached wherebythat agreement, the Company agreed to pay the sum of $20,000$3,657,000 to plaintiffsBank One by May 18, 2004, in full satisfaction of its obligations to Bank One and plaintiff’s counsel,each of the parties agreed to the dismissal of the lawsuit and issue to themrelease their claims against each other. Bank One agreed to execute releases of its liens on all of the Company’s properties securing the credit facility upon receipt of the agreed payment. The Company and the Bank agreed to bear all of their own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees incurred to date. The settlement payment was made by the Company on May 18, 2004. See Part II, Item 5, Other Information.

    2.       Paul Miller v. M. E. Ratliff and Tengasco, Inc.,Docket Number 3:02-CV-644 in the aggregate 10,000 sharesUnited States District Court for the Eastern District of restrictedTennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee.


        This action was commenced in November 2002 and sought certification of a class action to recover on behalf of a class of all persons who purchased shares of the Company’s common stock between August 1, 2001 and April 23, 2002, damages in an amount not specified which were allegedly caused by violations of the federal securities laws, specifically Rule 10b-5 issued under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as to the Company and Malcolm E. Ratliff, the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer and a Director, and Section 20(a) the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as to Mr. Ratliff. The complaint alleges that documents and statements made to the investing public by the Company and Mr. Ratliff misrepresented material facts regarding the business and finances of the Company. As of January 30, 2004, a written stipulation of settlement documenting the settlement terms was signed by counsel for all parties. The stipulation of settlement was presented to the Court on February 27, 2004 for a determination of initial fairness and initiation of other procedures leading to a final hearing. At the hearing, the Court granted initial approval of the settlement as proposed and established periods for determination of the class and dates for a final settlement hearing approving disbursement of settlement funds to any class members. Under the settlement, the Company has paid into a settlement fund the amount of $37,500 to include all costs of administration, and has also contributed 150,000 shares of stock of Miller Petroleum, Inc. that is currently owned by the Company that had been accepted in payment of an obligation owed to the Company by Miller Petroleum. The Company also contributed to the settlement fund the Company’s agreement to issue 300,000 warrants to purchase 20,000 sharesa share of the Company’s common stock for a period of three years from date of issue at 52 cents$1 per share,share. The number or price of the closing pricewarrants is to be adjusted to account for the additional shares sold pursuant to the rights offering made by the Company or other stated events. All expenses including attorney’s fees as are awarded by the court on final hearing are to be paid out of the settlement date. Plaintiffs have executedfunds. The parties stipulated the existence of a rightclass for settlement purposes only. On April 29, 2004, a final hearing for approval of way agreement, allthe settlement payments includingwas held in federal court in Knoxville, Tennessee. On May 10, 2004 the issuanceCourt entered its final order approving the fairness of stockthe settlement to the class, dismissing the action pursuant to the Settlement Stipulation, and warrants have been made,fully releasing the claims of the class members. Pursuant to the Settlement Stipulation and the litigation was dismissed by agreedCourt’s final order, datedclass members may file their claims against the settlement fund through July 17, 2003.

15, 2004. The fund will be disbursed in accordance with the claims filed. No further court approval is required or contemplated, although the Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement stipulation and the Court’s final order.

                ITEM 2 CHANGES IN SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS

        During the quarter, certain Directors and Officers of the Company exercised options granted to them pursuant to the Tengasco, Inc. Stock Incentive Plan and purchased the following number of shares of the Company’s common stock at the exercise price of $0.50 per share, which was the market price of the stock on the date the options were granted: Richard T. Williams- 50,000 shares; Peter Salas- 24, 000 shares; Sheila Sloan- 8,000 shares; Steve Akos- 24,000 shares; and Robert Devereux- 24,000 shares.

