Form 10-Q
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2010
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 001-32868
DELEK US HOLDINGS, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of
Incorporation or organization)
|
|
52-2319066
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.) |
|
|
|
7102 Commerce Way
Brentwood, Tennessee
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
37027
(Zip Code) |
(615) 771-6701
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Not Applicable
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has
been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer þ
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Act). Yes o No þ
At April 30, 2010, there were 54,339,479 shares of common stock, $0.01 par value, outstanding.
Part I.
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
|
Item 1. |
|
Financial Statements |
Delek US Holdings, Inc.
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In millions, except share and per share data) |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
40.3 |
|
|
$ |
68.4 |
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
106.3 |
|
|
|
76.7 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
112.2 |
|
|
|
116.4 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
55.3 |
|
|
|
50.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
314.1 |
|
|
|
311.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment |
|
|
869.8 |
|
|
|
865.5 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(186.1 |
) |
|
|
(173.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
683.7 |
|
|
|
692.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill |
|
|
71.9 |
|
|
|
71.9 |
|
Other intangibles, net |
|
|
8.6 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
Minority investment |
|
|
131.6 |
|
|
|
131.6 |
|
Other non-current assets |
|
|
13.5 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,223.4 |
|
|
$ |
1,223.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
207.0 |
|
|
$ |
192.5 |
|
Current portion of long-term debt and capital lease obligations |
|
|
42.7 |
|
|
|
17.7 |
|
Note payable to related party |
|
|
65.0 |
|
|
|
65.0 |
|
Accrued expenses and other current liabilities |
|
|
54.1 |
|
|
|
47.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
368.8 |
|
|
|
322.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt and capital lease obligations, net of current portion |
|
|
205.8 |
|
|
|
234.4 |
|
Environmental liabilities, net of current portion |
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
Asset retirement obligations |
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
Deferred tax liabilities |
|
|
108.9 |
|
|
|
110.5 |
|
Other non-current liabilities |
|
|
12.3 |
|
|
|
12.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-current liabilities |
|
|
339.0 |
|
|
|
369.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.01 par value, 10,000,000 shares authorized, no
shares issued and outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock, $0.01 par value, 110,000,000 shares authorized, 54,339,479 shares and 53,700,570 shares issued and outstanding at
March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
287.6 |
|
|
|
281.8 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
227.5 |
|
|
|
248.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
515.6 |
|
|
|
531.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
1,223.4 |
|
|
$ |
1,223.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements
3
Delek US Holdings, Inc.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(revised) |
|
|
|
(In millions, except share and per share data) |
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
892.9 |
|
|
$ |
368.3 |
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold |
|
|
820.7 |
|
|
|
317.6 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
56.1 |
|
|
|
45.8 |
|
Insurance proceeds business interruption |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21.1 |
) |
Property damage expenses (proceeds), net |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
|
14.7 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14.5 |
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
Gain on sale of assets |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
906.3 |
|
|
|
365.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss) income |
|
|
(13.4 |
) |
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
8.7 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-operating expenses |
|
|
8.7 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before income tax benefit |
|
|
(22.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.9 |
) |
Income tax benefit |
|
|
(8.0 |
) |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(14.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(14.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total basic earnings per share |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total diluted earnings per share |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
53,920,639 |
|
|
|
53,682,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
53,920,639 |
|
|
|
53,682,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared per common share outstanding |
|
$ |
0.0375 |
|
|
$ |
0.0375 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements
4
Delek US Holdings, Inc.
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(revised) |
|
|
|
(In millions, except per share data) |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(14.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(3.0 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14.5 |
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
Accretion of asset retirement obligations |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
Gain on sale of assets |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Loss on sale of assets held for sale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
Loss (gain) on involuntary conversion of assets |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
Stock-based compensation expense |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
Income tax benefit of stock-based compensation |
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
(29.6 |
) |
|
|
18.6 |
|
Inventories and other current assets |
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
9.4 |
|
Accounts payable and other current liabilities |
|
|
21.6 |
|
|
|
49.5 |
|
Non-current assets and liabilities, net |
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities |
|
|
(8.1 |
) |
|
|
85.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(9.6 |
) |
|
|
(80.8 |
) |
Expenditures to rebuild refinery |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(7.9 |
) |
Property damage insurance proceeds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.5 |
|
Proceeds from sales of convenience store assets |
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of assets held for sale |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(5.5 |
) |
|
|
(72.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from long-term revolvers |
|
|
200.6 |
|
|
|
121.7 |
|
Payments on long-term revolvers |
|
|
(197.7 |
) |
|
|
(36.3 |
) |
Payments on debt and capital lease obligations |
|
|
(6.5 |
) |
|
|
(54.8 |
) |
Taxes paid in connection with settlement of share purchase rights |
|
|
(2.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Income tax benefit of stock-based compensation |
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
Deferred financing costs paid |
|
|
(8.6 |
) |
|
|
(2.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(14.5 |
) |
|
|
26.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(28.1 |
) |
|
|
39.9 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period |
|
|
68.4 |
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the period |
|
$ |
40.3 |
|
|
$ |
55.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the period for: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest, net of capitalized interest of a nominal amount and $0.8 in the
2010 and 2009 periods, respectively |
|
$ |
4.1 |
|
|
$ |
1.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to the condensed consolidated financial statements
5
Delek US Holdings, Inc.
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
1. General
Delek US Holdings, Inc. (Delek, we, our or us) is the sole shareholder of MAPCO Express, Inc.
(Express), MAPCO Fleet, Inc. (Fleet), Delek Refining, Inc. (Refining), Delek Finance, Inc.
(Finance) and Delek Marketing & Supply, Inc. (Marketing) (collectively, the Subsidiaries).
We are a Delaware corporation formed in connection with our acquisition in May 2001 of 198
retail fuel and convenience stores from a subsidiary of the Williams Companies. Since then, we have
completed several other acquisitions of retail fuel and convenience stores. In April 2005, we
expanded our scope of operations to include complementary petroleum refining and wholesale and
distribution businesses by acquiring a refinery in Tyler, Texas. We initiated operations of our
marketing segment in August 2006 with the purchase of assets from Pride Companies LP and affiliates
(Pride Acquisition). Delek and Express were incorporated during April 2001 in the State of
Delaware. Fleet, Refining, Finance, and Marketing were incorporated in the State of Delaware during
January 2004, February 2005, April 2005 and June 2006, respectively.
Delek is listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the symbol DK. As of March 31,
2010, 73.1% of our outstanding shares were beneficially owned by Delek Group Ltd. (Delek Group)
located in Natanya, Israel.
2. Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Delek and its
wholly-owned subsidiaries. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in annual
financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles
(GAAP) have been condensed or omitted, although management believes that the disclosures herein are
adequate to make the financial information presented not misleading. Our unaudited condensed
consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with GAAP applied on a
consistent basis with those of the annual audited financial statements included in our Annual
Report on Form 10-K and in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC). These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in
conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto for the year
ended December 31, 2009 included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on March 12,
2010.
In the opinion of management, all adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of the
financial position and the results of operations for the interim periods have been included. All
significant intercompany transactions and account balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
All adjustments are of a normal, recurring nature. Operating results for the interim period should
not be viewed as representative of results that may be expected for any future interim period or
for the full year.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure
of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported
amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from
those estimates.
Segment Reporting
Delek is a diversified energy business focused on petroleum refining, wholesale sales of
refined products and retail marketing. Management views operating results in primarily three
segments: refining, marketing and retail. The refining segment operates a high conversion,
independent refinery in Tyler, Texas. The marketing segment sells refined products on a wholesale
basis in west Texas through company-owned and third-party operated terminals. The retail segment
markets gasoline, diesel and other refined petroleum products and convenience merchandise through a
network of over 430 company-operated retail fuel and convenience stores and sells fuel to a dealer
network of over 50 stores. Segment reporting is more fully discussed in Note 9.
6
Discontinued Operations
In December 2008, we met the requirements under the provisions of Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 360,
Property, Plant and Equipment (ASC 360) to classify our retail segments Virginia division
(Virginia stores) as a group of assets held for sale. The fair value assessment of these assets,
performed in the fourth quarter of 2008, did not result in an impairment. Upon their
reclassification, we ceased depreciation of these assets. In December 2008, we sold 12 of the 36
stores in this division. During 2009, we sold an additional 15 stores and in December 2009, the
remaining nine stores were reclassified back into normal operations. As a result of the
reclassification back to normal operations, the assets of these nine stores required a depreciation
catch up in December 2009.
Reclassifications
Cost of goods sold, reported in the condensed consolidated statement of operations, for the
three months ended March 31, 2009 has been revised due to a misapplication of accounting guidance
associated with accounting for lower of cost or market (LCM) reserves when using the LIFO method of
accounting for inventories. We recognized a reversal of a LCM reserve in the first quarter of 2009
in the amount of $4.8 million ($3.1 million, net of tax). The reversal should not have been
recognized until the second quarter of 2009 when our refinery resumed operations and the related
inventory was sold. This resulted in a $3.1 million reduction to previously reported net income in
the three months ended March 31, 2009, or $(0.03) per diluted share.
In December 2009, nine stores remained of the Virginia stores previously held for sale. These
assets were reclassified to normal operations and the consolidated balance sheets and statements of
operations for all periods presented reflect this reclassification. This reclassification was made
in order to conform to the current year reporting and had no effect on net income or shareholders
equity as previously reported.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Delek maintains cash and cash equivalents in accounts with large, national financial
institutions and retains nominal amounts of cash at the convenience store locations as petty cash.
All highly liquid investments purchased with an original maturity of three months or less are
considered to be cash equivalents. As of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, these cash
equivalents consisted primarily of overnight investments in U.S. Government obligations and bank
repurchase obligations collateralized by U.S. Government obligations.
Accounts Receivable
Accounts receivable primarily consists of receivables related to credit card sales,
receivables from vendor promotions and trade receivables generated in the ordinary course of
business. Delek recorded an allowance for doubtful accounts related to specifically identified
trade receivables of a nominal amount as of both March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009.
Inventory
Refinery inventory consists of crude oil, refined products and blendstocks which are stated at
the lower of cost or market. Cost is determined under the last-in, first-out (LIFO) valuation
method. Cost of crude oil, refined product and blendstock inventories in excess of market value are
charged to cost of goods sold. Such changes are subject to reversal in subsequent periods, not to
exceed LIFO cost, if prices recover.
Marketing inventory consists of refined products which are stated at the lower of cost or
market on a first-in, first-out (FIFO) basis.
Retail merchandise inventory consists of gasoline, diesel fuel, other petroleum products,
cigarettes, beer, convenience merchandise and food service merchandise. Fuel inventories are stated
at the lower of cost or market on a FIFO basis. Non-fuel inventories are stated at estimated cost
as determined by the retail inventory method.
Property, Plant and Equipment
Assets acquired by Delek in conjunction with acquisitions are recorded at estimated fair
market value in accordance with the purchase method of accounting as prescribed in ASC 805,
Business Combinations (ASC 805). Other acquisitions of property and equipment are carried at cost.
Betterments, renewals and extraordinary repairs that extend the life of an asset are capitalized.
Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred. Delek owns certain fixed assets on
leased locations and depreciates these assets and asset improvements over the lesser of
managements estimated useful lives of the assets or the remaining lease term.
7
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over managements estimated useful
lives of the related assets, which are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Automobiles |
|
3-5 years |
Computer equipment and software |
|
3-10 years |
Refinery turnaround costs |
|
4 years |
Furniture and fixtures |
|
5-15 years |
Retail store equipment |
|
7-15 years |
Asset retirement obligation assets |
|
15-50 years |
Refinery machinery and equipment |
|
5-40 years |
Petroleum and other site (POS) improvements |
|
8-15 years |
Building and building improvements |
|
15-40 years |
Property, plant and equipment, accumulated depreciation and depreciation expense by reporting
segment as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2010 are as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining |
|
|
Marketing |
|
|
Retail |
|
|
and Other |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
Property, plant and equipment |
|
$ |
440.9 |
|
|
$ |
35.5 |
|
|
$ |
391.2 |
|
|
$ |
2.2 |
|
|
$ |
869.8 |
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(63.4 |
) |
|
|
(6.3 |
) |
|
|
(116.2 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(186.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
$ |
377.5 |
|
|
$ |
29.2 |
|
|
$ |
275.0 |
|
|
$ |
2.0 |
|
|
$ |
683.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation expense |
|
$ |
7.9 |
|
|
$ |
0.4 |
|
|
$ |
5.8 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
14.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In accordance with ASC 360, Delek evaluates the realizability of property, plant and equipment
as events occur that might indicate potential impairment.
Other Intangible Assets
Delek has definite-life intangible assets consisting of longer-term supply contracts,
non-compete agreements and trademarks. The amortization periods associated with these assets are
11.5 years for the supply contracts, ten years for the non-compete agreements and four years for
the trademarks.
Capitalized Interest
Delek had several capital construction projects in the refining segment and construction
related to new prototype stores being built in the retail segment. For the three months ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009, interest of a nominal amount and $0.8 million, respectively, was
capitalized by the refining segment. The retail segment capitalized interest of a nominal amount
for both the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009. There was no interest capitalized by the
marketing segment for the three months ended March 31, 2010 or 2009.
Refinery Turnaround Costs
Refinery turnaround costs are incurred in connection with planned shutdowns and inspections of
the refinerys major units to perform necessary repairs and replacements. Refinery turnaround costs
are deferred when incurred, classified as property, plant and equipment and amortized on a
straight-line basis over that period of time estimated to lapse until the next planned turnaround
occurs. Refinery turnaround costs include, among other things, the cost to repair, restore,
refurbish or replace refinery equipment such as vessels, tanks, reactors, piping, rotating
equipment, instrumentation, electrical equipment, heat exchangers and fired heaters. During the
second quarter of 2009, we successfully completed a major turnaround on all of the units at the
refinery.
Goodwill and Potential Impairment
Goodwill in an acquisition represents the excess of the aggregate purchase price over the fair
value of the identifiable net assets. Deleks goodwill, all of which was acquired in various
purchase business combinations, is recorded at original fair value and is not amortized. Goodwill
is subject to annual assessment to determine if an impairment of value has occurred and Delek
performs this review annually in the fourth quarter. We could also be required to evaluate our
goodwill if, prior to our annual assessment, we experience disruptions in our business, have
unexpected significant declines in operating results, or sustain a permanent market
capitalization decline. If a reporting units carrying amount exceeds its fair value, the
impairment assessment leads to the testing of the implied fair value of the reporting units
goodwill to its carrying amount. If the implied fair value is less than the carrying amount, a
goodwill impairment charge is recorded. We do not believe any goodwill impairment existed as of
March 31, 2010.
8
Derivatives
Delek records all derivative financial instruments, including interest rate swap and cap
agreements, fuel-related derivatives, over-the-counter (OTC) future swaps and forward contracts at
estimated fair value in accordance with the provisions of ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (ASC
815). Changes in the fair value of the derivative instruments are recognized in operations, unless
we elect to apply the hedging treatment permitted under the provisions of ASC 815 allowing such
changes to be classified as other comprehensive income. We validate the fair value of all
derivative financial instruments on a monthly basis, utilizing valuations from third party
financial and brokerage institutions. On a regular basis, Delek enters into commodity contracts
with counterparties for crude oil and various finished products. These contracts usually qualify
for the normal purchase / normal sale exemption under the standard and, as such, are not measured
at fair value.
Deleks policy under the guidance of ASC 815-10-45, Derivatives and Hedging Other
Presentation Matters (ASC 815-10-45), is to net the fair value amounts recognized for multiple
derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty and offset these values against the cash
collateral arising from these derivative positions.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The fair values of financial instruments are estimated based upon current market conditions
and quoted market prices for the same or similar instruments. Management estimates that the
carrying value approximates fair value for all of Deleks assets and liabilities that fall under
the scope of ASC 825, Financial Instruments (ASC 825).
Delek applies the provisions of ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosure (ASC 820), in
its presentation and disclosures regarding fair value, which pertain to certain financial assets
and liabilities measured at fair value in the statement of position on a recurring basis. ASC 820
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures about
such measurements that are permitted or required under other accounting pronouncements. See Note 10
for further discussion.
Delek also applies the provisions of ASC 825 as it pertains to the fair value option. This
standard permits the election to carry financial instruments and certain other items similar to
financial instruments at fair value on the balance sheet, with all changes in fair value reported
in earnings. By electing the fair value option in conjunction with a derivative, an entity can
achieve an accounting result similar to a fair value hedge without having to comply with complex
hedge accounting rules. As of March 31, 2010, we did not make the fair value election for any
financial instruments not already carried at fair value in accordance with other standards.
Self-Insurance Reserves
Delek is primarily self-insured for employee medical, workers compensation and general
liability costs, with varying limits of per claim and aggregate stop loss insurance coverage in
amounts determined reasonable by management. We maintain an accrual for these costs based on claims
filed and an estimate of claims incurred but not reported. Differences between actual settlements
and recorded accruals are recorded in the period identified.
Vendor Discounts and Deferred Revenue
Delek receives cash discounts or cash payments from certain vendors related to product
promotions based upon factors such as quantities purchased, quantities sold, merchandise
exclusivity, store space and various other factors. In accordance with ASC 605-50, Revenue
Recognition Customer Payments and Incentives, we recognize these amounts as a reduction of
inventory until the products are sold, at which time the amounts are reflected as a reduction in
cost of goods sold. Certain of these amounts are received from vendors related to agreements
covering several periods. These amounts are initially recorded as deferred revenue, are
reclassified as a reduction in inventory over the period the products are received, and are
subsequently recognized as a reduction of cost of goods sold as the products are sold.
Delek also receives advance payments from certain vendors relating to non-inventory
agreements. These amounts are recorded as deferred revenue and are subsequently recognized as a
reduction of cost of goods sold as earned.
9
Environmental Expenditures
It is Deleks policy to accrue environmental and clean-up related costs of a non-capital
nature when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount can be reasonably
estimated. Environmental liabilities represent the current estimated costs to investigate and
remediate contamination at our properties. This estimate is based on internal and third-party
assessments of the extent of the contamination, the selected remediation technology and review of
applicable environmental regulations, typically considering estimated activities and costs for the
next 15 years, unless a specific longer range estimate is practicable. Accruals for estimated costs
from environmental remediation obligations generally are recognized no later than completion of the
remedial feasibility study and include, but are not limited to, costs to perform remedial actions
and costs of machinery and equipment that is dedicated to the remedial actions and that does not
have an alternative use. Such accruals are adjusted as further information develops or
circumstances change. We discount environmental liabilities to their present value if payments are
fixed and determinable. Expenditures for equipment necessary for environmental issues relating to
ongoing operations are capitalized.
Asset Retirement Obligations
Delek recognizes liabilities which represent the fair value of a legal obligation to perform
asset retirement activities, including those that are conditioned on a future event when the amount
can be reasonably estimated. In the retail segment these obligations relate to the net present
value of estimated costs to remove underground storage tanks at owned and leased retail sites which
are legally required under the applicable leases. The asset retirement obligation for storage tank
removal on retail sites is being accreted over the expected life of the owned retail site or the
average retail site lease term. In the refining segment, these obligations relate to the required
disposal of waste in certain storage tanks, asbestos abatement at an identified location and other
estimated costs that would be legally required upon final closure of the refinery. In the marketing
segment, these obligations relate to the required cleanout of the pipeline and terminal tanks, and
removal of certain above-grade portions of the pipeline situated on right-of-way property.
The reconciliation of the beginning and ending carrying amounts of asset retirement
obligations for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and for the year ended December 31, 2009 is
as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
7.0 |
|
|
$ |
6.6 |
|
Liabilities settled |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Accretion expense |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
7.0 |
|
|
$ |
7.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order to determine fair value, management must make certain estimates and assumptions
including, among other things, projected cash flows, a credit-adjusted risk-free rate and an
assessment of market conditions that could significantly impact the estimated fair value of the
asset retirement obligation.
Revenue Recognition
Revenues for products sold are recorded at the point of sale upon delivery of product, which
is the point at which title to the product is transferred, and when payment has either been
received or collection is reasonably assured.
Delek derives service revenue from the sale of lottery tickets, money orders, car washes and
other ancillary product and service offerings. Service revenue and related costs are recorded at
gross amounts and net amounts, as appropriate, in accordance with the provisions of ASC 605-45,
Revenue Recognition Principal Agent Considerations (ASC 605-45). We record service revenue and
related costs at gross amounts when Delek is the primary obligor, is subject to inventory risk, has
latitude in establishing prices and selecting suppliers, influences product or service
specifications, or has several but not all of these indicators. When Delek is not the primary
obligor and does not possess other indicators of gross reporting as discussed previously, we record
net service revenue.
10
Cost of Goods Sold and Operating Expenses
For the retail segment, cost of goods sold comprises the costs of specific products sold.
Operating expenses include costs such as wages of employees at the stores, lease and utilities
expense for the stores, credit card interchange transaction charges and other costs of operating
the stores. For the refining segment, cost of goods sold includes all the costs of crude oil,
feedstocks and external costs. Operating expenses include the costs associated with the actual
operations of the refinery and transportation and storage fees relating to the utilization of
certain crude pipeline and storage assets owned by the marketing segment. For the marketing
segment, cost of goods sold includes all costs of refined products, additives and related
transportation. Operating expenses include the costs associated with the actual operation of owned
terminals, terminaling expense at third-party operated locations and pipeline maintenance costs.
Sales, Use and Excise Taxes
Deleks policy is to exclude sales, use and excise taxes from revenue when we are an agent of
the taxing authority, in accordance with ASC 605-45.
Deferred Financing Costs
Deferred financing costs represent expenses related to issuing our long-term debt and
obtaining our lines of credit. These amounts are amortized over the remaining term of the
respective financing and are included in interest expense. See Note 7 for further information.
Advertising Costs
Delek expenses advertising costs as the advertising space is utilized. Advertising expense for
the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 was $0.7 million and $0.4 million, respectively.
Operating Leases
Delek leases land and buildings under various operating lease arrangements, most of which
provide the option, after the initial lease term, to renew the leases. Some of these lease
arrangements include fixed rental rate increases, while others include rental rate increases based
upon such factors as changes, if any, in defined inflationary indices.
In accordance with ASC 840-20, Leases Operating Leases, for all leases that include fixed
rental rate increases, Delek calculates the total rent expense for the entire lease period,
considering renewals for all periods for which failure to renew the lease imposes economic penalty,
and records rental expense on a straight-line basis in the accompanying condensed consolidated
statements of operations.
Income Taxes
Income taxes are accounted for under the provisions of ASC 740, Income Taxes (ASC 740). This
statement generally requires Delek to record deferred income taxes for the differences between the
book and tax bases of its assets and liabilities, which are measured using enacted tax rates and
laws that will be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. Deferred income tax
expense or benefit represents the net change during the year in our deferred income tax assets and
liabilities.
ASC 740 also prescribes a comprehensive model for how companies should recognize, measure,
present and disclose in their financial statements uncertain tax positions taken or expected to be
taken on a tax return and prescribes the minimum recognition threshold a tax position is required
to meet before being recognized in the financial statements. Finally, ASC 740 requires an annual
tabular rollforward of unrecognized tax benefits. At March 31, 2010, Delek had unrecognized tax
benefits of $0.4 million which, if recognized, would affect our effective tax rate.
Delek files a consolidated U.S. federal income tax return, as well as income tax returns in
various state jurisdictions. Delek is no longer subject to U.S. federal, state and local income tax
examinations by tax authorities for years through 2004. The Internal Revenue Service has examined
Deleks income tax returns through the tax year ending 2006. Delek carried back the 2009 federal
tax net operating loss to the 2005 and 2006 tax years, thus re-opening those years for examination
up to the amount of the refund claimed.
11
Delek recognizes accrued interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits as an
adjustment to the current provision for income taxes. Interest of $0.1 million was recognized
related to unrecognized tax benefits during the each of three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009.
Earnings Per Share
Basic and diluted earnings per share (EPS) are computed by dividing net income by the weighted
average common shares outstanding. The common shares used to compute Deleks basic and diluted
earnings per share are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding |
|
|
53,920,639 |
|
|
|
53,682,070 |
|
Dilutive effect of equity instruments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding, assuming dilution |
|
|
53,920,639 |
|
|
|
53,682,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding stock options totaling 3,556,632 and 1,775,062 common share equivalents were
excluded from the diluted earnings per share calculation for the three months ended March 31, 2010
and 2009, respectively. These share equivalents did not have a dilutive effect under the treasury
stock method. Outstanding stock options totaling 43,906 and 699,823, respectively, were also
excluded from the diluted earnings per share calculation for the three months ended March 31, 2010
and 2009 because of their anti-dilutive effect due to the net loss for the period.
Shareholders Equity
Dividends Paid
On February 10, 2010, Delek announced that its Board of Directors voted to declare a quarterly
cash dividend of $0.0375 per share, payable on March 18, 2010, to shareholders of record on
February 25, 2010.
Net Share Settlement
On February 21, 2010, our Chief Executive Officer exercised 1,319,493 share purchase rights
awarded as part of his previous employment agreement dated as of May 1, 2004, in connection with a
net share settlement. As a result, 638,909 shares of common stock were issued to him and
680,584 shares of common stock were withheld as a partial cashless exercise and to pay withholding
taxes.
Stock-Based Compensation
ASC 718, Compensation Stock Compensation (ASC 718), requires the cost of all share-based
payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the income
statement and establishes fair value as the measurement objective in accounting for share-based
payment arrangements. ASC 718 requires the use of a valuation model to calculate the fair value of
stock-based awards. Delek uses the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model to determine the fair
value of stock option awards and the Monte-Carlo simulation model to determine the fair value of
stock appreciation rights on the dates of grant.
Restricted stock units (RSUs) are measured based on the fair market value of the underlying
stock on the date of grant. Vested RSUs are not issued until the minimum statutory withholding
requirements have been remitted to us for payment to the taxing authority. As a result, the actual
number of shares accounted for as issued may be less than the number of RSUs vested, due to any
withholding amounts which have not been remitted.
We generally recognize compensation expense related to stock-based awards with graded or cliff
vesting on a straight-line basis over the vesting period. It is our practice to issue new shares
when stock-based compensation is exercised.
12
Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income for the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 was equivalent to net
income.
New Accounting Pronouncements
In January 2010, the FASB issued guidance regarding fair value measurements and disclosures,
which is effective for interim or annual periods beginning after December 15, 2009 and should be
applied prospectively. This guidance provides more robust disclosures about the different classes
of assets and liabilities measured at fair value, the valuation techniques and inputs used, the
activity in Level 3 fair value measurements, and the transfers between Levels 1, 2, and 3. Delek
adopted this guidance in January 2010. The additional disclosures required did not have an impact
on our financial position or results of operations.
3. Explosion and Fire at the Tyler, Texas Refinery
On November 20, 2008, an explosion and fire occurred at our 60,000 barrels per day (bpd)
refinery in Tyler, Texas. Some individuals have claimed injury and two of our employees died as a
result of the event. The event caused damage to both our saturates gas plant and naphtha
hydrotreater and resulted in a suspension of our refining operations until May 2009.
Several parallel investigations were commenced following the event, including our own
investigation and investigations and inspections by the U.S. Department of Labors Occupational
Safety & Health Administration (OSHA), the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board
(CSB) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). OSHA concluded its inspection in May 2009
and issued citations assessing an aggregate penalty of approximately $0.2 million. We are
contesting these citations and do not believe that the outcome will have a material effect on our
business. We cannot assure you as to the outcome of the other investigations, including possible
civil penalties or other enforcement actions.
Currently we carry, and at the time of the incident we carried, insurance coverage of
$1.0 billion in combined limits to insure against property damage and business interruption. Under
these policies, we were subject to a $5.0 million deductible for property damage insurance and a 45
calendar day waiting period for business interruption insurance. We did not recognize any insurance
proceeds during the three months ended March 31, 2010. During the three months ended March 31,
2009, we recognized income from insurance proceeds of $30.6 million, of which $21.1 million is
included as business interruption proceeds and $9.5 million is included as property damage. We also
recorded expenses of $7.9 million, resulting in a net gain of $1.6 million related to property
damage proceeds on the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of operations.
4. Dispositions and Assets Held for Sale
Virginia Stores
In December 2008, the retail segments Virginia division met the requirements as enumerated in
ASC 360 which require the separate reporting of assets held for sale. Management committed to a
plan to sell the retail segments Virginia stores and proceeded with efforts to locate buyers.
However, until we obtained the necessary amendments to our credit agreements, we were encumbered
from that action. At the time the credit agreement limitations were lifted, in December 2008, we
had contracts to sell 28 of the 36 Virginia properties. As of December 31, 2008, we had closed on
12 of the properties. We sold an additional 15 of these stores during the year ended December 31,
2009. In December 2009, the remaining nine Virginia stores were reclassified back into normal
operations. We received proceeds from the sales completed during the three months ended March 31,
2009, net of expenses, of $7.1 million, recognizing a loss on those sales of $1.3 million. In
addition to the property, plant and equipment sold, we sold $0.8 million in inventory, at cost, to
the buyers.
The carrying amounts of the Virginia store assets sold during the three months ended March 31,
2009 are as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory |
|
$ |
0.8 |
|
Property, plant & equipment, net of accumulated depreciation of $3.3 million |
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
13
There were no assets held for sale as of March 31, 2010 or December 31, 2009.
Once the Virginia stores were identified as assets held for sale, the operations associated
with these properties qualified for reporting as discontinued operations under ASC 360.
Accordingly, the operating results, net of tax, from discontinued operations are presented
separately in Deleks Consolidated Statement of Operations and the Notes to the consolidated
financial statements have been adjusted to exclude the discontinued operations. The amounts
eliminated from continuing operations did not include allocations of corporate expenses included in
the selling, general and administrative expenses caption in the Consolidated Statement of
Operations, nor the income tax benefits from such expenses. The remaining nine Virginia stores that
were reclassified into normal operations required a depreciation catch up in December 2009.
Components of amounts reflected in income from discontinued operations for the three months ended
March 31, 2009 are as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, 2009 |
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
5.3 |
|
Operating costs and expenses |
|
|
(5.3 |
) |
Loss on sale of assets held for sale |
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
Write-down of goodwill associated with the sale of assets held for sale |
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from discontinued operations before income taxes |
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
Income tax (benefit) expense |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations, net of income taxes |
|
$ |
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
5. Inventory
Carrying value of inventories consisted of the following (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Refinery raw materials and supplies |
|
$ |
19.4 |
|
|
$ |
19.3 |
|
Refinery work in process |
|
|
27.6 |
|
|
|
28.6 |
|
Refinery finished goods |
|
|
17.1 |
|
|
|
22.9 |
|
Retail fuel |
|
|
18.5 |
|
|
|
15.1 |
|
Retail merchandise |
|
|
24.9 |
|
|
|
26.6 |
|
Marketing refined products |
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total inventories |
|
$ |
112.2 |
|
|
$ |
116.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the excess of replacement cost (FIFO) over the
carrying value (LIFO) of refinery inventories was $25.6 million and $20.8 million, respectively.
Temporary Liquidations
During the three months ended March 31, 2010, we incurred a temporary LIFO liquidation gain in
our refinery inventory of $2.8 million, which we expect to be restored by the end of the year. The
temporary LIFO liquidation gain has been deferred as a component of accrued expenses and other
current liabilities in the accompanying March 31, 2010 condensed consolidated balance sheet.
There were no temporary liquidations during the three months ended March 31, 2009.
Permanent Liquidations
During the three months ended March 31, 2010, we incurred a permanent reduction in the LIFO
layer resulting in a liquidation in our refinery finished goods inventory in the amount of
$3.1 million. This liquidation, which represents a reduction of approximately 132,000 barrels, was
recognized as a component of cost of goods sold in the three months ended March 31, 2010.
There were no permanent liquidations during the three months ended March 31, 2009.
14
6. Minority Investment
Investment in Lion Oil Company
On August 22, 2007, Delek completed the acquisition of approximately 28.4% of the issued and
outstanding shares of common stock of Lion Oil Company (Lion Oil). On September 25, 2007, Delek
completed the acquisition of an additional approximately 6.2% of the issued and outstanding shares
of Lion Oil, bringing its total ownership interest to approximately 34.6%. Total cash consideration
paid to the sellers by Delek in both transactions totaled approximately $88.2 million. Delek also
incurred and capitalized $0.9 million in acquisition transaction costs. In addition to cash
consideration, Delek issued to one of the sellers 1,916,667 unregistered shares of Delek common
stock, par value $0.01 per share, valued at $51.2 million using the closing price of our stock on
the date of the acquisition. As of December 31, 2007, our total investment in Lion Oil was
$139.5 million.
Lion Oil, a privately held Arkansas corporation, owns and operates a 75,000 barrel per day,
crude oil refinery in El Dorado, Arkansas, three crude oil pipelines, a crude oil gathering system
and two refined petroleum product terminals in Memphis and Nashville, Tennessee. The two terminals
supply products to some of Deleks 180 convenience stores in the Memphis and Nashville markets.
These product purchases are made at market value and totaled $3.5 million and $2.2 million during
the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The refining segment also made sales
of $2.5 million of intermediate products to the Lion Oil refinery during the three months ended
March 31, 2009. There were no sales made by the refining segment to the Lion Oil refinery during
the three months ended March 31, 2010.