        On October 17, 2003, the Company filed a Registration Statement on Form S-1 with the SEC for a rights offering of the Company’s common stock (the "Rights Offering"). On December 29, 2003; February 11, 2004; and February 13, 2004, the Company filed amendments to the Registration Statement. On February 13, 2004, the SEC deemed effective the Registration Statement on Form S-1 as amended.

        The Rights Offering was a distribution to the holders of the Company’s common stock outstanding at the record date, February 27, 2004, at no charge, of nontransferable subscription rights at the rate of one right to purchase three shares of the Company’s common stock for each share of common stock owned at the subscription price of $0.75 in the aggregate, or $0.25 per each share purchased.

        The record date for the Rights Offering was set as of February 27, 2004. The offering expired at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on March 18, 2004.

        Each subscription right in addition to the right to purchase three shares of common stock carried with it an over-subscription privilege. The over-subscription privilege provided stockholders that exercise all of their basic subscription privileges with the opportunity to purchase those shares that were not purchased by other stockholders through the exercise of their basic subscription privileges at the same subscription price per share. In no event could any subscriber purchase shares of the Company’s common stock in the offering that, when aggregated with all of the shares of the Company’s common stock otherwise owned by the of the shares of the Company’s common stock otherwise owned by the subscriber and his, her or its affiliates, would immediately following the closing represent more than 50% of the Company’s issued and outstanding shares.

        At the time the Rights Offering closed on March 18, 2004 all 36.3 million shares offered had been subscribed and, as a result the Company raised approximately $9.1 million. The total number of shares subscribed for actually exceeded the 36.3 million shares available for issuance under the offering. Consequently, all shares subscribed for under the basic privilege were issued and the number shares issued under the over subscription privilege was proportionately reduced to equal the number of remaining shares. The allocation and issuance of the oversubscribed shares was made by Mellon Investor Services, the Company’s subscription agent who also returned payments for those oversubscribed shares that were not available.

        Pursuant to the Rights Offering, 7,029,604 rights were exercised pursuant to the basic subscription privilege, resulting in the purchase of 21,088,812 shares at $0.25 per share for gross proceeds to the Company of $5,272,203. A total of 15,211,188 shares were purchased pursuant to the oversubscription privilege, resulting in additional gross proceeds to the Company of $3,802,797.

        The net proceeds of the Rights Offering have been used to pay non-bank indebtedness in the aggregate amount of approximately $6 million (including up to $3,850,000 in principal amount plus accrued interest owed by the Company to Dolphin Offshore Partners, L.P., the general partner of which is Peter E. Salas a director of the Company) and to pay $1,157,000 of the Company’s settlement with Bank One. The balance of the net proceeds will be used for working capital purposes, including the drilling of additional wells.  At December 31, 2003, the Company incurred costs in connection with the Rights Offering of $223,003, which are reflected in the consolidated balance sheet as an asset. This asset will be offset against gross proceeds to pay Bank One, when received by the Company.

ITEM 5 OTHER INFORMATION

         On August 6, 2003February 2, 2004, Dolphin Offshore Partners, LP (“Dolphin”) which owns more than 10% of the Company’s outstanding common stock and whose general partner is Peter E. Salas, a Director of the Company, loaned the Company the sum of $150,000 for$225,000 which the Companywas used for working capital.making payment of principal and interest to Bank One for February, 2004. This loan iswas evidenced by a separate promissory note bearing interest at the rate of 12% per annum, with payments of interest only payable quarterly and the principal balance payable on JanuaryApril 4, 2004, which are2004. The obligations under the loan were secured by an undivided 6 % interest in the Company’s Tennessee pipelines.and Kansas pipelines and the security agreement referred to above. All notes payable to Dolphin and secured by an interest in the pipelines were repaid on March 30, 2004 from the proceed received by the Company from its Rights Offering.