At the time of acquisition, Delek acknowledged that our ownership percentage set a presumption
of the use of the equity method of accounting as established in ASC 323, Investments Equity
Method and Joint Ventures (ASC 323). As a result, Delek had reported its investment using the
equity method since acquisition. However, our interactions with Lion Oil since acquisition led us
to the conclusion that the initial presumption under ASC 323 had been rebutted. Beginning
October 1, 2008, Delek began reporting its investment in Lion Oil using the cost method of
accounting. This investment in a non-public entity, which is carried at cost, is only reviewed for
a diminishment of fair value in the instance when there are indicators that a possible impairment
has occurred. Delek carried its investment in Lion Oil at $131.6 million as of March 31, 2010 and
December 31, 2009.
7. Long-Term Obligations and Short-Term Note Payable
Outstanding borrowings under Deleks existing debt instruments and capital lease obligations
are as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Senior secured credit facility term loan |
|
$ |
77.0 |
|
|
$ |
81.4 |
|
Senior secured credit facility revolver |
|
|
30.4 |
|
|
|
32.4 |
|
Fifth Third revolver |
|
|
47.4 |
|
|
|
42.5 |
|
Promissory notes |
|
|
158.0 |
|
|
|
160.0 |
|
Capital lease obligations |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
313.5 |
|
|
|
317.1 |
|
Less: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt, notes payable and capital lease obligations |
|
|
107.7 |
|
|
|
82.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
205.8 |
|
|
$ |
234.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Secured Credit Facility
As of March 31, 2010, the senior secured credit facility consisted of a $120.0 million
revolving credit facility and a $165.0 million term loan facility, which, as of March 31, 2010, had
$30.4 million outstanding under the revolver and $77.0 million outstanding under the term loan. As
of March 31, 2010, Fifth Third Bank, N.A. (Fifth Third) was the administrative agent and a lender
under the facility. On September 1, 2009, Fifth Third assumed the role of successor administrative
agent under the facility from the resigning administrative agent Lehman Commercial Paper Inc.
(LCPI). During September 2008, upon the bankruptcy filing of its parent company, LCPI informed
Express that it would not be funding its pro rata lender participation of future borrowings under
the revolving credit facility. Since that communication by Lehman of its intention through March
31, 2010, LCPI did not participate in any borrowings by Express under the revolving credit
facility.
15
Borrowings under the senior secured credit facility are secured by substantially all the
assets of Express and its subsidiaries. Letters of credit issued under the facility totaled
$18.0 million as of March 31, 2010. The senior secured credit facility term loan requires quarterly
principal payments of $0.4 million through March 31, 2011 and a balloon payment of the remaining
principal balance due upon maturity on April 28, 2011. We are also required to make certain
prepayments of this facility depending on excess cash flow as defined in the credit agreement. In
accordance with this excess cash flow calculation, we prepaid $19.7 million in March 2009. An
excess cash flow prepayment for 2010 in the amount of $10.4 million was paid in April 2010. During
the period from December 2008 through March 31, 2010, consistent with the terms of the December 3,
2008 amendment discussed below, Express disposed of 60 non-core real property assets, of which 27
were located in Virginia. The application of proceeds from certain of these asset sales, net of any
amounts set aside pursuant to the terms of the facility for reinvestment purposes, resulted in the
reduction of the term loan in the amounts of $4.0 million and $7.0 million during the three months
ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
As a direct result of the December 10, 2009 amendment and restatement of the credit agreement
discussed below, the termination date of $108.0 million of the revolving credit commitments under
the senior secured revolver were extended by one year from April 28, 2010 to April 28, 2011. The
$12.0 million commitment of LCPI is the only commitment that was not extended and it will expire on
the original termination date of the senior secured revolver, April 28, 2010. The senior secured
credit facility term and senior secured credit facility revolver loans bear interest based on
predetermined pricing grids which allow us to choose between Base Rate Loans or LIBOR Rate Loans.
At March 31, 2010, the weighted average borrowing rate was 6.5% for the senior secured credit
facility term loan and 6.0% for the senior secured credit facility revolver. Additionally, the
senior secured credit facility requires us to pay a quarterly fee of 0.5% per year on the average
available revolving commitment under the senior secured revolver. Amounts available under the
senior secured revolver as of March 31, 2010 were approximately $59.6 million excluding the
commitment of LCPI as a lender under this facility.
On December 3, 2008, the credit facility was amended to allow for the disposition of specific
Express real and personal property assets in certain of its geographic operating regions. The
amendment also allows for additional asset sales of up to $35.0 million per calendar year subject
to such sales meeting certain financial criteria. Additionally, the amendment appointed Fifth Third
Bank as the successor administrative agent subject to the resignation or removal of LCPI. As stated
above, the resignation of LCPI and the subsequent assumption of the role of administrative agent by
Fifth Third were consummated on September 1, 2009. On January 28, 2009, the credit facility was
further amended to allow for the one-time prepayment in the amount of $25.0 million toward the
outstanding principal of certain subordinated debt owed to Delek and incurred in conjunction with
Deleks purchase, through its Express subsidiary, of 107 retail fuel and convenience stores located
in northern Georgia and eastern Tennessee, and related assets, from the Calfee Company of Dalton,
Inc. and its affiliates in 2007 (the Calfee acquisition). Pursuant to the terms of the amendment,
the $25.0 million prepayment was completed on March 5, 2009. The amendment also implemented a
100 basis point credit spread increase across all tiers in the pricing grid and implemented a LIBOR
rate floor of 2.75% for all Eurodollar rate borrowings.
On September 1, 2009, the borrowers and lenders under the credit facility executed a
resignation and appointment agreement that consummated the resignation of LCPI as administrative
agent and swing line lender under the facility and the appointment of Fifth Third as the successor
administrative agent and successor swing line lender under the facility. The agreement also
clarified that LCPI, as a non-performing lender under the credit facility, has no voting rights and
is not entitled to any fees under the facility. Additionally, under the terms of the September 1,
2009 amendment, Express, along with other relevant parties, released LCPI from any and all
liabilities they may have arising out of or in connection with the credit facility, including
LCPIs non-performance as a lender under the facility.
On December 10, 2009, the credit facility was amended and restated in its entirety. The
primary effects of the amendment and restatement were, among other things, (i) the one year
extension of the $108.0 million of revolving credit commitments, (ii) the addition of a new
accordion feature to the revolving credit facility accommodating an increase in maximum revolver
commitments of up to $180.0 million, subject to the identification by the borrower of such
additional lender commitments, (iii) the favorable adjustment for the remaining term of the credit
facility in the required financial covenant levels for Leverage Ratio, Adjusted Leverage Ratio, and
Adjusted Interest Coverage Ratio, as these are defined under the facility, and (iv) the increase in
interest rate spreads across all tiers in the existing pricing grid by 75 basis points and the
addition of a new top tier for leverage ratios greater than 4.00x.
Under the terms of the credit facility, Express and its subsidiaries are subject to certain
covenants customary for credit facilities of this type that limit their ability to, subject to
certain exceptions as defined in the credit agreement, remit cash to, distribute assets to, or make
investments in entities other than Express and its subsidiaries. Specifically, these covenants
limit the payment, in the form of cash or other assets, of dividends or other distributions, or the
repurchase of shares, in respect of Express and its subsidiaries equity. Additionally, Express
and its subsidiaries are limited in their ability to make investments, including extensions of
loans or advances to, or acquisition of equity interests in, or guarantees of obligations of, any
other entities.
16
We are required to comply with certain financial and non-financial covenants under the senior
secured credit facility. We believe we were in compliance with all covenant requirements as of
March 31, 2010.
Wells Fargo ABL Revolver
On February 23, 2010, Delek Refining, Ltd., a wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Delek US
Holdings, Inc., elected to repay and terminate its existing $300 million SunTrust asset-based loan
(ABL) revolver and entered into a new, four-year, $300 million ABL revolving credit facility. The
final pay-off amount paid under the SunTrust ABL in connection with this termination was $10.6
million. The new ABL revolving credit facility is made by a consortium of lenders, including Wells
Fargo Capital Finance, LLC in the roles of administrative agent and co-collateral agent, Bank of
America, N.A. in the role of co-collateral agent and SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc. as a joint
book runner. This new revolving credit facility (Wells ABL) is scheduled to mature on February 23,
2014.
The primary purpose of the Wells ABL is to support the working capital requirements of our
petroleum refinery in Tyler, Texas. Key features of the Wells ABL include (i) a $300 million
revolving credit limit, (ii) a $30 million swing line loan sublimit, (iii) a $300 million letter of
credit sublimit, and (iv) an accordion feature which permits an increase in facility size of up to
$600 million subject to additional lender commitments. Under the facility, revolving loans and
letters of credit are provided subject to availability requirements which are determined pursuant
to a borrowing base calculation as such is defined in the Wells ABL. The borrowing base is
primarily supported by cash, certain accounts receivable and certain inventory.
Borrowings under the facility bear interest based on predetermined pricing grids which allow
us to choose between Base Rate Loans or LIBOR Rate Loans. The initial pricing for loans under the
facility includes a margin of 4.00% above LIBOR for loans designated as LIBOR Rate Loans and 2.50%
above the prime rate for loans designated as Base Rate Loans.
As of March 31, 2010, we had letters of credit issued under the facility totaling
approximately $153.2 million and had a de minimis amount of $1,000 in outstanding loans under the
facility at an average interest rate of 5.75%. Borrowing capacity, as calculated and reported
under the terms of the Wells ABL credit facility, net of a $15.0 million availability reserve
requirement, as of March 31, 2010 was $51.2 million.
The lenders under the Wells ABL are granted a perfected, first priority security interest in
all of our refining operations accounts receivable, general intangibles, letter of credit rights,
deposit accounts, investment property, inventory, equipment and all products and proceeds thereof.
The security interest in the equipment is limited to $50 million and will be subordinated or
released under certain limited circumstances. Delek Refining, Inc. and Delek U.S. Refining GP, LLC,
the limited and general partners of our refining subsidiary, respectively, and wholly owned
subsidiaries of Delek US Holdings are guarantors of the obligations under the Wells ABL. Delek US
Holdings is also a guarantor under the Wells ABL up to a total of $15.0 million. The credit
facility contains usual and customary affirmative and negative covenants for financings of this
type, including certain limitations at the refining subsidiary level on the incurrence of
indebtedness, making of investments, creation of liens, disposition of property, making of
restricted payments and transactions with affiliates. The Wells ABL also contains a fixed charge
coverage ratio financial covenant with which we must be in compliance at times when borrowing base
excess availability is less than certain thresholds, as defined under the credit facility. During
the three months ended March 31, 2010, we were not required to comply with the fixed charge
coverage ratio financial covenant. We believe we were in compliance with all covenant requirements
under this facility as of March 31, 2010.
Fifth Third Revolver
On July 27, 2006, Delek executed a short-term revolver with Fifth Third Bank, as
administrative agent, in the amount of $50.0 million. The proceeds of this revolver were used to
fund the working capital needs of the newly formed subsidiary, Delek Marketing & Supply, LP. The
Fifth Third revolver initially had a maturity date of July 30, 2007, but on July 27, 2007 the
maturity was extended until January 31, 2008. On December 19, 2007, we amended and restated our
existing revolving credit facility. The amended and restated agreement, among other things,
increased the size of the facility from $50.0 to $75.0 million, including a $25.0 million sub limit
for letters of credit, and extended the maturity of the facility to December 19, 2012. On
October 17, 2008, the agreement was further amended to permit the payment of a one-time
distribution of $20.0 million from the borrower, Delek Marketing & Supply, LP, a subsidiary of
Marketing to Delek, increase the size of the sub limit for letters of credit to $35.0 million and
reduce the leverage ratio financial covenant limit.
17
On March 31, 2009, the credit agreement was amended to permit the use of facility proceeds for
the purchase from the refining subsidiary to a newly-formed subsidiary of Delek Marketing & Supply
LP of the crude pipeline and tankage assets of the refining segments Tyler, Texas refinery that
are located outside the gates of the refinery and which are used to supply substantially all of the
necessary crude feedstock to the refinery. Pursuant to the terms of the amendment, the purchase of
the crude pipeline and tankage assets was completed on March 31, 2009 for a total consideration of
$29.7 million, all of which was borrowed under the Fifth Third revolver. The amendment also
increased credit spreads by up to 225 basis points and commitment fees by up to 20 basis points
across the various tiers of the pricing grid. In addition, on May 6, 2009, the credit agreement was
further amended, effective March 31, 2009, related to the definition of certain covenant terms.
The revolver bears interest based on predetermined pricing grids that allow us to choose
between Base Rate Loans or LIBOR Rate Loans. Borrowings under the Fifth Third revolver are secured
by substantially all of the assets of Delek Marketing & Supply LP. As of March 31, 2010, we had
$47.4 million outstanding borrowings under the facility at a weighted average borrowing rate of
approximately 4.6%. We also had letters of credit issued under the facility of $10.5 million as of
March 31, 2010. Amounts available under the Fifth Third revolver as of March 31, 2010 were
approximately $17.1 million.
Under the terms of the credit agreement, Marketing and its subsidiaries are subject to certain
covenants customary for credit facilities of this type that limit their ability to, subject to
certain exceptions as defined in the credit agreement, remit cash to, distribute assets to, or make
investments in entities other than Marketing and its subsidiaries. Specifically, these covenants
limit the payment, in the form of cash or other assets, of dividends or other distributions, or the
repurchase of shares, in respect of Marketings and its subsidiaries equity. Additionally,
Marketing and its subsidiaries are limited in their ability to make investments, including
extensions of loans or advances to, or acquisition of equity interests in, or guarantees of
obligations of, any other entities.
We are required to comply with certain financial and non-financial covenants under this
revolver. We believe we were in compliance with all covenant requirements as of March 31, 2010.
Lehman Credit Agreement
On March 30, 2007, Delek entered into a credit agreement with Lehman Commercial Paper Inc.
(LCPI) as administrative agent. Through the maturity date of this credit agreement on March 30,
2009, LCPI remained the administrative agent under the facility. The credit agreement provided for
unsecured loans of $65.0 million, the proceeds of which were used to pay a portion of the
acquisition costs for the assets of Calfee Company of Dalton, Inc. and affiliates, and to pay
related costs and expenses in April 2007. In December 2008, a related party to the borrower,
Finance, purchased a participating stake in the loan outstanding as permitted under the terms of
the agreement. At a consolidated level, this resulted in a gain of $1.6 million on the
extinguishment of debt. The facility was repaid in full on the maturity date of March 30, 2009.
Promissory Notes
On July 27, 2006, Delek executed a three year promissory note in favor of Bank Leumi USA (Bank
Leumi) in the amount of $30.0 million (2006 Leumi Note). The proceeds of this note were used to
fund an acquisition and working capital needs. On June 23, 2009, this note was amended to extend
the maturity date to January 3, 2011 and require quarterly principal amortization in amounts of
$2.0 million beginning on April 1, 2010, with a balloon payment of the remaining principal amount
due at maturity. As amended, the note bears interest at the greater of a fixed spread over 3 month
LIBOR or an interest rate floor of 4.5%. The amendment also implemented certain financial and
non-financial covenants and required a perfected collateral pledge of Deleks shares in Lion Oil.
The shares were pledged on January 4, 2010 and secure Deleks debt obligations under all promissory
notes from Bank Leumi as well as promissory notes from the Israel Discount Bank of New York (IDB)
that were outstanding on January 4, 2010, on a pari passu basis in accordance with the terms of an
intercreditor agreement and a stock pledge agreement executed on June 23, 2009 between Bank Leumi,
IDB, and Delek. As of March 31, 2010, we had $30.0 million in outstanding borrowings under the
2006 Leumi Note and the weighted average borrowing rate was 4.5%. We are required to comply with
certain financial and non-financial covenants under the 2006 Leumi Note, as amended. We believe we
were in compliance with all covenant requirements as of March 31, 2010.
18
On May 12, 2008, Delek executed a second promissory note in favor of Bank Leumi for
$20.0 million, maturing on May 11, 2011 (2008 Leumi Note). The proceeds of this note were used to
reduce short term debt and for working capital needs. This note was amended in December 2008 to
change the financial covenant calculation methodology and applicability. The note was further
amended on June 23, 2009 to require quarterly principal amortization in the amount of $1.0 million
beginning on July 1, 2010, with a balloon payment of the remaining principal amount due at
maturity. The amendment also modified certain financial and non-financial covenants and required
the perfected collateral pledge of Deleks shares in Lion Oil, as discussed above. As amended, the
note bears
interest at the greater of a fixed spread over LIBOR for periods of 30 or 90 days, as elected
by the borrower, or an interest rate floor of 4.5%. As of March 31, 2010, we had $20.0 million in
outstanding borrowings under the 2008 Leumi Note and the weighted average borrowing rate was 4.5%.
We are required to comply with certain financial and non-financial covenants under the 2008 Leumi
Note, as amended. We believe we were in compliance with all covenant requirements as of March 31,
2010.
On May 23, 2006, Delek executed a $30.0 million promissory note in favor of IDB (2006 IDB
Note). The proceeds of this note were used to repay the then existing promissory notes in favor of
IDB and Bank Leumi. On December 30, 2008, the 2006 IDB Note was amended and restated. As amended
and restated, the 2006 IDB Note matures on December 31, 2011 and requires quarterly principal
amortization in amounts of $1.25 million beginning on March 31, 2010, with a balloon payment of
remaining principal amount due at maturity. The amendment also introduced certain financial and
non-financial covenants. The 2006 IDB Note bears interest at the greater of a fixed spread over
3 month LIBOR or an interest rate floor of 5.0%. Additionally, on January 4, 2010, Delek pledged
its shares in Lion Oil, to secure its obligations under the 2006 IDB Note, as discussed above. As
of March 31, 2010, we had $28.8 million in outstanding borrowings under the 2006 IDB Note and the
weighted average borrowing rate was 5.0%. We believe we were in compliance with all covenant
requirements under the 2006 IDB Note as of March 31, 2010.
On December 30, 2008, Delek executed a second promissory note in favor of IDB for
$15.0 million (2008 IDB Note). The proceeds of this note were used to repay the then existing note
in favor of Delek Petroleum Ltd. (Delek Petroleum). On December 24, 2009, the 2008 IDB Note was
amended and restated. As amended and restated, the 2008 IDB Note matures on December 31, 2011 and
requires quarterly principal amortization in amounts of $0.75 million beginning on March 31, 2010,
with a balloon payment of remaining principal amount due at maturity. The note bears interest at
the greater of a fixed spread over various LIBOR tenors, as elected by the borrower, or an interest
rate floor of 5.0%. Additionally, on January 4, 2010, Delek pledged its shares in Lion Oil to
secure its obligations under the 2008 IDB Note, as discussed above. As of March 31, 2010, we had
$14.3 million in outstanding borrowings under the 2008 IDB Note and the weighted average borrowing
rate was 5.0%. We are required to comply with certain financial and non-financial covenants under
the 2008 IDB Note. We believe we were in compliance with all covenant requirements under the 2008
IDB Note as of March 31, 2010.
On September 29, 2009, Delek executed a promissory note in favor of Delek Petroleum, an
Israeli corporation controlled by our beneficial majority stockholder, Delek Group, (Delek
Petroleum note) in the amount of $65.0 million for general corporate purposes. The Delek Petroleum
note matures on October 1, 2010 and bears interest at 8.5% (net of any applicable withholding
taxes) payable on a quarterly basis. Additionally, the lender has the option, any time after
December 31, 2009, to elect a one-time adjustment to the functional currency of the principal
amount. The Delek Petroleum note also provides the lender the option to make a one-time adjustment
to the interest rate during the term of the note, provided, however, that the effect of such
adjustment cannot exceed the then prevailing market interest rate. As of March 31, 2010, neither of
these two options had been exercised by the lender. The Delek Petroleum note is unsecured and
contains no covenants. The loan is prepayable at the borrowers election in whole or in part at any
time without penalty or premium. As of March 31, 2010, $65.0 million was outstanding under the
Delek Petroleum note.
Reliant Bank Revolver
On March 28, 2008, we entered into a revolving credit agreement with Reliant Bank, a Tennessee
bank, headquartered in Brentwood, Tennessee. The credit agreement provides for unsecured loans of
up to $12.0 million. As of March 31, 2010, we had no amounts outstanding under this facility. The
facility matures on March 28, 2011 and bears interest at a fixed spread over the 30 day LIBOR rate.
This agreement was amended in September 2008 to conform certain portions of the financial covenant
definition to those contained in some of our other credit agreements. In March 2010, the financial
covenant was further amended to be similar with the financial covenants contained in the existing
Bank Leumi and IDB promissory notes. We are required to comply with certain financial and
non-financial covenants under this revolver. We believe we were in compliance with all covenant
requirements as of March 31, 2010.
Letters of Credit
As of March 31, 2010, Delek had in place letters of credit totaling approximately
$185.6 million with various financial institutions securing obligations with respect to its
workers compensation and general liability self-insurance programs, as well as obligations with
respect to its purchases of crude oil for the refinery segment, gasoline and diesel for the
marketing segment and fuel for our retail fuel and convenience stores. No amounts were outstanding
under these facilities at March 31, 2010.
19
Interest-Rate Derivative Instruments
Delek had interest rate cap agreements in place totaling $60.0 million of notional principal
amounts as of both March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009. These agreements are intended to
economically hedge floating rate debt related to our current borrowings under the Senior Secured
Credit Facility. However, as we have elected to not apply the permitted hedge accounting treatment,
including formal hedge designation and documentation, in accordance with the provisions of ASC 815,
the fair value of the derivatives is recorded in other non-current assets in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets with the offset recognized in earnings. The derivative instruments
mature in July 2010. The estimated fair values of our interest rate derivatives as of both March
31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 were nominal.
In accordance with ASC 815 we recorded non-cash expense representing the change in estimated
fair value of the interest rate cap agreements of nominal amounts for both of the three month
periods ending March 31, 2010 and 2009.
While Delek has not elected to apply permitted hedge accounting treatment for these interest
rate derivatives in accordance with the provisions of ASC 815 in the past, we may choose to elect
that treatment in future transactions.
8. Stock Based Compensation
2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan
In April 2006, Deleks Board of Directors adopted the Delek US Holdings, Inc. 2006 Long-Term
Incentive Plan (the Plan) pursuant to which Delek may grant stock options, stock appreciation
rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units and other stock-based awards of Deleks common
stock to certain directors, officers, employees, consultants and other individuals who perform
services for Delek or its affiliates. An amendment to the Plan was adopted by Deleks Board of
Directors and stockholders in May 2010, increasing the maximum number of shares authorized under
the Plan from 3,053,392 to 5,053,392. The options granted under the Plan are generally granted at
market price or higher. All of the options granted require continued service in order to exercise
the option except that vesting of stock-based awards granted to three executive employees could,
under certain circumstances, accelerate upon termination of their employment.
On May 13, 2009, we filed a Tender Offer statement that gave eligible employees and directors
the ability to exchange outstanding options under the Plan with per share exercise prices ranging
between $16.00 and $35.08, for new options under the Plan to purchase fewer shares of our common
stock at a lower exercise price. This offer expired on June 10, 2009 and we accepted for exchange
options to purchase an aggregate of 1,398,641 shares of our common stock, representing 84.28% of
the 1,659,589 shares covered by eligible options. We granted replacement options to purchase
803,385 shares of common stock in exchange for the tendered options. The exercise price per share
of each replacement option granted pursuant to the Offer was $9.17, the closing price of our common
stock on the New York Stock Exchange on the grant date, June 10, 2009. This modification resulted
in an additional $0.1 million in stock-based compensation expense, which will be recognized over
the remaining terms of the original options granted. Prior to the Tender Offer, approximately 75%
of grants under the Plan vested ratably over a period between three to five years and approximately
25% of the grants vested at the end of the fourth year. Following the Tender Offer, we expect that
most new awards granted under the Plan will vest ratably over a period of four years.
Employment Agreement
On September 25, 2009, we entered into an employment agreement with our President and Chief
Executive Officer, Mr. Yemin. Under the terms of the Agreement, Mr. Yemin was granted 1,850,040
Stock Appreciation Rights (SARs) under the Plan on September 30, 2009. The SARs vest over a period
of approximately four years. 640,440 of the SARs are subject to a base price of $8.57 per share
(the fair market value at the date of grant), 246,400 SARs each are subject to base prices of
$12.40, $13.20, $14.00, and $14.80 per share and the remaining 224,000 SARs are subject to a base
price of $15.60 per share. The SARs will expire upon the earlier of the first anniversary of
Mr. Yemins termination of employment or October 31, 2014 (the first anniversary of the expiration
of the agreement). The SARs may be settled in shares of common stock or cash at Deleks sole
discretion.
On February 21, 2010, Mr. Yemin exercised the final 1,319,493 share purchase rights awarded as
part of his previous employment agreement dated as of May 1, 2004, in connection with a net share
settlement. As a result, 638,909 shares of common stock were issued to him and 680,584 shares of
common stock were withheld as a partial cashless exercise and to pay withholding taxes. The share
purchase rights were scheduled to expire on April 30, 2010.
20
Compensation Expense Related to Equity-based Awards
Compensation expense for the equity-based awards amounted to $1.0 million ($0.7 million, net
of taxes) for both the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009. These amounts are included in
general and administrative expenses in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of
operations.
As of March 31, 2010, there was $4.3 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related
to non-vested share-based compensation arrangements, which is expected to be recognized over a
weighted-average period of 1.5 years.
9. Segment Data
We report our operating results in three reportable segments: refining, marketing and retail.
Decisions concerning the allocation of resources and assessment of operating performance are made
based on this segmentation. Management measures the operating performance of each of its reportable
segments based on the segment contribution margin.
Segment contribution margin is defined as net sales less cost of sales and operating expenses,
excluding depreciation and amortization. Operations which are not specifically included in the
reportable segments are included in the corporate and other category, which primarily consists of
operating expenses, depreciation and amortization expense and interest income and expense
associated with corporate headquarters.
The refining segment processes crude oil that is transported through our crude oil pipeline
and an unrelated third-party pipeline. The refinery processes the crude and other purchased
feedstocks for the manufacture of transportation motor fuels including various grades of gasoline,
diesel fuel, aviation fuel and other petroleum-based products that are distributed through its
product terminal located at the refinery.
Our marketing segment sells refined products on a wholesale basis in west Texas through
company-owned and third-party operated terminals. This segment also provides marketing services to
the Tyler refinery.
In order to more appropriately align business activities, certain pipeline assets which had
been held and managed by the refining segment were sold to the marketing segment on March 31, 2009.
These assets and their earnings streams are now reflected in the activities of the marketing
segment.
Our retail segment markets gasoline, diesel, other refined petroleum products and convenience
merchandise through a network of company-operated retail fuel and convenience stores throughout the
southeastern United States. As of March 31, 2010, we had 434 stores in total consisting of 232
located in Tennessee, 92 in Alabama, 81 in Georgia, 13 in Arkansas and 9 in Virginia. The remaining
7 stores are located in Kentucky, Louisiana and Mississippi. The retail fuel and convenience stores
operate under Deleks brand names MAPCO Express®,
MAPCO Mart®, Discount Food
Marttm,
Fast Food and Fueltm,
Favorite Markets®
and East Coast® brands. The retail segment also supplies fuel to 53 dealer locations as of March
31, 2010. In the retail segment, management reviews operating results on a divisional basis, where
a division represents a specific geographic market. These divisional operating segments exhibit
similar economic characteristics, provide the same products and services, and operate in such a
manner such that aggregation of these operations is appropriate for segment presentation.
Our refining business has a services agreement with our marketing segment, which among other
things, requires it to pay service fees based on the number of gallons sold at the Tyler refinery
and a sharing of a portion of the marketing margin achieved in return for providing marketing,
sales and customer services. This intercompany transaction fee was $2.6 million and $3.1 million in
the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Additionally, in April 2009, the
refining segment began paying crude transportation and storage fees to the marketing segment,
relating to the utilization of certain crude pipeline assets. These fees were $2.3 million during
the three months ended March 31, 2010. During the three months ended March 31, 2010, the refining
segment sold finished product to the marketing segment in the amount of $6.9 million. There were no
such sales during the three months ended March 31, 2009. All inter-segment transactions have been
eliminated in consolidation.
21
The following is a summary of business segment operating performance as measured by
contribution margin for the period indicated (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining |
|
|
Retail |
|
|
Marketing |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
Net sales (excluding intercompany marketing fees and sales) |
|
$ |
401.6 |
|
|
$ |
375.5 |
|
|
$ |
115.6 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
$ |
892.9 |
|
Intercompany marketing fees and sales |
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
(9.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold |
|
|
378.5 |
|
|
|
335.2 |
|
|
|
113.9 |
|
|
|
(6.9 |
) |
|
|
820.7 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
24.7 |
|
|
|
32.9 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
(2.3 |
) |
|
|
56.1 |
|
Property damage expenses |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment contribution margin |
|
$ |
2.5 |
|
|
$ |
7.4 |
|
|
$ |
5.8 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
|
15.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.5 |
|
Gain on sale of assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(13.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
571.0 |
|
|
$ |
426.2 |
|
|
$ |
74.3 |
|
|
$ |
151.9 |
|
|
$ |
1,223.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital spending (excluding business combinations) |
|
$ |
7.6 |
|
|
$ |
1.9 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
|
$ |
9.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining |
|
|
Retail(2) |
|
|
Marketing |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(revised)(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(revised)(1) |
|
Net sales (excluding intercompany marketing fees and sales) |
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
|
$ |
295.6 |
|
|
$ |
68.5 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
$ |
368.3 |
|
Intercompany marketing fees and sales |
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold |
|
|
(3.2 |
) |
|
|
254.9 |
|
|
|
66.4 |
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
317.6 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
33.4 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45.8 |
|
Insurance proceeds business interruption |
|
|
(21.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21.1 |
) |
Property damage proceeds, net |
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment contribution margin |
|
$ |
14.6 |
|
|
$ |
7.3 |
|
|
$ |
5.0 |
|
|
$ |
0.7 |
|
|
|
27.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.7 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
405.5 |
|
|
$ |
457.0 |
|
|
$ |
61.1 |
|
|
$ |
167.2 |
|
|
$ |
1,090.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital spending (excluding business combinations) |
|
$ |
79.9 |
|
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
80.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
These amounts have been revised due to a misapplication of
accounting guidance associated with accounting for lower of
cost or market (LCM) reserves when using the LIFO method of
accounting for inventories. We recognized a reversal of a
LCM reserve in the first quarter of 2009 in the amount of
$4.8 million ($3.1 million, net of tax). The reversal
should not have been recognized until the second quarter of
2009 when our refinery resumed operations and the related
inventory was sold. This resulted in a $3.1 million
reduction to previously reported net income for the three
months ended March 31, 2009, or $(0.03) per diluted share. |
|
(2) |
|
Retail operating results for the three months ended March
31, 2009 have been restated to reflect the reclassification
of the remaining nine Virginia stores to normal operations. |
22
10. Fair Value Measurements
ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for its measurement and expands
disclosures about fair value measurements. We elected to implement this statement with the one-year
deferral permitted by ASC 820 for non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities measured at
fair value, except those that are recognized or disclosed on a recurring basis (at least annually).
The deferral applies to non-financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value in a business
combination; impaired properties, plant and
equipment; intangible assets and goodwill; and initial recognition of asset retirement
obligations and restructuring costs for which we use fair value. We adopted ASC 820 for
non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities measured at fair value effective January 1,
2009. This adoption did not impact our consolidated financial statements.
ASC 820 applies to our interest rate and commodity derivatives that are measured at fair value
on a recurring basis. The standard also requires that we assess the impact of nonperformance risk
on our derivatives. Nonperformance risk is not considered material at this time.
ASC 820 requires disclosures that categorize assets and liabilities measured at fair value
into one of three different levels depending on the observability of the inputs employed in the
measurement. Level 1 inputs are quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities. Level 2 inputs are observable inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1
for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly through market-corroborated inputs.
Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability reflecting our assumptions about
pricing by market participants.
We value our available for sale investments using unadjusted closing prices provided by the
NYSE as of the balance sheet date, and these would be classified as Level 1 in the fair value
hierarchy. OTC commodity swaps, physical commodity purchase and sale contracts and interest rate
swaps are generally valued using industry-standard models that consider various assumptions,
including quoted forward prices for interest rates, time value, volatility factors and contractual
prices for the underlying instruments, as well as other relevant economic measures. The degree to
which these inputs are observable in the forward markets determines the classification as Level 2
or 3. Our contracts are valued using quotations provided by brokers based on exchange pricing
and/or price index developers such as PLATTS or ARGUS. These are classified as Level 2.
The fair value hierarchy for our financial assets and liabilities accounted for at fair value
on a recurring basis at March 31, 2010, was (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity derivatives |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(0.1 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The derivative values above are based on analysis of each contract as the fundamental unit of
account as required by ASC 820. Derivative assets and liabilities with the same counterparty are
not netted, where the legal right of offset exists. This differs from the presentation in the
financial statements which reflects our policy under the guidance of ASC 815-10-45, wherein we have
elected to offset the fair value amounts recognized for multiple derivative instruments executed
with the same counterparty. As of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively, $0.2 million
and $2.7 million of net derivative positions are included in other current assets on the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets. As of March 31, 2010, $0.3 million of cash collateral is
held by counterparty brokerage firms. These amounts have been netted with the net derivative
positions with each counterparty.