         DuringThe following persons that are the quarter ending September 30, 2003, a Director, Charles M. Stivers and an employeeCompany’s Directors, Officers or owners of the Company, Robert M. Carter, exercised options granted to them pursuant to the Tengasco, Inc. Stock Incentive Plan and purchased 24,000 and 12,000 the number of sharesmore than ten percent of the Company’s outstanding common stock respectively atpurchased the exercise pricenumbers of $0.50 per share, which wasshares in the market price of the stock on the date the options were grantedRights Offering indicated as follows: Stephen W. Akos (Director) 48,868 shares; Jeffrey R. Bailey (Director, President) 66,287 shares; Robert L. Devereux (Director) 412,457 shares; Richard T. Williams (Director, Chief Executive Officer) 190,000 shares; Dolphin Offshore Partners, L.P. 14,248,732 shares.

         On October 17, 2003,May 18, 2004, Dolphin loaned the Company filed$2,500,000 bearing interest at 12% per annum with interest payable monthly beginning June 18, 2004 and principal payable on May 20, 2005, which loan is secured by a registration statement withfirst lien on the Securitiescompany’s Tennessee and Exchange Commission on Form S-1 with respect to a proposed rights offering to existing shareholders asKansas producing properties and the Tennessee pipeline. The proceeds of the record date, which has not been determined. The rights offering will provide thatloan were used to fund in part the holderssettlement of the Company’s approximately 12 million outstanding shares of common stock may purchase two shares of common stock for each share held.   The offer includes an over-subscription privilege whereby participating shareholders may purchase shares that were offered but not purchased by other shareholders.Bank One litigation. See, Part II, Item 1, Legal Proceedings.

         The right offeringOn May 5, 2004, the Company completed the drilling to the Knox formation of the Hazel Sutton #3 well in the Swan Creek field in Hancock County, Tennessee. Well logs and pressure tests indicate that this portion of the Knox gas reservoir is already being made in orderdrained by other wells, and completing the Hazel Sutton #3 as a Knox gas well would not add significantly to reduce debt and increase shareholder equity.    The proceedsthe total volume of gas that will ultimately be produced from the offeringKnox reservoir. Instead, the well will be usedcompleted as a Trenton gas well. On May 18, 2004, the Stephen Lawson #8 was drilled to reduce the Company’s non-bank indebtedness, to reduceKnox formation in the Company’s indebtedness to its bank lender, and/or for working capital purposes.  The subscription price, record date, offering period, issuance date and other detailsSwan Creek field in Hancock County, Tennessee. It is anticipated that this well will produce commercial quantities of the proposed offering have not yet been determined, although the Company anticipates that the offering will commence within 60-90 daysgas from the date of filing of the registration statement.  When the Securities and Exchange Commission declares the registration statement effective, the prospectus and related documents will be mailed to shareholders of record and will also be made available, as applicable, for distribution to beneficial owners of the Company’s common stock.  None of the Company, its board of directors or any committee of its board of directors is making any recommendation to shareholders as to whether to exercise their subscription rights.Knox reservoir.

ITEM 3    DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES

      NONE6 EXHIBITS AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K

                        ITEM 4    SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

      NONE(a)        The following exhibits are filed with this report.

 Exhibits10.47 Promissory Note dated May 18, 2004 from Tengasco, Inc. and Tengasco Pipeline Corporation as Maker to Dolphin Offshore Partners, LP as Holder in the principal amount of $2,500,000 bearing interest at 12% per annum, payable interest only monthly beginning June 18, 2004 with principal due May 20, 2005, prepayable without penalty, and secured by the Company’s Tennessee and Kansas producing properties and the Tennessee pipeline.

       Exhibit 31: Certifications31.1 Certification of Richard T. Williams, Chief Executive Officer, and Mark A. Ruth,pursuant to Exchange Act Rule, Rule 13a-14a/15d-14a.

31.2 Certification of Chief Financial Officer, pursuant Exchange Act Rule, Rule 13a-14a/15d-14a

31.1 Certifications of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 30218 U.S.C section 1350 as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Sarbanes - Oxley Act of 2002.