11. Derivative Instruments
From time to time, Delek enters into swaps, forwards, futures and option contracts for the
following purposes:
|
|
|
To limit the exposure to price fluctuations for physical purchases and sales of crude oil
and finished products in the normal course of business; and |
|
|
|
To limit the exposure to floating-rate fluctuations on current borrowings. |
We use derivatives to reduce normal operating and market risks with a primary objective in
derivative instrument use being the reduction of the impact of market price volatility on our
results of operations. The following discussion provides additional details regarding the types of
derivative contracts held during the three months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009.
23
Swaps
In December 2007, in conjunction with providing E-10 products, which contain 90% conventional
fuel and 10% ethanol, in our retail markets, we entered into a series of OTC swaps based on the
futures price of ethanol as quoted on the Chicago Board of Trade
which fixed the purchase price of ethanol for a predetermined number of gallons at future
dates from April 2008 through December 2009. We also entered into a series of OTC swaps based on
the future price of unleaded gasoline as quoted on the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) which
fixed the sales price of unleaded gasoline for a predetermined number of gallons at future dates
from April 2008 through December 2009. There were no gains or losses recognized on these contracts
during the three months ended March 31, 2010. Delek recorded gains of $0.4 million during the
three months ended March 31, 2009, which were included as an adjustment to cost of goods sold in
the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations.
In March 2008, we entered into a series of OTC swaps based on the future price of West Texas
Intermediate Crude (WTI) as quoted on the NYMEX which fixed the purchase price of WTI for a
predetermined number of barrels at future dates from July 2008 through December 2009. We also
entered into a series of OTC swaps based on the future price of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) as
quoted on the Gulf Coast ULSD PLATTS which fixed the sales price of ULSD for a predetermined number
of gallons at future dates from July 2008 through December 2009.
In accordance with ASC 815, the WTI and ULSD swaps were designated as cash flow hedges with
the change in fair value recorded in other comprehensive income. However, as of November 20, 2008,
due to the suspension of operations at the refinery, the cash flow designation was removed because
the probability of occurrence of the hedged forecasted transactions for the period of the shutdown
became remote. All changes in the fair value of these swaps subsequent to November 20, 2008 have
been recognized in the statement of operations. For the three months ended March 31, 2009, we
recognized gains of $9.4 million, which are included as an adjustment to cost of goods sold in the
condensed consolidated statement of operations as a result of the discontinuation of these cash
flow hedges. There were no gains or losses recognized during the three months ended March 31,
2010. There were no unrealized gains or losses remaining in accumulated other comprehensive income
as of March 31, 2010 or December 31, 2009. As of March 31, 2010, there were no additional
unrealized gains or losses held on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet. As of
December 31, 2009, total unrealized gains of $2.0 million were held as other current assets on the
accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet.
Forward Fuel Contracts
From time to time, Delek enters into forward fuel contracts with major financial institutions
that fix the purchase price of finished grade fuel for a predetermined number of units at a future
date and have fulfillment terms of less than 90 days. Delek recognized (losses) gains of
$(0.3) million and $0.6 million, respectively, during the three months ended March 31, 2010 and
2009, which are included as an adjustment to cost of goods sold in the accompanying condensed
consolidated statements of operations. As of March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, total
unrealized (losses) gains of $(0.1) million and $0.1 million, respectively, were held as other
current assets on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets.
Futures Contracts
In the first quarter of 2008, Delek entered into futures contracts with major financial
institutions that fix the purchase price of crude oil and the sales price of finished grade fuel
for a predetermined number of units at a future date and have fulfillment terms of less than
90 days. Delek recognized gains of $0.3 million and $0.4 million during the three months ended
March 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, which are included as an adjustment to cost of goods sold in
the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations.
From time to time, Delek also enters into futures contracts with fuel supply vendors that
secure supply of product to be purchased for use in the normal course of business at our refining
and retail segments. These contracts are priced based on an index that is clearly and closely
related to the product being purchased, contain no net settlement provisions and typically qualify
under the normal purchase exemption from derivative accounting treatment under ASC 815.
Due to the suspension of operations at the refinery in November 2008, Delek was unable to take
delivery under the refining contracts covering the period of the refinery shutdown and settled
these contracts net with the vendors, even though no net settlement provisions existed. Therefore,
Delek discontinued the normal purchase exemption under ASC 815 for the refining contracts covering
the periods from January 2009 through April 2009. Delek recognized losses of $1.7 million relating
to the market value of these contracts for the three months ended March 31, 2009. There were no
futures contracts recorded at fair value under ASC 815 during the three months ended March 31,
2010.
24
Interest Rate Instruments
From time to time, Delek enters into interest rate swap and cap agreements that are intended
to economically hedge floating rate debt related to our current borrowings. These interest rate
derivative instruments are discussed in conjunction with our long term debt in Note 7.
12. Commitments and Contingencies
Litigation
In the ordinary conduct of our business, we are from time to time subject to lawsuits,
investigations and claims, including, environmental claims and employee related matters. In
addition, certain private parties who claim they were adversely affected by the November 20, 2008
explosion and fire at our Tyler refinery have commenced litigation against us. Although we cannot
predict with certainty the ultimate resolution of lawsuits, investigations and claims asserted
against us, including civil penalties or other enforcement actions, we do not believe that any
currently pending legal proceeding or proceedings to which we are a party will have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Self-insurance
Delek is self-insured for employee medical claims up to $0.1 million per employee per year.
Delek is self-insured for workers compensation claims up to $1.0 million on a per accident
basis. We self-insure for general liability claims up to $4.0 million on a per occurrence basis. We
self-insure for auto liability up to $4.0 million on a per accident basis.
We have umbrella liability insurance available to each of our segments in an amount determined
reasonable by management.
Environmental Health and Safety
Delek is subject to various federal, state and local environmental laws. These laws raise
potential exposure to future claims and lawsuits involving environmental matters which could
include soil and water contamination, air pollution, personal injury and property damage allegedly
caused by substances which we manufactured, handled, used, released or disposed, or that relate to
pre-existing conditions for which we have assumed responsibility. While it is often difficult to
quantify future environmental-related expenditures, Delek anticipates that continuing capital
investments will be required for the foreseeable future to comply with existing regulations.
We have recorded a liability of approximately $7.6 million as of March 31, 2010 primarily
related to the probable estimated costs of remediating or otherwise addressing certain
environmental issues of a non-capital nature at the Tyler refinery. This liability includes
estimated costs for on-going investigation and remediation efforts for known contamination of soil
and groundwater which were already being performed by the former owner, as well as estimated costs
for additional issues which have been identified subsequent to the purchase. Approximately
$2.6 million of the liability is expected to be expended over the next 12 months with the remaining
balance of $5.0 million expendable by 2022.
In late 2004, the prior refinery owner began discussions with the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) Region 6 and the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding
certain Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements at the refinery. Under the agreement by which we purchased
the Tyler refinery, we agreed to be responsible for all cost of compliance under the settlement.
The prior refinery owner expected to settle the matter with the EPA and the DOJ by the end of 2005;
however, the negotiations were not finalized until July 2009. A consent decree was entered by the
Court and became effective on September 23, 2009. The consent decree does not allege any violations
by Delek subsequent to the purchase of the refinery and the prior owner was responsible for payment
of the assessed penalty. The capital projects required by the consent decree have either been
completed (such as a new electrical substation to increase operational reliability and additional
sulfur removal capacity to address upsets) or will not have a material adverse effect upon our
future financial results. In addition, the consent decree requires certain on-going operational
changes. We believe any costs resulting from these changes will not have a material adverse effect
upon our business, financial condition or operations.
25
In October 2007, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) approved an Agreed Order
that resolved alleged violations of certain air rules that had continued after the Tyler refinery
was acquired. The Agreed Order required the refinery to pay a
penalty and fund a Supplemental Environmental Project for which we had previously reserved
adequate amounts. In addition, the refinery was required to implement certain corrective measures,
which the company completed as specified in Agreed Order Docket No. 2006-1433-AIR-E, with one
exception that will be completed in 2010.
Contemporaneous with the refinery purchase, Delek became a party to a Waiver and Compliance
Plan with the EPA that extended the implementation deadline for low sulfur gasoline from January 1,
2006 to May 2008. EPA later agreed to extend certain provisions of the Waiver that allowed us to
exceed the 80 ppm per-gallon sulfur maximum for up to two months past the original May 31, 2008
compliance date. Construction and commissioning of the gasoline hydrotreater was completed in June
2008 and all gasoline has met low sulfur specifications since the end of that month. All
requirements of the Waiver and Compliance Plan have been completed and EPA terminated the Waiver in
early June 2009.
The EPA has issued final rules for gasoline formulation that will require the reduction of
average benzene content by January 1, 2011 and the reduction of maximum annual average benzene
content by July 1, 2012. It may be necessary for us to purchase credits to comply with these
content requirements and there can be no assurance that such credits will be available or that we
will be able to purchase available credits at reasonable prices.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 requires increasing amounts of renewable fuel to be incorporated
into the gasoline pool through 2012. Under final rules implementing this Act (the Renewable Fuel
Standard), the Tyler refinery is classified as a small refinery exempt from renewable fuel
standards through 2010. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) increased the
amounts of renewable fuel required by the Energy Policy Act of 2005. A rule proposed by EPA to
implement EISA (referred to as the Renewable Fuel Standard 2, or RFS 2) would require us to
displace increasing amounts of refined products with biofuels beginning with approximately 7.5% in
2011 and escalating to approximately 18% in 2022. The proposed rule could cause decreased crude
runs and materially affect profitability unless fuel demand rises at a comparable rate or other
outlets are found for the displaced products. Although temporarily exempt from this rule, the Tyler
refinery began supplying an E-10 gasoline-ethanol blend in January 2008. Because our exemption
from RFS 2 is scheduled to end at the end of 2010, we are in the planning and engineering stage for
projects that will allow us to blend increasing amounts of ethanol and biodiesel into our fuels
beginning in 2011.
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), also known
as Superfund, imposes liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original conduct,
on certain classes of persons who are considered to be responsible for the release of a hazardous
substance into the environment. These persons include the owner or operator of the disposal site
or sites where the release occurred and companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the
hazardous substances. Under CERCLA, such persons may be subject to joint and several liabilities
for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances that have been released into the environment,
for damages to natural resources and for the costs of certain health studies. It is not uncommon
for neighboring landowners and other third parties to file claims for personal injury and property
damage allegedly caused by hazardous substances or other pollutants released into the environment.
Analogous state laws impose similar responsibilities and liabilities on responsible parties. In the
course of the refinerys ordinary operations, waste is generated, some of which falls within the
statutory definition of a hazardous substance and some of which may have been disposed of at
sites that may require cleanup under Superfund. At this time, we have not been named as a
potentially responsible party at any Superfund sites and under the terms of the refinery purchase
agreement, we did not assume any liability for wastes disposed of at third party owned treatment,
storage or disposal sites prior to our ownership.
In June 2007, OSHA announced that, under a National Emphasis Program (NEP) addressing
workplace hazards at petroleum refineries, it would conduct inspections of process safety
management programs at approximately 80 refineries nationwide. OSHA conducted an NEP inspection at
our Tyler, Texas refinery between February and August of 2008 and issued citations assessing an
aggregate penalty of less than $0.1 million. We are contesting the NEP citations. Between November
2008 and May 2009, OSHA conducted another inspection at our Tyler refinery as a result of the
explosion and fire that occurred there and issued citations assessing an aggregate penalty of
approximately $0.2 million. We are also contesting these citations and do not believe that the
outcome of any pending OSHA citations (whether alone or in the aggregate) will have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
In addition to OSHA, the Chemical Safety Board (CSB) and the EPA have requested information
pertaining to the November 2008 incident. The EPA is currently conducting an investigation under
Section 114 of the Clean Air Act pertaining to our compliance with the chemical accident prevention
standards of the Clean Air Act.
26
Vendor Commitments
Delek maintains an agreement with a significant vendor that requires the purchase of certain
general merchandise exclusively from this vendor over a specified period of time. Additionally, we
maintain agreements with certain fuel suppliers which contain terms which generally require the
purchase of predetermined quantities of third-party branded fuel for a specified period of time. In
certain fuel vendor contracts, penalty provisions exist if minimum quantities are not met.
Letters of Credit
As of March 31, 2010, Delek had in place letters of credit totaling approximately
$185.6 million with various financial institutions securing obligations with respect to its
workers compensation and general liability self-insurance programs, crude oil purchases for the
refining segment, gasoline and diesel purchases for the marketing segment and fuel for our retail
fuel and convenience stores. No amounts were outstanding under these facilities at March 31, 2010.
13. Related Party Transactions
At March 31, 2010, Delek Group beneficially owned approximately 73.1% of our outstanding
common stock. As a result, Delek Group and its controlling shareholder, Mr. Itshak Sharon (Tshuva),
will continue to control the election of our directors, influence our corporate and management
policies and determine, without the consent of our other stockholders, the outcome of any corporate
transaction or other matter submitted to our stockholders for approval, including potential mergers
or acquisitions, asset sales and other significant corporate transactions.
On September 29, 2009, Delek executed a promissory note in favor of Delek Petroleum, Ltd., an
Israeli corporation controlled by our indirect majority stockholder, Delek Group, Ltd (Delek
Petroleum) in the amount of $65.0 million. The note matures on October 1, 2010 and bears interest
at 8.5% (net of any applicable withholding taxes) payable on a quarterly basis. Additionally, the
lender has the option, any time after December 31, 2009, to elect a one-time adjustment to the
functional currency of the principal amount. The note also provides the lender the option to make
an adjustment to the interest rate, once during the note life, but that adjustment cannot exceed
the then prevailing market interest rate. The note is unsecured. The loan is prepayable in whole or
in part at any time without penalty or premium at the borrowers election.
On January 22, 2007, we granted 28,000 stock options to Gabriel Last, one of our directors,
under our 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan. These options vest ratably over four years, have an
exercise price of $16.00 per share and will expire on January 22, 2017. The grant to Mr. Last was a
special, one-time grant in consideration of his supervision and direction of management and
consulting services provided to us by Delek Group. The grant was not compensation for his service
as a director. This grant does not mark the adoption of a policy to compensate our non-employee
related directors and we do not intend to issue further grants to Mr. Last in the future.
On December 10, 2006, we granted 28,000 stock options to Asaf Bartfeld, one of our directors,
under our 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan. These options vest ratably over four years and have an
exercise price of $17.64 per share and will expire on December 10, 2016. The grant to Mr. Bartfeld
was a special, one-time grant in consideration of his supervision and direction of management and
consulting services provided by Delek Group to us. The grant was not compensation for his service
as a director. This grant does not mark the adoption of a policy to compensate our non-employee
related directors and we do not intend to issue further grants to Mr. Bartfeld in the future.
On January 12, 2006, we entered into a consulting agreement with Charles H. Green, the father
of one of our named executive officers, Frederec Green. Under the terms of the agreement, Charles
Green provided assistance and guidance, primarily in the area of electrical reliability, at our
Tyler refinery, and was paid $100 per hour for services rendered. Mr. Green did not provide any
services during the three months ended March 31, 2010. We paid a nominal amount for these services
during the three months ended March 31, 2009.
Effective January 1, 2006, Delek entered into a management and consulting agreement with Delek
Group, pursuant to which key management personnel of Delek Group, provide management and consulting
services to Delek, including matters relating to long-term planning, operational issues and
financing strategies. The agreement has an initial term of one year and will continue thereafter
until either party terminates the agreement upon 30 days advance notice. As compensation, the
agreement provides for payment to Delek Group of $125 thousand per calendar quarter payable within
90 days of the end of each quarter and reimbursement for reasonable out-of-pocket costs and
expenses incurred.
27
As of May 1, 2005, Delek entered into a consulting agreement with Greenfeld-Energy Consulting,
Ltd., (Greenfeld-Energy) a company owned and controlled by one of Deleks directors, Zvi Greenfeld.
Mr. Greenfeld did not stand for re-election at Deleks 2010 annual meeting of stockholders and, as
a result, his tenure on the Board of Directors ended on May 4, 2010. Under the terms of the
agreement, Mr. Greenfeld personally provides consulting services relating to the refining industry
and Greenfeld-Energy receives monthly consideration and reimbursement of reasonable expenses. From
May 2005 through August 2005, Delek paid Greenfeld-Energy approximately $7 thousand per month.
Since September 2005, Delek has paid Greenfeld-Energy a monthly payment of approximately $8
thousand. In April 2006, Delek paid Greenfeld-Energy a bonus of $70 thousand for services rendered
in 2005. Pursuant to the agreement, on May 3, 2006, we granted Mr. Greenfeld options to purchase
130,000 shares of our common stock at $16.00 per share, our initial public offering price, pursuant
to our 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan. These options vest ratably over five years. The agreement
continues in effect until terminated by either party upon six months advance notice to the other
party.
14. Subsequent Events
Dividend Declaration
On May 4, 2010, our Board of Directors voted to declare a quarterly cash dividend of $0.0375
per share, payable on June 22, 2010 to shareholders of record on May 25, 2010.
Amendment to 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan
At the 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on May 4, 2010, our stockholders approved an
amendment to our 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan, among other things, to increase the maximum number
of shares authorized for issuance by 2,000,000 to a total of 5,053,392 shares.
Related Party Transaction
Zvi Greenfeld did not stand for re-election at the 2010 Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on
May 4, 2010 and is no longer a director of Delek.
Income Tax Receivable
A receivable carried on the condensed consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2010 related
to federal income taxes in the amount of $39.6 million was received in April 2010.
Special Bonus to Chief Financial Officer
On May 4, 2010, the Companys Compensation Committee authorized the payment of a special bonus
to Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Mark B. Cox, in the amount of $128,058
(the Special Bonus). The Special Bonus supplements an earlier payment to Mr. Cox relating to the
loss he experienced on the sale of his Texas home.
28
|
|
|
ITEM 2. |
|
MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL POSITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A)
is managements analysis of our financial performance and of significant trends that may affect our
future performance. The MD&A should be read in conjunction with our condensed consolidated
financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this Form 10-Q and in the Form 10-K
filed with the SEC on March 9, 2009. Those statements in the MD&A that are not historical in nature
should be deemed forward-looking statements that are inherently uncertain.
Forward-Looking Statements
This Form 10-Q contains forward looking statements that reflect our current estimates,
expectations and projections about our future results, performance, prospects and opportunities.
Forward-looking statements include, among other things, the information concerning our possible
future results of operations, business and growth strategies, financing plans, expectations that
regulatory developments or other matters will not have a material adverse effect on our business or
financial condition, our competitive position and the effects of competition, the projected growth
of the industry in which we operate, and the benefits and synergies to be obtained from our
completed and any future acquisitions, and statements of managements goals and objectives, and
other similar expressions concerning matters that are not historical facts. Words such as may,
will, should, could, would, predicts, potential, continue, expects, anticipates,
future, intends, plans, believes, estimates, appears, projects and similar
expressions, as well as statements in future tense, identify forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements should not be read as a guarantee of future performance or results,
and will not necessarily be accurate indications of the times at, or by which, such performance or
results will be achieved. Forward-looking information is based on information available at the time
and/or managements good faith belief with respect to future events, and is subject to risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual performance or results to differ materially from those
expressed in the statements. Important factors that could cause such differences include, but are
not limited to:
|
|
|
competition; |
|
|
|
|
changes in, or the failure to comply with, the extensive government regulations applicable to our industry segments; |
|
|
|
decreases in our refining margins or fuel gross profit as a result of increases in the
prices of crude oil, other feedstocks and refined petroleum products; |
|
|
|
our ability to execute our strategy of growth through acquisitions and transactional
risks in acquisitions; |
|
|
|
general economic and business conditions, particularly levels of spending relating to
travel and tourism or conditions affecting the southeastern United States; |
|
|
|
|
dependence on one wholesaler for a significant portion of our convenience store merchandise; |
|
|
|
|
unanticipated increases in cost or scope of, or significant delays in the completion of our capital improvement projects; |
|
|
|
risks and uncertainties with respect to the quantities and costs of refined petroleum
products supplied to our pipelines and/or held in our terminals; |
|
|
|
|
operating hazards, natural disasters, casualty losses and other matters beyond our control; |
|
|
|
|
increases in our debt levels; |
|
|
|
|
compliance with, or failure to comply, with restrictive and financial covenants in our various debt agreements; |
|
|
|
|
seasonality; |
|
|
|
acts of terrorism aimed at either our facilities or other facilities that could impair
our ability to produce or transport refined products or receive feedstocks; |
29
|
|
|
changes in the cost or availability of transportation for feedstocks and refined products; |
|
|
|
|
volatility of derivative instruments; |
|
|
|
|
potential conflicts of interest between our major stockholder and other stockholders; and |
|
|
|
|
other factors discussed under the heading Managements Discussion and Analysis and in our other filings with the SEC. |
In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, our actual results of operations and
execution of our business strategy could differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by,
the forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance upon them. In addition,
past financial and/or operating performance is not necessarily a reliable indicator of future
performance and you should not use our historical performance to anticipate results or future
period trends. We can give no assurances that any of the events anticipated by the forward-looking
statements will occur or, if any of them do, what impact they will have on our results of
operations and financial condition.
Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date the statements are made. We assume no
obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect actual results, changes in assumptions
or changes in other factors affecting forward-looking information except to the extent required by
applicable securities laws. If we do update one or more forward-looking statements, no inference
should be drawn that we will make additional updates with respect thereto or with respect to other
forward-looking statements.
Overview
We are a diversified energy business focused on petroleum refining, wholesale sales of refined
products and retail marketing. Our business consists of three operating segments: refining,
marketing and retail. Our refining segment operates a high conversion, moderate complexity
independent refinery in Tyler, Texas, with a design crude distillation capacity of 60,000 barrels
per day (bpd), along with an associated light products loading facility. Our marketing segment
sells refined products on a wholesale basis in west Texas through company-owned and third-party
operated terminals and owns and/or operates crude oil pipelines and associated tank farms in east
Texas. Our retail segment markets gasoline, diesel, other refined petroleum products and
convenience merchandise through a network of approximately 430 company-operated retail fuel and
convenience stores located in Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi,
Tennessee and Virginia. Additionally, we own a minority interest in Lion Oil Company, a
privately-held Arkansas corporation, which operates a 75,000 bpd moderate complexity crude oil
refinery located in El Dorado, Arkansas and other pipeline and product terminals.
Our profitability in the refinery segment is substantially determined by the spread between
the price of refined products and the price of crude oil, referred to as the refined product
margin. The cost to acquire feedstocks and the price of the refined petroleum products we
ultimately sell from our refinery depend on numerous factors beyond our control, including the
supply of, and demand for, crude oil, gasoline and other refined petroleum products which, in turn,
depend on, among other factors, changes in domestic and foreign economies, weather conditions such
as hurricanes or tornadoes, local, domestic and foreign political affairs, global conflict,
production levels, the availability of imports, the marketing of competitive fuels and government
regulation. Other significant factors that influence our results in the refining segment include
the cost of crude, our primary feedstock, the refinerys operating costs, particularly the cost of
natural gas used for fuel and the cost of electricity, seasonal factors, refinery utilization rates
and planned or unplanned maintenance activities or turnarounds. Moreover, while the increases in
the cost of crude oil, are reflected in the changes of light refined products, the value of heavier
products, such as coke, carbon black oil (CBO), and liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) have not moved in
parallel with crude cost. This causes additional pressure on our realized margins.
We compare our per barrel refined product margin to a well established industry metric, the
U.S. Gulf Coast 5-3-2 crack spread (Gulf Coast crack spread), which is used as a benchmark for
measuring a refinerys product margins by measuring the difference between the price of light
products and crude oil. It represents the approximate gross margin resulting from processing one
barrel of crude oil into three fifths of a barrel of gasoline and two fifths of a barrel of high
sulfur diesel. We calculate the Gulf Coast crack spread using the market value of U.S. Gulf Coast
Pipeline 87 Octane Conventional Gasoline and U.S. Gulf Coast Pipeline No. 2 Heating Oil (high
sulfur diesel) and the first month futures price of light sweet crude oil on the NYMEX. U.S. Gulf
Coast Pipeline 87 Octane Conventional Gasoline is a grade of gasoline commonly marketed as Regular
Unleaded at retail locations. U.S. Gulf Coast Pipeline No. 2 Heating Oil is a petroleum distillate
that can be used as either a diesel fuel or a fuel oil. This is the standard by which other
distillate products (such as ultra low sulfur diesel) are priced. The NYMEX is the commodities
trading exchange located in New York City where contracts for the future delivery of petroleum
products are bought and sold.
30
As we have previously reported, on November 20, 2008, an explosion and fire occurred at the
Tyler refinery, which halted our production. The explosion and fire caused damage to both our
saturates gas plant and naphtha hydrotreater and resulted in an immediate suspension of our
refining operations. The refinery was subject to a gradual, monitored restart in May 2009,
culminating in a full resumption of operations on May 18, 2009. For the three months ended March
31, 2010, the refinery was fully operational. For the three months ended March 31, 2009, refinery
operations were suspended for the entire period.
Currently we carry, and at the time of the incident we carried, insurance coverage of
$1.0 billion in combined limits to insure against property damage and business interruption. Under
these policies, we are subject to a $5.0 million deductible for property damage insurance and a 45
calendar day waiting period for business interruption insurance. We recorded property damage
expenses of $0.2 million during the three months ended March 31, 2010. During the three months
ended March 31, 2009, we recognized income from insurance proceeds of $30.6 million, of which,
$21.1 million is included as business interruption proceeds and $9.5 million is included as
property damage. We also recorded expenses of $7.9 million, resulting in a net gain of $1.6 million
related to property damage proceeds. Although we have submitted all of our contemplated insurance
claims, we have not fully and finally resolved all of our outstanding claims with our insurance
companies for a number of reasons, including, without limitation, the interpretation of insurance
policy provisions, insurance deductible amounts and periods, market conditions that affect
projected revenues and firm profits, additional or revised information, audit adjustments and other
verifications of the insurance claim and subsequent events.
The cost to acquire the refined fuel products we sell to our wholesale customers in our
marketing segment and at our convenience stores in our retail segment depends on numerous factors
beyond our control, including the supply of, and demand for, crude oil, gasoline and other refined
petroleum products which, in turn, depends on, among other factors, changes in domestic and foreign
economies, weather conditions, domestic and foreign political affairs, production levels, the
availability of imports, the marketing of competitive fuels and government regulation. Our retail
merchandise sales are driven by convenience, customer service, competitive pricing and branding.
Motor fuel margin is sales less the delivered cost of fuel and motor fuel taxes, measured on a
cents per gallon basis. Our motor fuel margins are impacted by local supply, demand, weather,
competitor pricing and product brand.
As part of our overall business strategy, we regularly evaluate opportunities to expand and
complement our business and may at any time be discussing or negotiating a transaction that, if
consummated, could have a material effect on our business, financial condition, liquidity or
results of operations.
Executive Summary of Recent Developments
Refining segment activity
Our average throughput for the first quarter of 2010 was approximately 54,400 barrels per day,
of which approximately 49,000 barrels per day was crude oil, delivering capacity utilization at the
Tyler refinery of 81.7%. The refinery produced approximately 94% light products in the first
quarter of 2010 and recognized an operating margin, excluding intercompany fees paid to the
marketing segment of $2.6 million, of $6.24 per barrel sold. This margin represented 94.2% of the
average Gulf Coast crack spread in the first quarter of 2010. The refinery was not operational
during the first quarter of 2009 due to the explosion and fire that occurred on November 20, 2008.
Marketing segment activity
Our marketing segment generated net sales for the 2010 first quarter of $120.5 million on
sales of approximately 14,300 barrels per day of refined products compared to $71.6 million on
sales of approximately 13,300 barrels per day in the first quarter of 2009. Net sales for the
marketing segment included intercompany revenues of $2.6 million relating to marketing services
fees and $2.3 million in crude transportation and storage fees paid by our refining segment in the
first quarter of 2010. In the first quarter of 2009, sales included $3.1 million in marketing
service fees. The refining segment began paying crude transportation and storage fees in April
2009.
Retail segment activity
Retail fuel margins increased 15.2% in the first quarter 2010, to $0.129 per gallon, compared
to $0.112 per gallon in the 2009 first quarter. This increase was partially offset by a decline in
same-store fuel gallons of 0.3% in the first quarter of 2010, compared to a decline of 2.2% in the
first quarter of 2009. Same-store merchandise sales increased 1.2% in the first quarter of 2010,
versus a 4.4% decline in the prior year period. Increased gains within our fresh grab n go food
business, combined with higher sales of snacks, candy and cigarettes, contributed to sales growth
in the period, particularly at our re-imaged store locations. These increases were partially
offset by a decline in merchandise margin, from 32.0% in the first quarter of 2009 to 30.8% in the
same period of 2010.
31
Throughout the past year, our re-imaged stores have outperformed the legacy store base on a
number of operating metrics, including same-store sales of fuel (gallons) and merchandise. As we
continue to rollout more food service (QSR) sites and private label products, we anticipate our
re-imaged locations are well positioned to continue to generate food and merchandise sales at
levels that outpace the legacy store base. As of March 31, 2010, approximately 15% of our store
locations included QSR restaurant formats that include brands such as Quiznos®, Subway®, Blimpie®
and Krispy Krunchy Chicken®, among others.
Market Trends
Our results of operations are significantly affected by the cost of commodities. Sudden change
in petroleum prices is our primary source of market risk. Our business model is affected more by
the volatility of petroleum prices than by the cost of the petroleum that we sell.
We continually experience volatility in the energy markets. Concerns about the U.S. economy
and continued uncertainty in several oil-producing regions of the world resulted in volatility in
the price of crude oil and product prices in the first quarters of 2010 and 2009. The average price
of crude oil in the first quarters of 2010 and 2009 was $78.61 and $43.24 per barrel, respectively.
The U.S. Gulf Coast 5-3-2 crack spread ranged from a high of $8.27 per barrel to a low of $4.58 per
barrel and averaged $6.62 per barrel during the first quarter of 2010 compared to an average of
$9.14 in the first quarter of 2009. This reduction in the metric reflects the lost margin
experienced in the industry.
We also continue to experience high volatility in the wholesale cost of fuel. The U.S. Gulf
Coast price for unleaded gasoline ranged from a low of $1.85 per gallon to a high of $2.20 per
gallon during the first quarter of 2010 and averaged $2.04 per gallon in the 2010 first quarter,
which compares to an average of $1.22 per gallon in the first quarter of 2009. If this volatility
continues and we are unable to fully pass our cost increases on to our customers, our retail fuel
margins will decline. Additionally, increases in the retail price of fuel could result in lower
demand for fuel and reduced customer traffic inside our convenience stores in our retail segment.
This may place downward pressure on in-store merchandise sales and margins. Finally, the higher
cost of fuel has resulted in higher credit card fees as a percentage of sales and gross profit. As
fuel prices increase, we see increased usage of credit cards by our customers and pay higher
interchange costs since credit card fees are paid as a percentage of sales.
The cost of natural gas used for fuel in our Tyler refinery has also shown historic
volatility. Our average cost of natural gas increased to $5.15 per million British Thermal Units
(MMBTU) in the first quarter of 2010 from $4.58 per million MMBTU in the first quarter of 2009.
As part of our overall business strategy, management determines, based on the market and other
factors, whether to maintain, increase or decrease inventory levels of crude or other intermediate
feedstocks based on various factors, including the crude pricing market in the Gulf Coast region,
the refined products market in the same region, the relationship between these two markets, our
ability to obtain credit with crude vendors, and any other factors which may impact the costs of
crude. As of March 31, 2010, inventory levels which were reduced at the end of 2009, remained at
their low levels primarily because of reduced capacity utilization. Our refinery was not operating
as of March 31, 2009, resulting from the explosion and fire in November 2008, which accounts for
the low inventory levels held at that time.