       Exhibit 32:32.2 Certifications of Richard T. Williams, Chief Executive Officer, and Mark A. Ruth, Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section18 U.S.C section 1350 as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.


      SIGNATURES

        Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereto duly authorized.

                  (b)     The Company did not file or furnish any current reports on Form 8-K during the quarter covered by this report.


SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant duly caused thisreport to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereto duly authorized.

Dated: November 13, 2003May 20, 2004

TENGASCO, INC.

By :s/ Richard T. Williams
Richard T. Williams
Chief Executive Officer


By :By: s/ Mark A. Ruth
Mark A. Ruth
ChiefCheif Financial Officer

Exhibit 31

31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Richard T. Williams, certify pursuantthat:

1.     I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Tengasco, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2004.

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to Section 302state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the Sarbanes-Oxleycircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The Registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act of 2002 that:Rules (13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the registrant and have: ;

1.        I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Tengasco, Inc. and Subsidiaries.

2.(a)        Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

3.        Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, m and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.        The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules (13a-15e and 15d-15e) for the Registrant t and we have:

    (a)        designed under our supervision to ensure that material information relation to the Registrant, including its designedDesigned such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made know to us by others withwithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared:


(b)        evaluated

Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c)Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’sregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; :and

evaluation, and;

    (c)        disclosed(d)

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that the occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and


5.     The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions);

5.        The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors) or persons performing the equivalent functions);

(a)

    (a)        allAll significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and


(b)        any

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves the management or other employe4semployees who have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.


Dated: November 13, 2003May 20, 2004

By :By:s/ Richard T. Williams
Richard T. Williams
Chief Executive Officer


Exhibit 31

31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Mark A. Ruth, certify pursuantthat:

1.     I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Tengasco, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2004.

2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to Section 302state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the Sarbanes-Oxleycircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.     The Registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act of 2002 that:Rules (13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the registrant and have:

1.        I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Tengasco, Inc. and Subsidiaries.

2.(a)        Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

3.        Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, m and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4.        The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules (13a-15e and 15d-15e) for the Registrant t and we have:

    (a)        designed under our supervision to ensure that material information relation to the Registrant, including its designedDesigned such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made know to us by others withwithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared:


(b)        evaluated

Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c)Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrant’sregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; :and

evaluation, and;

    (c)        disclosed(d)

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that the occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and


5.     The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions);

5.        The Registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting to the Registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the Registrant’s board of directors) or persons performing the equivalent functions);

(a)

    (a)        allAll significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the Registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and


(b)        any

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves the management or other employe4semployees who have a significant role in the Registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.



Dated May 20, 2004

      Dated: November 13, 2003

By :By:s/Mark A. Ruth
Mark A. Ruth
Chief Financial Officer



Exhibit 32

32.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 I hereby certify that:

(J)        I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004.

        To the best of my knowledge this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (i) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m (a) or 78o (d)); and, (ii) the information contained in this Report fairly present, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tengasco, Inc. and its subsidiaries during the period covered by this report.

(B)        To the best of my knowledge this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (i) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and, (ii) the information contained in this Report fairly present, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tengasco, Inc. and its Subsidiaries during the period covered by this report.

      Dated: November 13, 2003May 20, 2004

By :By:s/ Richard T. Williams
Richard T. Williams
Chief Executive Officer

Exhibit 32

32.2

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 I hereby certify that:

(C)        I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (i);

(B)        To the best of my knowledge this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (i) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and, (ii) the information contained in this Report fairly present, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tengasco, Inc. and its Subsidiaries

        I have reviewed the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004.

        To the best of my knowledge this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (i) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m (a) or 78o (d)); and, (ii) the information contained in this Report fairly present, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Tengasco, Inc. and its subsidiaries during the period covered by this report.


      Dated: November 13, 2003May 20, 2004

By :By:s/ Mark A. Ruth
Mark A. Ruth
Chief Financial Officer