Factors Affecting Comparability
The comparability of our results of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2010
compared to the three months ended March 31, 2009 is affected by the following factors:
|
|
|
The explosion and fire at the Tyler, Texas refinery on November 20, 2008 shut down
operations at the refinery for the three months ended March 31, 2009. Operations at the
Tyler refinery fully resumed on May 18, 2009. |
32
Summary Financial and Other Information
The following table provides summary financial data for Delek.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(revised) |
|
|
|
(In millions, except share and per share data) |
|
Statement of Operations Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining |
|
$ |
405.9 |
|
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
120.5 |
|
|
|
71.6 |
|
Retail |
|
|
375.5 |
|
|
|
295.6 |
|
Other |
|
|
(9.0 |
) |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
892.9 |
|
|
|
368.3 |
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold |
|
|
820.7 |
|
|
|
317.6 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
56.1 |
|
|
|
45.8 |
|
Insurance proceeds business interruption |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21.1 |
) |
Property damage expenses (proceeds), net |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
|
14.7 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
14.5 |
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
Gain on sale of assets |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
906.3 |
|
|
|
365.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
(13.4 |
) |
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
8.7 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-operating expenses |
|
|
8.7 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before income tax benefit |
|
|
(22.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.9 |
) |
Income tax benefit |
|
|
(8.0 |
) |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
|
(14.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(14.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total basic earnings per share |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.03 |
) |
Loss from discontinued operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total diluted earnings per share |
|
$ |
(0.26 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.06 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
53,920,639 |
|
|
|
53,682,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
53,920,639 |
|
|
|
53,682,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flow Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows (used in) provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
(8.1 |
) |
|
$ |
85.9 |
|
Cash flows used in investing activities |
|
|
(5.5 |
) |
|
|
(72.1 |
) |
Cash flows (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(14.5 |
) |
|
|
26.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
(28.1 |
) |
|
$ |
39.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining |
|
|
Retail |
|
|
Marketing |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
Net sales (excluding intercompany marketing fees and sales) |
|
$ |
401.6 |
|
|
$ |
375.5 |
|
|
$ |
115.6 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
$ |
892.9 |
|
Intercompany marketing fees and sales |
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
(9.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold |
|
|
378.5 |
|
|
|
335.2 |
|
|
|
113.9 |
|
|
|
(6.9 |
) |
|
|
820.7 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
24.7 |
|
|
|
32.9 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
(2.3 |
) |
|
|
56.1 |
|
Property damage expenses |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment contribution margin |
|
$ |
2.5 |
|
|
$ |
7.4 |
|
|
$ |
5.8 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
|
15.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.5 |
|
Gain on sale of assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(13.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
571.0 |
|
|
$ |
426.2 |
|
|
$ |
74.3 |
|
|
$ |
151.9 |
|
|
$ |
1,223.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital spending (excluding business combinations) |
|
$ |
7.6 |
|
|
$ |
1.9 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
|
$ |
9.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining |
|
|
Retail(2) |
|
|
Marketing |
|
|
Eliminations |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(revised)(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(revised)(1) |
|
Net sales (excluding intercompany marketing fees and sales) |
|
$ |
4.0 |
|
|
$ |
295.6 |
|
|
$ |
68.5 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
$ |
368.3 |
|
Intercompany marketing fees and sales |
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating costs and expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold |
|
|
(3.2 |
) |
|
|
254.9 |
|
|
|
66.4 |
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
317.6 |
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
33.4 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45.8 |
|
Insurance proceeds business interruption |
|
|
(21.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21.1 |
) |
Property damage proceeds, net |
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment contribution margin |
|
$ |
14.6 |
|
|
$ |
7.3 |
|
|
$ |
5.0 |
|
|
$ |
0.7 |
|
|
|
27.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.7 |
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
405.5 |
|
|
$ |
457.0 |
|
|
$ |
61.1 |
|
|
$ |
167.2 |
|
|
$ |
1,090.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital spending (excluding business combinations) |
|
$ |
79.9 |
|
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
80.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
These amounts have been revised due to a misapplication of
accounting guidance associated with accounting for lower of
cost or market (LCM) reserves when using the LIFO method of
accounting for inventories. We recognized a reversal of a
LCM reserve in the first quarter of 2009 in the amount of
$4.8 million ($3.1 million, net of tax). The reversal
should not have been recognized until the second quarter of
2009 when our refinery resumed operations and the related
inventory was sold. This resulted in a $3.1 million
reduction to previously reported net income in the three
months ended March 31, 2009, or $(0.03) per diluted share. |
|
(2) |
|
Retail operating results for the three months ended March
31, 2009 have been restated to reflect the reclassification
of the remaining nine Virginia stores to normal operations. |
34
Results of Operations
Consolidated Results of Operations Comparison of the Three Months Ended March 31, 2010 versus
the Three Months Ended March 31, 2009
For the first quarters of 2010 and 2009, we generated net sales of $892.9 million and
$368.3 million, respectively, an increase of $524.6 million or 142.4%. The increase in net sales is
primarily due to the resumption of our operations at the refinery on May 18,
2009 after the November 20, 2008 explosion and fire, which ceased refinery operations through
such date, as well as increased fuel sales prices at the retail and marketing segments.
Cost of goods sold was $820.7 million for the 2010 first quarter compared to $317.6 million
for the 2009 first quarter, an increase of $503.1 million or 158.4%. The increase in cost of goods
sold resulted from the resumption of our operations at the refinery and increased fuel costs at the
retail and marketing segments.
Operating expenses were $56.1 million for the first quarter of 2010 compared to $45.8 million
for the 2009 first quarter, an increase of $10.3 million or 22.5%. This increase was primarily due
to the resumption of our operations at the refinery.
We did not recognize any insurance proceeds related to the fourth quarter 2008 incident at the
refinery during the three months ended March 31, 2010. During the first quarter 2009, we recorded
insurance proceeds of $30.6 million, of which, $21.1 million is included as business interruption
proceeds and $9.5 million is included as property damage. We also recorded expenses of
$7.9 million, resulting in a net gain of $1.6 million related to property damage proceeds.
General and administrative expenses were $15.3 million for the first quarter of 2010 compared
to $14.7 million for the 2009 first quarter, an increase of $0.6 million. The overall increase was
primarily due to an increase in salaries and employee benefits, partially offset by a decrease in
other taxes and outside services. We do not allocate general and administrative expenses to our
operating segments.
Depreciation and amortization was $14.5 million for the 2010 first quarter compared to
$10.2 million for the 2009 first quarter, an increase of $4.3 million, or 42.2%. This increase was
primarily due to several projects that were placed in service at the refinery, including the
saturates gas plant rebuild due to the fourth quarter 2008 explosion and fire and the turnaround
activities and crude optimization projects completed in the second quarter of 2009.
Gain on sale of assets for the first quarter of 2010 was $0.5 million and related to the sale
of four company-operated retail and convenience stores and one dealer location by the retail
segment in the first quarter of 2010. There were no asset sales from continuing operations during
the first quarter of 2009.
Interest expense was $8.7 million in the 2010 first quarter compared to $4.7 million for the
2009 first quarter, an increase of $4.0 million. The increase is attributable to a number of
factors, including higher interest rates under several of our credit facilities which have been
renewed or amended over the last twelve months, the resumption of the use of our refining segments
ABL credit facility to issue letters of credit for crude oil purchases compared to the first
quarter of 2009 when the refinery was not operating and increases in deferred financing charges due
to our refinancing and amendment activities. We also did not have any significant refinery
projects in process during the first quarter of 2010, so little capitalization of interest expense
occurred in the first quarter, whereas we had a significant capitalization of interest expense last
year in the same period. Interest income was nominal in the first quarter of 2010 and $0.1
million in the first quarter of 2009. This decrease was primarily due to lower cash balances and
lower investment returns.
Income tax benefit was $8.0 million for the first quarter of 2010, compared to $0.5 million
for the 2009 first quarter, an increase of $7.5 million. Our effective tax rate was 36.2% for the
first quarter of 2010, compared to 26.3% for the first quarter of 2009. Reflecting discontinued
operations at an after-tax amount is the primary reason the first quarter 2009 rate is
significantly less than the first quarter 2010 rate.
35
Operating Segments
We review operating results in three reportable segments: refining, marketing and retail.
Refining Segment
The table below sets forth certain information concerning our refining segment operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009(1) |
|
Days operated in period |
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total sales volume (average barrels per day)(2) |
|
|
53,439 |
|
|
|
948 |
|
Products manufactured (average barrels per day): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline |
|
|
30,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
Diesel/Jet |
|
|
20,244 |
|
|
|
|
|
Petrochemicals, LPG, NGLs |
|
|
1,447 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
1,785 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total production |
|
|
53,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Throughput (average barrels per day): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crude oil |
|
|
49,043 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other feedstocks |
|
|
5,364 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total throughput |
|
|
54,407 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per barrel of sales(3): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining operating margin(4) |
|
$ |
5.71 |
|
|
$ |
N/A |
|
Refining operating margin excluding intercompany marketing service fees(5) |
|
$ |
6.24 |
|
|
$ |
N/A |
|
Direct operating expenses(6) |
|
$ |
5.14 |
|
|
$ |
N/A |
|
Pricing statistics (average for the period presented): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WTI Cushing crude oil (per barrel) |
|
$ |
78.61 |
|
|
$ |
43.24 |
|
US Gulf Coast 5-3-2 crack spread (per barrel) |
|
$ |
6.62 |
|
|
$ |
9.14 |
|
US Gulf Coast unleaded gasoline (per gallon) |
|
$ |
2.04 |
|
|
$ |
1.22 |
|
Ultra low sulfur diesel (per gallon) |
|
$ |
2.05 |
|
|
$ |
1.33 |
|
Natural gas (per MMBTU) |
|
$ |
5.15 |
|
|
$ |
4.58 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The refinery did not operate during the period from November 21, 2008 through May 17, 2009 due
to the November 20, 2008 explosion and fire. The refinery resumed full operations on May 18,
2009. Sales volumes for the three months ended March 31, 2009 include minimal sales of
intermediate products made prior to the restart of the refinery. |
|
(2) |
|
Sales volume includes 838 barrels per day sold to the marketing segment during the three months
ended March 31, 2010. There were no sales of product to the marketing segment during the three
months ended March 31, 2009. |
|
(3) |
|
Per barrel of sales information is calculated by dividing the applicable income statement line
item (operating margin or operating expenses) divided by the total barrels sold during the
period. |
|
(4) |
|
Operating margin is defined as refining segment net sales less cost of goods sold. |
|
(5) |
|
Operating margin excluding intercompany marketing fees is defined as refining segment net
sales less cost of goods sold, adjusted to exclude the fees paid to the marketing segment of
$2.6 million during the three months ended March 31, 2010. |
|
(6) |
|
Direct operating expenses are defined as operating expenses attributed to the refining segment. |
Net sales for the refining segment were $405.9 million for the first quarter of 2010 compared
to $0.9 million for the 2009 first quarter, an increase of $405.0 million. The increase is due to
the resumption of operations at the refinery on May 18, 2009 after the November 20, 2008 explosion
and fire. The average sales price during the three months ended March 31, 2010 was $84.40 per
barrel sold. The minimal sales in the first quarter of 2009 represent the disposition of certain
intermediate products unnecessary to resume operations at the refinery.
36
Cost of goods sold for the first quarter of 2010 was $378.5 million compared to $(3.2) million
for the 2009 first quarter, an increase of $381.7 million. This increase is a result of the
resumption of operations at the refinery. The average cost of goods sold during the three months
ended March 31, 2010 was $78.69 per barrel sold. Cost of goods sold in 2009 consisted of gains
recognized on derivative contracts.
Our refining segment has a service agreement with our marketing segment, which among other
things, requires the refining segment to pay service fees based on the number of gallons sold at
the Tyler refinery and to share with the marketing segment a portion of the marketing margin
achieved in return for providing marketing, sales and customer services. This fee was $2.6 million
during the first quarter of 2010 as compared to $3.1 million in the same period of 2009. In the
2010 first quarter, these service fees were based on the number of gallons sold and a shared
portion of the margin achieved in return for providing sales and customer support services. In the
2009 first quarter, these fees were based on the modeled sales included in the refining segments
business interruption insurance claims. We eliminate this intercompany fee in consolidation.
During the first quarter of 2010, we recorded property damage expenses of $0.2 million related
to the November 20, 2008 explosion and fire at the refinery. During the first quarter of 2009, we
recorded insurance proceeds of $30.6 million, of which $21.1 million is included as business
interruption proceeds and $9.5 million is included as property damage. We also recorded expenses of
$7.9 million, resulting in a net gain of $1.6 million related to property damage proceeds.
Operating expenses were $24.7 million for the 2010 first quarter compared to $12.2 million for
the 2009 first quarter, an increase of $12.5 million, or 102.5%. This increase in operating expense
was primarily due to the resumption of operations at the refinery.
Contribution margin for the refining segment in the 2010 first quarter was $2.5 million, or
15.7% of our consolidated contribution margin.
Marketing Segment
The table below sets forth certain information concerning our marketing segment operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Days operated in period |
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
Products sold (average barrels per day): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gasoline |
|
|
6,603 |
|
|
|
6,705 |
|
Diesel/Jet |
|
|
7,651 |
|
|
|
6,578 |
|
Other |
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total sales (average barrels per day) |
|
|
14,298 |
|
|
|
13,342 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct operating expenses (per barrel of sales) |
|
$ |
0.65 |
|
|
$ |
0.14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales for the marketing segment were $120.5 million in the first quarter of 2010 compared
to $71.6 million for the 2009 first quarter. Total sales volume averaged 14,298 barrels per day in
the 2010 first quarter compared to 13,342 in the 2009 first quarter. The average sales price per
gallon of gasoline increased $0.83 per gallon in the first quarter of 2010, to $2.13 per gallon
from $1.30 in the first quarter of 2009. The average price of diesel also increased to $2.15 per
gallon in the first quarter of 2010 compared to $1.42 per gallon in the first quarter of 2009. Net
sales included $2.6 million and $3.1 million of net service fees paid by our refining segment to
our marketing segment for the 2010 and 2009 first quarters, respectively. In the 2010 first
quarter, these service fees were based on the number of gallons sold and a shared portion of the
margin achieved in return for providing sales and customer support services. In the 2009 first
quarter, these fees were based on the modeled sales included in the refining segments business
interruption insurance claims. Additionally, net sales include crude transportation and storage
fees paid by our refining segment to our marketing segment, relating to the utilization of certain
crude pipeline assets. These fees were $2.3 million during the three months ended March 31, 2010.
There were no transportation and storage fees during the first quarter of 2009.
Cost of goods sold was $113.9 million in the first quarter of 2010 approximating a cost per
barrel sold of $88.49. This compares to cost of goods sold of $66.4 million for the first quarter
of 2009, approximating a cost per barrel sold of $55.28. This cost per barrel resulted in an
average gross margin of $3.36 per barrel in the 2010 first quarter compared to $4.33 per barrel in
the 2009 first quarter. Additionally, we recognized (losses) gains during the 2010 and 2009 first
quarter of $(0.3) million and $0.6 million, respectively, associated with settlement of nomination
differences under long-term purchase contracts.
37
Operating expenses in the marketing segment were approximately $0.8 million and $0.2 million,
respectively, for the first quarter of 2010 and 2009, an increase of $0.6 million or 300.0%. This
increase is primarily due to the intercompany sale of certain pipeline assets from our refining
segment to our marketing segment on March 31, 2009. Operating expenses associated with these
assets amounted to $0.5 million during the three months ended March 31, 2010.
Contribution margin for the marketing segment in the 2010 first quarter was $5.8 million, or
36.5% of our consolidated segment contribution margin.
Retail Segment
The table below sets forth certain information concerning our retail segment continuing
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009(1) |
|
Number of stores (end of period) |
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
Average number of stores |
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
Retail fuel sales (thousands of gallons) |
|
|
102,998 |
|
|
|
106,672 |
|
Average retail gallons per average number of stores (in thousands) |
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
Retail fuel margin ($ per gallon) |
|
$ |
0.129 |
|
|
$ |
0.112 |
|
Merchandise sales (in thousands) |
|
$ |
86,815 |
|
|
$ |
88,610 |
|
Merchandise margin % |
|
|
30.8 |
% |
|
|
32.0 |
% |
Credit expense (% of gross margin) |
|
|
10.4 |
% |
|
|
7.8 |
% |
Merchandise and cash over/short (% of net sales) |
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
0.3 |
% |
Operating expense/merchandise sales plus total gallons |
|
|
16.7 |
% |
|
|
16.4 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Retail operating results for the three months ended March
31, 2009 have been restated to reflect the reclassification
of the remaining nine Virginia stores to normal operations. |
Net sales for our retail segment in the first quarter of 2010 increased 27.0% to
$375.5 million from $295.6 million in the 2009 first quarter. This increase was primarily due to an
increase in the retail fuel price per gallon of 44.5% to an average price of $2.63 per gallon in
the first quarter of 2010 from an average price of $1.82 per gallon in the first quarter of 2009.
Retail fuel sales were 103.0 million gallons for the 2010 first quarter, compared to
106.7 million gallons for the 2009 first quarter. This decrease was primarily due to the sale of
underperforming stores in the second half of 2009 and first quarter of 2010. Comparable store
gallons decreased 0.3% between the first quarter of 2010 and the first quarter of 2009. Total fuel
sales, including wholesale dollars, increased 39.5% to $288.7 million in the first quarter of 2010.
The increase was primarily due to the increase in the average price per gallon sold noted above,
partially offset by the decrease in total gallons sold, also noted above.
Merchandise sales decreased 2.0% to $86.8 million in the first quarter of 2010 compared to the
first quarter of 2009. The decrease in merchandise sales was primarily due to the decrease in the
number of stores operated during the first quarter of 2010 as compared to the same period in 2009.
Same store merchandise sales increased 1.2%, primarily in the cigarette and candy and gum
categories.
Cost of goods sold for our retail segment increased 31.5% to $335.2 million in the first
quarter of 2010. This increase was primarily due to the increase in the average cost per gallon of
47.1%, or an average cost of $2.51 per gallon in the first quarter of 2010 when compared to an
average cost of $1.70 per gallon in the first quarter of 2009.
Operating expenses were $32.9 million in the 2010 first quarter, a decrease of $0.5 million,
or 1.5%. This decrease was due primarily to a decrease in insurance, salaries, utilities and
maintenance expenses due mainly to the decrease in the number of stores operated, partially offset
by higher credit expenses.
Contribution margin for the retail segment in the 2010 first quarter was $7.4 million, or
46.5% of our consolidated contribution margin.
38
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our primary sources of liquidity are cash generated from our operating activities, borrowings
under our revolving credit facilities and, due to the refinery incident in the fourth quarter of
2008, business interruption and property damage insurance proceeds covering the period of downtime
experienced by the refinery and necessary capital expenditures to repair and replace assets damaged
in the incident. We believe that our cash flows from operations, borrowings under our current
credit facilities and insurance proceeds will be sufficient to satisfy the anticipated cash
requirements associated with our existing operations for at least the next 12 months.
Additional capital may be required in order to consummate significant acquisitions. We would
likely seek these additional funds from a variety of sources, including public or private debt and
stock offerings, and borrowings under credit lines or other sources. There can be no assurance that
we will be able to identify or consummate significant acquisitions or to raise additional funds on
favorable terms or at all.
Cash Flows
The following table sets forth a summary of our consolidated cash flows for the three months
ended March 31, 2010 and 2009 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cash Flow Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows (used in) provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
(8.1 |
) |
|
$ |
85.9 |
|
Cash flows used in investing activities |
|
|
(5.5 |
) |
|
|
(72.1 |
) |
Cash flows (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(14.5 |
) |
|
|
26.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
(28.1 |
) |
|
$ |
39.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Net cash used in operating activities was $8.1 million for the 2010 first quarter compared to
cash provided of $85.9 million for the 2009 first quarter. The decrease in cash flows from
operations in the first quarter of 2010 from the same period in 2009 was primarily due to a
$29.6 million increase in accounts receivable, net and a $14.1 million net loss in the first
quarter of 2010 as compared to a $3.0 million net loss in the same period of 2009. These changes
were partially offset by an increase in depreciation and amortization expense in the first quarter
of 2010 as compared to the first quarter of 2009.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Net cash used in investing activities was $5.5 million for the 2010 first quarter compared to
$72.1 million in the 2009 first quarter. This decrease is primarily due to a $71.2 million decrease
in capital spending in the first quarter of 2010 as compared to the first quarter of 2009.
Cash used in investing activities includes our capital expenditures during the current period
of approximately $9.6 million, of which $7.6 million was spent on projects in the refining segment,
$1.9 million was spent in the retail segment and $0.1 million was spent at the holding company
level. During the first quarter of 2009, we spent $80.8 million, of which $79.9 million was spent
on projects at our refinery, including the rebuild of the saturates gas plant damaged in the
explosion and fire in the fourth quarter of 2008, and $0.9 million in our retail segment.
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
Net cash used in financing activities was $14.5 million in the first quarter of 2010, compared
to cash provided of $26.1 million in the first quarter of 2009. The decrease in net cash from
financing activities in the first quarter of 2010 primarily consisted of net proceeds from
long-term revolvers of $2.9 million in the first quarter of 2010, compared to net proceeds of
$85.4 million in the first quarter of 2009. Further contributing to the decrease was the increase
in deferred financing costs paid to $8.6 million in the first quarter of 2010 from $2.5 million in
the first quarter of 2009, due primarily to the new ABL agreement entered into in February 2010,
which replaced the SunTrust ABL revolver in our refining segment. These decreases were partially
offset by payments on debt and capital lease obligations of $54.8 million in the 2009 first
quarter, as compared to payments of $6.5 million in the 2010 first quarter.
39
Cash Position and Indebtedness
As of March 31, 2010, our total cash and cash equivalents were $40.3 million and we had total
indebtedness of approximately $313.5 million. Borrowing availability under our three separate
revolving credit facilities was approximately $139.9 million and we had letters of credit issued of
$185.6 million. We believe we were in compliance with our covenants in all debt facilities as of
March 31, 2010.
Capital Spending
A key component of our long-term strategy is our capital expenditure program. Our capital
expenditures for the 2010 first quarter were $9.6 million, of which approximately $7.6 million was
spent in our refining segment, $1.9 million in our retail segment and $0.1 million at the holding
company level. Our capital expenditure budget is approximately $58.7 million for 2010. The
following table summarizes our actual capital expenditures for the first quarter of 2010 and
planned capital expenditures for the full year 2010 by operating segment and major category (in
millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Full Year |
|
|
Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2010 Budget |
|
|
2010 Actual |
|
Refining: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sustaining maintenance, including turnaround activities |
|
$ |
4.7 |
|
|
$ |
0.8 |
|
Regulatory |
|
|
32.8 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
|
Discretionary projects |
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Refining segment total |
|
|
40.7 |
|
|
|
7.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discretionary projects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing segment total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sustaining maintenance |
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
Growth/profit improvements |
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
Store enhancements |
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retail segment total |
|
|
18.0 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital spending |
|
$ |
58.7 |
|
|
$ |
9.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In 2010, we plan to spend approximately $18.0 million in the retail segment, $6.0 million of
which is expected to consist of the re-imaging of 16 of our existing stores. We spent $0.4 million
on these projects in the first quarter of 2010. We expect to spend approximately $32.8 million on
regulatory projects in the refining segment in 2010, $18.9 million of which relates to the Mobile
Source Air Toxics (MSAT) II compliance project and another $7.4 million of which relates to the
maintenance shop and warehouse relocation project, both of which are discussed further below. We
spent $5.9 million on regulatory projects in the first quarter of 2010. In addition, we plan to
spend approximately $4.7 million on maintenance projects and approximately $3.2 million for other
discretionary projects in 2010.
MSAT II Compliance Project
The purpose of the MSAT II project is to comply with the MSAT II regulations, which limit the
annual average benzene content in gasoline beginning in January 2011. The project will consist of
new fractionation equipment, Isomerization Unit modifications and a new catalyst for saturating
benzene. The fractionation section is expected to be completed by 2011 and the Isomerization Unit
modifications are planned for completion by 2013.
Maintenance Shop and Warehouse Relocation Project
This project involves the construction of a single, new building outside of potential
overpressure zones for personnel working in the existing maintenance shops and warehouse. The
purpose of the project is to provide a safer working environment for maintenance and warehouse
workers at the Tyler refinery by minimizing the risk of injury due to vapor cloud explosions, fires
and releases of hazardous substances. The purchasing department employees will also be relocated to
this building due to synergies with the warehouse operation. This project began in 2009 and is
expected to be completed in 2010.
40
The amount of our capital expenditure budget is subject to change due to unanticipated
increases in the cost, scope and completion time for our capital projects. For example, we may
experience increases in the cost of and/or timing to obtain necessary equipment required for our
continued compliance with government regulations or to complete improvement projects to the
refinery. Additionally, the scope and cost of employee or contractor labor expense related with
installation of that equipment could increase from our projections.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We have no off-balance sheet arrangements as of March 31, 2010.
|
|
|
ITEM 3. |
|
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK |
Changes in commodity prices (mainly petroleum crude oil and unleaded gasoline) and interest
rates are our primary sources of market risk. When we make the decision to manage our market
exposure, our objective is generally to avoid losses from negative price changes, realizing we will
not obtain the benefit of positive price changes.
Commodity Price Risk
Impact of Changing Prices. Our revenues and cash flows, as well as estimates of future cash
flows, are sensitive to changes in energy prices. Major shifts in the cost of crude oil, the prices
of refined products and the cost of ethanol can generate large changes in the operating margin in
each of our segments. Gains and losses on transactions accounted for using mark-to-market
accounting are reflected in cost of goods sold in the consolidated statements of operations at each
period end. Gains or losses on commodity derivative contracts accounted for as cash flow hedges are
recognized in other comprehensive income on the consolidated balance sheets and ultimately, when
the forecasted transactions are completed in net sales or cost of goods sold in the consolidated
statements of operations.
Price Risk Management Activities. At times, we enter into commodity derivative contracts to
manage our price exposure to our inventory positions, future purchases of crude oil and ethanol,
future sales of refined products or to fix margins on future production. During 2007, in connection
with our marketing segments supply contracts, we entered into certain futures contracts. In
accordance with ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (ASC 815), all of these commodity futures
contracts are recorded at fair value, and any change in fair value between periods has historically
been recorded in the profit and loss section of our consolidated financial statements. At March 31,
2010 and December 31, 2009, we had open futures contracts representing 30,000 barrels and
113,000 barrels, respectively, of refined petroleum products with an unrealized net (loss) gain of
$(0.1) million and $0.1 million, respectively.
In December 2007, in connection with our offering of renewable fuels in our retail segment
markets, we entered into a series of OTC swaps based on the futures price of ethanol as quoted on
the Chicago Board of Trade and a series of OTC swaps based on the futures price of unleaded
gasoline as quoted on the New York Mercantile Exchange. In accordance with ASC 815, all of these
swaps are recorded at fair value, and any change in fair value between periods has historically
been recorded in the consolidated statements of operations. We had no open swap contracts as of
March 31, 2010. As of December 31, 2009, we had open derivative contracts representing
95,967 barrels of ethanol with unrealized net losses of $0.5 million. As of December 31, 2009, we
also had open derivative contracts representing 96,000 barrels of unleaded gasoline with unrealized
net gains of $0.8 million.
In March 2008, we entered into a series of OTC swaps based on the future price of West Texas
Intermediate Crude (WTI) as quoted on the NYMEX which fixed the purchase price of WTI for a
predetermined number of barrels at future dates from July 2008 through December 2009. We also
entered into a series of OTC swaps based on the future price of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) as
quoted on the Gulf Coast ULSD PLATTS which fixed the sales price of ULSD for a predetermined number
of gallons at future dates from July 2008 through December 2009.
In accordance with ASC 815, the WTI and ULSD swaps were designated as cash flow hedges with
the change in fair value recorded in other comprehensive income. However, as of November 20, 2008,
due to the suspension of operations at the refinery, the cash flow designation was removed because
the probability of occurrence of the hedged forecasted transactions for the period of the shutdown
became remote. All changes in the fair value of these swaps subsequent to November 20, 2008 have
been recognized in the statement of operations. For the three months ended March 31, 2009, we
recognized gains of $9.4 million, which are included as an adjustment to cost of goods sold in the
condensed consolidated statement of operations as a result of the discontinuation of these cash
flow hedges. There were no gains or losses recognized for the three months ended March 31, 2010.
41
We maintain at our refinery and in third-party facilities inventories of crude oil, feedstocks
and refined petroleum products, the values of which are subject to wide fluctuations in market
prices driven by world economic conditions, regional and global inventory levels and seasonal
conditions. At March 31, 2010, we held approximately 1.0 million barrels of crude and product
inventories valued under the LIFO valuation method with an average cost of $61.99 per barrel. At
March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the excess of replacement cost (FIFO) over the carrying value
(LIFO) of refinery inventories was $25.6 million and $20.8 million, respectively. We refer to this
excess as our LIFO reserve.
Interest Rate Risk
We have market exposure to changes in interest rates relating to our outstanding variable rate
borrowings, which totaled $247.8 million as of March 31, 2010. We help manage this risk through
interest rate swap and cap agreements that modify the interest characteristics of our outstanding
long-term debt. In accordance with ASC 815, all interest rate hedging instruments are recorded at
fair value and any changes in the fair value between periods are recognized in earnings. The fair
value of our interest rate hedging instruments decreased by a nominal amount for both the three
months ended March 31, 2010 and 2009. The fair values of our interest rate swaps and cap agreements
are obtained from dealer quotes. These values represent the estimated amount that we would receive
or pay to terminate the agreements taking into account the difference between the contract rate of
interest and rates currently quoted for agreements, of similar terms and maturities. We expect that
interest rate derivatives will reduce our exposure to short-term interest rate movements. The
annualized impact of a hypothetical one percent change in interest rates on floating rate debt
outstanding as of March 31, 2009 would be to change interest expense by $2.5 million. Increases in
rates would be partially mitigated by interest rate derivatives mentioned above. As of March 31,
2010, we had interest rate cap agreements in place representing $60.0 million in notional value
and all mature in July 2010. These interest rate caps
range from 3.75% to 4.00% as measured by the 3-month LIBOR rate and include a knock-out feature at
rates ranging from 6.65% to 7.15% using the same measurement rate. The fair value of our interest
rate derivatives was nominal as of both March 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009.
The types of instruments used in our hedging and trading activities described above include
swaps and futures. Our positions in derivative commodity instruments are monitored and managed on a
daily basis by a risk management committee to ensure compliance with our risk management strategies
which have been approved by our board of directors.
|
|
|
ITEM 4. |
|
CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES. |
(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management has evaluated, with the participation of our principal executive and principal
financial officer, the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Rule 13a-15(e) or Rule 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) as of the end of the
period covered by this report, and has concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are
effective to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in the
reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is recorded, processed,
summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange
Commissions rules and forms including, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to
ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is accumulated and communicated to our management, including
our principal executive and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosures.
(b) Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There has been no change in our internal control over financial reporting (as described in
Rule 13a-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) that occurred during our last fiscal
quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
control over financial reporting.
42
PART II.
OTHER INFORMATION
|
|
|
Item 5. |
|
OTHER INFORMATION |
Dividend Declaration
On May 4, 2010, Delek announced that its Board of Directors voted to declare a quarterly cash
dividend of $0.0375 per share, payable on June 22, 2010, to shareholders of record on May 25, 2010.
Special Bonus to Chief Financial Officer
On May 4, 2010, the Companys Compensation Committee authorized the payment of a special bonus
to Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Mark B. Cox, in the amount of $128,058
(the Special Bonus). The Special Bonus supplements an earlier payment to Mr. Cox relating to the
loss he experienced on the sale of his Texas home.
43
Annual Meeting of Stockholders
The following information relates to matters submitted to the stockholders of Delek US
Holdings, Inc. at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on May 4, 2010.
At the meeting, the following directors were elected by the vote indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
Ezra Uzi Yemin |
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
40,985,509 |
|
Votes withheld: |
|
|
3,782,354 |
|
Gabriel Last |
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
40,867,736 |
|
Votes withheld: |
|
|
3,900,127 |
|
Asaf Bartfeld |
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
40,965,363 |
|
Votes withheld: |
|
|
3,802,500 |
|
Aharon Kacherginski |
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
44,687,243 |
|
Votes withheld: |
|
|
80,620 |
|
Shlomo Zohar |
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
44,690,664 |
|
Votes withheld: |
|
|
77,199 |
|
Carlos E. Jordá |
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
41,888,520 |
|
Votes withheld: |
|
|
2,879,343 |
|
Charles H. Leonard |
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
44,692,829 |
|
Votes withheld: |
|
|
75,034 |
|
Philip L. Maslowe |
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
44,689,832 |
|
Votes withheld: |
|
|
78,031 |
|
The proposal to approve an amendment to our 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan, to, among other things,
increase the maximum number of shares authorized for issuance by 2,000,000 shares to a total of
5,053,392 was approved by the vote indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
41,475,966 |
|
Votes against: |
|
|
3,147,667 |
|
Abstentions: |
|
|
144,230 |
|
Broker non-votes: |
|
|
4,477,907 |
|
The proposal to ratify Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for
the 2010 fiscal year was approved by the vote indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
Votes cast in favor: |
|
|
49,184,614 |
|
Votes against: |
|
|
35,888 |
|
Abstentions: |
|
|
25,268 |
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Description |
|
10.1 |
* |
|
Delek US Holdings, Inc. 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (as amended through May 4, 2010) |
|
31.1 |
|
|
Certification of the Companys Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule
13a-14(a)/15(d)-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act. |
|
31.2 |
|
|
Certification of the Companys Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule
13a-14(a)/15(d)-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act. |
|
32.1 |
|
|
Certification of the Companys Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
32.2 |
|
|
Certification of the Companys Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
* |
|
Management compensatory plan or arrangement |
45
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Delek US Holdings, Inc.
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Ezra Uzi Yemin
|
|
|
|
Ezra Uzi Yemin |
|
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Mark Cox
|
|
|
|
Mark Cox |
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
|
Dated: May 7, 2010
46
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Description |
|
10.1 |
* |
|
Delek US Holdings, Inc. 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (as amended through May 4, 2010) |
|
31.1 |
|
|
Certification of the Companys Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule
13a-14(a)/15(d)-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act. |
|
31.2 |
|
|
Certification of the Companys Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule
13a-14(a)/15(d)-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act. |
|
32.1 |
|
|
Certification of the Companys Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
32.2 |
|
|
Certification of the Companys Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
* |
|
Management compensatory plan or arrangement |
47